Palo Alto, California

Welcome to the PaloAlto Parks and Recreation Commission meeting on Tuesday, June 23rd, 2026. I'll call the meeting to order. I'd like to uh start with a roll call. >> Okay. Uh Commissioner Klein House >> here. Commissioner Smith >> here. >> Commissioner Axelrod >> present. >> Uh, Chair Freeman >> here. >> Commissioner Deng >> Uh, Commissioner Brown is absent. And Vice Chair Wei has uh called in sick today. >> Okay. Thank you. So, this is the point where members of the public uh may speak to any item not on the agenda. Uh so now we'll open it up for um for items on another. If you are in person here in person uh and would like to speak uh please fill out a speaker card and head to the clerk. Uh if you're joining us uh on Zoom um for an item that's not on the agenda, just raise your hand. The clerk will um call you. And uh actually due to a recent uh policy change, we'll hear Zoom comments at the end of the agenda. There any speakers? There is currently one speaker in person. Okay. So, Doug, Pete, do you want to come up? Good evening. Uh, my name is Doug Peterson and I appreciate this opportunity to address the commission on a subject of my own choosing. Yesterday, I submitted a letter to this commission and the valley water board of dire directors urging you to jointly address the ongoing harm caused by the broken sllegate that continues to undermine the ecological health of the 600 acre PaloAlto flood basin. The letter includes an attached PDF of an in-depth report I prepared regarding the complex issues surrounding the broken gate. As some of you surely know by now, I feel a strong obligation to defend the interests of wildlife and the purpose of the lengthy report is to expedite the repair of the gate which has not functioned properly for a very long time. I am here again in person to emphasize how deeply important this is to me as a wildlife advocate and to urge this commission to ensure that the nearly 2 years of public statements affirming PaloAlto's intention to repair the gate will finally result in visible action. The recently renovated tide gate structure provides valuable flood flood protection to PaloAlto, but the inoperable SLE gate represents a significant environmental shortcoming that needs to be remedied. I delivered simil similar comments to Valley Waters board of directors this afternoon and remain optimistic that our shared commitments to environmental stewardship will result in a cooperative effort to repair the gate. Thank you. >> Thank you and thanks for your comments. We appreciate your taking the time to uh to share your comments. Any other? >> There are no additional comments at this time. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. I like to um Okay. Are there any um next we'll move on to agenda changes, additions, and deletions. Um, so I before we get started, I want to let the commission know that we're that to accommodate those who wish to attend the meeting uh in person or in Zoom uh to comment on the agenda, we have moved the you probably noticed on the agenda that we've moved things around. Um um so we moved the ad hoc layers on and department uh report to the end of the agenda. Um, so now is the opportunity to make any additional changes or deletions to the agenda. Do I have any? Okay, seeing none, we'll move on to the next item. So, we have two sets of minutes to approve. Uh, one set of minutes is from April 28 26 and the other is from May 26 26. um like to have so do I have a motion to approve the April 28th, 2026 minutes? >> I'll move to approve the April 28th minutes. Okay, do I have a second? >> Second. Do I have a second? >> Second. Okay, thank you. We do a vote approval. Commissioner Klein House, >> yes. >> Commissioner Smith, >> Commissioner Axelrod, >> yes. >> Chair Freeman, >> Commissioner Deng, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you. Okay. Like to approve the second set of minutes, which was for May 26, 2026. Like to have a motion to approve those minutes. I move to approve the May 26. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. Thank you. >> We move to vote on that. Thank you. >> Commissioner Deng, >> yes. >> Chair Freeman, >> Uh, Commissioner Axelrod, >> yes. >> Uh, Commissioner Smith, >> And Commissioner Klein House, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you. Okay, we'll now move on to the business items. The first um business item is to recommend the adoption of a park dedication ordinance to dedicate a portion of the measure E site as parkland CQA status exempt under CQ CQA regulation. Whatever. Is there way to get started there? >> Thank you. Um my name is Tina Fam and I'm a senior senior engineer working for the wastewater treatment plant. I'm happy to present regarding this item tonight. Um we also have Travis Belt who is a natural resources uh director with Ringcon, our consultant who completed the work for the wildlife corridor evaluation. Um I also want to introduce um Karen North who is our assistant director of environmental services division. Um and we also have Greg Sans here in the audience who is uh with Woodward Curran representing our program management consultant as well. Next slide. Um, so here we have our recommendation. As stated in the staff report, I'd like to recommend PRC consider the results of the wildlife quarter evaluation and also recommend um consider recommending to city council adoption of a park dedication ordinance to dedicate 7.7 acres of the measure E site as parkland. Next slide. Our agenda today um includes a few different topics. I'd like to spend a few minutes to talk over Measure E background. Then I'll talk about the regional water quality control plant and what we do for bioolids currently. Then I will briefly go over the bioolids alternative evaluation completed this year. Um then I'll turn it over to Travis who will talk through their firm's work on wetland wildlife corridor evaluation. Next slide. Before we get into it, I'd like to point out to the commission where our wastewater treatment plant is. In this figure, you'll see a red circle with a yellow star indicating its location right in the center of this photo. To the north is Palo Alto airport and the golf course. Um to the uh to the west is an office park. To the east is the Palatoto Baylands. To the southwest is Reszo Marsh and to the south is Bixby Park. And so that is um in that direction is where the measure E site is. Approximately 10 acres adjacent to our wastewater treatment plant. Of that 2.4 4 acres is roughly uh relatively flat terrain while 7.7 acres is on a slope hillside adjacent to Bixby Park which is a closed landfill. Next slide. And next slide again. So this slide here um I've included to uh describe the key objectives and features of measure E. Uh just to give you some history, in November 2011, residents of Palo Alto approved a ballot measure to undedicate and remove approximately 10 acres from parkland. The main objective was to provide a reliable long-term solution for organics, which there are three types, bioolids from wastewater treatment, food scraps, and yard trimmings. Another goal was to reduce uh landfill disposal of these three waist streams and their associated greenhouse gas emissions. Another objective which has thankfully uh already been completed um was to allow Paloalto to phase out its existing incinerators used at that time to uh treat bio salage. So at that time it was the largest carbon source emitter in the cities. Um and uh after 2019 um when the wastewater treatment plant was able to build our solids dewatering building we were able to decommission these incinerators and began offhauling bioolids. And so that was uh completed even though measure E land was not used at that time. Some other key features of measure E is that um the 10 acres had very specific approved uses uh for them. Um basically treatment of the three waist streams that I described. If the city wanted to do anything other than to treat those three waist streams, then another ballot measure would be required. Measure also did not specify any specific technology and it did not obligate Palo Alto to build within any specific time frame. It did say though that at the end of the 10-year period, which has since passed, council could rededicate the 10 acres, but it did not require council to do so. Last thing I want to mention in this figure here you see uh which is also the same figure in your attachment um C in your packet is that as I mentioned 2.4 4 acres right adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant is relatively flat. 7.7 acres is a former landfill that has been capped with roughly 4 feet of soil and it also contains an extensive network of groundwater monitoring wells removing landfill lee and methane as part of the regulatory compliance practices to maintain a closed landfill. So staff have determined that the 7.7 acres does not really make sense to build any potential facility on these um on these 7.7 acres. The current conditions limit any sort of grading structural loading. So we basically want to minimize um as much subsurface disturbance in this area as possible. And so you'll see later again um but uh staff will recommend 7.7 acres of this area be rededicated as parkland. Next slide. Um, so there's a lot to this slide. I I wanted to include this slide here to show that this item has been brought up to PRC and council several times. Um, and this slide mostly focuses on after 10 years after the ballot measure has passed. Back in 2021 and 2022, staff from multiple departments, including public works, utilities, community services, and planning and development services coordinated together to see if partial or full dedication of measure east side as Parkland was feasible, possible, or advisable. Ultimately, PRC in October of 2022 recommended dedication as Parkland after several discussions with city staff. city council in April of 2023, they directed staff to instead consider um consider uh completing two technical studies. One study was to determine the feasibility of supporting a wildlife corridor connecting Renzo Marsh and Baylands through the measure E site and the other study was to determine whether the 2.4 acres of the measure E site should be preserved for the potential bioolids processing facility. Um and so we feel that after this time we are able to bring back um to the commission and to council the results from these technical studies. In that same year, council acknowledging how space constrained we were um directed wastewater treatment plant staff to begin the exploration of purchasing property contiguous to the plant and also explore funding sources to to be able to purchase property. Um this direction was limited to three properties in the office park but it also allowed staff to explore leasing options as well. Um in 2024 is when we kicked off our long range facility plan which is included a bow solids facility plan really intending to answer the questions that council had asked. Um I also want to note that in the last several years council has made the bow solids facility plan a top council priority. So tonight we are here and we are eager to share Rinkcon's wildlife wetland corridor feasibility study results with the aim of by the fall being able to bring the bios facility plan and the park dedication ordinance back to council. Next slide. All right. So this slide is um included here to remind the commission that we are a regional facility that we have six partner agencies um and we are a 24x7 operation with engineers, operators, maintenance folks in support of providing wastewater treatment plant services to close to 260,000 people. Next slide. Um this slide here um is intended to show our um current projects going on as part of the previous 2012 long range facility plan. We have many projects um in underway, some completed, some in construction and some in design um totaling roughly $500 million of work to re rehabilitate our aging plant. This is quite common. uh wastewater treatment plants, many of them were built in the 1970s with Clean Water Act money given by the federal government. Um and so plants after roughly 50 or so years require major rehabilitation. We're not alone in our efforts. Um we are also simultaneously updating our long-range facility plan as well to be able to plan for the next 30 to 50 years. And so what's unique to me about this plant um based on other plants I've worked on and what I've seen is that we are incredibly tight with many physical constraints. We have many projects stacked up right against each other. We can't build much higher because of the airport and flight paths. Um, and we're constrained in many directions. We can't necessarily dig down because of high groundwater affecting potential projects. We currently rent layown area at the airport and we're also pursuing additional parcels toward the office park as council directed in August of 2023. And so we'll be doing all of this even without um the topics that discussed tonight regarding measure E. Next slide. So back to bioolids in our current processing um uh or or current processing. Um as part of the wastewater treatment plant process, we remove solids from our wastewater. Then we thicken it, blend it, and dewater it on belt filter presses that were recently built as part of our solids dewatering project in 2019. As I previously mentioned, this allowed for decommissioning of our incinerators. As stated, this sludge cake is then hauled off to two different processing facilities in the Solano County and the other in Central Valley. So ultimately, these processes result in fertilizer byproduct that can be used for agriculture. And our previous bioolids facilities plan envisioned this to be a temporary practice until potential bioolids treatment could potentially be placed on site. Next slide. Um so now to our recent Balisaw's facility plan update. Um the city is no stranger to balisaw's facility plan updates. We completed evaluations in 2012, 2014 and 2019. Um but what is important is that uh we feel that it's important that we look at these things every couple of years because technologies change, regulations change, hauling and treatment costs change. Um, one thing I also want to mention is that our secondary treatment project, one of the largest capital projects in the city's history, uh, its main driver was to treat nutrients, including ammonia, to protect the bay. And so this change as part of this project will treat nutrients and protect the bay, but it'll also result in bioolids uh, production increase starting when the project is finished in 2018. And so >> 20 >> 29 >> 2029 sorry. So we wanted to make sure those assumptions were worked into our long range planning especially if we're anticipating increased bioolids production um because we want to think about what we would need for our plant for the next 30 to 50 years. Next slide. So, Corolla who is um working on this bioolids facility plan update, they evaluated over 15 alternatives and really narrowed it down to these six. Two of them are uh um offhauling um either continuing with our current relationship with the two treatment uh places in the Solano Valley and Central Valley or potentially offhauling to a regional facility, potentially San Jose's regional facility. um and also four alternatives on site. And so the analysis considered a lot of different criteria including capital costs, life cycle costs, environmental impacts, regulatory compliance, and implementation feasibility. The valuation found that the alternative one, what we currently do right now, um is no surprise the lowest in cost. Um, but it also said that other technologies such as alternative six drying and paralysis demonstrated potential environmental benefits including net negative greenhouse gas emissions but at a significantly higher cost. The the analysis also identified key uncertainties associated with emerging technologies and evolving regulatory requirements including potential future limits on peace which are per and polyfloro alcohol substances. These are known what are these are known as forever chemicals and these were used in firefighting foams and other uses. There are several states that have file solids treatment standards related to PAS. Although California does not have such regulations yet, we are working very closely with our consultants to track them um as we may need to change our treatment processes if these if these regulations come into place. Next slide. One other thing that the analysis uh highlighted to us is sighting and space concerns were very very important. So there's a lot on this slide. I don't want to point out everything. Um just know that we are trying to very carefully plan for our future including both future liquids and solids treatment needs. Um this slide really highlights both. Um and so first thing I wanted to mention is in Corella's analysis they concluded that a 20ft setback uh as you can see in yellow um would be needed to continue the practice of providing landscape screening from the outside. And also um as you've noted, we very tight on on the site. We want to reserve space for both liquids and solids treatment and plan for the future. So there could be a very uh likely situation where in the future if off-site management costs increase dramatically, we would need to build on-site anorobic digesttors seen here as tanks number one um on the measure E site. And then if future PAS regulations required uh paralysis then the city would also need to reserve space for both. And so this would need to happen in the future when paralysis could or you know become an established technology. The only way to fit both on site would be to place some of the solids processing in the measure E area and some adjacent on site um as shown here in purple um in order to um in order to meet our future needs. And we feel that this would align with uh some of the land uses as measure E allowed because only bioolids processing would be placed on the measure E site. Next slide. So ultimately to sum up the bioolids um treatment recommendations is that our consultant has recommended that we continue current operations but we maximize uh for future flexibility. um because things will change, technologies will change um and uh we need to track uh PAS regulations, off-site partnerships um and technology development just in case. Uh we should also be ready to take action um as necessary in the future. As our consultant has told us, there's not that much time once um regulations in place, agencies will need to um comply to meet those needs. Next slide. So as mentioned um before this is our initial recommendation for measure E to reserve a portion of it for potential future bio solids processes especially if future PAST regulations um go into effect and then for the 7.7 acres we'd like to rededicate as parkland. Next I'll turn it over um to Travis to go over the wetland wildlife corridor evaluation. Thank you, Tina. Travis, uh, director of natural resources for Rinkcon Consultants. Uh, worked with a team of biologists and geologist to conduct the wetland wildlife corridor evaluation in the um, measure E site. Um, going to just talk a little bit about it briefly today. uh with the intent of providing some baseline information results of the study and hopefully uh initiate some conversation and and open the floor up to questions. I'd like to start just uh briefly with um sort of an executive summary of the the study that we conducted. uh the measure e site. The focus of our study was to determine whether a wetland wildlife corridor could provide meaning meaningful ecological benefits between Emily Renel wetlands and the Bayland Harbor Marsh. Our assessment found the site already functions as habitat and supports wildlife movement and hydraologic connection in its current state. and multiple we evaluated multiple corridor concepts including an open air and underground alternatives. While several alternatives appeared technically feasible, they would require substantial excavation avoidance of existing infrastructure and ongoing maintenance to implement. Most importantly, the analysis found that these corridor alternatives would only provide a limited additional ecological benefit or uplift relative to the existing conditions. We found that potentially targeted habitat enhancement, so enhancing the existing habitat conditions in this area could likely provide a greater ecological benefit with less disturbance and most likely lower costs. Next slide, please. just like to talk about the measure E site parameters just a little bit. Uh the conceptual corridor site is the footprint of the potential wetland wildlife corridor that we evaluated and that's the sort of small uh yellow rectangular um elongated polygon there. Um the study area is located between the Emily Renel wetlands and the PaloAlto Balins marsh. Um it includes portions of the Bayland's nature preserve, the closed landfill and areas adjacent to the um water quality control plan. Because the site sits between two important habitat areas, there was interest in understanding whether a new wildlife corridor could improve ecological connectivity. We say improve ecological connectivity because the site in its existing conditions already provides hydraologic connection between the two wetlands via an 18-inch underground pipeline. Next slide, please. The Palo Alto City Council initiated this study to evaluate the potential for establishing a wetland wildlife corridor or alternative beneficial environmental use at the measure E site. Rencon was tasked with literature review, a site visit, an analysis to explore alternatives for creating a wetland wildlife corridor between and including portions of the Bayland's Nature Preserve and and the Emily Renel wetlands. Our role our role was to evaluate that concept using field observations, biological assessments, excavation assessment, hydraologic evaluations, and a review of site constraints to determine whether a corridor would meaningfully improve ecological ecological outcomes. Field surveys were conducted on November 13th and 18th in 2025 and included general site reconnaissance, wildlife observations, vegetation classification, and hydraologic and topographic evaluations. The corridor design alternatives were explored that we explored included the open air options. There was two of them. an open channel, which would be sort of a trapezoidal uh likely mostly straight channel, and a wide wetland swale, which would be a more meandering uh wider channel, and then two underground options, which included oversized multiar barrel box covert and an arch span covert. Next slide, please. This slide just shows an overview of the site and the various constraints that we uh evaluated. Um, this uh photo was taken during the field survey in November on November 18th and it it illustrates the close proximity of several important features that influence the project feasibility including the Balins Harbor Marsh and Barkadero Road, the regional water quality control plant and the horizontal levy pilot project. These existing conditions helped inform our ecological and excavation assessments and our evaluation of potential corridor alternatives. Identifying that the open air wide wetland swale or open channel alternatives would likely be a desired outcome. The following parameters would need to be achieved. We would need about a minimum wildlife quarter width of 100 feet for plants and invertebrates and aquatic species and a minimum width of about 200 feet that's at the top of bank is recommended for birds and small mammals. These uh these parameters were based on a study conducted in 2008. To achieve this, it was determined that approximately 810,000 cubic yards, excuse me, cubic feet of roughly or roughly 300 shipping containers of soil would need to be excavated to create the required hydraologic connection. Existing constraints to the corridor alternatives include the need for a covert or bridge crossing at Embaradero Road to provide hydraologic connection to the Balin Marsh embar uh changing uh the Embaradero Road drainage systems. Maintaining the recently constructed horizontal levy pilot project functionality maintaining the landfill maintenance facility which isn't seen in the picture. It's just off to the left here. And relocating regional water quality control plant, landfill, and park infrastructure, including a landfill flare gas man, two groundwater monitoring wells, a wastewater pipeline, and portable water pipelines. Next slide, please. I think one of the takehomes here is that the site isn't ecologically blank at this current state. wildlife movement, habitat uses are occurring in the site as it sits right now along with the hydraologic connection already mentioned via an 18-inch pipeline. So the question wasn't simply can we build a wetland corridor, but whether doing so would actually provide meaningful benefit ecologically. This distinction is important because the goal of a corridor and measure e site would be to achieve the greatest environmental benefit for the site and surrounding bayins. Existing habitats there now include the eucalyptus woodland. It's planted in 1988 and 2013 to f facilitate plant screening. Those woodlands provide nesting bird and raptor habitat. Uh there's currently existing pickleweed mats which is a wetland community um and it's also a California um sensitive natural community. There's quail bush scrub which is a common upland native community. And then there's landscape areas. Three of the landscape areas are slated for unre unrelated capital improvement project restoration at this time. As part of this evaluation, we evaluated species for their potential to utilize the site in its current and potential future conditions. We found that white-tailed kite was using the site readily at this point. Currently, white-tailed kite is a fully protected species under the state of California. Um, it's particularly interesting to me. It's one of the few birds that u mates for life, reuses their nest, and has large family groups. So disturbance in that area could be disturbing. Uh six other special status species were determined to have high potential to occur um in both conditions, existing and future conditions. Northwestern pond turtle, burrowing owl, salt marsh yellow har um salt marsh common yellow throat, Alama song sparrow, California's ridge whale, and the crotch's bumblebee which is a state candidate species. Three moderate potential to occur species and the existing and current conditions include California black rail, monarch butterfly, a federally candidate proposed species, and salt marsh harvest mouse, a currently listed species. Target targeted habitat benefit focusing on existing conditions rather than vastly changing the conditions would benefit these species. Next slide, please. Going along with that theme, we want to discuss targeted habitat enhancement with the potent potentially using the existing conditions and enhancing the existing conditions. Um beneficial uses focusing on wildlife habitat, upland restoration, and wetland enhancement. Upland habitat corridor enhancement of existing habitat could benefit a variety of species. I already mentioned the crotch's bumblebee, the brewing owl, monarch, butterfly. Upland habitat enhancement would include removal of non-native vegetation such as upland mustards and restoration of native vegetation communities on site. This option is a lower impact, low maintenance, and relatively inexpensive compared with construction of a wetland corridor. Specifically, restoration of native grasses, forbes, and shrubs to mimic locally appropriate communities such as a coastal grassland or coyote brush scrub or coastal sage scrub would be appropriate. Working with the screening, the existing screening that's there now, uh we could enhance the monarch and raptor use by planting more eucalyptus trees or Monterey cypress trees. Um and then on the marsh marsh sides of the site, we could pursue enhancing the pickle weed mats that are already existing. Uh some of those areas are invaded with non-native species at this time. Those species could be removed and um pickleweed mats mentioned is a sensitive natural community. They actually are really resilient and will come back pretty easily. um along the edge of the marsh on the southwest side and the north southwest side and the northwest side. These mustards could be removed providing that enhancement of the wetland in upland communities would benefit many species. I have a list of species that we could add um but don't want to belabor that topic here. It's uh something we could definitely discuss more. Compared with constructing a wetland habitat corridor, the alternative uses identified under the study would result in fewer temporary impacts to habitats and species on site. Would be more feasible to construct from from a regulatory and financial perspective. Would not require major construction to relocate utilities or other infrastructure which is critical to the treatment plant. It's not mutually exclusive. Could implement one, could implement all of them, could take them in little bits and pieces. It's not a huge disturbance all at once. And most importantly, wouldn't be prohibiting for future uses with the treatment plant. Um the the site is eventually if the site is eventually needed for additional critical wastewater treatment plant infrastructure major demolition would not need to remove the restoration areas. Next slide please. This slide's just basically a summary of of where we've been and um the findings um where we've been. We did a field and desktop evaluations. We studied, we evaluated um data from the California natural diversity database uh which is run and operated by the California fishing game fish and wildlife. Um we studied the information information planning and consultation database which is run by the US fish and wildlife service. We studied species recovery plans. We utilize city provided LAR data, aerial imagery and wildlife corridor studies. We conducted two field visits, biological and hydra hydraological evaluations. We evaluated the four alternatives by working with the city and their consultant team. The alternatives were the open air wide wetland swale which ultimately would be ecologically preferred because it provides terrestrial and aquatic plant and wildlife species habitat and hydraologic conditions but is very heavily constrained by sight constraints. we don't have the width to get that desired channel. The other open air open channel would have limited benefit because it provides minimal aquatic and terrestrial wildlife species and hydraologic connection in underground. It's pretty much mainly what exists now but in a different configuration uh would just support hydraologic connection and have very little benefit to wildlife or plants. Um ultimately we found that if pursuing a restoration or corridor project in this area, alternative upland enhancement would be uh more suitable for the site. At this point, I'd like to hand it back over to Tina. >> Thanks, Travis. Next slide. So I'd like to bring back to the commission our initial measure E recommendations after sharing some of the preliminary recommend preliminary technical recommendations from the two studies that council had asked us to look at into. So again we'd like to reserve 2.4 acres for potential uses regarding ball solids processing um and the 7.7 acres we'd like to rededicate to parkland. Next slide. This slide simply summarizes next slide. This slide simply summarizes the park dedication ordinance which includes the 7.7 acres and then last slide is our recommendation again. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Thanks for the um great presentation. And I'd like to first thank um thank you for the uh thoughtful and the wellprepared report that uh you put out. Um we appreciate the additional uh material uh which and and the responses to questions that that were provided. Um as I reviewed the staff report uh the supplemental Q&A and the correspondence we received I found the materials to be you know pretty comprehensive and I think also with the presentation it was pretty pretty thorough as well. So the issue before us is not um uh whether the uh a facility will be built uh but what rather whether the um the city should rededicate the entire 10 acre measure E site as parkland or preserve uh approximately 2.4 acres adjacent to the regional water quality control plant for potential uh future bio bio bioolids related uh needs. So, so before I open it up to uh public comments or ask the commissions for uh clarifying questions, I'd like to kind of briefly summarize the work of the ad hoc committee which uh Commissioner Klein House and I are on and the factors that um uh that informed our recommendation uh going forward here. So, Commissioner uh Klein House and I spent uh considerable time reviewing the Measure E ballot uh language uh prior uh staff reports. Uh the historical background as you said, this has been something that's been um going on for about I think 2022 or so. Uh and the correspondence received from the public. Our focus is not uh was not on what uh future uses might someday be proposed, but rather on the specific question that was referred to the parks and rec commission by the city council. U Commissioner Klein House and I and staff and Sarah and others um did a walk through I think it was about a month ago and so it gave us a pretty good feel for um what what is before us here. So like I said we spent we spent a lot of time looking at that. Now several um several observations guided our discussion here. Um first the the measure E language um ballot was very specific. Uh voters approved the um temporary removal of site from parkland dedication for the exclusive use of constructing a facility for processing uh yards trimming food waste uh and other organic materials. And so as you've indicated here, no such facility was ever built and measure and the measure specifically contemplated that the property would be returned uh to parkland after 10 years. And I guess that's where we are today. Uh secondly we we consider the physical characteristics of the site itself uh especially after our walk through and much of the approximately let's say 7 uh 7 acres is constrained by landfill as I understand it landfill conditions and it's not suitable for traditional park development. I think you guys have talked a little bit about that. However, the uh 2.4 4 acre area has historically served as a a buffer uh between the regional qual water quality control plant uh and Bixby Park and has potential value as a habitat restoration area, wildlife connectivity and open space. So uh for those reasons uh we we'll we'll make some recommendations going forward. At this point I would like to uh Commissioner Klein House if you have any uh to speak to the items as well. Yeah, I had a couple of questions. >> I had a couple of questions and comments respond to what you have presented. uh RCON presented one thing that was of interest uh that the site the measure E site has value ecologically animal use that there's already use by species of um special status species and it could be enhanced as a plant habitat to really provide a lot of value between the uh Emily Renzel marshes and the um the uh bay or the Harbor Marsh, even if that is not an aquatic um connectivity. So that was interesting because many times it was presented there's nothing there. It just stinks. Nobody uses it. We don't need it. And I think that establishes that there is value for wildlife and for nature. So I think that's an important thing to start with because the question is not really are we going to put a a new water connectivity but are we going to lose that site completely versus a different kind of vision can we restore it to nature and I think that's a different um or it's going to be industrial the other observation that I think is important to note is that the 7.7 acres on the landfill is not very useful for nature. because of the cap, you can't have animals dig into that. If there are squirrels that are trying to make a home, usually they're being uh excluded from that site. You cannot really plant trees there uh because the roots will upset the um the um cap underneath. So the the the 7.7 acres provide currently uh people can walk or or bike they can do that but there's not a lot of other things that is parkland can be used and whether it is parkland or not doesn't really make the use different anyway so those are interesting observations and I would very much appreciate share it if you share the list of species that you mentioned uh that ringcon has with all of us. Um having established that I think it's also important to you know we received letters from the public and one of those letters from was from the honorable pre uh former mayor Ramy Renzel and she said that the 120 foot landscape buffer which is essentially the measure E site was installed and h has been maintained by the regional water quality control plant as a condition for approval for the plant's development. It was expected to be a buffer that provides a visual and otherwise noise smell a buffer. And so she says it's a and I'm going to quote this because I it's ironic that measure E removed the required landscape buffer land from park dedication and may result in an even more industrial and smellier facility being located even closer to the park that this buffer would was intended to protect. I have a lot of difference to some of to the legacy of some of our uh previous um especially Emily Lorenzo those marshes are in her name. So I want to say also that I do not underestimate the complexity and the difficulty of running a water treatment plan on a small scale and the effluence going to the bay and you definitely want the water that goes to the bay not to be contaminated in any sort of way not now and not in the future. Um, so the so I understand the the complexity and you know I don't want to see the bay be contaminated either. But as Yeah. So we want get to the commission as far as if there's any clarifying questions before we go to um the public comments. Do you have any additional clarifying questions to ask? >> Okay. Any commissioners with clarifying questions? Commissioner Klein, I mean, Axel Rod. >> Yep. Thanks for the amazing report. I have a few questions. Hopefully, I'll try to get through them fast. Can you help me understand how much bioolids is going off site? Like how many trucks, how often, what's the volume we're talking? >> Yeah, currently we have roughly two to three trucks a day leaving the facility. Um, so I think roughly 63 uh tons per week. >> And is that likely to be impacted materially in 29? >> Yeah, we've modeled an increase of roughly uh 20 to 25% due to our change in wastewater treatment plant process that would allow us to better treat ammonia nutrients. >> Okay. So even after 29 it'll be like three to five trucks a day. Yes. Got it. >> And are the contracts with off-site facilities yearbyear, excuse me, are they long-term signed? >> Uh, from what I know, we uh may have recently renewed the contracts in the last year. Uh, potentially Karen North can answer that better. >> Sure. So, we um the contracts for there's two contracts. There's one for hauling off the the solids and then there's also a contract for the two processing facilities. The challenge for us is we managed to get five-year contracts in place, but that was before AB218 went in, which is going to uh flood the market with bioolids because there's no more the Senate bill AB28 basically made it so no bioolids cannot be used as alternative daily cover in landfills. So, we've been doing creating class A biosids for a very long time. Specifically, when we switched over from the incinerators, which was ash, now to raw sludge that it's not treated at all. So, we're having raw sludge go in the streets. It's just dewatered. That's all it is. Just cheesecloth, dewatered human waste is in the trucks. Um, then that was to buy us time to figure out if technologies had improved and changed, which is why we've done the bioolids facility plans updates. so frequently because technologies are rapidly changing and evolving. The question though for you is I think we're on our fourth or third fourth year of our contract and then we're going to have to go out again and we anticipate our cost will go up um exponentially just because the market will be flooded with other folks other wastewater treatment plants looking to handle their bioolids without treatment which is why San Jose is one of our potential options to send it to because they are they have all of their bioolids goes alternative daily cover and they're actively pursuing um a facility ility to treat their bios and so that might be a closer location for us to haul our dewatered sludge cake. I'm sure that's a lot more information than you wanted but >> no that was helpful. Thank you. >> If I can just add um our consultant has also let us know that there are certain triggers that would uh cause us to relook at all of this again and do another bioolids facility plan. One of the triggers would be if the cost to treat and um offhaul the bow solids would double. That would really change the analysis and have us look at on-site treatment sooner than than not. >> Okay. Thank you. Um I have a lot of other stuff, but I'll let others ask. Thank you for that. Yeah, I was going to um kind of remind me of it, but you you indicated that the the potential need for 2.4 acres may be 15 years or more in the future. It is dependent upon regulatory requirements and operational needs. I think you just talked about a trigger. So I was asking what would be the what would be the additional context regarding the likelihood that this lab would actually be needed and what specific circumstances would trigger that need. >> Yeah. So that's something we're still investigating and finalizing a part of our long uh range facility plan and our bios facility plan. Our consultant is trying to help us with an implementation plan from this point on um because they've recommended offhauling but we can't potentially do that forever. So what are the triggers? One of the triggers is cost for the existing practices. Also we've uh been tasked to continue to have a pulse on the changing technologies paralysis. One of the technologies that could treat PAS on site is constantly changing and evolving. And so that's something we're tracking as well. If costs for that potentially decrease or if the efficiencies increase, then that could be something attractive that we'd want to jump on faster. Um, also uh we are tracking regional uh changes and partnerships as K North had mentioned. You know, if San Jose uh is able to take some of our sludge, uh we would jump at that and that would change some of our calculus for what we plan to do in the future for our balance facility plan. >> Okay. Commissioner CL. So I um attended and actually watched again the um presentation from February about the different options that you were looking at and it seems like the main motivation for keeping the flexibility with the measure E site is really the PAS and liquids whereas for the bioolids it is possible maybe not comfortably but possible to accommodate the bioolid facility. on the existing footprint. >> Um so you've mentioned several different things. Um we have many motivators as I've mentioned to look holistically um at all the triggers. One of the main triggers that you mentioned that I agree with is that PAS and solids is something that is uh something we watch very carefully. Our consultant has acknowledged that uh you know three states um are uh h have enacted um PAS regulations that require wastewater treatment plants in those states to do something else whether they want to truck their bioolids out of state or treat on site. It's really caused a change in how those wastewater treatment plants um you know deal with their bioolids. We're not there yet because California has not required us to do so, but um that is on the horizon. So that's that's one of our main motivators um and to reserve some space on site to have that flexibility. >> I did want to add um just a little bit. So we have been there for almost a hundred years um the treatment plant. So our our partner with Stanford is I think in two years time frame is going to hit a hundred years but we've been around forever. We can't relocate this sewage treatment plant. We also are sandwiched between lots of sensitive habitats which we also are there to protect. If you notice we built the horizontal levy. So our we are the true stewards of the environment. Um, we have been working there and trying to figure out how to remove contaminants, make sure contaminants not are not entering the South Bay. Um, we're also trying to look at ourselves as a resource recovery facility, how do we get the energy out of the the the waist stream? How do we get the re the water if we can? So, I just want to give perspective that the environmental services division that I manage is really a true environmental like that is our our top goal. So this is you know council asked us to look at just to remind us to look at what can we do. So this is why it's taken us years because updating a long range facility plan to look out the next 20 to 50 years. When we did our longrange facility plan in 2012 we did not anticipate nutrient reduction that that would be a mandate. Thankfully, we are fitting it into our existing footprint because we have nowhere to go, no other space. And our bioolids, we were asked to do it for our climate action plan goals to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. But all we've done is buy ourselves time. We anticipate, I'd say, in the next 30 to 50 years, we will have more regulations that we have to comply with. So, all we're trying to do is we're not saying we have to do it right now. We're just trying to keep our options open. Because what keeps me up at night is if we have raw sewage in the street or we can't or we're discharging things that we shouldn't be discharging in the bay because my ultimate goal is to protect the environment. So we're not saying that either way decisions this we're just telling what our council asked us to do. We can do a wildlife corridor which is great. Keep it as as existing and hopefully we don't need it. But um and then do can we fit everything on the on the within the fence line? I don't think we can in the next 50 years. And that's what we were trying to look at because we don't know what in future regulations are going to hit us. So that's where looking at liquid processing and bioolids and this has been a ton of work. So to try and figure this out, imagine a very small parcel for 236,000 people and that's continuing to grow. So and trust me, I I love the bay lands. This is why I worked there for 25 years. It's my favorite place to be. Um, one of the things I learned in one of the meetings or answers was the other states that have standards for PIFAs, uh, their standards are higher than our PIFAs. So, if California follows them, then we would be totally within the boundary and not have to do very much. I'm not saying it's not likely or possible that they'll come up with better um regulation in Palo Alto, but I think what I'm trying to say is we don't know what is needed, how much of this land is needed. And the time that we don't know what is needed is 15 or 20 or 30 or 50 years. And meanwhile, that land has been degraded. It's been used. Even the plantings that were there are not have not been taken care of. and um and it's held sort of like yeah we'll just use it when we need it and I don't see why it can't go back to parkland be restored as an upland habitat just like Rcon highlighted and then should the time comes when you need some or all of it the voters will understand like you know they will and meanwhile measure E was really temporary said let's look at what we do we have 10 years we look at it it's been more than 10 years and now it's like oh let's just consider a permanent or indefinitely so I'm not underestimating the issues that the um water pollution control plant is facing but we our our charge is the parks right and this area anyway I'm not sure this is not a question but All right. Um, you you you said that you you've looked at the purchase of the I understand the the need why there's the asking about the 2.4 acres, but you also talked about the purchase of property uh contingents to this site. Can you give us kind of an update where that's because some of those buildings I know are empty and maybe they were looking at, you know, getting rid of and so forth. So you kind of >> So we've been looking at purchasing adjacent parcels for almost 20 years. So and acquiring land within the city is is extremely challenging. Thankfully our our council directed us to work on that. Um we are actively pursuing that. It's we can't talk too much just because it's in negotiations. Um, but that that is more to move bodies and people off the site for safety and for construction. And so we have that space availability for the liquid side that we're currently updating right now um from the 2012 master plan. Uh we also are trying to figure out how to where to house everybody because our facility is as Tina alluded to is a 247 facility. And so when there's a large storm event, we have we have some operators that literally spend two to three days straight there if they are trying to maintain the the site um and keep all the water going through. So our wastewater is on average about 20 million gallons, but when there's a big storm event, we can go up to 60. Yes. Ex 60. We are we are dry weather 39 MGD million gallons of water per day and we are permitted for wet weather up to 80. So it just gives you a perspective of the volume of water and the and the population that we're serving. Um we are thankfully out of sight, out of mind and usually hopefully out of the papers which is our goal right but just to give perspective of what we're dealing with when there's a rain event. So that's why we're trying to get the people off the site so we can contain that those preserve those 25 acres as much as we can for liquid and and future process needs. But you know we in the next hundred years who knows what's going to happen for us. >> Yeah. Okay. Thank you. >> I have something to add. Um agree with uh K North. I I also want to add that um the consultant that did the B solids facility plan thought very carefully about how to fit everything on site. Um and so the office space would not be ideal for solid treatment because it's quite far from our existing air raators, clarifiers and dewatering building. Um the north side uh of the site and also where measure E the 2.4 acres is would be much more ideal location from a process perspective where the piping would need to go and start on the site versus where the office park is. That being said, purchasing is uh still something that council directed us to do and we will continue to do so to get bodies off the site and um you know more space for workspace planning and parking and um employees. We are also um renting space from the airport for layown area for our construction because we do need space to put um equipment pipes um and so we are doing that now and will continue to do so. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, can I show Axel right? >> I'm just trying to figure out what are the odds of us needing those 2.4 acres in the next say 20 years. Like I really appreciate the perspective that you have. That's really long term. We don't know what's going on. But just back of the envelope, we're doing like five trucks a day. Even if the processing costs double, the payback for doing a a project like this is probably in the decades. Am I wrong? Yeah. Um, it's a really tough question. It's something we've asked our consultant several times um, since they have a better pulse on the balisologist industry and cost for these projects. And I'd say there's multiple factors that we need to consider. The regulations, so the chance of that hitting us um, and we don't know exactly when they hit, how long we will have to comply. Um and when typically they are established um all the wastewater treatment plants in the in California would have to meet them as well. So it's almost a race to build some of that infrastructure that's needed which makes it even more difficult. Um also uh cost of hauling and treatment um you know has increased. Not sure if it will double in the next five years, but maybe the next 5, 15, 20 years, especially with fuel costs. We see that as a much higher possibility than we did before. Even when the study um was really underway earlier this year, things have changed since then, even so. Um and then also there may be site disposal restrictions as well that we want to keep track of. So there's there's a lot of things that are in play, but we'd say that we feel that the most prudent thing that we could do at a wastewater treatment plant in order to think about the next 30 to 50 years is to reserve this space. >> Okay. Any other commission? Commissioner Q, >> I noticed that um our plant's average dry season flow is about 18 MGD compared to a permitted capacity of 39. How does existing excess capacity influence our long-term bioolids planning decision? >> I can take a stab at that. Um so uh dry weather flows as you mentioned are roughly around you know 18 to 20 but in the wet season we could see um anywhere up to 40 to 60. And when we do long-term planning we don't only think about the uh flows that we've seen in the past although those are very influential on our planning. We reach out to all of our partner agencies. Um we ask them to give us projections based on their housing element. um for the next five years up to 50 years. And so we sum all of that information up in order to uh think about what we should build not just now but for the next 30 to 50 years. And so over the 50-year time frame, we feel that um the 80 MGD capacity may be sufficient, but it's something we want to look at again in 10 years. in 10 years, you know, with different population projections, we may want to think about increasing our capacity in order to meet future needs. >> And I just want to add, um, when we have increased concentrations, so when I first started 25 years ago, we were around 26 million gallons of water per day, but our our waist stream has changed. So, it's a very concentrated waist stream. So, as we increase population, we're going to have higher loads of ammonia, which means higher solids. So we may get more uh less water coming in, but it's going to be a more d more concentrated water. And so the solid processing, which is we don't process at all. We just dewater and haul out. That's going to continue to increase over time. And so that's something that we also have we're trying to model, but it's challenging, especially because we're in the middle of a secondary process upgrade, which will increase our solids after that gets completed in 2029. And then on top of that, we're also trying to model what is the population change and demographics going to change in our service area. And so we're we you know, it's not a perfect science, but we just don't know everything, but we know that our solids are going to go up. Definitely in 2029, our solids will increase significantly when the secondary process is completed. >> Thank you. >> Okay. I also have a following up question about since this facility serves several regional communities, how are we balancing our goal of the regional collaboration with other cities? >> Yeah, so it's a very unique uh partnership model that we have with uh the five other different agencies. Uh we have long-standing agreements. I think Karen mentioned the agreement with Stanford almost hundred years and so a lot of these agreements are decades old um and these partners have capacity shares within our plant and so they are very important in the decision-making process for everything we build. If we build a new capital project or for example the secondary treatment project, um all these agencies share in the costs and our debt financing and so we have to um establish uh amendments to existing agreements for every single project and they go to um these agencies councils and our councils. We both have to mutually agree. Uh, Palo Alto owns the facility and administers it, but we uh definitely depend on our partners to be able to carry forth these projects um and pay for the operating and capital costs for these projects. And we meet with them regularly. We actually met with them today. Um they are great partners uh in order to keep this regional facility going. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Uh any other clarifying questions? If not, we'll move on to public comments. >> There are currently uh three speakers for public comments and one person online. >> Okay, go ahead. >> Okay, first up we have Stephen R. Hi. Uh my name is uh Steven Rosalum. I live in old PaloAlto and uh in 2011 I was very active in getting measure E passed and approved by almost 65% of the voters. I think that's important to remember um at this point in time because uh people voted uh to take responsibility for our waste and to process it on site. At the time we were incinerating it and which was clearly not environmentally sound anymore and uh we agreed that we needed to do better. As it turned out, the 7.7 acres of the 10 acres turned out to be not suitable for further construction because it's a landfill and landfill cap can't be breached without releasing contaminants into the environment. So, um, people now realize that, you know, after looking at it carefully that, uh, there's only 2.4 acres of the site that would be available for bioolids treatment. And the voters, as I say, in 2011, they agreed that we should take more responsibility for treating our waste and not exporting it to other people to deal with. Um u because of that I I urge the commission to approve the staff recommendation to restore 7.7 acres as parkland uh with minimal soil disturbance as the consultants have pointed out uh because most of the environmental uh benefit of the parkland is already u available with by by just minimal improvements to the um to the plantings that are there. Um, this will continue continue to honor the intent of the voters in 2011 to encourage the city to take fuller responsibility for the treatment of our bioolids. Thank you. >> Thank you. Up next, we have Herb B. Chair Freeman and commissioners, I believe you should recommend to the council that they dedicate the entire measure east site as as parkland. Uh there are a number of related issues. The first is the proponents of the measure did argue about this incinerators but they will plan for removal independent of the measure E adoption. uh second staff has said it would take uh until the fall to to bring forward uh you the recommendations for bioolids but you don't have to wait to bring before the council uh that long to bring your recommendation. They're currently on a 9-week vacation. they meet on August 10th. Uh the uh recommendation to dedicate uh all of the measure site to Parkland can come can be put on their next agenda on August 10th. It doesn't have to wait until the report on the bioolids. Uh the uh the the issue of uh whether or not uh changing uh to dedication or not changes the use or not of the land is just the opposite of what our charter member of a parkland said. It says when something has a that particular use, it should be dedicated. It's not that we take something else that's not uh being used as a park play or recreation uses uh that's never been used for that purpose and dedicated and then say oh well let's make that a park. Uh so in terms of the use of the property once it's sort of a hole in the park uh uh some people say it should be used for something other than parkland. uh when the council was discussing the salt removal facility uh location uh Walt Hayes the main author of the measure site sent an email to the council and he said oh use the measure e site for the salt removal facility. So this attitude that we just leave it undedicated because sometimes in the future it might be needed uh is backwards. it should be rededicated as car parkland and then as before in the case with the this same uh plant and with the airport uh if the council feels that what's currently dedicated parkland needs to be un dedicated for good use such as in addition uh to to for a particular facility uh it will go to the voters and ask them to remove from parkland which the voters have done in cases I believe both with additions to this plant and also in the case of the report uh just there was some concern that once it was undeedicated uh it will remain that way forever just for the sake of having something empty. It shouldn't be that way. Thank you. >> Up next is Peter D. >> Good evening. I'm Peter Dremmyer, resident of Powalto. I grew up in Palo Alto. loved the Baylands, loved the foothills. After college, I moved back here to work on the International Earth Day 1990 campaign, and I've stuck around. I've been doing environmental work. I was one of the leaders of the Measure M campaign, measure E campaign. I was also leader of the Measure M campaign. So, um I am curious, why is Commissioner Klein House allowed to participate in this discussion, let alone the ad hoc committee, let alone vote on it? 15. I I like Shani. We agree on most issues, but 15 years ago, she and Emily Renzel were up there on the dis with Walt Hayes and me, and we debated measure E. Walt and I as proponents, uh, those two as opponents. And if I were on the Parks and Recreation Commission, I would be told when Measure E came up, I had a conflict of interest and I would have to recuse myself. 3 years ago, the ad hoc committee came to the commission with a recommendation to suggest that all measure E be rededicated. We weren't consulted at all. I heard about it from a reporter who called me said, "What do you think of this?" So, we mobilized people and at the parks and recreation commission meeting a few days later, people were shocked that there was any controversy. Well, an ad hoc committee is supposed to look at things and work through things in advance, not hide information. And at that meeting, two commissioners voted no on the recommendation. One abstained, which was essentially a no, but on a 4 to 2:1 vote, uh, it moved forward. And the thinking was, well, we've come this far and, you know, we're kind of surprised now. and instead of trying to figure out why there was that surprise. It's like here we are and council is going to look at other issues. We have to look at parks and recreation, they'll consider other things. Um I don't I don't think that was a good look for the parks and recreation commission. No one consulted us this time around. Just got a notice last Thursday thanks to staff that on the bioolids plan that there was this opportunity. You know, the undeedicating park land doesn't just create automatically park. I mean, the 7.7 acres isn't going to change. The 2.4, there's no funding. There's no community interest in putting park benches and picnic tables next to a wastewater treatment plant with planes flying over. If you're interested in what the community thinks, um, it'd be better to, you know, publicize this in a way that people show up. I mean, a lot of people would show up if they knew that the measure E site was at risk, but we just don't hear about these things. And again, I I you know, I I like Shaunie. I respect her in most ways. We work together on some issues, but it's just very inappropriate for her to be an ad hoc committee and lobbying all of you. Thank you. Our final speaker uh joining us via Zoom is Brett A. >> Can you hear me? >> We can hear you. >> All right. Uh yeah. So I would like to uh support staff's proposal. I've um been in Palo Alto for 30 years now. I really enjoy the bay lands. I uh use it multiple times a week for all different kinds of activities as well as viewing the wildlife there. And I think I as well as many palatans are very proud of our bay lands and open space and the way we preserve habitat. But I'm also uh thinking that we're also very proud of our regional role that we play in processing our sewage and the concern for the environment and the impact on the ecology from our pollution. And I think staff has done a diligent job here in presenting uh both sides of um of the issue. Um the public has expressed in the past the desire to preserve all of this land as as parkland, but it's also expressed the desire to balance that against our need to to limit the pollution that we are burdening others with. So in in a sense there's biodiversity value in preserving this land uh as parkland and and a preserve but there's also ecological value in in doing what we can to prevent our pollution from leaving our city and exposing others. Uh so I think we need to have a compromise here and the public has expressed its opinion on both sides that this is a good tradeoff and that if we have good reasonable options that we should take them uh as they appear. We learn more about the pollution problem as time goes on. Uh we know that that problem is growing. We know it's not going away. We know we're going to have to do something about it in the future. We also know from the staff report that there's marginal incremental value in in um developing the ecology on this small piece of land. So I think we we we're achieving with the staff report a very good and uh judicious balance of interests here and and keeping our options open to do the right thing. I think in terms of managing our own pollution. Thank you. There are no more speakers at this time. Okay. Thank you everyone who spoke uh this evening. Appreciate the um thoughtful comments and perspective uh that have been shared. Um at the moment like to go ahead and see if there's any commissioners who have any additional questions. I'll start with you Commissioner Ding. I don't have any other questions >> which is uh Commissioner Klein of Commissioner Smith. >> So I think where we are is that the 7.7 acres is pretty clear. We're talking about the fate of the 2.4 and I'm just going to go back to you guys because I think you have a much better crystal ball than we could potentially have. So if you think about the costs and the risks and you had to be a Vegas better what are the odds that in the next 10 to 20 years we are in a situation where we want to use those is it like a 10% 50% 80% give me a sense >> it's it's hard to say as I mentioned but I would say it's probably even odds >> I'd actually probably say it's a little bit higher just based on what's changed in the 25 years that I've been here. Um the possibility especially once we get the secondary treatment upgrade completed and all the um competing demands that we currently have with our liquid processing. So what we're at staff level we're going to we'll have to figure out what are we upgrading because we don't want to increase rates too high but also to protect the environment and the PAS um ones are are coming down there if you look in the news and pretty much every um contaminants of emerging concern discussion is is tailored around that. California has done a good job of banning um products, but it's still it's a forever chemical and it's not coming out of our system. So, it's it's something that definitely we are tracking and been monitoring and um for a long time, but we never know like I didn't expect nutrients to be required in 2012 and it's already required now. So this is regulations can impact us and change quickly and doing upgrades to sewage stream plants take decades to plan and build. >> Thank you. And just one other small question. If this is re um done from measure E, if we want to continue the hydraulic connection and we have to service the 18inch pipe, is there any change in how we'd have to do it or that all stays the same? The hydraulic connectivity is uh something that we put in as a beneficial use to connect the Emily Renzel Marsh since it was originally wetland. Um but then it got because of the landfill it was it was basically landlocked and so that pipeline that went in was put in place um to help benefit the restoring the whole wetland area. So, it's a combination of a freshwater marsh, that's our effluent, um, and then also the salt marsh, which is the 18inch pipe that goes underneath. So, it's a it's there's two flows going through there. And that was to also mitigate, um, our impact to the creek. So, by putting salt water into the creek, Matador Creek, we also need to provide a freshwater source, which we provide upstream. >> I'm just trying to get it. There's going to be maintenance. Maintenance is not impacted by one way or the other. >> Yeah. I was just trying to give you a little bit more history on the Renzel March which is from 1992. >> So, >> thank you. >> Yeah, >> Commissioner Smith, >> I don't have any further comments. >> Okay, Commissioner Klein House. >> I have been involved in this since a very long time. I visited them many times. I visited with Karen and others. Um I don't think I approached it closed mind. I think I really looked I sent a lot of questions. We received really good answers. Appreciate the um the meetings, the responses, everything you've done. I do. Um and you met with me individually at times. You met with the ad hocs. I actually participated in various meetings. I don't think I'm I approach this round as a closed mind, but I want to say something else. We've seen some of the what's happening in the Bayland in several other meetings this year and it's clear that what was once tidal wetlands east of 101 are now create converted into roads. the uh flood basin which is not fully functional as a and never was supposed to be as a habitat because it needs to be kept dry for the water to come in. There's the treatment plant. There's the landfill which you can't even have a squirrel there before you have to gas it. The airport, the golf course, athletic facilities and now housing is coming in and other facilities. So the actually functional biological areas, wetlands and some of the uplands in the baylands have shrunk considerably really pretty much. There are also studies from the bay that show steep declines in bird populations. And so I guess why is nature so expendable has always been my question. Why aren't we looking you know I appreciate that you're looking at the offices. I really do and I hope you can purchase all of them. Maybe they're not needed anymore. But I do think that we're that this connection, even if it's upland and not a an aquatic connection, provides a really important corridor and component of the pro of the full bay lands between the Emily Renzel Marshes, the ITT pro uh previous whatever facility that was uh and and the harbor marsh and the bay. And so it's not a minor area from an ecological point of view. And I think Rencon showed that in their report. It's not negligible. It's not insignificant. Previously, you know, there were indications that said, "Oh, there's nothing there. It's only some raccoons." But it's not. And so for us as a as a power commission, I wish the council would actually say, "Yeah, this is important enough to we're going to find all the money in the world, buy all these properties, you know, and maybe that's what we'll end up if if if if measure E was not so readily seemingly so readily available." And so this is how I feel about it. That's all I have to say. >> So um you know several speakers referenced the um the importance of preserving the wild wildlife corridor and habitat connectivity between the bayands and I renal wetlands. and staff help us understand the long-term environmental benefits and tradeoffs associated with dedicating the full 10 acres versus preserving the 2.4 acre portion. So, you're asking uh just asking for clarification. Uh what are some of the differences pros and cons between uh dedicating 10 versus dedicating 7.7? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, uh we were asked by council to investigate whether we could potentially use and need the 2.4 acres. Ultimately, um not much will change in the short term. As I mentioned, we don't foresee a short-term need uh because our consultant has asked us to continue the current practice while um keeping an ear out and eyes out for certain triggers. But in the future, if um regulations change, if cost of uh hauling changes, um if we are forced to build uh on-site treatment, then um being able to move quickly to meet those regulations and to put in infrastructure that, as Karen North mentioned, um wastewater treatment infrastructure takes a long time to plan, design, and build. um we are much more likely to be able to meet these regulations and uh deliver cost to service uh uh cost effective um projects if we're able to reserve this 2.4 acres um rather than having to go through a process of um you know undedicating the amount of land needed in order to uh build those same facilities. So we are hoping to save time and money um uh in order to move quickly in that case. >> I just want to add that um our our goal is to actually enhance so um Tina alluded to it earlier that a couple of our construction projects that we currently have, we're actually planning on going and enhancing the 2.4 acres the screening. Um and it's not really even if you dedicated the full 10 versus dedicating the 7.7 and kept the 2.4 um the habitat quality would be I'd say that remain the same or be better because we are planning on enhancing it. It's just for us to futureproof our facility. I was I don't have the crystal ball but to try and make it so if there's potential in the future I don't we're not going to go out into the Baylands. We're not going to fill the bay lands to create the sewage treatment plant. That's not an option. We don't own the parcels adjacent to we're we're working on that, but that's also doesn't work out with the flow when we're, you know, moving pipelines and and process. Um it would be extremely challenging to get a pipeline across. We're currently dealing with multiple projects right now. We keep on hitting on um utilities underground while we're dealing with pipelines. Um so it's very challenging to try and get move the flow that's currently happening at our facility which is why the perimeter um makes sense for bioids uh which is why we've been doing the the longrange facility planning space where can things go what makes sense so we understand it's parks and reccomission your initial was the 10 acres you're we were just asked by council do we need it um in the future and we've done our analysis and it looks like we do so but it's this is all we're here to do is just provide information. >> Okay. Any other comments? >> Okay. Um so, thank you. So, the commission has heard the presentation, the public testimony, and uh commission discussions. Um so, based on that discussion, I'd like to offer the following motion for the commission's consideration. Um, and this is from the ad hoc, but also from listening to all of the the comments and and reading the letters that have been coming up from the public. I move that the parks and recreation uh recommend that the city council adopt a park dedication ordinance designating uh 10 acres of the measure E site within Bixe Park as dedicated park land for future park recreation and open spaces. Is there a second for that? >> I just want to make sure that Eric, we it's I believe staff has it on screen, but there was a little bit of verbiage. >> Oh, yeah. We did add something in there >> change. So, let's let's make sure we've captured that correctly. >> Okay. >> Can you uh reread your motion or >> Yeah, that's that's exactly what I put. So the park PRC recommends city council adopt a park dedication ordinance to dedicate 10 acres of med measure E site at Bixu Park at Parkland S Parkland. The 2.4 acres should be gloatically enhanced with native plants and trees to provide habitat and passive recreation value. I get a second. >> I'll second. >> Okay. >> Okay. Call to vote here. Uh, Commissioner Klein House, >> yes. >> Uh, Commissioner Smith, >> Commissioner Axelrod, >> no. >> Chair Freeman, >> uh, yes. Commissioner Deng, >> no. >> That is a 32 vote. So 322, right? So I believe it passes. Motion carries. Nope. Motion does not carry. >> Motion. >> No, the you would need majority of so it would need four. Yeah, >> that motion does not carry. Okay, >> we'll be I well majority I guess sitting present we have a majority but there's there's a total of six of you and it needs a majority of >> this of more than three. I think that you need to make sure of that because I don't think that's true. >> The I believe the majority is of the five. I thought >> there Oh, sorry. There's five of you here. So, yes, three. Three. Then the motion does carry. Apologies. I thought there were six of you here. >> Okay. >> Correct. >> Yeah. So, motion carries then. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. We'll move on to the next item. Thank you. >> I just wanted to say thank you so much for your dedication and the number of years you've done and I go out to the bay lands a lot and uh and go to Bixby Park and then we go over around the pond and stuff and the work you've done as you go to Bricsby Park on the left. It's been very nice. You're working on that. So, >> okay, we'll take a five minute break. >> Thank you. to the meeting. We'll start with item number two on the agenda. >> Chair Chair Freeman, I do have an announcement. Um, I wanted to announce that tonight's Parks and Recreation Commission meeting um will be going live on channel 30. Um, this is because um after the posting of the agenda um this channel was changed from 26. >> Okay. >> Um so just just to inform the public. Okay. Thank you. for clarification as well. Um, this is item number three on the agenda. >> Yes. U Good evening, Chair Freeman and members of the commission. Thank you for this opportunity to uh present to you this evening the financial feasibility of expanding the uh driving range at Bay Bland's Golf Links. I am Lamb Do with the division of open space parks and golf. For the study session, I am joined online by Ed Gil uh representing the National Golf Foundation. Um Ed will be presenting the financial study which he and the foundation prepared. Um Ed has served several past roles including director of consulting for the foundation. Uh previously the city has worked with the National Golf Foundation on golf matters such as the golf course uh design selection and development of uh course operator requirements. Next slide please. As an overview for tonight's study session, the focus is on financial feasibility of expanding the driving range with construction of a new driving range uh ground level and a second deck. This is a discussion only. No recommen no recommendation is being sought from the commission this evening. Staff plans to return to the commission at a later date for recommendation during the uh 2022 finance committee budget hearings. The committee discussed converting the driving range to a double-deck facility and there has been remain some interest in this potential project. Um I'll speak to the golf courses and the driving ranges financial performance and then Ed will present the found national golf foundation's financial feasibility study and then from there uh I'll then discuss other factors and site constraints and then we will conclude the study session with a commission feedback where staff is seeking your uh thoughts on the feasibility. Next slide please. In uh 2018, after a 2-year uh renovation closure, the Pala Municipal Golf Course reopened as the Bayands Golf Links. Um the renovation was for the full 18 holes of the course uh changing it from a flat and mostly straight golf 18 golf holes to a link style course uh with contours, mounds, and bends and some unique features such as a large putting green shared by two opposing holes. Uh the link style has created more challenging course with different distances but however playable by golfers of different skill levels. Still nonetheless uh the course uh was designed and rebuilt using pass palum turf in the fairways which was selected for being salt tolerant and in the bays clay soils and its ability to be irrigated with reclaimed water as well. Next slide please. In looking at the golf courses uh financial performance um since 2021 the f uh the course has performed well and is operating in the black. Um however in the first two years fiscal year 19 and future 20 after the renovation reopening the course operated in the red. This was due to multiple debt service payments when in the first year of operations and then also in the second year of operations um fiscal year 20 there was the closure due to the onset of the co 19 pandemic. However, since those two years the uh course has consistently operated in the black. Um the driving range uh as well has done well um since 2021 with increases in gross revenue. Most recently in the last fiscal year 2025, the driving range brought in about $772,000. Next slide, please. And now I'll ask Ed Guthrell of the National Golf Foundation to present their financial feasibility study. Ed, if you would take over, please. >> Yes. Thank you, L. And uh hello, Chair Freeman, and other commissioners. It's good to be with you. Although a little late past my bedtime where I am, but um I just wanted to preface this Murphy's law. I came down with a upper upper respiratory infection. So hopefully I'll make it all the way through and you'll forgive me if I go to the water bottle a few times. Um next slide, please. So just a little background first on National Golf Foundation. We were founded uh 1936 in Chicago by the Graphus brothers and the organization involved evolved into the leader in golf industry consumer research as well as other types of research. Um many publications we put out monthly and yearly and uh one of them the most prominent is our annual graphus report which is a basically a state of the industry report that all the main major manufacturers rely on the club makers and the and the ball manufacturers and club car and pig and titleist and rainberg. So a very prominent position in in golf and golf research. We also do custom golf facility research and consulting. That's what we're involved with. Uh Richard Singer and myself is at the facility level. Uh an important consideration is we're independent. We don't design golf courses. We don't manage golf courses. So even though we're advocates for the game and we like to see golf facilities do well, we want to our goal is to give you independent reports without uh without any skin in the game, if you will. and we far and away the municipal golf industry leader. Um, Richard, I I recently retired from full-time work last year, but uh, at the time of my retirement, Richard Singer and I, the senior director, had over, uh, over 65 years of total experience at NGF Consulting. And we have a ton of experience in the Bay Area including as long mentioned previous work with city of PaloAlto. Uh worked for the city of San Francisco over the on and off for several decades, Mountain View Sunnyvale. Actually worked for Google a project uh at Moffett Field or for Moffett Field and also the Prescidio Trust for Presidio Golf Course. Uh next slide please. So, this is the reason we're here. Um, especially that picture on the left. This is the driving range at Balins's. And you'll see the picture on the left, very crowded Tline. And, uh, I'm told this is the norm and not the exception, especially during peak demand times. Especially when we first started this study back in 2023. I know that the OB Sports and now the Trune folks um mentioned that it's really, you know, people have to wait to get on to to practice. So, um certainly there's certain times of the day where it's easier, but it's very uh difficult to uh to get on and practice. Okay, I'm I'm sorry I didn't have that those three pictures in my version. Sorry about that. Anyway, um the reason we're here again is to consider double-decking the driving range, the feasibility of double-decking the range, and adding a technology component. Now, technology can take a lot of different forms. But what we're we're talking about is it could run anywhere from just simple ball tracking and gaming, you know, using one of the major vendors or uh being able to play virtual famous courses like Pebble Beach to game improvement using launch monitors that measure distance and club head speed and launch angle. So that that's more the game improvement angle. So the technology covers a whole gamut and um some of the things that we did in the report it's a lengthy report but what we covered was first of all an overview of national golf trends as they relate to the potential feasibility of double decking and enhancing the range at balance. Uh, of course a local market analysis to look at the with a focus on the supply demand in the range driving range market including technology technology enhanced ranges. uh a little bit on site visibility and we also put a basic conceptual program together uh with some cost estimates and finally you know tied into the market opportunity conclusions uh utilization estimates for the expanded range and the projected net incremental cash flows that will result to the city and to bailance. Um and the ultimate the key city objective that we were asked to take into consideration is uh the city wants to explore opportunities to generate incremental net revenues while expanding opportunities for players to practice as well and improve their games. Uh next slide please. So as as Lam mentioned, PaloAlto and MUN um it was a genuine cash cow. I know from pre prior experience in the Bay Area doing other studies for other cities that PaloAlto was always a cash cow, but it was kind of a pedestrian flat course and it really had hosted a lot of play. So sometimes it wasn't in in a great condition. It's been completely reimagined and uh it's been doing quite well since it became balance with the rounds up most recently rounds up almost 6% in FY24 and up marginally again in FY25. So you're basically only exactly at 60,000 rounds. Uh a key consideration though is that your average rate, what we call the average rate, that's the green and cart fee spread out or divided by all the rounds is much higher than it used to be when it was PaloAlto MUN. So uh the rounds figures might might not knock your socks off although that's very busy 60,000 but when you do it at an average rate of you know 70 plus dollars it's very impressive. So, the total revenue has also been on an up upward trajectory and uh I think it's an all-time high since it reopened of 5.4 million in in FY 2025. And for some perspective or context, the US average, and NGF tracks these things, the US average for an 18hole public horse is 1.5 million in revenue. You're almost reaching that in net profit. So, uh so Balins is doing terrific. And we talked about or talked about the range traec trajectory as well reaching about 772,000 in FY25 and I believe it's on pace um in FY26 to meet or exceed that number by a little. Um, one thing I'll mention real quickly though when it when Lam showed that chart, it struck me is one of another reason we're here is you'll know it's growing the range revenue, but it's kind of flattening out the growth because I think you're you're probably coming up against some organic growth constraints due to the the limited number of tea stations. So, uh, that's another reason to consider the expansion. Next slide, please. So I mean the national trends are pretty favorable, really favorable actually. Golf was in a really good spot. Rounds played reached the, you know, record for the fourth time in in five years. And the amazing thing is this was achieved with roughly 2,000 fewer courses or facilities than we had during the previous participation peak which was you know back during the the height of Tiger Woods is uh renaissance as a golfer. So 2,000 fewer facilities you know through attrition and now we have a lot of healthy facilities left behind. uh golfer green grass golf participation reached 29 million eighth consecutive year of growth and about a million more golfers than we had over a prior year and we've actually actually added five million net golfers min over the last eight years um total participation which includes offc course now offc course is not just facilities like Topgolf which I'm sure a lot of you have heard of but it also includes oncourse technology ranges. So that that participation at using utilizing technology at an enhanced range at a golf green grass golf facility is considered off course participation. But anyway, that number for total participation has topped 48.1 million. Um, importantly, and I know this is very important uh in in your neck of the woods and a lot of parts of the country is that the customer base is becoming notably more diverse. Uh, golf had always had a reputation of, you know, catering to just uh one specific demographic, but it's becoming the cohort showing the biggest growth since 2020 include youth, African-American, Hispanic, and female. uh the female segment has added two and a half million new golfers since 2020. So with the conversion of tra traditional golf with new forms of engagement, a lot of it wrapped around technology and entertainment um we see continued strength and demand in facility utilization and that supports healthier economics and it allows for golf course reinvestment. Uh I know balance is not accounted for as a enterprise fund but um with the money it's throwing off I mean what we're seeing all across the country is is you know municipal enterprise funds taking that money the profit that they're earning and and reinvesting in the facilities. Uh one negative about the growth boy it's not as bad as it used to be. Even though we've had 16 plus million first- timers, beginners during the current era, uh the retention was less than 25%. So, we're still losing quite a few out the back door, if you will. Uh next slide, please. So, this kind of reiter reiterates what I just mentioned. This graphic on the left shows uh both green grass uh offc course and combined participation dual participants and the growth trajectory. And then on the right there's actually, you know, I think a lot of the press that you saw, maybe not so much in the last few years, but prior to that, you thought, oh, golf must be dying because a lot of the stories that you would read was golf courses closing. But a lot of the golf courses that were closing were due to higher and best higher and best use and they were privately owned daily fee facilities. The total uh supply of municipal facilities in the US is actually at an all-time high uh with 2600 plus facilities and almost 3,000 courses and California trails only Texas as you can see in the total number of municipal golf courses. Uh next slide please. So key findings from the local regional market. Uh you have a very dense population from which to draw customers. Um, you know, I I think, excuse me, let me back up here a second. Uh, 3.44 million people within a 30 minute drive time, which we're considering essentially the the primary market for balance, 30 minute drive time, and great demographics for golf participation with a uh median household income more than two and a half times the national figure. And of course we realize that's mitigated somewhat by the uh very high cost of living in the Bay Area, especially housing. Um golf participation correlates strongly with higher income. Uh participation rates are relatively high in all the subm markets. We looked at golf participation rates and the Bay Area is one of the most active golf markets in the country. Um the 30 minute trade time we looked at showed annual rounds played average per 18 holes of more than 53,000. 70% higher than the national figure of 31,000. So the bottom line here is you have five times as many golfers per 18 holes of public golf as the as the US does overall. Uh this is an undererved market for golf for sure. Next slide, please. So, you don't there aren't a lot of golf facilities considered. We just ted on this considering the population or not a lot of public golf facilities, and there's even fewer with uh with driving ranges. The 10 mile submarket around Balins has only five public courses with driving ranges totaling 101 T stations. Now, of course, there's several others that are, you know, 10 to 15 miles away. Prune, Mariners Point, San Jose, MUN, and they they all have active ranges. Um, we did a a little comparative graphic here for some of the most active driving ranges in in the regional market here. We also included a comparable Dair Creek golf course much further away in St. Louis and Bispo County. And the reason we included that is they have um low population density and a very successful range due to their addition of uh 10 uh entertainment bays. And we'll have a picture of that later on. But you can see these facilities uh three of them you know Prunidge and San Jose MUN with about two million in annual range revenue and Mar Mariners Point is privately owned. So they didn't outright share the information but through different sources we've estimated their range revenue at 3.2 2 million and Balin's uh that's this is the the figure from the original study back in 2023 I believe uh 663,000 you're about 100,000 or more higher than that but as I mentioned I think you're you're coming up against some natural constraints um I like to look at the figure the figures at the bottom population per public tea station and you can see Balin's compares favorably to all of them lags a little behind Mariners Point, but it's it's like eight or nine times higher than Dair Creek and St. Louis Abyspo, and yet they have almost twice the range revenue. So, it just shows you with the right product in a market like this, you can uh you can really do well. Next slide, please. And this just touches on what we're seeing. I mentioned earlier having uh technology enhanced driving ranges at the golf course because there's and it's it's becoming ubiquitous. It's really becoming very common um because there's a growing rel you know our research and you know proprietary NGF research shows there's a relationship between the two in terms of sharing user bases. You know, for instance, if you if you had a technology enhanced range, you might draw some people initially to it that are beginners or they're not golfers at all, they may eventually graduate over to the to the golf course itself. And you may have uh more people that utilize the golf course using the driving range when it's enlarged and enhanced. Um, next slide, please. So, these are some examples. Um, adding technology can mean a lot of things. The upper left there is McKinnus Park up in San Rafale. And this is a two- deck struct structure that they added top tracer, I believe, on the bottom level several years ago. And then they added right here on the upper level. And this is a basic setup. You have the mats and you have the monitors. So this is, you know, bolts ball tracking technology. And you could also you could also utilize it to, you know, play virtual courses and things like that. But as you can see, there's no furnishings or anything like that. But, uh, the two bottom pictures and the one in the upper right, uh, Sailfish Sands Golf Course here in Martin County, Florida, they just added this top golfike lounge contiguous to their new restaurant. The whole building is new and you can see they have the furnishings, places to sit, places to place your drinks and then they have the large monitors for people that are just sitting there and then you have the monitors that are actually smaller monitors are actually closer to the hitting station. And you have a similar setup down below. This is S Derry Creek and St. Louis Abyispo. It's called Swing Time Suites and it's been incredibly successful. An advantage that this facility has is it backs up what those pictures you're looking at on the bottom right behind that what what's shown there is a walkway right to the restaurant. So they have very convenient either selfs serve or or wait service for food and beverage and alcohol. Next slide please. So we wanted to boil it down to you know with the results of our market analysis there were a number of positives and of course there's always a few constraints. I think the positives are you have a very high uh high G participation rate and very favorable per capita supplied numbers. It is an underserved market as I mentioned um not as bad as Southern California. I mean, Southern California by far is the um most underserved market in the country to the point where they had to pass a law to stop people from brokering brokering tea times illegally. Um but it's very active market and the successful track record of some of the facilities we looked at, some of the range facilities, it it shows you the $2 million is very achievable in terms of annual revenue. um relatively low number of competitors as I mentioned with the nearest technology enhanced ranges is MA ranges being Mariners Point and Foster City and Mission Hills of Hayward across the bay in in the East Bay and both about 12 miles away as the crow flies but I mean you know traffic in your area so um might might be quite a time to get there. So we think that high quality technology range at Balin should be a very strong regional draw. Uh another thing we see is in the United States is um what we call latent demand. People that are very interested in taking up the game that have not. And uh I think we calculated based on survey research there's about 90,000 very interested non-golfers within 10 miles residing within 10 miles of Baland. So, uh, depending on how you go here in terms of whether you want to go the full, uh, the full boat and do entertainment base that that draw, you know, young people, Gen Z and millennials to socialize and hang out. Uh, the more you do something like that, the more you're likely to, you know, generate or try to activate some of that latent demand. Uh, next slide, please. So, there's always there's always risks, there's always constraints. uh you know for instance you could have nearby competitors uh Shoreline or or Moffett Field Golf Club Moffett Field for instance maybe they introduced technology although golf club Maffield just just enhanced their range within the last few years and they didn't do it then so um I'm not sure Google wants to spend a lot of money there right now for whatever reason but um so that's always a threat more competitors introduce a similar product and then there's the extraneous ious black swan type events or just a regional economic recession that reduces discretionary income. Uh our research shows seems common sense that previous recessions have definitely impacted negatively impacted the performance of golf courses. And then there you know the the retracement from the ongoing surge in golf demand may occur at some point although a lot of people thought it would have happened years ago that it was just a temporary pandemic era bounce but it it has proven to be anything but that especially with the growing diversity of user groups. And then there's always the, you know, the fact that the golf entertainment trend could begin to wayne. Um although I I do want to clarify the and we're going to talk about this in a in a minute. The program that we assumed for our proform purposes did not include any entertainment bays. It did include technology and monitors at at every station, but it and there's modular bays that can be easily converted to putting some furnishings in and some big screen monitors, etc. But, um, as it's programmed now, conceptually, it's not so much a golf entertainment range, more like a technology enhanced range. Uh, next slide, please. So our conclusion is that there seems to be an active uh and strong market opportunity for double-decking and enhancing the range at balance. We think that you know the range revenues reached an all-time high and may surpass that this year but maybe up against coming up against its ceiling in terms of organic growth based on the limited capacity. um all positive market factors that we saw. We didn't see any any negatives in terms of the local market and we think it'll manifest these factors will manifest in strong market impact and incremental net revenues. Um the last bullet again we mentioned opportunity for golfers of all levels as well as non-golfers. in terms of non-golfers that there'll be more opportunity to draw non-golfers again with uh more entertainment oriented bays as opposed to just having the technology for um game improvement and ball tracking. Although that will still attract people that are that are new to the game and are interested in technology especially in in the Silicon Valley. Next slide please. So basically the preliminary program that uh you know and this came after meetings on site years ago with city staff and and with uh OB Sports and uh the first T as well of Silicon Valley. We uh came up with a program a preliminary program that expands the range from 27 T stations on one level and it goes it goes to 68 on two levels. uh some space on the ground level. There's TE's added on the northeast corner and also on the south end where the current instruction bays are. Uh so we end up with 68 total stations. Uh the technology we didn't assume any particular technologies you know the leading ones out there right now are top tracer range, trackman range and inrange. So that'll be up for you know for the city and its operator to uh to decide you know what's best suited uh for the facility. I mean you could have two you could use trackman range or more of a launch monitor uh for the instruction bays and then for the regular bays you could have a different type of technology. So there's several different ways you can go. And I should mention it's not really mentioned here but these these um software providers they're generally you lease the software. So, you're not paying for a lot of hardware. You're basically leasing it on a on an annual basis. I I should also mention that the the whole reconfiguring of the range will bring it back 12 yards from the existing Tline. And uh this will help you especially with reducing the number of errant balls that seem to be exiting the west end of the range into that parking lot. I think that it's an office building back there. So the program the preliminary program is designed to provide flexibility through a phased approach. Um right now it would it could be easily converted you know two bays at a time could be easily converted by adding furnishings and a a big screen monitor to a u to so-called entertainment bays out top golf. Um we also showed a conceptual r uh lounge area in back of the lower level um te's tea stations. This is something that Mariners Point recently did up in Foster City. They uh they had they had an incredibly se successful range, but what they did is behind the lower level stations, they added some seating areas and they bought a food truck. So it's mainly actually mainly for people not just playing in those units but also for people that are waiting to play. Uh next slide please. So based on the program as I just described and this right now this program the base program that you see on the top of this table does not include a roof at the second level. Uh the open it's uh the facility is open air. It has overhead lighting on the ground level. No roof is assumed at the second level right now in the space program. And all bays as I mentioned we will have some type of ball tracking gaming technology with uh with moni with monitors. Uh no no entertainment bays but they can be convert some can be converted in the future based on demand. Um so these cost estimates I stress are from um L you can correct me if you if you can whether we updated the cost estimates in last year's update but this may date back a few years. Uh regardless you're going to have to go out and get you know new bids, new estimates anyway. The netting I know you had your new trajectory study done. So the netting estimate that we got from judge netting um I think the height is maybe 10 to 12 feet higher at its peak than we had estimated based on the second level. So bottom line is the preliminary cost estimate was anywhere from 8.4 million to 9.08 million on the high end. um optional items which optional items will be cheaper if you include them in the in the uh initial construction and these these are priced if you do it that way if they're if it's done in the initial construction. So, the metal roof on the second level and a screen wall on the back. And then we also had programmed in an optional concession restroom building uh closer to the clubhouse at the uh north near the northeast corner of the of the tea line uh not far from the turn and not far from the the pro shop and the clubhouse. And this is something that you would, you know, work out with your operator to uh to see if it's necessary. We we did a little placeholder for it in case you want to you know uh discuss that further with your operator. Uh next slide please. So we did a 10-year financial proform based on the inputs the assumptions that are described in the report and the inputs and I'm going to show you the basic utilization model uh on the next slide. But um of course these make a lot of exception. You know there's no uncontrollable external v variables to completely sync the ship. You know you never know what's going to happen in terms of that but there's no reason to expect that at this point. So um the key model output outputs are the range the enhanced range is expected to generate about 1.7 million in gross operating revenue the first full year growing to 2.1 million by year five. 2.4 million by year 10 and based on a projected 65% gross margin and this you know uh TRUN gave us some help with this when we put this together about their expected margins on driving range business that resulted in a net income of 1.1 million year one increasing to uh 1.36 million by year five. And of course some of this that's not all that's not not all incremental but we used a base of net income of 600,000 against which to compare it for the existing range in FY25 and we estimated incremental net revenue to be 515,000 in year one growing to 710,000 by year five. Next slide please. So this is the basic utilization model just showing the first five years. Uh these were the major inputs uh you know the number of days number of stations we assumed one bucket per hour one bucket rented per hour 11 days on average use and then the utilization percentage as you see here. This is across all times. you know, it may look low when you look at it and say, "Wait a minute. You told me we have, you know, too little capacity, but uh there's always going to be some slow times uh in addition to the high demand times. So, this this is across all 11 hours of all 355 days. Uh but we do think it's conservative. So, we we want to be conservative so that the city can make responsible decisions. So I think our numbers are highly achievable and um and we wanted to you know give you realistic and achievable numbers when we did this. Uh next slide please. So we also did a sensitivity analysis several scenarios the base model as you can see the incremental net stabilized income is 710,000. Um, I did want to mention also if you look at if you calculate ROI by the stabilized net incremental revenue and you divide it by let's just say that let's just say the cost ends up being 10 million um a little higher than we estimated that's still about a 7% ROI. Um so it's all it all ties back to how many years the payback is going to be. We highly confident this is going to be a, you know, basically an annuity for the city. It's just a case of how long it will take to pay back the initial investment. But it it is showing a pretty good ROI um on a back of the napkin type calculation. So these utilization scenarios or sensitivity analysis, the uh one was lower the utilization percentage. I just showed you those and the incremental net goes down to excuse me 516. Uh the other one would be to lower the average bucket revenue and all and this is all other things being equal. So that would be the only thing we changed that variable it comes down to 419 or 590 rather. And then if we lower the utilization percentage and the average bucket revenue we had the in incremental net revenue come down to about 414. And then on the positive side, if you had lower range expenses, in other words, a higher operating margin, uh then we had a higher incremental net income of $815,000. So, uh that was the sensitivity analysis. Obviously, you can't vary. There's so many different variables. You can't to there's a million different combinations. So, we we chose to do four potentially common scenarios. Uh, next page, please. Next slide. So, in summary, our our analysis showed a clear market opportunity for the double-decked and enhanced range. The market was very positive, not a lot of competitors, um, you know, strong population demographics and and a dense population, an underserved golf market and some regional competitors that have, you know, shown the way that, you know, it's it's it's real. You can you can do these really strong revenues, $2 million and up at these uh at these ranges, provided you have the capacity. So the main level of uncertainty I guess is the the cost to construct the poles and the netting the structure itself. You know these are the things that you have to you know put a a fine pencil to um to you know to sharpen that up. And then there's the of course going to the FAA. I don't want to get into that. That's not our purview. But hopefully the FAA will not have any kind of problem with the uh the new heights. So we think there's be a strong return on investment. There might be some variability in the number of years it takes to pay back. Uh one final consideration is we really didn't consider potential incremental rounds of golf from introducing new golfers, new patrons to the facility that may not have been to bailins before. uh we did not consider food and beverage because you have uh a lease for the food and beverage operation. So we were thinking food and beverage incremental to the city would be relatively minimal. However, if you ended up doing that um halfway house, we could call it over near the northeast end of the range, then, you know, maybe with a new new future agreement. Um not putting, you know, telling the city what to do with it, you know, maybe they'd want to do handle that aspect of the food and beverage differently if uh if it was to be served serving primarily the driving range. Um we also didn't in consider incremental pro shop revenue. So we wanted to be conservative and make just show the incremental driving range revenue itself uh so that you can make some informed uh decisions without looking at pie in the sky numbers. So with that uh I will turn it over to uh back to L or over to commission for questions. >> Next slide please. Thank thank you we had for the financial perspective. Um uh Chair Freeman and the Commission, I'd like to now address um other factors and site considerations, excuse me, site constraints. Um in particular, um we the site feasibility needs to be looked at. Um consideration of expanding the driving range does necessitate a parking study to address parking adequacy. Um and also as the golf courses and driving range are adjacent to the Palato airport um Federal Aviation Administration approval needs to be sought for the increase in the ball retention net and poles. Um additionally pro let's not forget project funding and a payment plan also needs to be explored as well. Next slide please Eric. Um and then we have some uh possible next steps to look at. Um staff here we are soliciting your feedback. Um, does the commission believe a second deck arranged uh concept warrants for the evaluation? Is incorporation of a technology desirable? Um, is entertainment desirable? Is food and beverage desirable? Um, also what other additional information does the commission need? U staff could possibly evaluate alternatives as well. Um, phasing and sequencing of the project or scaling back the project. Um and then other possible next steps uh following this would be um assessing potential funding sources uh returning the commission to the commission for a recommendation and then presenting to the city council. Um with that this concludes our presentation and now we'd like to switch to uh clarifying questions and a discussion with the commission. Next slider. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank staff and consultant for the presentation and also uh for the report which provides a lot of lot of very useful and uh thorough information. Um and before we open it up for public comments and uh clarifying questions from the commission, um I would like to recom uh remind my fellow commissioners that uh tonight's discussion is focused primarily on the financial feasibility of the driving range expansion and associated technology enhancements. um and that there will be further opportunities to examine environmental impacts, FAA considerations, traffic studies, design alternatives, and other project specific details. So, I think what you're asking for us tonight is to provide you u input based on the financial uh information that was provided as to whether or not we think this is a project that should go forward >> for consideration to go forward. Okay, >> thank you. Okay, with that mindset uh mine I'll open it up to clarifying questions from commissioners commissioner Klein house >> in this is about the next steps just a question about that it did not include analyzing compatibility with the balance master plan and I think it should so that's something that I think you need to And I have to I have a question which I don't know. It's not a financial question, but I don't know what this looks like. I don't I'm not a golfer. I never been to a second deck or a first deck. I I have no idea what we're talking about. I'm sorry. There's the presentation didn't show us what this might look like. I could follow you uh commissioner with um either examples or um perhaps a virtual tour of other facilities. Um I could look for something online and share with you. >> There was there was nothing in the presentation but I think it was in the documentation that was provided. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. So, I mean, it would have been helpful to have illustrations of what what it looks like now and sort of what the second deck would look like. I mean, you had that in the in your documentation, but for those >> I'll take a look. I also I would like to know the delta between the height now and the height in the future exactly where the this new fence would be, where the structure would be. I would and next time you come to us it's it's not on the agenda now but please give us a lot more details on what this looks like and what this means for the bay lands. Yeah, it could be kind of a conceptual diagram. Something showing what the kind of what I think in in your documentation you had provided sort of an illustration of the lower deck and then the upper deck. >> That's correct. With within the um >> within the within the report the the report itself. >> Yeah. Okay. So the information there it was just the documentation. Yeah. Uh the other the other um so you mention you mentioned a number of uh compare compatible comparable facilities and regional uh competition. I didn't see I mean you mentioned Moffettfield and a couple of others. I didn't see Stanford Golf Course in there. Is that a is that a reason that was excluded? >> We were looking at um facilities that offered technology. >> Okay. >> Uh there are other driving ranges within our area. However, um the two that you mentioned are not uh technology focused. They are just standard uh driving range similar to us. So, in the consideration of whether or not we should proceed uh with the second deck, we're looking at um expansion with technology enhancements, which is sort of essential to the viability. But wouldn't we probably want to stay public to public rather than public to private? >> Um, okay. Well, clarifying questions. Okay. Any you have do you have a clarifying question? >> Um, yeah. Um, a few small questions. So, I know you're going to look at financing routes, but for a project like this, is it typically funded from debt or are we trying to see where the financial priorities are for uh general projects? This impact other projects potentially. >> I apologize, I missed the beginning of the question. Could you repeat that please? So for a project like this that's likely to be a money maker over time is the most likely source of funding additional debt so it doesn't impact other projects or are we trying to see hey where are we going to marginally spend $9 million best? >> Thank you for the question. Um that's something that we would discuss with the city's uh office of management and budget. Um historically in the past however uh such projects as this um the city has taken on additional debt and then paid it over uh over time via debt service. Prime example is the current uh way the course operating the renovation was uh done via um a 30-year debt service that we're paying off. >> Okay. Uh and can you on the netting which seems to be the biggest cost is that all the incremental cost for the second tier or some of that 4 million having to redo the netting anyway >> that includes the latter which would be redoing the netting. >> Okay. So it would help to understand what the incremental delta would be of netting for the second tier. The estimates that are in there are to um bring the current height to what we think would be or perhaps slightly needing to bring it higher based on a recent trajectory study. I hope that answers your question. >> Maybe it's just not clear. I I want to know, hey, we need to replace the netting every n years anyway. So, here's the cost to do that. And when we do that, to add another 18 ft, here's the incremental cost to add that. Is that somewhere in there or is that not >> No, that is not an incremental cost. The estimates there are to uh construct the from the current heighting to the um needed height. Um so it's could be debated whether or not the additional netting um being that the netting does need to be replaced um and brought higher anyways, whether or not that would be uh considered uh a financial impact to this project. That's, you know, open to discussion. >> Okay. Um, and is there any impact on fees for current users that's in the plan or is it is that just kind of continued growth and current trends >> in the and I'll ask Ed to fill me in fill in um the gaps here. Um in the financial projection, um there is a uh proposed rate increase because when using a technology bay, as with currently other facilities that offer technology, there is an increase over using a just a standard um driving range where there are no uh uh technology implements. So >> yeah, I I can expound on that, Mom. Uh basically what we're showing right in the ba in this base program was assuming no top golf like bays for now uh with furnishings and you know a table to set your drinks down etc. Uh those types of bays are usually rented by the hour you know for four to six people and depending on the time of day anybody anywhere from $30 to $50 per hour. In the case where you're just essentially adding the technology to the stations, um what we often see is the the range buckets will go up a certain percentage. I know when Marin uh McKinnus Park up in San Rafale, I believe they doubled uh I think they believe they doubled their fees if I'm not mistaken, their bucket fees when they uh went to the top tracer. Now um it's usually not that steep at all. We we in our performer we averaged let me see I think we took an average of $17 per bucket that's across all sizes in year one. So we we assume some moderate increases and that's that's the way it's basically done when you add the technology is you're adding you're making it more attractive. So u you're and plus there's cost recovery as well. So there is there is some there's no increase in golf fees to play the golf course of course it's just the range buckets will go up in price. >> And the last question for um thank you for that is uh has there been any surveys of the actual users on site? Do they value technology? Do they want more of it? Would they pay more etc? >> We could do that certainly. That wasn't part of our scope but that is something that NGF does though. We could, you know, we could circ likelihood to uh utilize things like that. Uh we could even uh we could even go to the general community. Obviously, not all golfers in the community uh play at Balins. Um so we do have addresses. NGF does have address email addresses, databases in the in the Bay Area. So depending on your needs, we could go out to the general market or just current bailins customers. >> Yeah. or just like little index card on right on site. Hey, would you do this? Punch out something. >> You could do that, too. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, I I guess tagging in on that question would be I think you said that the technology would would come after the fact, right? So you're talking about the financial cost here is building out the second deck which is doubling the number of uh folks who are going to be using the driving range and then I would there's a cost that's associated with that but then let's say you're going to go from 38 to 64 driving range but the price you keep your price at the same level. It is now until you add the technology. Is that correct? >> Yes. The excuse me, the technology can be added in phases. It's not a um all at one time. Um it would be added um in sets um bays at a time and it's up to us and or the operator on how we implement it uh out. Um it's as Ed mentioned the the technology is is uh there's some hardware but it's mostly a software cost and so the software cost is the licensing cost and as we expand more and more base the the licensing and the cost of offering that service increases. Okay. >> Um it also depends on other features that we would want to add. But you had said that on the return of investment you could look at sort of a recouping of the so I think there you I thought you had a cost there was like one point there was different I don't know if you can put that cost sheet up but you're the amount that >> I think that that would be building out the deck and then >> correct >> uh adding the height to to the uh >> yes Eric can you go to >> the netting is that correct? Slide 20, please. >> We'll bring up that slide. So your low estimate is 8 million 8.4 >> correct? >> Which would be include the new netting in poles because you're increasing the height of the poles, right? But you I guess what commissioner Alcarod was saying that's a project you have to do anyway right so is that included in this cost >> yes so as mentioned in the staff report you are correct that is a cost that due due to the um aging of the facility due to changes in uh equipment advancement due to player skill development enhancement um the current uh netting height would need to be increased regardless of whether or not we move forward with this project. Um, so that's the uh the better discussion is is this really a cost of the of the project or should this be really considered a separate cost and we shouldn't should not be looking at the 4.3 million for the netting in polls. >> So yeah, >> so you're looking at 8.4 million >> and from that um you're doubling the number of driving ranges. Correct. So >> more than double action. >> Cany talk. >> Wait a minute. You have to excuse me. >> The day is late. So why don't we go around? >> Right now we're asking clarifying questions and I'll we'll get >> all haven't done it. So why don't we have >> Let me let me finish up please. >> Okay. >> Because the hour is late. >> I understand. So that's the question here is whether or not the 8.4 4 million. What is when you say you're doing a a return on investment over what period of time is that going to you indicate 3 years, 5 years for the recovery of your costs? Yes. Um if we were to back out the cost of the netting imples consider in the consideration of the current status of and age and advances in technology the range needs these uh netting and poles anyways then that would uh reduce this you know 8.4 low estimate down to um 4.1 million and Ed if you could correct me if I'm wrong on that. Well, I mean, first of all, you're going to have to get all new new estimates on these, but yes, I mean, if this was a a sunk cost, so to speak, that you were going to have to spend considerable money replacing the existing netting and poles under any circumstances, even if you didn't go forward with this project. It's probably not fair or accurate to count the whole cost of the new netting and poles and the ROI calculation. Um, another question you had, Commissioner, about the technology. Um, the technology, the fourth line item you see, specialtycustom electrical. So, the software and the monitors and what have you are leased, but you know, it has to be set up, the structure has to be set up to facilitate that. So the uh specialtycustom electrical is is for that purpose of of getting uh the technology uh to facilitate the technology at the range. So that's included in the in the base cost there. >> Thank you. If there's no other clarifying questions, we'll go on. Do we have any uh public uh comments? >> Do you have a clarifying question? >> Yeah. Yeah, I have a clarifying question on the on the construction costs and do we include any of the maintenance cost there over the years? >> The ongoing maintenance is not included in there. >> Not >> this is this is to construct um and then post construction would be um the ongoing maintenance which would be part of the regular um operations of the entire course itself. >> That's right. I I understand that we need a payback period for any projects. So, uh what kind of project cost would this investment no longer meet our city's desired return threshold? >> I'm not sure I understand your question. Could you rephrase that please? >> Um let me ask you this way. In the bigger picture, how does this project compare with other recreation capital investments in terms of community benefits and a financial return? >> I think that's undetermined. Um, you know, we the city has uh programs through for for the community in the uh community service department, whether it be through recreation, whether it be through the arts and science programs, or whether it be through golf programs. Um the um most of those programs are not returning revenue. Um they're not revenue generate generating as much as the golf programs, golf program is the one that returns more revenue than its expenditures. All the other ones are much lower um anywhere from only re recouping 10% to up to about 30 to 40%. Um the golf course as you can see in the in uh the charts displayed earlier is operating in black where we are um not only recouping our operating cost but we're also um recontributing back uh revenue into the general fund. >> That's a good information. Thank you. >> Thank you Commissioner Smith. Um uh first of all u in future uh future presentations we have to have the time limit. This went on way way too long. The second time I've been in the same session talking about financial. This has no chance of happening in PaloAlto. Zero. And the people that drive in to go to the bay lands are not going to want to see a second story. And if you haven't been by one, find one in the area. I mean, there's no way this is going to happen. And uh Commission Commission Smith, are you asking a clarify? >> I know, but what I'm saying is uh there this financially maybe could make some more money, but uh I think we have to use our time, effort, and money. And uh this is not the right place to uh do it. And uh uh so uh but please let's consider that before we do a lot more work and a lot more time on this that it has no chance at all because what it'll do to the people going to the park to the bay lands. Thank you. >> Are there any other Commissioner Clone House? Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm going to go back to a couple of small questions. How much taller or higher would the new um net be from the current net? What's the delta? >> The ball uh included in the ball trajectory study in the um uh staff report is it's looking at about 170 ft. >> Yes. But what is it now? >> And currently we are in the range about 80. >> 80. >> Yes. >> So 80 to 170. Okay. 170 is what Topgolf has over in San Jose. They're not doing well. They're emitting. Well, I don't know about that specific facilities, but Topco overall had a lot of issues with their, you know, with uh their valuation and they work all almost all night. So, is uh similar lighting and operations hours contemplated or we are going to do what we do now, which is after dark it closes. In the uh performer model that is presented, it is operations until approximately 9:00 p.m. >> Until what? >> 9 p.m. >> Okay. And then what does that mean in terms of lighting? Do you have to have lighting similar to what Top Golf has? Because that's the one of the two biggest light pollution emitters in the South Bay. The Top Golf over in San Jose. That's too to be determined at this point. We we you know it's not part of the design part of the um if this were to be um something that uh the city determines to look further into um those would be vetted um through a design process. So it's not necessarily determined what the lighting would be at this time. >> So the the cost of design is included in these estimates. >> I'd have to ask Ed. I believe it's not but Ed could you could you verify I think from uh >> the these are these are hard costs these do not include soft costs uh design etc. So can you translate that to people who don't know what hard and soft costs are? >> Well, soft costs are the design elements, things like that. Hard costs are actually physical physical construction. And >> so this does not include any kind anything else other than actual construction >> and the turf and the netting and the poles, right? And the custom electrical miscellaneous site improvements. >> Yeah. And uh turf is that is is deciding whether it's um plastic or natural turf. That's a soft cost. >> Determining whether it is I mean that's I wouldn't say I mean that's just a discussion item with the city and the man and the management group. What what you want to do there in terms of >> it's it's it would be further down the line as we would vet this. Right now there's just a uh in the cost here there's a placeholder that doesn't the um we'll look into um what the actual cost will be and what type of tariff it will be. >> Okay. I don't want to ask a lot more but I generally think that with today's financial situation this is quite a big adventure. Thank you. Okay, let's open it up to public com any public uh speakers. >> Yeah, we have one public comment in person and one uh actually not anymore. So, just just the one in person then. >> Okay, >> that'll be uh Herb B. uh Chair Freeman and Commissioners uh uh surprised that this kind of agenda items before you. Then I saw Commissioner Smith here and he is in the business of hearing these kinds of proposals all the time. So I thought I might have entered one of his uh meetings with somebody trying to start a new business and getting him to invest in it. uh in in terms of who to be responsible for the cost. Uh netting is needed. Well, there's an office building there in a parking lot which used to be part of the driving range and about 40 years ago uh someone wanted to build that office building and they own the land where the winter lodge is which is own low destiny residential and they proposed a trade on the ballot. Um, the park dedication charter amendment says you could make a trade without a vote of the people if you get parkland in return, but they didn't want that dedicated as parkland. And it seems when they put that building in, they knew it was where the driving range is. They should be paying for the fence, not not the city. Also just like as in coverly we have a a regional uh operation that is we have all these uh organizations that are be going to be involved in coverly and have uh voters of PaloAlto approve attacks but none of the other cities where that is served by them are participating and here we're providing a golf course for a regional area and none of them are participating. That's not what happens with the regional water quality control plant. Everybody uh pays for a share. And there's a final thing that where it's located in an area that's subject to uh both liquefaction from earthquakes and also uh rising sea levels. We should not be intensifying development uh in the bay lands. uh we should be reducing it and not adding more and uh that that's a major reason why uh I don't think you should be going forward with with any uh further discussion of an item like this. Uh I don't I guess this is coming directly from staff. you know we didn't have the council direct uh staff to consider such an operation and I think uh that should come first before money is spent on on doing these financial analyses which uh probably require future analysis after uh after a meeting with with your questions. Thank you. So we do have one more speaker online on Zoom. Um it's a so first T Silicon Valley. >> Can you hear me? >> We can hear you. >> Wonderful. This is George Moxy uh president CEO First Silicon Valley. Uh just uh a couple reminders for everyone. One is that the uh expanded uh practice area on the golf course side of the range uh has never been usable in the last what eight years uh because of golf balls going over the netting. So that's one positive byproduct of the higher protective uh range netting that would be required with this. Uh the second is the opposite side between the range and embarcadero road and I've spoken with you all before uh about the first te's uh strong interest in developing that area for our youth program. So that's another byproduct of raising those range nets. um if that area, that youth area so to speak, becomes uh safe, then we would love to have um a conversation about uh a a private public partnership uh for the first TE to help develop that area. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you speakers and hope come back to the commission. Any additional questions to ask the to provide information on It's not a question, it's a comment. It really worries me that should the venture not be as economically successful as the projections show, then hours will be extended because that's how you make money. You get people to come and drink at night and have fun. That's what Top Golf leaves on. Late night, afternoon and late night drinking. I do want people to have fun, but I don't but the light pollution and noise are bad enough at 9:00 p.m. I think it should close with dark. You know, when it's dark, turn the lights off if you're going to do something more. The height of the netting is another thing. This is the bail line. That's a huge visual impact. You can see it from far far away and I think there's probably something in like I really want to see next if it comes back a very strong analysis of how if possible at all to mitigate the impacts that the bayance master plan is trying to have. Embaradero road is supposed to be a scenic road. It's designated as such by the city of Palo Alto putting a 170 ft tall fence closer because right now you can't use that area because the balls are flying. So you're going to move it closer to the road. I I don't know why we don't do that first that analysis of is this compatible at all before we go and invest a lot of money into thinking well you know can we make money by having more people come and play and also with with Topgolf they were at the verge of bankruptcy and they sold their operations at way less than what it was worth before so maybe there's a huge demand for it and maybe it changes but the environmental impacts really need to come first in the bay lands. That's when all evening it's like that's the our first consideration and yeah we want to people to come and play. We want the first state to come and play but do we want to build this? I don't know. I I would like to see the environmental issues and the lighting is definitely a major one. We just passed a dark sky ordinance. Anyway, if you say no lighting at all, well, maybe. I'm not even sure if that's because of the fences. Okay. Thank you. Uh, Commissioner Aler. Um, I think the the main thing that I just like to see is what would be the public sentiment of the current users because that's what we're really going to be going after. So, just some informal studies there. Um, talk to them about technology, increased fees, uh, utilization, parking. I I think you could do a pretty easy outreach survey for the um users because they're the ones that are really going to be footing the bill and getting the use out of it. Thanks, >> Commissioner D. >> Yeah, I want to thank Lamb and Ed for a great analysis. There are some encouraging pieces, but we also have uncertainties. So I I think as we move forward I would like to better understand the range of potential project costs, the associated payback periods, how this investment compares with other recreational priorities competing for limited capital dollars. I think those information would be very helpful when it comes back. >> Can I add one thing? If if you're going to look at what people want and to see I think mockups what is it going to look from Bixby Park what is it going to look from different points where a lot of people go to visit pro I don't know how many I think some point somebody said it was about a million people that come to the bays every year have some visuals of what it's going to look like and not only ask the users but ask the users of all the area around. Is that okay? >> Thank you. I think I think what you've what you're asking us is to whether or not this is a project that is um feasible. Correct. I mean, is it financially something that we think that you should pursue? I think there's a lot of there's still a lot of work that has to be done I think before you can come I mean come back to the commission for uh to ask about whether or not this is a project that should move forward. I mean that I I don't know if this is just the initial stage of that because you have it doesn't sound like you done a sort of a public outreach to find out uh is this something that um that golfers who are currently using the facility want. Um, and then to look at it, I mean, when you look at the I'm I'm kind of visualizing this with uh the top t netting that you can see from 101. I don't know how tall that is. It's probably about the same height, right? That's about 100. Maybe you're saying that right now we're 80 ft. We want to take it up to 170 ft. But you don't really know at this point if it's 170 a guesstimate or or do we even know if that's the final height? Thank you chair. Um you are correct that you know this is sort of the initial step. um recognizing that this is you know a a large or would be a large outlay financially that's you know that's a an essential part of of the um equation um we are reaching out to the commission for feedback so starting with the financial feasibility and also the other factors that we brought up that need to be uh considered um I' I've heard from your colleagues on the commission on the um commission as well and that's the type of feed that we um would like to receive um and so it's heard duly noted um and things for us to further explore and look into as well. >> Any other commissioners feedback? Okay. Do you think you have received the information that you were hoping to receive or not hoping but uh feedback from us as to whether or not this is something you want to take to the next step? There's still a lot of work I think that has to be done in the background before you could even um visualize this as becoming a reality. Um the cost of it is I mean you've come up with a cost based on the information that came from your consultant but um there's the there's a lot of whether or not this is really something what that people want. I mean, have you the fact that you're talking about doing the second deck, has that been some I know we've been talking about that for years, but is that really something that is needed at this point? I know there's I think in your report you said there was a there's a wait list of people for the driving range, but is that worth worth you going to get 8 million back from adding that second deck? >> Yeah. Yeah. So there's more to look at aside from the the the cost, the financial, the uh return on investment. Um uh you know there's the the service perspective like you said there there um during uh the primary use hours uh we are essentially at capacity as demonstrated. Um however overall I think you phrased it well. you know there there is much more to look at and we recognize that it's um this is not um a decision that that's going to be determined in the near uh you know immediately it's you know it's going to take um several discussions or more um and it's not solely just with the commission um but there's other you know stakeholders as well um until um uh further development um is made and decisions uh to help uh formulate a decision And so, you know, this is the start. Um, and I think think I think the commission, you know, we we started with the financial perspective, but we also recognize um that there's much more to that as well. >> Okay. Thank you. And thanks for the work that you they have done on it, but like I said, there's a lot more to do on it. So, thanks for including the commission and getting our our input. So, thank you for again. >> Well, and if I could say thank you, chair, for this opportunity as well. Um, I want to thank also um, Ed, our consultant, Ed Guthril, our consultant from National Golf Foundation. Um, a lot of work put into that. Um, and recognizing that, you know, we task National Golf Foundation with the from the financial feasibility perspective, but also I think Ed and I have had discussions, you know, understanding that there's more to it as well. So, um, thank you everyone and sorry Ed, we've kept you up all this time. Um, Ed's actually in the East Coast right now, so sorry about that. >> All right. Well, thank you and u thank you for that for the presentation and actually if you put together that report is very very well done. So thank you for that. >> Thank you. Appreciate that. >> Okay, we'll move on to the next item which is department report I believe. >> Oh yes. Um so city official reports. Um just for the record um item number four council liaison report. Um uh council member Julie Lifcott Haynes is not present. So we'll move on to um item number five, departmental report. All right. Um so my name is Sarah Robastelli. I'm the division manager for open space parks and golf. Um thank you um commission for hearing our report this evening. Um a little bit later if you want to forward to the next slide. Um I want to kind of recap some of the most recent community events that have been extremely um successful. We've celebrated the opening of the Bryant Street Community Center. There's two photos on your left hand side of that slide. Um, and then hosted two family movie nights, the photo in the middle on top. Um, with more than uh 300 attendees at each event, and then on the bottom middle slide is the ribbon cutting for Thursday live on California Avenue. Um, and we also wanted we supported our very first well-attended PaloAlto Pride event on the right hand side. Uh, these events continue to provide opportunities for the community to connect and engage across the city. So, if you go to the next slide, I'm going to talk a little bit about our upcoming events. Um, on the left hand side, Thursday live is returns this Thursday. uh June 25th. This um month's theme is a taste of California A featuring world music um and and also I believe um local veter I believe. So um come come out and we hope to see you on Calav. Um in the middle there we have the summer family movie night series. We want to um encourage you to come out to uh Mitchell Park athletic um fields for the summer. We our upcoming movies are July 10th for Zootopia 2 and then on July 17th goat we have showing. And then on the far right a fourth of July cookoff and summer festival. This is an annual event. um will be featuring food trucks, beverage, um children's activities, inflatables, live entertainment, free chili, uh tasting. I believe a few of you will also be judges. Um this year we will also be having um a photo booth. Um and we currently actually we've depleted since last month. We have 11 confirmed. Um last year we had um 12, but we're still um pacing per per normal. Um this is a common occurrence. So we're really excited about that. And then if you just hang on this slide, I have two also items that don't have that I are worth noting but do not aren't captured on the flyers. We have a a municipal service center openhouse that will kind of be a look behind um some of our services. Um MSC open house is Saturday, July 25th from 10 to 2 and um we are really looking forward. This is a um event for everyone in the community. Um it there's activities, demonstrations for all ages. And then just something to highlight um that's happening in our parks again this this um let's see Saturday we have the Twilight concert series um that's taking place. It's a free outdoor uh performance and um this Saturday it's at Mitchell Park June um 27th at 6:30. Um and then upcoming there will be two at Rinkanada Park. This is July 11th and 18th. Um moving on to the next slide, I want to highlight some of our summer camps have started and they're off to a really strong start. Foothills camp is nearly full and our 49 specialty camps. There are currently at 83% enrollment. At the Bryant um teen center, participation has been steadily increasing and beginning this fall, we'll expand ours, add Friday evening programming, and um explore new educational workshop um opportunities. So, all all very exciting there. And if you advance to the next slide, um you may have heard that yesterday on June 22nd at approximately 4:45 uh p.m. Palto Fire Department and our open space um rangers responded to a wildfire in a rasidero pres uh road and it was in our one of our preserves. Um there were no injuries or structures involved. The fire was contained um by 5:17 p.m. And um the map to your right um is an area of approximately everything in red are the burn areas and um it's approximately four air four acres. Um fire and ranger crews uh continue to monitor the site for flare-ups and hotspots. The fire cause is currently under investigation um by order of the supervising park rangers. The areas encompassed um by the uh fire burn scar is again approximately four acres. We have closed that to members of the public through June 30th. Um, this does not June 30th and this does not affect any trails or fire roads within the preserve. Um, the closure is for public safety and protection of our natural resources. It's also posted on site. This doesn't um this really is to protect u the environment um you know minimize any erosion or disturbance of any um uh and and also prevent spreading of invasive weeds. So we wanted to note that. Um and then if you advance to the next slide, um on the left hand side here, you will see that before you you you can see some of um last week, uh staff completed a refresh of the raster a rasera preserve gateway exhibits. The exhibits were originally installed 20 years ago. Uh the project included reprints of uh and then reinstalling all the exhibition panels. So you'll see a lot of the colors had faded and became discolored. Um we also created some new models um and ultimately cleaned up the area. This resulted in a much more um improved visitorfriendly experience and a refreshed gateway to the preserve. And then if you advance to the last slide, um improvements at Bowden Park continue with um support of our partners of the Kuanas Club. Um volunteers recently painted the park benches and staff also refreshed the arbor and playground fence with a new coat of paint, which um is part of our ongoing maintenance efforts. These improvements keep the park looking welcoming and well-maintained. We want to thank our partners um with the Kuanis club. So some some definite improvements um coming around and that is all we have on our departmental report this this month. >> Good a lot going on and thank you for that. Look like you guys had a pretty pretty busy month and of course July is going to be even busier with the preparing for the chili cookoff. We know it's a lot of work that happens in the in the background. So, um, pass on to staff and others the our appreciation for the work that they do and the work that they're going to be doing. We'll see them running around in u on the 4th of July. So, I don't know how many of us have volunteered to be judges, but that's a fun event. So, I look forward to getting my new apron and uh checking out the new the new uh chili cook off there. Okay. Any um comments on the departmental reports, Commissioner Alorite. >> Yep. Thanks for the um awesome report. A lot of good stuff going on. Um, I really like the Brian Center and I really like the integration cross generation, you know, the senior center and the teens. I think that that's going to be great. Uh, municipal service center openhouse is always a blast. Uh, I'm looking forward to that one. Hopefully parking will be a little easier. That's been an issue in the past. And I think on Thursday live the kickoff time is different than it was on third Thursdays, right? 6 5 versus 6. And uh I was there for I think the last one was the first one and I I just noticed that there's very little traffic in the 5 to 6 PM window which the vendors were not that excited about. I don't know if there's a way to get the word out that starts a little earlier. Come on down. Things are available. >> Yeah, great stuff. >> Oh, that's good feedback. Um I'll make sure to pass that along. >> Thank you. Anyone else? Commissioner Kleos, >> I was trying to figure out exactly where that fire was. And did you say the trails are closed? I was Can you >> So it's close to gate B. >> Huh? >> Close to gate B, which >> gate B. Okay. >> Yes. Which is close to the uh Portullah Valley side um of of the preserve. >> Okay. Do you know if it's where I think it is? There's like a family of coyotes living there. Do you know if those were impacted? >> I do not know offhand, but I'm sure the rangers know and I can follow up with you after. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, other than that, everything looks like a lot of fun. Thank you. Looks good. Do we know what caused the fire? Would that just >> um it's currently being investigated. >> Okay. That's a lot of a lot of acreage, but they seem like they got on it pretty quickly, so that's good. Commissioner Dane. >> Yeah. I just want to thank our dedicated staff for making all those amazing special events happen. I saw myself present at most of those events. Yeah, very excited. I'll just keep showing up and supporting the local community events. Thank you. >> Okay, we'll move on to item number six, I guess. Uh, ad hoc uh committees and layers on updates. Any Commissioner Absor, I think you have an update. >> Sure. Um, I think most of you already know this, but the coverly master plan got approved. The November sales tax is going to be on there. Uh, it looks like the existing tenants are not going to be changing until at least next year sometime, but we'll probably hear about what the priority should be at that time. And uh, yeah, community engagement goes on. And then some sad news, but on Safe Routes, Rose is going to be retiring apparently. I don't know who's next, but uh yeah, Safe Routes will need a new representative. So, you're just full of news tonight, huh? That's good. Good. Okay. Thanks for letting us know about that. That some staff would be following up on or >> um I can follow up that that was news to me. You heard you heard it first. So yeah, I'll I'll reach out to Rose >> and team. >> Okay. Anyone else or commissioner thing? >> Um I will be attending the next youth council meeting coming up at the teen center. Also I attended the cubby tenants meeting. Yeah. I think they showed their concerns on would they will have dedicated space if we're going to move forward and start construction. I think our council members answered those questions well. Yeah. So yeah, I think we did very well for the attendant communication over there. Commissioner Glhouse >> for the nature connectivity. Commissioner Wei and I had a meeting with staff and we're planning to bring a presentation next time on where we're at with evaluating the various um existing documents. Thank you. >> Okay. I had the my two items were presented tonight as far as golf and uh also uh the measure E uh nothing to report on the uh the San Antonio community advisory group I think which I'm also on that advisory group is sort of in hiatus I guess until they have some additional information. So that's we haven't had any any meetings on that in the last few months. So we'll see well hopefully I have more to report on that next uh next uh next meeting. Uh with that we'll move on to any public speakers for >> there are no uh speakers online at this time. >> Okay. Okay. Then we move on to the next item which is staff's updates. >> Oh um let's see for >> future meetings and >> for future meetings. Sure. Um, so we have uh park improvement two park improvement ordinances that are currently listed for your July 28th meeting. A foothills improvement plan which would be an action item in addition to a rasero creek pipeline. Um so there are two action items scheduled. Um both of those would be um yeah action items. >> Both action items or not one of those? >> No. Um both of them are up for park improvement ordinances um as we've discussed both of them previously. Okay. >> And um then would be coming for an action. >> Okay. So that's the park improvement plan and the arrest roll >> arrest creek pipeline which is uh the utilities project uh team has been working on um with it's there's I believe last year you received a uh robust update and presentation uh by that team >> and that will be included in the packet but we'll talk about it more >> of course and then Um, as Commissioner Klein House noted, um, I believe did you are you anticipating or we can talk offline about, um, the nature connectivity, um, having a few slides. Did you want that perhaps in in the um let's see not as a business item but maybe coming back for the um during under ad hoc committees and liaison updates. >> I thought that was our plan. We weren't planning to have an agenda item just as a presentation >> in the right that's it's not gonna we weren't planning to have like half an hour you know >> okay I'm just to be clear I wanted to have it >> I have a question about the u arrestero project and about both actually uh one no the arrest project do Do you have is there an an environmental review project already like an EI or a mitigated negativity? Do we have something? >> Yes. >> Then can you please share it like ASAP like right away? >> Sure. I can follow up with the future. So if we have a if this is a a sequel document then I missed it on sequinet and it I shouldn't be missing things on it should be there >> was can you check what's going on there >> because there is the state >> uh sequinet lists all the projects that have a secret document and if it does have one then it should be here. >> Well, uh I can follow up with the commission after uh the meeting. >> Thank you. >> Axel right? >> Just wondering for the foothills, is there going to be enough time for staff to do the updates that we talked about when we've been up there last time? >> Um good good point. Um, I'm speaking with them on Thursday and I believe there there's a larger staff that is speaking and we'll come back to the group but we as of now the answer is yes but we'll yeah >> okay good. Okay, I think with that note we'll join the

Mhm. >> Mhm. >> Good evening. Welcome to the June 18th, 2026 Public Art Commission regular meeting. We're going to start with roll call. Okay. Uh Commissioner Joshi >> Present. >> Uh Commissioner Stern >> Commissioner Mollerie >> Present. >> Uh Commissioner uh Delagaza >> Present. >> Commissioner Smith >> And Commissioner Tran >> Present. >> Okay, we we have a full house. Fantastic. Welcome everybody. Do we have any agenda changes, additions, and or deletions? Nope. I motion to approve. >> Yes. >> Second. >> Approve. >> Uh Commissioner Stern. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Moller Lee. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Smith. >> Commissioner Tran. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Du Bois. We have some pretty good ones to share with you all since we last saw you. So, um we wanted to let you know that we were successful in getting the uh Santa Clara County grant to for the phase two restoration of the Arna Frescos. So, there will be official announcements soon. Um but we're really excited about that. The work will take place in 2027. The other thing is we have art lift projects that are rolling out and now visible throughout the city. So, for instance, on the left here you can see the sculptures by Charles Gadeken on California Avenue. Um there is a QR code on one of those, so you can take control of the lighting. Otherwise, they it moves through a pre pattern a pre determined pattern. But, um from what I hear from some of the business owners right there, people are really attracted to the lights. They're coming down there and people are really scanning the QR code and and utilizing it. So, that's great to hear. Um we have uh workshops that have begun for um Sophia Lee's Whispers Through the Trees, where people [clears throat] can make these um these fortune cookies and um add hopeful messages that will um that will hang down and they will be installed on California Avenue um upon completion when she has critical mass of fortune cookies. We have quite a few other things. This is one um that um that was just completed out at Cubberley. Um and so you can see the indigo dyeing, which took place over several weekends. I believe Commissioner de la Garza helped with that and also participated. I saw your arms pretty deep in those buckets. Um and so these are some of the um the patterns that were created and those are on display at Cubberley now. Chaya Grisham Grisham It's the workshops are over now. So, the final product is up. >> [snorts] >> And then um we have community mural workshops kicking off this weekend at Cubberley. Um so that's pretty exciting. You can see the dates there. I also have some flyers here should any of you want to take them. Um and then the rhinoceros project also kicks off this Saturday right out here on King Plaza. It's um a community sewing circle project. No experience necessary. Um a great opportunity to take part in in something that will be a much larger project. Um also looking for any volunteers who might be able to help them set up on Saturday morning. Then just let us know because um one of the artists had an unexpected health thing and may have some limitations. Yes. Oh. Okay. Chairperson is volunteering. So, great. Thank you. Um And so, I think that is it, but be sure to visit the the Art Lift website. We have coming up, we have about eight more activations that are taking place this month, and we have quite a few in July and then rolling into August. So, Denise has done a great job putting those on the website and through our e-news, really to get the word out. >> Now, I haven't seen the the first one you shared the light, but it looks pretty permanent. >> They do. They're quite durable as they should be in that environment. They're they're a steel base with the LEDs, and we made arrangements with our partners in public works to be able to pull some electrical to run them. Um so, they will be there until September when they are going to make preparations for a new California Avenue sign. So, that'll be the segue out for those. >> Thank you. >> And that is it for city official comments. >> Okay. So, our first non-action item is public art in private development, the initial review for public art in private development associated with 762 San Antonio Road. >> And we are joined online this evening by Gary Johnson of Acclaim Properties. He will be giving you the presentation. As you all may recall from the handout, initial review is the first time a project comes to the commission, so it's an opportunity for you to look at the overall development, give some feedback about potential locations for public art to maximize that accessibility, that visibility, and think about, you know, are there themes that emerge, any feedback on on what is presented today. It's a non-action item, it's not a voting item. The the applicant then will take that feedback, develop their artwork, and then come back for final review to show you the final design of the artwork for their final approval. So. >> Just for our understanding, so this is just initial review, this is not an action item, so the commissioner is not voting for on it. Nonetheless, to the extent we have any feedback, we are welcome to share that with the presenters. >> correct? Absolutely, that's the purpose of the initial review, so that the commission can give some feedback at this point before they get too far down the line developing an artwork or a location. >> Right. >> Um, so >> And mainly just for our just so that we're not wandering off too far, what what what sort of are the the type of feedback that we are looking to kind of keeping an eye out for? >> So, depending [clears throat] on on what's presented this evening, he's going to walk you through the developments, so you're going to see a a large building. Thinking about what is the experience where that artwork is placed. Where you know, is it in fact accessible 40 hours per week, but the commission may want it accessible more than that. So, rather than putting it in a lobby, for instance, there was a previous project he put it in a lobby, he said the lobby's open 24 hours, but the commission asked the applicant to consider pulling the artwork exterior of the building so that it felt more public and more accessible. So, it's those kinds of issues that I would like you all to keep in mind as you're seeing the presentation. So, usually location, location, and in thinking about the context of the neighborhood, what kind of theme if there are themes that emerge to you, things of that nature. >> Fantastic. >> Okay, so with that, I believe we have Hi Gary, you're online. And Hi everybody, can you hear me okay? Yep, it's all >> Uh thanks thanks for letting me zoom in. I I told Elise a couple days ago I got sick, and so I I didn't I'm so grateful that I could I could zoom today um instead, but I I do prefer to do these types of things in person, so appreciate your flexibility here. I'd love to talk to you about our project at 762 San Antonio Road. So, maybe I could share my screen. Oh, yeah, okay, here we go. Okay, screen. Okay. And here we go. Okay. All right, can everybody see that okay? >> Yes. >> Okay, great. So, um this is 762 San Antonio Road, and I'm with the Acclaim Companies. We're the developer of this project. We're uh we're also the developer of another project at 3150 El Camino Real in Palo Alto, which is a multi-family project that um will be uh coming before you in um most likely August for um evaluation of of art. We uh are really really excited about this project. We are um kind of in the midst of the entitlement of of this project. It sits on 2 acres, and this is a joint venture with Globe Investments, which is on the Hanghold uh trucking site at 762 San Antonio Road. It's a approximately a 2-acre site. Uh the project view that you're looking at right now is facing San Antonio Road, and this is really our storefront. There's 228 units. 30 30 units are designated as below market rate at the at the low low level. The uh the project has two um on-grade parking structures stacked on floors one and two that is hidden from sight uh along San Antonio Road and wrapped in units. And then on top of those two I'm sorry, there's actually three levels of parking uh that are wrapped in units. And then uh on top of those three is five units of of additional uh units to for a total uh stories of eight eight stories total. So, the project is 85 ft tall. Um This is kind of how it sits on San Antonio Road. This is Leghorn Street on the backside. It wraps around an oil changers here on the corner of Leghorn and San Antonio Road. It sits also right on the edge of Mountain View. So, the backside of the of the project faces an an industrial area of Mountain View. Here's an aerial view. This is kind of a shot of the amenities. Some of the amenities that we have at the project was pool and spa here. There's uh a 20 25-ft setback from the the proposed. So, along San Antonio Road, the city has the ability to widen the road a little bit. And so, there's a 25-ft set back from the the potential widening of San Antonio Road. And there's currently a 33-ft set back from back of curb here along San Antonio Road. And that is to the face of the building. Here's another shot where we're kind of focusing in here along San Antonio Road because we feel like this may be the area that you may want to focus on since it's the storefront of of the project. Here's just to put it in context. This is the back side of the project that faces Mountain View. There is a secondary entrance here along Leghorn. Entrance to the parking structure. And a secondary uh smaller lobby for for pedestrians. Another view here. This is um also we have two entrances to the parking structure. Uh one this entrance here goes to the bottom level of the parking structure. The other entrance on Leghorn goes to the upper two levels of the parking structure. We have we separated the entrances to the parking structure to alleviate any sort of traffic concerns. Even closer shot here. Some elevations which depict depict some of the articulation of the building and also the the height. We're going through here pretty quickly. Um This is very back side. And then once again, this is This is an elevation at slightly different angle of of the front. The the entrance lobby is over here if you can see my cursor. And there is a a leasing area in there. And then uh a a lounge here and um a public uh not on a public, but a kind of a a co-work space here on the corner. I'll skip over This is kind of a secondary entrance, which I think is maybe less desirable to to place art on, but just showing it for context. Here is the front of the facade without any trees. It was um I had I had those removed so we could really see see the layout of the front of the front facade here. So, we uh we spent a lot of time kind of designing this front facade cuz it is the really an important storefront of the project. Um you'll see this has kind of this um artistic element here um that comes down and goes over the top of the building. There's a deck on the top here that this kind of shades. But, we are um we are also in discussions with um a particular artist for this project. The artist um we we haven't kind of formally selected him, but we we have formally selected him on our other project and are just kind of in discussions. We would love for him to work on this project as well. We uh his name is Giles Miller, and I have a a deck um and at least would it be appropriate for me just to kind of flip through his deck quickly to show some of the work that he's done? Or should I stop here and and ask and and kind of sit tight for questions? >> I I think it would be helpful if you um quickly went through Giles's deck so the commissioners have a sense of who you're thinking of and they can give any feedback on that as well. And then open it for questions. >> Great. Okay, so Sorry for the scrolling. So, here's Giles Giles's deck. Uh so, Giles has has created he is based in London and he has a fantastic team that we we went through a selection process for 3150 from artists literally all over the world um for that project and and selected Giles. This is one of his an example of of some of his art. This is Giles and his team. Giles draws a lot of his inspiration from nature. He He works with local fabricators for art. He has um a few projects art art exhibits art projects in San Francisco um that I will I will get to here in a second. So, this one is um located on the Champs-Élysées in Paris. This one is Fractalism. This is located in San Francisco. Falling Still is in London. Um This is in Mumbai. And this is his very signature piece of his in in in England. Here's another one in canned. And so uh he's prolific and he's credible to work with. That's why we are in discussions with him on this project. So um we can kind of head back to to this uh Torah deck here. All right. I guess I guess that's it for me. Thanks. >> So I think at this point we will open it up for questions and comments. There are a couple things as I watched the presentation I just wanted to um make sure the commissioners are aware of that with that setback for the potential future expansion of San Antonio Road we don't approve artworks to go in there because then it it sort of orphans the artwork. Um so we don't want to place anything within that setback. Um so primarily we're likely looking at something that's going to be architecturally integrated. Um and I did point out to the applicant that there is a limit on the number of commissions an artist may have. They they are entitled to have two uh public art in private development projects within the city. So that is permitted um but the applicant couldn't come back with a third project with the same artist. So I just wanted to put that out there. >> I just and and thank you so much for your for your presentation and walking us through this project. Um just so I understand sort of where is the proposed location uh of this um artwork? Do Do we know? >> There isn't one that's part what they're asking for um from the commission um but Gary do you have some some initial thoughts that you've spoken with Giles about? You want to go over? >> Yeah, we have. So, one you know, the this this element appears to be potential element which art could be affixed to uh the front the front facade um through here could be areas that we look at for art. There's also a a a mini a mini [clears throat] plaza in front. There's quite a significant setback from the street, so we could do a you know, some sort of free-standing art there potentially. You know, it's good to kind of see So, right in here if you could see my cursor and I can see if I can come in a little bit closer. So, there's some nice area in here where art could be considered. And then moving it it along San Antonio Road, this area in here could be an option as well. Yeah, so we're just kind of um >> And and how >> the suggestion. >> And how does that location coincide with the setback that you were talking about? >> Yeah, so this is this is the setback from back of curb from still from back of curb face of building is 33 ft. And the the additional easement cuts this down to 25 ft. I think is what at least was mentioning. We We have kind of a the building where we could place art. Anything between that 33-ft and the 25-ft is an easement that the city has. >> I have a question. >> Thank you. Um the one-story building, is that to the west of your property? >> Yeah, there we go. >> Yes. >> Um what uh what is that? >> It is a one-story industrial building. >> Okay. And then the just uh adjacent to it, but in front of your building, it looks like there's sort of a court area or something. >> Right here? >> No, to the other side, where you are, your building. No, sorry, in the front. Yeah. >> Oh, right here? >> Yeah, yeah. So, can you I can't I can't really tell from here. What is that exactly? And is there a a wall? Um or is that a kind of a plaza? >> Yeah, it's it's it's a plaza, um and these are uh landscape designs that um we are considering and have submitted to the city for for review at this point. >> And that plaza is open to the public? >> Good question. Um this plaza I think could be open to the public, yeah. >> And just I'm sorry, one more question about Jaume's work. Is that interactive work? I couldn't I can't really tell. >> No. It I think you can sure you can um it appears that yeah, you can kind of touch it. Some of it you can. And for example, like like this one, I don't I know you're asking if it if it moves. Um I don't believe this one moves. Uh yeah, this one yeah, you can kind of and feel this one. I see this one you probably don't want to be interacting with that one. >> So, some some of his previous work does have some movement to it, but um other pieces kind of give the illusion of movement. Yeah. >> Well said, thanks. >> Do we know if 30 Do we have a sample or example or a thought about what 3150 El Camino's going to look like? >> That is coming in August. >> Um could you point out where the storefront is again? Like if >> Would you like >> Is it Does that >> me to show you on on this image or on a different image? >> Not shopping. Okay, so Okay, yeah. So, I was just trying to figure out if public was actually going to be moving on the space. >> It's a co-working space for the people there in the building. It's It's for building tenant amenities, isn't that right? >> Yeah, inside the building is, yes. It's co-working, leasing, lounge, lobby. >> And is the parking public parking or parking for people coming in residents or >> The The parking is designated only for residents. There There's no retail on the site. It's a pure multi-family residential project. >> Okay. So, that seems to really indicate that this um from a public art standpoint needs to be something that's visible from the street, really from driving because there is nowhere to park. Um yeah. So, another comment um that tall um artistic Yeah. kind of piece you're talking about seems to be a prime location really because of the height. Those trees are going to fill in and I would imagine anything that's on the lower section of the building, you know, will be obscured in a majority of the time depending on the type of tree, but One other comment while I'm at it. Um given, you know, the the speed at which you travel along San Antonio Road, um something that's seen from uh not just straight on looking at the building, but from the sides, if you will, even if it's that tall section, but something that comes over on the sides, um I think would be much more >> Speaking of this? >> Um that, yes. Also the the kind of architectural piece or the artistic piece you mentioned, Gary mentioned. Um I don't know if something could come along the side of that, but I would think artwork that's visible coming toward the building from either direction, um would be seen and appreciated much more than something that's just straight on. You wouldn't be able to see it often. >> That's a great comment. >> I um I love the idea of the grandeur of that, of having it on that large um architectural form. Um as his work is described as sensory, I'm wondering if there can be something that's reflected just a little bit on the ground level for somebody to um in to to actually touch and kind of recognize the interaction of the of that that element. >> Um I also um agree with folks in terms of the the that artistic uh architectural um awning piece uh seems like a prime location for the work and I think uh as stated before it was it's viewable from the street so then perhaps the material used should be of a perhaps a larger scale so then it could be experienced from afar and preferably matte finish so it's non-reflective and intrusive to drivers and also probably stationary so it's not making any sort of clattering sound that would disrupt the tenants. >> Actually I have a comment too and it looks like I agree with um I'm going to call it lattice. That's just what it reminds me of. Is a great option and it looks like that might be someone's windows that it's going to be covering so I think that should a consideration to keep in mind that someone's going to be potentially looking out at it maybe through it wanting to look through it so I think that's just something to consider. >> I'm also thinking of like that gray area. It's kind of back off a little bit but um >> Set back. >> But you would be able to see it as you're driving through. Um might be kind of uh >> Are you speaking of this? >> Yeah. It's just kind of like a bigger space that uh >> Is there a >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah, that area right there. >> This one? >> Yeah, it just seems like it's a a bigger space that you might have a little more flexibility but you would only be able to see it from one direction. >> The concern I would have about that is as soon as that one story building turns into a five story. >> Oh, yeah. True. >> All great points. >> Are there any other comments or questions from the commissioners? >> I do. Just one question. It's good so we're I'm looking at the budget and it's a sizable budget and depending on the spend for uh for the actual art commission, let's say if the um the artwork ends up being less than the um you know, 805,000, what happens with the delta? >> Generally, they would pay the difference into the public art funds um and we'll see once we do the um construction evaluation where the numbers come out to. >> Thank you. >> Um I heard in the presentation earlier that there was some idea about taking a a sort of a band of artwork across the building also and I think that would be uh in my opinion, I feel uh that might really well balance out that what Amanda you called the lattice uh feature which is so tempting to put all the artwork on but just crossing it with a band on the lower part of the building because um just having all the beautiful artwork on one side of the building might make from a strictly real estate point of view, make that part of the building more precious. And I I uh agree with Commissioner Mallory's idea of um wrapping somehow making that gesture on across the corner over the corner so that it has more of an impact and it's not very frontal. Thank you. >> Great, thank you. >> I guess the last thing I'll just add is I think the um artist that you guys are looking at Giles. I looked at his website before coming today and um I think it's a really exciting opportunity to bring some pretty incredible art down into Palo Alto, so bravo. >> It will certainly add to the building for sure. Yeah. And also, you know, with the location. I mean, it it looks like even though this is a multi-purpose building, this is not a building where uh people that don't live there would actually go in. It's not like there's a cafe or anything like that. So, you would want the artwork to be on the outside of the building. Any other questions? >> I just I I just want to say I really think it's going to be great. Good choice. And I like the biomorphic style of it, the sensory style, the more organic. Attaching that to uh rectilinear facade is I think a great idea. >> Any final thoughts? We good? Okay, thank you so much for the presentation. >> And just uh for um mental planning, uh when would they be coming back for the next phase? >> It's always a wild card. It depends on how long it takes them to develop the artwork and um you know, these developers are are frequently juggling a lot of different permitting issues and whatnot, so it it really can vary. But, usually it's a couple months at least. >> And also required prior to permitting of the project. >> Well, best of luck. We're very excited about this project. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, Gary. >> Okay, thanks. Thanks, everybody. >> Take care. Hey, all right. Well, first action item. Sherman Avenue parking garage temporary mural. Excellent. Thank you. We're really excited to bring this to you as there's been a lot of focus on California Avenue and they're having another Thursday event next Thursday evening. So, just a little background, brief refresher if anyone's watching from the public as well. Um the Sherman Avenue parking garage, um this was a temporary mural project that was part on last year's commission plan that we didn't quite get around to because all the x-raying the the building decks and whatnot took a little longer than we anticipated. So, it is one of our projects listed on this year's work plan. Um February 26th, the Public Art Commission approved the funds for the structural studies, the permitting, the fabrication, the hardware installation, and the artist fee so we could move ahead with a call for artists. Um March and April, we went through a selection process and Commissioner Mallery was on that panel. Um in April, we came back to the Public Art Commission to have the artist approved for the project. Um in May and June was design development. So, the artist spent a little more time getting clarification on that California Avenue plan, um spent some time on Cal Ave meeting with business owners and members of the public were able to come learn more about Philip's work um and see samples and talk to him a little bit about what they think of when they think of California Avenue. And the great thing about being out there at 11:00 in the morning on a weekday is you're truly getting the folks from the neighborhood who are out there on their daily rounds. So, it was it was a wonderful experience. So, this evening we are here to show the design that he has come up with. And so, as a reminder, it's going to go in those two middle squares. So, his statement, "As I walk through California Avenue and spoke with members of the community, a recurring theme emerged. Many had witnessed the neighborhood change over the years. It made me reflect on similar transformations throughout the Bay Area, including my hometown of San Jose. Change can be unsettling, especially when it brings uncertainty. Yet within change, there is also possibility, growth, and beauty waiting to be discovered. I chose the butterfly as a symbol of transformation. On the left side of the mural, the butterfly is depicted realistically before evolving into something beyond its current form. The painted lady butterfly, a species found across much of the world, serves as a metaphor for change itself. It is universal, constant, and affecting all of us. The background color palette reflects the cycle of the seasons, reinforcing the idea that change is a natural and ongoing process. Everything changes is both a visual metaphor and an invitation to embrace transformation. So, with that, this is the design. So, you see the left side is more realistic in the color pattern of the actual butterfly. And then to the right, you get a lot of the bright colors and hues. And he was also thinking about all the different ages that are there, making it very youth-friendly, you know, for kids who may not understand, "Oh, a butterfly change." So, that is that is Philip's design for the project. And we're here willing to ask any questions. It has been sent out to the selection panel. The The feedback we've gotten has been very positive on the project. People are excited to see it come, especially since the tones of the garage are quite muted. It's going to give a really bright punch of color. And as a reminder, this is the first an annual project. So, it's not a forever project. It's a temporary project. So, it would change out in the in another year with a different artist. Are there any questions? >> I have a question. Are there some trees that have grown up there in front of that area? >> No, it's it's a blank plaza in front of it. So, I don't know if we can put up the picture of that corner. >> I love that it says everything changes when it's going to be a temporary mural. It's kind of then it's just kind of like setting the stage of like um this is this will be changing, too. >> I have a question about the font that he's using. Um it's kind of a ransom font and I'm wondering if the context of that might be questioned somehow. >> Oh, interesting. Okay, we'll pass it along. >> Um So, I have a question. The dimension is 21 ft by 19 ft. Is that the whole entire space? >> Here? >> Uh-huh. >> So, here. >> Oh, okay. Got it. >> Those decks are where we can put place the hardware. >> Okay. >> Those other squares are largely ornamental. >> Mhm. >> You can't really anchor to those. >> And so, on a going forward basis, we understand that this is a temporary sort of annually we're going to have a different artist putting up their artwork. And is it going to be sort of the same size that we're contemplating? And so, the installation will be very similar. >> Absolutely, it'll be the same. We do not want to be in a position of removing and adding more hardware. It's um it's a very tricky process. We need a brain trust of engineers and x-ray people on site as every piece goes in. So, we're not moving it. It's all They're all going to be the same scale. >> Do we have any renderings of what it looks like on the building? >> Actually, we do not. Um but >> That's right. >> It adds much needed color to that area. So, it's it's a wonderful fit. >> I mean, it feels like it's going to be a real statement piece. >> Um is so is is this like the finalized um submission from the artist? Or is there any Is this like a draft or this is pretty much it? >> This Well, that's the reason we're here tonight to gather any feedback as he does the final touches. If there are any slight changes as he moves forward, and then he creates the design files for printing. >> Yeah, I'm I I think I mean, that the issue raised with like it looks like a a ransom font also brings up different feelings for me in terms of like the the phrasing of everything changes. Uh I mean as he kind of alluded to in the interviews that he conducted or community members he talked to, they seemed like change was something that was um a little hard to deal with, you know, and change not being a good thing. And then also within the context of it being like digital art and it brings to mind was just like was this made by AI? And are we thinking about everything changes from like >> [clears throat] >> the hand rendering to something that is like uh generated. Right? So then um all of this becomes uh you I start to think of it in a subversive sense. And it kind of just kind of bums me out in a way. Actually, despite it the colorfulness, which I appreciate and I think, you know, color is always can always be impactful. But um yeah, with all that that I just mentioned, that still really um makes me look at this in a different way. And not quite as positive that it might um initially try to connote. >> Interesting. So so some of the feedback, I mean, I said not always good, but I mean, by and large people are excited to see changes and see more activation happening on California Avenue. So that's where we were just coming from. >> You know, the other thing I was kind of thinking um to Commissioner Tran's point is, you know, when you're focusing on one piece, you may have certain reactions to it, but California Cal Cal Cal California Avenue, I think that area, we do have a lot of murals. And I think sort of visually, the the visual experience of people who are there either driving by or walking by. What would be the some of the last, you know, artistic images that they see? And that that may be a nice counter balance to to to this. >> Well, I I feel like for artists, you know, AI is kind of like kind of a threat to to us, but I feel like for the rest of the world, like except for maybe like the graduates right now. Um But, you know, a lot of people are celebrating and really I feel like it kind of marks the time. Whether we like it or not, we are in a just a lot of change. And um So, I could think, you know, it's it marks the time. >> So, um Chair Shen, I just wanted to call out we missed. We do have um an online speaker to this item. We want to give them time to speak before we continue our discussion. That would be great. Okay? Yes. >> Committee members, here please. Um you're welcome to address the commission, please. >> Thank you. Thank you for for giving me the opportunity to speak. Um I just wanted to I'm a Palo Alto resident. I live in the College Terrace community. I spend a lot of time on on College Avenue, and I just uh I appreciate and want to echo Commissioner uh Tran's comments. I I actually found it a bit tone deaf uh given the artist's statement regarding the, you know, the maybe mixed sentiment about change in the area, and I I think the comment about the kind of digital design and uh the other comment that was made about the typeface selection, it uh read to me uh initially is very antagonistic almost. Uh additionally, I just want to call out that while I think it's great to bring uh you know, a nice splash of color to that area and to that garage, I I would maybe push back a bit on the expansive color palette that's chosen and uh yeah, I I love the idea of this project. I have to say I'm just not a particular fan of this piece uh uh for kind of the aesthetic and the message that it seems to be giving uh and thank you for the opportunity to give a comment. >> Thank you. Can I squeeze in a couple of comments as well? Um I agree with the public commenter uh and agree with uh Commissioner Tran. Uh I think there is a little bit of um uh well, well, maybe I'll start with like a little bit of political context where I don't I I think a lot of people are questioning or pushing back against some of the changes along Kalaniana'ole Ave, even the street closure, the housing, the policy around bicycles. And so I don't know if anyone will actually receive this message and think it's sort of directed at them in a way that is uh sort of it could be perceived as dismissive of like, "Oh yeah, well, everything changes." Um uh So, that that was a reaction to the public commenter and I think it's and Commissioner Tran, I think it's a I I I'm not sure how much I'd be over-interpreting to that point. I think aesthetically, I'm uh I like that it has a lot of color and texture and so it can be visible from far away and also be a different experience as you get closer. But, I think like just it seems very on the nose, right? Like it says it's a visual metaphor, but when it just says when it says everything changes in like big block letters, it's not really a visual metaphor. It's like literally telling you what it is, not like showing you. And so, like seems a bit like uh it reminds me of like a '90s Euro pop dance album cover sort of um in a way that uh is personally not my taste, but that's also just one person's opinion. >> Thank you. That's a good comment. >> I'm able to see everybody's points in this um artwork, and I'm still able to see some sort of an upbeat um you know, imagery that that place needs. Um I'm also able to see that it could have you know, you know, sort of dissolved into being um a nostalgia piece, and it's staying away from that. It's reminding me very much of the first cover issues of um covers of Wired magazine. You know, it's got that sort of a thing going on. All in all, for 1 year, it's great, I think. [laughter] For 1 year. >> But, it may be more powerful without the everything changes on it. Like if with that removed, I feel like it it it doesn't slap people in the face about who don't want change. You know, which I feel like when it says that, it is kind of like pushing an agenda. Um but by just removing that, then I feel like it stands alone a little stronger, and it's just shows that change is also beautiful and frightening and um Yeah, I just I think it's a lot stronger without the words. >> It's really interesting and I appreciate everybody's comments. And you know, what I'm hearing which I maybe maybe good reminder and feedback for the artist that when we see a piece of art, we don't see it out of context. We see it with the lens of some of the things that are in our lives that we're also experiencing and and so we're making a lot of associations with a lot of the current conversations that are very impactful and people are having strong reactions to. So maybe that is just sort of a sentiment we can kind of share. You know, public art is public is taking up public space and it's a conversation starter or a message to the public. And so you know, we I you know, this is not to editorialize but is to say, hey, you know, if we're going to put something out there, you know, here are some of the climate that maybe for for consideration. Um now that being that that is an action item, what's our responsibility world and responsibility? >> Yeah, I think um we can take a vote on the conceptual design and give the artist additional direction. I also want to be very cautious that we're not designing by committee and over playing the hand in the artist work. Um so I mean these are all good comments we can bring back to the artist um to think about. So I appreciate that. Um we can come back if need be in August. We could delay the whole project until the fall. Um, to bring a design back to the commission in August. Um, or we can give the direction, see what the artist decides to do with it. And move forward with that. >> Does the selection committee Does this come back to the selection committee or where where the final stage? >> This did come to the selection committee and the feedback that I had gotten back was very positive. That Yeah. Yes. Um >> I haven't been here for that many meetings at this point. >> Mhm. >> Uh, but we rarely have someone on the line making a public comment. >> Mhm. >> Um, and I think it's worth noting. Um and that there are commissioners who feel some apprehension about this. Um, so I don't know whether you know, whether we want to delay it or not. I'm not quite sure, but I think there's more feelings of unease than is typical with the things that come through here. >> I think the unease is coming from the accessibility that is being provided by the text. And we are not used to seeing text very often with work. Uh, but I I would I would err on the side of caution with that because for the young people, uh, it's a point of access, you know. They are able to handle words much more likely than my people my age, I think. And I I I don't know. I just feel like, um you know, if it would be interesting to have this open to people in their 20s or in their teens and see what how they react to it and they might they might just really enjoy walking by it and it might it might give them a sense of strength to say everything changes, and it's quite okay to see change, you know? It could be I don't know. I just feel that way. Thank you. >> Um I think everyone has expressed their um you know, feedback. Um and I to your point, and this doesn't come up very often. Um and we certainly uh we certainly uh usually don't editorialize um you know, artistic design. Um sometimes we give feedback of um an audience standpoint to say, "Hey, you know, this is this may not be a how you experienced it, but this is how I potentially or someone may potentially experience it." And we, you know, we give that feedback. Um but having said that, I think we um since this is an action item, my recommendation is that we take a vote. Um and my recommendation that we take a vote for uh approval or non-approval with the feedback, and this is obviously a recorded session, so this will be shared with the artist so that they know that potentially, you know, here here's a spectrum of audience, um and people based on their personal experiences have this initial reaction. And then, you know, and see how they respond to that. >> And I do think that the artist would be responsive if we ask specifically it seems like the the lettering, the language seems to be the main source of the issue. Um if we asked him to revisit that. >> I just have one more comment in terms of accessibility. >> Mhm. >> I honestly don't think this typeface is accessible to everybody, either. So, it's something he might want to think about. >> What do you mean? >> Uh people with with you know with >> Uh >> Oh, sorry. Sorry. People with low vision or maybe other sensitivities, sensory issues, they might not be able to >> Yeah. >> appreciate what this says. >> Yep. Yep. >> Okay. So, um thank you everybody for such a robust and um thoughtful discussion. Um so, we'll take a vote on this. Um do I have a motion to approve with the feedback to the artist? >> I would move to approve. >> Do I have a second? I'll second the motion. Okay, I'm going to roll call this. Um All right. Commissioner uh Joshi? >> I approve. >> Okay. Commissioner Stern? >> Commissioner Mallory? >> I approve. >> Commissioner Smith? >> Commissioner Tran? >> Uh I don't approve. >> Okay. Commissioner de la Garza? >> I do not approve. >> Okay. Um I approve with the feedback to the artist for consideration uh to um to the sensitivity comments that have been made. And I think we have enough votes to carry. And and maybe um having said that we have enough votes to carry with this fairly enthusiastic and robust, rich feedback. So, to the extent um the artist has another um you know, interpretation or framing that they would like to come back and share with the commission, we will welcome that as well. >> Is that what you're asking about? That's a good question. Let me see what um what his availability is for Philip to turn around and change. I'm not sure what his his schedule is, but >> Okay. Fantastic. Thank you so much. Uh next item next action item is the University underpass mural. Now, this one is really exciting. >> So, as you all may know, that Caltrain the University Avenue Caltrain is the second most traveled on the whole line. Um it has never incorporated public art despite our best efforts over the last decade to do so. And I'll share with you some of historically some of the challenges of incorporating public art into that tunnel in the past. It is um you can see if we can go back to the previous one for a second. Um you can see it's pretty dark um and those those are the two framed in red or the two pedestrian um levels. So, if you go straight across, you're entering Stanford campus. And then you have ramps that come off of that that go up to the Caltrain platform. So, a lot of people enter here. This is the gateway to downtown Palo Alto, to Stanford. Um there are other transit hubs. There are buses, the Marguerite shuttle, all above ground there. Um and about 10 years or so ago, uh we were trying desperately to incorporate some artwork into that tunnel because it seemed like such a shame not to have any Um what we found was there were challenges with the lighting. And if there was an attempt to put LED lighting in to do something a little more colorful, something of that nature, >> [sighs] >> the conduit was pretty fried. There's moisture that that comes into that concrete. Um and we really couldn't touch it or chance anything that was going to make it seem darker. So we left the lights alone. And and it's always been painted cream, so that would would reflect what light is there. So fast forward to a notification I got after the fact that hey, surprise, the conduit's been changed. There is better lighting. There's not increased capacity there to do like a light piece or anything of that nature, but it is brighter and it's been cleaned up and it's been repainted. There are still some moisture issues within the walls, of course, um but that it is a great opportunity to incorporate perhaps some sort of mural work into those walkways um without covering all the white because we still want to bounce some light. Um and we know there are some water issues. So we reached out to um our counterparts at Stanford to sort of talk through some options. We've gotten some feedback from them. We're working with the economic development team to um to reach out to downtown businesses. The hotels group has been really excited about the increased lighting capacity. People say it looks less creepy. I guess that's good. Um we like less creepy. Um but it's a pretty narrow passageway and because of the nature of the walls, it's not something we would want to drill or put hardware into. We're really looking at something that's going to be surface level. And so we wanted to come to the commission um to sort of a introduce the project, let you know what our initial thinking is on a way to proceed. Um, we did actually submit just last week was that just last week? Yeah, several days ago. >> [snorts] >> Um, a grant to the VTA um, to help support the projects. Those grants top out at $25,000. And we won't find out until August and the work would not be able to take place until 2027 if we're using grant funding. Um, we are hopeful that if uh, the commission approves funding for a mural project that would cover approximately 25% of the wall surface there. So, those could be individual figures, objects, it could be something with flow, it could be a lot of different things. Um, that it would show that the city is committed to this, help us maybe bring in some more partners and more funders um, to take part in the project. So, um, some of the thinking is yes, we would cover maybe 25% of the space. So, we're not blocking out all of the cream. And not spending so much money on on walls that do have some water challenges. Um, and we were toying with various ideas of if is this one artist? Do you have a different artist for each corridor? So, it's a different experience in each of those and they sort of work together to make sure that the designs fit, but they're unique styles. Um, thinking about wayfinding when you come off there there is lots of signage, but visually is there another way to communicate? If you're going to Stanford this way, if you're going to downtown, it's this way. So, um, so those are the kinds of things we wanted to ask for your feedback on as then we you know before we move forward with downtown businesses and various stakeholders to gather their input. We just wanted to hear from you all and hopefully allocate funding in the way in the um in the amount of $65,000 which would cover approximately 25% of that wall space. >> I think this is super exciting. Um you guys have probably thought of this, but um what about mural along the ceiling? So you don't lose light from those walls cuz it is so dark in there. Um anyways, I'm excited to see. >> And and just just for for my understanding, maybe we can go back to the picture a little bit. So the light on top, that's the new addition, is that that's the improvement? >> Yes, they they didn't put in um new s- places for the fixtures. They're essentially the same placement, but they are LED and they replaced the conduit and so it is brighter, it's more reliable. >> Got it. Okay, so better lighting, uh more robust. And then and in terms of location, you you're just like open. >> We generally don't like to be overly prescriptive because the artist is your best problem solver. So um so we just don't know if an artist might make a proposal for individual sort of vignettes or if it's something that has more flow to it. We sort of leave it open. >> Got it. And just one last question. So when you say 25%, you're saying geographically you're cutting it up or is it going to be kind of you know like Max Smoke House? You know, they painted the whole thing black and then they put plants on top and it could be you know, some of it is negative space. >> Yes, it it could be any of those. >> Uh I think it'd be nice to consider artists that would are making work about like nature considering like how confined the space is. So thinking about like bringing nature into this kind of confined space and making it more inviting that way. But also considering what was here before and then maybe the art might be reflecting of that history. Um and also because it's only 25% that you're going to be covering um thinking about like like pockets, right? So just like a pocket like a uh some sort of image or composition in maybe a corner or something and in a different corner like a lower corner or something. So then uh the space is accessed by commuters, right? So there's a potential for them to see something different every time, right? Or have the sense of discovery within their um their uh their walk and their commute. So that might be some things to consider. >> You mentioned seepage issues in the tunnel and um maybe a muralist or an artist who is working with uh ceramic tiles. Uh or even architectural tiles, you know, sort of 1970s type of and that would maybe go well with the Art Deco architecture upstairs. Um but you know, it's a painted over ceramic tiles so that it doesn't take up too much depth into the it doesn't protrude too much into the um the space. But still is providing that um um protection from water. >> Um definitely the the style now is quite stark. So I think um Councillor Tran's comment about bringing nature in um might be a a theme that resonates and as far as the wayfinding some kind of plants could you know help you almost do that coming from the outside going to the inside and maybe where that area is could have a plant that reflect that. >> Are the artists for this project from the pool or is this would this be a new group? >> That's that's a great question. If we get the grant then we would need to use Santa Clara County artists specifically. If we don't get the grant and we're moving forward that's something we could discuss with our partners. We do certainly have a very robust pre-qualified pool but it depends on who the partners are that are coming to the table with potential funding you know and what they're what they're feeling is if they're happy with who's in the pool or they feel like we need to do an individual call. As I said we're at the very beginning. >> [laughter] >> Do you see this being more than one artist or one artist or do we have any idea? Do you? >> I see it being multiple artists. >> Okay. >> That we give a lot of shots. I was just I don't know that it seems to me those Greg Brown guys people are super popular in Palo Alto. Maybe we give artists an opportunity to riff off of that. >> I actually have a question because of the experience we had with seepage for the Midtown poetry wall. So you know that in combination with the temporary murals that we're talking about. I'm just wondering if sort of the type of material, is this an opportunity where we can sort of create um a place for temporary hanging or something that, you know, um where it cuz the seepage is something that is going to shorten the life of a mural. >> Certainly, and you can see um Next time you're in there, have a look-see. Um the primarily you see a lot of it coming out the bottoms of the walls. You can see where the paint is rough, where they painted over. Um and so you can see where some of the problem areas are. So I suspect we would try to design around some of those chronically challenged areas. But that's Yeah, see, there you go. Now you can see a little bit of it. Um but yeah, we had some conversations with public works about that and gathering their advice on um placement and coverage for that reason. >> Um kind of touching on what Commissioner Joshi said or brought up, it it might be [clears throat] Again, I just really think of light. I walk through there and it it is so dark. So using reflective materials, not just paint on paint. Um so whether that's tiles or even I mean, I'm thinking of the um public art and private development we just saw. Obviously out of our budget, but um you know, a sense of movement and different materials and provides interest, um but maybe it would even enhance light. >> I think this is like probably way too ambitious, but um I think of all those little alcoves and like in um the subway system in New York, they have all of these little brass sculptures. And then I've also seen this artist who does these brass sculptures that are painted of weeds. And like if we were to bring nature in and and those elements might be something really whimsical and interesting but maybe way over budget. >> I know that the artist you're speaking of and they're way out of budgets, but they're pretty great. >> I think it's Karim Rashid who has designed the subway in I think it's New York. I could be totally wrong. It could be somewhere in Europe, but and it's all tiles. Subway tiles with you know, text on them etc. So again something reflective, something washable, something that doesn't go down with water. >> I think yeah, I mean we can explore tiles a little further. The initial thinking is because there's already water in that substrate. It's going to be really challenging to be able to get something that's going to hold and adhere. >> Uh also might be good to have an artist that is like site responsive, but also working with materials that um is about like degradation or certain kind of like imperfection within the material or composition. So rather than like uh putting a band-aid over something or deterring from that is just like oh that is just a part of the architecture and part of that space at this point. >> All great comments. >> I'll go for it. >> No, no, I just there's there's there's still that there's that reflective paint that we mark the streets with too. It would be interesting to consider and there's I was just trying to look up her name. There's an artist her name's Mary something that I'm spacing out on, but that might be interesting to considering that people are using their headlights and going through. >> Mhm. Just trying to think about constraints and budget. Uh a couple of ideas that popped into my head is that uh Sol LeWitt has uh he was like this minimalist artist who does a lot of geometric shapes and uh does a lot of integration with architecture where he has uh concepts like you connect different corners of architectural features with lines and you lay out grids and uh uh have a sort of programmatic approach. Uh and I don't think we could pay the license or royalties for whatever an actual Sol LeWitt uh mural would be, but I think his ideas are pretty out there in the open and uh meant for like drafts people to be able to just do on their own. And so like something like that that is uh simple enough that it can be done at a large scale throughout the entire space and still feel coherent and clean uh was something that comes to my mind just because I love those Sol LeWitt exhibits that uh they have at SFMOMA and uh Mass MoCA and other places. Um And then another artist that I was just trying to Google the name of uh Varini who does these sort of like geometric projections that are painted with a certain pattern and then from a certain spot it looks like a like very stark optical illusion where uh uh it might look like there's a floating grid of circles in a church or something like that. Um uh So so I mean that those are just ideas of like large scale potentially affordable uh concepts that would make the space feel cohesive and fit the restrictions around only using paint and things like that. >> I I love that because it makes the space feel more expansive. It like or even just changes the confinement. It makes it feel more open. >> Okay, guys. I'm going to just provide one sort of counterpoint to it cuz we're just sort of ID- ideating. Um I remember one time uh for purposes of wayfinding, uh we had these crosswalks with fish. Do you guys remember those? >> We still do. We still do, right? >> I thought they were great. Then somebody said, "Whose great idea is this to put fish on the ground when kids are walking?" And I was like, "Oh, yeah. Put on the lawyer's hat." Because cuz kids are looking on the ground instead of crossing the street. And I was like, "Oh, there's that perspective, the safety perspective as well." So, we do sometimes consider that. >> I have to say it's my favorite project of all time. >> I think inviting light artists is a great idea. You know, only only thing I thought of that first um also when I was thinking about this. Um the only problem with that might be that um vandals, you know, vandalism might be people react to that kind of art and they might throw a thing at it or you know, at the projector or some such thing. But if it can be done, that would be great. >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I misunderstood. Is it you were talking about projecting art? >> Uh it could do, yeah. >> Uh I didn't Well, there was an artist that basically takes makes it look like there's a projection of paint or something on a 3D surface, but it is painted. It's not a projection where it would look like there's a grid superimposed like architecturally in a way that doesn't or a bunch of sort of circles or if you stand in a circle certain place it lines up and is sort of engaging in that way. Um and then from another angle it looks like nothing but um yeah, it's something for people to discover. >> So, we we do have a a speaker online. I believe it's the same speaker who spoke to the last item. >> Hi, yeah, it is me again. My name is Sarah uh uh I just wanted to throw out I I you know, no idea if this is in scope or not, but when you showed that first image uh from the road view looking at the overpass it it struck me that the that face of the overpass itself uh is very kind of stark and I don't know if you've explored this already uh but what would it look like to put the majority of an installation on that face and then I could imagine you have an you know, minor elements or minimal elements going through the tunnels to kind of connect both sides of it. Uh and I'd also throw out there and again, I'm totally naive to what it looks like to partner with Stanford on on this kind of project, but that that overpass is also kind of the gateway, you know, to the Stanford art museums and if there's you know, any capacity for for them to draw in uh either an artist or provide provide funding for that. I just thought I'd throw that out there if you hadn't thought of it. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other Any other questions, comments, input? If not, since this is an action item, I'm going to ask uh to see if we have an emotion if we have someone to motion to Oh, what is this? Uh approve the allocation of fund in the amount of up to 65,000 for the mural project. Do I have a motion? >> So moved. >> Do I have a second? >> I second. >> Fantastic. All right. So, we're going to do a roll call on this. Uh Commissioner uh Joshi? >> Approved. >> Commissioner Stern? >> Commissioner Mollerie? >> Approved. >> Commissioner Smith? >> Approved. Commissioner Tran? >> Approved. >> Commissioner de la Garza? >> And for me, enthusiastic yes. All right. Next project is acceptance of gift of artwork. Woohoo. Happy Merry Christmas. >> We have um two gift items to consider this evening, which is pretty unusual. Um I think Nadia is going to take this first one, which is a gift of artwork by artist Richard Shaw. >> Okay. So, the recommendation today for the commission um um is to accept the donation of artwork by artist Richard Shaw into the um City of Palo Alto collection of permanent public art. So, just to provide you a little bit of context um for this gift um offered to the city. Um Bay Area artist uh Richard Shaw has offered um to donate um this piece uh titled Watercolor Palette uh with ink. Um it's a glazed uh porcelain tabletop sculpture with overglaze decals and transfers. Um the artwork was recently exhibited um at the Palo Alto Art Center as part of um the Clay Sustains group exhibition. So, following the exhibition, the the artist offered um the work as a gift to the Art Center. However, as a non-collecting institution, the Art Center recommended that the artist instead um offers [clears throat] the um um gift um to the city's uh collection of permanent public art. Um Richard Shaw is uh widely recognized uh worldwide as a leading figure in contemporary ceramic sculpture. He's um best uh known for his um assemblages um rendered in trompe l'oeil style, so deceiving of the eye, like um And so, he um transfers everyday objects into meticulously crafted ceramic sculptures that combine humor with and social commentary. So, every single object uh rendered as part of this composition is in fact made of ceram- made of porcelain, glazed porcelain. So, through his uh master of ceramic decals and overglaze transfer techniques, um he um replicates the appearance of common materials and found objects, blurring the boundaries between reality and um artificial. By juxtaposing the ordinary with the unexpected, Shaw creates works that both are playful and thought-provoking. Attached to the staff report is the artist's resume and exhibition history. You can see that he is presented in public collections throughout the Bay Area, across the United States, and internationally. I also should mention that we have another artwork by artist Richard Shaw in the city collection. And unlike this um ceramic piece, we actually have a print titled Self-Portrait that was donated into the collection by former public art commissioner and art patron Paul Karlberg in the '90s. So, you know, this um edition would be a significant gift addition to the city's collection. Both artworks can be viewed on the city's website. Let me know if you have any questions or comments, please. >> Um I just like to say I'm really excited about this piece. I mean, as an alumni of UC Berkeley, and this guy was like the mentor to my mentors. Yeah, and then his work is exquisite. Just the trompe l'oeil style in which he employs implies creates these pieces here is is is is awesome. And I I think it'd be really exciting to have this in the collection. And it's also kind of intricate and like you really need to see it up close to really experience it. So, it'd be interesting to see where you folks place it. But also, I also recommend looking at his wife's work, Martha Shaw, who is largely under recognized. But it was like a huge like supporter of him throughout his whole career. And I mean, she's a painter. And I think she's represented by part two gallery or something, but uh Yeah, I I just as the kids say, I he's he's goated. He's old-school and >> Great comment. Thank you. >> Any hands up? >> I don't see any hands in the audience. Thank you. Do you have any comments, observations, or just a note of appreciation? What a beautiful beautiful piece of artwork. And we've been looking at some temporary art projects, but this is a permanent collection, so just thrilled to to have this. So people can go and appreciate it. And it will be part of our permanent collection. So thank you so much. We need to actually make a motion to accept it. Do I have a motion? >> I motion to accept. >> Okay, do I have a second? Commissioner Tran. >> [laughter] >> Yeah, I second. >> All right. Okay, we're going to roll call this. Commissioner Doshi? >> Approve. >> Commissioner Stern? >> Approved. >> Commissioner Monareh? >> Commissioner Smith? >> Approved. >> Commissioner Tran? >> Commissioner De La Garza? >> Approved. >> And approved by me as well. Thank you so much. And our last action item, last but not least, yet another gift. Fantastic. >> And as I mentioned a couple of minutes ago, it is it is highly unusual. We don't get that many gifts outside of the Cabrillo artists. And so it's an interesting moment to have two on one agenda. Um this is on a whole different scale. Um so this is a large-scale ceramic sculpture by the late artist Viola Frey um titled Seated Man foot poised on the world from 2004. Um this has been offered to the city of Palo Alto as a promised gift by a local resident art collector and former board member of the Palo Alto Art Center Foundation. Um so it depicts one of the artist's iconic monumental male figures often referred to as the everyman or the blue-suited man. Um some of you may have seen these in various museums and cited um in collections. Um you can see from the resume she is her work is all over the world. She's quite prolific. Um Bay Area artist um born in 1933, passed in 2004. This was one of the last large sculptures that she made. She was one of the most influential American ceramic artists of the 20th century and a pioneering figure in the California Funk Art movement. Um renowned for monumental figurative sculptures, she challenged traditional distinctions between fine art and craft while expanding the possibilities of ceramic practice. Um again, she's exhibited and in collections internationally. Um the artwork was purchased shortly after her death in 2005 for $90,000. Um we have not had a current appraisal of it, but we would believe that it the value has increased significantly in that time. Um, the artwork is located in the lawn of the private residence of the donor. Um, so we did engage a conservation team to go evaluate it and see its condition. Um, could it travel? What would it take to clean it up? All of those kinds of good things. So, we learned a lot about the specifics of the piece, including it'll be much better suited not in the moisture of grass or under a tree. So, um, a lot of that residue and whatnot can be undone. Uh, then we started, uh, thinking about where it could potentially go. Uh, so we've been working with the Palo Alto Art Center thinking about, uh, placing it in that outdoor sculpture garden. Uh, it he'll be in good company with, uh, Nathan Oliveira's Universal Woman. Um, [snorts] and be a little bit protected because the garden gates do close at night, so it's not just out in the wild all night. Um, we would need to pour, uh, a small foundation for him to be on, a concrete footing to elevate him a little bit. Um, and, um, I think we've located the the space for it, uh, where the artwork will be safe and cared for and remain in good shape. The conservators, um, really they once they evaluated it, they said the piece is in remarkably good shape. There are some minor areas of loss that frequently happen when the piece is assembled. Um, you can see some of the seams in this image across his chest, but, um, also the legs, they're large pieces of ceramic that go over long pieces of hardware. Um, so it is, um, labor intensive to move and time consuming to take it apart, move it to the conservation studio, have the conservators work on it, clean it, and evaluate if that hardware on the inside would need to be replaced, which it may be because of the moisture. And then reassemble it at um in the Art Center courtyard. So, the estimate that we have so far from the conservators is somewhere between 14 5 and 16 5 for the conservation. That does not include pouring a pad um or moving it. So, there would be some cost associated with that. Um should the commission approve this promised gift, which we would have to firm up that agreement. We wanted to come to you first to find out if the commission's open to it, should we be able to get this done. Um then we will come back to the commission with more precise costs for that footing and um in the transit of the artwork. >> So, couple questions. Uh one is um the cost associated with um you know, the cleaning, the the situating, and all that. That would come out of which budget? >> Most likely the maintenance budget. >> And second question is being um sort of the type of material it is, ceramic. Um I I appreciate you're talking about the safety of the location, but um would it need to be sort of cover from the weather? Cuz sometimes pal also we do have you you know, rough rain and whatnot. >> No, it would it wouldn't need to be covered. The conservators feel like it's great in the wild as long as it's not in an irrigation system in grass. We would lift it up, it'll be on a hardscape in that courtyard um and be in the sun, not under a tree. So, there's nothing dropping onto it. >> Do we have some kind of track record on how these sculptures do in the public in terms of people interacting with them, climbing on them, etc.? >> Well, of course, it's it's pretty interesting and it's monumental, which is part of the reason we pour a a base for it because it sort of creates this um the space. Um we would need to work with the art center and watch the behavior. It'll be right outside the visitor services window, so it will be monitored during uh during art center hours, so they can keep an eye on it. And um should it be problematic, we could put up a little, you know, stanchion or something of that nature if we need to. >> Um if there is structural work needed, >> Yeah. >> um how does I I know I'm going to just give me a rough idea budget, but how does that match against the budget that you have to use? Would that need to be split over two different years or >> That's a great question. Um we haven't entered into those detailed conversations. I think it's something that we can manage, certainly for a gift of this size. Um but we just have to see what it looks like. We just didn't want to get too deep into it because they can't tell that until they open the sculpture. >> Will it be in the covered space um for the art center entrance? Is that where you are saying it will be or in the open? >> If you walk in the art center entrance and you walk past the front desk into the back courtyard, that's where the Nathan Oliveira sculpture is. Sky Hook Boca Raton is back there. It's the sculpture courtyard. There's only two in there. But the art center is very enthusiastic. Um if we're able to get this piece placed back there as well. Um some of these sculptures has been shown at the Art Center before, so there's an exhibition history. Um and I know that their foundation's pretty excited about the prospect of being able to negotiate this. >> That seems much more secure than being totally outside the Art Center here. >> Absolutely. Great question. >> And you may have already talked about this, but I just worry about the you know the sun beating down on it over time. Um you know, like how many years can it withstand that, you know? >> The conservators are not They say it's actually great for it to be in the sun because it's less likely to have any organic growth, and that's really what deteriorates it. So, um a lot of these are frequently cited in full sun. >> Actually, my my concern is really more sometimes our rainy season gets um you know, pretty exuberant and with like you know, flying branches and things like that because it's ceramic, you know, if you if you have um um material flying material coming at it, it may cause damage. And I'm just trying to understand. I think the garden is pretty well shielded from a lot of that uh external potential external um intrusion. >> That's a great point, and it is um there's a little corner. So, following Commissioner Joshi's trajectory, if we walk in the front door, we go past visitor services, we go out that door, it would be to the left, and that's a little corner of the building there. So, it is somewhat shielded. Um the nearest tree is on the other side, and it's not very large. Um I we feel like that is going to be the safest place for the sculpture to be cited. >> It's not ours yet, but we're already protecting it mentally. >> You can all take shifts on duty. Any other questions or comments? If not, uh do I have a motion to approve um the acceptance of this promised gift of artwork? >> I move to approve. >> Do I have a second? >> I second. >> All right. Okay, let's make sure we count the votes. Uh Commissioner Yoshi? >> I approve. >> Uh Commissioner Stern? >> Approve. >> Commissioner Mollering? >> Commissioner Smith? >> Approve. >> Commissioner Tran? >> Commissioner de la Garza? >> Approve. >> Ohlhausen, I approve as well. Okay. I guess do we have any public letters? >> There was one in the packet. >> Do we have any commissioner questions, comments, and more announcements? >> Oh, um I have I have an exhibition up over the David Brower Center. I'm part of like a four-person show over there. I wasn't able to announce it the last meeting cuz we didn't weren't here last month, but um it's part of a a four-person show called Flow State, and it's up until August 20th. If y'all can make it out there, um very proud of the work. Thank you. >> Fantastic. Going to have to get the information from you. >> If you send me the link to it, I can distribute it to all the commissioners. >> Fantastic. >> Also, um there will not be a July Public Art commission meeting due to lack of quorum. So, the next time we meet will be in August. >> Okay, fantastic. Thank you. Uh, do we have any virtual public comment? >> No raised hands. >> Okay, fantastic. On that note, the meeting is adjourned. Thank you very much.

Good evening. Come on, folks. Want to call the room to order. Want to call the room to order, please, so we can get going and hear from all of you. All right. Good evening. Calling to order the June 15, 2026 meeting of the PaloAlto City Council, which shall be our last meeting before we take a summer break. So with that, I will ask our clerk to call the role. >> Council member Lethod Haynes >> here. >> Council member Rectal >> Council member Lowing >> here. >> Council member Bert >> here. Mayor Vinker >> here. >> Council member Lou >> Vice Mayor Stone >> here. >> For the record, all present. >> Excellent. Well, we get to start tonight with a special order of the day. That is one of the joys that we get to do here on council, although a little bittersweet. And that is a proclamation expressing appreciation to Bill Gut upon his retirement. And I have asked council member Lowing to read the proclamation. >> Happy to do that. Where is our honored guest tonight? Okay, great. Great. Front row. Front row. Perfect. Perfect. Okay. This is a proclamation from the mayor expressing appreciation to you upon your retirement. Whereas Bill Gudov joined the Palo Alto Junior Museum and Zoo in June of 2001 to support the summer camp program and has dedicated nearly 25 years to inspiring curiosity, creativity, and a love of science in generations of children's children and families throughout the Palo Alto community. And whereas Bill served as a science teacher, educational leader, and beloved community figure, developing and facilitating exceptional school science lessons, summer camps, afterchool programs, and open space programs that inspired thousands of local children through his passion for inquiry, extensive knowledge, sense of humor, patience, and kindness. And whereas Bill designed and constructed innovative teaching tools and hands-on scientific models that made complex scientific concepts engaging, accessible, and memorable for students of all ages. And he became widely known for his remarkable ability to improve and repair educational equipment and exhibits. And whereas Bill played an important role in mentoring and training new junior museum educators, generously sharing his expertise and fostering a culture of learning, collaboration, and encouragement that earned him the deep admiration and respect of his colleagues. And whereas Bill contributed significantly to the development of exhibits and educational experiences at the Junior Museum and Zoo, as well as within the Baylands and Foothills preserves, while also supporting the care and well-being of the zoo's animals and forming meaningful connections with many of them. And whereas Bill's work was guided by his deeply held belief that science has the power to transform a child's understanding of the world into one filled with wonder, discovery, and delight. And that belief was reflected in every lesson, interaction, and experience that he created. And whereas Bill's impact on the community is reflected in the words of the students and teachers he inspired, including everything Bill touches is magic. Bill's a rock star and a master. It's hard to improve on perfection. I just wish we could have more bill time. And lastly, I don't care if I'm sick, I have to go to school today because teacher Bill's coming. And whereas Bill Gooduff is recognized by his colleagues, students, families, and the broader community for his extraordinary dedication, generosity, creativity, and unwavering commitment to education and public service. And his presence at the Junior Museum and Zoo will be greatly missed. So therefore, Vicky Vinker, Mayor Silia Peloto, on behalf of the entire city council hereby recognizes Bill Guff for his outstanding service to this community. Thank you. [applause] >> Boy, I I don't want to step on that hearty applause, but you deserve it. You are a true gem uh for and really a true asset to our community. I want to thank you on behalf of all the generations of students who have benefited from you and all of us who benefit from them. And maybe you could tell us who's here with you and then we'd love to have you come up for a photo unless you'd like to say a few more words first. >> Well, you guys should know. Look, >> just step toward the mic so we can hear. >> Oh, look how many junior museum people showed up. >> Wonderful. Raise your hand if you're a Junior Museum person. Oh, look at that. [applause] after after working with kids all day to show up at the end of the day [laughter] that that shows the dedication of the whole organization. So >> a >> that's a huge part of of everything we do. It's just an amazing team. >> Marvelous. >> I didn't know I did all that stuff. >> Thanks for uh thanks for letting me know. >> Well, we are so glad you did. And if you'd like to come up here and have a photo with us, right, just walk on the site on up to the deas. Thank you. Well, thank you, Bill, and thank you all for coming to support Bill and for what you do for our city every day. We're grateful. Okay, Mr. City Manager is reapproaching there. We're moving on to agenda changes, additions, and deletions. >> Yep. Thank you, mayor. I figured we'd have a bit of shuffling going on uh in the moment, so want to just give folks a moment to >> exit and relocate as appropriate. Uh just want to note a couple of uh agenda changes this evening. Uh item uh both related to your consent calendar. Item 8 has been removed uh from uh the agenda. Oh, I'm sorry. That's not correct. I got my numbers wrong here. There it is. 18. Sorry. Item number 18 has been removed from the agenda uh for some minor corrections. And item 23 uh which is related to SB 79 has been uh reaggendized uh itemizing uh the three actions uh related to that item. So those are the only changes this evening there. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. City Manager. So with that, we will move on to public comment on items not on our agenda but within the purview of this council. So madame clerk, how many requests to speak do we have? >> We have a total of 24. However, that includes two groups of seven. [gasps] Um, [snorts] let's go with uh a minute and a half each for the individuals and let's go with seven minutes for the groups. Our first speaker is Charlotte L. Welcome. So, oh, are they speaking individually, each of the three of them? I see. Okay. Well, we're so glad to welcome you to our Teen Arts Council. So, go ahead and and take go ahead and take what time you need. Okay. Hello. My name is Charlotte Lou, a junior at Palto High School and co-president of the Teen Arts Council. Today, my fellow Teen Arts Council members and I are here to first and foremost thank the city for funding our events this year, formally introduce the Teen Arts Council and what we do, building on our youth arts month decoration back in March, and finally ask for usage of the new Brian Street Teen Center. Next slide, please. The Teen Arts Council is a group run by Paloto Teens dedicated to planning free art events where students can express themselves creatively in a safe space. Every Tuesday at the Palto Children's Theater, about 10 motivated team members meet to plan our events, buying food and decorations, marketing through posters and social media, and running the event itself. Our motto is by teens for teens. Thanks to your $8,500 grant for our summer festival, Wayfest, we were given the breathing room for uh funding other events and ultimately served over 350 teens in the Polo community. Here are the events that we held. Next slide, please. We kicked off the year with our candle lit concert where teen musicians performed among Halloween decorations and a backyard barbecue. In February, we hosted our Valentine's masquerade ball. Teens decorated masks, danced together, and filled out icebreaker bingo cards. Afterward, many teens told us they had an amazing time hanging out with friends and meeting new people. We also hosted our bianual clothing swap and open mic where teens sipped on boba, learned about sustainability, thrifted for clothes and art supplies, and performed on stage. Next slide. Then we had our annual film festival, Luminescence, which gave creative teens across the Bay Area the chance to share their work and win prizes. We also premiered Picture Perfect, a film by our teenage council sponsored committee, the film lab that will be shown annually at the Palo Alto at Palo Alto High School to teach students about healthy relationships. Right after AP tests and prom, we held our DIY self-care night where teens made perfumes and lip scrubs, played board games, painted tote bags, and enjoyed service dogs. May is usually the most stressful month for students as everyone is cramming for AP tests, studying for finals, and grappling with the end of the school year. We wanted to create a break from this cloud of stress by creating an event where teens could just relax and take their mind off of academics. Next slide, please. >> So, I was trying to I thought you were speaking as a group and I was trying to give you seven minutes total. So, why don't you take another 30 seconds and then we'll try to get each of you a total of seven. >> Okay, I'm almost done. Okay. Um, next slide. >> All right. Finally, to kick off the summer, we held Wayfest, our annual art and music festival. Teens bought goodies from local teen art vendors and listened to teen bands and performers. Teens also participated in various arts and craft stations, played field games, and won raffle prizes. And thanks to the city's grant this year, we also had a food truck, which we are extremely grateful for. These fun community art events matter to us because of because of how the Ten Arts Council started. I'll hand it off to Matteo to explain the T arts council's origins. Thank you. Hello, my name is Matteo Serrano and I am a a junior at Los Altos High School. Uh I am the graphic designer of Teen Arts Council. The Teen Arts Council was initially a student group founded in 2009 as a community response to a suicide cluster. The recent student tragedies underscore the urgency of raising awareness of teen mental health and creating inclusive spaces for teens to be themselves outside their home or school. Moreover, when facing the constant pressure of Bay Area teen that makes everything a competition from your grades to your extracurriculars or even your own creative expression, a space where no one expects you to be better than those around you is invaluable. Next slide, please. To address this, we laid out three main goals for the council. One, create a free third space where teens can truly be expressed how who they are through engaging in art activities where whether that's painting a tote bag, upycling jeans, or singing their heart out. Two, to build a relaxed non-competitive community where everyone gets the most applause and support and everyone and people can choose how engaged they are, they want to be. We always have an opinion in our events just to sit down and be uh at the back and enjoy the free food. Three, offer inclusive leadership opportunities without barriers. We don't have an application. We host p public meetings and we provide volunteer hours. Today's teams will be the future someday. So, TAC cultivates good leaders and representatives of our generation by offering a space where we can learn, fail, and get back up again and with constant support. We as teens know that you as adults care. You care that our mental health and you care uh when we're struggling. But you can't always know what we need without hearing from us directly. By being here, we want to stress the importance of teens having their own voice and stay say in how their mental health is addressed by adults. And so we're going to tell you exactly what we teens need, a dedicated space of our own. I'm taking it giving it to Amanda. >> Okay. Hi, my name is Amanda and I'm also a part of the Teen Arts Council, also known as TAC of Paul Alto. So, continuing off of Matteo, through our event planning experience and proven impact, we are eager to further our goals. That's why we're asking to use the new Brian Street Teen Center for meetings and events for the 2026 to 2027 school year. Teens need a designated third space, and the Teen Center is just that. Right now, we meet at the Children's Theater. However, since we share the space with so many other great programs of the Children's Theater, we are struggling to find the uninterrupted time and space for us to host our events. It was an honor to be chosen by the city to paint the very first mural in the teen center for its reopening. As we've already familiarized ourselves with the space, we would love to be able to do it even more and take on the responsibility of arts programming at the Teen Center. Specifically, if you were to have access to the teen center, we would use this space to hold our weekly meetings. We would use it to hold our previously mentioned events with some benefits like the fact that it has a large open space and comfy furniture at the teen center, which is perfect for a DIY self-care night. We also have new ideas of organizing monthly arts and craft space for teens to connect with one another. However, currently we face a few issues regarding the teen center. It closes at 6:00 p.m. for when we hold our meetings at 6:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. with events going on even later than 7:30. Additionally, transportation is a problem, too, especially for gun high school students that are on the other side of the town. To combat these issues, we are requesting three main parts of this plan. Number one is later hours, such as having it open at 400 p.m. and closing it at 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and close at 9:00 p.m. on Friday to Sunday. The current hours are 3:00 to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays. But if our school ends at 3:30 and it takes at least 20 minutes to go to the teen center when combating peak traffic, teens would only be able to utilize the space for 2 hours. The second is on transport support. So we could make the teen center much more trans much more accessible through a free destination through the Palo Alto link. Additionally, having designated links from the from gun and pali to the teen center would greatly increase our member account, our attend event attendee account and also more gun students could benefit from the teen arts council. I have a lot of friends from both gun and pali who would love to be a part of TAC, but they find the transportation to be a personal issue. We ask that the city provide two links, two link cars, one for gun and one for pi which reach the schools at 6 p.m. and are able to come to the teen center by 6:30. But having >> Amanda, I'm going to need you to wrap up, but please do send this to us in an email. Come back, you know, in the fall and talk to us, but we will read it. But go ahead and finish your your last sentence or two. >> Can I take one last minute? Okay. Thank you so much. So when so this these link cars would reach the schools at 6 p.m. and come to the teen center by 6:30. By having city sponsored safe and reliable transportation, it's crucial to increasing our accessibility and equity for hundreds of teens that don't have their own transportation. Finally is the continued funding to sustain our events and initiatives. As we mentioned earlier, some of our main attractions and events are only possible because of the city's funding and generous support. and we are so grateful that we are able to have them. As someone who has attended the events that TAC has hosts and also plays a part in planning them, I've seen how impactful our events are able to be when we have more support from the city itself. Our events combine arts along with core issues like sustainability and also mental health. Our impact can be achieved with your support. Finally, I want to thank you guys for your time, your support, and your belief in Palo Alto teens to be able to accomplish within our community through arts programming. And thank you. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Melissa D. Good evening, mayor and council members. Thank you for everything you do on behalf of this community. I am Melissa Denwy representing Indivisible PaloAlto Plus and SOS PaloAlto safety over surveillance. I grew up in PaloAlto attending K through 12 here and my parents still live in the same house where I grew up. We are here tonight because we are deeply concerned about the flock AI surveillance cameras and there is real urgency around this issue. Our community is deeply worried about this right now, today. And I'd like you to see this for yourselves. Could everyone here who feels that this is an urgent issue, please rise. Thank you. Please be seated. That's this room. That's PaloAlto. Here's why this matters so much. Right now, there are documented risks to our civil liberties and our Fourth Amendment rights. Today, not someday, but today, ICE has invisible access to flock data. As it states in the DHS privacy impact assessment, and I quote, "Vendor retention of ICE data. ICE does not contribute data to the commercial LPR database, and the vendor is not permitted to use any of IC's query data, including photographs, for its own purposes. ICE query data is not retained by the vendor except to maintain audit logs for use by ICE. In light of revelations that ICE uses Flock, Flock has not provided sufficient guarantees that PaloAlto's data is not currently nor will be used for immigration enforcement. Second, ICE detention facilities are coming to our region. The county is suing right now to try to stop ICE from opening a detention center in our backyard. After ICE ran roughshod over the permitting process to get there, ICE is also secretly planning a detention center in Dublin, where an abandoned women's prison filled with toxic mold and crumbling asbestous exists. We trust that when you return from break, you'll have a thoughtful and meaningful conversation about all of this. But while you deliberate to keep our community safe, you must cover the cameras. What Flock wants most, most most of all is our data. We know this because their current valuation does not match what they charge for cameras unless the value of our personal data is factored in. We are the product. So while you deliberate, the only safe option is for the police department to physically prevent flock from collecting this information. This is common sense practice once a product safety risk comes to light. Prudent actors take that product offline until the safety issues can be resolved. Doing otherwise leads to civil lawsuits and fines. Other cities have done exactly this. Covered their cameras to stop Flock from continuing to collect data while they work through next steps. Dayton, Ohio, Olympia, Washington, Evston, Illinois, Cambridge, Massachusetts. As federal access to this data becomes more real every single day, the cameras here in PaloAlto need to be covered, too. And we're not alone in this. As you can see here, more and more cities are cancelling their flock contracts altogether, and that trend is only accelerating. PaloAlto doesn't want to be the last one standing on the wrong side of it. So, here's what we're asking city staff to do right now until the city council can take formal action after its break. First, direct the auditor to meet with community members to discuss the scope of this audit. Second, adopt the community suggested audit parameters. Third, cover the cameras now to prevent immediate harm. And fourth, partner with us to promote our democracy forum to the general public. This is a multi-layered issue and the public deserves to be educated on these issues as the council deliberates. And when you come back from break, remember you won't be alone in that room. The PaloAlto community stands strong on this issue and is ready to do what it takes to legally cancel the contract with Flock. And at Stanford, over a thousand people have signed on, including more than a 100 faculty members and leading constitutional scholar Larry Diamond demanding that flock cameras be removed. PaloAlto has stood up to this federal government before, and we were proud of you for it. Let's do it again. Thank you. Our next speaker is Linda F. Good evening, Mayor and Council members. My name is Linda Fromer and I've been a resident of Palo Alto for nearly 24 years. My husband and I chose to move to this city when we relocated from New York specifically for the schools and the safe community it offers. Raising our three children here included many wonderful years of involvement in Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Little League, youth community services, PaloAlto recreation summer camps, and much much more. This community has been exactly the safe, welcoming place we hoped it would be. Until recently, I was unaware that surveillance cameras had been installed throughout our city. When I learned of that, something shifted for me and not in the direction of feeling safer. Quite the opposite. Clearly, we live in an anxious moment nationally. We are watching institutions bend and civil liberties erode in ways that would have been unthinkable a few years ago. In that context, a city-wide camera network is not a neutral tool. It can be and historically has been used to monitor immigrants, to track and chill political disscent, and to silence the voices of people who are simply exercising their right to speak up. Of course, public safety is a multiaceted issue. Our community deserves to have a comprehensive discussion about safety. Right now, our neighbors are not safe. Plans to build detention centers in our backyard in Dublin and Gilroy are not abstract policies. They are a direct imminent threat to people in our neighborhoods and on our streets. Activists liberties are threatened by the federal government. Parents driving their children to gender affirming care appointments are looking over their shoulders wondering if they're being tracked. Our Stamford community worries about participating in protests as their research funding gets ripped away. This city's safety was never built on surveillance. It was built on neighbors, on community, and on trust. At this moment in time, our federal government is failing us and we are turning to you for help. After initial set of flock cameras was installed in PaloAlto, there was a second wave. I fear this can easily lead to a third and fourth wave. Are we heading into being a city with cameras watching us everywhere? I hope not. It seems as though it would be so easy to upgrade the cameras to condors and other advanced technology that uses AI and facial recognition. Do we need and want that in our community? I don't. And I know many others don't as well. If Lockach gets the FBI contract, our data will become bait for the federal government. Without any doubt, without any need to question anyone's intentions, more data means more data breaches, more exposure, more harm to the people this city is supposed to protect. Once the genie is out of the bottle, it can't be put back. But more importantly, I know if you as PaloAlto leaders stand up to fight this issue, we can have a real impact. We are a technology leader and with that comes responsibility. It is incumbent on the city council to ring the alarm bell. Now, I urge the council to discontinue the use of these cameras and recommmit to the values that made so many of us choose to raise our families here. Thank you. Our next speaker is David P. >> Hi, good evening everyone. I'm um a local homeowner and I wanted to address um SB79. A city manager mentioned that earlier. Um uh I want to give a plug for higher um buildings, taller buildings. >> We have an item on that coming up in the consent calendar. So I think you need to hold your comment for that because that is on the agenda. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Luis R. >> [snorts] >> Uh, good evening, city council. My name is Luis Rosas. I'm a concerned community member and organizer from East Palo Alto, born and raised. A majority of East Palto is composed of black and brown working-class people of color. Many EPA residents commute to Palo Alto for their jobs, drop off, and pick up their children from school. And this is also where uh EPA families visit for food and food and entertainment all year round. Flag safety has been found to share Pauloto's data to federal and law enforcement agencies from out of state. This directly puts EPA's majority Latino and Latina population at risk as this current presidential administration seeks to target and persecute us indiscriminately. Palo Alto owes EPA many debts, some of which include um fighting tooth and nail to deny EPA from becoming its own city. Some of that can also include the racial and economic segregation policies that denied black and other minority families from living in Palo Alto. All this being said, the city of Palo Alto has the opportunity right now to do what's right by their EPA neighbors to protect them and their families by cancing their flock contract. Doing this ensures that Paul Alto's data does not fall into the hands of federal agencies like ICE and DHS. I would say that y'all should listen to your community members and your constituents, everybody who's here, everybody who's been fighting. This is not the first time as as far as I know that uh they've come up to you and this is a fight that is still happening in East Palto as well. So, thank you so much for listening. Our next speaker is Fen T. Hi there, city council. Thank you guys for what you're doing. It's a hard night. Some slides out that to see. This has to do with induction stoves. And thank you very much for the induction stove rebate program over natural gas stoves. And thank you very much for shifting the messaging from that of climate change to in a way the more local the more direct in a way you could argue the more important that of health. Um I was recently with my wife on our honeymoon second honeymoon and I have some tobacco fighting graphics for you to share. If you have suffered with cancer or have forensic, these may be triggering because this is what other countries are doing to get the message across. Could I have the next slide, please? So, Canada is tracking how graphic cigarette warnings are over time and you can see the number of countries now that are actually putting this in place. So, this is my mother country. Next slide, please. So, this is what Canada has on their cigarette boxes. And so think about this is something to talk when we talk about natural gas stoves and triggering lung cancer in children and adults. Next slide please. This is what Thailand [snorts] what some might consider a third world country. They don't h they have to pay for their own health care as a government entity. So they want to get it across that health. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Valin V. >> Good evening. My name is Valen Varnasi and I'm a rising junior at Los Altos High. Thank you for listening. I'm asking council to redesign the Bueno Vista utility upgrade as fully electric, the way it was originally planned. Homes with gas stoves have a 20% higher rate of childhood asthma. Gas appliances release nitrogen dioxide and benzene. Pollutants tied to asthma and respiratory disease. Buenov Vista is home to families with kids and seniors, locking them into another 20 plus years of gas means means locking them into that exposure. Now, the cost. California's 2022 scoping plan commits the state to carbon neutrality by 2045 and the path to get there decommissions the gas distribution statewide. Installing new gas lines now means rateayers pay twice which is very suboptimal. Please reconsider and thank you so much. >> Our next speaker is Peter R. Hi, my name is Peter Revangh. I'm an incoming senior at Pi in Eagle Scout and I have a strong interest in viral science. The issue I'll be speaking on today is the dual gas and electric utility implementation of Buenav Vista mobile home rather than only electrification. I think this issue and environmental issues in general often suffer from a lack of representation from younger people. Young people uh are underrepresented in these decisions, even though we'll be living with consequences much longer than most current elected officials. That's why I support transitioning this mobile um home community to all electric utilities rather than continuing to rely on natural gas. The choices we make today will affect our community for decades. Uh and I think we should choose the option that's best for our future. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Zena H. >> [clears throat] >> Hello, I'm Zena Hammer and representing the San Francisco Creek neighborhood uh group. Um we're grateful that Peloto has initiated the annual bridge replacement project and the Hamilton storm drain project. These are meaningful steps and we appreciate the support. Um there are two reasons for our concern and urgency tonight. First, we're facing another uh forecast of a very strong El Nino similar to the 9798 uh when the flood of record occurred. Second, we face a deadline that will not wait until the recess is over in August. On July 14, the Valley Water Board is scheduled to vote to replace its commitment to the 70-year-old flood protection for reach 2 with a funding only metric. This would formally relieve Valley Water of outcome responsibility for this project at the very moment when the project needs Valley Waters's technical leadership and support the most. This matters because a credible plan already exists. The WRA alternatives evaluation report published in the spring of 25 provides a viable path to a 70-year-old flood protection including replacement of the Pope Choser Bridge. Uh the JPA reconfirmed uh the project's design goals. This problem is not technical. It's political will and um a July 14 vote once taken will be very difficult to reverse. Please contact Valley Water to encourage them to maintain their commitment to this project. Thank you. Our next speaker is CMSA. My name is Sheamus and I live on Stanford campus. You know, I have this Flock off badge here. Uh but I think I got a little confused outside. I'd like to share three of the reasons I'm so excited about Flock coming on to our community. Uh so, first of all, they enable connection. I heard that a Kansas police chief searched for his ex-girlfriend 164 times in four months. And I was just so heartwarmed by his unrequited uh dedication to and affection for her. Uh second, Flock can share data with a whole national or statewide network. Um so as we saw in Mountain View, statewide and nationwide lookup settings can actually be toggled on by accident. Um and it's really exciting to have a technology that helps jurisdictions to cooperate with each other uh even when they maybe don't mean to. And third, I know that most people would expect that the government would need like a warrant to track everywhere that they've been in the past 30 days. Uh, but that's another one of the great things about flocks, so these police officers can just decide for themselves that they'd like to find out uh where I am. Uh, but I'm worried that this frictionless process actually isn't fast enough. So, I was thinking we could use the cameras along with uh information like race and income level actually to predict when someone is on their way to commit a crime uh and arrest them before [snorts] that happens. Uh so, I'd appreciate it if you could, you know, appreciate the advances we're making with in with AI uh and direct the police to look into that. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Justine B. Good evening, Mayor Vinker and city council members. My name is Justine Bert. I'm the executive director of the PaloAlto Transportation Management Association, and I'm here to urge you to reconsider something that came up on June 1st. I think bank bikes should be allowed on California Avenue. Um there's an important underpass under Calav Transit Center, the Cal Train Station for Green Middle School students who live on one side of El Camino to get to school. Um there are a number of Stanford research park workers who get off the Cal Train at Cal A and would need to bike to work. So it's an important place for uh bikes to come through if we can keep them slow. And so I know the e-motobikes are of particular concern. Um I've biked quite a bit on Cambridge and uh the pavement quality is pretty bad and cars are pulling in and out of the parking lots there. So not a great place for bikes to go through. Um so I suggest maybe instead 5 mph speed limit on Cal A. I really like the schematic of the um um the negative space for the bike lanes and the pedestrian um thermoplastics. um maybe 5 mph speed limit with tickets given above 10 miles an hour. Just something to think about. And uh for those of you who might be available tomorrow night, we're doing a community bike ride leaving at Cal A and El Camino Rial going down to Eagle Park in Mountain View and back. Hope you can join us. Thank you. >> And that concludes public comment on items not on the agenda. >> All right. Right. Well, thank you, Madam Clerk, and thanks to all of you who provided public comment tonight, especially our youth. With that, we will move on to council member questions, comments, and announcements. So, colleagues, what say you? I know I've seen a few of you at a bunch of events. Maybe we'll just give it a minute to settle down here. All right. If you could take your conversations outside, that would be appreciated. >> They can't hear me. >> All right. Okay. Okay, if you could uh [laughter] they can't hear me. >> Sorry, we need to move on with our meeting and it's tough to hear back there. Thank you so much. Thank you. All right, so uh colleagues, there's a couple things I'd like to let you know. I'm not seeing any lights, but if anyone has uh comments, please do ring in. Um, one is I wanted to I announced this on Friday, but it's a matter of general interest, especially given an agenda item coming up about our utilities. Um, so as you know, PaloAlto has its own municipal electric utility, and we provide power through the Northern California Power Agency. Last year, the longtime general manager of NCPA announced his retirement. Um, so I serve on the executive committee of the board of NCPA and we conducted an extensive nationwide search for his successor and I am pleased to announce tonight that Tony Zimmer has been selected as NCPA's new general manager. Tony has worked at NCPA for 25 years and up until Friday served as its assistant general manager. I am confident that Tony will be an excellent leader at this time when capacity, reliability, and affordability of our electric power is critical. And so I wanted to let you know he's in Roseville, but uh will be out here uh getting to know us better. Okay. Um, I also wanted to um let you know that uh uh about a global data center pact that C40 had is sponsoring and announcing and launching this week. C40 is an association of the world's 100 largest cities and they will be announcing this pact at London Climate Week this week. And even though we are not one of the 100 largest cities, uh they did invite me to endorse the pact which I have done. And so it will this pact I have copies of it for those who want to see it. But it basically establishes a vision for sustainable high-erforming urban data centers grounded in equity, sustainability, and local benefits. So I just wanted you all to be aware of that. Um, so that is all I have and seeing no lights, we will move forward with our busy agenda. Okay, we will move to our action items before consent tonight since some of those uh consent items depend on it. And so we will move first to item two. All right. So, while staff is arriving, let me give a little background on uh this uh item. So, tonight we will hold a public hearing to consider item two, which is a series of actions adopting utility rates and financial forecasts. There are seven separate resolutions under this item. Three of these proposed changes to the city's water, wastewater collection, and refuge rates require a public hearing under Proposition 218. As required by the California Constitution, we will conduct majority protest proceedings for the water, wastewater collection, and refuge rate increases, and the public will have an opportunity to speak. But first, staff will make a presentation on water, wastewater collection, and refuge rates and financial forecasts. And then once we've conducted the Proposition 218 hearings on those rights, rates, rights, rates, we will consider the rates for the city's electric, gas, fiber, and storm water management utilities. So, I will turn to staff for the presentation. Welcome. >> Good evening. Alan Curator, director of utilities. I'm going to introduce Lisa Belier. She is our uh assistant director of resources. Um she pres presented here last year but this is the first year she's presenting as assistant director. Um so we have an efficient presentation broken up as the mayor said in two parts. I did want to also highlight that in terms of affordability. Uh Lisa will go in some of the details of our expansion in terms of um uh lower residential discounts and rates and expanding to more of the population. But I'll turn it over to Lisa to go through the first items on Prop 218. Thanks. >> Thank you so much. Good good evening, mayor, council members. My name is Lisa Balier and I'm here to talk to you about the 2027 proposed utility financial forecasts and rate proposals. If you could go to the next slide, please. PaloAlto provides essential utility services that that uh residents and businesses in Peloalto rely on every day, including electricity, gas, and drinking water. And our focus is on keeping those services safe, reliable, and cost-effective. A big part of our work is maintaining and upgrading the infrastructure that supports the community. We replace aging pipes. We're increasing system capacity to prepare for electrification and undergrounding equipment in high fire threat areas. When storms hit or leaks occur, our crews respond quickly to keep neighborhoods safe and minimize disrupt disruptions. We're also contributing our share to the regional wastewater treatment plant rebuild to protect the waters of the bay. We're also planning ahead. PaloAlto already uses 100% carbon neutral electricity with a significant share that comes from renewable sources. Our electrification programs support residents and businesses who want to electrify their homes, vehicles, or buildings. And we do all of this with careful financial management. We oversee more than $500 million each year. And as a publicly owned utility, every dollar goes back into maintaining reliable service, keeping rates stable, and planning for long-term needs. Next slide, please. I want to take a moment to talk about the suite of resources that the city has to help customers save on their utility bills. The bill impacts that we show in our presentations assume that customers keep using the same amount of energy and water. But customers can take advantage of these programs to reduce their energy and water usage and this is the best way for customers to control their utility bills. So our rate assistance programs as director curator mentions have recently expanded based on council action from earlier this month. more uh income qualified residents are eligible and discounts for the electric utility are larger up to 35% off of electric bills for income qualified customers. We're also continuing our gas discounts of 25%. And those programs are funded through public benefits funds and there's also water rate assistance available through Valley Waters program for incomequalified customers. In addition to rate assistance, rate assistance, we have residential energy assistance program which provides home upgrades and weatherization to improve comfort and reduce monthly energy usage and utility bills for income qualified residents. Now, for all of our customers, we have a sophisticated series of efficiency measures and electrification support, ranging from free customer surveys, devices, and rebates that help customers save energy and water. And with our advanced metering and automated leak alerts, residents can track their usage and catch any issues early. Overall, these programs help make utility services more affordable, efficient, and help residents manage their utility bills. Next slide, please. I just have this one slide that gives you a brief overview of the water, wastewater collection, and refuge rate increases. These are increases that were reviewed in detail by the finance committee. and the finance committee recommended unanimously that the council approve these rate proposals. Finance committee members noted that reserve balances were drawn down during the pandemic to support lower rate increases and that the current upward pressure on rates is partially a consequence of those prior decisions. As noted on this slide, there is a pass through portion of the water rate increase since the wholesale water rate increase is increasing from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. That increase will go into effect automatically and customers have each received a postcard that notifies them about that increase. For the water utility, what the council's voting on tonight is what is needed for the distribution system needs. It's driven mainly by the investments that we need to make in our water system in PaloAlto. Much of the system of pipes that is within the city that delivers water is decades old and we need to replace aging mains in order to um maintain reliability and reduce leaks in the water system. We're also investing in seismic upgrades to our water reservoirs so that the system can perform during emergencies or supply interruptions. And these capital projects for the water utility help ensure we have a safe, dependable water supply long into the future. Briefly on the wastewater collection system, the wastewater collection system is facing significant capital needs and major projects, major capital projects have already been deferred. Now, we're at a point where we do need to move forward with replacing old sewer mains to prevent failures, backups, or spills of raw sewage and costly emergency repairs. We need to upgrade a lift station and other collection system repairs as well. Increasingly stringent requirements and aging infrastructure at the regional water quality control plant mean that upgrades are necessary there as well, and PaloAlto needs to pay our share of those costs. On the refuge collection side, refuge rates are increasing because of the rising cost of collecting and processing solid waste. The cost of the city's solid waste contracts have increased and it has become more expensive to process solid waste materials with more stringent state and local regulatory requirements. The 3% rate increase is necessary to make sure we can continue reliable collection service, responsibly process materials, and keep the system financially stable for the long term. Next slide, please. This slide is provided for your reference. It does have a lot of numbers on it. I wanted to just make sure that you had this information for all of the utilities, but I will separately address uh electric and gas after we discuss water, wastewater, and refues. The overall I wanted to bring your eye to the bottom of the column that is outlined in red. The overall increase on the utility bill from this set of increases is 8% on the average residential bill. And this is $35.20 20 cents per month. Next slide, please. This is the recommendation and summary for the council to approve the resolutions with the financial forecasts and rate schedules for the water wastewater collection and refuge utilities. And I'll pause there. >> All right. And so when you say pause, you done with the the presentation. I see there's some supplemental slides of those just for questions or >> um my understanding of the script of the hearing was that we would uh have a a portion for the electric and gas uh after we address water, wastewater, and refues, but I'd be happy to take any questions you have on >> I just wasn't sure if you were done with that first part. >> Yes, done with that first part. Thank you. >> Excellent. No, no worries. Thank you very much. There's a lot of moving pieces to tonight, so thank you. Well, director, assistant director, thank you very much for the presentation so far. Um, and we will uh turn to public comment on the proposed water wastewater collection and refuge rate changes and financial forecasts. But before we do that, uh, the city attorney, I believe, has some background to provide on how the Prop 218 public hearing will be conducted. So, Mr. City attorney. >> Thank you, mayor. So tonight's water, wastewater collection, and refuge rate hearing will be will follow the requirements of a provision of the California Constitution that is commonly referred to as Proposition 218. Prop 218 sets forth rules that local governments must follow before increasing property related fees. Notice of tonight's hearing was mailed to effective water, wastewater collection, and refuge customers on April 30th, 2026. The city clerk has been accepting written protests against the proposed rates and will continue to do so until the close of the public input portion of this hearing. After the close of the public comment portion of the public hearing, the city clerk will tabulate the written protest against the proposed water wastewater collection and refuge rates separately. If a majority of the affected customers have signed written protests against any of the proposed rate rate increases, they they will not be impo the the rate increases will not be imposed. Otherwise, the city council may adopt the proposed water wastewater collection and refuge rates by resolution. >> All right. Well, thank you, Mr. City Attorney. Um so now we will move to public comment on water wastewater collection and refuge rates and financial forecasts and speakers will have up to two minutes. So madame clerk would you please uh organize our public comment. >> We have no requests to speak and no hands are raised on Zoom for this um for the water and wastewater rates. >> Very well organized. Thank you. Okay. Then if it appears that there are no members of the public who wish to speak on these rates, uh before I close it, just want to remind anyone that this is the last opportunity to submit written protests on water wastewater collection and refuse rates. So I'm just going to pause for a moment in case anyone wants to walk up with any paper uh written comments. Seeing none, I will now close the public hearing on the water, wastewater, and refuge rates. Before we turn to council questions and discussions on the utility rates and financial forecasts, we will first count the written protests on the water, wastewater, and refuge rates, which I assume is the same count as you had gave me before because we didn't get any additional ones. Is that correct? >> That is correct. We have received seven protests against water rates. Okay. So, beginning with water, there are 19,538 water customers subject to the water rate changes, meaning that 9,769 protests are needed to create a majority. And the city clerk has just told us there are seven written protests that we received against the proposed water rate increases. So that being the case, we do not have a majority protest and the total number is not higher than 50% of the total water customers subject to the rate increases. Since there is no majority protest on water rates, we will consider the resolution adopting a water rate increase tonight. So now are there council questions, discussion and action on the proposed water rates and financial forecast. [sighs] >> Wow, that was like a tie. Vice Mayor Stone, >> thank you, Madam Mayor. And I I just have one one question from staff because I just think it's it's helpful for everybody, especially based on the conversation we had last week on the SF PU. Can you I know I think Allan I think you gave me this information a couple months ago but for everybody else's knowledge. So on the the staff report talked about the I guess a big driver of our water rate increases is due to the SFPU and the SFPU originally projected a 1% whole sale rate increase but modified that to a 7.4% 4% increase um with an with significant projected increases over the next few years. And we know that even those are not reliable based on the SFPU's kind of previous errors in their projected rate increases. What what percentage of our water rate increase is attributed to the SFPU increase? >> Sure. I think right I'll have Lisa go through the details. I think it's uh 580 per month is in regards to the uh the impact that we're have we're passing through on the water side for SFPU. As you may recall, um uh Vice Mayor Stone uh SFPU uh gave us an increase that we were a little surprised with in terms of that. So, we've had to adjust our rates accordingly. Uh so that's the main driver is the the cost of water. >> Yeah. And I'll just add to your question in terms of the amount of the rate increase that's due to the SFPU about half of the water utilities costs are to pay for the commodity to pay SFP to purchase the water and those that amount is going up by 7.4% and on the distribution side we're increasing the uh distribution rates by 8%. So it's quite similar and so it's about half. >> Okay. So about half of our crease our increase attributed to the SFPU increase. >> Yes. >> Okay. Great. Thank you. >> Council member Rectal. >> Okay. Clerk, can you bring up packet page 20? I want to look at figure two there in the middle of the page. And this is going to show the wastewater reserves. packet. Page 20. Okay. And what this shows is that during 2023 and 2024, our reserves went to zero. Can you talk was that due to the COVID rate cutting that you talked about or >> Yes, during that time period we did proceed with a uh sewer main replacement a year early [snorts] and additionally to uh because of coordination with repaving uh on El Camino. And so that that happened. And additionally our um overall for the utility our costs were higher than we had projected and our revenues were lower than we had projected in part because of COVID impacts. And so those things together led to a low a low reserve. >> Okay. And so yeah the next question was going to be could you have foreseen this and in this case there were some things that were unexpected. >> Correct. and CO also I guess was unexpected. Um so across the board I mean overall I think our utilities are wellrun. It does bother me when I see 16% increase and a lot of that is due to capital funding capital projects and so what's the trade-off between raising rates and financing that can you talk about why we chose that to raise the rates what we are proposing? So, so in general for the wastewater utility and this is showing the operations reserve for for the uh the wastewater utility. Um we show that the capital reserve it's it's it's probably just just as um uh just as low in terms of that. We've actually had to take a loan from the fiber utility uh during this time in CO. Um there has been increases to the wastewater treatment plant as you it's a it's a generational in uh reinvestment into the plant in neighborhood around $397 million or $400 million. Um we have received a lot the city and I I'll credit public works uh department and Bra Egleston and his team they re received state revolving fund loans which is less than 1% but we still have that de that debt service and we also are increasing seeing increased operational costs coming uh uh from that treatment plan as well. So those are the real rate drivers. Uh what we have done on the wastewater collection system is we've been very proactive in actually um videoing the lines the collection system lines and seeing which ones are in need of replacement. So we were able to defer some of those projects and now as Miss Belair has mentioned we it's time for us to actually push forward those projects and uh we we've packaged those projects together try to get uh the most bids and favorable bids from contractors. So, um, those are the the key drivers for us right now. >> Okay. And but we're raising rates by 16% on the wastewater. Could we raised it by a lower amount and then finance more of that in the future? What's the trade-offs there? >> I think as we've been thinking about debt financing, we've been thinking about that primarily for one-time projects rather than projects that are really necessary on an ongoing annual basis. And the key driver here for the collection system is that we need to do main replacement on a consistent basis in order to make sure that we replace all of the remaining pipe before they get to be, you know, more than 110 or 112 years old. So that's what's been driving this. And uh if we debt finance that then it would, you know, build on each other. >> Okay. >> Yeah, >> that makes sense. Yeah. Anything ongoing, you really don't want to finance that. So of this rate increase, how much of it is due to the wastewater plant and how much is it due to the the mains roughly? >> Um you know it varies from year to year and this year majority is because of the treatment cost uh as well as to replenish reserves on both the treatment side and the collection side and I do have some specific numbers I can look up for you. >> Okay. And then also big picture now we look back in hindsight. Should we have been saving more reserves or do you think that we just got unlucky and we were doing the right thing? Right? Because this reserves are a good thing when you need them, but they also increase costs. And so if we would have had more reserves, that means in the past we've been charging more for utilities. And so there's a trade-off between having healthy reserves and keeping rates as low as we can. >> So I [snorts] I'll comment first. I mean um COVID was an extreme event uh for not only in this community but nationwide and across the world. So many utilities actually tried to keep their low their rates low and stable. So it's unsurprising. Um I think what we have done is try to be very uh um structured in terms of what we need to do next in terms of the the the future uh investments and I think one of the key ones and different from other agencies is the reinvestment of the wastewater treatment plant at this time and we're also dealing with some of the inflationary costs. So we were we're hit with COVID. We're also hit with these inflationary costs that um and for those reinvestments and that's across the board. So uh you know our public works team has been looking at similar like projects and reinvestments. The city of Sunnyale is going and updating their wastewater treatment plants. So we're updating those costs and and taking advantage as as much state lowcost interest rate uh financing that we have. So, um, given given th that perspective, I think the city has been very strategic in terms of trying to keep rates low. Um, you know, but we have been hit with these multiple events. Uh, so now we're trying to replenish those reser reserves and and the city council is going through and taking a look at those reserve policies to to um prepare ourselves for the next next potential events. In your professional opinion though, do you think the reserves are a proper amount right now or do we have to consider raising them? >> I think we're going to have to look at uh some of the investment costs of the treatment plant and especially the bids coming through. So, it it's it's healthy for the organization to take a look at that uh in terms of the staging of those projects and um we're working very closely with with our foils over in the public works department and how those projects are going. Um, so we will bring that back. I I understand that that council has referred some of that to the UAC. So that will be a big part of their upcoming work plan and and looking at those reserve policies and providing a recommendation back to city council. But we definitely are going to look at uh the capital reinvestments uh to to meet the regulatory requirements to uh for the discharges to the bay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. Uh, seeing no other lights. So, right now we're just focusing on water. Is there a motion to approve the water rates resolution? >> So, move. >> Thank you. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Seeing no request for further discussion, would you please call the role? >> Vice Mayor Stone? >> Yes. >> Council member Bert. >> Mayor Vinker. >> Yes. >> Council member Lithcods. Yes. >> Council member Lou. >> Yes. >> Council member Rectal. >> Council member Lowing. >> Yes. >> Motion carries unanimously. >> Thank you very much. So, moving on to the wastewater rate protest count. There are 22,410 wastewater customers subject to the wastewater rate changes, meaning that 11,205 protests are needed to create a majority. So, Madame Clerk, did we I don't think we had any additional uh numbers for that either. So, uh, how many, um, written protests did we receive against the proposed wastewater collection rates? >> We received seven protests against the wastewater rates. >> Okay. Thank you. So, the total number of protests received is not higher than 50% of the total wastewater customers subject to the rate increases. Since there is no majority protest on wastewater rates, we will consider the resolution adopting a wastewater collection financial forecasts and rate increase tonight. So, are there any further questions, discussion, or action on the proposed wastewater collection financial forecasts and rates? Seeing none, [snorts] is there a motion to approve the wastewater collection rates resolution? So, >> thank you. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Thank you. Madam clerk, would you please call the role? >> Mayor Vinker, >> yes. >> Council member Lowing, >> Vice Mayor Stone, >> yes. >> Council member Rectal, >> Council member Lou, >> yes. >> Council member Lethod Hayes, >> And Council Member Bert, >> yes. Motion carries unanimously. >> All right. Thank you. So, moving on to the refuge rate protest count. There are 20,712 refuge customers subject to the refuge rate changes, meaning that 10,356 protests are needed to create a majority. I will now ask the city clerk to provide the number of written protests received against the proposed refuge rates. We received four protests against the refuge rates. Thank you, Madame Clerk. The total number of protests received is not higher than 50% of the total refuge customers subject to the rate increases. Since there is no majority protest on refuge rates, we will consider the resolution adopting a refuge financial forecast and rate increase tonight. So, are there council questions, discussions, and actions on the proposed refu rates? Seeing none, is there a motion to approve the resolutions regarding refuge rates? >> So move. >> This is I'll second. >> Well, good. Council member Bert, move. Council member Lou, second. Seeing no request for further discussion, Madame Clerk, would you please call the role? >> Council member Rectal. >> Yes. >> Council Lith, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Stone, >> Mayor Vinker, >> yes. >> Council member Lou, >> yes. Council member Lowing. >> Yes. >> Council member Bert. >> Motion carries unanimously. >> All right. Thank you. So, we got through the Prop 218 rates. We will now turn back to the nonproposition 218 rates presentations. Uh we will consider the utility rates and financial forecasts that are not prop 218 as I mentioned namely adoption of resolutions adopting financial forecast and fiscal year 2027 rates for gas, electric, fiber and storm water management. The order of proceedings for this item will be as follows. First, staff will make a presentation on the proposed rates and financial forecasts for gas, electric, fiber, and storm water management. Next, we will hear public comment. Speakers will get up to two minutes each. Lastly, council will have a chance to ask questions and discuss followed by motions. So, I will turn back to the director and assistant director for the remainder of your presentation. >> Thank you very much. just two two slides um and then the recommendation slides. So for the electric utility the proposal this proposal was unanimously supported by the finance committee that took a look at it in detail. The finance committee voted for a 4.5% increase in fiscal year 2027. As I mentioned, the utility, the electric utility is modernizing the grid and planning to issue bonds to pay for these costs with a planned 85 million bond issuance later this year. Grid modernization is going to improve reliability and resiliency as well as increasing capacity to prepare for electrification. Electric rates are being affected by rising long-term costs across the entire power system. We're seeing rising long-term costs for grid upgrades that are needed to maintain reliability and support more electrification in the community. State requirements for renewable energy also continue to increase, which means we need to procure more clean power at a time when those resources are becoming more expensive. We're also facing higher requirements for power reliability. And together, these factors are driving up the costs of providing reliable and clean electricity. I want to make a note about building permit fees. During the finance committee's discussion earlier in this year in in April, the committee directed utilities department staff to develop a rebate program for building permit fees related to photovoltaic generation and energy storage systems. This will be a local decarbonization program and we'll uh be proposing to use $225,000 of non- rate revenues uh in order for this purpose. And we would keep the amount of funding for local decarbonization the same by correspondingly reducing the allocation of cap and invest auction revenues to the cap and invest reserve. Next slide, please. For the natural gas utility, the UAC reviewed the gas proposal of a 9% increase and recommended lowering the increase by reducing the general fund transfer or possibly using reserves. Staff did investigate the possible use of reserves and found that there are no available reserves to use for this purpose. The finance committee also took a look at this issue and recommended voted 21 to recommend the 9% overall rate increase. I did want to note that the finance committee discussed but did not decide to go forward with an option to reduce that would reduce the overall gas bill approximately 1%. And that idea was to slow the recovery of the gas price spike mitigation reserve to 32 months instead of 16 months. That uh those funds are to mitigate the impact on customers of a price spike similar to the one that we saw in 2023. Next slide, please. This slide summarizes the recommendation that I discussed for the electric utility. Next slide, please. This slide summarizes the recommendation for the gas utility. And I do want to say a couple words about the fiber proposal and storm water management. for fiber. These the rates in the included in the packet implement a 3% consumer price index inflation increase. That increase affects only four customers that are continuing on the dark fiber rate schedule that the the schedule that uh existed prior to 2006. There's also an inflationary increase to the advanced engineering fee for new connections, but most of the dark fiber customers are not impacted by this increase. For the storm water management fee, a majority of PaloAlto property owners approved a ballot measure in 2017. This fee funds the 13 storm drain capital improvement projects that were listed in the ballot measure. And that ballot measure allows for an inflationary increase consistent with the applicable consumer price index which is 3% for this year. So with that that concludes the presentation and be happy to answer any questions. >> All right. Well, thank you very much. Uh now we will turn to public comment. Uh speakers up to two minutes. Madam clerk, do we have any public commenters on these rates? There are no requests to speak and no hands are raised on Zoom. >> Okay, great. So, are there council questions, discussion, and action on the financial forecast and proposed rates for gas, electric, fiber, and storm water management? And these we can do collectively because we don't have the same process as we did to the under the prop 218 rates. Council member Rectal Couple questions on electric first. Uh in the staff report you talk about the when and where approach to try and delay the costs and we can delay the cost. Does that impact our reliability? What what's the trade-off there? >> Uh so the win and where approach is actually for the distribution. So as customers electrify uh what we found especially in this last year we can keep pace with the customers coming in and looking specifically at the part of the distribution system that serves them the basically the transformers that would serve the residents or businesses. We've been very successful in that regard. >> Um the the real change in the the real change is we'll be able to meet those requirements in a nutshell. >> Okay. And so when you replace the transformers how old are they? Are they generally fairly old or are you actually replacing relatively new equipment when you upgrade? >> So the distribution transformers um vary in age and size but for the most part the smaller ones have been in the system for quite some time and are in need of replacement. As we look at those we also look at the poles itself to see if those need replacement as well. I think the main folks that we're looking at now is actually looking at the resiliency reliability of our substations which um if you look back at them are circa 1960 or 1970 and and they are um ready for replacement and expansion. So um we are doing those in a manner that is most cost effective um and also improves reliability to our customers. So um we're very excited about those projects. uh as you go through the capital projects you'll see that as well as we have very defined projects um because we are going for financing as well. >> Okay. Um but over in big picture if you look at the speed at which we're upgrading our utility are you satisfied with that >> familar some of these capital projects to our neighboring agencies in terms of not only the scope and scale but also the timing. um by timing these projects out and looking at electrification and load growth in general for the city. Uh we have seen some load growth uh you know coming from commercial activities and we also are projecting load growth with uh more residential um but by not doing uh the projects and extending them out over time we're actually reducing some of our um our bonding costs over time. So we actually see that as a a reduction in terms of some of the long-term uh rate impacts to our customers and increasing affordability. >> And in the staff report you say that the electric consumption is expected to be 14% higher than previously expected. Is that electrification or why is that? [sighs] So that's primarily due to some of the commercial um commercial space where we're seeing some growth in that area really the the high-tech space where we have businesses moving in and they do need some compute uh with their facilities. Um these are not the large scale data centers that you read in the news but they are really onrem uh compute for for those high-tech businesses that need to have it on site and frankly separate. >> Okay. So most of the growth is on the commercial side not on the residential. >> Yeah. the the the growth that we've seen on that on that percentage is primarily there. >> Okay. And then finally for on the gas side uh we have a 14.5% distribution increase rate increase for the distribution portion of the gas utility. Uh what is that from? What are we upgrading? >> Well, we're uh investing in the main replacements. We are also getting a federal grant for some main replacements but continuing u at our at our level of main replacement as well. So that is a benefit for the customers in PaloAlto in terms of safety and reliability. Uh, additionally, one of the drivers of the gas rate increase is the sales levels have been lower in the gas utility and uh, you know, there have been some mild conditions over the last couple of uh, uh, uh, winter seasons and that has led to some lower lower gas projections going into the future as well as as we've had those milder weather conditions. So, um, you know, we'll we'll keep monitoring it and updating our forecasts every year, but that's one of the one of the primary drivers. >> We had a very mild winter. So, you know, when we make those projections earlier, you assume a normal year, and that was not a normal year. Um, and just as u uh Miss Belier has mentioned, the city did receive a 16.5 million federal grant um to pay for some of these gas main replacements as well, and we could obviously pass those savings on to the customers. Are we seeing electrification cut into our gas use or are there other effects that are bigger than that? >> We will have a lot more information on that I think when we can analyze our AMI data. But for right now and we think it is having some impact and that's what we see when we look at the regression. Uh however you know much larger impact on a on one year to the next is weather changes. >> Okay. Yeah. I love AMI. I think that's going to really help us be more efficient. Okay, thank you. >> Um I have a a question. Um so for the electric utility rates, um you mentioned the um using the building permit fees for non-right revenues to uh for the local decarb efforts with uh PV generation and and storage. Um, and then you also mentioned that uh taking some of the cap and invest auction revenue and putting it in the cap and invest reserve. And I'm wondering if any of that is related to carb's very recent decision about the cap and invest program and creating the new $4 billion fund for uh for industry some would call them polluters to pay in or is that have any impact because don't aren't we getting increased revenue from that? No, no, this is not a change that's related to that. Uh but we uh you know the name has changed the the cap and invest um but this is a reserve that the city has had and the electric utility to capture those cap cap trade in the past and now cap invest uh funds uh in an equivalent amount to the wreck exchange program. So, this is because of a council decision from several years ago that we're capturing some of those funds for uh local decarbonization programs. >> And I I also do want to add you had actually two embedded questions there. The second question was um yes, this utility is expecting more cap and invest monies based on carb's recent decision. Um probably about almost double what we received in the past. So that is roughly 1.8 8 million if memory serves me correctly around there but depending on the auction revenues. So so those are we're trying to estimate those forward looking. Um so those those would be able to be used for um um basically what the carb requires us to use for our our customer programs uh energy efficiency renewable energy and of course our SCCAP programs as well. >> Right. I guess what I was trying to figure out, there's very recent awareness of a likely increase in revenue from the GGRF, which comes from CARB's decision on the cap and invest. And so, has any of these decisions on what we're doing with our cap and invest revenue and putting it in the reserve, uh, has any of that been affected by the expectation of the increased money? That's what I'm >> That is a really really good question and sorry I didn't catch it the first time. So, but um that that's true. This is late breaking. We are at the stage of just making those estimates of how much money that's going to be. One of the items that we're committing to as part of the resolution tonight uh on the electric utility is to bring back to the council within this fiscal year uh report on our carbon neutral plan and also on our wreck exchange revenues. So, we can at that time bring forward any changes and the council could weigh in on any changes to the way that that program operates and uh that would be an opportunity to weigh in on the use of those funds and get an update on what those protections are at that point in time. But >> that's that's great. Yeah, cuz I expect it we might want to make some adjustments and it is very late breaking so I wouldn't have expected much change but I wanted to check and see you know where we stood on that. um um because it is quite a quite an interesting quite quite a change uh of plans in some ways with TGRF and and the Air Resources Board recent action. So, thank you for that. All right, seeing no further lights, um where are we on this? All right, we did the public comment. We didn't have any. We have the discussion. I guess we're just want I guess I'm ready for a motion. If there's a motion to approve uh the resolutions uh that have the rates and financial forecasts for gas, electric, fiber, and storm water management, I would entertain that now. >> I so move. Second. >> All right. Council member Rectal uh on the motion. Uh Vice Mayor Stone on the second. And when you're ready, Madame Clerk, please call the role. >> Council member Bert. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Stone. >> Council member Lou. >> Yes. Yes. Council, Council Member Liths, >> yes. >> Council member Rectal, >> Council member Lowing, >> yes. >> Mayor Vinker, >> Motion carries unanimously. >> All right. Excellent. Well, thank you very much, director and assistant director. Uh, and that will close out item two. >> So, now we will move on to item three. And look at that, we are on time. Um, I shouldn't have said that out loud, right? [laughter] [gasps] Okay. So item three, which is the adoption of ordinance adopting the operating and capital budgets and a whole lot of other stuff that's in your agenda. So tonight we will hold a public hearing to consider item three, adoption of an ordinance adopting the budget for fiscal year 2027. This item includes the following specific actions. First, adoption of the fiscal year 2027 operating and capital budgets, including the fiscal year 2027 city table of organization and the changes to the municipal fee schedule. [clears throat] Acceptance of the FY27 through 2031 capital improvement plan. Adoption of a resolution determining the appropriations limit for FY 2027. acceptance of the June 30, 2025 actuarial valuation of the city of PaloAlto retiree health care plan and fund the actuariately determined contribution for FY 2027 and 2028. Finally, authorize the city manager or designate to negotiate and execute a memorandum of understanding and funding agreement or lease amendment with the PaloAlto Museum for cost sharing of repairs to the basement and waterproofing in the Roth building and drainage improvements to Heritage Park. So, consistent with the conflict of interest rules under the California Political Reform Act, review of the budget will be segmented into two parts so that council member Louu, city manager Shicado Shakata, and I can recuse ourselves from certain Stanford related elements of the budget outlined in attachment C to the staff report for this item. The order of proceedings will be as follows. Staff presentation of the FY2027 budget. One round of technical questions from council. Recusals for Stanford University related conflicts. The remaining council members will discuss and vote on Stanford University related budget items. Then Council Member Lou, city manager Shicata and I will rejoin the meeting. Vice Mayor Stone will be in charge when I'm out back. [sighs and gasps] and then council will discuss and vote on the remaining FY2027 budget items. So with that, I will turn to staff. Welcome. I assume you have a presentation on tonight's public hearing. >> Yes, thank you. Uh good evening, mayor, council, members of the public. Lauren Lee, the chief financial officer. I'm excited to be here tonight to present uh the draft adopted budget and thank you for enumerating all the items and thank you for everyone especially the council who's in been involved throughout this process. Next slide please. So as noted there uh we are at the top of this process which is staff's presentation. Next slide please. Um so tonight we will summarize the finance committee deliberations and their recommendations to council. Also review the final balancing actions presented before you and other actions as listed by the mayor. Um and our goal is to adopt the budget and all the um other actions that usually accompany this annual process. Next slide please. This shows the chronology of the budget development process beginning in uh earlier than May, but it starts here in May and where we are tonight, which is the draft document for your consideration and adoption as the fiscal year begins July 1st. Next slide, please. This is a summary of the general fund budget. As noted there in the last column, the general fund budget is about $312 million. The citywide budget, which includes all the enterprise fund plus the capital budget, is about a billion dollars. Within the capital fund, we have a $1.2 billion 5-year plan and the 27 CIP budget, which council is asked to approve, is 316.8 million. The general fund BSR, which is our reserve, is projected to be at 53.7 million or about 17.2% 2% of our expense. Our staffing level will be about uh 1,089 positions. That is a reduction of 21.25 net positions uh because we're closing um a structural uh deficit. So that's about 2% um citywide. Next slide, please. Most of these um recommendations you have seen as of May 11th. Um I'm pleased to share that uh we city staff and the committee were able to rebalance the budget with technical adjustments. It's very important for us to preserve our services and also um move forward with capital investments. So with the technical adjustments predominantly around revenues we were able to rebalance the budget. What I will call to your attention that's different than what you saw on May 11th as a council is the uh office of transportation. You'll notice there we have one assistant engineer position. This is in uh an an extension of the part-time position that was slated for OSV, the oversized vehicle program. We're proposing a full position um that will also deliver other uh projects and services and programs related to OOT. So finance committee evaluated this staff reviewed it and it's bringing this back for your consideration. As noted there it is a leveraging 150,000 of OSV reappropriation already. So the uh fiscal 27 impact is shown there on the screen which is about 38,000. Uh future year funding will be yet to be determined which will be a variety of funding sources. Um next slide please. In total uh the general fund impact is 939,000 of additional appropriation. Again, as noted, um these have been rebalanced with either measure K or new revenues and or reductions of the net impact to CIP transfers. We mentioned in the memo before and we'll mention again, we're hopeful that um the prior year adjustments for sales tax will be favorable by 2 million. We have more than that set aside. Should that manifest, we are hopeful that our BSR will actually be about 55.7 million or closer to 18%. Keeping in mind our target is 18.5%. So, uh, wanted to call your attention to that because that is an important component of our fiscal sustainability and our fiscal strategy. Next slide, please. Uh, we like to have a look ahead. You know, in our annual process, we have a 10-year long range financial forecast. In our budget development process, we usually have a 2, threeear look ahead as we move towards budget adoption. As some of you may recall, this fiscal 27 budget had a projected general fund deficit of 17 million. So, we've done great work to balance it, most of which is using ongoing solutions. Um, as noted there in 2829, we still have some work ahead, but these are very manageable differences here of 1.7 and $3.2 million. So, great work to everyone who's been involved and certainly um um there will be some service impacts in areas. Um so, we want to be note we want to note that um that comes along with these types of budget reductions. Um however, very pleased with where we are today. Uh want to also note that um this does assume a certain level of partnership with PAUSD and cost sharing. Uh should those cost sharing not come through for a couple of important programs um those deficits could grow between 1.4 to 2.3 million depending on the level of gap um with that level of partnership. Again, these are um these are things we will revisit likely in December or February once we know more um as those conversations have yet to happen. Um in addition in fiscal 29 every two years we do our uh OPED study. So um in the last couple of studies there have been an uptick in expenses. We will bring that back in a couple of years and we'll continue to monitor that. Um, as far as you need to be concerned, um, the 27 budget implements the policy and implements the requirements of the actuarial report. Next slide. Um, the city encompasses many funds, enterprise funds in particular, as you noted in item two. Um, a large part of our, uh, budget entails uh, utility funds. And so before you are the utility rates um and this incorporates the action that you just took on um item number two. So this summarizes the approximate residential monthly bill impact for um the fiscal 27 fiscal year. Next slide please. Um along with the general fund budget, you will be um asked to adopt the capital budget, the CI 5-year plan, the table of organization, the municipal fee. I'm also very pleased that airport uh was able to make some substantial um changes to the fee, bringing that fund more in alignment with the ongoing cost. So, I want to really acknowledge staff for that work. Next slide please. OPE I mentioned every two years we do that actuarial report. Uh we did that earlier in February and brought that back to committee and have incorporated those obligations in the 27 budget. We're also incorporating it in the 28 outlook on the slide that I just showed you. Um, as noted by the mayor, um, we do want, uh, council to provide authority to the city manager to negotiate and execute anou and a funding agreement with the PaloAlto museum to provide cost sharing for repairs to the basement and waterproofing in the Roth building and improvements to the heritage park drainage. Um such dollars to a certain extent have been appropriated in the CIP by the finance committee appropriation uh limit or the GAN limit as a state requirement. We do that annually. We are well within those limits and it is your job as a legislation legislator to um also adopt that resolution. Uh last but not least, we have a letter of support from the planning and transportation commission as it relates to our CIP plan. Last slide. Um, this slide summarizes the draft motion that staff has prepared for council to consider and to adopt. Next slide, please, mayor. That summarizes staff presentation. Excellent. Well, thank you very much, Director Lie. Uh we uh now will have one round of technical questions from the council excluding the items in attachment C of the report that are related to Stanford. So colleagues, questions, [clears throat] >> Council Member Lou, >> thank you. I appreciate all the work. I think things are largely as I expect and as we've left them previously. Maybe one point I want to just confirm uh since this I was trying to find in my notes and it got bit lost was about the $2 million sales tax adjustment and implications of BSR. Um can you talk a little bit more about uh how that adjustment is otherwise uh incorporated into our budget? um was it an assumption that we had from the very beginning and also what the nature of this $2 million adjustment is. Is it a one-time deal or have some ongoing component? Uh so just a little bit more color. Uh >> sure >> would be helpful. >> Um apologies for the vaguess given the general confidential confidential nature of >> want a vague answer to this. Yes. >> Correct. Um so 26 budget at midyear um we did an adjustment which council approved. That adjustment had two components. A one-time component for what we call prior year adjustment and an ongoing base adjustment which would be a reduction of our base revenue for sales tax. The portion we're relating to tonight relates to the one-time adjustment. So um as we know more and as we work with the state that estimate is getting more refined and we're very hopeful that um we will have more available than we had originally thought. So this is favorable. >> Right. So, so this adjustment came in the process uh by which time we had already made all of the cuts and this $2 million is sort of uh newish news from the past month or so after most of the decisions have been made. Um and if we had known there was this $2 million before we could have made slightly different choices, but not very different choices because it is a $2 million only one time sort of adjustment. >> Correct. Correct. Correct. It's not a trend or a ongoing >> business activity change. Okay. Got it. >> No. And so at midy year we separated the adjustment into one time and base adjustment and 27's proposed budget for revenue already considered the new baseline for the sales tax. >> Yes. Okay. Okay. Thanks for repeating that part and I get it. Thank you. >> Council member Lowi. I probably should have turned to you first as chair of our finance committee. [clears throat] Yeah, these are more comments than than questions, but uh if you will allow >> Well, we're we're going to come back after the public for more comments, but if there's some >> I just want to get an overview where we are and and have uh our finance staff take a bow. Um this was a extraordinary challenge as you know going into it and uh director L and her staff has just performed extraordinarily as I said before. Um there is no now forecasted structural deficit for the year. It's a balanced budget and we didn't know coming in what we're going to have to do for that. Um and the services that are are remaining uh are substantially the same for our uh citizens. So that's just merits um attention and and notice. I said that just just as the the reporter walked out of the room. So, uh, [clears throat] but, uh, >> let you repeat it later. >> Yeah. And, and I'm also delighted to see on your timeline the little red badge that say it's tonight after all this work that we hopefully are going to do that. I just want to point out a couple of things. Uh, you notice the ad for OOT that plus one. And I really want to emphasize that because in getting a budget together uh it's possible that sometimes uh for good intentions in my judgment um and the committees um they can go too far in making cuts. And one of the things we said towards the end of the committee meetings is what what are we missing now that we really need to have for any of you to execute on core strategic items. And the item that came back after some uh came back literally we didn't do it that day but research was this item to execute on some of the things like the daylighting in parking that we were behind on and things like that. So um I'm pleased that we got a response like that saying I really do want a little bit more money in that area. Um because we want that too from our staff to say here's where we're a little short and here's what we can get done with it. Now evaluate that. So, um, I I salute staff for considering that, but also thanks thank the staff that did did make those cuts. [clears throat] Um, so o overall, you know, that's where we are. The other thing I wanted to point out, if you guys didn't notice that little bit of optimism there, we did find a half a million dollars in new estimates of projected increase in toot revenue. So when we talk about sales tax getting t cut cut and toot going up um it shows the the strength that we have from from multiple revenue streams and already we've been able to do that. Um and that wasn't just a fill-in because uh our director is too uh too honest for that. So it was it was real forecast. Um that said as you all know we can come back if something changes um because these are all estimates for everything uh on the revenue side. So, I'll leave it there and then come back for some comments. Thanks. >> Thanks, Chair Lowing. Council member Liths. >> Thank you, Mayor. And I echo the praise of my colleagues for your tremendous work and um and to my colleagues for on the finance committee for doing their part to bring that uh projected deficit way down. Um I wanted to turn to theou with the Palo Alto Museum. Um, I appreciate that the city is uh working with the museum on cost sharing for repairs to the basement and waterproofing um in the Roth building and improvements to Heritage Park drainage. We did receive a letter from museum leadership today raising a few more detailed concerns that um I wanted to address. Um the first is they're projecting that their costs are going to increase beyond what is currently known. And so the question is will the cost share um which I presume is a 50/50 although it doesn't say that in on this slide. Um will that share increase proportionately um as the full scope and any increased costs become known? I'll I'll actually read the the four questions that they had and then maybe we could address them. The second is could the would the city consider transferring uh funds as the work progresses rather than after the fact so the museum's not acting as a construction lender. The third is would the city wave building permit permit and inspection fees consistent with a unanimous council direction years ago for public private partnerships and would the city commit to an expedited cross departmental approval timeline uh to try to ensure that all of this work gets done before the winter rains uh come. So, this seems to be a set of concerns on the part of our partner of the Palto Museum and wanted to see what uh staff's thoughts were on these four questions. >> Um I think the technical response on the budget side is um we would be able to cost share up to the appropriation per the budget. So um and hence that's why we go through this budget process is to determine what we have the authority to spend. So uh we have 250,000 um that was appropriated from um a savings from um Mitchell Park Library project and then also we have about 75,000 that's available um in another fund that was designated that so we have the sum of those two. Um so beyond that we would have to come back for council authority >> and I'll add from there that our staff is working directly with museum and uh public works in particular in the lead at this point and as such we're comfortable that we've got sufficient appropriations to get us through the summer recess and if any further action is needed by the council that we can cover that after you've returned. >> Okay. So the takeaway for the museum should be that the city will figure it out that the 50/50 cost share even if costs rise beyond what has been appropriated through this process tonight that that's not a sort of a one anddone deal. I think they're very afraid that they're a little nonprofit and they're worried about being left holding uh more of the responsibility than they can accommodate. And I know we all have an interest in this museum being successful. That said, we're trying to reasonably and fairly appropriate responsibility for these additional costs associated with water. >> Exactly. I I would agree that the second part I I would not go so far as to say the um even the 50/50 has been fully uh fleshed out at this point. So that's really ongoing discussions, but again comfortable and confident that we'll be able to resolve this. >> Okay. Thank you very much. All right, seeing no further lights, uh we will turn to our public hearing. Uh and speakers, uh that have public comment on this have up to two minutes to address the council on all of the items related to this public hearing. So, Madame Clerk, how many speakers do we have? >> We have four requests to speak. Okay. Excellent. >> Our first speaker is Herb B. Thank you. I'm speaking on uh the item that uh council member Luck HS was mentioning which is the Ross building uh in the park. Uh I you know checked online uh this afternoon before the meeting and I didn't see anything posted on the agenda item uh that you just were talking about as to the details of the project and uh I don't know anyone else in the public who's seen that before the meeting. Uh I don't believe that you should proceed with this and I think you're moving this because uh you have received uh substantial money for the Roth building uh for restoration from the county historic heritage program. Uh that requires when the city owns the property that it be dedicated to Parkland. And the way to dedicate uh something for Parkland and PaloAlto is through a charter amendment that was adopted in May 1965, which is by ordinance uh following a resolution of intent to do that that ordinance. And we essentially made false statements uh to the county uh in each of three resolutions that uh the Roth building is in Heritage Park, which it is not. And the one where I was able to check uh the you know the packet material uh for the most recent one that included showing a a city zoning map that shows that it's included in Heritage Park. So you're given uh two reasons uh to go ahead and do it at the last meeting before a 9-week vacation. Uh the the first is by is by putting it here uh from that was amended by by the finance committee uh now at the very last minute and second by now getting uh some cost items from uh history museum. That's essentially saying oh we we just must do it now. Don't do it. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Bruce G. Hello everybody. Great great to see you. Um I'm here. If you were to ask me five years or even three years ago that if I would be here in front of city council in support of the Pal Museum, I'd be scratching my head say me. Uh but I have to say that over uh what I've seen recently the city the new leadership of the of the uh the Palto Museum the board and the direction are doing I really see this as an inflection point for the for the museum uh really being part of a pillar in our community. I think it really adds a lot of positive things a real gathering point and it's something that we could be really proud of. is going to be a museum that's really in the new age. It's not I I really love how it's got away from the history part because it's both respecting the past but looking forward and I think a lot of communities would be jealous of to see of the vision that they have and how it's going to really uphold the Silicon Valley the can do the innovation that is beyond display for our community and those around it. So uh I have uh been totally converted and really want to support uh the museum and see the role that it can play in our community. In fact, Rotary uh Paltor Rotaries did a very generous grant in support of the museum just because of those reasons. And so uh thank you very much and I hope the your the continued support to make this come to life uh comes to fruition. Thank you. Our next speaker is Margarite H. >> Good evening, mayor and city council. My name is Margarite Gong Hancock and I'm a lifetime PaloAlton as well as the inaugural president and CEO of the Palton Museum. I'm really coming today with a full heart. I want to express first appreciation. You know, as being a new person in this kind of a role for a new institution has meant a tremendous amount since I joined the museum a year ago. to see the kind of collaboration that has come from city staff across so many departments, public works, public art, uh administration, planning, of course, the city manager's office, library, and others. And also, thank you to each one of you city council members. You have come to the museum. You have heard about our vision and plans. You have added your ideas. You've come to participate in our events, and you are helping make the vision and the plans better. So, thank you for leaning in and uh our whole board and I am thankful because the vision we have is really worth uh showing up for. Imagine uh walking in and seeing the story of Wan Bionis or I am PaloAlto with icons as well as unsung heroes where everybody has a place. Imagine walking to a gallery of seeing the life of trees in Palo Alto's innovative role in environmental sustainability or PaloAlto's role in movies. Imagine going to the gallery where community members have particip participated in their view of the future of PaloAlto at 150 in our PaloAlto 244. [gasps] So all of those things were moving forward uh to be a community hub, a place that holds our stories, builds our connections and inspires a better future by built by with and for the community. Uh and then in January, the water came in. The rains came down and the floods came up and not once but multiple times and we faced the wrenching challenge of moving our collections to safety, postponing our opening and delivering that news to our partners, donors, community members who have been working so hard along with us. So, it's been a a challenge. >> Your time is up >> and we want to thank you for all of that and the moments that you have now this time to support us in the ways that count for us to open our doors. Thank you very much. Our next speaker is Bill R. >> Good evening, Madame Mayor and other members of the city council. As I was walking up here, I just reminded it's been a while since I've been behind this microphone. I've lived here in Peloala for 67 years and just looking at uh you people I I think I I uh well I beat you by quite a bit. Um I came to Stanford and never left. Been in the real estate and healthc care business and uh that's been my career. I've actively supported the community through the PaloAlto Community Fund, the PaloAlto um Peninsula Open Space Trust, the YMCA, the Gamble Garden, Yusede Consery, and now the PaloAlto Museum, which I believe belongs as a pillar institution, worthy of civic investment. Margaret Gong Hancock, which you just heard from, is just an extraordinary leader. I know many of the board of directors hall quite capable people. They are all excellent representatives of our community. I've noted the name change from Pelo History Museum to Po Museum because it's more than just history. It's the whole community that is has existed for well over a hundred years. When I invest in the museum, uh I expect my gift to support the team, the exhibitions, the programs, the things that make the museum uh what it is to be. What do I expect if I asked being asked to fund a city park drainage system on or the waterproofing of a city-owned building? Uh infrastructure problems with documented roots going back 20 years. to cover at least part of drainage costs. Uh that are the city's responsibility and commit to a clear path. What I'm asking of is for the closing and funding gap as the full scope becomes known. >> Your time is up. >> Oh well, am I done? >> Yes. I got two just to expedite the um approval time the real dates construction finishes before the rainy season so that the museum can open. [snorts] Um let the donors fund the miss mission. Let the city fund its own assets. City has been long and coming your time >> well over 30 years. Oh come on. >> There are many missteps along the way. Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. And that concludes public comment for action item three. >> All right. Thank you to our public commenters and thank you madame clerk. So seeing no more uh members of the public who wish to speak. I am going to close our public hearing on this item and so now we need to turn to the recusals. The California Political Reform Act requires city officials to recuse themselves from matters where it is foreseeable that the city's decisions may have a material impact on a person or entity that is a quote financial interest to that official and allows the cities to segment multi-art items so that the parts of the item that are the subject of the recusal are separated from the remaining parts of the item. This year, Council Member Lou, city manager Educata, and I will be recusing ourselves from certain Stanford related elements of the budget. Those elements are listed in attachment C. So, we will now each disclose our financial interests for the Stanford related items and then we will depart to the back until this portion is over. So, I will start. For the record, I have a disqualifying conflict of interest under the California Political Reform Act with the items listed in attachment C to the staff report, which are partially funded by Stanford University, which is a client of my law firm. Accordingly, I'm recusing myself from this matter and I will not participate in discussion on this item and will leave the room until the item has concluded. So, uh, council member Lou, >> I will similarly similarly recuse as my spouse works at Stanford. >> City Manager, >> and I will similarly recuse as my spouse spouse is employed by Stanford Healthcare. >> Okay. So, we will depart and you are now in the good hands of Vice Mayor Stone. >> All right. Thank you, Madame Mayor. Just let the record record reflect that. Mayor Vinker, council member Lou, city manager at Chicago have have recused themselves from and will not participate in discussion and have left the room. So we will now proceed with the discussion of the Stanford University related budget items. Are there council questions, discussion and action for Stanford related items in attachment C? See council RTO that for later. Okay. Any questions or discussion on Stanford related items? I see no lights. Is there a motion to approve Stanford related items for the fiscal year 2027 budget? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Great. >> Like to Would you like to speak to your motion? Council member Liths? >> Nope. Thank you. >> Council member Bert. >> No. Thank you. >> Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, when the clerk is prepared, we can take the vote. Council member Bert, >> yes. >> Council member Lowing, >> Vice Mayor Stone, >> yes. >> Council member Lithnes, >> Council member Rectal, >> yes. >> Motion carries. 5 02 with council member Vinker or Council Member Lou and Mayor Vinker recused. >> Great. Thank you. Well, my power was shortlived, so I'll return the gavl back to the mayor. So, we'll wait until they come back. All right. Thank you, Vice Mayor. So, now we will return uh to council for questions, discussion, and action on the remainder of the fiscal year 2027 budget. Uh, Council Member Bert. >> Thank you. Um so I'd just like to follow up on my colleagues and some of the speakers on the um item that staff uh reported on on the uh expense on the Roth building. So first when we did discuss this at the finance committee and we were able to identify two prospective funding sources uh they were not uh anticipated uh as a cap on what the city might contribute and I just want to make real clear on that they were what we have allocated to date and so that that might have been um unclear but um the the committee did discuss that and and we were um clear that that was not the limit. Uh but there was we don't didn't have a number at the time. So those were identified sources. Then more broadly um I do think it's important to frame uh the issue. Um there's really become increasing enthusiasm about the museum as really a um a city asset um a destination uh a valued uh facility for our residents uh even a facility that uh staff has embraced uh for utilizing and um and I'm I'm especially enthused about the way the the the content ent of the museum is has continued to evolve and embracing and celebrating our multicultural history and and our technological history. Um so in that context um uh it is also a a city-owned asset and as I um have kind of looked at what are the the the issues uh that are involved with with uh the delay in their opening and the urgency that um this get uh resolved quickly enough so that um hopefully the the necessary um uh uh re uh repairs to the uh flood control from the park and the runoff that has come uh into the building from the park as well as uh the waterproofing of the building itself that needs to happen as quickly as possible. Um, and I also, as I've thought about it, um, you know, there's it's we've we've heard from donors that say, "Look, we're we've been contributing and are willing to contribute to really the the exhibits and the buildout of the of the building." Um, but I don't see any basis why the museum should have to share in the cost of repairing the runoff problems from the park that have been identified for 20 years. and are outside of clearly outside of their responsibility. And then that leaves the the issue of the um of the waterproofing of the building itself and um and those aspects. And and I'd like to hear my colleagues thoughts on whether that's what we should be sharing the cost on with the museum and the uh the city should bear responsibility for the the park costs. Um so I want to put that out on the table. Um and then um uh also we do have uh I think um uh a history of waving uh city inspection fees for nonprofits. So hopefully that could be part of the um of the uh ways in which uh these urgent repairs get funded. Other than that, I I just more broadly on the budget, I'm real pleased that uh we were able to um resolve what started as a a challenge in in um deficits um much through ongoing savings uh others through one time. and that uh our our sustainability of our budget going forward is not without challenges but is much more manageable than it appeared to be even months ago. So I want to thank staff for all the work that they had done um on on um really moving us forward in that regard. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member Rectal. Yeah, I I do I question the whole cost sharing aspect of the Roth building. Certainly the park, they had nothing to do with the park. That would clearly in my mind be 100% city. But even the building, I mean, this is Powto city property. There's nothing that they did that caused the problem. This was a pre-existing condition. And I don't understand why we're cost sharing at all. Like on any commercial lease, even a triple net lease, the landlord would be responsible for major structural issues. And this is a major structural issue. Can you talk about why why are we uh cost sharing at all? Uh let's see. Council member, I'm not sure how deeply you want to get into this. I I would note for the record perhaps just to correct a couple of things that you noted the city has invested about $10 million into the renovation which as scoped was expected to include waterproofing for the building. I would also note that the renovation included u modifications to the park area where there is drainage and so that was all a part of the scope of the renovation and so >> but they didn't design the park. No, but they did modify the area of the park that has been identified as one of the drainage issues. Uh this was used as a layown area for the building renovation and so as such all of the um the area adjacent to Bryant was uh a part of the scope. So I would also note that we have an existing agreement with the um museum and so any additional financial uh arrangements would need to be reflected in a amendment to those agreements. >> Okay. I mean but this is just not some financial counterparty. This is a partner, right? This is one of our nonprofit partners. And nonprofit partners do wonderful things for the city, but unfortunately sometimes they're not the most financially sophisticated. And it's just to say, "Oh, tough luck." That just doesn't seem to be the right message. They're doing something really important for the community and this is the most vulnerable time in their life. They're they're starting up. They're trying to come up with exhibits. They're trying to attract donors. And what kind of donor is going to want to come here and pay for uh updating the park? They would say, "No, I'm going to give it somewhere else. I'm not going to support the city of Palo Alto." So, I think we're really shooting them, really doing them a disservice by really sticking to our guns. I don't think that's the the proper >> Well, council member, just to be clear, I did not say uh we're either saying tough luck, sticking by our guns, any any of that. Again, my uh description in response to early question is that we're confident that we'll be able to work through this uh through the council's recess and should any further action be required by the council that that would occur when you return from your recess. >> Okay. >> Can I add to that as well? I think for some context um as uh finance committee member and council member uh Bert mentioned when we took this up back in May originally it was just the pro appropriation from the heritage park project which was about 77,000 and then as the conversation evolved we actually appropriated more towards this purpose which was another $250,000 from the Mitchell Park Library project savings. So in aggregate that's like 325 and that's only in the span of 30 days. Another aspect I want to add to this conversation for those that are not aware is we actually added this authority for council with the desire for us to move quickly. Right? We don't have a contract in place, but at the same time, we're looking for council to provide city manager and staff authority so we can move quickly as we can administratively recognizing that there are more unknowns than known. And in the last four weeks, we've been meeting with the museum at least once a week or every other week and been working with them very closely on this issue. Wanted to highlight that because this has really evolved and our partner with shshipip with them is really important. Um and as noted um we have enough here in appropriation to get through the recess period. Um and given the urgency and obviously the importance of this we will bring it back timely. >> Okay. Thank you. Council member Lowing. Yeah, >> actually Director Lie just addressed things I was going to ask her to to address. Uh a little bit of the history in the process [clears throat] and of course this all started with the fact that no nobody had estimates when we were in the finance committee meeting and so we had to just kind of press on and here we are tonight trying to approve a budget and we still don't have all the data. So, we just have to move on uh together with, you know, sort of D trying to do exactly what you said that I wanted to add, which is they want to open for all kinds of good reasons and we want them to open. So, uh staff is working on this. They're not sort of putting it on the back burner. Uh so, we just want that pace to continue and when we and we did identify those sources that you talked about. Um [clears throat] and and I'm I'm confident that you're going to you're going to get there. Are we intending one specific question though are we intending to get the final contract back to us for approval on the revisions here. It's more of a maintenance contract but not quite. So that's why I'm asking the question. Um I think um part of the question might be depending on if it's executed during the break it would come back as a ratification because tonight council is providing the authority to the city manager to enter into such >> Yeah. We just don't know what the total amount is yet and what the potential cost share is. So we have unknowns that we can't approve. >> That's correct. And and so you'd be giving me the authority to work those issues out with the museum as well as uh to make expenditures within the approval or the appropriations authority you're granting through the budget. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thanks, >> Council Member Lou. >> Thank you. I was going to really make the same point as Council Member Lowing. I think there's still some moving pieces. We just got some information today. We want to be clear that we're a very strong partner. We want to reassure donors uh and we will get this done. But that said, we don't really know the numbers involved. $700 some odd thousands is potentially a lower bound or potentially we'll get more bids and a better understanding of the cost uh soon as well. And I think this does point to uh a larger need for a thoughtful approach on how we do city property leases. I know that's been discussed in pieces in policy and services, but uh the way we handle Gamble Gardens versus the lawn bowling club versus the Winter Lodge all have some different structures. And so we're creating we we've created another sort of special structure in the museum. That's not ideal, but I think um uh we should uh come back to this when we have more information. Um, I'll just make a couple of other brief comments here. Uh, I'll say that Canopy was a point of contention. We uh in committee revised the uh proposed cut to around $15,000 in uh uh of their budget from the original baseline of around $43,000. I think as we've sort of looked at the budget picture here, heard about the uh sales tax adjustments, I think I'm comfortable just squaring up Canopy um to their intended level uh because that is a relatively modest cost and that is uh investment in the city's infrastructure and the city's trees. Um uh I'll also just briefly note that I've been working with the school uh through the city school leaison committee in flagging the budget needs for uh track monitors and crossing guards. Uh the city's plan right now is unless it's changed, city manager, please correct me, is that we would uh basically fully fund and maintain the current level of service for uh crossing guards uh and track monitors until uh the midyear budget cycle, at which point we would really need an answer from the school district on um whether they're willing to also chip in. And then at that point we might have to make some hard decisions about what we do for the rest of the budget year andor what we do on an ongoing basis. Um uh so uh that's just how the crossing guard and well mainly just the crossing guard situation will be handled in the interim uh while we wait for a school district answer. Um uh so yeah, the I'll just bump my closing flag uh and see if there's any receptiveness for just squaring up that last $15,000 for Canopy. Um uh but otherwise, I'm really grateful for all the work. Uh got through a lot. Uh uh there's so much more we could talk about, but um I'm ultimately pretty happy with where we are. Mayor, may I clarify please? >> Two parts in your um comment uh council member Lou. One was regarding Canopy and the second is regarding the uh track watch and crossing guard. The way the technical adjustments are presented for you in your adopted budget is the full funding, no the full appropriation for both of those programs through June 30th with the assumption of revenue coming from PAUSD. Right. >> Should at midyear the revenue isn't shared that that revenue doesn't come then we would need to adjust the revenue. Yes. >> But at this junction from a service level perspective the appropriation in the draft budget assumes service through June 30th. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you. Um >> were you next? Yeah. Vice Mayor Stone. >> Thank you, Madam Mayor. And just also big big big thanks to director lie and your entire team for this. I know a incredible lift and things looked really bad many many months ago and I think we were all very anxious about what potential cuts we might be seeing in this community and what what you've done is is nothing short of brilliant. So I appreciate that and the and the faithful shephering of the finance committee. Appreciate all the work that was done there as well. I think most things that I was conser concerned about have been have been resolved. Um I know at this point it is challenging to even move a a small amount a small amount of money around. I mean I think in I think generally I'm supportive of of what council member Lou suggested as far as the canopy funding, but I know $15,000 even at at this point can be can be a bit of a a challenge. So if there was if there's Yeah. You want to speak to that? >> Sure. Um if the desire of the majority of the council is to um maintain canopy at the current contract level which is adding 15,000, we would just modify the CIP transfer by the 15. >> Okay. >> So that's how we would offset it. >> That's it. I would note that uh we are aware of other community partners that have expressed an interest in potentially providing funding to Canopy. So I think that there are um a number of uh conversations underway. Uh so again we follow the council's uh direction um but do want to share our awareness of that. >> Okay. Well that's interesting. Um, okay. And then just my my my next issue just to second what what council member Bert had suggested regarding kind of cost sharing for the PaloAlto Museum moving forward. I I think a cost sharing of the building makes sense when it comes to the to the park. I agree. I think the city should take on that that funding or at the at the very least I'm I'm interested to learn more about what the city manager said regarding a potential contributed a potential a trying to better understand to I guess what percentage of the kind of the damages are are are attributed to work that the museum did to the to the building. And so if it was I just throwing out a number 10% maybe then they take on 10% of that cost share for for the for the park. So I think we should be taking on either the full amount or if we can better understand that if we even know that I would support something along those along those lines and ultimately agree with a lot of what already has been said about the the the real potential of this of this partnership and I know staff has been working incredibly hard to be able to to do this and so I think your I think your proposal tonight was a reasonable one. I think we can just improve it a little bit to make sure that our our partners are able to our partner in the Palo Alto Museum is able to continue on the on the path when there's been a lot of um unforeseeable kind of disasters that have that have occurred that have knocked them off uh off the path there. So, thank you. >> All right. And I also want to add my thanks uh to staff uh for bringing this forward in this posture. Uh I echo uh what uh council member Lowing said that you know when we had our first look at this it was it was a bit scary and uh to see the work that has gone in to it not just since then but laid you were laying the ground work anticcedent to that and uh to show up in this way with this uh deficit reduction from not just the one-time cuts but the ongoing cuts. It's really uh encouraging and while we have more work to do in uh coming years, this is this is a really a great uh situation to be in tonight. So, thank you for that. I also want to thank my colleagues on the finance committee because I know you did a lot of work. Uh also, that's always a heavy lift and clearly from your comments tonight, there were a lot of good discussions that went on at the finance committee. Um, so with respect to the museum, I think it's unanimous up here that we're all delighted to have it in our community, understand its potential, its impact on enhancing the community, and know that it's in good hands with those who are stewarding it. uh currently um wi with respect to the the the park costs and the the building waterproofing. Um I'm glad to see that staff is working hard with the museum staff. Uh so I add my kudos for that and uh kind of align myself with uh council member Lou that we just need to know a little more but want you to keep it going so that we're not slowing them down while we're in recess. um to find a way to get through that time period and then we can sort things out when we get back in a in a way that's fair and uh make sure that we do all we can to see their opening come in a timely way. Um but I just think, you know, understanding a little more of the facts of the the what's going on with the the water um coming in from the park side and also a little bit more about the contract terms. I don't have any sense of what those are and how it should all sort out. So, but I would like to and I'd like to find a way that the city can can be supportive. So, I I am happy uh leaving that in your good hands now, although I would be eager to revisit it come August so that we can uh support next steps. Um I like the idea of squaring up Canopy actually because I think uh council member Lou makes a good point about the uh the infrastructure uh being essentially city infrastructure. Uh I do note uh city manager, thank you for letting us know that there are some people uh exploring perhaps uh helping them out. Uh would there be a way to check in at like the six month mark and see if those have come to fruition or if we could be of further help at that point? >> I'm sorry, mayor, could you repeat the question? Well, I'm what I'm trying to understand is I would like to let the uh the people who are looking at supporting Canopy, I'd like to see that play out, but if it does not play out, I would like to have another conversation about what we could do uh to to support that. >> Certainly, uh we can stay or we will stay in touch uh to uh find out what we can about uh third party uh philanthropic support. >> Yeah, I mean it's it's a it's a modest amount. So, we could just do it tonight, but I think it would be but given uh that they also aren't the only one out there uh with needs, I think it would be good if if uh some community partners stepped up to help us in this instance, given our deficit and given all we've done to reduce staff, etc., etc. Uh if that could be the case, that would be uh ideal. Um, and uh, our CFO explained uh, answered my questions on the track watch and uh, crossing guards situation. I think that's been clarified now in a way that I'm comfortable with. So, thank you for that. Did you have more to add to that >> for Canopy? Just to be specific, it could be brought back at midyear. Mhm. And I assume that with it being a modest uh shortfall on the funding from us that that would be timely hopefully. [laughter] All right. Thank you. That would be that would be helpful. Um that's what I have at this point. So I will uh move on to Council Member Lithcott HS. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, on Canopy, I'll add that I uh was a part of that conversation that the city manager had uh where we became aware that there's potentially third party philanthropic interest in supporting Canopy. So, I think we're in good shape uh letting that proceed and we'll sounds like we're interested in covering the shortfall should it come to that. On the museum, um obviously I'm interested in the subject. I was the first one to speak on it. I I do think that we've heard um staff city manager has given us a little bit uh greater scope of understanding on the 10 million originally allocated toward the renovation and rehabilitation. And I would like to I think we've been heard as a council about our concerns about sharing and I don't think we sitting up here can come to a decision tonight about the appropriate um uh u allocation of the share. I think the arguments that the park should be ours and the building should be theirs make some sense and yet I don't know the overall um scope of uh the project financially and so um I am going to trust that we've been heard and that um in the over the break it sounds like staff and the museum leadership will figure out how to share this and so we can get this thing open. That's what we all want and we want responsibility to be allocated appropriately in accordance with who really should be responsible for what in a budget that's a over a billion dollars 312 in the general fund. I think we've said enough on this topic tonight. uh it has risen as sort of the bell over the ball in the budget conversation and I think I I hope staff feels you have a a sense of where council is and that um I certainly trust you to make the right decision about what this healthy partnership looks like going forward. >> Council member Bert, >> I'm prepared to make a motion if we're ready. Sure. >> Okay. So, I would first like to move the five uh staff recommendations that are on slide 12. Um and then with um a couple of additions. first that uh staff would um return at midyear or sooner uh to review um any whether [clears throat] there is any remaining canopy budgetary requests. um if that has not been resolved uh through donations. And then that the um uh on the museum project that first that um uh we uh wave the uh the permitting and inspection fees. second that we um that staff move forward with um uh a cash flow um uh support for um the museum's or for the uh repairs uh toward the museum so that they um are not asked to uh bear the burden that they don't have the resources to do on the cash flow. Um and um that we support the continued expedited process that staff is already pursuing. And then last, that we request staff to um uh that the city uh cover uh the expenses for the park repair uh to the extent that um it can be determined that um it is principally the city's responsibility and the city manager negotiate a cost sharing on the uh building repairs. Uh second and I don't think I need to comment further. Thank you. >> Council member Ectal, do you want to speak to your second? >> No. >> Okay. Is there is there discussion on the motion? Does staff have any comments on the motion? >> Just a clarification on fee waivers. We typically don't wave fees. It would be a reduction of revenues because these would be revenues coming into the city. So just to want to clarify that point. >> Is that how we normally do it when we've essentially wave them on nonprofits? it I think it essentially becomes a general fund cost for the the cost of the permits. >> So we don't charge the fees then >> right the city the city absorbs those >> and I should have mentioned one other thing um and my recollection is that the bulk of the city contributions were transfer development rights um and those are not actually city operating revenue. uh the city is a steward from receiving those um uh uh or or selling off those rights uh and receiving them. I can't remember how to describe the mechanism, but they're not out of general fund. Correct. >> That's correct. With respect to TDRs, I uh don't recall the specific uh breakdown among the funding sources used. Well, I suggest that we'll let the city clerk capture all of that and then we can take a look at it and see if there's how we're feeling about the language. >> Mayor, I do have a question in the motion. City Council member Bert, um you mentioned cash flow support as number two. >> Uh will you clarify that or is that just a general statement yet to be determined by the city? to be determined by the city manager, but the intent is to um uh to help support the cash flow on the renovation uh and repairs. Um so that the uh and and my understanding is the museum will in all likelihood be managing the the project and so uh we wouldn't want for instance the them have to shoulder the city's share of the cost from a cash flow basis. Okay. So, what I heard from this clarification is that this is general direction deferring to the city manager in working in partnership with the museum as we work through project management, go through the technical review, determine more specifics. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Perfect. I think all of seven we can just say um uh related to the museum and then that first one would be one action. the do you follow what I was meaning? So seven is all about the museum and then that first sentence on waving uh the permanent inspection fees would be uh sub bullet one under that. Uh let's see. I >> think you meant five is all about the museum. >> Oh. Oh, we got two places. Sorry, I didn't pick that up. >> Five was what? Five is what staff had coming into today. >> Oh, I see. And then yours. >> So, this would all be under five, I suppose. Everything under seven would be sub bullets under five. Does that make sense? I >> I think if we move them there, we can sort it out. But six is separate. >> Yeah, >> Madame Clerk. Whatever the canopy one is, separate. Yeah, there you go. >> Okay, let's see. And I don't know it has to be in the motion that the last one was simply to continue the the uh expedit guided efforts to try to make sure that it's accomplished before the next rain season, but I know the city is already taking that to heart. >> Would you accept a friendly amendment? What' you say? >> You have to tell me what it would be. >> Well, I wanted to know if you were open to it before I even said anymore. >> I'm open to it depending on what it is. >> All right. I like that vibe. Uh I think you want the rainy season bit at the end of that big sentence. That is number five. So, it's to provide cost sharing for repairs to the basement and waterproofing in the Roth building and improvements to Heritage Park drainage um in an expedited manner to in to try to make sure that repairs are done prior to the start of the rainy season. Something like that. >> Sounds good. >> I'm good. Ask staff is does that give you the clarity you saw it? Do you have any concerns about Okay. [sighs] All right. Madame clerk, let me know when you are ready. Are you set? All right. Because I don't see any other f further lights. So, I think we can go ahead and take a vote on this motion. >> Council member Lowing. >> Yes. >> Council member Lou. Yes. >> Council member Burton. >> Yes. >> Council member Rectal. >> Vice Mayor Stone. >> Yes. >> Mayor Vinker. >> Council member Lithuhane. >> Yes. >> Motion carries unanimously. >> All right. Thank you. Well, thank you all for all the hard work that went into this. Congratulations on getting this far and we have ourselves a budget. All right. [sighs and gasps] So we will move on then uh not too far behind uh to our consent calendar which with the removal of item 18 is uh items 4 through 17 and 19 through 23 A and C. So give me just one moment to sort out my I think we all need to reshuffle for a minute. >> [sighs] >> Hold on a minute. Got the wrong page in front of me. >> Okay. So, madame clerk, is there any public comment on the consent calendar? [sighs] >> Yes. >> How many requests to speak are there? >> We have 18 requests to speak. >> Wow. Okay. Um, and an additional hand was just raised in Zoom. So, we have 19. >> Now, we have 19. Okay. Then we'll go with uh one minute for individuals. And there aren't any groups. >> Correct. There are no groups, just individuals. >> Uh, okay. in case any other more. Come on. Let's go with uh you think each go with a minute and a half. It's gonna be 30 something. Yeah, we'll go with a minute each. All right. Thank you. >> Our first speaker is David P. >> Is there a David P in the room? No. David P. Moving to our next speaker, Scott E. Hello. Um, I'm Scott Ellison. I'm an 18-year University South resident, and I'm also here on behalf of the University South and Professorville Neighborhood Association. We urge council to keep the SP79 item on consent and approve the half-size option now and without amendment. The people living in the these neighborhoods were never consulted and we prefer as much of the status quo as possible until the city meaningfully engages with us as residents. We stand ready to support our city council and staff and driving forward with this engagement and navigating this issue together. Thank you as always for your time and service. >> Our next speaker is William O. >> Good evening, mayor and members of city council. My name is Will Oler. I serve as chair of the Menlo Park Housing Commission, but I'm speaking tonight strictly as a private citizen. I lived in Palatoto for 6 years before moving to Menlo Park. For half of that time, I did not own a car and I biked and used transit regularly. Despite that, it was surprisingly difficult to find apartment housing close to the Cal Train. Eventually, I reluctantly had to buy a car in order to maintain the mobility I wanted. I believe that combating our housing crisis requires us to build much more housing. Housing near transit has many advantages both for the people who live in it and for everyone else who has to deal with car traffic. We should be taking advantage of the entire transit corridor on the peninsula. For these reasons, I am an enthusiastic supporter of Senate Bill 79. I called our mutual state representatives multiple times throughout the process to support it when it was under consideration. This is a bill backed by local voters, approved by representatives, and tailored to our area. The policy being advanced by Pala tonight is clearly not the intent of the law. It's a bold stretch to claim that you >> Your time is up. >> Our next speaker is Erica S. >> Hello. Um I'm Erikica Staer. I'm representing 414 California. Um, I'm here to ask city council to reconsider the urgency ordinance that's on consent. By approving the urgency ordinance, the city is asserting that housing is a imminent threat to public health and safety. This seems to conflict with the pro-ousing designation the city is currently seeking. SP79 allows for mid-rise projects, not highrises or mega projects that could potentially pro uh pose an unforeseen burden to city infrastructure. In the case of 414 California, it allows for a maximum of 44 units. This is the level of density that is needed to create a viable mixeduse project um at an important infill site on a prominent street in the city. If the ordinance passes, the project will no longer be financially feasible with the important retail and placemaking aspects that are critical to this location. Thank you very much for your time. Our next speaker is Scott LG. Uh I'm Scott Leven Gazenheight Lane use attorney Holland and Knight to here for today for 414 California Avenue also resident of the area for more than 30 years. The ordinance tonight asks you to find that transit oriented housing is a current and immediate threat to the public health safety or welfare. A current and immediate threat to public health safety or welfare month ago council approved a 14story tower. I know you didn't all want to but you did it. Um, a building half that height on the same street can't suddenly be a public health emergency when you didn't find one last month. So, I don't believe you can certify to the state that your utilities are adequate housing element and then tell the community today that the same housing is threatening your public safety. Both cannot be true at the same time. You're also applying for a state prohousing designation. Emergency decrees to suppress that same housing is not a prohousing act. I think HCD will see this for what it is. So, I'm not asking you to stop planning. I think there's a lot you can do on Calav, but I'm asking that you not manufacture an emergency today that doesn't exist on the record. So, please decline to pass the emergency ordinance. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Scott O. >> Hi, Scott O'Neal. Speaking for myself, I want to suggest it's good to converge on SB79 densities faster where appropriate. To illustrate, I invite you to imagine two possible mixtures of additional housing in say 2034. If you allow SB79 to take full effect in the downtowns, that's apartment density midrises. So by 2032, we'll expect to have apartments built, not just built, but in place for years, gently used apartments on their second or third occupant, maybe not cheap, but cheaper than new. If we c if, on the other hand, we cap SB79 at 50% in our downtowns for 5 years, as M23 proposes, that's merely town home density. We might get we might get more expensive exclusive town homes. Any apartments in that scenario would be fewer in number, brand new, more expensive. Which mix should we prefer? The exclusive Palo Alto favoring the higherass town homes or the more affordable inclusive Palo Alto with gently used, more naturally affordable apartments, making room for our friends, workers, and loved ones who need that help the most. Please remove SB23 for consent. Negotiate some places. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Jeremy L. Good evening council members. Thank you for your time tonight. I'm here to comment on the pro housing designation which PaloAlto forward is really excited that the city is seeking. It reflects the good work the city has done in its housing element and beyond in the El Camino Rail focus area in things to come like the San Antonio road area plan. I will simply note with my perspective as somebody who works in cities up and down the peninsula that there are other cities that have received the pro housing designation, Redwood City, Mountain View, just a skip and a hop away, a Cal Train stop or two that are looking at SB79 positively. Redwood City is letting the law go into full effect without any modification. Mountain View is doing a local alternative plan. We think that there's a way that PaloAlto can take the best parts of things happening in other cities and leverage this law to reflect the pro-ousing reputation that the city is building for itself uh into the future. So, thank you for your work. >> Our next speaker is Amy A. >> Good evening, Amy Ashton. Um, first of all, of course, thank you for the innovative alchemy rail focus area zoning, the GMR, the San Antonio Master Plan area. We have come a very long way in terms of housing. We all know this, but we still have a long way to go. And SB79 is a valuable tool to help us. Phz take years. Builder's remedy projects, which are more than half our pipeline, were a one-time thing. HIP isn't producing housing. the larger sites, churches, the Midtown Safeway, they are not converting. We need more units and SB79 is a valuable tool to get us there. Housing near transit is good for local businesses, the environment, and our community. I urge you to implement SB79 and let's really show what it means to be a pro housing community. Thank you. Our next speaker is Patty I. I'm I'm Patty Irish and I live at 850 Webster Channing House, an 11story building nearby. We have 200 independent residents who can walk to most of the services we need and we have 185 employees. Um, some drive as far as Stockton. You've heard that before. To work here by building density on Calav and University, you provide the opportunity for people to live near many services and all these services also need people to use them. Calab and University are key areas of Peloalto. It's much more costly effective for you to support building where much of the infrastructure is already there, not starting new. Please build up. Uh it's wonderful actually to live in a higher rise to take advantage of conserving land and reducing the costs. This will allow more people to work here and live here. >> Please respond with to the urgent need. Thank you. Our next speaker is Shaunie K. Good morning. I'm Shani Klein House. Speaking as a resident, no other hats on my head today. And on a different topic, in 2024, council approved several paving projects just like item nine on your agenda tonight. One of those was to pave around cir skirt around a water tower at Foothills Park. That never happened. Instead, a road was paved. A dirt road was paved between the water tower to Alexis Drive without any authorization and no way back. Once you pave something, it's paved. This time on your agenda, there is a trail next to Adobe Creek to be repaved. That's fine. just please make sure that the project is limited to that section of the trail and no further and at the existing width and not wider. And also as resident, I thought you made a good decision about SB79 and I hope you keep it. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Joe F. >> Hello, my name is Joe Flity and I'm speaking as a private citizen. I moved here 18 months from 18 months ago from Columbus, Ohio. I just applied online for a job. I didn't expect to come out to California. I just have a unique background where I buy chemicals. And at Tesla, I would have gone to Austin, Texas or Palo Alto, wherever they sent me. And I'm just so lucky that I came to California. This is a great place. I really underestimated how awesome the weathers is and how many great people I've met. And there are just so many other people who want to move to Silicon Valley. This is one of the most economically dynamic areas in the history of human civilization. And we have the opportunity to build more housing where it makes sense next to transit. And it's just so many, you know, people that I've met are also under pressure from the cost of living. And I've met young people who want to start families and move away because the cost of housing is just really expensive and it's difficult for them to to balance both those costs and their jobs here. So, they've moved away to lower costs of areas. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Leela H. >> Good evening everyone. Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts today. Um I'm a longtime resident of uh the Ventura neighborhood and I think SB79 topic should be uh come off the consent agenda. Um, I also suggest not delaying the full implementation of SB79 because the community needs more housing units that low and lower middle inome families can afford. That's more of an emergency than delaying it because it already takes a long time to build housing, so why delay it further? Um, I think a community that has residents from different income brackets is richer because we're exposed to more people with different life experiences, uh, such as young professionals who are just starting their careers, um, seniors looking to downsize and staff, um, at PAUSD and teachers. Um, so thank you for your time and I, um, yeah, I'm done. >> Our next speaker is Adam S. Good evening. I'm Adam Schwarz. I have lived in University South for 11 years, right next to Channing House with my wife and my kids. Um, thank you so much to all members of the council and for city staff for all the work you've been doing for so long, so hard to build more homes. I'm here to respectfully request that you take this item number 23 off of consent that we allow SB79 to go into effect at the very least in the neighborhoods we already know that we want to build more housing. Um so many of my uh friends have had to move away from PaloAlto because they can't afford to live here. Um my kid adult is living in my house which is wonderful but they would like to live in their own home which is currently um not an option for them because of the pricing. My mother um is in her 80s and needs to move to live closer to me and that is a struggle for our family financially because housing is so expensive here. We need more homes, especially near transit. So, please please uh take this off consent and let SB79 go into effect in the neighborhoods where we already know we want to be building more homes. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Steven T. Good evening, may mayor and members of the council. My name is Steve Chang and I I've lived in Palo for 43 years. First, I strongly urge the council tonight to pull the SP79 urgency ordinance off the consent agent agenda. A decision of that magnitude which impacts so many people and and so many neighbors deserves a tr full and transparent discussion and not voted on silently as part of a package. That doesn't seem right to me. I chose to make PaloAlto my home and to raise my family because of the vibrant walkable neighborhoods, its treeline streets, and the promise of a forward-looking community. But today, our city is facing a real emergency. A severe shortage of homes for our teachers, workers, and lower middle inome families. They can't afford it. Instead of trying to delay and scale back the implementation of SB79 with a questionable and non-compliant ordinance, >> let's choose positive civic leadership and let's pull off consent and uh stop the delays and take an opportunity. Your time is up. build a great Palo Alto. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Abby Y. >> Um, hi council members. Uh, I'm Abby Ye. I'm a master of laboratory animal science student at Stanford University, currently living on campus. Um, thank goodness the housing is subsidized because I tried looking for housing and um, I knew the housing market was pretty bad before looking, but like wow, it's really bad. Um it was like it was like 3K on average. Um and like my partner got a job at Apple and like that's considered a pretty good um paying job, but uh even that couldn't get her a um house. Um yikes. So um yeah, please take uh SB79 off consent and say yes to it. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Jeff L. Good evening everyone. My name is Jeff Leavinsky and I wanted to thank you all for the hard work you did two weeks ago balancing all the different issues and such in order to come up with what's on the consent uh calendar tonight and I hope you vote yes. I'd like to point out that in we looked at some of the um options that were on the table earlier and one of those was to exempt uh properties on El Camino. That would include Town and Country. With the density bonus and such, we could not keep any retail at Town and Country. You are literally two weeks away from Town and Country being forever lost potentially as a retail center in this community. that would affect employees, shoppers, diners, school children who go there. It would have an extraordinary devastating effect in our community. Please vote yes on the consent calendar. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Doria S. Thank you. And I agree with the um previous speaker about the potential disastrous loss of retail in the community. But I want to start out by thanking the mayor and the city council for their work on June 1st. And I also want to thank the staff for their hard work on SB79. Um you had a unanimous vote on the 1st of June um to pursue a totally legal option to compliance on SP79. And I think without going into a lot of detail and repeating things you've already heard that you should do the same thing tonight. And I know that a lot of community members will really really appreciate you doing that and will support you. and I know that they would join in with me and wish you a very very lovely vacation. Thank you. Our next speaker is Deborah G. I am astounded that this SB79 issue got put on the consent calendar. I don't know whose idea that was. That is just nuts. Um this is way too big an issue. Um I mean I'm not sure you all not to know know but property values in PaloAlto are dropping. I just bought a house in PaloAlto for 25% less than its appraised value and I sold my own property for 8% less than its highest value that was about 10 years ago. So property values are dropping in this city. Um uh enrollment in our schools have plummeted. you're cutting the budget and you know you took this amazing the city of Poto took this amazing vibrant economy and just went I think we like it the way it is to be residential and didn't build housing. You know this is like at some point this isn't just bad governments it is malpractice. >> Our next speaker is Haley G. Hi, good evening council. My name is Hi, speaking as a previous resident and current case manager for unhoused adults at the opportunity services center. While I support the city's application for the prohousing designation program, I would like to suggest improvements to strengthen the application specifically regarding the city's approach to working with unhoused individuals and encampments. I have observed firsthand how difficult it is to regain affordable housing after experiencing homelessness. When assisting these individuals in reapplying for housing, the housing they do qualify for can of wait list that extend for years. I've seen up to 10 years. Although I appreciate the city's investments and solutions to this issue, significant barriers persist to obtain housing and shelter. According to the shelter hotline, there's a current three to four monthth wait list for congregate shelters and close to a year for the home key sites. As a city applies for the prohousing designation program, I encourage the council to strengthen the application by demonstrating how Paul Alto will continue to expand access to realistic housing and shelter opportunities for unhoused neighbors. Thank you. Our next speaker is John S. John S, you should be able to unmute yourself and speak. >> All right, that concludes public comment on the consent calendar. >> All right. Well, thank you, Madam Clerk, and thank you to all of our public commenters. We appreciate the time you take to come down and speak with us. Um, so with that, I will ask my colleagues if there are any recusals or no votes or requests to pull uh on the consent calendar. There's a lot. Okay. Council member Lou, >> uh, I need to recuse from item 12, which uh, uh, involves relationship with Stanford. uh and my spouse is employed by Stanford and I need to recuse from uh item 23 on SP79 as uh I live within the SP79. I own a condo in the SP79 radius. >> All right. Thank you, Council Member Liths. I would like to pull an item and I wonder if the clerk can uh I'd like to pull 23A. Um because this item was initially agendaized as one item with four ordinances within it and now is three sub items. I just want to be clear that the I'd like us to assist the public in understanding which one I'm talking about. Do you have anything handy that shows what 23A is? If you don't, I can just >> or the city attorney might be able to. I don't. It's hard to put you on the spot. >> Okay. >> So, it item item 23A are would be the two temporary ordinances that council adopted at uh first or introduced at first reading on June 1st. So, one would be a temporary ordinance u exempting certain historic sites from SP79 and the other would be a temporary ordinance exempting other properties from SB79 and establishing development standards at uh 50% of the standard SB79 density that comply with uh with the standards in the statute. >> Thank you. And if I'm sorry to interrupt if I may. We do have a um copy of the materials in the back of the chambers for public display and review. >> Okay. Thank you. So I'd like to pull 23A. My reason is while I support historic properties being protected, it's been lumped in with the 50% overlay throughout the SB79 splash zone, which I'm very concerned about because it'll roll back our existing progress toward greater density in those areas. and I feel it's inconsistent with our quest for pro- housing designation which we're simultaneously going for tonight with item 7. >> Can I just remind uh our colleagues that we have the new protocol where you have up to a minute to explain uh any request to pull. >> Thank you. I would also like to pull item 23B. My reason, this is the urgency ordinance on historic buildings because I haven't been able to find anywhere in the record presented to us any emergency findings that warrant an urgent ordinance on historic buildings. Therefore, there's the potential that we're putting the city at legal risk by pressing a set of potentially really problematic findings. And finally, I would like to pull 23 C, the urgency ordinance on the 50% of SB79 overlay. My reasons are uh first this urgency ordinance will kill 414 California Avenue, a mixeduse multif family housing application with ground flooror retail which we all felt largely supportive of when it came before us in a study session. In fact, this council encouraged that developer. I don't understand why we are considering killing it. Second, there are credible concerns that our emergency findings for this urgency ordinance may be found to be quite problematic, therefore putting us at legal risk. Third, if we do this, we truly lose all hope of earning a pro housing designation. So, I believe council should discuss potential amendments to this ordinance. If some meaningful amendments are made, I will support it. Otherwise, I will vote no. >> Thank you. Uh, Vice Mayor Stone, >> I'll vote pool 23C. Council member Rectal, >> I need to recuse myself on item 23 due to my home's proximity to the San Antonio station. >> Okay. And I need to recuse on item 12 uh because of my uh law firm uh as Stanford as a client. And I would also like to pull 23 C for much the same reason that council member Lithu Hayes mentioned. Basically reflecting on the issues raised by public commenters regarding the interim ordinance that seeks 50% reduction in SB79 standards. I am not comfortable making the necessary findings that it meets the high standard for urgency absent any amendment. That standard says that there's a current and immediate threat to the public health safety and welfare. >> [gasps] >> I also believe that there would be adverse impact on our prohousing designation application and importantly the grant money it could unlock. All right. So I see no further lights uh with those three requests to pull. I believe that item uh 23 C is pulled. >> That that's correct. Mayor, >> you're right. and 23 A and B is not because there was only one request for each of those. So, um, what we can proceed to do is vote on the non-pulled items and then return to the pulled items. So, I'll let Madame Clerk manage all those recusal. I'll give you a moment. Madam clerk, I should have made clear that in the and asking to pull that I will be voting no on the ones that I requested to pull. Did I miss if there was a maker and a seconder of the motion? >> Oh, that's a good question. Would somebody like to move the consent calendar in the form that the clerk has put out here? >> So moved. >> Thank you. Is there a second? I'll second it. That was very delicately put, Madame Clerk. Thank you. [laughter] >> Council member Liths, >> yes. >> Mayor Vinker, >> Council member Rectal, >> yes. >> Council member Bert, >> Council member Lowing, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Stone, >> Council member Lou, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Council member Liths, would you like to speak to your no votes? >> I think you were. >> I don't think I need to speak further to my no votes because I explained why I was pulling >> and I assume that with the item being pulled, we're going to figure out when to talk about that item, whether it's tonight or that's what I'm moving to next. I just wanted to give you that opportunity on A and B. So with respect to agenda item number 23 C, I would like to see us discuss it now because we this can't really wait until after break and I think having started with the reasoning, I would like to do that. Absent any objection from the city manager. >> No, no objection. Staff is ready to go when you are. >> Okay. And um I think because of the uh importance of this item that uh I believe that we should if we can't get it done in 10 minutes, we need to keep going until we finish it again because of the urgency of just getting a resolution one way or another for this item. So with that, I will open up discussion on uh item 23C. >> Can we get it posted? Can we get it posted on the screen? >> Yeah. And mayor, we might have an extensive discussion here. Should we have or break it before proceeding on a very substantive discussion that might take a while? It's already been added. >> I think let's let's go at it. Let's go ahead and see how we do. And if it just gets extended, we could take a break at that point. Um, >> and so I'm sorry, Council Member Lowing, what would you like to see on the screen? >> 23 C. >> 23 C. the one we're talking about now since every so everybody in the chambers can see it as well. >> Okay. So I guess what we're looking for so so the the the uh would you like the staff recommendation that we because it's basically the interim urgency ordinance with respect to the 50% reduction in SB79 uh standards. There's a two-page interim ordinance. Is that what you want on the screen or what what would you like? >> No, ju just just that if that's all there is. So, I just want everybody to know what we're >> I agree. This is what I was um getting at in uh referencing um something we could put on the screen and talking about pulling it perhaps what staff gave us when they told us it was being broken out into three. >> I have an idea. Why don't we put the uh revised agenda item? That might help us. Would that satisfy you? Okay, great. Thank you. Thanks for raising that. I think we can delete A and B there. Or do you want them all there just for reference? Which was your preference? Yeah, that's what we're talking about. Okay. All right. So, with that, let's return to council discussion. Uh, Council Member Liscott HS, thank you. Uh, I appreciate that we've pulled this because I know how much work went into the SB79 um ad hoc effort uh to address the state law and figure out its appropriate and best application in our city. Uh, it was late. Uh, we made some decisions. incredibly late at night and uh I appreciate we're having an opportunity to u make sure we're making the right decision. Uh my concern with this urgency ordinance on the 50% uh overlay over these transit oriented development sites articulated by SB79 starts with what we're doing with 414 calab as I initially said when I pulled um I want us to think hard about why we're adopting an ordinance that's going to block an application that is in the main something we felt largely supportive of even if we had some aesthetic concerns and more broadly looking at Calav everybody on council has really agreed that there needs to be housing development there, more density. That's where we want to encourage dynamics mixed dynamic mixeduse neighborhoods. So, I'm concerned that we are considering adopting an ordinance that prevents that from happening, at least temporarily. And legally, if we get in a position of having to defend what we've done, we'll devote money and staff resources to defend the temporary interimm ordinance that is blocking something that is something we want to see happen anyway. My second concern is legal. To justify an inter emergency ordinance, this council has to make findings that there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety or welfare. I have seen I have found no evidence presented that would allow me to make such a finding and if we nevertheless go forward. Public commenters who have written in have suggested we may be putting the city at substantial legal risk and it is our job to protect the city from that risk. Third, if we make emergency findings to warrant this urgency, it is highly doubtful we'll get our pro-ousing designation that we just approved in item 7 and we set our housing reputation back again. Fourth, if we carve out some streets from the SP79 splash zone like Calv, like the El Camino Rial focus area, like University A, like San Antonio, we're not going to get a massive influx of developers in this July 1st through 15th window. nor are we going to get proposals in R1. Why do I think that? Because we had the builder's remedy in effect for a year and a half and we had 10 projects and none were R1. Just the two weeks gives time for those who are planning to submit like 414 Calv and a property in the El Camino Riale focus area which apparently they want to file under SB79 because it allows more units of housing than the focus area. and then the window will close and it will take the steam out of those alleging that they may sue us. So what it comes down to for me is I feel I can only support this interim urgency ordinance if we do some carveouts like Calav and elsewhere and also if we augment the language in our late night June 1st motion to ask staff not to just explore within 6 to 12 months but to return to us with a plan to revise zoning in these areas. I feel it is imperative to give staff clear direction on next steps. So those are the main reasons why I'm interested in this conversation happening again and I hope we can reach a compromise tonight that is better than we came up with on June 1st. >> Right. Thank you. And I just want I think to clarify further sort of where we are to set the stage for this. Um, so we just approved two temporary ordinances that will become effective on July 16th. Uh, that exempts historic sites and, uh, reduces the, uh, SESB79 standards by 50%. Starting July 16th. We also just passed an urgency ordinance that exempts historic sites starting now. Um, so that would be effective on July 1 when SB79 comes into effect. Hopefully, Mr. City Attorney, I didn't screw any of that up. [laughter] >> [gasps] >> Um so where we are now with this interim urgency ordinance uh on reducing the SP79 standards everywhere um uh starting as soon as it would pass. It would need four votes to pass whether in the form it currently exists in in the staff report or in an amended form. So we could pass it as is, amend it or reject it. If it does not pass in any form, SP79 will go into effect on July 1 for uh with uh without those reduced standards for those 15 days. So if it does pass in in in some form, it would be effective upon adoption. I just wanted to sort of set that out as parameters for this. With that, I will turn to Vice Mayor Stone. >> Thank you, Madame Mayor. And I I didn't explain my my reason [clears throat] for for pulling. I figured I'd hold off now. Um, so I think so for me upon further review I've concluded that the draft interimm urgency ordinance implementing SP79 50% option just contains a fundamental flaw that I can no longer support. And specifically section 1J of attachment D states that's our right. So, in our in our draft ordinance, the reasoning for the the urgency that we would be stating in this draft ordinance is that the city council finds and declares that the impacts described above present a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare that would be realized by approval of projects under the standards set forth in the government code. But then the very next sentence acknowledges that there are no pending project applications that would be affected by the ordinance and that the ordinance would not deny approvals needed for multif family housing projects. So to me, these findings are just difficult to reconcile. On the one hand, we're making the extraordinary declaration required for an urgency ordinance that there exists a current and immediate threat to public health, safety, or welfare. Yet in the same section, we acknowledge that no such immediate development pressure presently exists and that no housing projects would be would be impacted. I'm concerned that we're effectively asserting the existence of an imminent threat while simultaneously acknowledging that the circumstances giving rise to that threat are not actually present. I don't believe the record before us supports making that finding. I do want to be clear though that I do believe the underlying rationale behind the temporary non urgency ordinance that we have already passed is sound. I think unplanned and unmitigated development of any kind can create significant challenges when infrastructure and public services are not adequately prepared. If fully maximized, the development potential enabled under SB79 could place additional strain on existing wastewater capacity, public safety services, transportation networks, and other critical infrastructure. And I think those are legitimate planning concerns that I that I support. So absolutely welcome Councilman Lift with Scott Hayes suggestion that we provide additional clarity to staff on a on a more aggressive time frame on when we can when we can see those uh those plans and strategies for increased density in some of these um in in some of these areas. So for that reason, I continue to believe that pursuing the 50% TOD eligible parcel approach while simultaneously accelerating those planning efforts is the most prudent and balanced path forward. But while I support the policy objective, I do not believe the legal findings necessary to justify an urgency ordinance are supported by the facts before us. and therefore I can't support the proposed urgency ordinance as drafted. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. And uh I agree with my colleagues that have spoken so far that uh on the legal side that because we have to meet the heightened requirement to pass an urgency ordinance, there is increased legal risk in order to cover those 15 days. But just speaking practically for a minute, I think there's pretty low risk that we're going to get a slew of applications in that short time. We know of the one that's likely 414 California. And so I just want to talk practically about that for a minute because we did have some concerns about some of the specifics during this study session, but I recall us being excited about the prospect of housing at that site. And I also recall the architect saying it wasn't that our concerns weren't anything that they couldn't address. So in addition to what council member Lith said, um you know when I look at it just from the practical side, the biggest issue that I [clears throat] remember was um when we did our pre-screen on 414 was applicants interest in shutting down Mimosa Lane. And I don't believe anything about this SB79 decision is going to affect that one way or another. So in other words, I believe we do retain control over that right of way um regardless of if uh this passes or not. Um so you know net net I believe that our legal risk outweigh outweighs the risk associated with having one or maybe a couple of applications that get filed in that short window. Um so you know I believe that that risk of the risk of passing the urgency ordinance outweighs the risks of not passing it which include uh so if we pass this we we do we risk our pro housing designation application. We risk loss of interest by developers upon whom we rely to build homes for our community. We risk expending legal fees to make our case. We risk paying the legal fees of the opposing party if we lose. HCD could step in if they have concerns about our ordinance, which would put us in an adverse posture with them, uh, at a time that it could affect our other dealings with them. Um, so, you know, for me, um, this is something that, uh, I just can't, uh, see passing as is. Um, now we we we're going to need four votes either way. Um, I I'm willing to discuss some carveouts uh for this uh if we want to do that instead. Um, and then I could might be able to get behind it similar to council member Lithcott HS if we are clear in our direction to staff. Uh I noted in the staff report that we talked about that was trying to capture what we talked about last time about what we would do in the next six to 12 months to get a more granular look at zoning. Um it said that they will uh explore opportunities to accelerate housing production on California Avenue and adjacent areas of ECR. Um I would definitely want to add and bring back to council a proposal for zoning revisions to affectuate such production in that time period. we we need to see it come back so we can act on it. Um so you know if we put something like that in there um uh and uh we carve out uh areas that we could agree upon um I would entertain a conversation around that. >> Council member Bert. >> Um so we really have before us two issues as the vice mayor laid out. Um one uh is a question on legal findings and the other is really planning policy and um and uh what we look at on sound community design the impacts of development um and related matters. I'll just note that uh setting aside for the moment uh the legal issues um when we've done the major upzoning uh that we have already done to uh u incentivize the over 6,000 housing units in our uh housing element. We've created a a area plan for the south San Antonio area. We did considerably considerable um uh looking at impacts on transportation, biking, safety, uh uh uh infrastructure on um the El Camino uh focus area. Um we've initiated our downtown housing plan, um which embraces transitoriented development and does so in a thoughtful, deliberate way. Uh so what was proposed um previously uh at our last meeting would have just arbitrarily thrown out any of those kinds of um well-designed considerations. Our our issue before us right now is more narrow. Um I I do want to say that uh when 414 Calav came before us, yes we all supported in principle. We had certain different uh design and impact um feedback for the applicant, but it was not dependent on SB79. That project was going to be coming back to us based upon other zoning incentives that we're offering. there was no discussion of SB79 at the time and our support for that project was not contingent on SP79. So that's just not accurate. Um so um I also uh want to point out that some of the other considerations uh one of the things that some of the members of the public were talking about is the uh the unconsidered impacts of if we had gone forward with uh the proposal of two weeks ago uh on potentially very significant loss of retail. SP79 is designed to be coupled with SB 330, which allows um uh additional um housing uh u uh uh waiverss and that in could include eliminating city requirements for ground flooror retail whether at in Calav University or uh town and country. Um and then I do want to also note that within that proposal was um inclusion of uh Elma. Um and along Elma in the area u uh within the half mile of the Calav train station is a good portion of our market rate affordable housing. Meaning it's not deed restricted but it's 70 years old or so. it's uh rental rates are low for our city. Um but SP79 would not count that as existing affordable housing that needs to be replaced. So we would have the 13% of affordable housing in SP79 which may not even offset the existing market rate affordable housing which is the true missing middle that we have struggled so hard to have in this community. Um and then um uh I just want to note that on even on the issue of 156 calav um uh the um uh Molly Stone site, we looked at impacts for over a year on that and that sort of consideration is the very sort of evaluation that we will be looking for to come back when this returns to the council. So we make good sound judgments on where we do want to upzone in these transit oriented development areas. The representations by members of the community um uh that somehow us looking at doing this in a deliberate manner means that we're against transitoriented development is false and it's demonstrabably false and we will continue to show that it's false. Um, so I would really hope that the public would not misrepresent the extensive actions and positions that this council has taken nor the impacts of what is being considered. So, um, I wanted to put those um, uh, facts on the table. >> Council member Lowi. >> Yes. Thanks. I want to make a couple of general comments first. Um, as we we noted two weeks ago, you know, this 50% now is offered within the law. This is not something that's illegal or sneaky or anything else. Um, it's there intentionally to give us time to look at an alternative plan should we choose to do that. And that takes a lot of time even if we had staff sitting around doing nothing. And we don't have that. So the reference to, you know, Mountain View is doing an alternative plan and they chosen to do it. That's part of the analysis that we would do to figure out if we want to do an alternative plan or not. We may not need to because we're also doing the downtown housing plan which might get us there and then we don't have to do anything. So, um that's exactly what this is supposed to do. Implementing this thing at 50% doesn't change ultimately SB79 at all. I'm also concerned that the narrative on the this whole thing of SB79 is talking about all this affordable housing that we're going to get for the missing middle middle the lower middle income my kids can live here and all that. Uh as was just noted it's usually about 13% maybe we can get some of it to 15%. Some of the projects that we have were getting 20 20 before the state law came in and they went down to 13. So I I just don't think that that's dealing with reality. I think you're going to have 85% market rate in most of these in most of these projects, which is just the state. I'm just stating the facts here. Not a preference for for for us at all. Um I also stated last week that something like 414 calv um has alternative ways to move forward right now and mentioned that to to the developer after the meeting. Um one is PHC. there's no reason it has to be slow. And so 44 unit project could could work just fine. Um and with respect to new zoning, I I certainly support that. There are areas of of uh California Avenue and other areas that we know we're going to reszone. So, the issue is just how can we pace all this stuff at once when we feel like we're in good shape relative to the arena numbers that we're working through our planning department to get to get up and running. [clears throat] Um so back to this specific here in in this this window period of the um ordinance that's cons of concern here. Is there not the opportunity in those numbers of weeks to get a number of applications or are we just I think the the mayor mentioned that statistically we're probably not going to get those. Um so we don't we don't have any guesstimate of that. We're just saying that's probably not going to happen. >> Are you asking staff? >> No, I was asking I was asking you first just because you you came up with the conclusion. Oh, well, we usually don't have coll back and forth, but um I I I wouldn't expect it. I mean, there's 30 days from tonight to pull that off. Uh they would have to file in the 15-day window preapp, but I don't know. Um but uh >> Okay. So, the related >> I'm not aware, I guess, of more than uh well, I mean, I you can ask the the housing uh staff what they're aware of. Are they done with the director late? >> Your question is how many applications do I anticipate are going to come in if the intermance doesn't >> I think the mayor just changed it to how many are you aware that are coming in? [clears throat] >> I I I don't know that any are coming in. Nobody's spoken to me. I heard the discussion >> of 415. We have other pending applications that have come before the city either in terms of pre-screenings for PhDs or uh have filed applications that could convert within the radius. >> Okay. So the only implication by what you said the only implication for not doing the uh urgency ordinance is that we might get a few more applicants in that narrow time frame of a few weeks. Sorry, I missed the first part of your your question there. >> If the if we did not do the urgency ordinance is the only implication for that compared to where this was before this item was [clears throat] pulled, excuse me. Um is that we might get a few applications in that time frame? Are there any other applications, any other outcomes that could come up here that we should be aware of? That's the only reason I'm asking the question. Yeah, I I I haven't done an analysis of what applications may be in the queue, what owners I don't know how significant of a of an issue it would be. There's there's a few that I could think of that could probably turn over and file a pre-screening application under SB 330 even if it's not fully formed. >> Yeah, I I was asking if there's anything else besides that. So, it's been established that some other some other people could come in. I get that. Is there anything else or does the city attorney want to say that there's any other outcomes that we should just as as we make the vote if we should just consider anything else? >> So, so coun council just adopted the the temporary ordinance on the consent calendar on the second reading. So, that that ordinance will take effect on uh on uh July 16th. So, so you what you're talking about now is what to do in that period between July 1 when SB79 uh takes effect and uh ending on July 15th. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Since you did ask me that, might I just jump in and point out that >> Sure. >> in the uh year and a half that we had builder remedy projects available to be filed, we got 10. So this is 15 days. That was a year and a half. I don't know if that's indicative, but it's sort of benchmark. >> I'm just trying to turn turn over every stone just just to see what the outcomes are making this change because it was in before by staff. And so that's that's all I'm asking for. >> Certainly. Um, council member Liths. >> Yeah, I just want to respond to some of my colleagues comments. Um, you know, I know we all want to get our um our arena numbers accomplished and we are penalized if we don't. And um, you know, and we look at where we are and how long what it's going to take to get us there. I believe we could have trouble meeting our arena without SB79. Um, I don't want to see us get to 2032 and not having met it. And then I think if we don't meet it, then the builder's remedy can kick back in. Um, and when we get to 2032, SB79 will be fully in play. Um, and then we may have our single family neighborhoods more at risk because the density will have to be spread out at that point. Um, so I kind of see this as a tool to get us toward the 6,086 unit goal. Um, what I understand about SP79 is that in terms of the affordability, um, first of all, local inclusionary ordinances are not superseded by are not preempted by SB79 as I understand it. So we our local inclusionary still stands and what it does is it increases allows for an increase in floor area ratio and dwelling units per acre but not height which means you end up with squatter more compact buildings with a greater number of units which ought to be more affordable. Um and as I understand it SB79 can't be used to displace renters. It can't be used on a building that has that has had at least three or more rental units and uh where those units have been rented out in the last seven or eight years. So, I don't see it as displacing renters in these sort of naturally affordable uh buildings you're talking about. And again, as I understand it, and I'm not an expert on this, um, it will create inherently more affordable buildings and at a height that we want. We don't want the 85 fts. We'd rather have the 65 foot with uh, greater density in terms of the number of units within. So, I see it as more attractive. And that's why I'm interested in some carveouts, just a few streets like CalF where we could say, "Hey, we all know we want to liven up this street. We all know what it has the potential to be. We need more housing there. We've talked about um a mixeduse zoning situation there for some time. Let's honor that commitment to Calv and maybe to a portion of El Camino. like I started out two weeks ago with a whole lot of streets and I'm pulling back from that, but I'd like us to end to land on a couple where we can commit that SP79 as written will take effect. >> Council member Bird. >> Yeah. Um just one item. uh director late uh council member Lithcott HS um asserted that SB79 would not increase our heights. Two weeks ago, we had an extensive report and a table showing what the impacts would be on floor area, uh units per acre and height. Can you refresh everyone on what the impacts would be on height? Um I'd have to pull up the record, but it's in the neighborhood of 65 ft, 75 ft, and I believe 85 ft as you get closer to the concentric center. >> Yeah. So, uh quite nearby the um uh stations, it went up to 85/4 mile, it went out to 75. And our existing zoning in those areas uh where there's height is what >> varies by zone but the highest is 50 in the downtown area and less as you >> and then it goes to 65 ft even in R1 neighborhoods uh where we have a 35 ft height limit. So the claim that it doesn't affect height is far from accurate. I think what I'm doing is comparing SB79 to the El Camino focus area where we're looking at 85 ft. >> But that's not all where the only places it would apply. >> Well, I'm not asking to undo your 50% entirely. I'm saying keep it in place to protect R1, but let's carve out a few places in the city where we're comfortable with SB79 taking full effect. Yeah, that was the intent of the referral to the planning commission is we would do exactly that, but we have a more narrow decision right now on this motion. >> Right. And so, so >> I want to just mention a couple things and I'll come to you, Council Member Lowing, uh, and then to the Vice Mayor. Um, so I don't know if I was in artful in how I stated things or what, but um, Council Member Bert, when you were talking about somehow 414 being dependent on SP79, I don't recollect saying that. If I did say that, that's not what I Oh, okay. Because I think it's just that the 50% reduction would be a problem. Okay. Um what I wanted to say is that um I because I don't I may not have made it express when I explained why I wanted to pull um but you know if we can get this amended in a way that we're comfortable with it uh and uh in the two ways I mentioned before that would be of interest to me but if not I would join council member Lithkot HS in voting no on this. And so that is so if if if you're interested in not having two or I don't know if there's three no votes in order to get something passed, we should be talking about that. And I believe Council Member Lithcott HS listed several carveouts that she was interested in. And so, you know, if there's interest in that, fine. If there's not, I think we're left. We know where we're left. So, I just wanted to make sure we're understanding where we are in the conversation. With that, I'll turn to Council Member Lowing. >> Yeah. So, that's [clears throat] exactly what I was going to come back to. Um, further discussion the other night, you know, there there's there's time to do a new look at other other zoning, but that's not at midnight and it's probably not tonight. But what I I think I'm hearing you you saying is that if you got a fourth motion, sorry, a fourth vote to eliminate the urgency ordinance, then then we're done because that goes away. >> What what I'm saying is if if you don't get four yeses for this ordinance, it goes away and SP79 comes into its full force in effect for those 15 days. >> But I'm trying to put it in a positive mode. If I become the fourth vote, is that are we done? Yeah. [laughter] >> Okay, then that's what I'll do. >> I'm sorry I misunderstood you. Thank you for clarifying >> because this is the this is the thing that's the hot button for for some folks. I I don't see it as being material as it's been explained uh by staff. Uh and it doesn't obviate any decisions that we make in the future about putting up uh other buildings of of any height. Sometimes 75 feet is great and other times, you know, that's not. So that's exactly the kind of thing that we need to take time to do is figure out where that best goes and where it fits in the context or where we want to create context like like down in San Antonio area plan. Um, so I think that's I think that's the way to go. So I'll do that. >> Vice Mayor Stone, do you have more to say after that? No, I mean I I I had initially put on my light just to kind of refocus back to because I think we were starting to kind of relitigating what we had just passed for the temporary ordinance and I don't think that's appropriate for what we're what we're doing here. I guess maybe then just a procedural question for staff to as far do you need a do you need a motion that we're like withdrawing the urgency ordinance because my just understanding is there's no four yes votes it just it it already fails. >> So there there there's a staff recommendation. Uh there's no requirement for council to move that recommendation. Council can shape its own motion. uh whatever that motion is, whether it's staff recommendation or something else, needs four votes to pass. >> But I think >> just yeah, just to just to clarify. Yeah. So, so without a motion that then that then nothing happens and the um the situation we were explaining to council member Lowing remains in force which you know basically there's a a 15-day gap where um SB79 would take effect to its full extent through all you know all three transit oriented development areas. >> So the motion vice mayor would be the three things that you want and not the urgency ordinance. We just wouldn't mention the urgency ordinance in the motion and the other three would be in the motion. >> Just just to clarify that if if for for that you you would have to make you know um urgency findings today to adopt something that takes effect uh immediately. You know the absence of those findings you know we would be in the same situation as you can't have something that takes effect immediately. >> Right. But is that different than what I [clears throat] just said that you would just take the three that are there as opposed to all four of them because we're voting against the fourth one? >> When Sorry. When you're saying the three, do you mean the three that have already passed? >> Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Okay. >> Oh, yeah. No, I'm sorry. I misunderstood you. So, yeah. So, you So, so, so you do if you would need if council wishes to act today and have this ordinance take effect before July 1, that's that's not what you want to do. So there there have been there have been three ordinances that have that have already passed. If you if council does not take action now th those those three ordinance are passed. Um the the urgency ordinance that council just voted on takes effect now and the two that um uh you voted on the second reading will take effect on July 16th. >> Right. So we don't have to vote separately on this item at all because there's four opposed. >> We don't have to. Um, I would like a motion just that we uh direct staff to bring back a proposal for the zoning revisions that you want uh in in that 6 to 12 month time frame because right now it it just says that they're going to explore opportunities. So, I think it might be nice to set clear expectation that they'll come back so that we can have the granular conversation >> which was similar to the first motion a couple weeks ago >> or we were asking them to come back. it but it's but it's not with respect to any of these ordinances right it's just yes it's just that let me gently say that I didn't think what I read in the staff report was as strong as what we discussed because it didn't mention coming back and I just would like to make that clear so >> director late is that do you have that no okay [laughter] I'm going to leave this one alone all right um which of you were I didn't see whose light came on first or is >> Oh, no, that was my >> That was your old light. Okay, Council Member Bert. >> Yeah. I I just want to make sure I understand, Mayor, what you're proposing. Uh if we don't have four votes in support of the urgency ordinance, it simply dies. If we were to adopt whatever amendments you're asking, uh it wouldn't be in conjunction with the urgency ordinance. the urgency ordinance it would be instead of it. Correct. >> It's adjacent. I would say so. No, I I I think >> adjacent. I don't know what that >> right. Exact. I'm trying to explain. Um, so I can drop it all together because we've we've we would have moved on uh the the the main thing before us, which is the interim urgency ordinance would be by no by inaction would not come into effect. What I was suggesting was that it's within the scope of this item if we wanted to be clearer on when staff comes back to us. Um because I think that's still just going to happen. That was separate from these ordinances that they're going to come back. Um I'm sorry that they're going to what it says right now is explore opportunities to accelerate housing production on Cal a and adjacent areas of ECR. And all I wanted to do is make clear, but but honestly, if director late here and hears us, I we probably don't need a motion, that after they explore the opportunities, they would also bring back to council a proposal for zoning revisions. That is separate and apart from this urgency interim ordinance. >> Well, while I um anticipate that bringing back zoning um recommendations would be part of that process, I don't know the sequencing. I could very much see that it would be planning commission review it come to the council we give feedback and then subsequently there would be uh a zoning to reflect that but I don't know that sequence so I don't think I want to uh be too stipulating right now we've given that direction we've given the time frame uh I think uh the process is good >> okay I don't know that it changes uh uh the the process that would otherwise be followed. It's just giving a sort of timeline and I I think so. Let me just ask ask the director. Um is that added language that I proposed comfortable for you or is there any concerns I guess I should ask? Um, you're asking if I have concerns about adding language returning with an ordinance within 6 to 12 months instead of just exploring the changes. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> Yes. To bring back a proposal. >> Yeah. I don't have a an objection to that as a you know, if that's the council's direction. >> Okay. Um, well, let's just so we can can wrap this because I think we're getting close to burned out here. I don't see any more lights. Uh, I'm I'm going to make a motion that we um direct staff to explore opportunities to accelerate housing production on California Avenue and adjacent areas of ECR and bring back to council a proposal for zoning revisions to effectuate such production within the next 6 to 12 months. Is there a second? Okay, we have a second. >> Any further discussion on that? Council member Bird. >> Yeah. Um, so on the actual the item that was pulled, it doesn't speak to that. So, um, are you saying that we wouldn't take an action to drop the urgency or or for or against the urgency ordinance? Um, or that it would die from lack of action because your motion doesn't address that one way or another. >> Correct. That part would die for lack of action. We could make that express or we could just leave it alone. I was it was seemed superfluous to to to do that. So if the since this was part of the staff report and within the scope of the item for the three items. So the staff report was for all of 23. It got split into three. I don't think this went particularly one way or another. So I believe it's within the scope. But I mean I could >> So I just want to ask the city attorney. >> I was just about to do that. ask the city attorney if he has a view on whether that's a proper motion or not. >> So, you know, it's it's it's general direction to staff. I think it is within the broader scope of the agenda item. Um ju just to maybe to to to tie it back um to the this uh specific action. it might be better to uh explicitly include uh the language that council member Brid is suggesting even though I understand your view that it it seems a little bit superolous but to say you know you know in l something to the effect that in lie of of acting on uh the interim urgency ordinance uh the direct you know provide direction to staff to bring back uh you know an item within six to 12 months using the language you proposed >> and if Happy to take that as a friendly amendment if you could help the clerk with the language. But council member Bert, go ahead. >> Yeah, if that goes forward, I'd like to ask that motion be split between the uh uh dropping of the urgency ordinance and the additional direction to staff. >> Well, I think it's just stating the circumstance of this motion when I think I heard you say in lie of adopting the emergency ordinance. >> Yeah. I I'm not sure they understand the basis for splitting the the motion unless the the maker >> because substantively agree those are two different things. >> No, one is a circumstance just like one is because we're acting to not go forward with the urgency ordinance. The other is uh whether we're uh going to direct staff to take additional action. And I want to be able to vote on those two things separately. >> Okay. I I think that's a request to the maker and seconder though. No, thank you. >> Okay. Um, Council Member Lowing. >> Yeah. I just wanted to point out in defense of staff that you've this this adds a significant workload. I I'm I'm going to support the motion. I just want to point out that, you know, we need to be a little tolerant as to when it actually comes back. Uh, and there may be a choice to take it to PTC at some point. So, um, it's a chunk and it's not on his workload yet. Uh, so just noting that I still I'll still support it. >> All right. Thank you, Council Member Bird. Is that a new light? >> Um, yeah. I I just am requesting [clears throat] that the motion be split. >> Right. And I think the city attorney's answer was that it was up to the maker and I declined that. or is that different or >> Yeah, I I'm not I'm not aware of a a a parliamentary requirement for the motion to be split. So, it's it's would be at the discretion of the mayor. >> I think our protocols actually, if I recall correctly, address that uh it's at the discretion of the mayor, but if they can be reasonably uh separated and request to do so, that [clears throat] is our normal normal procedure. So are you so are you asking to split it with the addition of the language that you sought because that's not on the screen now but we we is that >> two parts uh one would be to vote on uh uh not going forward with the urgency ordinance. The second would be whether to give the additional direction to staff that you requested. >> I understand your request. I think what we need to do is first get the motion. Um, uh, since I've accepted your friendly amendment and I believe the secondary, are you okay with that or not? >> I am okay with it. I think it makes sense for the record to reflect that there has been a decision not to go forward with the emergency urgent ordinance and that there's this uh, part B or second part that is about what we're doing going forward. >> Okay. Well, then I think we need to work on the language. Let's first get the language that the city attorney had mentioned because I'm not sure it lends itself to two. So, we may want to further revise it along the lines that council member Liths just mentioned. So I think madame clerk um I think that we would say to direct staff that in lie of adopting the urgency the interim urgency ordinance of 23C might be the easiest way to name it. um and it would go on to explore blah blah blah. I think that's where we left off with the language and so let's look at that and think about the splitting. So um so uh the council procedures uh rule 43 uh C provide that if a question contains two or more divisible propositions each of which is capable of standing as a complete proposition if the other are removed the presiding officer may upon a request of a council member shall divide the same the presiding officer's determination shall be appealable by any council member Okay. So, so madame clerk, I believe the language that you've written there, this is this is a friendly amendment. So, we can go ahead and put it in because I'm the council member Bird asked and I think council member Liths and I agreed. So that language that two direct staff that in lie of adopting the emergency ordinance of 23C that whole text can go after um up in the main motion after two direct staff and you can just delete that direct staff is duplicative. Yeah. Now, Mr. City attorney, is that what you were suggesting? Let's take a look. to direct. >> Okay. After >> that, that's that's consistent with with the I believe that's consistent with the language I proposed. Um um >> I think we need a comma after 23 C and then two TO just Okay. But I'm sorry I interrupted your thought. >> No, that I would just say that I I would defer to uh Council Member Bird as to how he proposes to divide the um that the motion. It's it's very simple. It's that it allows the the council to vote on the urgency ordinance and then to vote on this additional direction to staff as two separate items. So, they need to be broken apart um for purposes of that vote. >> Okay. Well, then let's just rewrite it as uh the two motions. Honestly, let's just do two motions. >> I agree with that. >> Okay. So, thank you, Madam Clerk, for bearing with us through that. I think now what we want to do is to say um to do kind of what you were trying to do. Okay, there introduce and adopt and sorry things moving around. All right, so that was the original MO motion. Uh yeah, as presented by staff. I want to get the city attorney's view on that. >> Sorry, mayor. What's the question? So, we didn't move this as the problem. >> Yeah. [laughter] No. So, so I So, I believe I I I believe that the remedy to to address this would be to withdraw your motion uh and then make a and it would have you would have to withdraw your motion and then, you know, uh revise the motion to include a vote on the staff recommendation. And then a second part of that motion would be uh you that the direction that you recommended providing for staff and then C council member Bert has requested that those questions be divided and council vote separately on each of them. >> Can we just put this one the back back the way it was uh vote for it and then have the have a motion or are you saying we need to do the in the other order? Uh I I just don't want to end the item after if we vote on uh the motion um that the clerk had up there a minute ago on the actual urgency ordinance. If we vote [snorts] no, I want to make sure this comes up. So um yeah. So if if we so we just need someone else because because we have to have different movers, right? >> No, you don't you can you can both move you. So, so I believe what's being requested is that you move both parts. >> Um, >> I don't want to. [laughter] >> Yeah. Um, >> that's the thing. >> Yeah. >> On this particular thing, I mean, it's >> Yeah. So, so, so, so you you you're not you, you are not you are not compelled to amend your your motion. I I'm just say suggesting that as a path forward. >> I'm happy to have the vote taken. I'm just saying I don't want to be the maker of the motion to adopt the interim emergency ordinance. That's I think council member report would be probably be happy to do that and then we >> all right >> can what I had suggested several times is that the motion be to uh not proceed with the urgency ordinance consistent with your main motion to not proceed not to proceed and vote against it >> simply to not proceed and then you have a second >> split motion that is to do direct staff as you proposed. We do this a lot. >> I understand. I thought I'm just looking at what the clerk has, which is looking to introduce and adopt it, which I don't want to do. But I think I like your suggestion of making clear on that second one that I think just went away. Um that it's the reverse that it's to not adopt. Right. That's essentially what you want, right? We could have split it out, but we're I'm just making two separate motions to make it cleaner. So if that language could come back, madame clerk and I think what you're saying is to put it in one so it's we can split it. >> Okay. To direct staff to not proceed with adopting. >> All right. So now this now we would split that one and I think council member Liths, you're okay with that. After 23 C we would split it into two. >> [snorts] >> You're standing strong with this, aren't you? Okay. >> All right. I think we're there. Um we're I mean I think the pro I mean so so this is so just to clarify like both of these there's there's one main motion on the floor. So so both of these elements have to be part of the same main motion and then then that question is divi vote that then that qu that motion can be divided for purposes of voting um as requested by by council member Bert. Is that clear to everyone? >> I'm sorry. >> So, so this is this I just concerned that because this looks like it's two motions. We we could we can only have one mo main motion on the floor and so this this should be this should be made as a single motion and then divided and then the separate vote should be taken on the divided motion just just just just to >> Yeah, she does have motion split for the purpose of voting. >> I'm sorry. I I I I I I did I did not. >> Yeah. I think because we had the one on the screen prior that had them both and then she has a motion split. I If you're good with that, I'm good with that. >> Okay. Yeah. If you could just be clear that you're making the motion and and and council member Liths is se is is seconding it for the record. I think that would be helpful. >> I think it's embedded in each or is that not enough? >> Okay. >> Right. >> Yes. Okay. I just >> I'm missing the concern. Um I >> would it be cleaner if the motion was Mayor Vinker move seconded by me to direct staff A to not proceed with adopting the inter interim urgency ordinance 23C b to direct staff to explore. That way council member Bert can split out >> B >> B from A. He can vote one way and we we can split the subp parts of the motion but it's one motion one mover and seconder. >> It's I think that that that part was clear. I think it was more that I was just wanted to be clear that you were seconding it because I'm not sure that was on the record. >> I'm actually proposing that it be structured differently than it currently looks. Right now, as you said, it looks like two different motions. Don't take it out yet, Madam Clerk. I'm I'm just asking a question. Does that make more sense to you, Council Member Bert, or you don't care either way? >> Yeah, I think it's probably I mean, thank you. I think it's probably a distinction without a difference. So, okay. Okay. So everybody's good with voting on this way. All right. So we'll start with uh the main motion before it was split or do we need to start with the split or does it matter? >> Uh I I think you can vote in either order. >> Okay. Let's take it from the top. Please call the role. >> All right. [snorts] Voting on the first part of the motion. >> Council member Lowing. >> Yes. >> Mayor Vinker. >> Council member Bert. Yes. >> Council member Liths. >> Yes. >> Council member Stone. >> Motion carries. >> Voting on the second part of the motion. Council member Bert. >> No. >> Council member Lowing. >> Yes. >> Council member Lethods. >> Vice Mayor Stone. >> Yes. >> Council me Mayor Vinker. >> Motion carries. >> All right. Okay. Thank you all for persisting through that. I know it was a little painful, but we're going to take a break. We're going to go get dinner. Uh, see, [sighs] we'll be back in 15 minutes. All right. Thank you all. question. >> Oh, wait. I think there's one. Since we changed courses, I'm certainly willing to listen to Mr. Barack. Is there anybody? >> We have one request to speak. >> Okay. Excellent. Welcome, Herpa. heartbeat. >> I'm doing this off the cuff because um I I thought when I saw the since you're having a meeting with your your city attorney and uh different uh rules applied to different cities and I recall what for example >> excuse me I want to be able to hear you. Could we have some uh more quiet in the chambers please? Thank you so much. All right. Sorry Mr. Brock. Go ahead. >> Okay. And I I may be getting this wrong, but uh you just passed at least one urgency ordinance which said four-fifths of the members present were sufficient. In my recollection, I thought in PaloAlto it was four-fifths of the total council. Uh for example, uh city attorney said that the other ordinance would take effect, you know, 31 days after the second reading, but we once had a city attorney from a city where it was 30 days and hired interns would start drafting ordinances 30 days. So I think you one would need need to check. I don't have a copy of the charter and code available for me to look at to confirm my memory of what what's required for an urgency ordinance. But since you're meeting with the attorney, it probably be about something in in this city's charter and code rather than some others. I just wanted to bring that up and I apologize if I'm wrong about that. >> Thank you, Madam Clerk. Is that uh do we have any other uh public comments on AA1? >> No, we have no further requests to speak. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you very much. May I have a motion to move into close session, please? >> Some moved. >> Second. Thank you both. Would you please call the role? >> Council member Lethod Hayes. >> Yes. >> Council member Rectal. >> Council member Lowing. >> Council member Burton. >> Yes. >> Mayor Vinker. >> Council member Lou. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Stone. >> Motion carries. Five to two. [laughter] >> Two absent for the vote. >> Yeah. Five. I think five. Oh. >> All right. Thank you. All right, I'm going to call us back to order. And I first want to uh recognize the city manager whose comments I skipped over in my eagerness to do our closed session. Um, but actually before I do that, I need to report out from our closed session. So, I uh want to report that the city council authorized the city attorney to join an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff's position in County of Santa Clara versus US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement case number 26 CV5604. All right. So now, Mr. City Manager, your comments. >> Yes. Uh thank you, mayor. I would just note for the record that material has been distributed in the agenda packet. So given the hour, I'll dispense with comments and we can proceed with your last action item. >> All right. Thank you very much, Mr. City Manager. We appreciate that. And we will look at your uh uh slides which I believe are also online for people to access. Yes. Okay. So we will move on to action item item 24 which is uh to consider a resolution regarding the 2026 bicycle and pedest pedestrian transportation plan. So uh welcome staff. I don't know which one of you is going to pick it up but I will turn it to you. Welcome. >> Thank you mayor members of the city council. My name is Aussie Arce senior transportation planner with the office of transportation. I am excited and pleased to present tonight the final 2026 bicycle and pedestrian transportation plan for your formal adoption tonight. This comprehensive document serves as the city's 10-year action plan and strategic framework to establish a comfortable, connected, and safe active transportation network in Palo Alto. I'm joined tonight by chief transportation official Rio Lo and transportation planning manager Sylvia Starlac. Next slide, please. The purpose of tonight's action item is to present the final 2026 bicycle and pedestrian transportation plan, also known as the BPTP, for formal consideration and adoption via resolution. Adopting this plan tonight formally establishes our city's vision for active transportation while simultaneously positioning Palo Alto to successfully capture competitive regional and state infrastructure funding. Next slide, please. This has been a robust multi-phase process that began in 2023. Our planning process has focused heavily on updating previous frameworks, including the 2012 BPTP to reflect modern travel behaviors through an extensive four-phase engagement campaign spanning public workshops, online surveys, collaborative field tours. Staff gathered more than 1,000 distinct community comments. The resounding mandate from our residents was clear. Prioritize safety, especially for our student population and further develop a continuous low stress network that functions seamlessly for all users of all ages and abilities. Next slide. When we brought the plan to you on December 1st, 2025 of last year, you spoke positively about the plan's direction, and you gave us clear direction to refine several critical areas. We heard you and the final plan before you tonight reflects exactly how we have responded within the plan's text itself. First, you asked for a proactive stance on ebikes and ecycles. We have expanded the plan to feature specific regulation, engagement and education strategies to safely manage the rapid growth and speed dynamics of ebikes and ecycles. Second, you asked for to total for tight local alignment. We have seamlessly locked this network into the San Antonio road area plan, the North Ventura coordinated area plan, the Midtown bike ped undercrossing at Elorado Avenue, and the Cubberly master plan to name a few. Third, we added concrete directives to audit existing policies within our 2030 comprehensive plan that could inadvertently restrict safety improvements. As detailed in the staff report, we closely re-examined policy T-4.1 regarding street access and verified that local authority under existing comp plan policies fully permits the installation of highly effective safety features such as neighborhood modal filters for our bicycle boulevards and student routes. Finally, we made vital project modifications based on your feedback, including prioritizing safe routes to school projects and expanding capital programming for dedicated pedestrian improvements. Attachment C of your final of your staff report provides more details on how staff incorporated council's feedback into the final plan document. Next slide. Moving into the core elements of the final plan, this consolidated framework establishes our actionable blueprint for combining structural network designs with immediate capital priorities. First, the primary strategy focuses our foundational design baseline away from high-speed complex arterials, focusing resources instead on neighborhood bicycle boulevards such as the flagship Bryant Street Bike Boulevard and the Park Boulevard bike. Second, rather than attempting to finance or construct the entire visionary network all at once, the 10-year implementation framework isolates 19 miles of core near-term enhancements. This sets us on a path towards prioritizing 25 prior priority bicycle projects, 24 targeted intersection and pedestrian crossing safety enhancements, and dozens of policies and programs specific to improving the walking and biking conditions in the city. Third, the plan explicitly elevates our pedestrian environments by establishing geographically distinct pedestrian districts for areas such as University Avenue, California Avenue, San Antonio Road, and the Mitchell Park Cberly corridors that will utilize a customized pedestrian toolbox focusing directly on sidewalk continuity, intersection crossing visibility, and neighborhood placemaking treatments. And the plan includes crucial programmatic strategy programmatic strategies to address the rapid adoption of ebikes and ecycles including programs around bike education, regulation and engagement. And lastly, it in it integrates with other city projects as mentioned earlier. And next step and finally looking forward to immediate next steps here pending council's adoption. Staff will publish an adopted final plan document. [gasps] Staff has initiated work to advance the plan's initial priorities for implementing. Thank you. including first uh these are immediate next steps regarding ebikes and ecycles microobility and youth safety. We are actively developing a comprehensive ebike and ecycle strategy which we will bring back to you as a da d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d dedicated agenda item. This is in addition to developing educational material with PAUSD and PD's enforcement and encouragement efforts as resources allow. Second, staff has initiated work on potential improvements along Bryant Street. This work will feed into a broader effort to update the city's 2001 traffic calming policy in order to increase the responsiveness and efficiency of traffic calming work in the city. Third, staff is seeking grant funding and advancing projects prioritized in the BPTB through the city's capital improvement program CIP process. And this includes the South Palo Alto bikeways demonstration project on East Meadow and Fabian Way and the Midtown Bike Pet Undering and El Dorado Avenue. And lastly, staff is also activating BPTP policy IC1-3 on payback reform to return to council with an evaluation and reform proposal for payback to optimize committee efficiency and effectiveness. Now, at this time, I'd like to introduce the city's chief transportation official, Rio, to discuss the council's recent council direction on Carfree Calav, which is a specific part of the BPTP since Calab has, is, and has historically been a part of the city's citywide bicycle network. >> Thank you. I wanted to say uh thank you to everybody who's helped to develop this plan. Thank you to Aussie, thank you to the council, to the boards and commissions, and hundreds of people who weighed in on this project. Um, I also wanted to acknowledge that we heard two different sets of feedback on CALB. So, I just wanted to kind of tease that out a little bit. Um, in relation to the BPTP on December 1st, uh, a council directed staff to provide bike access slow speed 8 miles per hour and with an alternative uh, with additional efforts to boost um, the performance of Cambridge Avenue as a supplementary route. Um and um on June 1st um council also deliberated on Calv um outdoor activation standards and expressed concern about the use of ebikes along um this corridor with direction to return with a bike free design. And so in terms of the ebikes, there's a number of strategies that are covered in the BPTP and also we've started collaborating with the school district and and with the police department on you know addressing some of these issues. Actually what sometimes appear as ebikes are actually emotos which are illegal. So there's a lot of outreach that needs to happen and that we're starting to work on um in in that regard in terms of uh next slide please. In terms of um the other part which is to do with the uh Calav design, staff is recommending that council adopt the plan as is. Um and this implies a further conversation about Calav. Um and so I think this is the this is the community street approach which is shown on the left here. there's already quite a bit of work that's happened um in terms of setting up the um the intersection and encroachment permits with with CALR. Um the other alternative and and um there are uh options that we can consider in terms of the walk only time. So we we'd assume that it would be walk only during the farmers market and the Thursday night events. Um but there could be other times that we also consider it as a walk only. um uh street as well. Um the other alternative would be to adopt the plan with direction to make revisions to the BPTP as necessary to align with the June 1st direction on Cal A and Cambridge. And this is the option on the right of the screen here, which would also imply that we need to return with a budget item midyear or in um fiscal year 2028. So again, um really uh appreciate your tireless service to the city um especially late at night and um and also the engagement on this project and staff are recommending approval of the resolution to adopt the BPTP. Thank you. Oh, next slide. Sorry. All right. Thank you, Mr. Arce. Thank you, Director Low. Thank you, Miss Darlac. It's nice to have you all here and really appreciate this extraordinary body of work that's summarized here. Apologies for the hour and thank you for hanging in with us on it. Um colleagues, let's do a a round of clarifying questions if there are any and then we will move to public comment and then back to the deis. So, does anyone have any questions they'd like answered before we move to public comment? Council member Bert. >> Yeah, thank you. Um so uh on the CLAB question um as we discussed last meeting we have uh a problem of uh the safety of pedestrians and primarily ebikes or fast bikes but most of all the ebikes most of all in the evening. Calav precoid was its busiest period was during an extended lunch hour period several two three hours. Now the busiest period is in the evening. Um but uh since our last meeting, I've heard from a number of folks involved with safe routes to school that there are still a very significant number of school commuters that are using Calav uh in the early morning and then uh in the later afternoon. Do we have any idea how heavily it is used by school commuters? Um, we don't have specific counts, but it is part of the the school access route for Green Middle School and for >> half of our middle schoolers bike to school >> and and about 50% of them ride to school. So, but I'm not sure how many come through that way. >> Okay. Um, and then um there's one other Oh, uh I think you mentioned PA USD. I've heard that uh they are exploring uh prohibition of uh maybe it's class two and three ebikes being uh ridden to campus. Um do you have how serious are they on that? >> That's also what they've told us. Um it sounds like they're serious, but I don't think it's been to the board. Um, so what we've heard is that the the they're considering a prohibition of class two and three in fiscal year 2027 and then um class one, two, and three in fiscal year 2028. >> Oh, I don't know if I agree with the one, but I'm glad on the class two and three. Um, okay. There is an area where we we have the um uh separated bikeway birectional uh wrapping around Green Middle School and then it ends at California Avenue and doesn't extend to Garland which is the route that you need to get to to take the Ross Road um Boulevard. Um, my recollection is when when that was first being considered, the gap between Calab and Garland was considered. There was some neighborhood push back and it got dropped. Is has that been re-examined? I didn't pick up. Is that part of what's considered in the plan of um reooking at extending that to make it so that we don't have the kind of a gap there. So the um the the segment that you're talking about is between Newell and Lewis, not Ross because Ross dead ends. Are you talk? >> No, no, that's >> Sorry. >> No, I'm talking about on Middlefield. >> Oh, from Middlefield to Garland. >> From Calav to Garland on Middlefield. >> Sorry. >> There's just I think it's only two or three houses there, right? And yet, >> yeah, we we have not um looked into that. >> Okay. Yeah, my recollection is that was part of the original plan and then it got dropped because of some neighborhood neighbor push back. I I I just say I I don't typically see cars even utilizing that. And yet we don't our our our two directional bike route uh doesn't extend in a way that gets you at least onto Garland and a safer street. Okay. Um, well, I'll leave it there on on questions. Thank you. >> All right. Any other questions? >> All right. Let's move to public comment. Madame Clerk, do we have requests to speak? >> Yes, we do. Sorry, one moment while I calculate how many hands are raised on Zoom. 18. We have 18 requests to speak. Okay. Um, we're not going to go down to one, but I think we do need to go to one and a half minutes each. We don't have any groups, right? >> No groups. And actually a few have lowered their hand. So I one moment. Okay. I think that might be it. We have 12 um 11 requests to speak. >> Oh, then let's let's go with two minutes each. Thank you. >> Our first speaker is Ken J. Ken J. >> Our next speaker is Derek G. >> And thank you, sir, for hanging in with us tonight. >> Hi, I'm I'm Derek Gurnie and I'm the father of a child who uses Calav to uh as a safe route to school along with several other children. So, uh, my parental instincts became, uh, pretty activated last week when I learned that the council directed staff to make, uh, Calav pedestrian only. Uh, this instinct led me to fire off an email that, uh, perhaps is a little inmperate, and I apologize if it was maybe a little harsh. Um, but I think the spirit of my email stands that um, I think we really need to if we were to close Kalav to to bikes, we would need to first have in place a safe, attractive and viable alternative for for children to use to to get to school. When I think of the those other alternatives and their imposed cons, I think it when I think about it, I think it makes much more sense to make Calav a place where pedestrians and cyclists can just safely interact. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Shauna M. >> Hi, council members. Um, I'm also a parent and I wanted to speak about our downtown areas. Um, reading the BPTP report, I have seen that the most dangerous areas that are called out are our downtown areas. And um I would love the council to um take a look at that and maybe focus more on those areas and make sure those routes are safe for our students and um our kids. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Janette S. >> Hi council members. I'm speaking as a resident and also as a parent of a Addison Elementary. Um I took a look at the plans and realized that there are absolutely no considerations um for those kids heading to Addison Walter Hayes and to Green Middle School from Palo Alto North. Um, and I think that we should truly look at all schools and creating safe bike routes for all kids to be able to ride kids or ride their bikes to school. My daughter this year had a very near miss with a car that was terrifying on Webster Street. Webster which not only has um several conolescent homes but also elementary schools and there are definitely needs to have proper diligence to ensure that we're looking correctly at truly dangerous routes including downtown to protect our children and to allow them the joy of riding their bikes to school safely. Our next speaker is Bradley. Thank you, Madame Mayor and Council members. I'm speaking as a resident and a parent and uh my uh daughter's route to Green Elementary would run through Cal Avenue. And while I acknowledge a viable a valid concern for safety uh for pedestrians, um it is my understanding that this concern is to do with ebikes, class 3 ebikes, illegal ebikes primarily, and that the the council itself u when surveying Calv found that only one or to bicycles at at higher speeds than uh would be deemed safe, even passed through when Congressman Lou was was um recording data there. my daughter will have to if if the plan um is changed to a bike free avenue, my daughter will have to ride on a on Cambridge if she wishes to ride her bicycle to school in the presence of cars. So, my uh my read on this is that it's an overreaction that we're trying to solve a safety problem for pedestrians, which is minimal and very narrow, and that instead we're creating a new safety problem for children, putting them on alternative routes where cars are going to be sharing the streets. And frankly that is uh that seems to be um in opposition to the spirit of the plan which was introduced which put safety as the top concern. Also um I ride that route to get to the train. So it's not only children but primarily I'm concerned for the children. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Amy A. Good evening, council. Thank you first of all to staff and council and all the boards and hearings for the for the years of work on the bike plan. Um, tonight I specifically want to speak to the Cal a access for people on bikes. We need this access preserved because it represents such a large piece of our overall network. It connects to the Alma underpass to Cal Train to the Bike Bowl Vadarm Park and also to the new bike lanes on El Camino. Please continue this access for the majority of us riders who are safe, who do who are careful, who do look at the speed limit, who ride appropriately. Staff's plan presented on June 1st was well thought out and supported by the Lord Bright community. It made sense. Cambridge is not an appropriate alternative. It lacks direct intersection access to El Camino. Um, it doesn't connect to any of the other spots in our network where we want to get to. It also has I I lo I lost count. I believe there were 18 driveway openings last time I drove it. And those are real points where people have accidents. It's not an appropriate alternative. And I know so there's been discussion about time limitations perhaps on Calav, maybe limiting it after 5:00 PM, 6 PM, but these time limitations are an ineffective measure. I think we all know that there are no bike signs on Calav now and they are ignored. So I guess I would urge you to please have a second look at staff's plan that was presented on June 1st. it balanced the needs of so many users on the street. Um, and uh, please, if that's not appropriate and you look at Cambridge, make sure to really have a hard thought about the loss of parking, closing of driveways, all the things we need to do to make it safe. And I think you'll find that Calab becomes a more attractive option. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Cedric B. Uh good evening. Um I am a member of payback but I am speaking for myself. Uh thank you to everyone who contributed to this bicycle and transportation plan and I urge you to to approve it but to incorporate the recommendations from payback the bicycle uh and pedestrian advisory committee that are listed in attachment B including the items with which staff did not agree. Alan Wtel's email explains well why they should be included. Um otherwise as many have noted I was also very disappointed by the direction to explore a bike free cal a in reaction to a small minority of ebike riders going too fast. Calav is a very important bike network connector between neighborhoods, schools, bus and rail transit and it is an important bike attractor with its shops, restaurants and cultural destinations. The parallel routes are not as safe nor as convenient. Plus, there's the social aspect of hanging out on California Avenue and seeing your friends riding by. Greet them and improve your well-being and their well-being and strengthen the community. If the only way to access the area is by parallel routes and alleys, the street will lose some of its vibrancy. I would ask you to instead do outreach, education, and and enforcement of a reasonable speed limit like 10 miles per hour and directly address unsafe behaviors rather than diminish California Avenue's vibrancy and nor punishing all riders for the sins of a few. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Penny E. Penny E, you should be able to unmute yourself and speak. Moving to our next speaker, Ken K. Good evening, council. In support of the BPTP, I'm Ken Kersner, a local bike advocate. This plan is a big upgrade from 2012. The low stress network gets more people riding sooner with fewer trade-offs. Two requests. Um, first, ebikes didn't exist as a policy category in 2012, and the pace of micromobility has quickened. Please request staff to bring a midcycle update every three years with rider data, safety data, project status so we can course correct on a regular cadence and not in 2040. Second, on California Avenue, the threat is emotal throttle motorcycles banned under SB 586, not legal cyclists. Three quick best practice suggestions from other California cities. One, post no motor vehicle signage. Two, partner with uh PAUSD on a teen diversion program like Coronado's waving citations for a safety course. And three, deploy sensors to confirm that it's an e-oto problem, not a cyclist problem before adopting anything permanent. And last request, include updates as promised by CALR on El Camino bikeways in the year one work plan. I also wanted to make the council aware that the El Camino bikeways network into Menllo Park has a quick build segment from Sandill to Middle Avenue. On June 10th, this project was unanimously endorsed by the Menllo Park Complete Streets Commission and will come before the Menllo Park Council later in June. And I also wanted to invite the council to join our El Camino Real Community Rides currently Tuesdays at 6 p.m. and they'll shift to another night in July. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Peter R. >> All right. Good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Pete Rice. I'm speaking on behalf of the College Terrace Residents Association. Uh first, I wanted to thank staff and their team for all the hard work that went into the bike and ped plan. I know how much work these plans take and we appreciate the effort. Uh in general, we are very supportive of new and better bike and ped infrastructure and programs. Uh we recognize that walking and biking are a vital part of our transportation system. Uh two requests. Um we ask that uh the city address Stanford Avenue. Um, Stanford now has homes on both sides and as a school route. Uh, having roughly 2,000 ft between marked crossings does not meet the safety needs of our neighborhood. Crossings at Oberlin and Welsley were warranted back in 2004. Uh, we received speed humps instead. Uh, which are appreciated, but they're not enough. We still need marked crossings. Um and then finally on the California Avenue, uh we strongly oppose any bike ban. Uh it's an important carfree route for our kids heading to Green Middle School. Uh also for uh commuters and families and neighborhood residents that want to access Cal A. Uh moving bike moving people on bikes, especially kids off of a car-free street and onto streets with cars would make them less safe. uh these concerns about the reckless riding and emotos should be addressed directly. Um but a bike ban uh doesn't make any sense and it's not a proportionate safety response. Um so please keep California open for slow safe riding. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Alan W. >> Uh good evening mayor and members of the council. I'm Alan Wtel, a member of Payback, and I thank Cedric, the uh earlier speaker, for endorsing the comments that I have previously submitted in writing. Uh I'll use my time to uh briefly recap those comments. Uh at its May meeting, Payback recommended adoption of this plan with a number of changes and additions. Uh the vote for that was 12 to zero with one abstension. So I believe they should be taken seriously. Uh staff agrees with some of those recommendations but disagrees with others and I am asking the council to adopt all the recommendations that payback made in full. Uh I call your attention in particular to items B and C. B involves the entire roadway network. Uh the BPTP focuses almost exclusively on designated bikeways class 1 2 3 and four. But it's long been recognized that bicyclists need to ride on almost all roads because their origins and destinations don't always lie on bikeways. Uh there is ample scope to improve these roads to improve safety and continuity to make them part of the network to provide complete connectivity without designating bikeways. staff uh refers to the complete streets policy and the comp plan but nowhere in the BPTP are these items mentioned. So uh this is an important omission that the council can rectify. The other item item C concerns class 4 separated bikeways. There are significant concerns about the conflicts created by these bikeways between cars and bikes at intersections and driveways. uh the safe streets plan and others that staff refers to do not adequately address these issues. So payback expresses caution about them uh which I would like you to adopt. >> Thank you. >> Um I believe Penny E has been Yeah. >> Yeah. I was just asking if you could try her again and see if we can hear her. >> Penny E, you should be able to unmute yourself. We still can't hear anything. >> Okay. Yeah, she tells me she's having trouble. Uh she's uh something's keeping her microphone from working. Um but I know she did send us an email at 5:39 today. So I would just ask my colleagues to take note of that if we Penny one more time. Can we hear you? No. So with technical issues. Okay. Well, I'm sorry about that, but we will uh take note of your uh emailed comments. So, Madame Clerk, is that uh close out our >> Yes, that concludes public comment for action item 24. >> All right. Thank you so much. Okay, colleagues, uh bring it back to the deas for discussion motion and council member Lou. >> Thank you. Uh just starting with a quick question. What is the process going forward for making tweaks? Uh finding new opportunities, maybe working on some of the points addressed by public commenters around um access from downtown to green or uh the comments from payback members. Is there any venue or outlet to yeah re evaluate different parts of the plane over time? Um yeah, sorry. Um yes, there is as as each of the especially for the major projects, these are things that would come through some sort of engagement process. Um some of them would be coming, you know, to council for for the for the larger projects. And so that would be an opportunity for um tweaking some of those elements. >> That would only be for items, major items that are on the plan, but then smaller items or sort of more general policy changes like uh payback recognition be around trying to plan uh for safer streets as a default. um there wouldn't be a venue or a natural way for us to address that uh or think about those options short of a colleague's memo or something like that, right? Uh that's possible, but I think that there are other policy items that would be coming to council as well. So, uh for example, I'm expecting that we we will be having a a bike ordinance update at some stage. So some of those items could be fleshed out there if they if they're not caught here. >> I think I'm very sympathetic to many of the points from the public commenters and payback. Uh and I also really want to prove this tonight, but I don't want those extra comments to go into a black hole. So I would uh as we think about emotion or just as we think about general council priorities and what we prioritize for uh the coming years each year in priority setting find some way to re-evaluate um uh and bump in periodic updates to planning every few years. I I think uh that's a baseline and something that we owe to this amazing community that puts so much effort into this document that we know is great but should be continuously improving. Um and tonight I think we certainly should approve this document. Again we should be so proud of this. Um, we should really connect this document with the bigger picture goals of uh how much safer and more vibrant uh and just pleasant our city can be with a really thoughtfully built uh comprehensive bike network. And uh yeah, we should be ready to commit the capital. uh we should be ready to uh find uh other phases or tweaks uh in the coming years. One point that I will uh just ceue up because it seems like one of the big discussions of tonight is Calav. I'm really grateful to to the members of the public who came and spoke about the safety concerns of uh effectively banning bicycles from Calav. I really stand by my previous comments. I think we can make the street much safer than it is. We can support businesses. We can protect vulnerable road users. And we can also investigate speed limits, time limitations. We can enforce on illegal emot. We can uh build surfaces that discourage fast cycling. Uh I think we can do all of those things. Um I am usually loathed to change a council decision, especially one that was so recently made. and uh that had pretty wide support. But I think at this time we have a lot more information. We've also been operating under this assumption that we would allow slow cycling on CAV for uh don't quote me exactly but maybe a couple of years. And so I don't think we're going to really be upsetting the decision we just made or uh uh throwing a big wrench in the process if we gently walk back at least some aspects of the decision to ban bikes on KAV. Um uh so uh I'll leave that there and uh be happy to chime in later on a motion if that helps. Right. >> Thank you, Council Member Rectal. Uh the one of the public commenters, oh, first of all, thank you. Good work. I do appreciate it. It's been a long haul, but it's it's very good product. Thank you. Um one of the public commenters talked about CALR improving the uh El Camino bike lanes. Can you give us more details what what the plan is on that? Did Cal Train commit to doing something after one year? Yeah, I think you're referring to I think it was Ken Kushner who mentioned that um CALR is supposed to report back on usage on the bike lanes. >> Okay. It's just a usage. It's just they're not proposing ways of improving or anything like that. >> I don't think so. I mean, if they were not performing well, then we would expect them to fix it, but >> I think it's about the counts. And will we get those counts? Will council get the counts that uh >> I I don't know. I we will absolutely share. >> I would be very interested in that. >> We would share them. >> Okay. Um clerk, can you go to packet page 934? This is a a map that I both love and hate. And and what it's showing is it's showing the dangerous routes or the high injury network. And the problem is that some of the high-end networks are like by Bryant just because we have so much traffic on it. And so we don't know is it dangerous per capita or is it just the fact that we have so many bikes on it that by just even a safe bike route is going to have incidents. And so it's not very actionable. It's good information, but it's not very actionable. If we had either another map that showed the density or preferably another one that had the per capita incidents, uh that would be much more useful. But this is kind of just telling you, yeah, there's a lot of bikers on Lomma Verde and a lot of bikers on Bryant and uh so I don't know how you can improve that. Do you have count datas for how many people go on Bryant each day? [sighs] >> So you're referring to figure 14 which is the bicycle and pedestrian high injury network. And >> exactly and we show the locations where there's a lot of injuries but some of those locations have a lot of bikers on them. >> Correct. So just the fact there's a lot of incidents doesn't necessarily mean they're inherently unsafe. It's just the fact that you have a lot of bikers. There's more chances for injuries. >> Correct. And this high injury network analysis is uh best practice that's used in all long range planning efforts. So it followed the similar methodology, but you are correct. Higher usage could lead to higher >> So do you have counts of how many people use each of these bike routes? >> [sighs] >> We we did some counts back in 2024. Uh but what we did for this planning effort was we used uh big data called replica which created a methodology to try to better understand how people move locally. >> Okay. I mean that. So, do you have a table or some data that's usable that would be able to list how many bikers a day use Bryant? How many bikers a day uh use some of these other routes, Meadow Drive, for example? >> Not by day. And traditional count data is relatively expensive. And so, the city doesn't period periodically conduct citywide bicycle counts, unfortunately. So, if I'm looking at this and I'm a bicycle planner and I'm trying to say this is going to tell me what bike routes are dangerous, how do I determine that? >> How do you determine which bicycle routes are dangerous? >> Yeah, by looking at this map. Because this tells me the gross number of incidents, but it doesn't tell me how frequent they are. Yeah. the it doesn't tell me the rate you know what percentage of people who use that get injured >> right this is where collisions have occurred the dates are 2018 to 2022 is a 5year time frame for this um >> but do you do you understand what I'm saying that if I'm a planner I want to go after the places where people have a high probability of getting injured and this doesn't tell me anything about probability it just tells me the gross numbers and so it's skewed by the number of riders that take those routes I understand what you're saying. What you're asking for is actually one of the holy grails of transportation planning or bike planning because no one has the denominator to like norm the number that you want. Um so >> I mean we can't use replica or anything else or even >> could you send an intern out there and have them count bikes? >> I guess I mean it's it's a difficult thing. I mean this is there are some >> this this seems like such a lost opportunity because it's almost there. >> Yeah. So there are some cities that have invested for example in in eco count or uh counters totem pole counters where they tell you how many bicyclists have come past there that day. We don't have that. I mean we have so many cyclists on so many streets. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Okay. My time's up. Thank you. Council member Bert. >> Thank you. Uh just a follow-up thought on Council Member Rectal's concern. Well, one I doesn't rep replica does not count bikes on routes. Okay. Um we actually had had uh a detection system like that in 2014 and 2016. So we actually had it a dozen years ago and I don't recall why it went by the wayside, but does seem appropriate. I I will say there's another factor for consideration. So, Council Member Rectal is correct that uh the the data that we have on this table doesn't um show really the the comparative risk per ride, but it does show where you'd get the most benefit for a particular pro protective measure because it is multiplied by the number of riders. Um so uh I too would like to know the comparative risk but but I I just bear that in mind as well. I also thought um maybe I got wasn't listening closely to one of the speakers but I thought one of the El Camino Rial considerations is that Menllo Park is looking at extending protected lanes which would bring more volume. But for us when we discussed it, a lot of the reason for embracing this was the close to 2,000 new housing units that were planning on El Camino that would uh disproportionately use those lanes. Um I wanted to go to this question on T-4.1 which is about um street closures and um payback had had wanted to have clearer language that filtering was not a street closure. Staff respond and said no we don't interpret it that way. problem is the same language in T41 was there in 27 and 2018 when the the Ross Road uh bike boulevard was being considered. The chief transportation official at that time interpreted that language in the opposite way. Said that filtering is closure and therefore we couldn't do filtering. So I'm glad that staff has interpreted the way they do now. But I don't see a problem with providing the clarifying language of payback because contrary to what staff said, there is there must be ambiguity or we wouldn't have those two transportation officials interpreting it two different ways. I agree with your interpretation. So don't get me wrong, but I think why not put it in there and eliminate what is was clearly some some level of ambiguity that allowed a different interpretation. Um and then um I did want to go to the uh Calab issue because I was really reluctant to at our last meeting on this say I I think we need to restrict biking on Calab because I had fought for three years to try to have it stay part of the plan. We had never done anything to do calming. We have no physical measures. We don't have signage on speed limits. We have contradictions between a sign that says, "Please walk your bikes and recently painted green bike lanes there." Um, so we haven't really helped matters that way, but I'm very one I was until hearing from so many me members of the public, I wasn't aware how heavily it must be in early morning and to some degree in the later afternoon used for safe routes to school and some other commuting. Um, and hearing that the PAUSD is wanting to move forward on this restriction, I'm interested in what actually Penny Ellson had put in writing on this uh a temporal closure that you already said, well, when we have the the evening um uh events once a month and the we already and on the um farmers market, but really whether we should consider that after 6:00 it's a no bike area and it's signed. Appreciating that we would have that in conjunction with signage on uh and and um calming measures when it is open and that there's no panacea. I mean we have people drive on the freeways at 80 miles an hour even though we have speed limits. That doesn't mean we don't have a speed limit. Um, so I I'm I am uh interested in this this concept of the calming measures, the school restrictions and the temporal closure as what might be the right balance. There really is a currently a danger in the evening. It's contrary to what some of the speakers said, it's not rare that we have u essentially the class three bikes and they're not necessarily just the electric motorcycles. they are class 3 bikes either altered or unaltered and it's a danger. So I think we have to figure out how we address the two things together. Um I also did want to uh bring up one other intersection that I'm not sure has been identified. New and Embaradero. Um when cars are or bikes are coming northbound, I'll call it on new to cross Embaradero, they come around and there's a bend there and it's blind. And um I I would just like to request that we add addressing safety measures there, whatever those may be. I don't want to engineer it, but it's a problem that I see regularly and I think it's it's a significant problem. Um, and then I I one of the things I've been doing the last couple weeks is reading some of the studies on that were very interesting and that basically have shown that Cherros are not effective and can be actually counter to safety and that merely painted bike lanes without protection or at least without a buffer area also not enhancing safety. And these have been two measures that have been widely adopted uh in you know all kinds of jurisdictions for the last what decade or two and the studies are now showing uh they they aren't working and even the sheros can be and some of these can be counterproductive um for reasons that they explain in the studies. So, I do really embrace us focusing on uh class one and four lanes and if we have painted bike lanes to really try to design in buffers because those do help even if they're not a physical barrier. Um, so I think those are uh my comments at this time. Thank you. Uh, oh, one other thing. I'm sorry. Uh Penny Elson had recommended that there really be a wording added on uh on the San Antonio area access to the Cal Train station. And I do think that's very important. >> Okay, friends, we've worn you out. I have no lights. So, I'm just going to make a couple quick questions and then I'll go back to Oh, good. Thank you. Um uh um I'm intrigued, Council Member Bert, by what you just said about the Cherros because that had always kind of been my instinct that they don't feel safe. So, it's interesting that now there's that uh analysis that sort of bears that out. Um I also uh agree about New and Embaradero Road. I live quite near there and have had several sort of awkward circumstances because of the the angle of the intersection and so then sometimes bicyclists will use a crosswalk on the opposite side of where you think they are but they're going faster. It's just an awkward intersection for bicycles. And of course we had one tragic instance which I don't think was the result of bike lanes. Um anyway, um you know, the I think we're all um really grateful for and pleased with the um the work product before us. Um and this big issue seems to be around the Calav bike lanes. Um and I mean honestly I'm conflicted about it. I have always had some concerns as to how the bikes would interact with the pedestrians there. Uh, you know, I I liked the meandering, I'll call it, uh, bike lane that would slow them down. Um, but it's still a little awkward for me to sort out how they interact one with the other. But um you know I I'm very um concerned about the parents concerns that have been expressed tonight. Um I don't think I had appreciated how many school children used that route. And I was thinking more of adults um or people going there sort of as a destination to play if they were school age but not you know not necessarily on a commuting route. So, um there isn't um an easy alternative there uh for volumes of school kids. So, that's one I would like to hear more about. But I think that's something that we need to we we need to come away from this with some sort of either plan to further evaluate it or a revision of our decision whether or not it's just to um eliminate uh ebikes but let other bicyclists through or or all but class one uh ebikes something like that. I am certainly open to hear more from my colleagues on that um because I I think it's a quite a conundrum as to what to do on that front. And now that I have two lights, uh, I will go to Council Member Lowing. >> Okay. Thank you. [cough and clears throat] This has been such a massive effort for so many years and to see it come to fruition, particularly on our last night uh before break. Seems like everyone's getting to a finish line here on our bikes and and so on. So im immense thanks and um I wouldn't think of adding something something substantive to this but I also want to just point out areas that I really appreciated. It's extraordinarily strategic uh and comprehensive, but at the same time, you did a great job on coming up with very specific details and programs and [clears throat] you know where you say first of all strategically on back page 939 you say all ages and abilities bikeway system and you put that stake in the ground. It's for all ages and abilities and I really like that. put that on on U 967 here I thought was terrific where you put in a near miss reporting program you know not just that you're going to kind of take a look at it but there's a specific set of programming um that that you've done around that so that's what I meant by being both strategic and program detailoriented so to me that just raises the quality of this [clears throat] um that said to customer Lou's point there are going to be things that come up. Um, and first, you know, be assured, council member, that we're we're still going to do those things even if they aren't in this uh uh in this plan as we get into new neighborhoods and stuff like that. But yes, it should be incorporated every few years as, you know, version 1.1 and and so on. So, [clears throat] we're not going to back off on safety in in new neighborhoods because it hasn't made the the publication of this book yet. Um, so I'm just I'm just really impressed. Just [clears throat] back on Calav, I understand the constraints, but and and we're going to have to sort it out and maybe it is certain times of the day, but it I I understand the the debate, I should say, not the constraints. [clears throat] Um on that um the transportation official, chief transportation official said that if we go with no bike lanes, then we need more budget. And I didn't understand that because if there's no bike lanes, it seems like there's less to do. So if we went with the June one motion of uh last week, why would you need more budget after that? um because the the motion was to come back with a redesign and um we actually completed the we had we thought we'd completed the >> okay >> design. >> Okay. And alternatively, I think there's also 100% agreement that Cambridge is not ready for prime time. So in any case probably in addition to whatever we do on Calab, we might want to be doing something on [clears throat] Cambridge. But if we don't do it on Calap, then we have to spend some money on Cambridge to to make it safe and make it more more travelable around the the bad pavement and the cars and all that stuff that we thought about. So, um that that's another one of the considerations at this point for maybe allowing school kids, you know, 8 to five to come down there under five miles an hour. [clears throat] But just great job and glad to have it here to vote for it. Thanks, Council member Rectal. >> Okay. First, that one that affects me directly, the cross traffic across bike lanes. There's on Wilky Way, there are some culde-sacs that don't have stop signs and Door Dash drivers come out of there in the evenings and just blow across the bike lane. And I really think that every intersection on a bike lane should either um be a four-way stop or a two-way stop for the crossing traffic. I don't see any reason why they should have a rightaway to buzz through there because they don't stop and look for me. And so that's really dangerous, but actually a really simple way of adding safety, making a four-way stop. It's two signs. It's really simple. So I think we should look into that. Um uh the El Camino Way buffered bike lane. I like the idea that's really kind of tight, but there's parking is so tight over there, especially now after losing the parking on El Camino Riale that I think the neighborhood is just going to have a fit if you try to take away parking to add a bike lane. Uh what do you think of that? What's feasibility of adding a buffered bike lane on El Camino Way? For example, in El on Cambridge, we're proposing the same thing, but there's options for parking there. There aren't nearly as many options in El Camino Way. So short of us designing the project here, we would consider repurposing some of those parking stalls to ensure there's adequate room for the bicycle facility, but that is just a consideration among other design considerations. >> Okay. Yeah, cuz people use those parking spots and the parking is just so tight there already. So, um, so in general, I mean, I like buffered bike lanes. As council member Bert was saying, that buffered bike lane is much safer than a regular bike lane. So, I like the concept, but on areas where parking is tight, uh, I I worry about the implementation of that. So, okay. Um, next, Bryant Bike Boulevard from Embaradero to downtown isn't a bike boulevard, it's a car boulevard. It's the people coming down from 101 on Embaradero. They turn there and they go fast down uh Bryant. It is not safe. And so if we could put some modal filters in there, that would be really good. We have Bryant a block over. I mean a Waverly a block over. I think it's doable. And so I really think that's something we should look at because it's a bike boulevard and it should be safe for bikes. And there's it's a car boulevard today. We yeah we agree and as noted in the staff report Bryant Street Bike Boulevard is on the immediate next steps and pro processes a project is already underway to look at Embaradero to Homer and really make it a true bicycle boulevard because we've heard similar from um from residents. >> Okay, I applaud you. I missed that. Thank you. Um, another thing, bike theft, or at least the fear of bike theft is another reason that people don't bike. And uh, so for example, well, do we have good bike theft data? I've never seen any reports that show how many bikes are stolen in Belo. >> The police department would have that data and I don't have that readily available. >> I mean, I would think that' be part of this bike report, wouldn't it? because that a lot of people tell me that their kid wants to go up to Redwood City for a concert and he has to drive them to the Cal Train station cuz they're worried about the bike stolen. >> Correct. Bike parking is a part of this planning effort. We're looking at it more from a activity center and demandbased. Um however uh working with our partners in the police department that is definitely something that we can look at as a part of that process. >> Okay. I do like the the bike hub at uh the Cal Train station. I've heard very good things of people who use that. Uh can we expand something like that elsewhere in commercial districts or >> God? >> Uh so we're part of the city's recent discussion on the new parking garage on Hamilton. Uh the design does include a bike room of sorts similar to what you're referring to. >> Yes, I would love that. So, please keep that in the design or at least considering in the design. >> Um uh any plans for daylighting areas? So, we'll have this extra area that you could have bike parking there. You could have bike rentals. Do we have any plans or plans to study that? >> Sorry. Sorry. You mean daylighting as in the corner daylighting? >> In the corner daylighting. By state law, if you have a daylighted area, you can use that for bike parking. >> Oh, yes. Yes. So, I think in um that is the plan. >> Okay. >> Um we don't have the staff for it right now, but we'll be able to soon. >> And the plan is to is this just downtown or this all over the city? >> So, the plan in terms of the daylighting is to focus first on school routes and bike boulevards. And where it's appropriate, we would consider adding bike parking. >> Okay. >> Y >> that that is good. That's a good use of it. It doesn't block the line of sight and bike parking is always good. Uh and the last one is uh a lot of maps were in there. None of the maps show the Bryant Street community center. They show the all the other community centers, but they don't show Brian. So, if you can cut and paste and throw a little bubble on that. Okay, that's all. Thank you. Anyone else? I think these folks need a vote, right? >> Council member Bert. >> Yeah. So, we've gone through some things that we may want to propose that be edits. Um, in terms of the process, uh, would if we have a set of amendments, are those then able to get folded into the plan and that would be the right recourse? >> Yes. Yeah, we can. You can, um, propose to adopt with specific amendments. >> Okay. >> Um, I'm ready to make a motion. >> Uh, so I would move adoption of the bike plan with the following amendments. And I guess on the first one um what's what's in the plan right now on Calab, we gave this other direction. Is that in the plan? >> No. So the the plan right now assumes that there is bike access along Calav. >> Okay. So I'll add that supplementally as just a direction not necessarily explicitly in the plan but kind of follow up to our previous meeting. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, um first um to uh evaluate um extension of the two-way bike track between on middle field between Calav and Garland. Second to and I'm I'm saying evaluate. I don't know if that's the nomenclature you want in the plan, but I'll let you decide that. Okay. Uh second um to look at um uh safety improvements in the uh at the uh new embarcodero intersection. um area. Third, to add the language that Penny Elson suggested on the um in the San Antonio uh station area to add the Cal Train station specifically. Uh next to add the payback language or something equivalent to it uh that clarifies uh what staff has already embraced on the interpretation of T-4.1 regarding filters not being closures. Um and um then to evaluate um stop sign or other protections when roadways cross bike boulevards and council member Rectal, was it just boulevards, not lanes as well? You said lanes, but >> Oh, I meant just bike routes. Okay. Bike routes and and that because it's an evaluation, it's not a hard and fast rule, but just to prioritize that. Um, and I think that covers it. I did want to just note one of the dilemmas, mayor, on, you know, you talked about, well, can we regulate class two or three? That's the problem. The state doesn't let local jurisdictions do those carveouts. Um unfortunately although the state is going to >> tighten that well and even the the state legislation uh this session uh is not addressing that either. They're embracing tightening up the rules on what is a class three basically. Um so I think that captures the um changes that I would propose. Did you want to say something else about protected bike lanes? At some point you mentioned class one and class 4 and >> Well, let me ask staff on that. Um, to what degree would you characterize the plan right now as moving us away from sheros and unprotected painted lanes to protected either class one or four or lanes [snorts] with buffers. >> And that last one, I'm not sure, is there? So I think that the last time that we came to council or maybe it was the time before um some of the direction was to lean in on the quiet streets. So we're focused on the bike boulevards which we think is cost effective there. There would be sharers but they would be in conjunction with other things to slow down the traffic the the motor vehicle traffic um and then focusing on where they cross uh the high injury network. Um there are a number of projects also related related to protected bikeways on those larger streets, but that's not the majority. >> This plan does uh address um protected lanes either class one or four more than we have in the past. >> Yeah. >> Oh, and I realized there's one other area that I want to comment on, which is the um the I guess class one off-road, right? um uh between uh between Stanford Research Park and the back of Chamalus. Uh and there's concern by neighbors there of intrusions and safety. I just want to say that that it doesn't have to be in the plan, but that I want to get out on the record that I would be supportive and I don't see any reason why that off-road path couldn't be up against um the the north edge, the commercial side, so 30 ft away or so from their back fences, and have a fence on the south side of the path that would make it secure so that their concerns over security into their backyards are addressed. So I I think that is something that would be logical and I would support on that path and it has lacked a name. I would I was stumbling and we keep calling it different names. Um I was thinking perhaps something like uh the Matador uh connector uh route um or something to that effect, but it needs a name that is descriptive and uh and suggests what it accomplishes even. That's I think all I had. >> We tried uh calling it the Bullpark Path extension, Chamala's Drive easement. Um but we'll give that a little more thought. Thanks. >> Yeah, ask Gemini. I probably have some good ideas. >> Yeah. >> Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Uh do you want to speak further to your motion? >> I don't. Thank you. >> Thank you. Do you want to speak to your second? No. >> Okay. Council member Lou, you had some comments. >> Uh, well, I was going to make a very similar motion, but I just have one question or a question and then a comment uh on the motion just so I can understand the point about the two-way bike track between Milfield between Kal and Garland. I see how that basically goes on the immediate south side of Green Middle School, but then on California Avenue on the immediate north side of Green Middle School, there is a protected bike lane in a little wiggle from a semi-protected wiggle from Middlefield uh or from Calav to Middlefield to North California Avenue. So >> I am probably just blanking about what the purpose of the garland is if it's parallel like one block or less than a block. >> The answer is um if you're attempting to utilize the Ross Road bike and the pedestrian signal that crosses or Oregon, um there's not a direct route to get to it. >> Ah oh yes. Okay, got it. And this yeah, >> at least on middlefield, this makes it safe. I don't know what the original plan was on how to deal with the Garland intersection, but there was a plan of sorts. >> Right. Okay. Right. Yes. And I can see how organav is just not good at all in that context and how Garland is the right way to Yes. Got it. Um, thanks for clarifying that uh and reminding me of that. Um, I'm also curious if you'd be open to accepting some of the payback language around uh uh bicycle friendly street design as a default as a city uh constructs or modified roadways. That's attachment B. Uh it is, I'll admit, not necessarily the most specific policy. Uh but I don't think it's really necessarily fully encompassed just by the city's complete street policy. I think um uh having some element of >> street guidelines thinking about widths thinking about sightelines as we repave and renovate streets uh is >> can be done in a loweffort high return way where at minimum for example when we repave and reconstruct new streets we can think about things like daylighting which may not have may not otherwise be a policy directive >> so I think that's a if you're open to it. something that I'd >> so um yeah Alan Wtel in his note to us made the point that um comp plan policy T-3.5 does state um language like um I think we would support um and then staff has made the points in response to payback that we do already have the city's complete streets policy addressing it. But then Allan says, "But that policy is not referenced in the bike plan." Is that correct? >> We'll need to double check on that. Uh, however, it's a existing city policy that we would follow like other policies. >> We This is the bike plan. if we got if it's a a critical part of what we're saying is our whole vision and plan, we ought to at least reference it. And I think that would so I would I would add uh what uh Council Member Lou was asking about, which is um the payback recommendation on um referencing uh the complete streets policy within the bike plan. Is that >> uh yeah, including bicycle friendly street design, the payback recommendation on bicycle friendly street design, I suppose. >> Okay. And both those things, the the complete streets policy and the bicycle friendly street design. And I'll just say that I'm now recalling that the argument that was made there is that we want to look at safe bicycle streets even uh when we're not specifically adding bike lanes or those particular measures but through paving or various different measures. were just conscious of um uh uh the bike safety of streets even outside those targeted areas without stipulating particular outcomes. >> And maybe one last question about the motion um uh by default because it does not mention uh the Calav close street portion uh we're sort of continuing the course. Do we need a separate motion or a separate discussion or how will we come back to the ideas of >> so I thank you for bringing that up. So these things are additions to and then in addition referral to staff to uh examine um uh uh uh safe slow biking on Calav being reconciled with conflicts from uh during peak pedestrian hours and with uh motorized bicycles and then I think you've kind of got some sense of considerations that we're now tossing out there. >> Sounds great. All right. Thank you. I think the motion does need to be does need a couple updates, but >> yeah. So, for number six, I think that was >> um the complete streets. Oh, there we are. bicycle access to San Antonio station. Yeah. >> Sorry. Mah, were you going to try and capture the calav just a referral to staff as opposed to these others being changes to the plan? >> Under number three, you can drop the rest of the sentence after to at the cow train station. There we are. Oh, and actually you can drop area as well. And then do you have wording? Maybe you can center the wording from number seven. Um, >> so that's for a separate one that the referral is for Cal A not for middlefield. So seven would be refer to staff uh evaluation of uh reconciling uh bike access particularly for school and other commutes with pedestrian safety. um during peak pedestrian use hours or particularly within that [snorts] [sighs] and I guess maybe it if it's helpful uh to add the council uh uh supports PAUSD pursuing restrictions on class 2 and three ebikes. >> I'll say we did have discussions in the city school leaison committee about this and both members we have been supportive uh the police >> but this gives the council the point here is this gives uh >> on the record that the council is >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. and we're excited with the school district's direction and >> that's great to know. So, if the city attorney is okay with that, then seconder, are you okay with that? >> Yeah. Uh, at the end of seven, can we say including the possibility of time of day restrictions? >> Yeah, I'd be fine with that. So the end is seven including the possibility of time of day restrictions [clears throat] >> if if I make >> to refer to calv >> calv. Yeah number seven should say should start with >> access along calav. Yeah. >> For reconciling bike access along >> all of seven is related to Calv. >> Um the carfree portion. >> Sorry. Carf free portion of calf. Yes. >> And number one should say on middle field not between middlefield. >> Oh yeah. >> Yes. Thank you. >> And get rid of the middle field. Get rid of the between >> the between before Milfield >> before >> first one. Keep going to the left. >> Y. >> Yeah. Okay, colleagues are good. >> I'm I'm good. >> Staff is good. Clerk is good. >> Number number six still says pay back, but I think you want the acronym. >> Oh, yeah. >> Oh, [laughter] >> yeah. Auto crack. >> I don't know. That looks better. >> Council member Lowing. >> Yes. >> Council member Lou. >> Council member Bert. >> Yes. >> Council member Rectal. >> Vice Mayor Stone. >> Yes. >> Mayor Vinker. >> Council member Lithmes. Yes. Motion carries unanimously. >> Wow. Yay. Yay. [applause] All right. Well, colleagues, bear with me for one more moment as we conclude. No, one more moment. We got a lot done tonight and in all our meetings this month. So, thank you. Our next meeting is on August 10th, and I wish each of you a very pleasant council break. But before we go, I want us to close I want to close us out in accordance with a very good idea that council member Bert had a couple weeks ago, but which I had forgotten by the time that very long meeting ended. So it is my pleasure to adjourn this meeting in memory of longtime PaloAlto resident Clarence B. Jones. He was Martin Luther King Jr.'s attorney, speech writer, and close adviser who is probably best known for having secreted Dr. King's famous letter from Birmingham jail out of the jail and distributing it. He also helped write Martin Luther King Jr.'s I have a dream speech and was a scholar at Stanford University. I am and uh I I know Council Member Lithcott HS perhaps others of you saw him less than a year ago uh on July 17th at a rally right here at City Hall's King Plaza and it was an honor to have him in our midst. So in his memory we are adjourned. Have a good summer.

Well, good afternoon everyone. I'm going to call our meeting to order. Today's meeting is a special joint meeting of the Climate Action and Sustainability Committee and the Utilities Advisory Commission. So, thank you staff for suggesting that we do this today. I think it'll be really helpful for us to hear from each other. So, uh, before we get started, uh, Madame Clerk, will you call the role? >> Commissioner Mets >> here. >> Commissioner Tuker >> Council member Bert >> here. >> Commissioner Gupta >> Vice Chair Phillips >> here. >> Chair Vinker >> Council member Lou >> here. >> Commissioner Croft >> here. Chair Mau >> present. >> Commissioner Sharf. >> For the record, all members of the climate action and sustainability committee and utilities advisory committee commission are present. >> That is impressive. Well done, people. All right. Well, uh so item one on today's agenda is going to be our joint item with participation from both the committee and the commission. After item one, we will take a fivem minute break and the utilities advisory commission will be released and after which the climate action and sustainability committee will reconvene to hear item two. So with that uh madame clerk, is there any public comment on items not on the agenda? >> We have no request to speak for general public comment. >> All right. Thank you. So it is our tradition at the climate action committee to do standing verbal reports. So, I will turn first to staff. >> Thank you, Chair Vinker. Uh Brad Higgleston, director of public works, and I do have a few updates to share. Uh so, first, in the first quarter of this year, 2026, the city was accepted into the Los Angeles Clean Tech Incubator City Climate Innovation Challenge uh to support development of a curbside EV charging pilot program. So, that is in the works. uh and staff intends to bring a preliminary plan for program design to the climate action sustainability committee uh for feedback in the second half of 2026. So, we'll be getting that onto an agenda. Uh next, I'm sure most of you are aware that the city celebrated the grand opening of its new Bryant Street Community Center last week, which houses both the teen center and a permanent dining room location for La Coma. But what you might not have heard is that this uh building was part of the non-residential packaged HVAC pilot program which uh replaced aging gas HVAC equipment with all electric equipment. So this was one of uh 13 projects, most of which are either completed or in the construction phase that staff estimates in some represent about 25% of probably the annual turnover for uh that type of units. Uh so staff is actually ending that program and transitioning over to what we're calling the advanced HVAC pilot program. But all of these projects that included the Bryant Street Community Center uh provided a lot of important data that's factoring into the design of that next U program. And lastly, I wanted to announce that we have some new members of our climate action action working group that serves as advisors to staff on the climate action and sustainability initiatives. Uh we've added several over the past couple of months. So they are uh David Cole from Carbon-Free PaloAlto, Hillary Glenn and Andrea Gara from 350 Silicon Valley PaloAlto team and Aiden Meow who's the current chair of the youth climate advisory board. So those are my updates and utilities director. >> Uh yeah, a couple updates for this group in general. Wanted to provide some really good news on uh carb extending cap and invest and knowing that program. So from 2027 to 2030, we'll actually be receiving a significant increase in the amount of allocations and revenues, it's going to be going up by 193% which will be several million dollars that we can use for uh affordability, looking for climate action programs as well. Um and and rebates for our customers. So we're really excited about that and we'll be that's part of the discussion today. Uh in addition, we have an induction cooktop rebate program. We're going to actually have a few booths over at the uh chili cookoff as well. So, you'll see staff there um trying to show our residents induction coach tops. And that completes my report. >> All right. Thank you very much. I seem to be having some kind of allergic something. So, if from time to time I step away, please forgive me. But, uh so now we turn to committee member comments and announcements. And I invite commissioners as well if there's something relevant that the body should know about uh either from another organization you've been uh involved with or some other thing relevant to this uh meeting. I welcome you to ring in. Now there's a light on down there and it says Bert, but I think it's coming. It's either inadvertently pushed or it is one of you. >> Okay. Does any any commissioner to my left or council member want to speak? Anybody to my right? Okay. Okay, I'm going to undo this light. And I will just say um I uh saw the director of Lacy last week and so had I known about our our uh the EV opportunity, I might have lobbied a little but uh that's great news. Director Ugleston, thank you. I just have one item that I would like to report and that is that after a lengthy competitive nationwide search, the uh commission of the Northern California Power Agency has appointed a new general manager and that general manager is Tony Zimmer. Tony has been with NCPA for more than 25 years. he up until yesterday uh or I guess until Monday uh serves as the assistant general manager of power management at NCPa. So we had quite an extensive um recruitment process and interview process and I wanted you all to know uh about that change. Uh Randy Howard's last day I believe is today. um the outgoing general manager and uh I exchanged uh emails with Tony yesterday and have invited him to come to PaloAlto which he says he will do. So uh for those of you who would like to meet with him, we will let you know when that will come to pass. Okay. Anybody else? All right. Seeing no lights, we can move on to our first joint action item. >> Sure. Okay. So, good afternoon. Uh, commissioners and council members, Kylie Nose, assistant city manager. I just wanted to kick off today's item and ultimately this joint session uh at a high level. Um, and well, today is really a part of staff and the council's continuous um, strategic planning effort about how the city will reach its climate goals and the resources that are necessary to achieve them. Um while we've made a lot of progress to reducing our emissions, it will need more time uh to achieve its 80% goal, um whatever strategy and timeline that ultimately the council and the community chooses to reach this goal, it's really going to be important to balance climate progress and affordability as we navigate this. And so we wanted to invite the two bodies, the UAC and the committee to discuss this together to help give staff joint feedback on the scope of this upcoming modeling effort. Uh this really is our attempt to ensure both bodies have the information they need later this year to advise the council um on both utility impacts as well as emission benefits of these strategies. So with that um we'll kick off the joint session and turn it over to staff for the presentation. Thank you. Uh, thank you, Assistant City Manager NOSA. My name is Jonathan Oenshine. I'm the assistant director for climate action, and I I'm going to talk to you about the um the some of the strategic planning we're going to do this year. So, this year, we want to help the city council decide uh if they want to set a different timeline for achieving the 80% emissions reduction goal and what role they want the city to play in achieving that. So today we're going to talk about six proposed strategies for communitywide electrification that achieve the 80% goal on different timelines and uh whose costs we plan to evaluate using the SCCAP funding model. Now we're not use we're not asking for a recommendation today on which one of these policies to follow. We only want feedback on the range of policies so we can be confident when we return with the results later this year that you have the information you need to make policy recommendations. And we're planning to return in December or early 2027 uh with the results. We are planning to discuss the utility impacts uh of each strategy with the UAC at that time and then have the sustainability committee provide recommendations to the city council on which strategy to pursue. And that'll enable us to make sure that the next climate action work plan which starts in 2028 aligns with that long-term vision. Next slide please. All right. So modeling climate action at community scale with all the different interrelated costs and impacts is really hard and there aren't a lot of community scale models out there to draw from. that our two prior modeling efforts have given us a much stronger um understanding of communitywide electrification and we're uh well positioned to lay out some actionable options this year. So our first effort back in 2020 was a partnership between staff and a consultant AECOM. Uh at that in that study, we were only able to identify 72% reductions. And while we were still able to make some preliminary cost estimates with that information, uh staff didn't have the knowledge and time to dig as deeply as we'd like and the consultant didn't have the bud the uh capacity and the budget to do such a comprehensive analysis. But we identified some good early areas to focus on uh and we identified our knowledge gaps as far as programs go. And then we identified the knowledge gaps we needed to focus on in the next study. Then starting in 2024, we contracted with E3 and WDAN to fill in those knowledge gaps uh through studies of EV charging needs and electrification opportunities in the multif family and non-residential sector. And we also had them build out a communitywide funding model for us. Now, as part of that effort, we had uh we had to model a few illustrative scenarios with a focus on the 80 by30 goal uh which we presented to the um the sustainability committee late last year and to the council um earlier this year. Now, we learned a lot about the financial dynamics of communitywide electrification from these scenarios, but they were not intended to provide a consultant-driven definitive answer for what the city should do. We wanted that policy conversation to be staff driven and that's the conversation that we're having this year. So um as we noted earlier, we've achieved quite a bit on our greenhouse gas goals thanks to those early studies and pilots uh with the biggest contributor still the reduction in our electric portfolio emissions followed by high rates of EV adoption in PaloAlto and remote work as well which drives down VMT. Uh we still have a long way to go on building electrification. Um but we've got and that's the toughest area and the one where we do have the most influence locally but we've gotten a great start with about 6% of Palo Alons having electrified an appliance already and programs getting off the ground recently in the commercial and seen the multifac family sector as well. So our goal with this exercise is to build on that past progra progress and figure out how to make it an ongoing practice. Next slide please. So generally what we found in our prior studies and pilot programs is that while good voluntary program designs can accelerate adoption and adoption rates are up five to 10 times from where they were when we just had plain old rebate programs. They can only do so much and regulations are also needed. And then when dealing with community scale programs, upfront rebates require a great deal of upfront funding and they have other issues as well. Um that it would exceed current city resources if we wanted to scale those programs up uh citywide. But we also found that based on 2024 assumptions, electrification is a net community benefit, meaning that the long-term benefits uh offset the increased upfront investment. And this makes sense when you think about the long-term savings for maintaining just one energy system in your homes and your community rather than three systems. But there are transitional issues um in trying to transition from one system from three systems to one system. The benefits are distributed unevenly. Some people see a net benefit, others don't. And uh these are based on 2024 assumptions. So some of these insights might shift as we update our assumptions to reflect the current policy environment. Um, but we don't want to focus on the net community benefit in the 2026 modeling. The most important thing we want to focus on is the cost impact to individual community members and the city along with its utilities since that'll best inform what strategies are going to work best for us. Next slide, please. So, we will be updating those 2024 assumptions. I'm not going to go through every item on this list, but I just wanted to note a few. Uh I'm happy to answer questions on any of them, but first off, um external funding is less available. That was actually a relatively small part of the revenues and the funding sources in the uh illustrative scenarios. Um but we do nevertheless want to update update that. I also just want to note grid modernization costs have gone up, but we're developing more flexible strategies to reduce costs uh to ensure by ensuring we only build capacity when it's needed. Um so we'd update that underlying assumption. And then the future of California's signature EV legislation is uncertain. Advanced clean cars too. Um and that'll have a big effect on our EV forecast which puts more importance on building electrification as a strategy. Next slide please. All right. So when I talk about these strategic alternatives or strategic options um this is what I'm talking about essentially it's a package of policies. Um so that includes the programs assumed in the strategy as well strategy as well as the local regulations. And for each strategy we plan to estimate the adoption rates that this package of policies results in uh and then input that into the model uh to to output the costs. And we can also model the effects of carbon pricing subsidies to maintain affordability for those still using gas as community electrifi electrification proceeds and assumptions about electric rate design. Next slide, please. Uh these are the six alternatives we're proposing to model. So there's a baseline that assumes no local action that allows us to understand the impact of the other five strategies by looking at the differences between that those in the baseline. Uh strategies two and three will illustrate the cost and impact of adoption of income qualified programs and regulations by isolating each of those in its own alternative. Uh strategy four is a combination of strategies two and three. So with some some additional programs to cover non-incomequalified community members uh who are exempt from regulations. So folks who might not be income qualified but might have complex projects uh that might exempt them from regulations but uh for whom we still want to try and drive adoption. Strategy five maximizes end of life electrification through comprehensive programs and regulations potentially uh including for people who are regulated but it doesn't and the the goal here is to see what package of policies would push maximum end of life uh electrification but it doesn't push people to retire equipment early. This one would definitely require additional revenue sources. And then strategy six adds early retirement as a way to achieve the 80% goal on a timeline as uh close as possible to the current 2030 goal. Um it is it's the most ambitious uh option on the on the menu and the closest to what would be needed to reach the 80 by30. Next slide please. So with these scenarios and the updated assumptions, we plan to uh so first we're going to estimate the adoption rates for these six strategies and that'll allow us to estimate the year in which the 80% reductions are achieved for each strategy and then we'll input them into the model along with the updated assumptions and then uh that'll output the community revenue need for each strategy. Um we'll then identify a set of revenue sources and calculate the rate impacts and the impact on community member expenses. And we're likely going to need to work through a few different combinations of revenue sources. Uh and we have some additional internal discussion and legal work to do to work out what combination of revenue sources could be viable. Um we'll also need to factor in how carbon pricing or policies around gas the gas transition and electric rates could affect the outcomes. Uh next slide please. So this slide lists the revenue options that we'd use in the model. Um and obviously each source has different constraints. Um some affect the utility bill, some don't. So taxes not related to the utility bill wouldn't affect bills or energy affordability, but um funding sources related to utility usage would. Um and as they impact the utility bill, that could raise affordability concerns. Even if, as is the case in a lot of electrification projects, those bill increases could be offset by savings in other household expenses, EVs or EV adoption is a good example of that or could result in a lowerc cost energy system uh over the longer term. Uh you still when you see that bill increasing, that's what you're paying attention to. Uh I also just wanted to note the role of restricted revenues like public benefits, capp invest, and LCFS which have been our primary funding source for climate programs. So far, uh, they tend to be most useful for pilots and transitional programs in the years leading up to regulations taking effect. On their own, these funding sources are insufficient for the most ambitious strategies we're modeling. Uh, though they might be enough for some of the less program intensive strategies. And, uh, of course, as we noted to the council at its May 2025 meeting on this topic, using these revenues for climate action programs uh, does mean they can't be used for other compliant purposes. it would reduce rates. Next slide please. I just want to when we have had uh some folks um asking about uh pricing carbon um the you know the the um the price of carbon that's needed to really drive a full um electrification transition is a lot higher than what's in the market right now. you have a gradual scaling up over time. And so the question comes up, is it possible to price carbon? And I just wanted to highlight uh that there are a couple of competing things that affect the gas bill. Um when we did the gas I want to remind everyone about the gas transition study that we brought some preliminary results about last fall. Um which found that very high levels of electrification are required before many mains can be removed. and the preliminary uh so essentially we you know we looked at you have about 40% of the costs for the gas utility that are fixed obviously that varies with market prices um and so there is a certain amount of uh bill increase that happens as sales decline due to communitywide electrification and so that creates a policy choice about whether you need to find another funding source for subsidies that could help provide some relief to folks who are still using ass um and there's an interaction between that phenomenon and you know potential policies that would uh potential carbon pricing policies. So we talked a little bit about carbon pricing alternatives at the April sustainability committee meeting. You know realistically in the beginning years carbon pricing could be a tool to um affect cost effectiveness. In later years, as you have declining sales, you have a policy lever around those additional subsidies or lack of subsidies and how they affect the gas bill. If what you're concerned about is electrification cost effectiveness. Um, so essentially what we're going to do with the modeling is we're going to we're going to take a look at a baseline scenario with no carbon pricing and look at a couple of different subsidy options and then if it makes sense to incorporate carbon pricing is in into the model for one of these options to provide policy information, we'll do that. Next slide please. So we talked to the working group about uh about the this study yesterday. Um there were questions about the six options, but the overall feedback seemed to be that they made sense. Uh there was a lot of discussion about the carbon pricing and gas decommissioning um dimensions of communitywide electrification. Uh there was a comment noting that air district regulations, you know, could be delayed or didn't move for could be delayed or might not move forward and that would affect the strategic options and we have to be prepared to be able to model that if um something like that occurs. And then a comment about uh emphasizing, as I think will be emphasized today, the need to take care to focus on affordability, including looking at sources of funding that don't necessarily impact utility bills, which is definitely on the menu. Um, and then as a potential sub option, um, trying to focus on a single area of electrification to make progress. And then there was also just a a a comment to um ensure we don't delay work on other efforts like local regulations or financing while completing the analys completing the analysis. And that is definitely uh staff's intention to keep those the 2026 2027 work plan moving forward. Next slide please. So this is what we're seeking feedback from the committee and the UAC on. um is uh do these strategic alternatives are these the the six alternatives that are going to give you the range of policy options you need to be able to advise the council on utility impacts and uh to be able to recommend to them a a strategy for um communitywide electrification going forward. >> All right. Well, thank you very much. Appreciate that. I think what would be the most helpful way for us to proceed uh with 10 of us uh is to now turn to any clarifying questions about what you've heard so far and then we'll go to public comment and then we can come back and you know share our insights, thoughts and views on these uh six options. So let me first open it up. It's going to be a little I can't I don't know if I can use these lights because they're they're not helpful. So, I will just look for you. Turn your microphone on and I'll look for red lights for anyone who wants to speak. So, I think that's uh Commissioner Gupta. I happen to be looking to my left and then I'll come back over here. >> Sure. Thank Thank you for the presentation. Um just a clarifying question on option five. Uh when you say maximize end of life, are you talking about uh gas appliance end of life or are you talking about this the gas system end of life or something else? >> Gas appliance end of life. So um and and I I did have we there was pointed out during the working group meeting that um uh some of the regulations might drive a little bit of early retirement but that's the overall intent is um end of life end of gas gas appliance life. >> You mentioned just a very simple clarifying question that looking to replace three systems with one system. What are the three systems? Sorry, I meant to say three systems, electricity, gas, and gasoline. Okay. >> Yeah. Um I did not ask about this um yesterday. I'm curious um just looking at the greenhouse gas inventory where transportation fits in just 57% still coming from on transportation. Does does that fit into this or are we just looking at buildings? And is there a separate discussion on transportation? We're looking at both transportation and buildings, but we do have a lot more influence on buildings. Where we have more influence with transportation tends to be both on alternative on active transportation and then um making sure that there's access to adequate EV charging especially for folks who are underserved. >> So charging is in kind of within each of these options that you're looking at. >> Yes. Yeah. Hi. Uh again, thank you for the presentation. I had two clarification questions. Uh first of all, regarding regulations, what would be an example of regulation and we might have given that the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, you know, will have their regulations going forward. uh I you know presumably we wouldn't write something that would conflict with what they're doing but so I'm trying to understand what we what would be an example of regulation we would have that would >> yeah on top of that >> yeah they're meant to be complimentary so um the two most promising looking regulations so far are uh building emission savings ordinance and building performance standards and um essentially what these do is they um they drive electrification in in in residential um as uh homes are sold and in this is something that Berkeley's adopted um and then with building performance standards through a tightening um standard on uh energy use or emissions. >> Okay. So >> generally for larger commercial buildings. >> Okay. So conservation measures that would be separate from the appliance issues that they would address. >> That's right. >> Okay. And then the other question was car what is carbon pricing mean in this case since if if we have uh you know emissionfree electricity and we offset carbon CO2 and our gas with with offsets what's left over what do we what's the price on? Well, uh, carbon offsets, the carbon offset gas program is actually a form of carbon pricing. So, um, one approach is to buy, uh, one approach is to buy products that actually reduce emissions like offsets. So, we do have a carbon pricing program right now, >> right? >> Um, >> that's what I'm trying to understand. >> There are other products. Yeah, there are other products that one could buy. um they have different pricing but another uh another approach and the simplest to simplest to model is simply uh carbon tax >> that's what I'm trying to understand on what >> on natural gas use >> okay so in addition to the offsets of natural gas we would might have a tax a carbon tax on it >> it's something that we can model um I'm not necessarily saying that we want to recommend that I'm I just want to >> definitely not ask for recommend just trying to understand what it means. >> But that's the simplest that's the simplest approach for carbon pricing to model. >> Okay. >> Okay. Okay. Great. Thank you. >> Um uh following up on that uh question about revenue sources. Um there was a parcel tax mentioned and so uh how would that function to address this? It would just be uh a a bulk revenue source, not related to carbon usage. >> That's right. Um and I and I think one of the things that maybe helpful to do is to to do a scan of what sorts of approaches to funding uh climate programs are out there. Um a parcel tax is a good standin as a standin for um a non energy related um tax, but there are a lot of other mechanisms that cities are using. And so I think having a scan of that when we bring back the results would be helpful. Well, and then a legal question, uh, whether it be a carbon tax or parcel tax, uh, would either of those be specific taxes and require a twothirds majority, >> Chris. >> Chris, I think everyone's looking at you. I was going to say, >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Could you repeat the question? Um, if we explored u either a carbon tax or a parcel tax, would those be specific taxes and require a two-thirds majority? >> Uh, they they if they were dedicated to this particular use, they would require two/3s. >> That's what I was assuming. Okay. >> And you know, I I think it's uh useful to look at surveying what are all the different revenue sources. Um, but I also don't want to have lingering out there something that we are thinking may be one or two different options that if we do polling we may find out that they're off the table, especially with that threshold of 2/3 majority. Um, so rather than commissioning a separate poll, have we looked at incorporating a question or two in our annual resident survey? I forget the title of our survey. Um, so we haven't gotten that far. I think where we are right now is trying to determine whether there's even an appetite for a for, um, whether there's even a need for or an appetite for raising additional revenue in the first place. And so, um, >> well, let's start with the need part. uh we've already discussed quite a bit that if we were to really scale our programs, we're far from having the funding to do so. Um so that I thought had in one sense establish the need. Uh but if the funding to do so is not available then we would be pivoting to other approaches. So that's why, you know, a little bit of a chicken and egg issue, but I I would encourage us to look at getting a sense, even if it's not a full poll on this, can we incorporate that in our annual uh survey and see whether uh it's something that has some possibility or we just say no, those are off the table. We need to start focusing in other areas. Yeah, the I'll just add that the timing is good for that suggestion because that rules out in the late summer and this is the time that we're starting to think about any changes to questions or new questions we might want to incorporate. >> Great. And council member, I think how you described it as a sense is a really nice way and elegant way to say um because that resident uh our annual resident survey isn't going to be the same statistical sampling and valid as the council is used to and we do you know specific ballot measure polling looking at voter um profiles and the like. >> Yeah. Although even from that survey we get um uh error bands that are reasonably valuable especially across the whole community more so then we look at uh it breaks it down by segments of the community but this would be a communitywide question. >> Correct. >> Um what percentage of our citizens have EVs do we know? Um, I should have that on the tip of my tongue, but it's uh it's right around 20%. >> And isn't that some of the highest in the nation? >> It is. >> So, if we were to, you know, go full out on electrification, but didn't move the needle on EVs, would we get there to 2030, >> so that's we're in the middle of updating our EV forecasts? uh with with the with the advanced clean cars 2 regulation in place. Um I think the outlook was that EVs were a major driver. Um >> but what I'm really saying is let's assume let's assume it doesn't move. Like maybe it moves to 22%. Let's assume it doesn't move. If we went all in on the rest of the electrification, do we get there or do we not get there or do we not know yet? >> Yeah. So I I I think so I think it's unlikely that electric vehicles won't move. If they didn't move, um then it would be well near impossible to do it just with building electrific electrification because that's about onethird of the remaining emissions. Um so we do need EV adoption and we do need to make sure there's adequate charging. Um, and that will be harder to do without the state regulations, but there are a lot of different factors at play. >> Why do you think they're going to move? What's what's the what's the drivers in in people's behavior given that we're the highest I think in California and highest in the country? >> Um, we've seen continued adoption year on year on year um and increasing adop increasing purchases of new vehicles. I think we're going to have to see what happens over the next few years with changes in um incentives and changes in state regulations, changes in tariffs. Um but there's a lot of investment in this space and uh people are working to bring costs down and gas prices are high, gasoline prices are high. So there's a there's a lot of uncertainty but um there are also a lot of factors that point towards continued EV adoption especially in a place like Palo Alto. Have there been particular things that you've seen people do that have moved the needle where they adopt more EVs >> or is it just a general, you know, we want to own EVs, gases prices are higher, it's the right thing to do, you know, and people is it internally driven or we do we have levers is what I'm really asking. >> We have fewer levers for actual EV adoption, but one of the biggest obstacles to EV adoption is availability of charging. And so that's a lever that we do have. Um there there are also um I think you know paying attention to electric rates um is also important. Palatoto's lower electric rates I think provide a motivation for adoption and um there are um ways to do purchase incentives um especially you know income qualified is where where you see a lot more um a lot more focus on the purchase incentives but I'm I'll just acknowledge that we have fewer levers for that than we do for building electrification. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, I just want to follow up on that. Um, so I I couldn't hear clearly that the question, but I think it was uh what portion of our uh car ownership is EV essentially. Is that what you were saying? 20%. >> That's right. >> But uh as staff has been updating us repeatedly, we're now I think it is 50 or just over 50% of all purchases or EVs. Correct. We we're verifying that number uh right now even before you asked the question council member because wanted to make that point that being at 20% if you've got 45 or 50% of new purchases EVs is continuing to drive up that. >> That's right. And that's been going up steadily. Um and uh and I've made the point that families that have two vehicles uh my anecdotal uh experience is that they predominantly drive the EV and um and so the EV use in the community today is in all likelihood above that 20% and either way we're on that track and as the point you made that um that the market forces are driving down the costs of EVs and giving greater selection. But then we still have the state mandate in place of um uh no ICE uh vehicle sales in 2035. Is that correct? >> We do, but it's subject to legal it's been subject to legal challenges. So the FA you know so the impact of it is uncertain. >> That's right. But it is as of right now that is state law. Correct. Um, that's I I will say that's my understanding. However, I think someone with a little better knowledge of the the legal landscape, you know, I need to need to rely on them and I don't know if we have that information for you tonight. >> Oh, looks like our city attorney might >> I mean, is you're correct that it that it remains state law on the books. The enforcability of that law is going to, you know, is in question and might take some time to resolve those questions. >> Understood. That's okay. Thank you. >> Can can I provide the figure we were discussing? So, um the most recent data we have on percentage of new vehicles purchased in PaloAlto that are EVs is 55%. >> Did you say what percent? >> 55. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. That is particularly meaningful because one of the things we do at the air district is give out grants to communities around the bay to build EV infrastructure. And from time to time, you know, when we get the use statistics back because we look at, you know, dollars per ton of carbon removed, they're not good. But that's because they don't have the the wherewithal to buy the vehicles and some of the lower income communities. So if ours is at 55, that makes uh then then you're right to be really focusing on the infrastructure. So um that is very good news on that front. Um I wanted to ask uh on the underlying assumptions to be updated. The very first one is external funding source availability federal state etc. And if this is supposed to be I don't know how far out we're we're looking or thinking about modeling but wow good luck with that. And I say that because um you know we we uh have seen a fall off in certain federal funding especially for EVs. We don't know in two years exactly what's going to happen. Um there's just a lot of um moving pieces on the funding. So can you talk a little bit about how you would grapple with that in the modeling process? Uh we're still working through that, but I think I think the likely outcome is that it's going to be a fairly low contribution um to available funding sources. And um and I just want to note that the the uncertainty in these projections is exactly why we wanted our consultant to build a reusable model that we can update as we need to, just as we do for utility rate models or utility um uh supply projection models. Um this is this is a changing landscape and we may need to do updates. >> Yeah. Because all all of these six options, all of the modeling is extremely multivariate and you know each of those variables could change within an option. And uh your last slide uh from the working group saved me from having to remind people that the timing of the air district regulations is up in the air at the moment. And so being able to adjust for each of these variables I think is going to be essential in getting models that we can use not just initially but you know sort of as we review um our choices. So all right thank you. Any further questions before we go to public comment? All right. Seeing none. Madam clerk, do we have speakers? I'll come back to you. We currently have two requests to speak. Our first speaker speaker is Mera J. >> Mera, you should be able to unmute yourself. >> Okay. Yeah. Um, I agree with everything that you're saying. Has to be Hold on. Like public comment. Do you have a comment on our six options for electrification in Palo Alto? >> I think not. >> The speaker has muted themselves, so we'll move on. >> Yes. >> Our next speaker is Stephen R. >> Hi, this is Steve Rosenlo. Um, I have no substantive comment to make, but uh, the Zoom feed has a traffic noise on it and it makes it very hard to hear the audio. Um, it's sometimes police sirens, sometimes heavy equipment. Right now, it's just like freeway traffic. So, there's an open mic somewhere that would be nice if you could turn off. Thank you. >> All right. Well, thank you, Dr. Rosen Bloom. We will attempt to troubleshoot that as best we can. I see a lot of staff looking around. So, appreciate the heads up on that. All right. So, it sounds like we have no further requests to speak. So, we will close public comment. All right. So, let's bring it back to the deis for a discussion of these options. And I I will start with you because I think I didn't quite get to you before we went to public comment. >> It's okay. I didn't know if my question was too uh detailed as in our discussion of solutions. So, um I'm super sensitive to the affordability of electricity given the goals of the city um the goals of the utility commission. We've discussed um sensitivity to all the utility rates rising. Um but in particular, electric prices rising seems problematic in our goals of trying to electrify everything. So, um I did have a question about, you know, we're always limited to cos for our pricing and um I have a question about the legality or the ability to have kind of gas transition projects be budgeted and can those go into a co-et. So, for example, if we're getting people to switch out of a gas uh HVAC system into a an electric HVAC system, could we fund a program and since it's moving away from gas has something to do with gas, can that go into a KOSA analysis? >> I think it be good to defer to our attorney. Um, so, so I mean I think that's that's a that's a complicated question um that I I'm you know that I know that our office is looking at but I I mean I don't have the answer to that sitting here. >> Can I build on that um quickly? I think Jonathan um I wanted to just thank you for the presentation. Um, but I am sensitive to the fact that in building out these models, there are just, you know, thousands of variables that are all interacting. Um, and so anything you can do to simplify the takeaway for our commission makes this both easier to interpret and apply. So something along Commissioner Croft's um line of inquiry might be what's the ratio of a electricity price to a gas price and how does that ratio end up influencing this sort of transition to electrification? Right? That's a piece of actionable policy information that um you we may still use KOSAS to set rates um but we can concretely understand the degree to which those varying prices relative to one another um are likely to impact the trajectory on which we're headed. So I would just encourage you to continue to look for comparable both like tornado plot which variables matter and and elevate those um for our visibility but also to the extent that you um create dimensionless numbers of that sort um that that can guide our thinking and our decision-m would that's an output that would be very helpful. >> That's very helpful. Um, and if there are additional model outputs that it helps to that would help the commission evaluate utility bill impacts, I think that that's definitely feedback we're looking to hear. >> If I could add, Commissioner M. So, so um, Sacramento Fellow Municipal Utilities District has some metrics like that in terms of the electric rates and affordability in terms of people potentially fuel switching um, to EVs. So, they are tracking that as well. So that's one of the things we're talking internally on the group and the previous climate action studies did take a look at a comparison to EV charging with lower rates in PaloAlto in comparison and what that means to a internal combustion engine as well >> right I mean certainly we don't have no control over gasoline prices so that that's outside of our control um on a vehicle electrification front but on a building electrification front um you know ultimately we do set both gas and uh you know and electric rates and this 18% kind of search charge also is a is a lever um it's an affordability lever but it's also a price increase lever and I think as a commission we've wrestled with that um as like how do we maintain affordability while still not undercutting an electrification transition >> is the temporal scope of the study to 2030 or when you say the modeling and or are you looking beyond that or is it and I guess the context of my question is given we can't address very much in the electric vehicle side we've heard gas the for the natural gas the baseline forecast is that it's going to go down by about 1 to 2% between now and 2030. I'm beginning to wonder if any new projects or new policies that we would institute, you said the study's going to be available in the first half of next year, would really have much impact. Um, and I I mean I don't see the levers if we're talking 2030 that would really make a substantial difference. So, and I don't see for example that we have 85% of our customers more or less residential customers have at least one gas appliance. I don't see any impact from decommissioning gas for many many years. So, just a kind of a question. I mean, are we going to be looking at now you can't tell you haven't done the study, but are we just going to be looking at really small differences here? >> Uh, no. And I think the next five years is not the it's not the not the most important time horizon for this study. We're looking out over decades um in this study. And we'll need to as we look at those longer term uh uh strategies. We'll have to look at what what are the strategies over the next what are the shorter medium-term strategies over the next five years that complement that longer term effort most effectively. And um you're right that over the next 5 years, it's what it's been over the last several years, which is um the sort of continued push to create a critical mass of um adopters to the point that it becomes mainstreamed and you can regulate it and drive those adoption rates up even higher. Um so uh just following up on that uh concern, we we had had some previous discussions at this committee meeting on the reality that um a couple realities. Our programs and our progress are really leading. Uh we're ahead of almost any other city anywhere. And yet we are not going to hit our 8030 goal. Neither is anybody else. Uh but when these goals were first set, nobody had any idea because this never been done. And um so then the question is um you know what should we do going forward both in terms of setting a time horizon on the goal or revised one which I personally favor continuing to be very aggressive uh but recognizing the reality that uh 2030 is not going to be our success date. Um and second uh we I guess 3 years ago added a goal of 100% carbon neutrality which has actually become a more broadly uh uh adopted goal among cities and um and other government agencies. Um in reality it's easier to meet interestingly than the 8030 goal. um perhaps less meaningful. Uh but nevertheless, uh if we uh in parallel look at how can we work even more toward the 100% carbon neutrality and push out modestly our 8030 goal so that we are still on as aggressive a path as we can realistically pursue. Um those would be kind of the directions that have been going on in my own mind and I want to put that out on the table for feedback. >> Commissioner Mets. >> Yeah. U well first of all I thought the uh strategic alternatives that were uh laid out seemed to you know cover the spectrum. So I thought that was uh a pretty good list. Uh I have a question though sort of what's underneath those? In other words, what would be the content? Uh specifically, we have I think we can claim a pretty successful uh heat pump out water heater program. I think we're installing a couple of hundred units per year, right? But if the air district uh regulations go into force, that will require all residential water heaters uh to be replaced over, you know, as they are as they have to be replaced with heat pumps, which would be, you know, I'm assuming a tenth someday. They have a lifetime like 10 yearish. So they'd have something like 10% of them would have to be replaced every year, which would be in the thousands. So does this program address, you know, how we would marshall our resources to be able to uh support the community in that kind of transition uh with both just in terms of logistics, in terms of finance, all the things that we're doing in the existing program on a you know like one at least one order of magnitude smaller scale. Are we prepared to scale that up? Is that intended to be included in here? Um you know all all those sort of basic questions about how that would work. uh when and if those regulations go into force. >> So it is it is in here at a high level in terms of each each in each uh strategic option we look at we have to make some assumptions about what sort of support we're providing um uh to people who are regulated by the air district regulations. So, for example, in option four, um the we would be looking at um programs that are supporting people who aren't regulated but not people who are. Um and that that's sort of the level at that level that that high level is what would be included in this analysis. But um at a much more detailed level, we're um we're both talking internally and talking with the sustainability committee. We just had a conversation on this in May about what kind of support we we believe uh PaloAlto needs to provide as we enter into these uh this regulatory environment. And we're also in conversation with the uh CCAs and other municipalities around the region to try and coordinate efforts. Um, and I don't want to go too far down this road, but just the two things I'll say is that you have a range of supports that you can provide from permitting to activating contractors to incentives or financing um for people who who aren't as who are maybe exempt from the regulations and need some support. The other thing I'll say is that the regulations uh there was just a discussion within the last month of providing exemptions from for uh as many as 40% of people from these regulations. Number one. And then number two, the way that these regulations will come into effect is is complex and uh you're likely not going to get 100% of the people who are regulated complying with these regulations as well. So, we're trying to make some estimates on what we think the impact will be um and simultaneously figuring out how to support people. >> Okay. It's So, if I understood what you were saying, it was possibly support people who are not impacted by the air district regulation. >> Yeah. And we we so we are uh we are getting a little bit of field. Um but the conversation in May um also uh talked about whether there should be any support for people who are regulated and um there was a little bit there was some interest in understanding the cost of that but um I think more support for letting regulation um uh folks who are regulated um you know don't necessarily need the financial support. Um, again, this is a very open open and fluid topic and it's not really the subject of tonight's uh tonight's discussion, but it's something that, you know, we're going to factor in different options to different strategies. >> Okay? I mean, my thought was that suddenly thousand literally thousands of people are going to have to deal with this each year within our community. and we have uh I think a pretty wellestablished program at least my experience with the program was that it was very well organized and so on. Um so it would seem like somebody who suddenly has to deal with this whether they want to or not that would be a valuable support. Um, yeah, I mean, and and it would require a substantial amount of funding to do that. And again, these are discussions, these are discussions we're having, and it's something that is, I think, applicable in the next 3 to 5 years. And it's something we're going to work into the models. Uh, but I don't have numbers for you tonight. I think we're >> No, I wasn't even thinking of financial support, but more the logistical support. here's how you go about Yeah. getting a heat pump, water heater, and all the contracting and all the all the stuff that >> Yeah, there's a there's a cost to that as well to that technical assistance, but we that that is one of the options on the table as well. For sure. >> Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, I I would just add in that um you know there there it is multivariant multiffactorial because there will be some people who um want to change before burnout and so having support in place for those if they're low income or need other help is uh one thing. It's about 45% that we that under staff's current proposal at the air district that would be carved out. Part of that's income based. Part of that's if you have to update upgrade your panel. Part of that is if you have to put in what is it more than 50 feet of electrical line. There's various different things that cause those carveouts as currently proposed by staff. Um that vote won't take place till probably November. Um but each of those um the customer profiles that would end up with each of those carveouts could be somewhat different. So the support that would be needed in some cases is financial, some cases not. So, um, yeah, just to reiterate that, um, Council Member Lou, >> thank you. Uh, appreciate all the comments so far. I think, uh, setting a realistic time frame for an 80% reduction goal is really important, but one drum that I'll continue to beat as we do this modeling is I would also love to see what that what a per capita emissions reduction looks like. I don't know if uh modeling or considering any form of population growth over these time frames is something that we can do and is already included. Um uh I think that sort of removes the potential disincentive when considering the goals to adding housing when we know adding housing can actually uh reduce the per capita emissions meaningfully. Yeah, that's actually been one of the um one of the real uh triumphs I think for Palatoto so far is that we've actually reduced emissions on a per capita basis pretty significantly down to uh I think California's target for I can't remember which a chat's going to pop up here at some point with our sustainability manager reminding me. Um but yes, we could we could include that metric. >> Okay. Um I really appreciate it and agree entirely with the working group feedback. uh the working group feedback working group uh did flag uh a point about neighborhood or block level gas line decommissioning which I thought was interesting but that's not a strategy or part of any of the alternatives that we're modeling right now right is that a pilot that we do and then later we decide whether it's actually a viable thing to fold in >> so there there's a fair amount of internal discussion about electrification of whole blocks um and tracking of efforts on this across uh across um California. Um for the modeling um we're going to have to see uh we we don't really have good estimates I think of what sort of cost savings we might be able to leverage. Um so it may not be something that gets fully factored into this initial uh initial run. >> Yeah. Yes. I realized that a uh block or neighborhood level gas line decommissioning is a whole another level of geospatial analysis and a whole another level of financial analysis that might sort of blow up the complexity of this analysis. So I think uh as much as I would love for that to be included in one of the six options or be a seventh option, I realize um that that might not be feasible and I I think I'm okay with that. Um uh not to get too far into the specifics of how these alternative scenarios work. Um but I just want to think aloud a little bit about how we work with income because there is an explicitly income qualified option but I also suspect that in some of the other options um like maximizing end of life replacement and so on that there would also be some sort of income or equity based component. Um, I think income is not necessarily the full picture, right? Like a lower income renter is going to be have very different ability to electrify than a uh retiree who's technically low income but maybe lives in a $5 million house and has a $5 million brokerage account or something. So, it's not like necessarily the full picture of equity and income is also not necessarily the full picture of workability. Um uh because some of the programs that we'd want to implement would be most effective if we just did something that was multif family or uh for renters or for uh small businesses and small restaurants or something like that. Um, so can you talk more about the like how we should think about income and whether we can include that kind of nuance besides just sort of straight income into the analysis of some of these alternatives. Yeah, we've we've made a lot of progress over the last year or so um in breaking down and and we we showed some charts about this at the May uh at the May meeting where we're breaking down uh where folks live and their income levels and trying to get a sense of where do we have um low-income homeowners, homeowners versus condo owners? uh how where do we have um low-income renters and how and and where are these folks, you know, are these folks in dedicated affordable housing versus um single family homes versus market rate housing? And so, uh we've made a lot of progress on breaking that down because each of those groups are going to have different needs for program implementation. Mhm. >> Now, um I will say that the you know the um the building type is the primary driver for the the cost of the actual measure. And so when you combine that estimate of where the um uh how many um uh low-income residents that we have and what sorts of buildings they're in, that gives you the basis, I think, to be able to do some modeling of different sorts of program types. >> Okay, great. I would hate for us to do low income but then only do uh low-inccome single family homes or uh uh I think having that data incorporated into this um uh >> commissioner can I just add a couple points when you were talking about you know the funding and affordability and and income for residents. So yes, >> um as Jonathan mentioned, we are coordinating and getting information from other CCAs and they've done some surveys with their residents and do you have funds to do this type of improvement and if does that change with you know 0% financing or other financing tools. So you know that information we can we can glean off them as well also other surveys here. And just circling back to your other question on electrification of a block and um as as folks may recall back in 2023, you know, we did look at at areas where we have gas main replacement programs, culde-sacs, is that a possibility of of maybe looking at those areas and and electrifying in lie of actually um rebuilding the system that we're going to replace. So uh we have some geospaceial analysis on that. We put it in GIS, you know, we're looking at that now. So those are the one of the questions that came up yesterday and we have active navs looking at that right now. So >> right I understand that's a big and interesting but uh I I guess I just want to confirm that that was a parallel thread and not directly integrated into this >> not integrated with this but a separate path. >> Yes. Um maybe one last question uh another sort of big question that I don't mean to derail things. Will this analysis in any way help us be able to work backwards if we were to set a target date like 2050 for decommissioning 90% of our natural gas supply or something like that? Um or 2040 or some arbitrary date, some arbitrary percentage. uh uh uh yeah the question is just uh does the model in the framework that we're building also let us just sort of plug in numbers and then work backwards and see what the costs and uh friction would be or is that >> just such a different modeling >> exercise I don't know if I have the whole scope of your question but I think I think the answer is yes that we we we essentially have yearon-year information um so you can you can look at that and figure out where some of the friction points might be along the way. >> Okay. All right. Uh great clarifications. I think um uh I Yeah, appreciate the clarifications on the scope and I think most all of my concerns are already baked in. So, I appreciate that. >> Thank you, Council Member Lou. Um I love the per capita idea. Um I I just wanted to say on the um low-inccome definition, I appreciate your questions. Just FYI, what the air district has done on low-inccome qualification is to look at housing cost burden because of what you mentioned. It's not just what's your income, but like how much you're paying in mortgage or not. Um and so there are a bunch of different ways that we could look at um that factor. Um I'm going to um move on. I think Commissioner Gupta, you've gone on and off a couple times with your light before Commissioner Tuker rang in. So I'll go to you in that order. But let's I think what the staff is really looking for is if there are any uh revisions or discomfort with the six alternatives that have put out. So if you could wrap that into your answers, that'd be great. So Commissioner Gupta. >> Yeah, thank you. Thank you again for the presentation. And uh let me just quickly echo Council Member Bert's um statement that uh you know, we might be not making 2030 for our goals, but I think we should be uh aggressive and trying to pursue uh to pursue them nonetheless. Um so thank you. very excited for the the planning that you've initiated here. Um uh kind of my questions are are based on this this these anecdotes I'm I'm I'm experiencing from reaching out to residents about our utility and about electrification goals. There's a growing view in the city especially particularly from those telling stories of uh from having electrified their own homes that their bills have gone up actually. They've spent uh you know anywhere from $10 to $30,000 upgrading um the electric system in their house. they've upgraded appliances and now the utility bill at the end of the day on electric has been more expensive than gas. Um, and so that kind of informs a lot of my questions on this. I think we've talked a lot about the affordability question here and I think you know as we present this to uh to the city I think we really need to have a story about how this will save and I think you mentioned this in your own presentation how this will save you a resident of Palo Alto uh money on utility bill while being great for the environment and I think we should really clearly show that and again I don't know if those anecdotes are true. I mean there could be a lot of factors involved in you know what utility bills folks are experiencing. Um so my my um you know in the utility conversation um I've I've raised this issue of of uh having coherence between our grid mod and electrification investments and our and our gas system investments. So we're spending you know $400 million on grid mod uh to electrify but we're also spending tens of millions of dollars I think at least $50 million on maintaining our gas system. Um, and I am wondering if um, uh, uh, you know, as we look at these different options, have we thought about modeling what the stranded asset situation might be in our gas system, um, whether we can credit any avoided gas capex, um, in any of these six alternatives and present that, um, as part of it. Um, and then, um, adding on to that, u, I think council member Lou referenced this and the working group may have referenced this as well, this concept of zonal decommissioning. Um, uh, you know, what are those zones might look like best for our gas system? Um, you know, I actually do think we should try to include some of that analysis in this because it might help us avoid, you know, potentially tens of millions of dollars of stranded assets as we're looking at this on uh decades wide scale. So, that's my first question. Then I'll have more questions after that, too. >> Yeah, I want to turn to our utilities director. Um, but I I did want to say that we've, you know, we've uh made various uh to taken various looks at at capex and it is complicated. Um I do think there's that the gas transition study can provide a little bit more information for that. Um and it it's likely you know it likely has some effect but you know based on the high level studies we've done in the past it's probably not a determinative effect but I think every every uh you know every um measure that you take helps move toward the goal and so it is on our radar. Uh but just for a broader answer, I wanted to turn to our utilities director on this topic. >> Yeah. So the natural gas system is federally regulated. We are required to do a lot of inspections and replacements for our systems, not only for safety, but for frankly also affordability for our customers. So um we also actively apply for federal grants. So as as uh Commissioner Gustaf, you know, we we received grants from the federal government to replace our system that that are still affordable for our customers. Um, so have we looked into the wholesale changes and modifications of of zonally reducing? No. Uh, not yet. But part of this gas transition study, the preliminary results were more financial analysis. We do have a gas model and we're starting to look at that to see what that transition will look like. And at the same time, we have an obligation to serve our customers in an affordable and safe fashion and we will continue to do so. So those are the balancing parts that we have as having this utility. Um, in terms of the uh the question on uh on electric rates and is it is that switch moving from natural gas to electric um I will probably have to defer back over to Jonathan on that on the efficiency of some of these appliances and it also depends on how those those folks use energy. Um but as as you see folks um moving toward EVs I mean that's the primary driver for your increased um electric bill is is that type of fuel switching as well. So, we don't want to conflate those issues as well, but would love that feedback from those folks to to help us really get in tune to what they're seeing. >> Yeah. And I'll just note that Sorry, wrong with the microphone. Yeah. And I'll just note that we're we're trying to get a better handle too uh on it. It is always hard to track the impact of a single appliance um on an overall gas bill, but it is possible. And so we're trying to get a better handle on some of that tracking first in the commercial space, but um but also residential as well. So that that should help over the longer term. >> Oh, great. Thank you, >> Commissioner Gupta. I know you said you had questions plural. Um we were going to try to stick with the council five minutes per round. I'll let you have one more if you'd like, but we do have three other commissioners that I think want to speak. So it's your your call whether you want to do one more now. >> Oh, sure. I'll do >> But we'll come back too. >> Yeah, you can do one now if you want. >> Oh, sure. Yeah, I'll do one more. um just to extend council member Lou's um questions on um kind of looking at the different income groups and um I think he exposed a good question on um looking at renters. Uh I reviewed the website uh our city website maybe about a couple months ago on how can renters kind of electrify um and uh you know they have unique uh circumstances right because their their their residence is actually controlled by their landlord. Um, so I'm wondering if we're considering that as an aspect in these six uh different scenarios. Um, because I believe, you know, half of half of PaloAlto are are renters. So that's probably a big chunk of our um housing stock. >> I'll get you a new one. Thank you. this one. Okay, great. This is the specialized city clerk one. Thank you. Um, >> it's got too many fancy buttons. So, um, sorry, I lost the question. >> How do we the the rental the rental question on the six options? How do we Is that >> the question? I've got it. I've got it. Thank you. Um so the uh um what's interesting about this as a question is that those landlords are also subject to the air district regulations and so you need to factor in that regulatory effect and then um I think the question is whether we're planning to factor in uh portable induction cooktops for example or window-mounted heat pumps. Um, I think I need to check back on that, but I think this is I'll take that as a comment. Um, and make sure that whatever we're doing, we're making sure to take into account the impacts unless they're marginal. >> Thank you. Yeah. Hi. Um, so I concede I'm not al I'm not crystal clear on exactly what it is that staff would like or need from uh us um and what questions you'd most like answered. But um it's clear that you're looking at I mean from my point of view a lot of the right things uh in in considering the how we're hitting SAP goals. notably the connection to gas transition which is hugely important. Um so you're thinking about that the right way as far as I can tell. Um you're thinking about the impact on electric rates also super important. Um you're going to be u modeling and producing you know you're asking all kinds of questions like how much revenue is needed what are the right revenue sources and so forth. So I'm not sure what more I add to that. Um but uh since Pat or uh council member Bert did point out the question of power sourcing so carbon-f free power sourcing uh I'll bring up what what I think is one of the most important topics we need to be thinking here and that's gridscale batteries here locally not necessarily in San Bernardino County that too but local grids scale batteries and storage um also distributed resources so solar and storage um at large scale so on all of our commercial roofs, the roof of Cberly, uh the kind of operations that we we the utility could be operating in front of meter, that needs to be part of it. And then uh of course I'll ask about grid mod. I noticed that one of the assumptions that needs and and I think it's chart three or four that needs revisiting is the cost of grid mod. Let me ask first um in your view why does the cost of grid modu affect the questions or the modeling of these six scenarios? grid. >> All right. So to the extent that um uh grid capacity additions are needed um the the gr grid capacity additions are needed. Um that's going to have to factor into the cost of electri of communitywide electrification overall. and the utilities team has done a a really good job of of you know thinking through all the different dimensions of grid mod and which ones are you know really specifically related to that extra capacity and which are related to aging infrastructure so we I think have the the numbers at our disposal to be able to to update that assumption >> anything else because the >> yeah just in terms of grid mod I think the that's one of the the larger capital projects obviously in the city only second to the the wastewater treatment plant. But when you look at these six different models in terms of the adoption that may push some of the grid mod projects and we have 19 projects defined now maybe a little faster than others. So that would have to go into that that um that modeling as well as to the extent that our there need to be more incentives or programs or um uh funds necessary to have this adoption by the community. How do we generate that revenue and then what the expenses are? So grid mod isn't tied to it just because it's it's the win and wear approach and then how fast we adopt. If the adoption comes at a slower scale, then there are probably some levers we can pull in terms of how quickly we need to do that grid modernization so that um we we're not um building the infrastructure faster than uh the communities electrifying. >> I realize that the topic of grid mod is adjacent to it's not right in the heart of this whole discussion, but given the 440 million, it's a pretty big nextoor neighbor. Um, and one of the questions, one of the points that gets made over and over, UAC finance committee and so forth is we'd have to do a lot of this anyway. And UAC at least has never seen an analysis to estimate how much and what specifically would have to be done anyway. Um, I do know from looking at the March presentation made to this group, which UAC did not have presented, um, you begin to break down the costs in a in a better, more specific way. But that $244 million that I believe is all around 12 kilovolt uh, upgrades is so vast. It's more than all the other components of the 440 million combined. It is so big and and from as far as I can tell uh poorly detailed that it's just hard to hard to answer that important question what has to be done anyway and the when and where is promising it's really good because you can do exactly that you can phase up the grid mod spending but um I would urge uh uh analysis and answers to that question so because it has such a big effect on rates Um, one last thing I'd like to say on the battery thing I mentioned earlier is that uh I I know we've done analysis. I just don't think it's possible to it's very difficult at least to keep up with keep our analysis up to date with the plummeting cost of storage and deploying storage systems. Um, and so I really challenge the current notion that uh, gridscale batteries here locally don't pencil out. Um, I'm eager to see new analysis on that because again it affects grid mod, the cost of grid mod, the rates and um, uh, everything we're talking about. >> Do you have anything you want? >> Well, um, just just to circle back. So, one of the requests that uh we will be fulfilling with the UAC is looking at distribution storage as part of that and what those costs look like. Uh there was a presentation uh by by Jonathan and looking at that and how it it didn't meet the cost benefit ratios and we we'll still bring those back to the UAC. Um and in terms of our ability to take a look at the value and benefit from really looking at storage on a utility scale outside, it's also where the the energy is being generated. So the some of that value of the storage is the ability to discharge during uh when um when it has the most value and when you know Palaltto is using that power and having those batteries in areas where there is excess solar that so we can charge the batteries with very very cheap power is is one of those benefits. So um so when you look at bringing power and having batteries in in PaloAlto, you really don't have that benefit of charging them with cheap power because we do not have local generation here of that scale. Um even if you take into account the potential to add, you know, solar at uh at facilities, but it is something that we're bringing back and looking at and it's it's not something that we're taking for granted or or won't be reevaluating. There there's also other cities evaluate this at the same time. We know that our southern California um utilities have looked at this and looking at distributed generation and storage in lie of other types of centralized generation and they also found it was not economical. Um but you know so that's I just want to give some of that background to it as well but still something that we'll take a look at because things do change. >> Hey let's agree to disagree for now and discuss it soon because um like I said it's hard to keep up with how fast this is changing in the favor of uh solar and Okay. Um, just to give you a little solace on the other question about the um, you know, we we would need to do part of it anyway. I don't remember council member Bird exactly what the fraction was, but I remember before we embarked on the grid mod project and it came to either this committee or council a few times and we did understand that we had aging infrastructure and we were going to have to replace a fair chunk of it. So the question was what is the delta to do this additional mo modernization. So we did actually we did look at it at the time before embarking about 40% uh Pat saying so anyway um with that um council member sorry Mr. matter. >> No, thank you. >> Fair enough. >> Okay. Um, thank thank you again. I I guess I want to just come back to this idea that like we are not modeling to meet a regulatory target. So the precise number doesn't matter. um instead the actionable policies that fall out and the ability for the general public to understand how those policies relate to decarbonization trajectories is very important. Um, I would like you to think about um how we might visualize this and publish this model for as a communication tool and and whether it's feasible to do that. Um whether it's feasible to simplify things enough that you know people citizens of Palo Alto and and business owners can play with it and understand why we're going to propose the changes that we're going to propose. Um I understand that the resourcing may not be adequate to do that. Um I think the resourcing is light, very light as it is. Um but I would really encourage us to to think about that. Um again I I think that the you know that's going to push us towards kind of like metrics that are non-dimensional and and generalizable. So like for instance on the affordability thing like some very clear analysis of how total bill levels push up housing unaffordability or total housing unaffordability um and for whom would be super pertinent to a lot of this discussion right so that we understand okay look there's a cap how if we start applying taxes and to to manipulate um prices or we start to do x y and z like what's going to happen right um to that affordability stock. Um, it's not specific to your scope, but it it really is what ends up driving a lot of what happens in this model. Um, >> I'm happy to say it actually is part of the model and part of the scope that it does output that information. >> Amazing. Um, I'll just say on the parcel tax thing, I personally think it's just like economically inefficient to tax something that isn't um influencing behavior. And so like if I had to cut anything, it would be looking at taxes that aren't energy related um as a sub as a way to subsidize these activities. Um that's my own personal opinion and people are welcome to disagree. Um I do think that another question in here um is how you end up allocating revenue to different programs. Um so like what do you um how do you decide what to spend the money on first? Um, and there's a big difference. I think this actually touches very directly on Commissioner Tuger's comment. Um, which is that there are ancillary benefits to some of these investments. There are air quality benefits, there are resiliency benefits, etc. Um, to the extent that you know and those are judgment calls in the model. um the order of operations uh or the order with which you kind of like march up that curve of of technology options. Um so I'd just like to ask how that those ancillary benefits are being accounted for and the degree to which um you are weighting things like resiliency and and local air quality. >> Yeah. Um so those co- benefits aren't directly factored into the model. um the you know the the impacts on household expenses and energy costs and city revenue needs those are all factored in directly. um the co- benefits, we did take a look at those um in the 2021 study as a not a not a quantified but a um >> and in terms of uh prioritization essentially when we set up a scenario we're going to be setting up what we're planning to spend money on and then all of that money gets spent. Uh there's not a they we can determine what the cost effectiveness of different measures is. um but more as a tool as we're uh engaged in implementation as opposed to um when we're designing the model. So those those decisions have to get made ahead of inputting the the programs into >> I see. So you're not you're not spending more on vehicle electrification because that's where you see the largest carbon savings. You're saying I'm going to spend this much on vehicle electrification. I'm going to spend this much on building electrification. And that's therefore what my like deterministic >> yes but when we make those decisions we're taking the cost effectiveness into account and that was in the SAP funding study itself is that uh marginal cost of abatement curve. Uh so we're aiming for the the lowest cost basket of measures that achieves the goal we're trying to achieve. >> Okay. Um I guess I would just say like to the degree to which you can then find ways to communicate alongside this um both what like how that balance of um allocation across if not every like little sector at least like this is how much we it makes sense to to um invest in building electrification versus vehicle electrification, right? That's another kind of big picture policy decision that you could tweak in the model and either say it doesn't like it's insensitive to it or it really matters, right? Um and I think it also helps communicate why and you know here's the ancillary benefit of doing this as a to the degree that you can you can bring that in and show those co- benefits. Um I think it's going to help the citizens of Palto get on board with um with what we're proposing. I I think that's all. Uh yeah, I'm I'm done. Thank you. And uh I'll go to uh Commissioner Sharf, but I also know Commissioner Croft, you have your light on. If you want to turn it off, so because I think I'm draining all these batteries by you all having to have your lights on. All right. Thanks. >> So I wanted to come back to the strategic alternatives that we're modeling. Just so it's clear in my head. So on the baseline, it's basically we do nothing. But do you include them? Do you include the airboard regulations and the state regulatory framework that exists? >> Yes. >> Right. So it's so those would be without Palo Alto's special programs or something like that. >> That's right. >> And then when you move to the next one, the income qualified ones. Have you decided how you're modeling the programs? I mean, I thought there was a sort of a disconnect, maybe I got it wrong, between what um council member Lou was saying a little bit, what count what Commissioner Gupta was saying and you know, are you modeling this that you know, primarily that if you own the property, you know, here are the the biggest things that would move it or are we looking and saying, you know, if you're if you're a residential tenant, I actually have no idea how you'd get residential tenants to to, you know, get some sort of subsidy to get their landlord to make changes to property, but maybe you have something. But also, it's commercial tenants, right? That's all landlord tenant for the most part. So, when you talk about incomequalified, are you really looking at, you know, someone owns a and even condo association, I don't even know how that works. You know, I suppose you can change a cooktop out in your condo, but the heating and stuff, I don't know if it's more of a building or if it's more just hot water in your unit, which is probably hot water in your unit. But, I mean, I think all of that's complicated. I guess my question is are you spending a lot of time on the income qualified one and then putting all those different variables in? Do you have that information? So yes um in fact we've been doing a lot of that work uh because of these income qualified exemptions related with uh uh that are being proposed for air district for the air district rules. And so we're we've been doing a lot of work trying to understand okay who are these different income qualified folks in PaloAlto? Where do they live? How many of them own their homes? How many of those homes are single family? how many of those homes are condos. So, we have at this point the information we need to break that down. Um, and it, you know, the um the pool is rel is relatively small. um which makes this a relatively uh lightweight um option in terms of uh strategic options because as you said, you need to be a low-inccome owner um or you're dealing with dedicated affordable housing. Um but when it comes to tenants, the the options are relatively low cost. You know, it's those portable cooktops, it's the you know, it's the window mounted heat pumps and that's not going to be uh a lot. >> Yeah. So then we move on to when you when you say local regulations, what local regulations are you looking at? Like how do you model them? Is there a list of them or >> Yeah, I'm wondering if it's possible or maybe we can just look uh on our own screens at slide six uh which summarizes what goes into each of the strategic alternatives. Um, so the two most promising regulations and we looked we looked at a a bunch of regulations trying to estimate what their adoption rates are, but most most likely the building emission savings ordinance and the building performance standards are the ones that would drive adoption. Um, so building emission savings ordinance is focused on electrification uh related to home sales either funding or actual uh projects. >> So on that one, what you'd say it's a point of sale. You sell your house, you have to change it. Yep. Is that is that >> Yeah. Or you have to fund replacements. Um you know don't you don't want to slow down uh transactions in that sort of a situation. Um and then building performance standards are you know gradually ratcheting down on large commercial buildings the emissions per square foot that you're trying to or energy use per square foot that you're trying >> but only large commercial buildings. >> It's generally uh buildings on the larger side. Yeah. And so the the the you're right that those small and medium commercial u you know may get may get left out. I think you you know you have a lot of um uh th those would be impacted I think by the air district regulations. Um but it also you know leaves a space for some of the hardest to electrify uh um customers like restaurants for example. >> Okay. And then the enhanced one which is where we then basically give money for people to do this. Is that basically what we're looking at? >> Um which option are you looking at? >> Six. I'm wondering how you model six. Like you take a fund and say we're going to spend >> you know I mean obviously if you went out there and said we will pay for your home electrification tomorrow, you would move the needle dramatically. >> Well, but who pays, right? Because all the money comes from the community at the end of the day. Um so number six is uh is it's the same as number five. Um so you have a comprehensive set of programs. Basically everybody has access to the same sorts of you know we try we're going to try and model the model costefficient programs uh that take advantage of all available funding sources like savings on the bill that sort of thing. Um and uh but then you add in early retirement incentives that if you're retiring your gas water heater 5 years in that you could get an additional incentive you know for the lost uh the lost life for that and that would allow you to electrify on a shorter timeline. It's probably the most ambitious of all the different options that we're looking at and definitely requires revenue. But I think it's a good what it what it gives you is a metric on just how much effort is needed to achieve um uh the emissions goals on a nearer timeline. And I think that's a good calibration for community expectations. >> Okay. Thank you. And I just I might mention that when we talk about the air district rules on uh water heaters, if you have a large boiler like a large one that uh serves multiple units in a multif family residence or large commercial one, that doesn't come into effect until 2031. So it's only the the smaller ones first, then the heaters two years later, then two years later the large boilers. Just FYI. Commissioner Croft. >> Thank you. Um I uh in looking at the six options um and I appreciated the conversation about the cost effectiveness. Um it's kind of my comment is along the lines of both cost effectiveness uh how to get the biggest bang for the buck and also just recognizing the small size of the team. So going back to to uh the comment from the working group about um my comment is really do we want to put something on this list that acknowledges um a smaller scope. So, for example, um you can take a peanut butter approach and kind of have a lot of things on your goal list or you can really have a surgical strike approach where you find a big bogey um something you think um you might be able to put the team's efforts towards and go after one thing or maybe two things. So I think the 80% goal puts a lot of stress on us, a lot of emphasis on trying to hit that goal. But if we really want to have success with something, do we want to go deep on one thing or two things? So for example, you could say the transportation greenhouse gases are 57% on road. Let's just go deep on, you know, slipstream with all the people buying EVs. Let's try to make all of our expenditures go toward how do we enable everybody to follow on and get the penetration insanely high. Um and or you know maybe that's not our goal. Maybe our goal is uh space heating right space heating and commercial or space heating in both whatever it is but forget about all the others. So I I wonder if there's any room for running that through these models or whether that's a different model um to kind of acknowledge that we I think chance of success is low when you're spread so thin. >> Yeah, I think the way that you do something like that is uh is is build off the baseline scenario just like you do with income qualified programs, but instead of a a broad set of programs, you would focus on a single technology. um and you know you'd sort of and I and I think the question is um what's your driving goal in that in that scenario um we can measure how long it takes to reach the 80% goal. Um and if you're focusing on a single technology because to reach 80% it's really a a you know it's an all of the above. It's all hands on deck to actually hit that goal. Um but if you give a long enough timeline in the baseline scenario, you'll get there eventually. Um so so the question is like what is the metric for success for that um for that scenario and if it's you know achieving a certain level of penetration uh you know a certain level of adoption uh for that particular technology we could not just for a scenario like that not just measure the um year that the 80% goal is achieved but just to sort of recognize the particular success metric for that scenario. You'd want to measure when did we hit that, you know, whether it's 50%, 70% or whatever adoption level uh you're looking for. You know, what year did we hit that? Because that would be a milestone that would have a lot of public significance even if we hadn't reached the 80% goal by that time. Yeah, I guess kind of um that is part of my point is you want to be able to communicate very clearly what the goal is and then actually achieve the goal. So unfortunately with the 80% goal um you never want to go go say oh yeah well we set too audacious a goal we can't do it um and we did not achieve anything right because we have so many goals. So, the all hands- on deck comment, um, it just kind of scares me because it sounds like we have so many goals and to hit, you know, we're going to miss all of them, but we're going to move the needle. It feels better to me to pick a few and actually succeed with those few and then move on to something else. It's just a thought about how to get a team behind something and create the snowball basically. All right, I'm going to go to Commissioner Phillips and then back to Commissioner Gupta and we'll see if we can get close to closure because we do have another item that the three of us have to deal with. But Commissioner Phillips, >> thank you. Um, yeah, I just want to clarify. First of all, I think this seems like a reasonable spectrum. I haven't heard much else that people have talked about as levers that are missing. Um, I just want to kind of build on what council member Burch said and confirm that the outcome of this exercise is going to be over some time period, say 20 years for each of these, what do we see as the investment required? What do we see as the gas rates, the electric rates? What do we see as the carbon emission reduction relative to the baseline? And then we will have that menu of options to be contemplated by UAC, city council, finance committee as appropriate. Is that the I mean that certainly would be my desired outcome. Is that what's being envisioned? >> You're talking about the metrics. Uh I I'm talking about the outcome. So, it's a model. You're going to run a model. >> Y >> um how are you going to present the results of the model of the what's the time scope that you're going to be presenting and how are you going to present them? >> Um you're not talking about the time scope for the outputs. You're talking about when are we coming back to you? >> No, I'm talking about the time scope of the outputs. Are you going over 20 years, 50 years? >> Yeah. Um, so it it's it's going to go over the time period that each over which each strategy uh achieves the 80% goal. And um that could be out in the 2050s or 2060s. Um and of course, you know, if you're forecasting out that far, everything is extremely uncertain. Um, but what I think it does is it gives you um an understanding of, you know, if you're just relying on say the 100 or 200 homes that are turning over every single year, um what uh how long does it take to actually reach these 80% emissions goals? Um, so you you really do have to go over if we're you know if we're sticking with that 80% goal, you really have to do go do go over that you really do have to go over those longer those longer time scales, but ideally we're dealing with for most uh options with a time frame before 2050. >> So the output is going to be for each option a length of time that it requires hit the 80% reduction goal. >> Yep. the amount of reduction each year, the impact on rates relative to the baseline, the amount of external investment that's potentially needed coming from a parcel tax or some other location yearbyear. Is that >> it's the adoption rate, it's the revenue need, um the year uh yeah so the contributions to the adoption rate from the different uh parts of the the different the different um components to the portfolio, electric and gas rate impacts and then impact on community member expenses. Those are the five main metrics. And would you be doing these with baseline assumptions, single assumptions about future natural gas costs and electricity costs, or are you going to do some kind of um sensitivity analysis across those given again that you're talking about quite long time scales? >> Yeah, I mean I think we're going to have we're more we're likely to have to do some sensitivities. um was as um Commissioner M was was mentioning earlier. Um but we're we're going to have to work from some basic assumptions about the the long-term rates. >> Yeah. And I would just like to I'd like to stress what Commissioner Mauer said about thinking about how to communicate this and again the difference between the baseline. None of the forecasts they'll all be wrong. You know, things are hard to forecast especially the future. But the deltas with the um baseline at least will be reliable and hopefully insightful. Right. >> So to to focus on those >> I'm going to jump in before I go back to Commissioner Gupta. Um yeah, thank you for asking the questions that clarified that that we're going to model out however long it takes to get to 80% on the different ones of these. And uh in looking at the six options because they kind of build one on another, it's not I think that you're going to be doing six totally separate models. You can incorporate some work from one into the other like you mentioned four is a combination of two and three etc etc. But the reason I ask that is um apppropo of the discussion that my two colleagues have sort of uh had in part about if we're not going to hit our 80 by30 goal and appropo of Commissioner Croft's comments if we're looking at hitting another or setting another goal so that we can articulate what it is that we can tell our community we're trying to do. Um, it would be interesting for whichever one we seem to be centering in on if we could say, "All right, um, you know, we have our carbon neutrality goal. We're not going to hit the 80 by30, but we we would like to say, you know, we're going to hit X by Y or or the P per capita or whatever it is." And um somehow I'd like to know when we get to the leading models that number so that so in other words I don't know how much more work that is but if we're thinking that we want to have you know some other numbers when would we hit it under these things? So could that be figured out later in the process or how would we think about that? No, we have year-on-year numbers in the model. And so if what we wanted to look at was let's say that we're achieving 60% by 2040 or something along those lines. Um so that we have you know interim success metrics. California is doing that. Um we should be able to extract that from the model for different uh for different strategies. >> Yeah. I think it would be good uh to restate somehow um what we're doing so that we can say we hit it and then you know let folks know because to to Pat's point we are leading just because we didn't happen to hit this goal that we set with you know imperfect information at the time. It would be nice to say hey look at what we're doing not so we can say we're done and check it off but so it inspires us to do more. And I think just kind of hanging around this goal, we're not quite there, doesn't help us do that with to incentivize our residents either to support more or to act themselves because we're we're relying on them, right? We can't we can sit here and make all the policies we want and create all the incentives, but we're relying on our residents, our business community to actually do this stuff. So I think that that messaging, hitting a goal, setting a goal, hitting a goal would be really helpful to us in getting to our ultimate goal, which is is to uh reduce these emissions. >> Yeah, I I think trying to keep moving on a goal without milestones and celebration is tough. And I think, you know, I'm hearing the spirit of these comments and I think there are some some opportunities that we could, >> right? So, if we can, you know, sort of bake that into our uh evaluation and review of, you know, what what this output is, I I think that would be helpful. Commissioner Gupta, >> thank you. Just a quick question and and actually kind of extending I think the mayor's point about, you know, the residents and the the businesses will have to actually do the things we're asking them to do. One of the more promising programs I've heard about, and I think you're probably already working on this, is um on on tariff on bill uh financing or inclusive utility investment. Is that going to be modeled under uh strategies five and six that we have here? Um >> so I so yeah where we're offering programs um I I'm not saying that we are necessarily uh because inclusive utility financing there are a bunch of um there there are a bunch of dimension it could be a promising path forward there are a bunch of dimensions to it that are uh sort of practical and administrative uh that wouldn't be part of the model necessarily but the core from a financial flows perspective one of the core piece core aspects of a finance ing model like that is that you are getting some repayment over time that correlates with the bill savings from the people who are receiving an upfront incentive or an upfront payment. So it's it's analogous to financing. Um and I think we so we are going to model um we are going to model the financial flows that are equivalent to that and other financing potential financing measures all of which are on the table. >> Awesome. Thank you. >> I'm looking left. I'm looking right. I'm not seeing any more lights. Does anyone have anything else to say >> about this? Well, I will say that I have really enjoyed this and really appreciate the perspectives and expertise that our commissioners bring to our our thinking on this. Um, and I think it's been great to have uh have us all together. I've never seen 10 people on this deis before. So, that's quite exciting. Um, and we've also got a huge array of staff here and out in there. I don't think I've seen five quite fit across there. So, this is some kind of milestone. I hope someone took some pictures. Uh but no truly thank you for your thoughtful input and for joining us on a Friday afternoon. Uh I am very grateful and I will close out this item and we will take a fivem minute break and rejourn with a few of us. All right. Thank you. I think Oh my. All right. Let's reconvene with now just the uh climate action and sustainability committee. Feels so empty in this room now. So we'll move to item two uh which relates to the uh EV charging hub grant program. and I will turn to uh Mr. Aenshin. >> Great. Jonathan Oenshine, assistant director for climate action. Can I get the next slide, please? >> All right. So, you have the staff report. Um and when we adopted the e-mobility strategic plan last uh fall, we took that to council. One of the strategies we we're trying to expand the strategies we had. Um one of which is putting um EV charging hubs near multif family buildings. Uh we think public agency parking lots is a good place to start with those hubs. Um we also have uh so um that's PA USD the city and uh potentially I I think Cal Train potentially has some parking lots. Um we would reach out to other public agencies about interests but uh PA USD and the city have the most sites. So what we're proposing is a public agency EV charger grant program that could facil facilitate 100 plus chargers at 5 to 10 sites. It could be used to leverage other grants uh like a grant from the MTC that PAUSD has obtained uh but there are there's more money for these types of things coming um uh coming in the future. the guidelines uh in exchange for so our grant would essentially be partial funding that could then be used to leverage either agency funding or uh grants and um in exchange for the grant funding we would expect uh we have a set of guidelines we're asking you to approve we would expect the EV charging be open to the public that people can charge at cost overnight and I just want to note that there's a line in the staff report that gives the impression that the guidelines require public access 24 hours a day. That's not in the guidelines. That was a a mistake in the report. Um there are grants, other grants that do require public access 24 hours a day, but ours doesn't necessarily uh require that. Um and that they be within a quarter mile of multif family buildings, ideally eighth of a mile, and ideally uh dedicated affordable housing. Um so we're asking for you to uh recommend approval of these guidelines to the city council. Um we would go for approval in early August and do program design um in parallel. This would um allow for launch of the program on a timeline that's consistent with um grant timelines uh particularly for the PAUSD grant. Sorry, next slide. Uh the working group feedback on on this item was uh emphasizing the need to focus funding on public agency sites near multifamily. Um that you know that the the need for accessibility overnight and at cost. Uh making sure that the community knows about the availability of the chargers. So outreach and signage. And then uh there was some discussion about how this fits into the broader goals for the multif family sector that this is only one piece of a broad strategy um looking at curbside um EV charging hubs, shared chargers and multif family buildings which we've been doing and then even individual spaces uh putting chargers in individual spaces when you get enough adoption. Next slide please. And this is the staff recommendation. Thank you. Oh, my mic worked again. Um, all right. Uh, colleagues, do you have any questions before I go to public comment? >> I think I can ask. >> You both do. >> In the last item, uh, John, you mentioned something that was music to my ears that we have, uh, a you say a a new grant on curbside charging. It's uh it there may be funding involved but um it's technical assistance and partnership with um technology companies that are trying to work in this space and coordinating efforts across several agencies so that those to to help get those technologies off the ground. And within that context, is there um any uh thinking to get going on piloting this as soon as possible so that we learn from it? >> Yes, that's exactly the goal is to try and get pilots out there as soon as possible. >> Uh any estimate on time frame? Um I believe it's uh um we're we're aiming to structure the pilots by fall by uh fall of this year and then um that would imply implementation in the early the early 2027. >> And are these still anticipating tapping into the power in light poles? >> Um no I think light poles are um uh are less of an opportunity in PaloAlto. don't have those addition that additional uh capacity that you have in places like LA where the light pole um capacity was built with a lot of extra capacity and they're making use of it. Um so uh figuring out where to get the power and there are a lot of different strategies technology companies have been pursuing but figuring out where to get the power is is going to be one of the one of the challenges. >> Okay. Thanks >> council me. >> Thank you. So I just want I had a few clarifying questions. I'll try to save the more substantive questions for later. Uh there's reference in MTC grant and I think I'm a little bit confused to what extent we have obtained the grant or have I think in the staff report have approval to pursue the grant. >> So the MTC grant has actually been been obtained. >> Wait, sorry. >> We do actually have an MTC grant. It's for the P PA USD effectively has a grant to pursue charging on school sites >> and that is PAU USD only and that is 2.8 million and that's it could be used for city sites as well but there also is a local match and so funding is needed to be able to take advantage of the grant as well. >> What kind of agreements or stipulations are there for what percent of that 2.8 8 million is for PAUSD versus other sites. >> If PAUSD is able to take advantage of all of it, then it would all be for PAUSD. Um, but if it isn't, then city sites could be viable for that for the use of that grant. >> Okay. >> Or other grants for city sites. >> Okay. So then in this public agency parking lots program, we're talking about both PA USD and city sites. Both PAUSD has a separate 2.8 8 million grant and we're talking about a $500,000 program here. Is it likely that any PAUSD sites will actually take advantage of uh this separate program MTC grant? >> It is likely. Four of the sites that they've been looking at for the MTC grant are um are near multifamily and good sites for EV charging hubs. And the structure of this grant encourages the maximization of charging on those sites. So um and and also makes it more likely that they will move forward and take advantage of this grant uh of the MTC grant um because there is a there um the um funding sources that they had for the local match for that grant. Um they have money for design but for the construction local match um that money had to be expended. It was it was related to electrical upgrades that were associated with the EV charging hubs and that had to be expended before the grant was actually finalized. And so the MTC grant has actually been in limbo um for uh several months due to difficulties finding the local match. >> I see. Okay. So this is getting there a bunch of moving parts. I'm trying to think this through. So yeah, PAUSD has a grant, might not make use of it unless they can also have a local match, which they would need our grant to be the local match for MTC. >> That's how they would that's how they would they would manage this. Yes. >> And so our but then there's also this point that if they don't make use of the 2.8 8 million. It could go it could be used for city purposes. And so it sounds like they have no plans to make use of the 2.8 million outside of the four sites that we would provide the local match for. So what does the balance of that money look like? though they may you use so the four sites the four sites that are um the four sites that would be eligible for our grants um they so there are a lot of moving parts um the what they would likely do is um there's a lot of there's a lot of variability of uh in in cost projections right now and so the so the way they would likely take advantage of these two grants would be um concentrating their chargers on the um four sites. They have a fifth that that they may that that is less applicable for the city's goals. Um but they'll likely concentrate these 80 chargers on these five sites. And um if they're able to get those done within the uh grant funding amounts, they'll likely um and they have money left over, they have three other sites that they might expand to. If they either don't expand to those three sites or they expand to those three sites and there's still money left over in the MTC grant, that provides an opportunity for the city to uh put some um to to um put some chargers on city sites as well. However, you know, there is there's limited we think we can get that done, but there is limited capacity within the city and um and so our ability to leverage large fractions of that grant is probably limited. So, we do want to see PAUSD make a lot of uh take advantage of as much of the MTC grant as they can and then the city, you know, may be able to do one or two other sites. Oh, only one or two other sites on city property, >> right? >> Okay. >> That's really what we have capacity for at most. >> That still assuming that 2.8 million. Okay. Yeah. >> Um uh okay, maybe this is just a lot more to unpack uh during the main discussion and this is going way beyond the clarifying question, but okay, maybe one actual uh or two actual clarifying questions. The first one is what does overnight charging usage look like in our existing city garages? Is there already a ton of excess capacity? And if so, is trying to promote overnight charging maybe uh a would that cast out on the goal of trying to provide overnight charging for multif family homes? Um I wouldn't say that the overnight so we don't we we haven't we have some data. We don't have a full analysis yet of of um how much overnight charging is happening at the city garages. I will note that the city garages are a little bit farther walking distance from multif family than these sites would be. Um but every charger that I've seen on a city garage site is getting some level of overnight charging activity at some point. That's not saying that someone's there every night, but at some point over the month um every charger is getting some sort of uh some sort of activity. >> Okay. >> So, people are taking advantage of it overnight. >> Yes. Over a month, I think being used at least once being used at least once in one night is a low bar though. And uh uh I I I I think it's fine if the goal is mainly to provide daytime capacity and overnight charging is just a bonus that we try to optimize for. Um but it's just not clear to me uh if we're really framing our goals around the program clearly and if so uh what that means for the guidelines we'd recommend. But uh moving on to the next clarifying question. So the staff report said that maybe 5 to 10 sites were already found. Um what are the it sounded like that number might be four to five. What are those four to five sites right now? >> Um these are the um these are the um the four school district sites. Uh it's four elementary school or actually I don't it's four schools near uh near multifamily buildings um and they are within a an eighth of a mile or a quarter of a mile of um of several hundred multifamily units. Um, we also have looked at a list of 8 to 10 potential city sites, although we haven't narrowed down which of those would would have the highest potential, >> right? >> And so the city sites, we could only optimistically choose one or two and then the school sites four to five. I I I think an eighth to a quarter of a mile from hundreds of multif family units is not necessarily a super high bar. I think uh just because the number of cottage courts and ADUs and I'm not sure whatever else you might be considering multif family, it'd be hard to find uh many places in the sort of core of the city that aren't close to at least hundreds of multif family units. Um so if we have that list, I'd appreciate if we could pull that up and just talk about that in the next phase because it sounds like that list is not just a short list but is actually sort of the list of projects that would actually be built. So I think it'd be useful to you know at this stage but uh all right that was already a lot for questions and I'll hold the rest of the questions for the next step. >> Um just a couple follow-ups. Uh when PAUSD pursued this grant, they were in a situation of structural surpluses and huge reserves that is in the process of reversing itself to structural deficits and consumption of their reserves. I'll be surprised if if they continue to embrace this opportunity to the degree that they initially were. So uh whether we have capacity or not uh we should uh be talking with them about whether there is going to be greater opportunity for us and then we have to figure out whether we have that matching fund capacity. Um, and then as far as the uh utilization of the chargers on parking lots, I I like I see the uh the ones on Calab frequently and particularly the Cambridge lot and even though it's surrounded by u multif family, utilization's pretty low there. I I don't dispute that each charger occasionally gets used, but it's low. uh disappointingly low and maybe we need to uh promote it more because we may have a lot of folks who don't know what's there including property owners and uh property managers who can make sure that's case but um I I'm I'm disappointed that it's so low but it it appears to be so. Um but then um you mentioned uh Cal Train sites and uh I think those are opportunities. Um and then the last thing is we should be looking strategically at where housing will be multif family housing in addition to where it is today. And we all know that we've got certain areas that are going to have in all likelihood some major growth in multif family housing. So how do we really uh plan to accommodate that? However, this a qualifier for the new multif family housing is that in speaking with uh one of the major developers in our community and region uh who has a sustainability team in within their multif family development. They said you don't need to push us anymore. We as multif family developers are putting in charging on our own initiative because it's a competitive necessity today. Our our our tenants are demanding it which was great to hear. And so that's just another factor that we want to put in. And so it kind of counters that argument I was just making about the location because it may re-emphasize that our biggest challenge is existing multif family not new multif family. >> Thanks. >> Um I just I just want to share that uh the list is uh Addison, Hoover, Brionis and Aloney. Um and they're near uh a total of a thousand multifamily units uh between the four of them. Um so it's a lot denser. We there there have been EV chargers built at other school sites. Mo most of the school sites actually are pretty far from um far from multif family, but these four are high potential. Uh sorry. And uh so it's 750 sorry 750 units of which 250 are um dedicated affordable. >> Thank you. Um, yeah. No, I I I I I think that's a a good point. Um, uh, about um, you know, whether or not, uh, people are using the, uh, overnight garage, whether it's an issue of marketing, uh, or what. And I guess what I'm wondering is there may be people that not only don't know it's there, but don't believe it's okay like to leave a car overnight. So I think it's kind of both things that because I wouldn't necessarily know it was okay to leave my car there overnight. So >> what are we doing now if anything to really let people know? And what could we do in your judgment? >> Yeah. Um this is something we talked about at the working group is a need for that outreach and signage. Um so direct outreach to people who are within the uh walking distance um is a a really um critical item. Um and then you know signage that really grabs people um from you know from the street when they're going by so that they understand that they are that there is um availability of EV charging and some of it is just going to be a matter of growth that this will take a little bit of time. You know there's a chicken and egg problem that you you need to have the charging access but then people do take some time to get those cars as well. Right. No, but you're right about the chicken and egg. If they think that charging is relatively easy, they're more likely to get the car. >> Right. >> Um Yeah. And it's interesting. Um I think Pat makes a good point about the developers saying you don't have to push us anymore. What it'll be interesting to see is as the demand curve rises, do the does the installation curve keep up, be ahead of it, be behind it? You know, how much do we need to supplement that? And I think, you know, time will tell. They'll do the they'll do whatever's most profitable, but you know, they'll build it at one thing and then the building will last, you know, X years and that curve might change. So, >> yeah, a lot of moving pieces. >> It is. And it's the the new construction is the easy part. It's the retrofits that are really challenging. And so, being able to provide some charging near those multif family buildings means you don't necessarily have to do a whole retrofit project for that for those first few people to buy those EV chargers. >> Right. Right. Right. Um, yeah. So, why don't we uh see if we have public comment on this item? >> There are no requests to speak for item two. >> Okay. Um, well, I'll just say I love this idea. I I just think it's it's wonderfully brilliant use of uh public lands and if we can figure out the time of day in and around schools for the grant and uh uh I I I think it's pretty wonderful. I'm going to stop there because council member Lou selfcensored. Thank you uh to hold off on some of the things for this round. So, have at it. >> I'm afraid that I still don't quite understand the moving parts and that the net results is that we're not really going to prioritize the projects that at least accomplish the stated goal of supporting multif family homes. If the stated goal is were different, maybe uh I could wrap my head around this more easily. Um but uh Alomi for instance top of mind isn't next to any multifamily housing um or at least none sort of directly touching it. Uh, Juan Biones is in a pretty single family area except for maybe one apartment building that from Googling seems the the taller one uh uh uh off of Rasto that from Googling seems to have their own EV charging. And so uh at least that like super immediate capture uh doesn't seem obvious to me. So, it's not clear that we're hitting the goals that we should that we might be able to hit if we were to prioritize something like the Venture Community Center or uh uh the Winter Lodge, which is actually close to a good chunk uh both of those locations are close to a good chunk of like 60s7s8s relatively dense multif family uh housing. the kind of housing that uh we've talked about the challenges of getting renters to persuade their landlords to actually install EV charging. So, I really don't see how we're advancing the goals that we think we are advancing. Um uh and I don't really think it's an issue of the guidelines uh exactly or an issue of uh uh well well just more of a structural issue about the grant conditions and the point that these uh at least two or three of these four sites that are identified don't really seem like they're good at achieving the goals that we want them to. So >> how should we think about that? Is this just like just what we're stuck with? >> Well, I don't know what uh I you know, I don't know what you're seeing or not seeing in the casual Google Google searches. We did a we did a GIS uh review of each of these sites and um Addison and Hoover were each near 200 to 300 uh multif family units within a quarter mile um of which um 190 of them were dedicated affordable. And then Bionis and Alone had fewer, but each were within a quarter mile walking distance of 130 units each. Um, of which Aloney was 60 had 60 dedicated affordable uh units nearby. I I I think the extra layer that I'm seeing and also of course there's a lot of stuff that I'm not seeing with the Google Maps lookabout um is that seemingly a decent chunk of these will have EV charging already and also um uh I'm looking more in the immediate block plus couple blocks range so I'm not capturing um maybe some of the buildings that are more on the periphery. Uh so I think that's the gap. Um uh clearly those are non-trivial numbers that you are sharing but I do suspect the numbers could be multiple times higher if we prioritize venture community center or >> uh other places where I think there's a much more clear need that aren't where the land you sure sure there might be some apartment buildings captured but the land use is still 90% a vast percentage single family homes so it's not really um going to get the uptake we think especially if we're going to put on the scale of 80 plus uh chargers across those four sites. >> Yeah. So, Ventura is on our city list. Um and the grant program has is not just for these uh four school sites. There's enough there's enough fund there's enough um proposed budget in the in the grant to be able to do sites like Ventura in addition to uh these school sites. >> But I heard that we could maybe do one, but that was uncertain. >> We would need I if the MT So when I say when I say that I was in I was and this is where all the moving parts come in, but when I say that we have the capacity to do maybe one or two Um, we're I'm I'm talking about our capacity to be able to do projects on the timeline to be able to take advantage of the MTC grant if there's available funding from that. That's not the only grant funding source uh that we might be able to take advantage of. Um it's just that we um when we talk about the MTC grant timelines, we might only be able to uh have one or two sites ready on the timeline that the MTC grant requires, this proposed grant program, the this public agency EV charger grant program does not have those short timelines. And so the city could take advantage of this for Ventura Community Center or other sites over a longer timeline when other grant uh funding becomes available. Okay. >> So I don't think it's an e I don't think it's a an eitheror. I think it's a there's potentially an and here. >> Okay. Uh a couple more points of confusion. Council did get an email uh from the city manager as part of our regular updates and the MTC joint MTCPA USD grant was shared with us maybe a few weeks ago as this new thing. Um I'm guessing it's not actually this new thing and from what I'm hearing it's implied that we're running out of time to actually utilize this money. Yes, we are. >> Okay. Yeah. Um, and so is it a done deal if we move forward with the guidelines today that the four sites will be those four school sites and then maybe there will be a fifth site for Quenter or whatever else the city prioritizes. um at least for this first phase of funding and this first phase of like for this first timeline that we have >> those would almost certainly be the first four to five projects that um that that um participate >> um uh and there would be no ranking system or ability for us to say actually we think maybe Winter Lodge or the parking surface parking lot we have in Midtown is actually a a better fit in terms of supporting our multif family residents. I mean, you know, I think it's it's definitely possible and we do these sorts of analyses to look across a wide range of sites and say, um, you know, here are the sites that we really, you know, that would that would be the the top >> possible sites for us to implement on. But one of the challenges that we always run into with these programs is who's ready? Who's ready to move? who's ready to um you know who's who's at who has the electrical p capacity and who's willing to participate and so um we could try to optimize um and try to you know it would it would take us a longer time period and then right >> frankly I think we would lose access to that 2.8 8 million, >> right? Um >> can can I just add to that is that in the discussions that we've been having with the school district about this potential uh program and their expressed interest uh to your point, Council Member Burke expressed interest at least right now on still trying to pursue this on what's a fairly uh tight timeline. Um, I think if we introduced a lot of uncertainty into the prospects of them receiving the grant funds as part of our development of this, they would probably be unlikely to continue moving on the the pace to be able to access the MTC funds. I mean, I'm happy to do the school district a favor and give them this money so we can seed this match and we can provide EV parking for their uh employees and we can provide uh EV charging for the predominantly single family homes that actually live within a reasonable walking distance uh of at least most of the sites that they nominated. But I think uh that that's just what I would be approving. and be approving doing them a favor and giving them some money, not actually uh advancing the goals that we stated and that we thought we were going to advance today. >> I I think we just have a a different different perspective on it. Um we, you know, we we were struggling with um you know, we were struggling with this at one point um before we had community goals to push for multif family EV charging hubs. Um, and before we done the assessment to see which of these sites might actually serve as multif family charging hubs, we're satisfied that these four school sites um are near quite a bit quite quite a lot of multifamily units. And we wouldn't be proposing this program if we didn't think it advanced city goals. We're not in in fact it wouldn't be we we just don't have a um a policy mandate or a desire to spend um city or special revenue funds on something that's not going to serve multif family residents. Uh we're not we don't have a priority goal to try and provide employee charging for the school district. So, um, that that's not the reason for proposing this program. At the end of the day, >> I think >> I can't look at a map and reasonably see how Looney or Juanabriion would have any substantial nighttime usage from multif family residents, maybe from single family residents, but >> maybe follow up offline. >> I was going to say I think we have a a difference of opinion here and yeah, >> so you do what you can do, but I think we've heard from staff what they're going to say. I don't think we're reaching resolution. Do you have anything else? Because I Okay. So, um I I I do think that uh George raises a good point, but I want to wrap in what Pat raised, which is um I don't know when you last had your conversation with um the school district, but if they are feeling differently financially now, and if they weren't interested in pursuing all four sites, I take it we would push them to the two we do feel have greater impact, which are Addison and Hoover. Um >> um yes, I think Addison and Hoover are the best the best two sites. >> Yeah. So if they want to pursue all four, they want to pursue all four. But if for some reason they don't and we push them to those more highly impactful sites at that point, could we then be looking at the other city beyond just one additional one? >> Um absolutely. Um so the um uh yes and also we do have uh you know the limitations on the staff capacity on that short timeline as well. >> Sure. >> But yes >> but if um I mean to the point of uh not letting it go unused in a different uh context um if we could try uh that would be helpful. Um, yeah, because who knows? And then that might indirectly solve your concern. But, uh, okay. Because it seems to me like we we need to know sooner than later that they're still full speed forward or not on those four sites. And maybe you've talked to them quite recently, but >> uh, yeah, they do. No, they are. >> Okay. >> Um, yeah. and and I'll I don't have the the um yeah I don't have the buffer map for the or the um walking walking map for Aloney in front of me. But as I look at Briones um you know the the multif family that we're talking about is um in the quarter mile 1/8 to one quarter mile uh radius and so it's a little further away. You have to scroll away on the Google map a little further. Okay. Um I have some other comment and it's gone so I'll turn it back. Yeah. >> Um so whether it's from this uh trunch of grant funding or otherwise another site that I don't know if you've looked at is Elma Plaza which we have um public parking spots underneath the grocery store that are underutilized. Um and that construction is relatively new. So I imagine they have good amount of power but it was before we uh implemented EV charging requirements. And then I do like the Ventura site a lot uh because that is just surrounded by uh multif family and it's it's one of our lots and and and I think you're right too that uh the Winter Lodge also is one of these areas where we have um large amounts of market rate affordable housing. Yeah. Thank you. Good. >> I agree with all that. Um, do you have more you want to say? I think I could I would either need to think about this totally differently uh along the lines we've already discussed or I think I could maybe approve this if we could have some clarity in the guidelines that really prioritized at least one of Ventura Community Center so that uh uh and or Winter Lodge or and or one of these similarly identified city sites that are uh I think objectively serve the stated goals much better. I think uh if the venture is like a fifth in a maybe then it's hard for me to accept this. If it's like the number one priority and then maybe one or two of the school sites gets dropped off uh then that's fine. How can we is there some reasonable way in the guidelines to say we prioritize sites or we score sites based on these criteria? Uh and so therefore um we'll squeeze in a couple of these city sites at least the ones that we can get ready for the grant funding. Um, so yeah, I mean I think um I mean there's nothing in the guidelines that specifies how how the MTC grant is to be used and there and the program as we're proposing it has enough budget for the school site. sites the limitation or sorry I mean for the city sites in addition to the school sites you don't have to cut the school sites to get the city sites um so there are sort of two ways to think about this the first is um whether those two school sites just need to be disqualified entirely which you know and if you were looking at an eighth mile walking distance instead of a quarter mile walking distance you're potentially disqualifying those sites Um I do think there's a substantial portion of the MTC grant that probably gets unused um just because of the limitations of the grant uh if we go down that road. Um but you know that that is an amendment that that you know um is certainly possible to propose. Um the you know whether the MTC grant gets used for other school sites or for the Ventura site is not in this proposal tonight. Um but it could be a subject of discussions um with PAUSD and with our internal staff on in terms of what we think is possible to achieve um on our on our timeline. >> Right. So I think I had actually gotten confused. So there's there's not a shortage of money, there's a shortage of time. And so it's not like uh we could we need to prioritize Venture Community Center over a school site. It's just that we need to rush to get Venture Community Center uh some engineering drawing done or something like that to be eligible. How much time do we have until we actually >> about six months. >> Okay. So, it's not impossible, but you know, we we're and we're in we're internally talking about how to meet that timeline. >> What do you need, if anything, to be able to meet that timeline decisively for Ventura Community Center and Winter Lodge and or a few other sites? Maybe Winter Lodge is more complicated, managed by another entity, but you know, for the sites that we do have, six months is tough to get multiple of them, but it's seems feasible to at least get a couple. >> I think it's I think it's having it's it's the um I think first off having site control is is pretty critical. Um and uh so the Ventura site is, you know, I think the um I think more viable um and it would involve two things. First, we'd have to um make the timeline work uh internally, and that that's really just an internal discussion. Uh, we would need to get this grant program off the ground on the timeline that I was laying out in the staff report and um we would need to have a conversation with the school district about the use of the MTC grant and just be clear that um in addition to the four core school sites, Venture is getting done or you know one or two of the city sites are getting done. Um and uh and and then we see how we can make good use of the rest of the FCC grant. >> Yes. I mean, I think that sounds like a good game plan and that sounds like a minimum baseline because they're not going to be able to use 2.8 million with four school sites. I would also say that we should really prioritize the city-owned parking lot in the Midtown shopping center area behind the CVS that is similarly positioned to the Winter's Lodge. uh and actually surrounded by a lot of uh multif family housing that might not otherwise uh add EV charging. >> Yeah, that um that one actually has several there are applications for several EV chargers from private companies going in at that site. Um so it may be duplicative, but we have looked at that site as a possibility. >> Okay. Um, I I had a point, but I lost it. Might need a second. Um, uh, overall I'm not thrilled at all with where we are. I think I understand your position. I think it's also very clear if you look at a map of Janu. It's all single family, at least in the immediate block or two radius. Um, uh, I'm also fine, you know, doing the school district a favor. Uh, so even if I did swi- switch that framing, I, you know, I could accept it. Um, but in advancing this, I'm really putting a lot of faith in uh, Brad Public Works to get some more city sites that are actually going to serve multif family residents uh, toward the top of the queue. Um, oh, and I did remember the last question. One of the guidelines said that uh uh how strictly are we holding ourselves to these guidelines? One of the guidelines said that EV charging should not be within uh these hubs should not be in a/4 mile of other like EV charging, city-owned EV charging infrastructure. And that doesn't quite make sense to me in the case of, you know, downtown. You might want a few different EV charging hubs in the future. If we approve these guidelines with the language as is, is there anything actually precluding uh you know uh multiple EV charging hubs within a quarter mile of each other or is that more of a soft uh sort of suggestion for eligibility that will then be sort of scored and evaluated separately? I I think given that we have a lot of availability at existing charging hubs, um you know, like like we talked about earlier that having even more that providing funding for even more charging hubs within a quarter mile of existing hubs is probably a little bit duplicative. I think that was our thinking there. >> But is it a strict guideline or not? cuz I still think a/4 mile is basically from the top of university to pretty far down university. Um if we maybe have no uptake, no significant uptake on one part of university uh in some charger there, that's not to say that a charger at the hypothetically some other lot like the Webster Street garage couldn't be useful. Yeah, >> obviously making up uh the scenario here, but um yeah, how strictly would we hold ourselves to that quarter mile? >> Um I I think we were uh we were looking at it as a pretty strict guideline. Um but if we want to be more flexible on that as part of the part of this discussion, I don't have a good picture on how many additional sites in the city that might open up. We did take a look at it with the quarter mile radius exclusion, but without the quarter mile radius exclusion, it might open up some additional sites that become effectively workplace charging. Um, so just a little little unsure about what what effect that would have. >> If the utilization increases, we could adjust the design guidelines. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. And we have also not to say that we we can only pursue future city mobility hubs under the guise of this uh program as well. >> I mean these are >> balancing if we create a program like this then we're obligated to fund projects that meet the criteria. >> Sure. Okay. Um, uh, I'll trust that we will look at the utilization data and if there's actually, uh, some signs of demand that we can find the that we can find more sites within a quarter mile of each other. >> Are you good? >> Yep. >> Okay. Well, I'm going to move the staff recommendation and offer uh, Council Member Lou an opportunity to do a signing statement with his caveats. I'm kidding. Uh but no, I do I do move the staff recommendation. There's >> second. >> Thank you. Anything more? I think not. Okay, madame clerk, let's vote. >> Chair Binker, >> yes. >> Council member Lou, >> Council member Bert, >> yes. >> Motion carries unanimously. >> Very excellent. Well, this was a quite a good meeting. I feel a lot of good substantive conversation. So, thank you staff for hanging in there with us for three hours and for organizing us all the logistics of this meeting. With that, I will say have a good Oh, next meeting. Sorry, >> we almost forgot. Yes. Uh, next meeting is August 7th following that's the Friday uh when council is back from its break first. Actually, it's not because we've adjusted the August schedule. Instead of starting on the 3rd, start on the 10th. >> Okay. >> I had heard the first council meeting would be on the 10th. I mean, we're certainly open to look at adjusting this meeting. Um that this meeting for the 7th was still at this time on the books >> and and we can go ahead with that, but I just thought I would note that it's now would precede the first council meeting. So I would just thought I would check with see if anybody has any disinterest in the seven. Seeing none here you good? All right then we can go ahead with that. I just wanted to lift that up. >> Okay. Uh so we are planning three topics. Uh so the youth climate advisory board for the 202526 school year is planning to come to the meeting and give a report out on their activities and accomplishments. Uh and as well we're planning to have the first review of the 2025 greenhouse gas inventory and also uh bring to the committee the regional water quality control plant bio bioolids facility plan uh hopefully in a in a state to be ready for the committee to make a recommendation to the council. >> Great. Well, I'll particularly look forward to the YAB folks coming and meeting with us. That's terrific that we're doing that this year. All right. Well, with that, I wish you all a good weekend and uh we stand adjourned.

Mhm. >> Mhm. >> Why is it not Oh, it's cool that light is on on. I don't know what that light means, but it just went on. Clerk, can we call the order? >> Yes. Um, I just uh we began the webinar, but I just wanted to confirm with MidPen that it's currently being being recording. Um, if you could just give me 1 moment, please. >> Sure. I don't know what that is. It keeps beeping. It keeps going on and off. Okay. >> Thank you for your patience. We're ready to start. Commissioner Ansari. >> I'm here. Just wanted to say I have just cause to attend this meeting remotely under the Brown Act. I have not attended any meetings remotely this calendar year. I must attend this meeting remotely because I have a family medical emergency that prevents me from attending in person. And in this room I am not accompanied by anyone over the age of 18. >> Thank you. Commissioner Barr. >> Present. >> Commissioner Rosenberg. >> Commissioner Carna. >> Here. >> Commissioner Stemler. >> Vice Chair Causse. >> Here. >> Chair Cross. >> For the record, seven present. >> Thank you. Are there any in person public comments? >> We currently have no requests to speak in person. >> Okay. And nothing online. >> Just a friendly reminder, a recent change, we've moved virtual in public comment to the end of the meeting. >> Okay. We need to change the agenda appropriately going forward. >> [sighs] >> Are there any additions or deletions to the agenda at this moment? Commissioner. Okay, let's proceed. Let's talk about the approval of the minutes from the March 14th meeting. Do I have a motion? >> I would move that we approve those minutes. >> Do I have a second? >> Yes, please. Yes, please. >> Okay. Let's call the vote. >> Commissioner Stemler. >> Here. >> I I >> Commissioner Rosenberg. >> I. >> Vice Chair Kouzi. >> Commissioner Ansari. >> I. >> Chair Cross. >> Commissioner Carman. >> I. >> Commissioner Barr. >> Motion passes 7-0. >> So, the minutes are approved and we will move forward. Now, our first business item. Before we go to this, we always talk about um the absence of hate speech and in public meetings. And we will go forward and hopefully we will not have to uh endure that. Okay, business item. Our first item is the Palo Alto TMA. Let's talk about the nonprofit on transportation access and mobility support for the vulnerable residents of Palo Alto. Proceed with your presentation. >> Good evening, commissioners. Um there're going to be some slides in a minute that come up. I'd like to start by introducing myself. I'm Justine Burt. I'm the executive director of the Palo Alto Transportation Management Association. We're a nonprofit. Our funding comes from parking permit fund from the city, uh general fund from the city. >> so sorry. Can move the mic a bit closer? >> Oh, it's not loud enough? >> Yeah, yeah. Make sure it's nice and close so we can hear you loud and clear and people can hear you online. >> that? Is it okay? Oh, thank you so much for letting me know. Commissioner Kou say. Um, the Palo Alto Transportation Management Association is a non-profit. Our funding comes primarily from the city. Um, there are parking permits that go into a fund and we receive some funding from the general fund. We also receive grants such as from the VTA. And uh, the Palo Alto Community Foundation as well as membership fees from businesses in Palo Alto that receive benefits through our program. Um, our mission is better commutes for everyone. Our our core values have to do with what we actually accomplish, which is to reduce traffic congestion, demand for parking, greenhouse gas emission reductions, um, supporting small businesses and the low-wage service sector workers primarily are the ones that we currently help with our programs. And what you see on the first slide are our results from 2025 from the annual report. Uh, we, by giving out transit passes, bus and train passes, um, refurbished bicycles, $5 a day if low-wage service sector workers will bike into work instead, and after-hour lift up to 5 miles for individuals who um, take the train or bus to work but get off after bus or train stops running. So, our work resulted in 482 parking spaces around town being freed up, 2.9 million fewer vehicle miles traveled, and 1,152 fewer tons of greenhouse gas emissions up from 603 tons last year. And I'd like to really open with three quick stories of people we have helped. Um one is Katrina. Katrina works at a dentist office office nearby and she has two small kids in preschool. Um she used to be stuck in in rush hour traffic getting back home to Santa Clara. Uh we through a pilot with the utilities department gave her an electric scooter. And so she now gets off work at 5:00 and with her scooter she can get um 0.9 miles away to the Caltrain station downtown, catch the 5:13 train home, and get to the preschool before it closes at 6:00. Once when she was driving it was iffy if she was going to get there before they closed. So she is super happy with the Caltrain pass free Caltrain pass she received from us and the e-scooter and it improved her quality of life. Um second person I want to share a story about is Abdallah. Abdallah is a salesperson at one of the stores over at Stanford Mall and he used to drive to work five days a week. Um we offered him $5 a day to bike in instead. When we started out it was $2.50 a day but that didn't get a lot of people's attention so we doubled it to $5 a day. Caps out at $600 a year because that's the IRS reporting threshold. So $5 a day encouraged Abdallah to leave his car at home and bike to work five days a week which he now does. Um CBS Bay Area News contacted us about two months ago saying, "Can we do a story on Abdallah for the Bay Area News?" So there was a two and a half minute piece that um uh City Council member Pat Burt was in as well. So um the third story I want to share with you is uh Rakeya. So Rakeya works at um one of the telecommunication companies. Uh they give you um internet service through your your smartphone. And she also has two kids there in elementary school and they had their own little scooters, not electric, but they had their own little scooters. Once she got an e-scooter through us, through the utility pilot department, um through the utility department via a pilot that we did together, that e-scooter allowed her to scoot with her kids to elementary school, drop them off, then scooter over to VTA bus, catch fold it up on the VTA bus, then switch over to Caltrain, and then scoot the last quarter mile to work. And she proudly told us when we were having her photograph taken by a professional photographer for the annual report, that there was one day in the previous month where there were accidents on 280 and 101, and everybody else was half an hour late to work, and she was early, actually, because she took transit. So, these are the kinds of people we're helping, the low-wage service sector workers who really contribute to the quality of life here in Palo Alto. What would Palo Alto be like without the wonderful shops and restaurants downtown, on Cal Ave, along El Camino? Next slide, please. Um so so here's we offer people information showing them maps on our one-page flyer of the best ways to get to work from with different transit agencies or biking, depending on what city they live in. We share information about the Transit app. Has anyone used the Transit app to plan their trip? Well, it also tells you if the bus that's supposed to come in 5 minutes is actually coming in 5 minutes or in 7 minutes, so it's real-time arrival information, which is helpful. And Caltrain, if you've seen the website, they have a live system map, which shows you a train chugging its way from Sunnyvale towards the Mountain View station on its way to Palo Alto. So, it's nice to know where they are and how soon they'll be there. Um we offer incentives, as I said, $5 a day, Bike Lover Rewards, that's an app that goes on your smartphone that geo-fences the commercial areas, and when you're you and your phone pass that invisible geo-fence, $5 immediately goes on a virtual debit card you can spend right away or save up. The other tools we use to convince people to mode shift, leave their car at home, uh are case studies like the three I just told you about, um Katrina, Rachelle, and Abdallah, to inspire people who were in similar situations, think about how much money they're going to save on gas, wear and tear on their car. Um our relationships with managers around town at shops and restaurants, um helps them share the information, the programs that we have, so they can attract and retain workers. In the US, the average service sector worker stays in their job 110 days. So, you can imagine what a relief it is to managers, um when previously they'd trained someone up, they're all set, and then they leave. If they have someone who stays longer because they're getting benefits through Patma. And basically what we're trying to do is present information and incentives to workers so they can make the decision. Do the benefits of leaving my car at home and taking the Caltrain to work outweigh the uh the barriers to the change? Next slide. So, we have some wonderful sustainable transportation options here in Palo Alto. People love Caltrain, all electric, brand new Swiss trains that run more frequently, that's everyone's favorite. We also um give out VTA passes, primarily for the rapid 522 and the local 22 bus. Uh the SamTrans ECR bus comes down through San Mateo County, and the Dumbarton Express comes in from the East Bay. As you know, Palo Alto is very bike-friendly, as well. Many kids bike to school. And so, biking, electric bike, e-scooter, walking are great ways to get around. So, we're we're having these discussions with affordable housing advocates. Do people really need a car to get around? Between ride hail, uh Lyft, Uber, you know, car share, Zipcar, sometimes when I used to go up to to Richmond for a project, um I would just rent a Hertz over at the Sheraton cuz they have a Hertz office right near the front counter. So, can people get around without cars? The AAA said every January comes out with an estimate of how much it costs to own a car for a year, and this past year it was 11,500 or so. So, if somebody's making minimum wage, you know, that makes a big difference to their pocketbook, for their budget, for their family, if they don't need a car to get around, and they can take these different um options. Next slide. So, these this graph shows since January 2019 and up until December 2025, how many transit passes we gave out and activated. And you might be familiar with what happened in early 2020, why there was a 90% drop in transit passes. So, our nadir was 28 transit passes given out to people as people abandoned their car pools and abandoned public transit. And we've been rebuilding ever since to So, now that we're at 482 cars taken off road, 482 parking spaces freed up for other people. And as I'm sure you know, there's a dance downtown about the the people at the restaurants who have to move their car every 2 hours. And uh one restaurant waiter told me that one shift he made $50 and he got a parking ticket. So, he essentially took home $9 that day. Take a bike Let me give you a bike. Let me give you a transit pass. Let me give you a train bus pass. Um but, it's up to them to make the decision. Next slide. This is a picture of Javier. And Javier lives in Sunnyvale and uh told me that he would like a bike so he can get in shape. He currently drives and he wants to be able to bike from Sunnyvale to work. Um but, that also his shift now starts at 6:00 a.m., which is too early to take um alternative. So, he wanted to bike. And so, um just wanted to show you a happy picture of Javier at Silicon Valley Bicycle Bicycle Exchange, which is in Palo Alto, just off of 101 near San Antonio. And we um hook them up with people who are open to leaving their car at home at least 3 days a week and biking instead. And then, we pay a Silicon Valley Bicycle Exchange $491 for these beautiful bikes. And I say to [snorts] Greg, "Can you set aside the nicest ones for my folks?" And so, I'm seeing Cannondales and Giants and all kinds of really nice bikes that they accept donated from people in Palo Alto and the area. They check the shifters and the brakes and put air in the tires. And then, also offer people like Javier a free helmet, lock, and lights. And so, that's uh that's our agreement with them. So, beautiful refurbished bikes are going to people who really appreciate use them and save money on their commute. Next slide. And uh penultimately, here's uh a quote from one of our board members who's the human resources uh manager for Coupa Cafe that it really helps reduce her uh workers parking stress. They don't have to leave every 2 hours to re-park their car. They save on commuting costs. It helps their work-life balance. And she's a a committed um supporter of Pat Mose's work. Next slide. Um the last slide I want to share with you, and the next one's my contact information, is that there are still opportunities for growth though. 80,000 people work in Palo Alto, if you don't count the 29,000 associated with Stanford Research Park, and we're not counting Stanford University either. Of the 80,000 people, there are more opportunities to help specifically assisted living workers. We're working with Channing House to determine um if they're interested in taking advantage of any of our programs. We now have the go-ahead to work with hourly workers from the city of Palo Alto, the people who don't receive benefits. The city's salaried workers who do receive benefits can get a um Bay Pass, which you can use on any one of the 27 transit agencies in the Bay Area, but the hourly workers do not qualify for that, so we can now help them. Um we're focusing on reaching out to five actual cities where a lot of people we find in the commute survey live. Um so Mountain View, Redwood City, Fremont, San Jose, and East Palo Alto to see um what information we can put out through their weekly newsletters to try to help residents who work in Palo Alto and are low-wage workers. Uh finally, we just received the go-ahead from the city to uh since they're ending the Palo Alto Link program, um to transfer a portion of that budget to Pat Mose, so that we can help low-income residents now, help seniors, people with disabilities, be able to access sustainable transportation options if they'll use it three times a week, and uh will leave their car at home. So we're excited about the results that we've been able to demonstrate. I've been the executive director for the last 4 years and uh looking forward to the near future to to grow the programs even further. And the last slide is my contact information and I'll open it up for your questions. >> Thank you. Thank you for sharing this information which I think is invaluable for the people that we are most concerned with the vulnerable the seniors, the handicapped and the day workers that come in. Thank you. Commissioners Don. Commissioner Barr. >> Yes, on your list of ride hails you have Palo Alto Link, Lyft and Uber. But if you live in Palo Alto, there's one missing which is Waymo. We see Waymos driving up and down the streets constantly without any passenger or driver in them, but they appear to be on their way to pick up someone. Do you have any data on the number of rides that Waymo provides and also the price of a Waymo drive compared to a Lyft or Uber ride? >> So, we only offer the after hours Lyft program. It's a $10 credit per ride up to 5 miles, but it's not our first choice because generally it isn't a shared ride and we're trying to reduce the number of vehicles on the road. Waymo actually can be a zero occupancy vehicle, not even a single occupancy vehicle sometimes. So, we don't really get into Waymo or the costs or how many people it's moving. >> Do we Do we know how many people Waymo moves in Palo Alto? >> I can look into it and get back to you. >> should get that data. How How many rides does Waymo provide in Palo Alto um on an average day? And what is the price of a Waymo ride compared to an Uber or Lyft ride? If you could get that data, that would be very interesting to learn. I I have no clue, but I just know that there are constantly our Waymos on the streets of Palo Alto. >> I'll look into it and I'll get back to you. >> Other questions? Commissioner Rosenburg. >> Hi, thank you for your presentation. I have two questions. Um one I was just wondering if you could tell us a little bit more about how you secure the electric scooters. And then the other part of the question is are there any lessons opportunities to the communities on how to say ride a bicycle or how to operate the scooter? >> It was It was interesting. Yes, uh we we originally went into the the pilot of five people, three e-scooters, and two electric bikes. Um wanting to try out Unagi, which is a lease program. And it was the major lesson learned for that one was that it ended up being more expensive than just buying an e-scooter for people um up front. Um but it was also a really high-quality like a $1,500 um lightweight e-scooter. It's It's really important that you can fold it up and uh bring it on the bus or train and that it's not 44 lb. Somebody Some of them can be pretty heavy. Um but the most interesting lesson learned is is once Katrina and Rakeya had gotten used to using the e-scooters and the 12 months was up for the pilot, I went to both of them and asked, "What is your plan to replace this Unagi leased e-scooter once I need to send it back?" And Rakeya was horrified. [laughter] So I actually talked to my client and said, "Can I just buy her a new one that has, you know, safety features like suspension and lights on the back and, you know, and is lightweight?" And my client said, "Yes, please." Because Rachelle was now really used to it and Katrina was really used to it and they had these habits. They're using it 5 days a week. So we started with leases them and just realized it would be less expensive in in the future to to just buy them. We did run in into um some other challenges with it and we learned a lot from the process. But you had another question as well? >> Oh, thank you for answering that one. I can imagine that's pretty costly and hard to triage um who gets the scooters, but that's really interesting. I'd love to hear more about that perhaps at a later time. The second question was about lessons. Um are there any lessons beside provided to the people about how to operate the scooter or the bike? >> Um yes, we we were planning to work with San Francisco Bike Coalition that does a lot of um bike safety education to have in-person classes and I couldn't get anyone to sign up to commit for and to sign up for in-person classes. They were ready to do a few hours of of lessons and then a few hours of practice and just people were not making time for that, especially low-wage service sector workers. If you can imagine, many of them are uh moving between two different jobs and have half an hour between them and have family commitments to to spend a Saturday morning, two Saturday mornings coming out to do it to work on safety um just didn't happen. So we had an online 1-hour class and there were two people who actually came to it. One had her video off the whole time and the other one turned his video half off halfway through. So where we landed with that was I now have a bike safety quiz of 10 questions and you can't get a refurbished bike um until you return the the quiz to me. And everyone gets eight, nine, or 10 correct out of 10. Um and and one person I said, "Congratulations, you got all of them right." He's like, "Well, they're pretty they're pretty obvious like what the right answer is." So, it's a way to teach people but by giving them a quiz so they pick up the basics about, you know, intersections, how to stay safe in an intersection when you're coming to one with cars in it. So, that's where we landed was the quiz. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Um I'm just curious uh how involved you are are with um the push to build housing near transit in Palo Alto, which you know is now Although it is a rule in California that you must be building tran- uh more affordable housing near transit, Palo Alto is resisting. Um and I'm curious, you know, you know, you say, for example, fewer vehicle miles traveled. That may be true, but if we build affordable housing in large quantities and have an additional homes for an additional 6,000 residents, there will be more cars and there will be more uh emissions. So, how do you balance the need to grow housing and the population of Palo Alto? Uh how are you working with the council to ensure that they are abiding by the California standards for building affordable housing near transit? And um how how will you balance out these metrics that which look great if your population is stable or declining or becoming increasingly less mobile with a with a population that should be becoming younger and more likely to drive? >> I'm so glad you brought up that topic because you all are sophisticated and understand the housing transportation nexus. Tomorrow I am I am submitting a $25,000 grant proposal to VTA under the Transit-Oriented Communities um education and engagement program. And it basically involves doing three community bike rides with one group that lives in affordable housing units through Alta Housing or Mercy or another one in in Palo Alto. So getting 10 people to ride with us on the protected bike lanes of El Camino and getting more comfortable with that. And then loading the bikes into a VTA bus 52222. Have any of you ever tried to load a a bus while the bus driver is waiting for you to do it? And the arm kind of sticks and you got to get it up get the rack down and put it on. Um so we'll practice loading it on to either the bike rack which holds three or in the back of the bus. And then we'll ride it down El Camino Real, get off, get a snack at a restaurant, have an appetizer platter. As a way to kind of um socialize the idea that there are a bunch of great ways to get around that don't involve having a car. Which if we can popularize that and then I'll I'll take the results and lessons learned and share it with City Council and the Planning Commission. If we can popularize that idea because there is one City Council member said to me, "Are people really going to give up a car?" So you you saw one of the earlier slides how many great ways there are to get around. And when you need a car you really need a car. So get a Hertz or you know take a Lyft or Uber. Um so if we can popularize the idea that there are great ways to get around then maybe more of these affordable housing units can pencil out. Uh some of these developments that are being proposed because they won't have as many parking spaces. And the real estate value of one parking space I'm sure you know is is pretty expensive. So that's one way we're trying to contribute to more affordable housing. We're going to be um partnering with Palo Alto Forward who has a bunch of contacts in the affordable housing community. I mean, I know a bunch of people, but he had he worked very closely with them. So, to to put these together, to publicize these to rides, to find um residents in the affordable housing units. Um a second ride will be for residents who live in East Palo Alto who currently drive to their their work in Palo Alto. And as third is people who live in Mountain View. Same kind of thing. So, that's that's one way we're working on it. It's It's the case studies that really make the compelling argument that kind of stick with people in terms of what's possible. >> So, what would be a really awesome case study is someone who lives in East Palo Alto or San Jose or maybe way out in Pleasanton who can now afford to live in Palo Alto and therefore not drive 2 hours a day to their home. So, just keeping in mind that part of the reason people are driving is because they can't afford to live here. So, changing that would be really powerful. >> I wholeheartedly agree. Thank you for that question and comment. >> Um I Thank you for your presentation. Um this is uh I don't drive and I think like this is such an important issue and really thank you for your work because I I love the presentation of both the data and the stories and just changing behavior is so difficult. And but you're coming in at a time where like as somebody who who doesn't drive, you know, I take Caltrain every day and the amount of people I'm seeing these days that are getting on Caltrain that are like, "I've never taken Caltrain anymore, but the traffic it's just the with the point that it's reached in the Bay Area, um it is not reliable to get me where I need to go. So, I'm I'm going with Caltrain." And they're having positive experiences. So, thank you so much for your work. Uh one thing I wasn't aware of, Palo Alto Link is ending? >> Uh, the next few months. Yes. >> Oh, man. >> They're winding it down. The grants, um, some of the grants have run out and the city was trying to figure out how to cut, um, some expenses for the budget. So, >> Okay. >> they are giving a portion of that, a fraction of that to to Pat Mott to be able to provide Caltrain passes and bus passes and bikes. So, that, um, I think a big segment's going to be either seniors or low-income residents. I've already started receiving requests from people who There are pockets of lower-income apartments around town, as I'm sure you know. And I got a request last week from someone who had lives in Palo Alto in an apartment and works in Menlo Park. And he said, "Can I Can I get a refurbished bike through you?" And my first thought was, "No, you work elsewhere." Wait a minute. Starting July 1st, we can hook him up with a bike so that he doesn't have to drive. >> Just one comment. There is in Santa Clara County, there is a building in downtown San Jose that they're changing the allotment of parking spots. And they have record vacancies because people have moved out because they need to park a car. So, I think you're probably up against that polemic of of San Jose particular residents because they're trying to lower the costs of transportation. Um, and parking spots are hilariously expensive in Palo Alto or San Jose. As you're building new affordable housing, how do you find that middle point? And boy, I give you credit for education and teaching because we can get there. But that the that building caught my attention because of that 85% vacant now. A luxury building. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Maybe you could look at the stats on that and that would be beneficial for you to see those and then be able to understand the cost of parking and what the mayor is trying to do down there. >> It's it we do live in an auto normative society, don't we? Where the default is, how am I going to get to Berkeley? Hop in my car and a drive. Oh, wait, highway 880 is horrible for for >> Oh, yes. >> for traffic. Night and day, so. >> Yeah. I was someone who is CEO of a public company in Emeryville. Try doing that every day. And that was 15 years ago. I never knew where I would when I would get in or when I would get back. >> Well, it's quite a balance. If you have to go somewhere far away and you think, can I take public transit? You obviously, if it takes you an hour to drive and 3 hours to take transit, if it's going to take three times longer, that's hard. But are there ways to kind of uh nip the margins? So, when I need to go to Richmond or Berkeley or Emeryville, I drive over to Union City BART, park there, and then take the BART up. And then I can bypass all that 880 traffic. >> Yeah. >> And do work on it. Just do work on the BART. >> Commissioner Ansari, do you have any questions? >> Yeah, um I actually do. Let me lower my hand. Um thank you so much for your presentation. Um it's great to hear. I'm actually just curious, what's been most effective in actually getting your commuters to use your services? Is it direct like directly in engaging with the commuters or is it working through employers, organizations? Um are there certain incentives that are more attractive? >> The most valuable um path to low-wage service sector workers is through their managers. So, if if I can tell a few stories to the manager, explain the programs that we offer, what the benefits are to the manager of attracting and retaining staff, then that person will most likely then share it with uh with their employees. And so, these are the gatekeepers that we need to connect with and and convince to share the information. We have a one two-sided one-pager um that explains our program and programs and on the back uh gives maps. So, just telling a few stories and asking if they would be willing to share it with their employees. Um we do three marketing pushes a year, uh spring, summer, and then in the fall we do a commute survey. So, that's another chance to get the one-pager and the programs in front of the managers and find out how we're progressing. >> How do you Thank you. How do you um how do you contact the employers? Like are you guys going on foot or is there a process or is it restaurants versus like is there a process behind that or who you're contacting as far as employers go? >> Uh it's it's really a chemistry thing. It It's going out on foot and and asking for manager and uh get being able to explain just in 60 seconds who we are, what we offer, what the benefits are. And usually when I say, "And we offer free Caltrain passes, which are worth over $4,000 a year." That gets their attention. >> [laughter] >> And you're you're going to be able to attract and retain um service sector workers more easily. So, we are working with shops, you know, grocery stores, the restaurants that are so valuable to Palo Alto, the hotels, the motels. And then when something like repaving El Camino El Camino Real project and um removing 220 parking spaces comes along, then we did advance work out to 99 businesses along El Camino Real to let them know that was coming and to say, "You may be losing a few parking spaces on street, but we have all these programs to offer your employees." Um so, let us know how we can help. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for coming in and we will look forward to continuing discussions and working with you and the other uh NGOs that we work with with the vulnerable populations. Thank you. >> Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you. And if any of you have contacts with any shops, restaurants, small businesses, um I'd love to hear it so I can help even more people. >> Thank you. >> Chair, um before we move on to item two, would you like to open public comment for item one? >> Yes, please. >> If any member of the public would like to speak on item one, please raise your hand or press star nine now. >> We do have one request to speak. Our first speaker is Ming. Ming, you now have permission to unmute yourself. >> Ming, are you available? I don't think there's anybody there, is there? >> Yes, we had a hand raised, but um I don't believe they're available. >> Okay. Shall we move on to business item number two? Okay. It's our honor and and and pleasure to have the fire marshal of the city of Palo Alto. She is known as Tammy. And you can pronounce your name, please. But in any event, she is going to be talking to us about fire prevention by the Palo Alto Fire Department. And uh we've been very grateful to have the resources of Chief Larson and our fire marshal and here. And then we will have a a speaker virtually, uh Captain Wooten, that will come on after Tammy's presentation. I can't think of anything Well, there are many things that are important right now, but the Malibu fires, the Palisades fires, the Altadena fires made it really clear that nothing is safe. And that if we work with the community and educate them that we can benefit the community of Palo Alto. And thank you for giving us that knowledge. And going forward, there'll be a series of additional sessions. One is on Saturday by Captain Wooten. It's at the Rinconada Library. And those times are in the presentation. And we hope to do something after fire season together with the fire department to reassess, understand better, and go forward as other cities and other communities are coalescing around these issues because no one is immune to this. And there's a a county-wide group meeting on this exact topic this evening in San Jose. So, it's very timely, and thank you. >> Well, thank you very much for having me. Uh, my name is Tammy Jasso. I'm the fire marshal. Um, I would like to talk about wildfire preparedness today and >> And Tammy, could you please speak louder? >> Yes. Sorry. >> And on top of the microphone because we're recording. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um, so, first slide, please. Can you Next slide, please. Thank you. >> [sighs] >> So, wildfire preparedness is a shared responsibility. Here in Palo Alto, although we haven't had a wildfire in our foothills in a very long time, we are definitely vulnerable in our foothills and our open space in our wee neighborhoods and the regional fire corridors. And preparedness depends on not just the city, but our regional partners and our residents. Next slide, please. So, I wanted to take a minute to talk about some of the fires that have happened in the past. There's really only one in the in the past you know, 20-30 years in Palo Alto and that was the Liddicoat fire. That was about 1,000 acres and it was on both sides of Arastradero Road. Other fires in the area were date back as far as 1962, the Leap fire and that one um was northwest of Palo Alto near Sky Londa, about 1,300 acres. And in 2007, the Stevens fire, which was in Cupertino and that was 151 acres. And of course, in 2020 when we had the CZU complex fires. Um And then the lessons that we've learned um well, even if they're low frequency, that doesn't mean that there's low consequence. And in our foothills, you know, the fire builds over time and because we haven't had fire in a very long time there, there's a lot of fuels in the area. Um And then with the weather and the top of topography there, it makes it a very dangerous situation potentially in the foothills for us. Um next slide, please. So, some of the things we learned from the Palisades fires and other fires um recently down south um is that extreme wind and dry fuels can quickly um escalate a fire more than normal. And that also causes embers that will travel very far distances and affect homes and areas outside of the WUI. So, although you know, our high fire danger, moderate high, and very high fire danger is all in the foothills, mostly um west of Foothills Expressway, with depending on winds, depending on embers, you know, adjacent communities could be affected as well. Um And the other things we've learned is that evacuation systems need to be early. Um communication needs to be very clear. And it needs to be redundant. So, we need to let people know very early to get out in areas up in the foothills. We have some areas that have one way in and one way out, and it's a crucial to get evacuation started early, especially for those residents. Um Other issues that were um brought to light in the Palisades fires were the water water issues, power issues, roads, alerts, and public messaging. And so, all of those issues need to be treated as part of the incident and not separate issues. And so, that's something that um as we're dealing with those issues, we have to be thinking about all of those things as well. And this will um In doing so, that brings in, and I'll talk about this a little bit more later, um many different departments in the city will be dealing with this, not just fire. So, um other things that were learned is the home hardening and zone zero um make a huge difference. And so, just doing the things that residents can do to harden their home and um take away the flammability, the flammable objects are 5 ft around the home, makes a huge difference when it comes to wildfires and spreading to their homes. So, um I'm not going to get a whole lot into that. Um Captain Wooten will be talking a little bit about that in his workshop on Saturday, but there's a lot of resources um and I'll be talking about a few websites that people can reference to get more information. Next [clears throat] slide, please. So, from our perspective, from the fire fire department, we are a 24/7 all hazards coverage. Um we have someone available 24/7, six stations. Um a seventh station is a part-time station. It's open in Foothills uh Preserve. That's open during fire season. It's actually opening next week. We staff that station 12 hours a day um during fire season. We also have six fire engines in the flatlands, a ladder truck, a battalion chief, and three ambulances. In addition to that, we have two wildland fire engines, and those fire engines look different than our normal engines you see on a day-to-day basis. They're four-wheel drive. They're built to go up in the foothills. They're built to to fight wildland fires. Um we also have something called a skeeter, which looks like a souped-up truck. It's um also it holds water and and but a little bit less than our type three engine uh type and um it has less hose, but it also is also a four-wheel drive vehicle, and so it's it's made to go into the foothills. And we have also a what's called a type six, which is also a truck. Holds some water, but it's mostly used for what's called mop-up. So, it's not for fighting fire initially. After the fire goes out, we go back and do more work to make sure that fire stays out. And that's called mopping up. And so, we go make sure that spot fires are out, that anything that might be smoldering gets put out. And we'll use a type six engine for that. And we responded to over 10,000 calls last year. Um and that's for the whole city. Next slide, please. So, again, I wanted to touch on wildfire readiness is a citywide system. We um we have a Foothills fire management uh plan. And we have several departments that worked on that plan. We recently updated it, but we work with OES, we work with utilities, we work with public works, community services, um which is includes the rangers, um city leaderships, and we also have um outside partnerships with uh nonprofits like Santa Clara County Fire Safe Council. Um and our goal is to work on prevention initially, but also during and after a wildfire, it would take a concerted effort by all departments to mitigate those. Um and then the other thing we've done to about approximately 2 years ago, we did a pilot program. We called did a collaboration with Stanford University and Woodside Fire District. And we purchased 50 sensors in five wildfire sensors. 25 went to Stanford, 12 went to Palo Alto, and 13 went to Woodside and they are gas monitors that monitor the area for smoke to try to give us an early alert for wildfire. And so there's 12 sensors up in our foothills that ideally, if the fire breaks out, we usually would rely on phone calls from citizens to alert us for our response. These sensors would provide an could provide an alert [clears throat] prior to that. So in the middle of the night in areas that are not inhabited, we could get an early alert and send a fire engine up to to see if it's a fire before it got bigger and and you know, more dangerous. So those have been we've been working with N5 for the last 2 years with those. Next slide, please. All right, our CWPP. So we have Santa Clara County has a community wildfire protection plan. Each city in Pal in Santa Clara County has an annex in that plan. So our foothills fire management plan is a part of a greater county plan. And that is something that we continues to be worked on um with this with the county and with you know, internally with the city. The plan aligns local priorities. So we have priorities that are in Palo Alto and then the countywide priorities. And it it guides vegetation management, mitigation priorities, even public education. And also interagency coordination. Next slide, please. All right, so I talked a little bit about station 8 already. We are getting ready to open. We staff it with a three-person engine company with a wildland one of our wildland rigs. We share that responsibility with Santa Clara County Fire. It is supported by Los Altos Hills. They also help pay for those services and so we share um coverage of the of the station and so coverage starts next week. We typically will cover for the first couple of weeks and then the next month will Santa Clara County covers and then we cover the next month. So we it's a shared responsibility and it goes all the way through October. And what this does is helps with response times. If we don't have a fire engine in the foothills during the summer and a fire breaks out, it takes 20 minutes plus to respond from Palo Alto up into the foothills and so by having a fire engine stationed up there it it greatly reduces our response times. Next slide, please. Okay, other things we're doing. Every year we have wildland urban interface inspections and pre-incident planning. And so what that means is our engine companies go up into the foothills. They visit the homes. They do inspections. They look for fire hazards and they will give them notices of things they may need to correct to make their home safer. Um the other thing they do besides looking for fire hazards. So high grass um tree branches that are over homes, wood piles um you know, a spark. They look for spark arresters on on chimneys, that type of thing. But they also, in general, look at access. So, if in the event of a fire, how would they access the home? What pitfalls they may have. Um and what, um you know, things that may make responding or protecting the home more difficult. And so, in that way, hopefully, we they are more aware of the hazards in the area in the event that they have to respond there. Next slide, please. Um I and I'd be remiss to say to not mention, um our Foothills Park and Open Space treatments. Our, um rangers do a ton of work in the open space. And they are approximately 70% or so. I just spoke to, um the supervising ranger. So, they're about 70% done with, uh the work up there. And they do about 400 acres every year of mowing and disking up there. So, if you can imagine, that's a it's quite a bit of work that they do themselves. Um and they also helped coordinate all of all of our, um the work that gets done there. Um and just recently, um we worked with the Fire Safe Council and we finished all of our roadside clearance work. This is work that we do every year dur- and we clear all the the grass. And every 3 years, we try to do more, um you know, clearing brush and trees, but along the evacua- evacuation routes. And that's Los Trancos, Page Mill Road, and La Cresta Road. So, we just completed the roadside clearance work on May 29th. Next. Thank you. And, um lastly, what can residents do? Um I talked about what we do as a city and um there are many, many things that the residents can do. And so uh um I've put together some websites. Ready, set, go through Cal Fire has a very extensive website on different things how to prepare your home and harden them. Um that gives you lots of tips. Uh how to get ready in the event of before the wildfire happens. So we're coming upon wildfire season. So if you live in the in an area that is a high fire danger, you should have a go bag. You should if you're you have medications, you should have them ready to go quickly. If you have important documents, you should have a way to to get have them prepared. So if you need to leave, you can take them with you. That type of stuff. If you have animals, what are you going to do with your animals? So those are the types of things that um citizens can do to to prepare. Um the other really important things, um sign up for Alert SCC. Alert SCC is um for the whole of Santa Clara County. You um put your area in. If there's evacuations, if there's other emergencies, it doesn't have to just be wildfire, you will get an alert from from Alert SCC. That's one of the ways we will get the word out. Um the other thing is go to Genesis Protect. And you will look up where your zone is and if there's an evacuation required, it will go out on Genesis Protect. So if you know what zone you're in, you can go online and it'll show the the the zones or areas that are being evacuated and it'll also also show evacuation routes. Um another website or it's still on Cal Fire is um part of their ready, set go, but during the ready section they have um a pretty good information, you know, about zone zero, the first 5 ft and defensible space, what you can do. Um and then just lastly, a prepared home makes our job easier. And so when we come up there in a fire, if we're looking at um the different homes, we can protect a home that has defensible space much easier than a home that does not. And there's only so much we can do and with so much time. So by preparing your home, you give us a much better opportunity to protect it. Um and then the other thing is and Captain Wooten will I'll invite him to speak um on Saturday, there is the Firescape Workshop um at Rinconada Library from 12:30 to 2:30 and that will give a lot of information on the types of plants that you can that you can plant around your home that are that will be safer from fire. And is Captain Wooten available? >> Yep, I'm here if everybody can hear me. >> Yes, we can hear you. Thank you. >> Chief Jasso, did you want me to speak on anything particular? >> Can can you give us kind of um what you're going to be presenting on Saturday? That would be great. >> Sure. So um I'll be presenting um ahead of a Firescaping expert who's a landscaper who will be going over um all the plants people can put around their homes um and she'll be much more knowledgeable in that area than myself, but um I'm also uh certified as a firescaper and a firefighter with the city of Palo Alto. So I'm going to try to cover um basically just, you know, it can be very overwhelming for a homeowner to to look at their house and try to figure out what they need to do to be safe um when you look at all the code enforcement, fire code that's out there, insurance company um uh requirements, uh you know, getting into fire escaping, what Cal Fire says. And so, I'm going to try to to to put all that into simple terms and show people how they can get started and give them a little bit of education about what they can do um to start down that path um towards getting their home safe. Um so, we'll we'll we'll cover everything from uh you know, Cal Fire has an excellent zone system, which Chief Jasso mentioned with zone zero in her presentation, um which is integrated uh into how fire spreads and and uh unfortunately uh burns down homes at times. Um I'll be covering that and uh talking about what people can do to harden their home, what kind of construction features need to be looked at. Um and then just kind of uh preparing everyone then to to look at then, once they've done all that work, how do they come back with um fire escaping, which is a form of landscaping, and and beautify their home again in a safe way. >> Thank you, Jesse. That ends our presentation. Is there any questions for us? We can go with commissioner questions first. Thank you for your presentation. I wanted to ask, in one of these links, can you find the CWPP for Palo Alto? Not in the links there, but if you go on our website, um it was posted for um comments. And so I think if you just do a a quick search for um Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan, it should come up. If not, um please feel free to email me and I can send you a link. >> Thank you. And then I have one more question. Um in terms, I know you spoke a little bit about preparedness in the state or situation of a prolonged emergency, has there been any study on how we would handle the load to our electricity and water? And was there any like weaknesses or anything we identified with that in the city? >> I I have I'm not aware of any studies. Um we are definitely we work with utilities. Um I actually forgot to mention utilities has done a ton of work um to make our to make it safer up in the foothills. They are currently um undergoing a huge project to underground the the overhead wires. Um and so they've been working on that in in the foothills and they will continue doing that in the open space in Midpen. Um so they have definitely been trying to do a lot of work. Um and then our water, we have several water tanks up in the foothills to help with our water supply in the event of um a fire up there, which is you know, I would I I can't compare cuz I don't know exactly how much other jurisdictions have, but it's it was built um for a a lot of homes up in more homes than we currently have. And so we have quite a few water tanks and so that is going to be a plus a bonus for us because we'll have access to water, which is often an issue. >> Thank you. >> Uh-huh. I have a couple questions for you. You know I do. Um is there any way that we can run a workshop with land lords that we can make sure the city has about 50% of renters and it's going up. I'm a renter. I live on the on the outskirts of a very beautiful public park that's part of the property. Is there any way to get information to people who own these buildings of what they should do? We can't compel them to do it, but is there anything we can do when it's such a large portion of the civilians that live here? >> Yes. Um I could I'd be happy to talk to you more about doing some education, but we do do um inspections for um R2s which are high-density housing or any three or more units. So, we do annual inspections and so if we do see fire hazards or you have overgrown weeds or things that need to be um taken care of, those will be written up as violations as well and we do work with the Santa Clary Santa Clara County Weed Abatement Program and so if we have issues with um property owners that are not coming into compliance, they can be put into the Weed Abatement Program where the um weeds will be um cut down and then the owners will be charged for that. >> Okay. I mean if we could enc- encourage you or work with you and the chamber, >> Mhm. >> I think it would be valuable that's information. I mean, it's 50% of the people who live here live in these buildings. >> We do respond to complaints. Occasionally, we get complaints about properties um and then [clears throat] we will follow up with sending inspectors out inspectors out. >> Thank you. >> contact the owners, but I'd be happy to talk to you more about it. >> Sure. I'd be happy to help. Um because the way that you live in, commissioner, have huge vegetation. The buildings that I live in, you've seen the vegetation that I live in. What? >> Downtown Palo Alto a pretty low-risk area, just judging from the maps I've been looking at. Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Probably okay. >> Not with the size of the trees. I mean, they're 6 ft. They go all the way up the building for six or seven or eight stories. Anyway, and they haven't been cut back since the beginning of time. >> Well, hopefully the more dangerous trees or the trees that are um are dying or dead, um those definitely need to be trimmed back, but trees that are green and healthy are less of a fire hazard. >> Okay. >> And and especially down here being this far away from it, although we have other areas like out of the baylands that could burn as well. Um you know, with the winds and you can have spot fires even with house fires. Um if you know, it's it's it's not something that you can completely be safe from, but you can definitely um you know, cut down weeds, cut down dry trees, make sure gutters are clear, um things that would, if an ember were to land on it, it hopefully would not accelerate a a a or the spread of the fire. >> Thank you. Anyway, thank you for this invaluable information. I know there are neighboring city, as you said to me, it's a long time coming what's going on in Berkeley. It's years and years of education. And thank you for being as diligent. >> Thank you for having me. >> I'm sorry. >> Oh. >> I am Are there any questions? Anywhere? >> If any member of the public would like to speak on item two, please raise your hand or press star nine now. We do have one hand raised. Ming, do you now have permission to unmute yourself? Ming, would you like to speak on item two? >> You know, I I agree with um I agree with um what's the name? The woman that she was talking about the public par- parks. I agree with her. Cuz it's like way it's like it's like way over too much and I can't handle it. It's like, you know what I mean? Like if it's on and we need to upgrade the uh the cities to make more like public property. So, to make it even more better. So, I agree with that woman what she said. I trust her. So, yeah. I'm happy about that. And even though it needs to needs to be more better um and more beautiful outside. Like, no more cutting trees down to make the animal for the um for everyone to use it on the animals, you know what I mean? So, this is why I'm doing that. So, I'm helping I want to I want to help a lot of people there. So, that's why. Thank you. >> Thank you, Ming. We appreciate you calling in. Thank you. >> Thank you, Jesse, for being here. >> Thank you, everybody. >> And thank you for having us. >> Okay, we're going to go to business item three. And we want to talk about the subcommittees and what you were what you've done, who you've uh contacted, what the what the uh what you're going to go forward with uh over the next couple of months. So, we're going to talk about the community mental health subcommittee, the community the community engagement, HERD, and CEDA. And then when we're finished with that, I'd like to talk about the agencies that you've been assigned to and if there's anything you need with your council body, if they've been able to to reach out to you and you've reached out to them, just let us know so we go on forward with the August meeting being connected. Who would want to start? Commissioner Barr. >> Uh yes, I'm talking about the HERD committee that we we had a a meeting um and the an issue that came up uh on the whole issue of uh housing and economic recovery and development is housing for lower-income seniors that I'm sure you're all aware that Palo Alto is struggling to get the 6,000 housing units by 2031. Um but so far they haven't actually had any um um approved for lower-income seniors and there's extensive data uh from A from a survey that Avenidas did I think it in '23 called the the community assessment survey of older adults CASOA and it showed that housing particularly for lower-income seniors was the number one concern for seniors earning less than $70,000 a year. 64% said housing is my main principal concern. And so if we're going to develop 6,000 new units we need to plan for uh housing for seniors and in particular um the city has been talking about uh downtown parking lots. I know that there's a legal issue that came up over lot T on Lytton uh that Alta Housing proposed uh low-income family housing and then there was a legal issue raised. I'm hopefully that's going to be resolved soon because the city also at the same time did put out request for interest in lot C, the lot on Ramona Street behind Abvenidas, and MidPen Housing said they would like to build senior housing. Um so what the HERD Committee suggested is that in in the August uh curriculum meeting, we have a listening session on uh the need for housing for lower income seniors, where we would have a couple of uh with like Alta or MidPen Housing, and um Abvenidas, um and other senior organizations um about uh talk a listening session about uh what it takes to get housing for low income seniors. So I'd like to propose that we have a listening session in August uh on this issue of housing for low income seniors in Palo Alto. >> Commissioner Kou say, do you have anything to add to the HERD Subcommittee? >> Okay. And the only thing I will add for you, Don, is I've been reaching out to Alta Housing and making the introductions so we have yet another uh builder in the affordable housing arena. >> Yeah, I talked to the uh manager of MidPen Housing and they would like to come to a listening session in in in August to tell about their perspective cuz they're one of the biggest housing developers. MidPeninsula Housing is up and down the peninsula. They don't currently have anything I think in Palo Alto, but they are a very successful uh low income housing developer, so we'd like to have MidPeninsula Housing uh as uh at the listening session uh and I'm the I have the double hats of being the liaison to Abvenidas and being on the Abvenidas Board of Directors. So, I think that uh Abvenidas I we can find someone else from Abvenidas to come and talk about their support for housing for seniors. >> For Community Mental Health, Commissioner Canan and Commissioner Ansari, please. Do you have an update? >> We have I think we met about last month, but we haven't uh had a chance to sync up again. I think we have confirmed to have that parental uh listening session um after the schools are open. But, now that since we don't have a session in July, so we'll make an effort uh in the next couple of weeks to finalize on some of the details. And >> I'm waiting for Dr. Jose to confirm a date. It's moving out, Commissioner Canan and Commissioner Ansari, uh because I'd like him to be able to attend. So, I'm on hold with this person at Stanford and waiting for those dates. >> So, you're planning to push it out to September? >> It may be September. >> Okay. >> I didn't want it to be after going back to school, but I do also think that we'd be well served if we could have Dr. Jose um with us. So, we'll give him a few more a week, and if I don't hear something, then we'll go back to the other psych psychiatric team that we met and we're doing our own session and we'll put that together. But, I've gotten a lot of support from YCS for doing this, from the Stanford faculty, from the other mental health youth groups have all chimed in and would love to work with us. >> [clears throat] >> Okay. >> Should it be that specific person and push out or should we just continue to have something in August and maybe we can pin down for something again with Dr. Joshi on uh September in October, maybe? >> Let me find out. I'll I'll I'm I'll wait another week. >> Okay. So, as a subcommittee, maybe we can uh sync up in like 10 days. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Cuz I'd like us to book book a facility so that we're not all the way out and then we don't have a room. That would work. Commissioner Ansari. >> Okay. Um my only update is that I have talked to the the school and some of the the PTA folks that are kind of involved with the communication that goes out to the parents. So, they have said just because of timing and stuff, they'd be happy to share kind of the calendar as it comes together before school starts. Um and I think actually personally as a parent, I know how it's how it gets in August. September is not a is not a bad idea. Um >> I agree. >> Just be you know, if if it ends up being September uh because we're barely just trying to get reacclimated to everything and then there's there's back to school nights and there's all kinds of things. So, that's my update for that and then I have a I have an update for our community engagement as well. If I should just jump right into that. >> Please. >> Um so um Commissioner um Stimler and Commissioner um so I've been um we've been meeting weekly on this. And um we have set a date for October 4th for the community event for nonprofits and service providers in the community. Um October 4th, I believe at Mitchell Park is what we have tentatively on hold. We have um we're gathering a list of nonprofits that we will be reaching out to. We have an interest form already pretty much ready to go, an email copy to send out to all of the nonprofits and service providers asking them what would help them, what would make it valuable to them, um and just kind of gauging interest. And then we're just going to basically build on that. And so kind of how we're handling it is we're just making meet meeting weekly and getting through everything together. >> That's wonderful. Commissioner Stimler? Do you have any thoughts? >> Uh yeah, no, I Sorry, I agree uh on the engagement committee update. Uh we're making solid progress. Um I'm really actually quite excited for the event that we'll be having in the fall. Um and then moving forward, should I talk briefly about CEDA? Should I move Should we wrap to the next CEDA one? Should we go to CEDA? Um well, I think that's it on the event. I mean, we're meeting weekly. We're we're doing the outreach together. >> I mean, uh >> Okay. Was there any questions? Sorry. >> No, I was just wondering if Commissioner Ariel wanted to add anything or if she had any. >> Oh, Commissioner Rosenberg? >> Oh, sorry. Um yes, Commissioner Ro- >> [laughter] >> Yes, Commissioner Rosenberg. My email has your last name down differently. >> That's fine. People mistake it all the time. Do we to ask about outreach here? Should we do that? >> We can check in with Sophie right after. >> Yeah. For outreach, are we allowed to directly reach out to the organizations or should we be passing that to someone else? >> Let's talk about this offline cuz I have some ideas that I want to run by you guys. >> And I'd love to share the sponsorship list for the pride event. It was blue chip of all the people you probably want to come. So, I'd be happy to to work with you. Fair enough? Who do you want to go on to CEDAW? >> Yeah, the CEDAW committee has been meeting. We unfortunately couldn't meet right before. We are trying to grab some time with City Deputy Manager Chantel to talk about some additional ideas for increasing engagement with like political engagement for women. But we We're actually really excited to see the expanded roles for remote participation that recently came down. I feel like that's one of the one of the main concerns that we talked about was like how do we increase There's only I think been Now I forget the stat. Sorry, I don't have it at hand but it was something like there's only been 12 city council members who've been women in Palo Alto. So, that was something that we really anchored on like how could we increase political participation at the local level for women even though we know that it is an incredible amount of service that goes often late into the evenings and is a financial burden for families. So, it's is a challenge to think about what what we could do better. But that's one of the things we were thinking of. And I think the additional participation that is allowed because we now allow public comments remotely is a significant movement in that direction even though HRC didn't have anything to do with it. It was great to see. >> I'll just add to that. So, um Commissioner Simler and I met about a month ago, went over There's been some draft slides that cover the city and past commission's previous work on CEDA, looking at what um how cities similar in size have implemented CEDA. And as Commissioner Simler alluded to, it allowed us to narrow down the focus of how what we want to see in Palo Alto. Um now that we have Commissioner Rosenberg on board, um we have a meeting scheduled with Shantel Cotton Gains, who also bring her insight. And so, we'll be having that meeting in a week or two. Um yeah, to determine next steps for her insight. >> You know, as a footnote, we've I've been approached and I need to make the entree to you from Steven Lee, who was at the beginning of CEDA, and he'd love to be able to have the input and work with all of you. So, I'll do the formal. >> District question, um do I need to make a motion to have um a listening session at the August meeting? Or can we just concur that we'll have a listening session on uh housing for low-income seniors um in August? >> So, please, do we have to formalize that or will we do that? I thought when we're doing agenda, we're okay. Done. >> I'm sorry. >> We're okay. >> Okay, okay. >> have to do a motion. >> then can we have the the um the HERD subcommittee kind of organize it or We have to figure out who we're going to invite. And so would that be that'll be the job of of the herd of the three herd subcommittee. Okay, so the herd subcommittee will will communicate with each other and we will indicate which organizations we would like to come for a listening session on the issue of housing for low-income seniors in Palo Alto. Thank you. >> And on community safety, uh we have a new police chief. And I have approached him for our coordinated meeting and he's still getting his ship sailing in the right direction. So we should meet with him probably in the September fra- framework. On other issues, um I've moved forward in our discussions with a fraud workshop that overlaps many of the subcommittees. We will do it with Avenidas. We will hold it at Avenidas and we're hoping uh for an August date. Um Don, so you I'll give you the dates under consideration. I just want to confirm that our lead speaker is available on that date. And then we'll proceed. >> Okay, you'll you'll let me know more information by email or something like that. >> Now, has everyone made headway on our agency uh assignments? >> So Chair Cross, I just want to remind us that our agenda item is limited to the subcommittee report out. >> However, >> while we're doing our commissioner reports, if anyone wants to update the rest of the commission on liaisons they've had with their council buddy or any conversations that they've had with the agency that they are working with. That would be the time to do that. And in your packet is a reminder about who your agency is and your staff your council liaison. >> Thank you so much. Now, do we have to go to public comment? Is there any comment comment from the public online? And there's no one in the auditorium. >> If any member of the public would like to speak on item three, please raise your hand or press star nine now. We do have one hand raised. Our first speaker is Ming. Ming, you now have permission to unmute yourself. Ming, would you like to speak on item three? It appears we have no request to speak. Thank you. >> So, let's move forward on the city official reports. Are there reports or information that each commissioner wants to share? Won't we start in your direction? >> I have nothing to share at this time. >> Commissioner Causey. >> Um I'll just say and I'm sure I'm not the only commissioner who will speak to this was a wonderful pride celebration this past weekend. Um it really surpassed all expectations. I think they're still getting, you know, the estimate for attendees was originally they were predicting 500 to 1,000 and I think it's looking like the actual attendance turned out to be well over 2,000. I think they're still getting count. But um I know many of us were able to make it out. It was packed all day. It was wonderful. >> Oh, just a just a shout-out to Commissioner Rosenberg for her her um role in helping plan that. That was awesome. >> Commissioner Barr. Commissioner Cormack. >> No, I I was just curious to see if any of us spoke in the HRC from the HRC at the event. No, okay. Thanks. >> Well, I'll concur that the pride event was a rockstar event. The the planning commission that was part of that, I look forward to working with throughout my years in Palo Alto. Uh YCS the chairman was involved, their executive director, and the latest numbers I've heard were 1,500. It was truly exciting. It was an honor to share this with our new commissioner. Uh the programmatic work was stellar. And uh working with the rest of the planning commissioner, it was a true gathering of the community coming forward. And the program rocked. It really did. Thank you. And Commissioner Lorne Sorry. >> I have nothing to add at the moment. Thank you. >> Do you have anything you want to tell us before we move on? >> I do not. No. >> I wish your mother health. >> Thank you. >> All right. I know our council liaison is not here. He messaged me and uh we'll talk about his progress in August. And staff, do you have things to update us? >> Yes, I have a few things. Um so, in regards to uh YCS's application for emerging needs and our obligation to speak, they ended up um backing out of their um request. Um so, we're evaluating what we will do with that portion of the funds, but just wanted to update the commission on that. Um so, you didn't have an obligation to speak at that event. Um we have two events coming up in June um that may be of interest to the commission. Um one is the resource fair for our unhoused individuals. Um this will be at 33 Encina. Um we're collaborating with Life Moves, Peninsula Health Health Care Clinic, um and many other providers to support our low-income and unhoused members um of the community. There's going to be haircuts and it's a great It's great fun. So, if you guys have time to come out, you should. Um and then there will be a mental mental Oh my goodness. Mental health first aid training um at the downtown library. Um sorry, 1 second. Give you exact dates. Um and that will be on June 27th. So again related to some of the work that you guys have been doing on mental health for youth and others. And it's going to be Yeah, did I say it was at the downtown library? But I can share with you guys that information. And then finally we will not be having our commission meeting in July. We will break for summer. >> Could I ask what the date of the August meeting is? >> August 13th. >> 13th, is that correct? >> Are there any virtual public comments? >> I have to turn it off and then I have to talk. Um Is there anything else? >> If any member of the public would like to speak on an item not on the agenda, please raise your hand or press star nine now. We do have one hand raised. Our first speaker is Ming M. Ming, you now have permission to unmute yourself. >> [clears throat] >> It appears we have no request to speak. >> Okay, I think that we're going to adjourn. And thank you and have a safe, healthy, and happy break. And cool.

Perfect. All right. >> Recording in progress. >> All right. I'll call the meeting to order. First item uh on the or are there any um agenda changes, additions, or deletions? C >> can I call the RO? Oh yeah, sure. >> Yeah. Uh, Chair Roman, >> present. >> Uh, Vice Chair Willis, >> Board member Elinskas, >> present. >> Board member Eagles, >> For the record, we have quorum. >> Okay. Now, are there any agenda additions or deletions or changes? >> No changes are planned for this morning. >> Perfect. And is there any inperson public cond comment on items not on the agenda? >> Um through the chair I have not received any inerson public comment cards at the moment. >> All right then we can move on and we're holding Zoom comments to the end. Correct. Correct. >> Perfect. >> Um then we can move on to the city official reports. >> All right. Well, good morning and welcome to our June meeting. just have some brief updates to share here. So, we have six meetings remaining out of the year. Um, depending on any planned absences, please direct that to staff's attention and we'll note that for the record. And I did want to provide some updates. Since our last meeting on April 24th, the city submitted the annual report uh to the state for the certified local government status. Um in there's some upcoming changes, should I say, in late July and August with the historic resources board appointments. Um so that was originally planned uh before council's break in the month of July. Um but due to some heavy packed agendas, it has been postponed to um that late uh August um time once council comes back. So uh for the time being, the board is of the composition in front of us today. So um and I wanted to make note that on May 28th, we did hold the historic uh awards in the city hall lobby. I did have a photo from the event. Um, so we did have uh two board members that were present. Only one's pictured. Um, and we did have a council member uh that also came, but it was towards the end of the the ceremony. So, well attended. Great. And with that, I can entertain any questions before we get into some of those other agenda items. Perfect. If there's no questions, we can move on to the action items. >> All right. Well, starting with the first action item at 439 Lincoln Avenue. Uh this is a demolition uh within Professorville. [clears throat] So to orient ourselves here, uh this is a R1 single family zoning district in Professorville and the property is located near the intersection of Lincoln Avenue and Waverly Street, just three blocks or three lots over from that corner, should I say. Um, as for the property's historic significance, in June of 2024, it was surveyed and it was determined to not be individually eligible for listing in the California Register. However, the property was determined to be a contributing property to the Professorville Historic District and some of those details are provided in that attachment B of the staff report. And with that, we have a request to demolish a detached garage highlighted in yellow and pictured on the screen. And you may be asking yourself, why is this coming to the board? Um if we look at our municipal code section 1649070 uh demolition permits for significant buildings which significant buildings are all structures within a historic district are subject to a 60-day uh demolition moratorum that allows the historic resources board to make a recommendation to extend any moratorum to city council. So um in addition to the historic resources board, any member of the public may uh request to an extension of the moratorum on the on the demolition permit and city council can extend that up to one year from the date of application. So um I did want to note that this was sent as noted in the staff report to city council as anformational item. Um that is another requirement in the municipal code but um we're satisfying the second requirement coming to the historic resources board for the detached garage. So the recommendation for today is that the uh board is requested to review said application and provide a recommendation to council regarding whether to extend the moratorum or not. And that concludes staff's presentation. I'm happy to um entertain any questions and I do believe that the um applicant's team is here as well. Um I believe one covered parking space is required. So, if the garage is demolished, is there plans to create a new covered parking space? >> Yes, there is a associated building permits um for a junior accessory dwelling unit as well as um some other improvements on the property u just one story that um would be providing that replacement parking that you're mentioning in the municipal code. So, I I have a question about just sort of the general purpose of the moratorum. Is it to find you know an alternative use or site for the structure or there are other purposes associated with it like aside from you know delay I guess or additional study time. >> Sure. Sure. I I think the the intent of the moratorium, if we go back to when that code section was added uh in the municipal code, it is to allow all of those things that you mentioned. Um whether it would be say a structure such as a home or perhaps a a shed um kind of allowing maybe the community to um have a a look into if something could be preserved elsewhere rather than on the site. um should a property owner not want to um pursue say preservation of of a certain structure. So, it's a myriad of of options that could be that could occur within that time or it could just be waiting before it's demolished is another item. So, >> so it it's really a timing thing. It doesn't really change the ultimate outcome. >> Correct. It is just a timing. So um addressing um Getty's question, they are proposing a new junior ADU attached ADU and an attached garage. So it would break the pattern that exists right now between this house and its garage and the neighboring house and its garage. All right. If there are no more comments from the board, we can move on to do we have a presentation from the applicant or the applicant? I >> believe they're available for questions and maybe >> Yeah. >> Morning everyone. My name is Nandini. I'm with Arcanum Architecture and I'm here on behalf of the owners of 439 Lincoln. I had written up a little spiel, but I'll keep it really short. Um, I just want to talk about Paige and Turnbull's documentation of the garage and how they describe it. Uh, so Paige and Turnbull's documentation describes the garage as a simple stuckleclad one-story structure. It has a flat roof, sliding wood doors, no other openings, no architectural detailing or distinctive features. So, the garage was built in 1924 for a sum of $500, and it was actually built by a different owner. It wasn't built at the same time as the original the main house and so you know it was not part of the original design or construction of the development at 439 Lincoln. [clears throat] I think Paige and Turnbull's report describes it as it has limited historic significance. It is a accessory structure that is part of the entire property and it doesn't define the features of the property. But just apart from that, the garage is in fairly poor physical condition. Um, I think the permit application describes it, but I sent Stephen more pictures this morning. The doors are warped. They're pulling away. There's significant wood deterioration visible at the header. Um, it's not a building that can be successfully rehabilitated to today's use. It's really an accessory structure at the end of its life. And so we do ask the board respectfully to allow the application to move forward and not delay the demolition of the garage. Um my question is just why not maintain a detached garage that's more in character with the neighborhood rather than having one that's attached to the house that wouldn't have happened in the 20s. Um, so the the attached garage is really a rear attached garage. It's sort of set back so far from the property just based on the the setbacks and the way the new design is configured. It's set back far enough. I think it it it in fact is set back further than the requirements of a rear attached or detached garage. So I think the presence of that garage is going to be mitigated and you're not going to really p perceive it as a you know as a attached garage because it's set back so far. >> And when you say set back set back behind the facade of the house, >> right? >> Yes. And that was part of that building permit process that we went through for the first floor edition remodel. There is also an ADU on the property. So technically we did not need to provide any replacement parking. That's also part of the Yeah. >> Wonderful. Thank you. >> Thank you. I'm happy to answer any questions if any come up. >> Thank you. Um so I took a look at this property. I walked by it and um saw the green fence indicating a project and I was very relieved to see that it is a uh renovation rather than a de demolition because this is a beautiful house um and it deserves to be cared for. I think it's been neglected um over the past years. I am of the thought that we should not delay the demolition permit here. Um, this is a structure where the new owner is going to renovate it and a new family will be able to live in it. It's a beautiful property. Um, and I think it's a great example of meeting the community halfway. Uh if I may public, we perhaps should take public comment and then >> Thank you. >> public, we will take public comment before I continue. >> Yeah. And to the chair, we do have two requests to speak. Our first speaker is Karen H. Karen, you may now come up to the mic. >> [clears throat] >> Good morning and thank you all for um holding this this meeting. Um there are a few things that I think kind of convolute this from being a straightforward application for a demolition moratorum. Um, one thing and first thing I would say is according to page and turbles and I just heard something I did not read in the page and turbul report that the garage has lost its integrity. So the application the permit application indicates does not indicate this is historic. It indicates it's in historic district. That's very different. So applications need to be accurate. Um, another thing is I would actually I would strenuously ask you to please extend the moratorum because there's much to be learned here and I think much education that probably needs to happen as well. Um, the moratorium at the end of the moratorum the demolition permit if it goes forward as it is now as I understand it would be granted. Sequa says you cannot segment a project. So, as has already come out in this meeting, there's another garage being proposed. That's segmenting a project. You can't look at a demolition of a building and not also look at the at the um new building. That's segmenting SQA. That's not okay. It's really not okay. Um also, there are rules in PaloAlto that um if you demolish a building, you have to have uh permits for the replacement building. That's so we don't have vacant lots around town, all that sort of thing. Maybe there's a loophole for garages that I'm not aware of, but my understanding is for a long time if you demolish a building and there's going to be a replacement, those permits have to be approved before you can demolish anything. Um the um commissioner um or board member uh Willis has it right that the lot pattern is correct. Um about lot patterns is correct. I'm very tired this morning. I'm so sorry. The lot pattern comment is very correct. The lot pattern as um is described in the uh professorville design guidelines is very important and critical to the nature the very nature of professorville. Um one other thing about discretionary the um oh so that's one thing and another thing about um I am very tired. I do apologize. Um another thing about discretion and squa is while a demolition moratorum if you take it alone which I'm saying I don't think you can uh might be ministerial if you take it in toto with the replacement as well it's not ministerial individual review applies that's discretionary and individual review actually requires that garages in professorville and in neighborhoods they are detached and at the rear so what's being proposed is in violation of of that so there's a lot that needs to unwound here. And I'm not being very articulate this morning, but there's a lot that needs to be unwound. It's not a simple like, oh, it's okay. It's at the back. Um, it's just the garage. It's not that simple. And I would say that potentially >> potentially the future of Professorville could be hinge on what happens at this hearing and at this this project. >> Our next speaker is Michelle D. Michelle, you may now speak. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Oh, hi. Um, very nice to uh to to to meet all you and thank you for the time. I'm one of the neighbors. Um, I had to restore my house. It was termite ridden and in deep disrepair. So, I don't understand why the state of disrepair matters in this decision. Um, you could completely gut the entire uh entirety of the inside of the garage while keeping the look of the facade. Uh, and I don't know why you need to uh remove a garage to put another one. Just fix the existing one and call it a day. Um, and I disagree with the idea that it doesn't contribute to the look of the neighborhood. It does. The fact that it's set back very far with a lot of trees in front is the exact reason why I wanted to move to Professorville to start with. Uh and therefore, um I'm very concerned about what it will be replaced with. There is enough space on the lot, by the way, to add a detached garage somewhere else behind. So, it's not a requirement of removing this to put another garage. You can add that if you will. So, that concludes my comments. I respectfully ask that we are given more time uh to consider all this >> and to the chair that concludes public comment. >> Thank you. I'll open up to my fellow members of the board. >> Well, I think that leaves me with a few questions for Stephen. Um so, um from the professor real guidelines, is there anything that would apply to this garage? I mean is I mean obviously my feeling is walking by it has a strong relationship with the adjacent house to the right that the houses are set back similar amounts the garages are set back similar amounts um so I'm just curious I did not look at the guidelines before the meeting um and then the other question that Karen brought up about segmenting squa I know we don't have plans for the new garage um is that an issue or a non-issue in your mind, >> right? I think to orient the conversation here, let's see. So, the um applicant or property owner, should I say, uh did apply for um some ministerial permits. So, just subject to a building permit. They're not triggering the individual review process that was mentioned, which is a discretionary process um that would invoke SQA. So, um a ministerial process is exempt from SQA. So, they're proposing an ADU as well as a junior accessory dwelling unit and some first story additions to the structure, all of which only require a building permit. So, um before those permits can move forward, um the the demolition of that garage and that replacement parking will need to be tied in with that. So, um these are viewing say in concert, they're they're together um for that replacement parking component for for the new residents. um or remodeled residents, should I say. Um so I think that that captures the the SQA component. I I do not believe that this would be an issue of of segmenting. There's SQA is not triggered by by this work. Um, if we're talking about the design guidelines, um, the the project with the additions as well as accessory dwelling in it that was reviewed against the guidelines and, um, would be still considered say a contributing property within the historic district for for that proposed design. So, um, though that's not up for discussion on this agenda item, it does provide a little bit of color and context to what potentially would be replacing that uh that garage on the site. So, I think that's what I can offer. Let me clarify, [clears throat] Stephen. Our role today as the HRB is to make a recommendation to city council if we agree that the moratorum should be extended or if it remains as the 60 days. Correct. >> Correct. It would be a recommendation to extend that 60-day. So, um either you can make a recommendation to extend or no recommendation um would be the option. So, And how far in >> I think the microphone wasn't connected. >> Yeah, it's on. I don't think it's working right. Oh >> well, how far into the 60s are >> uh I believe the question was just for the record u for those people online um how far along we are in the 60 days. So we are right at um that threshold. Um so we are you know it's it's scheduled for city council. blanking on the exact date. It is listed in uh that staff report um as anformational item as well as going before the historic resources board today to um to make the recommendation or not uh to extend the moratorum. So um we are towards the tail end. >> I mean I guess I sort of get the sense that extending a moratorium in this case is really unlikely to change the outcome. Um, I I don't think anybody is going to pick this structure up for reuse. Um, and I I I really I think it's unlikely that anything would change as a result of the extension of the moratorum. >> I'm with you. Um, but I do feel like um it's an opportunity to put our opinions out there and I do feel like it's a disservice to the neighborhood to um disrupt this garage pattern. And I and also I I wish we had the plans. I mean it does make it a little harder like you're you know I I I I'm going to imagine the best possible scenario and it's set way back and it doesn't show and it's not obvious that the pattern has been disrupted but um but also you know not having the plans makes you a little you know what what is going to happen you know we don't know. So, um I I guess I would just make the point that when we make our motion, it would be nice if we register the fact that it would have been nicer to if the owners were willing to stay in sync with the neighborhood and maintain the pattern, but you know that we also understand where, you know, it's their property and they can do what they want with it. Um and you know it's it's not the best outcome but it's not the worst outcome either. >> So I also uh agree that um it doesn't seem that extending the moratorum is warranted. >> If I may just u comment back. So the reason why the plans for that replacement project are not um I mean that's not subject to the the board's review. So that's why that's not being uh presented today. So while it does provide some context as to what will be replaced, the the board does have a narrow purview for just reviewing the demolition and extending that delay. So that's that's the reasoning behind >> I think you what you just brought up is great that we need a clear definition of what we review and what we don't because okay I'm still wrinkled by the Julia Morgan next door that we didn't review um and it drastically changed the property. Um, so I think that if you have guidelines, please share them with us because I still do not understand what we review and what we don't because to me, this new project that we haven't seen that's on this Lincoln property is probably going to impact Professorville in some way, shape, or form. and the fact that we're not seeing it. I would like to understand where the line is and why, you know, and I I think you must have that because somebody's directed you about what the HRB reviews and it seems to be drastically different than what we reviewed a couple of decades ago when I was on the board before. Um, so I think it would be nice to clarify with us and just give it to us in writing so we understand and when somebody comes to us and says, "Why did you guys not review this?" we can say because you know so it would it would help us defend our position I think that um if we knew exactly where our purview was and I don't I don't think I do know that at the moment >> I think that would be a great addition to add to the work plan this upcoming work plan um that >> don't you already have that I mean how do you decide whether it comes to us >> I believe that the the purview of the board is clearly outlined in uh chapter 1649. I'm happy to set up a meeting outside of that uh of this public hearing right now on this item uh to discuss that further just to add some clarity, but um just to comment uh on the item that was brought up. I think it would be a great item to add to uh the work plan should there be other concerns from board members about uh that. So, >> and if I if I may just to step in and suggest the work plan could be an [clears throat] opportunity to have a discussion about the role of the HRB and what's laid out in the code and what um you know the kind of what the staff follows in terms of what things get brought to the HRB whether it's actually an item on the work plan or not. It could be a venue for discussing that to make sure that there is some clarify clarity on that topic. >> Um, Stephen, I just want to clarify something you said. Um, and I think I heard you say anything that meets a threshold for needing IR review goes to the board. If it doesn't require IR review, it does not go to historic board. Correct. discretionary projects have the opportunity to go to that. If it is a discretionary project on a category 3 or a four perhaps that is not subject to the board's purview. If it is on another property and it's falling in under what is defined in that 1649 as a minor um you know alteration that is captured at the staff level rather than at the board level. So um thank you Okay, great. Um, then I would like to uh make a motion to recommend to city council that we do not extend the moratorum for demolition at 439 Lincoln Avenue of the proposed garage demolition. >> I'll second. And I would like to add a little amendment if we could that says that we are reluctantly [laughter] um caving uh it's a better word um where we're reluctantly accepting the demolition the garage even though um there is a strong relationship with its neighbor to the right matching house setbacks and garage setbacks in maintaining the pattern of the neighborhood which will now be disrupted. Anybody willing to accept my I just think it's important for council to understand our logic. No. Okay. If we don't educate them, we'll never win. >> Board member Elinskus. >> Yes. Uh board member Eaglesen Chiswitch. >> Yes. >> Uh Vice Chair Willis. >> Thank >> uh Chair Roman. >> Yes. >> Motion carries 301. >> We may move on to the next agenda item. >> All right. Well, let me share my screen here. Well, um, how about we take a trip to 243 Webster Street. So, this is a category 2 uh rehabilitation project. This is in a R2, which is a two family residential zoning district um on our downtown north neighborhood. The lot is here pictured in yellow or outlined in yellow, should I say. So, a little bit about the uh construction chronology of the of the property. It was built in 1904. Uh the architect and original owner is unknown. Um but we do have some records from the Sandborn maps which I'll be uh going through. I pictured on the the right of the screen. It first appears in 1908 um on those maps. And between 1908 and 1924, a onecar garage was constructed pictured there in that 1924 Sanborn map. And then following that there was a one-story addition uh around 1924 and 1923. And in 1957 uh it was identified as having two units on the property. Um though there's no permits for that rear structure. It um it has been constructed and been there for quite some time since the 50s um as indicated by the Sandborn map. So, um that is part of the proposal here uh today and what's listed in the um packet on packet page 29 and 30 for that project description for for this property. So, a little bit about the architectural style. It's an eastern shingle cottage. Uh it's popular from the 1890s to the 1910s. It has uh some typical features of a symmetrical A-frame second story uh typically a large massing on that second story u with a wide u multi-wind dormers on each slope uh wood shingled cladding and um some detailing of colonial revival and classical revival. So, as mentioned, I'll go through the plans um briefly on the following slides. Um and just referencing back to that packet page 29 and 30 for those um project descriptions. So, for the proposal itself, um it is going to be raising and lifting the house. So, um that currently has a basement um albeit uh not too much of a headroom uh in it. So, the owner is uh electing to move the residence approximately 3 ft um on the property and uh approximately 3 ft above as well as uh increasing the grade of the property um that would effectively kind of mitigate against some of that height on the structure. So it would be a less perceived impact and we'll get into that on some of these elevations. So here's the original footprint and highlighted in yellow is where um the original house is and we can see that kind of approximately 3 ft kind of shifted to the right if you will on the screen. Since there are raising the the property, there are some additional light wells um for those windows uh to bring light into that as well as stairwells. So that's kind of the the perimeter if you will on on that. And if we look at that unpermitted portion in the rear, while this isn't subject to the Historic Resources Board purview because it is an accessory dwelling unit, um that is going to be replacing that uh that back unpermitted structure um from the 1950s. So outside of the period of significance for the property. So if we're looking at the front elevation, here's the existing conditions. And then I highlighted in yellow here where that uh previous grade is or existing grade. And we can see a slight elevation of the grade as well as kind of that underpinning being raised up. So, um, if it were just to be, um, without having that raised grading on the site, it would be a little bit kind of imposing to have that, uh, extra head height on on the basement. But, um, trying to mitigate some of that. And the Secretary of Interior standards, as detailed in the staff report, kind of notes some of these um some of these mitigation measures, if you will, or or features that the the architect has chosen to um provide less of an impact to the historic resource while still trying to accommodate the rehabilitation of the structure for that additional unit on in the basement. So, um, a lot of these or guidance, should I say, is is driven from flood standards that we have, um, and and those federal standards of either raising a site and providing either landscaping or raising the grade. There's there's a lot of different creative techniques that can be applied that can uh, lessen the impact of of a structure while also still providing some uh, protection from those. So, when you're relocating a house and raising it, those are the most applicable standards. And then also noting on the left hand side the fence uh that's going to be added to kind of screen the the stairwell uh if you will down to that um that basement unit. So, if we go around the house to the southeast side elevation, here's the existing um conditions. Then highlighted in yellow are the proposed. So we have that basement unit as noted earlier as well as a window change on this facade and that small rear addition. So there is already a rear edition that was non-historic as detailed in those application materials. Um, and the owner is choosing to have uh what is currently a deck on the second story enclosed and expanding approximately about like 50 square ft or so of additional floor area. So, pretty minor um changes to the rear, but um it will be adding, you know, some additional floor area to the property coming in below the 150 ft threshold for the individual review process. So, not triggering that um discretionary process. And then if we go around to the rear of the property where that addition is going to be located and a majority of the work as noted here that second story porch and there is going to be some window changes and the architect has noted that there's going to be some differentiation of some of the siding to note that the new addition uh is not trying to say invoke a false sense of history. so compliant with those um those standards there and as well as all around the [clears throat] the underpinning of the the structure of the introduction of some of those um some of those lights to bring uh light into the basement unit and a second story window if we teeter between the two would be changed for a restroom the interior and as we're going around the house on the other side elevation here, existing conditions in that rear edition as well as those uh basement additions. So with that, uh, staff is recommending that the application is consistent with the standards of review in the municipal code as well as the secretary of interior standards for rehabilitation. And the historic resources board may also um take the following actions. they could continue the project to a date certain with specific direction to either the staff and the applicant or recommend that the application is not consistent with the standards. So, and to direct the board's attention that is uh detailed on packet page 31 through 35 um the compliance and the reasoning or analysis if you will for each of those 10 standards for rehabilitation. And with that, I do have the uh applicant uh with us uh today. So, um I believe that they have some some words to say. So, thank you. Uh good morning. Um I'm the project architect. The I'm a historic architect. So, um, from the beginning, uh, this house originally wasn't a landmark building, but we, um, worked with Paige and Turbo when they did their survey and it was landmarked later and then it allowed us to use some exemptions and incentives, which helped us with the project. We've always intended to restore the house, rehabilitate it, and keep it in its original uh character and form and uh but yet get some better utilization of the site by um incorporating a unit in the lower area and then uh demolishing the old kind of non-historic building in the back and do something that was um more in keeping with the front. So um that's essentially it. Um we've um been working closely with Steven and um Amy prior to that. We're looking forward to moving forward uh with the project and uh restoring the house and adding some you know housing units for the downtown which is badly needed. It's close to the downtown and we feel like this will be some you know direly needed housing units and um looking also forward to restoring the house and getting it back in service. So, I'm just available for questions if you have any. And uh the primary reason we're moving it, I did want to mention the primary reason we're moving it is to allow for um access to the basement unit on the side in a discrete location and then still provide a six-foot setback. Uh after the 3-foot stair goes down to the basement, it's behind that fence. this provides um the firefighters you know access and other things and uh accommodates the light wells. So that's the basic reason why we're doing the move. So anyway, thank you very much. >> Is there any public comment on this item? >> Um to the chair, we have not received any public comment cards and there's also no raise hands on Zoom. >> Perfect. Then I'll open it up to discussion from the board. >> Um I have one question. Um so raising it three feet. So um I'd like to know what it how high above the current grade it is and how high it will be above the current grade. >> Yeah, the actual height that we're raising it is 18 in. Um, we have to do a we had for the flood zone, you know, mitigation, we needed the light wells to be raised 3 ft, the curbs of the light wells to be raised 3 ft to get them above the baseline flood zone, flood plane area that's estimated. Um and so one of the um one of the tools we used was to raise the house 18 in so that then the retaining walls or the light well walls would only have to be raised 18 in as opposed to uh 3 ft 36 in. So it was a way of kind of splitting the middle to accommodate an appearance that won't be too imposing. Otherwise we would have had kind of a moat effect of a wall around the house where those light wells were. So, um, it's a fairly gradual rise when you think about it because it will come from the very front property back rising slowly and it actually um facilitates better drainage for the site. So, there were some benefits that came out of this particular raise of the site to get it higher. So, that's that was it. But, um, it shouldn't have a significant impact. In fact, when we kind of did the front elevations, it it didn't have much of an impact on the overall appearance u relative to the neighboring houses or the house itself. So, hopefully that answers your question. >> It does. Thank you. Um, but I do I'm just curious, but the adjacent house on the right is very much a twin. So, what will the height relationship be in the end? I mean, now it looks like this one is just an itty bit bit higher. >> Yeah. So, we're going to be gradually grading back down towards that house to where we're back to their height, their their sight lot. So, I worked closely with our civil engineer to come up with a a gradual stepping down terracing of our um our landscape around the house and then coming down. And so, we have a nice driveway there. So we have a enough area to make that transition. And um so as it comes out and runs out to the uh neighboring property, there'll be a small probably um maybe six four to 6 in curb that will support a fence and that's that'll be the only height change there. So it's going to be fairly insignificant as far as the impact on the neighboring property. So it should work out fairly well. Yeah. >> Any additional [clears throat] comments or questions from the board? >> Um I have one question which is um is the house zone for multif family so that the upper unit and the basement unit are two. >> Yeah, it happens to be an R2. >> It's an R2. Okay. Yeah, it was one and then it had two addresses because that back unit had an address. So, it's it already had been used and I think the house according to the owner was always a kind of used as a rental property. So, from very early on when it was built This is somewhat off subject, but um I just want to confess that I did go through the house um when the current owner bought it recently. Um well, not that recently, a couple years ago, so I am familiar with the property and and the owner. Okay. Okay. If there's no further discussion, um I would motion I motion that the Historic Resources Board uh finds the project at 243 Webster to be compliant with the Secretary of the Interior standards and uh recommends to council that it moves forward. >> I'll second. If I may just a correction, not to city council, the director, but >> the director. So, let me let me restate that. Uh, the historic resources board finds the project at 243 Webster to be compliant with the secretary of the interior standards. And we recommend that the director move forward. >> I'll still second. >> Um, board member Eagle Chzoich. >> Yes. >> Uh, board member Yilinskis. Yes. >> Uh, Vice Chair Willis. >> Yes. >> Uh, Chair Roman. >> Motion carries. 40. >> And I just want to add a thank you to the owner for um doing such a nice job with this lovely little remnant of our past and um and I I'm sure it's going to turn out great. It's really nice to have it remain with us and improve its appearances. Thank you. >> Yeah. And and historic multif family is really cool. So, thank you. and raising a house and moving it is super cool. So, we are we we love we sign off on this project fully for what it's worth. >> All right, we can move on to the next step agenda. And before we get started, perhaps um we now might be the time for uh disclosures, recusals, or any of those items. So, okay. So, I need to recuse myself from this project. Thank you. So I leave the room. Yes. All right. Well, um we can continue down uh towards the bay um and go to 855 Hamilton Avenue. So this is a rehabilitation project. So, this property is um zoned R1, so single family. It's within that Crescent Park neighborhood. Um I do want to note that the as noted in the staff report, um this property was evaluated as part of the 2023 uh reconnaissance survey. So, while it is not currently designated, it was recommended for listing as a category 2 resource. um that is on the consent calendar uh with council following this meeting. So um staff in an effort to advance a project forward wanted to bring this before the historic resources board for a determination of the project's consistency with the standards um that shouldn't have a bearing or would not have a bearing on the designation of the property um as a project if it is decided um would be consistent with the standard. So um just wanting to make that minor note and the previous project 2 was part of that 2023 recon survey. So the difference there was the property owner had affirmatively chosen to list their property. This one there was uh no response. So following that um as noted in the staff report the property owner of this 855 Hamilton Avenue has expressed interest now in listing uh to utilize some of the incentives that we have in the zoning code for historic properties. still putting to use some of our um incentives here. Um so just wanting to frame the conversation. So a little bit more uh construction chronology than the previous property. So this was built in 1915 um and early so and uh the adjacent property 865 Hamilton was also constructed around the same time. So, this was built for uh Carolyn Ray and the property uh to the the north um or should I say east um on Cynica and Hamilton on the corner there was built for her son Robert. So, um and this is by the uh architect Sumner. Um there's about 50 homes um of his work within PaloAlto. So, kind of a prolific architect in in the area. Um, as we go through, uh, history, uh, Toll House was constructed in 1924. There were some repairs in the 70s for termites. Um, and some first floor additions and alterations in the '90s. uh re-roofing in 2003 and a kitchen remodel in 2005 as well as some uh minor addition and some site improvements uh more recently in the um mid 2000s uh 2009 and 2010 um with a trellis, a pool and a garage and some associated landscaping. So, if we get into the proposal, um just wanting to note that on packet page 88 is the um what's listed as the um project description. Actually 87 um and highlighting that through the plans here. So, um there's a few items to note before we jump into that. There is a junior accessory dwelling unit component of this. So that is not subject to the historic resources board review, but um as part of the incentives, um the property owner is um has an application, should I say, for a home improvement exception to have that additional floor area. So that additional floor area would be bridging um the main residence between the junior accessory dwelling unit. So adding as pictured here, um the junior accessory dwelling unit is in yellow and there is that tiny little sliver um that's marked maybe if I can get on the screen here um with my cursor that would be subject to the home improvement exception. So um if the property is listed uh they would be able to have that additional floor area on on the property. So, and there are some other rear changes with the new pergula added on the property. And we'll walk through some of the elevations. If we're looking at the front elevation, there is a minor change of a window changing to a door. So, essentially kind of busting out the the bottom of the the window and extending it down. um still keeping that same uh width of the opening. And if we go around the structure, we're looking at um the southern elevation here. And you can see that uh junior accessory dwelling unit being added in the rear of the property as well as uh if we go on the second story where there is an existing um patio kind of doing some some modifications to that. So this is really the line here um where the old structure is and everything here is the junior accessory dwelling unit. So, all of this would be changing though um with the with the remodel. If we go on the rear elevation on the western, there's a few changes to some of the windows. Uh relocating on the second story as well as uh the patio on that um second story. So, swapping out some of those doors there on on that addition as well as those windows. Um, just slightly relocating for some better interior circulation of of those spaces. And if we go to the northern elevation, they're noting that uh some few window changes just between the two elongating one window and replacing one larger window with two. And that addition um on the right pictured in yellow. So with that um as detailed in that staff report page let's see here 89 through 93 of the packet the project um staff has um analyzed and determined to be consistent with the standards of review in the municipal code as well as the secretary of interior standards and is recommending that the board also make that recommendation to the director. And as noted on the last project, uh the historic resources board may either continue the project to a date certain and provide some specific direction to the staff or applicant, or they could also recommend uh that the application is not consistent and should specify which standards they're in not complying with, should I say. And with that, the applicant is here. Um, and they do have some a presentation. So, turning it over and I work with Gasulinskas Architects. Um and I just thought I could uh share a few images of the property and uh including our proposed uh perspectives. Um these are just a few aerial images. Uh so you can see the property, the main residence uh which dated 1915. Um and then the accessory structure that is a much uh more recent from probably 2010. Um which is the garage. Uh in these images you can see uh top right uh that is the uh existing garage and the main residence. uh to the right at the center image you can see uh the front facade of the residence and the the most top right image shows um the dining room window that we are proposing to be replaced uh with a door so the owners can also utilize the front yard of the property. Uh and then at the bottom images you can see the rear of the home. Um bottom left shows um the existing family room uh which we are proposing to expand by 211 square ft um using home improvement exception. And I just wanted to note that um page on turbo report it says that this is not uh historic uh volume. It retains more or less historic footprint. Uh so there were permits in uh 89 and 2005 I believe which modified this area and in uh 89 the family room was adjusted to have an octagonal shape. Previously it was a laundry room here and then in 2005 it was returned to this more rectangular shape and slightly expanded and also the kitchen was expanded towards the northeast. Um and this is our perspective showing the front of the home and here you can see the um dining room door now. So we intend to keep as much um existing detailing as possible and um introduce the doors um below the transom. We are not doing any changes here. Uh well except um moving the fence closer to the uh front of the property. Uh this is the image of the rear. So you can see the ADU um on the left in the house in the behind the the two trees that we want to preserve. And this is also the ADU unit. And you can see the family room expanded. This is the uh existing accessory structure with a new pergola. Um this is another view towards the main residence and I think this image probably um shows the full picture of the family room being expanded. Uh this is our materials board. Um we are aiming to um retain as most existing windows as possible and recreate the detailing of the ones that are to be replaced. Um we are also um planning to replace the roof finish and our intent is to match existing or to relate as closely as possible to the um sister home at uh 865 Hamilton. Um and the the brick finishes and the limestone, those are to be used for the new elevated deck in the rear. And um the limestone is to be used for the ADU JDU finish to contrast slightly with the existing residence. And um here I just have our plants. If any if you have any questions, I could just um bring them up. And I guess to summarize from the public right of way, the major change we're doing is replacing the dining room window with a door. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any public comment on this agenda item? >> Um to the chair, we have not received any public comment cards and there are no requests to speak on Zoom. >> Okay, I will open it up for board discussion. I have a question for Stephen, of course. [laughter] Um, and and this is in no way an objection, but I am just curious, is there any requirement for an ADU to be used as an ADU when you build one? >> I guess I'm not fully understanding the question, but um the construction of a accessory dwelling unit, whether it's junior, say attached to a structure, um would have the items uh defined in state law. um that would define a dwelling unit. Um so whether it's rented or provided, you know, a space for a family member, um those uses aren't necessarily regulated. Um it's >> that's what I wanted to know. Yeah, >> nice house. [laughter] This is a beautiful house. Um, okay. I'm going to go back to my last uh verbiage for this motion if I can find it. Okay. Um, I motion that we find the project at 855 Hamilton to be compliant with the Secretary of the Interior standards and recommend to the director that we move forward. >> I will second. Um, board member Eagles and Chzwitch. >> Yes. >> Vice Chair Willis, >> yes. >> Chair Roman, >> Motion carries three zero. >> All right. Well, let's get board memberisk back and then we can do the uh the minutes. And through the chair, I uh did want to share that everyone was present for the April 9th meeting. So, no one would have to abstain. Okay. Are there any um additions, changes, or deletions to the minutes from April 9th? Okay. If there are not, I move to approve the historic resources board meeting minutes from April 9th, 2026. A second. >> Um, board member Yulinskus, >> yes. >> Board member Eagles, >> Vice Chair Willis, >> yes. >> Chair Roman, >> Motion carries 40. And uh at this time, do we have any virtual public comment? >> Uh to the chair, there are no raise hands on Zoom. Thanks. >> All right, then we can move on to board member questions, comments, announcements. >> Yeah, I actually did have a question about um some of the public comment we received in written form prior to the meeting. Um there were a couple that looked like they were pretty straightforward, like either staff or council type response items. Um, the one I'm curious about is the one that arrived um kind of like right before the deadline that we got last. Um, and it looked like it was from the uh a realtor associated with a a prospective purchase of a property. Um, you know, inquiring about the property's historic status, but then also kind of referencing some experiences that maybe a friend of the client had had. um that sounded to me like they were really inconsistent with what would typically be required of a preservation project in PaloAlto or historic rehabilitation. So I guess my question is like you know while it seems like outside of our agenda today to respond to that inquiry directly like what resources are like generally available to somebody who's you know coming and expressing that sort of concern and also may not have you know like ideal information about the process in general for you know rehabilitating a historic property which I guess also to just be clear with this it does not look like this property was historic. So that that's my question. >> Correct. I believe that that would be the Emerson property that was included in that uh most recent public comment um that I believe came in over the weekend. Um so I did respond to that email um and tried to provide some of the information and resources that we do have available while albeit um they are on the website. um that is a little difficult to find. Um so I provided the links to the the uh real estate agent I believe uh for that prospective buyer and tried to clear the air if you will for some of those um you know misconceptions for some of the permitting process. Um and this is correct that the property is is not historic. Um is a non-contributing resource within Professorville. um it has a contemporary uh build date of the 1970s. So well outside of the period of significance for the historic district. So while the standards or guidelines um design guidelines should I say do apply to the property that's just to keep the compatibility of the district. So um and keeping some of the the more contemporary designs um making them compatible. So, all of that was provided to to the real estate agent. >> Thank you. I think like the more we can do to like clear up misconceptions probably like the better off because, you know, there there definitely some I don't know some things out there that are, you know, just things that a purchaser or homeowner does not need to worry about. >> Did you ask for clarification on that $2 million? you know, wasn't that the number that she sort of came up with for the extra cost of the historic review and things required, >> right? So, um, rather than getting bogged down in some of the details, um, I I think, you know, if we view the glass still has water in it rather than maybe it it's not necessarily full or empty. Um I I think you know centering the conversation about um kind of warding off some of those misconceptions rather than getting into some of the details. I I think it's probably a more constructive way to kind of face some of that. So at least that's the staff's approach. So >> yeah, I I just curious what kind of things might have fallen in there that you know maybe we could you know address more directly in the future. I don't know. Where's our intern? I was hoping that we would see him today. >> They are starting on the 15th. So, um >> on the what they did the 15th. >> The 15th. So, next week >> on Monday. >> On Monday. >> On Monday. So, just uh right following this meeting, but um I think one of those items that actually how fitting then this is brought up. Uh some of the items that the intern will be working on is the historic inventory. um as we've as we've noted um in carrying on some of the the work or passing on the torch if you will from um Vice Chair Willis and uh Chair Roman and for some of the work that they've done on their ad hoc for um the work plan goal for updating the inventory as well as um I believe that there's some other items in the work plan for community engagement that we can work on. um to kind of ward off some of those misconceptions that the community might have about historic resources. >> I I am here next week if they need any misdirection, anything I can provide, [laughter] I would be happy to, but I also, you know, would, you know, I'm willing to be an in the intern's intern if they need, you know, extra resources for anything. I just I would really like to have an updated inventory when I leave this board. Um and I I know that sounds like a a you know a minimal goal, but it's been elusive. Um and I um would I'm really hoping to push that forward and I'm willing to put some energy into that. But um >> so one thing about the inventory I think Caroline you and I spoke and currently the inventory lives in like a spreadsheet or that's about it. >> So there's currently the city inventory published online is a list but then Stephen has a copy of it that is a spreadsheet. Yeah. Um, and I showed Carolyn an example of the um, property database that you know, San Francisco Planning has. That's actually a really great template. And if the inventory could become something like that and uh just on that note um I will say that at the historic preservation conference earlier in the month of May um I was able to attend a session for creating um a more engaged inventory and community. So there's been a few pro uh certified local government programs across the state that have uh digitized versions and kind of interactive whether you can you know click on a property and it provides all of the u building permits or historic resource evaluations that have occurred over the years. So believe that we have a lot of great examples and hopefully we'll have a great example to provide to that community uh as we build ours out. So, >> so yeah, if we could sit down, if you and I could sit down with the intern next week, that would be amazing because I just feel like even between Sam, you and Sam and I, there's some discrepancies about how we want to approach it. And I just think that maybe um addressing kind of what we're looking for as an end product um not, you know, not totally defining it maybe at this point, but at least, you know, sort of laying out the parameters and the decisions that need to be made. I'd really like to get that moving so we can get a manageable inventory that you can look at and understand because I think that if there's a we have different kinds of historic districts and um different properties involved and I think that um there's there's um we can it wouldn't take much to improve what we have right now but um I would like to um get it to a point where we could just do it once and you know have something we can update, modify and be, you know, basically done. >> All right. If there is no other comments or agenda items, I will join the meeting. Thank you.

Mhm. >> Mhm. >> Good evening everyone. I'd like to call to order this regular meeting of the Planning Transportation Commission for Wednesday, June 10th, 2026. Mr. De Vera, could you please take the roll? >> Yes. Uh Chair Chang? >> Here. >> Vice Chair G? >> Commissioner Aiken? >> Here. >> Commissioner Peterson? >> Commissioner Heckman? Commissioner James? >> Here. >> Commissioner Templeton? >> For the record, we have quorum, noting that Commissioner Heckman is absent. >> Um Ms. Armor, do we have any agenda changes, additions, or deletions? >> No changes. >> Okay. Uh at this time, we'd like to take in-person public comment for any items that are not on the agenda. For Zoom uh or remote public comments, we will address that at the end of the meeting. Are there any comment cards? >> Uh to the chair, we have not received any public comment cards at the moment. >> Great. Thank you. Uh on to city official reports then. Take it away, Assistant Director Armor. >> Thank you. Let's get the PowerPoint up for you today. So, as usual, we'll just go over your upcoming meetings. Um so, on the next slide, our next meeting on June 24th will be canceled due to a lack of items. Uh we have currently scheduled for your July 8th meeting two discussion items, 470 Olive Avenue rezoning and the PTC work plan. Now, I recognize that we've got two commissioners who uh may be absent for that meeting. And so, um depending on whether they are able to review and provide written comments, we may continue it for further discussion or could potentially to the second meeting. I will consult with the chair on how we want to manage that in terms of those agendas. And then next slide, a little bit of update on council. They did approve the draft ordinances for Senate Bill 79 and directed continuation of the work on the downtown housing plan at their June 1st meeting. There will be follow-up work for SB 79 based on the discussion and the motion from them that evening, but the second reading of the ordinance and the urgency ordinance to carry us through to that implementation, all of that will be on consent next week's meeting as well. On June 3rd, the Economic Development Committee considered and unanimously recommended approval of both the retail ordinance and the shrink wrap rule that were both recommended by the Planning Commission. And on June 8th, just this week, they discussed the San Antonio Road Area Plan and recommended we proceed with the additional studies for the core scenario developed based on their study session. There were a number of other things on that agenda including discussion of some of the work for or taking the Coverley Master Plan issue and putting it on the ballot. And so, that proceeds forward and and other work related to California Avenue. And then next week, the final week before or final meeting before council does their summer break and there are There are consent calendar items, but no discussion items related to planning and development services. Their next meeting will be on August 10th. They will have three council meetings in August, but it'll be the 10th, the 17th, and the 24th, rather than starting with that first Monday in August. And with that, concludes my presentation. We do have Ozzy Arce here to speak to transportation. >> Go ahead, Mr. Arce. >> Thank you, chair and members of PTC. My name is Ozzy Arce, senior transportation planner with the Office of Transportation updates for June 10th. Uh I presented a couple weeks back. Uh so, this will be a shorter update focusing on previewing upcoming transportation items slated for council consideration at the upcoming June 15th meeting. Moving to slide two, I want to highlight a major milestone for our city's active transportation infrastructure. The final 2026 bicycle and pedestrian transportation plan. I want to extend a sincere thank you to this commission for your foundational work on this project. Your review and unanimous recommendation of the draft plan back on November 12th were instrumental in shaping the document. Following your recommendations, City Council conducted a comprehensive review of the draft plan on December 1st, where they provided direction to refine policy language around e-bikes and e-cycle management, and tighter uh synchronization with parallel local area plans and projects. Staff has spent the last several months incorporating incorporating that feedback into a final plan document, which will officially go before the City Council for consideration and and adoption this coming Monday, June 15th. So, we're excited for that. Slide three outlines a very busy June agenda for the Office of Transportation at Council looking ahead at the upcoming items on June 15th. As mentioned, it's the last council meeting before their summer recess. Council will be evaluating the College Terrace Residential Permit Parking terms, reviewing the Alma Charleston Improvement Project, and as mentioned, voting on the formal adoption of the 2026 BPTP. Additionally, we are bringing forward the Palo Alto Transportation Management Association, known as PATMA, contract. We are launching a new 3-year agreement with PATMA. This year's contract features an important expansion that we want to highlight. As the city begins to transition and wind down the Palo Alto Link service, the micro the micro transit program here in the city later this fall, PATMA will scale up its capabilities. While the previous year's suite of services focused heavily on low-income workers downtown, their expanded offerings will now also be available to support seniors, disabled residents, and families with disabilities citywide, which is great news in today's context. And that concludes my OOT staff updates for this evening. I'm happy to take any questions you have. Thank you. >> Thank you. Commissioners, do you have questions? All right, let's go with Vice Chair Gee. >> Thank you, Chair, and I will continue my streak of always having questions for staff, so apologies for that. Um, my first question is for Assistant Director Armor on the retail ordinance and the shrink wrap rule. When the committee recommended approval for this item, were there any major changes, or did they recommend the PTC recommendation forward to council? >> There was a an addition >> [clears throat] >> of two personal service to include certain types of testing. Um, it was a narrow definition based substantially on the language that was recommended by a member of the public um to allow certain types of medical testing where they are doing scans and and things. So, it was a pretty narrow definition uh that was added and you can see that in um in the draft ordinance that's in the packet for Monday. >> Yeah, and I presume it's probably the same public speaker that came to us that provided that language. >> Correct. And so, as a response to the comments that they heard here at Planning Commission, they developed some language trying to keep it narrow and address the concerns so that it would really be very focused. There may be additional discussion with the Economic Development Committee later. They did ask that a few items, for example, allowing housing to be built above ground or behind some of the the Middlefield Shopping Centers, that that come back for further discussion at another time, but not hold up this ordinance moving forward. >> And no changes to the shrink wrap rule? >> No changes. >> Thank you. And then I had a second question, which is about the item that's coming before us on July 8th for 470 Olive. This is a partial item that we've actually discussed before, correct? >> Correct. >> Okay, thank you for the clarification on that. And then my other questions are for Mr. Arce. So, I had a question about the dark downtown parking project, which we've seen kind of pushed along through the year. Do you have any updates as to when that might come back to us or any explanation for this continued delay? >> As I reported last week uh or I would just say last meeting, the parking program's update and modernization initiatives that's specific to downtown needs a little bit more time. We are uh doing internal coordination as well as additional engagement with our downtown stakeholders. So, that's all I have for now. >> Okay, so we So, we think maybe sometime in Q3? Like I guess do we have an estimate on when that might come back? >> I asked the parking manager and they did not have an estimate at this time. >> Thank you. And then I also was wondering, could you provide a brief description of what the Alma Charleston Improvement Project is that you have the OTs working on? >> Yes, they are looking at Well, let me just pull this up so folks know. >> Yeah, I think Commissioner Templeton I probably frequent that intersection. So, I think we are curious. >> Yes, so I think this was I part of the uh work uh to accelerate the improvements around the Charleston and Alma uh im- corridor. It looks like they're looking at traffic signal modifications, street lighting improvements, and roadway resurfacing as the big ticket items for that effort. Um and yeah, council's looking at uh moving that forward at their June 15th meeting. >> Okay, great. Thank you. I just want to do a friendly comment to look into the potential loose wires that may have caused the issue at Meadow just to flag that potentially as an an issue that might come up here. So, just thank you for resolving that and I just want to make sure we don't repeat that here at Charleston. And then my last comment is more just a comment, which is I think the commission here really enjoyed the report produced by Patma that we saw during the pro-housing designation discussion and we're excited to see that. Well, I I will say I am excited to see that, but I think many commissioners will agree that the report was pretty thorough. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> [clears throat] >> Commissioner James. >> Um I'll second the Patma love. Um I think that was uh I like what they're doing. I like how they're doing it. So, I'm real glad to see that move forward and expand. Mostly, I just want to say thank you for forwarding my concerns about the the reach to from Newell Bridge back the renovation re-engineering of that area and to flag to your colleagues working on that that this might be the perfect time to um address that vexing problem of the the maintenance easement there. So, thank you for doing that and following up with me. I appreciate it. >> Commissioner Aiken. >> Thank you, Chair. First for Vice Chair Gee, there's a nice summary of the Alma Charleston project that appeared in Palo Alto online this afternoon. So, if you haven't had a chance to look at that, it's a good explanation. My question is for Mr. Barton Mr. Orsay, can you summarize what is in the works for the College Terrace RPP? >> I don't have any specific details on the RPP other than it is It's the It's just the It's the terms for the RPP, but I don't know what exactly it's looking to update. >> Yeah, that one's an unusual one and that it [clears throat] does allow commercial parking in a way that some of the other RPPs don't. So, I know people would be interested if that's one of the terms that's going to change. Okay, that's it for me. >> All right, seeing no other lights, I'll jump in with my questions. So, Assistant Director Armor, do you know I know that there's quite a lot that City Council asked the BTC to look at regarding SB 79 just recently. Do you have any sense of when that will be coming to the PTC? >> So, the original plan was for, um, an ordinance to basically implement, on a more permanent basis, the temporary ordinance that was drafted, um, and that that would have been coming to you in July. However, the direction from council was more involved. They are interested in having some consideration of looking at some of the properties where development might be likely or would we would like to encourage it to allow a bit more than what is allowed under the draft ordinance, is my understanding. And so, the, uh, background research and preparation for that will take a, uh, some more time. So, I would expect it's going to be at least a couple of months before we're able to bring that to you for discussion. >> Thank you. And then my other question, um, you had mentioned that at the next City Council meeting there's going to be a several items on the consent calendar, but nothing for discussion. Are those, are any of those items items that have come to the PTC or are they only >> They're They are. So, for example, the recommendations from the Economic Development Committee that I mentioned, those are both going to them, uh, first reading of those ordinances on consent. Uh, so there are a number of things, but none of them, any that are on consent, uh, that might be discussed, like, if they were pulled, they would then be discussed after the summer break. >> Okay, thank you. Uh, I have no other questions, so let's move on to our only action item of the evening. Um, so this action item is to recommend the City Council adopt a draft ordinance amending the special setback map to update the special setback along a portion of Hansen Way at 3300 El Camino Real. >> And I'm going to jump in here. You have met Senior Planner, Kelly Chao [clears throat] before, but I want to take this opportunity to thank her for her hard work because this is going to be her last planning and transportation commission with the meeting with the city of Palo Alto as next week will be her final week with us. So, big thank you to her for all of her work and this one final thing. I think she's going to provide us a nice short meeting. Um, knock on wood. This evening. So, take it away Kelly. >> Thank you. Good evening chair, vice chair, commissioners. My name is Kelly Chao. I'm [clears throat] here to present the special setback update on a segment along Hansen Way, specifically in front of 303 303 hundred El Camino Real. Next, please. This project was initiated by the city council as part of their motion back in May 2025 when they adopted the expanded El Camino Real area focus plan. The city council asked staff to explore reducing the existing setback of 50 feet to 20 feet to be more consistent with the intention of the focus area plan. And so, staff recommendation aligns with the city council's direction because reducing the special setback would remove the barriers of the development to development and provide more buildable space and of course consistent with the the focus area plan that will encourage higher density development along transit corridor as well as allowing maximizing allow maximizing housing potential on this site. And reducing the special setback also aligns with the site space zoning, which is RP. This is a correction from the staff report. We have mentioned that it's a CS, commercial district, but it's actually research park. Um, next, please. So, um, this is visually presenting what it is now and what it will be upon your recommendation and city council's adoption. So, the left side map is showing the existing special setback of 50 ft along Hansen away. And we're looking at the segment in front of 3300 El Camino Real. And the right side map shows the staff recommendation and city council. Next, please. Upon, um, recommendation from the PTC tonight and, um, staff will take this item to the city council for adoption. And as always, the ordinance, um, will become effective on the 31st day of the second reading. Next, please. This concludes, um, staff presentation and I'm ready to take any questions from the commission. Thank you. >> All right, does any body on the commission have clarifying questions before we take public comment? All right, Commissioner James and then Commissioner Aiken. >> Um, I just wanted to, maybe I overlooked this, but the way this is ordinance is written, it would only pertain to that one lot and that one that one side of Hansen. It would not extend to I thought the way it was written it it felt like it might extend to both sides of the street. >> [clears throat] >> That's correct. So, only in front of the the blue portion, um, Mr. Tavares, if you could pull it up. >> Oh, uh, >> Um, so we have a map also in the packet, um, that's page 17. Uh, it's showing just the blue portion, so it's just in front of the 3300. And um, anything below that site, south of the site, wouldn't have any impact with this particular item. >> And to add some context to that, across the street there already is a modification to the special setback on the property directly across Hansen Way. And so that was described in the staff report that there was a previous project that came through but wasn't built. Um but the modification to the special setback stayed in place that if they were to develop for mixed-use hotel use that they um would not be that the special setback would not be applicable to them. So that's already in place. >> Uh just to clarify, was there a specific language in the ordinance that you were concerned about that you wanted to ask? >> So I just um it just says uh um Yeah, it just looked to me like it was explore reducing the special setback setback along uh Hansen Way at El Camino to 20 ft. I just didn't see where maybe I overlooked it. Uh but I didn't see where it was clearly specifying one side of the street and not the other and you've kind of explained it but I didn't know if that should be captured in the wording and not just the map. >> Yes, I think um uh I think Commissioner Aiken also pointed out um prior to the meeting and we will be um making some revisions to clarify the location as well. >> That we could include a specific reference to the property that is the portion that is applicable. Um this was Thank you, Commissioner Aiken, for also providing that um just yesterday a suggestion cuz I think that will clarify and make it really clear. The map I think would be sufficient but it's good to have the language be clear as well. >> Um and it makes me so happy that I spotted the same thing as Commissioner Aiken. >> [laughter] >> And and I do want to use this as an opportunity to say that as we discussed at the last meeting, if we got those questions or comments early on Monday, I might have been able to put together a report for you. >> And my apologies for that. I think I there were some questions that I did not have until I drove by the site today. >> All right, uh Commissioner Aiken. >> Um and I will just follow up with the obvious follow up which is uh was there any interest in extending this blanket change to 3200 El Camino as well rather than just making it conditional on mixed use or hotel? >> So the council direction was specifically on this particular segment. Um so we're following that direction. Um if the PC is interested, you could also suggest that City Council consider in the future, but um for the purpose of making this quick uh adoption and make the change so that it's available for that housing develop future housing development, um I think the motion could be that it's just uh this that segment is considered and then perhaps in the future they could consider additional um study on that uh special setback across from the site. >> Thank you. I think that I think that answers the real question I had. Um but it uh does occur to me that if we were to make that change at 3200 El Camino, I assume that that would have to go through the regular noticing procedure and all the other >> Correct. >> processes. >> Correct. We would not include that at this time. Um it's not something that would be part of your recommendation on this item since that wasn't noticed. Um it's something that I will definitely keep in mind for future work efforts in case it ties into some other discussions, maybe more broadly about special setbacks on Hansen Way. >> Excellent. Thank you very much. That covers everything I had. >> Commissioner James, did you have another clarifying question? >> Um, I just want to say that I I I too had this thought of like, is this something we should be doing more globally? Uh, and I think probably just kind of not give the appearance of doing a special um sort of concession for one developer, one property owner, whatever, uh, just in a sense of appearing to have more fairness. But, I kind of came back to the idea that I'd like to see how it works on this one first. Um, but uh, I I do think there's virtue in uh it makes me a little nervous when we're doing little carve-outs one at a time because I think the the public could perceive that as as special treatment. >> If If I may provide one additional thought on that in terms of the context, um, sometimes the specific context of the particular property does actually play a factor in in this consideration. And so, in this case, the fact that that diagonal utility easement that cuts across the property um really impacts the ability of them to for them to use the parcel and redevelop it for housing, and it is a a site that that we do envision for housing. Um, there are Yes, it's one property that we're looking at at a time, and generally with planning we like to look more broadly. Um, but there are special circumstances here that that I think do make this appropriate. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh, I did have a quick question. So, Ms. Chan, in your presentation, you mentioned that the 20-ft setback would make it more consistent with RP. Um, is that because RP's uh If it If there were no special setback, the typical setback in RP would be 20 ft? >> Yes, that's correct. >> Thank you. Okay, I don't see any other clarifying questions. Mr. Chavarria, do we have any speaker cards or raised hands on Zoom? >> Uh, to the chair, we do have one request to uh on Zoom. Uh our first speaker will be uh Laura B. Laura, you may now speak. >> All right. Thank you. Hello. My name is Laura Bowser, and I am with Stan Hill Property Company, the ground lessee for 3300 El Camino, who's been working with the city to develop a mixed-use project at the site. We'd really appreciate all the work that staff, Planning Commission, and City Council have done on the El Camino focus area to accommodate more housing in this key part of Palo Alto. We [snorts] support adjusting the Hansen Way setback to 20 ft. As staff has mentioned, this will provide critical buildable buildable area on the site that's encumbered by other easements. The existing 50-ft setback is no longer necessary, and reducing the setback will create better activation on the corner of El Camino and Hansen Way. Thanks for your time, and Kelly, thanks for all your work. >> Thank you. All right. Then, uh since that's the only public comment, correct? >> Yes, uh we have not received any other public comment cards. >> Okay. So, we'll bring discussion back to the commission now, and close public comment. Anybody have any comments? Great. Uh Vice Chair Gee. >> Thank you. I had a quick clarif- Oh, I guess it's not a clarifying question anymore, but about the RP zone, we had previously discussed, I believe maybe Commissioner Aikins I brought up the idea of housing in the RP zone. Can you briefly discuss, is that currently allowed? Cuz I think my mental model was it wasn't, so I was just curious if staff had a comment on that. >> We can take a look. I know that that housing in the research park is a topic for future discussion based on the policies in the housing element. >> Yes. So, we can come back to that later. I just wanted to throw that at the beginning. Oh, you already have the answer. Well, >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> [laughter] >> So, we do allow multi-family development with conditional use permit. So, they would have to go through the process of getting approval. But, it is a use that can be allowed. >> Okay, great. Thank you. And then, do we know the timeline for the project that is on this property? Cuz I think Ms. Armor, you might have mentioned that previously. >> We don't know the timing. They have not submitted an application yet. >> Okay, thank you. Did you want to add something or >> Yes, just realized that this is a housing element opportunity site. >> Okay, perfect. >> So, it is permitted without conditional use permit. >> Okay, that's what I thought. I just wanted to clarify that. And then, I just had a couple comments and then I will wrap up. So, um I want to say that I support this and also support the language that Commissioner Aiken proposed as well as Commissioner James about clarifying that this specific sub ordinance is only for this property. I also uh agree with the fact that the geometry of this parcel makes it particularly unique with the easement. And I actually think that the geometry of 3200 right across also has some weird geometry and that's why we have previously done a carve out for that. And while I don't know if that's something that we want to apply wholesale across Hanson, I think that I would be in favor of adding to the motion to explore potentially just those single parcel, the Hotel Parmani site across the street just because it's so narrow already and reducing the setback seems to have allowed a current business to flourish as is. And [snorts] um yeah, that's my comment. Thank you. >> Commissioner Aiken. >> Thank you, Chair. I think Vice Chair Gee has summarized the direction that I'd like to follow as well. And just a side comment, there actually is housing in R-P already on El Camino. So, there is an existence proof. Thank you. >> I don't see any other lights, so I will go right now. I'm also supportive of the um changes that Commissioner Gee suggested and also uh recommend to council that the in the future we maybe want to consider the hotel par money uh setback as as well. Um I did have a question about and now it has flown out of my head. >> [laughter] [gasps] >> Uh that's fine. Can't be that important if I didn't remember. >> [laughter] >> Does anybody Is there a motion? >> I'll I'll make one. >> Oh, I know what it was. Sorry, sorry, sorry. So, this is just a question about the El Camino Real focus area. This parcel is part of the El Camino Real focus area. It is also a housing element um opportunity site. So, then it wouldn't require any conditional use permit. All parcels within the El Camino Real focus area, do they uh do they have to still apply for conditional use permit? >> So, yeah, so the the question was about the RP. Um and so that was where that answer came from. But with these other layers uh process or the the other rules and categories, we are trying to loosen those. So, I don't believe a conditional use permit would be required. They just have to go through architectural review. >> That makes sense. Okay. >> And if I may also clarify in terms of staff's recommendation, um we hear the interest in and support of changing the zoning or the the special setback across the street for future consideration. Um our recommendation to you in terms of uh providing a clear and clean recommendation to council would be to focus at the issue at hand. We can make note that there was the this discussion. >> Is it possible for us to make two motions? One motion with So, I was going to I was going to go ahead and make a motion with amendment just with Commissioner Aiken's comments on this and then make a separate motion for consideration on the other >> Staff would not have any concern with that. >> Okay, thank you. So, with that, I mean, I want to make sure other commissioners didn't have any other comments. >> Well, only only thing I was going to say is I I I I was sure do you want to make a motion on something that's not the agendaized item? >> Deferring to staff on that. >> Check in with our legal support. >> Counselor Yueng, are you there? Anyway, I I think it while he's on the line. Okay, there we go. >> Uh I'm I'm sorry. Could you repeat that question? >> I can jump in if you'd like. >> Uh the question was uh there seems to be at least partial support for a recommendation that in the future we consider reducing the special setback um on the other side of Hansen Way. So, not the property that was under the notice um now. So, it's not making a decision on it. It was just recommending to council that that be an item that staff could uh bring forward at some future time via a motion. But, it would >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> And that that kind of general direction is um fine within the scope of this item. Thank you. >> Okay. Great. Thank you. All right. So, Commissioner Gee, did you have a motion? >> All right. We'll go ahead. So, I move staff's recommendation with the uh attachment A, the ordinance, with the guidance that we include reference to the specific property at hand uh 3300 El Camino Real in in with any addition like potential some language that Commissioner Aiken might have referenced in that email to you. >> Do I have a second? >> Uh I'll be happy to second, but I just wanted to clarify that I did not suggest any specific language. >> Okay, then I will scratch that. So, I will I will start again. So, I will just Yeah. Okay. >> We can take just the first part of the motion stopping with any reference to specific language. >> Well, so yeah, I will move staff's recommendation of attachment A, the draft ordinance, with specific guidance for adding reference to 3300 El Camino Real. >> Can I have a second? >> Second. >> Great. Any discussion? Mr. Rivera, could you please take the roll call? >> Uh Commissioner Aiken? >> Yes. >> Commissioner Templeton? >> Commissioner Peterson? >> Yes. >> Commissioner James? >> Vice Chair Gee? >> Yes. >> Chair Chang? >> Uh motion carries 6-0. >> All right. Do we have a second motion? >> Yes, I will If If anyone else wants to I can take this again. Sure. So, I will move that we recommend to council to consider exploring reducing the setback on along Hansen Way for the property I believe it's 3200 El Camino Real, which is across the street from this property across Hansen. >> Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Great. Any discussion? >> Yes. >> Go ahead, Commissioner Templeton. >> Thank you. Um just from a procedural standpoint, I want to discourage this kind of thing when um a motion is not necessary. We can make this recommendation through staff alone. Um because you can imagine in the future how it could be um could get out of hand. I don't think a a vote is necessary for us to pass this recommendation along. So, um I think from a procedural standpoint, I kind of prefer a different approach. >> Any other comments? All right. So, if we're speaking for my own comment, I like the idea of documenting things that are clear direction because we are moving to um summary minutes instead of verbatim, so things tend to get lost. >> don't give direction to the council, anyway. We only give recommendations. >> Right. Sorry. No, what I'm saying is that I like this the I the idea idea of doing a motion because it communicates something that we do think is important, and I liked the um point that Commissioner James made about you know, we want to be kind of fair to everybody. So. >> Is that the case, staff, that if because the new way the minutes are done that even if we talked about this and you say you'll include it that it won't be in the minutes? >> I will I'll have to take a look at at how the >> Well, in that case, let's do it tonight, but it would be great if you could get back to us because we're going to do this a lot more if that's the case. >> Just from my own cursory review of the summary minutes, it is pretty high level, but motions are captured pretty detailedly. And so, having the motion, I think, agreeing with Chair Chang, assuming that this is how the minutes will go in the future, I think that I would prefer documenting discussion items that we want to pass along here as well. >> we're all in agreement about documenting. The question is is the minutes a document that will include this if we don't make a motion? To date, the minutes has been a place where that information could be found, but if going forward that's not going to be included based on the reduction in information provided in the minutes, then I agree with you. >> Great. Is there further up? Commissioner Peterson. >> Uh this is a question for staff. So, uh Ms. Armor, um you don't have to take this recommendation, correct? >> We will make note of this recommendation in the staff report when we bring this item to council so that they are specifically aware of it, um but it will be up to direct any future staff work. >> And that's my question then is is do you have a filtering on this of how you can, you know, rank order these motions we give you cuz I definitely have one on Cal-Ab that I'll start thinking about. You're going to You've opened the pipelines like agree with Commissioner Templeton and Commissioner Jang that this is helpful, but it will be a pipeline. How would you >> ask that they be tied to the item under discussion since this is related. It's on a separate parcel, but it's adjacent and it's the same topic. >> Okay. >> Um then our legal counsel has said that that is acceptable. Um going to a totally separate topic would not uh work. >> Okay. I did hear California coming up, but it's like is this some ground rules of some >> Correct. >> decorum. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, is there uh further discussion? All right, then Mr. Javeria, can you please take the vote? >> Yeah. Uh Commissioner Aiken. >> Yes. Commissioner James. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Peterson. >> Commissioner Templeton. >> Yes. >> Uh Vice Chair Gee. >> Chair Chang. >> Yes. >> Motion carries 6-0. >> Right. So, then on to uh next item which is approval of the minutes, the draft summary minutes for April 29th, 2026. >> And uh through the chair, I just wanted to share that everyone was present for that meeting, so no one would have to abstain. >> Okay. So then we can do a voice vote with the people who are present. Is that correct? >> Is there public comment? >> Yeah, no but So is there any public comment? >> Uh there is no public comment. >> Great. Uh would somebody like to make a motion? >> Move approval as revised. >> Do I hear a second? >> I'll second. >> Okay, any discussion? Mr. DeBerry, could we Oh. Commissioner Gee, or Vice Chair, do you >> I had a quick question. Can staff remind me when we moved to summary only? Was this Is Does this meeting have verbatim as well, or is it >> No, this one does not have verbatim. >> Okay. So So we we stopped having verbatim minutes from April 13th. >> Uh that was the last one, yeah. >> Okay, perfect. I just want to make sure we're not missing anything. Thank you. >> All right, I don't see Oh. Okay, yeah. I don't see any lights for discussion, so let's uh take a voice vote. So all in favor? >> Aye. >> Any opposed? And any abstentions? All right, so motion passes unanimously. Or I guess 6 0 1. >> That is unanimous with Commissioner Heckman absent. >> Great. Thank you. >> [laughter] >> All right, on to Commissioner questions, comments, announcements, or future meetings and agendas. Commissioner Tomlinson. >> Yes, um I have been reviewing the 26-27 school dates, and I will be absent on the 18th of November. So much to my surprise, but normally it wouldn't have been a problem, but we had to move it because of Veterans Day. So, unfortunately, it is what it is. Um Thank you. >> Commissioner Peterson. So, this is a question I should have asked earlier, but I was still parsing through the bicycle and pedestrian on page 124, it uh has study uh study number five, which is close the gap uh between California Avenue and Page Mill Road. I'm assuming we can't discuss it right now, but is there a way I can look into more information on that study? >> Yes. Um go ahead and and send that question to me via email, and I'll connect you with the appropriate staff. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Seeing no lights, we'll move on to the final item, which is virtual public comment. Mr. Cabrera, are there any comments coming in through Zoom? >> Uh through chair, there are not. >> Okay, great. So, then this meeting is adjourned.

June 4th architecture review board meeting. Can we have a roll call, please? >> Recording in progress. >> Good morning. Welcome to the June 4th architecture review board meeting. Can we have a roll call, please? Chair Adcock, >> present. Vice Chair Rosenberg, >> present. >> Board member Jojar, >> Board member Hirs, >> present. >> Board member Chen, he's absent. We have a quorum. >> Thank you. >> If I can just take 30 seconds, I'd love to welcome our new chair, and we're excited to uh having you lead us for the remaining year. >> Thank you. >> All right. Next is agenda changes and deletions. Stephen, anything changes today? >> No changes are planned for today. >> Thank you. Next is in-person comments. This time for anyone in the chamber uh who wishes to speak on an item that is not on the agenda. Um for um anyone joining us virtually, we'll you'll have time at the end of the meeting to speak on any non-aggendaized items. Um, do we have any uh requests to speak? >> No, we do not have any uh requests to speak at the moment. >> Thank you. All right, then we'll move on to city official reports. >> All right. Well, good morning and welcome to our first June meeting. Let me share my screen here. So, as for upcoming meetings, that June 18th meeting is cancelled due to a lack of quorum. Um, and we did not receive any new uh architectural review board uh projects since the last meeting. I did just want to note that uh last night we had uh two items that went before the uh economic development committee meeting. Um it's council committee. uh that one is the shrink wrap which was affecting the downtown properties as well as uh the economic vitality uh the retail ordinance as well. So some changes are forthcoming with that and if there are any other absences please direct that to staff's attention and we'll make note of that. Um and again that second meeting of this month is canled and with that I can entertain any questions. >> Do we have any questions for the staff? >> All right. Thank you. >> Um so next we will move on to our first agenda item. Did you have a comment? Go ahead. Um so be before we start considering the first agenda item, I need to disclose that I have a conflict of interest in the area of uh that property and therefore I will uh um not participate in the conversation and I will also leave the chambers and come back when we are ready for the following item. >> Thank you. All right. Um, our first item is a public hearing quasi judicial for 375 Hamilton Avenue. Request for recommendation on an architecture review application for construction of a new six-story parking garage with 266 parking spaces replacing existing parking lot D. SQA status is that an addendum to the previously certified downtown parking garage environment impact report has been prepared and this is zoning district PF. So um I forget do we do disclosures or u yes um any disclosures? >> Um I disclosed that I uh visited the site and uh just out of curiosity this is the second time we are seeing this project. Correct. >> Correct. >> Not the third just second. Thank you. No dis no disclosures. All >> right. I have visited the site. That's my only disclosure. So, um the recommendation from staff is to consider the addendum to the previously certified downtown parking garage environment impact report and recommend approval of the proposed project to the city council based on findings and subject to conditions of approval in the record of land use action. So, with that, um shall we start staff presentation? >> Sure. Good morning. My name is Christina Dub Cavichus. I'm the associate planner with the city. Um and I'm here today to present the um city's parking garage. This is the second time uh you're seeing the project. We had the study session. Um this year and um this time we're asking for a formal recommendation. Uh a little bit about the site. The project site is zoned as public facility. Uh and allowed uses within the zone district include public facilities that are used, owned, leased by the city of Palo Alto. And both the parking garage and any future affordable housing on the site are both are permitted uses so long as the site is continues to be um owned and leased by the city of Palto. uh downtown parking garage project uh was first introduced in the city's council infrastructure plan as a city's broader effort to improve downtown parking. Uh proposed design is based on the city council's chosen option 1A and that option was improved after the initial ARB hearing uh back in December 2025. um the option that ARB members um from three options that were presented um this design is based on the two that ARB preferred the most. The subject application is a request for major architectural review for a proposed six-story parking garage which with uh 266 parking spaces. Um, the surface lot is currently used as a surface parking lot with 86 parking spaces. In December 2023, council directed staff to resume work on the parking garage with the aim to integrate it with the future affordable housing. Uh, city council certified environmental impact report back in 2019. Um the proposed project today um exceeds allowable height, floor area, and setbacks, including a 7 foot special setback uh on Hamilton Avenue. However, in accordance with Paul Municipal Section 18.28060E on sites within the downtown district where the primary use is a parking garage, council can modify the development standards. Uh this slide shows proposed ground floor and street facing elevations. Uh vehicular access is proposed via the combined entrance and exit um on Hamilton Avenue. Uh there is existing one-way service lane lane 21 at the back of the site. Uh this will be maintained and retained enhanced with architectural paving, landscaping and lighting. uh proposed trash rooms uh electrical rooms are strategically located along that area as well. Uh and this project includes provisions for trash and recycling for both the subject site uh plaza as well as the neighboring property on um at lot 85. That's lot um that currently has a a restaurant um next door. Uh design incorporates um articulated facades with high quality materials, screening elements to break up the massing, enhance the visual interest. It's consistent with the downtown urban design guidelines, emphasizes human scale and um architectural quality. Um there's also public plaza proposed along the right side of the parking garage, part of the same property. Uh it incorporates brick paving, ornamental planting, and string lighting to enhance and activate the outdoor space. It will function as a small park until the affordable housing project is realized. Um, at its December 4, 2025 study session, ARB provided preliminary feedback on the proposed project, identifying key areas for further refinement. Since that time, the project has been revised in response to board's comments and staff found the project to be consistent with both the findings, downtown urban design guidelines, and public facility zoning requirements. Staff's recommendation for today's ARB um hearing is to consider the addendum for the environmental um report and also recommend this project to move to approval to the city council uh with anticipated date in September this year. Thank you. This concludes my presentation. We also have applicants presentation as well. Um and I'm here to help with any questions. Thank you. >> Do we have any questions for the staff? >> I have just a quick one in terms of timeline. So, looking on packet page 11, it says that they sort of, if I'm understanding this correctly, they under they they started this project in December 12th, 2020, 2016. >> Um, >> so it is now 2026. >> I'm just want to make sure that I'm following this timeline here properly. They started a parking garage 10 years ago. >> Yes. Uh good morning. Um my name is Holly Boyd. I'm the assistant public works director. Um yes to answer your question board member. Um this project was started awarded a contract with Wattry back in 2015 for design. We got all the way through um the approval or certification of the EIR and approval of planning entitlements and council February 2019 where this project was stopped and put on hold due to lack of um interest and funding. So in so there was a gap in the middle. >> There was a gap. So in 2025 we went to council um with a new contract. I actually think 20 this late 2024 we had a new contract with Wattry. Um went to council with various options including area to be set aside for future public uh future affordable housing. Um and they approved the option 1A which included a six-story um parking garage and the area set aside on the corner of Hamilton Waverly. So here we are. >> Okay. No, I just want to clarify. So, basically started in 2016, paused in 2019, and then sort of revived in 2025. Is that about right? >> That's correct. Okay. Thanks very much. >> I have a question. Go ahead. >> Um, on the garbage removal that you've mentioned there, it's for the restaurant, the other commercial facilities that are there will take care of their own garbage. It it would seem that somehow they have to how does that relate actually to to the building itself now because we have a a public building. Is it going to be the location for a private uh person a private commercial? >> Yes. So, the properties along Waverly, all of them have areas that um are used for their own refu um garbage and oil separators on their own property except for lot 85 which is currently using the parking lot. >> Parking lot. So the city plans to enter into agreement with the property owner and the building the property and business owner to the city >> accommodate their refu in our garage >> right do they pay for that or is that >> yes there will be some kind of payment um we haven't started discussions with them however in previous we've done this in previous parking garages I believe um lot R the Alma Street garage has this setup. So we did that like 20 years ago. So I imagine we're going to follow some sort of president. >> I see. Okay, that's fine. I guess follow-up question on that and I can't recall from the last presentation if that trash area in the garage is also intended for the future housing um or is this just for the garage cleanup and all that stuff? >> It's just for the garage and lot 85. The future affordable housing will have to have accommodate their own um refuge area. >> I have a sort of a follow-up question. Do you know the future use of the corner as affordable housing? Uh does anybody know whether that's been studied? uh you know because uh after all the construction might have some underground issues relative to the garage you know and uh just how how is that going to be handled and in fact how is the design of it going to be handled relative to what we're going to discuss today >> right so in 2025 we worked with our consultant Wattry and our architect the Hayes group um to come up with some preliminary um feasible sketches of what affordable housing could look like there. Um we also talked to one of our affordable housing partners, Alta, um and just kind of gut checked to see if what we were planning, what we anticipated going there was feasible. They said it was. um and any utilities, anything like that would need to come off the corner of Hamilton and Waverly. Um I'm sure Ken, um our architect could provide more response to that and either during his presentation or in an answer to the question. >> Yeah, sure. Yeah. >> Thank you. Then let's move on to um applicant presentation. You'll have 10 minutes. And please state and spell your name, please. >> Oh, someone else is sharing. >> I want to share. Yeah. Sorry. Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, I want to control it. Do I need to try it again? We're good. >> Yeah. Okay. Good morning, Chair Adco. Congratulations on the promotion. Um, good to see you all again. Um, board members, uh, my name is Ken Hayes, Ke H A with Hayes Group Architects. Um, joined today, um, by Architect of Record, Wattry Design. Um, Mel Morris, the landscape architects, WSP, Environmental Consultants, and I believe BKF only Wattry is here. Um, everyone else is on Zoom, so if you have questions related to to any of those areas, we we have uh the ability to answer them. Uh, I'd like to thank uh uh public works, Miss Boyd, and and Miss Yu, as well as uh planner um Dupicious um for helping us get the application um to you. So, when we were here in December, the board expressed general support for the project along with some questions and design preferences. Um so since then um we've been developing the project. Um just a refresher um the site is a 2/3 uh acre corner parcel at Waverly and Hamilton. It's currently used as lot D with uh 86 cars. Um the uh property is zoned PF public facilities. Surrounding properties are CDC uh GF pedestrian and public facilities. Neighboring historic resources in the light green include across Hamilton, the post office, a category 1. Down Waverly, the former PaloAlto toy and Sport, which was recently re uh restored, a category 2, Decker House, a category 2. And then on the corner of University is the Decker Oaks building, which is a category 3. There's a one-way alley, alley 20, lane 21 at the rear from Bryant. I'm from Waverly to uh to Bryant. And some contextual views of the post office with the terracotta roof. Uh the black rod iron and the tan um the tan colored walls. Um we have the former Taipei restaurant there, which we're sharing the trash enclosure with. Um and the prolific oven. And then there's the Palo Alto uh toy and sport um uh building to the right of that. And then if you look at it from Hamilton on the left is the part of the AT&T building. Very tall building the side of the Taipei with the parking lot in front and then the con porting place concrete All Saints Church um on the right. The program for the garage is six levels um of uh of parking for 266 cars, a 4,000 approximately square foot space uh for future um lowincome housing. Um and we're treating it as a simple flexible plaza at this point. Uh bike parking um for 42 bikes at a trash enclosure that will be the shared with uh with Taipei. As we said, uh we're going to be collaborating. We have been collaborating with um uh the public art program and Amy Landisburg. And the area that's highlighted in red is where the public art will be. And I'll show you what that where that is on the elevation when we get there. And then there's a rooftop future rooftop solar array for um PV panels. Um and those are future the site and design constraints. We have a zero setback against AT&T. Um and then uh at the alley we have uh 16 ft to the building but 9 and 1/2 ft to the planter. There's plenty of room to get um in and out there. Um we have uh the uh 10ft setback at the po so that we can have unprotected um openings. And at the front we have we're removing the special 7ft setback and we're going to have a two-ft setback. Um and then we're moving the curb line. Um so we end up with a uh 12- foot sidewalk. Um the uh program for the parking uh double loaded parking is 60 feet on each um on each leg and uh we have uh uh 20% open area uh of wall area required for 40% um of the perimeter. And we've got uh landscape uh zones for planting and benches and pedestrians. auto access uh on the east or I'm sorry the west end on Hamilton um and then bike and pedestrian access um at these uh or bicycle access rather at these two locations. Doesn't mean you can't come in another entrance as well with a bike. Then these are the pedestrian entrances um along Hamilton two primary um and then we have at the end of the po um we have an entry there and then uh there's some uh minor entries off of Hamilton to get into some of the handicap um the the accessible spaces. Vertical circulation occurs at the end of the POA where we have an elevator in the main stair. And then on the east end at Hamilton next to the public the the open space we have um the feature stair located and then there's the open space um at the corner. So when we were here in uh December last year, we had three options. On the left are left column are the Waverly, I'm sorry, the uh Hamilton options. On the right um are the Waverly options. Um at the time, option ones on the top, three on the bottom. Um you preferred option two and three on the left uh column for the uh Hamilton and we preferred option three on the Waverly side. And so those are the we prefer option two as opposed to option three on the H the Hamilton side which is why we've circled that and we've developed that um for you today. Um basically um the Hamilton uh facade has a strong horizontal canopy that defines the pedestrian zone kind of anchors the building where we have integral planters. There's wooden benches along there. It just kind of defines this um this pedestrian area. Um and then the building is organized um into these solid and voids um with uh um the perforated metal, the metal screens and solid walls in order to create a syncupation kind of along the street um and a rhythm to create uh facade uh interest. And there's plenty of depth um in and out um on on the uh on the facade as you move down. The west end is the auto entry um the larger opening and then to the left of that is a pedestrian entry. On the right hand side um is the uh feature stair. And the idea is we use the perforated metal where we are trying to get people to kind of come into the building whether it's the auto entrance um or the um or the the feature stair. The building's terminated at the top u with a strong horizontal structure that is part of the current plan and only the photovatic arrays would be considered uh future um up there. And then the public art um that we're working with uh Miss Landisburg on would occur here. And it's a public art piece that's already gone to the public art commission. And it features um metal um sculpture of kind of laser cut or cut metal um featuring local uh plants um in the area and that will consume that entire um concrete uh block in the center. These are just elevations. The miscellaneous um on the upper left um would be the return wall of the western pedestrian entrance. So you see the perforated metal return there. Um the uh view to the right, top right would be the PO looking east um where we have uh grape vines that kind of crawl up the side of the building. The bike um access to the bike storage is there at the lower left. Um and then the building the two elevations at the bottom the one on the right would be at the end of the po and so that's the alley um that has uh the main elevator and again a stair that uh allows you to circulate above material pallet um board form concrete near the base of the building defines the planters. um smooth form concrete elsewhere, integrally uh colored. Um we have wood benches um on the ground floor. Uh black or bronze um painted metal flat bar um for railings and at the grills that occur um on on the facade. Um and the idea there is we're trying to pick up on some of the rod iron. Um and uh and then with the metal fins and the perf metal pick up on the colors that you might find in the the sienna or terracotta tile on the um on the post office and some views of the building from the corner. This is probably the most accurate in terms of color. I'm not sure why all they they tend to color changes from view to view. This is the uh the plaza with the Perf metal in the corner. And then on the the rear we have the um the horizontal flat bar to allow ventilation in the garage and just kind of break down that um concrete wall that has a pattern of uh horizontal and vertical reveals. Some close-up views on the left would be looking down the PO. The bike storage is the first opening on the left and at the end of the PO would be the Perf metal identifying the main um or an entrance to the um the vertical circulation which is then shown on the right. And so if you go in there, it's kind of the public lobby. On the left would be the west end uh on Hamilton where there's a planter, some wood benches, that's a pedestrian and bicycle entry to the garage. And then the feature corner stair on the right with the uh black metal flat bar um uh stair. So this is day one. Um I'll try my best here at landscape since how much time do I have? Oh, I don't have any more time. >> Oh, the landscape is always left out. >> We'll give you one more minute. >> Okay, great. So the concept for the uh for the plaza is to kind of keep it simple, flexible space. Um we have um concrete uh planks basically that form the planters on each side of the two planted areas there. Um and there's a combination of new ginko and oak trees along the street frontage. Um brick paving um identifies the po and the alley behind the the Waverly uh street buildings. There's a privacy fence that runs the whole length here that kind of hides the back of these buildings so that the alley has a nicer appearance. That was one of your one of your questions at the last um at the last hearing. And then we we have um string lights that help kind of define the space overhead that also continues down the um the po um where we have uh these festuned lights that are above you um to help kind of define and and light the space. The uh the plant materials um are shown here. Lots of lots of color. Um some sedges, some yarao, some primrose you can and the ferns. Um the fence example is uh there on the left and then the pavers on the the far left. Again picking up that kind of terracotta quality um of the building. Uh this shows you some of the site elements of the concrete uh plank benches um that define the planters there on either side um shown in the center. So I am happy to answer any questions. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um I think next is um are uh questions or public comments. Um I think public comments >> right public comments. >> Yes. Do we have any uh request to speak? >> We have one request to speak um on this item. First person is uh Herb Borac. Please state and spell your name and you'll have three minutes. Uh Herb H E R Borac B is in boy O R O C K um Cherry Clex Chair Rosenberg and Commissioner Hirs. Uh the this project uh implements uh an item in the comprehensive plan that when uh you know parking spaces are removed some purpose from a lot um they need to be provided someplace else. And although that that general idea uh has received planning approval when a specific project comes up as in this case where uh lot T is in Tom uh on Linton Avenue uh would be project is proposed to lose 52 spaces. uh th this project uh is designed to provide spaces for those 52 and I believe under the environmental quality act that those two things together are one project that it's inappropriate to be uh discussing and writing uh approvals and recommendations on each of those two parking lots separately. Uh there is also the question of uh you know a challenge of whether you can even have h housing which would provide more land for the same number of net parking spaces which would be a a different structure. Uh there used to be a public uh bathroom self-cleaning toilet at the corner of of the lot of where the proposed housing would be and I believe that you know for pedestrian uses which is very heavy in the area that that needs to be replaced as part of the project. Initially you have a that corner available but in the future when if and when the affordable housing is built you'd have to find a specific location uh the pedestrian you know access uh from pedestrians and bicyclist one way would be from from the intersection of Gilman and Waverly and it seems to be uh whoever is changing signal cycle times whether they depend upon a demand response from traffic on Gilman or whether they cycle automatically uh after say a pedestrian signal is used across Gilman or traffic goes away from Waverly. I don't know, but it seems to change from time to time. And it could be related to the to the use of pedestrians uh and cyclists uh going to the garage or crossing the street and you you should make that part of your approval as to what it would be and also uh to come back uh if transportation wants to change those in any way uh in in the future. Uh so I I I I I think uh for th those reasons it would be difficult to make a recommendation on this project separately at this time. Thank you. >> Thank you. Do we have any questions for the public speaker? No. >> All right. Um does the applicant want to rebut any of um the public comment? I'm sorry. Yeah. Does the city have any uh responses? >> Sure, I can respond to that. Um, just want to note that it it's not legally required. Um, though we do desire and plan to replace the parking, it's not legally required. And both of these projects have independent utility and therefore are not required to be analyzed um, you know, in conjunction with each other under SQUA and are being analyzed separately. >> Thank you. All right, with that we will um no more public comments, right? Yeah. >> Okay, that's correct. We'll go to questions uh for the applicant. Do you have any questions? >> I have three. Okay. Um in response to the uh public comment, there's no bathroom facility associated with this project, correct? And there's not need to be required to be one either. Is that correct? >> Okay. Um number two, GKO trees. Which kind of GKO trees? I asked that because there's there's one version that's a little bit more smelly than the others. I got to make sure that uh we're doing the uh the >> the gentle kind, please. >> The street it's the street tree kind. U maybe John Pus, who's online, can tell us. >> Yeah, the the stinky kind is the female version. Uh the the fruit smells like vomit. >> Yeah, that >> and pretty rare that you get one. Uh but uh if that does happen, we would just simply replace the tree with a proper tree. >> Perfect. Thank you very >> Have to wait till it fruits sometimes if they >> making sure these are male goko trees. Great. >> And then um also for the landscape architect I believe uh there's the flat facade looking at Waverly that's mostly the um the smooth concrete. There's that triangular planting space below it. Is there any desire to put sort of a climbing vine in the meantime? like understanding that there will be a future potential project here, but in the meantime, that is sort of a large stretch of concrete. Um it might be nice to have just some greenery climbing the face. So, has that something that's been considered or analyzed in any way? >> Yeah. Yeah, that is what is proposed. Uh we propose to have climbing vines. >> Excellent. I didn't see it in the renderings, which is why I asked. That's all my questions. Thank you. >> Any questions, Stephen? >> Yeah. Um You know, I know there's numerous access to the to this property here, but the major one is on the corner. Would you would you say that that that will be the major entry for the building? >> Uh, yeah. I mean, I would think that uh we tried to make that the the major entry and the gesture to >> I'm sorry, I'm not getting your sound. >> Can you hear me? uh better when you're closer. >> Okay. Yep. No problem. Um so, uh board member Hirs, yes, I I consider that the main pedestrian entry for um those that don't need to take the elevator, right? It's probably going to be more um more fun to come down the stair because as you come down the stair, the the post office will be there kind of revealed in front of you, but um it's a it's a main entrance. Um uh >> the PO is more u yeah on the on the rear um passage the PO as you call it as it turns the corner and heads for CVS. >> Y >> uh things have changed a bit. The CVS back door is closed. There's no particular need for access to CVS anymore in that area. So I'm wondering is it is it you've kept a certain distance there probably for some of the garbage removal issues. >> Exactly. Um plus >> Yeah. And I also I mean the alley system in PaloAlto is uh is very cool I think. And so trying to enhance the alley um to allow for access for people that are cutting through and and you know, who knows what might happen at CVS um in the future. Um but it's also there to we have to be at least 10 ft to be able to get our um uh unprotected openings for the ventilation so we don't have to put a ventilation system in the garage. But um the 16 feet allows us to uh I think also create not only pedestrian access but also gets our storm water treatment area taken care of in that area. >> Mhm. >> And I would also like to note that there's private parking on behind AT&T's building that we need to maintain access for. I'm sorry. Is private parking where >> behind the existing AT&T building next to our property that we need to maintain exist access for >> a pedestrian access that would have been through the >> access vehicle access. >> Oh, but that's going to be at the rear of the building. There's none of that relative to this ped these pedestrian ways here at all. >> No. >> Um Okay. I was just really wondering if there's any flexibility in the width of that because so it's a drainage issue drainage or or is there >> so what 5 and a half 6 and 1/2 ft is uh drainage planters basically raised planters for storm water treatment. >> Okay. Uh >> and the trash is picked up also from that side of the alley or from that alley. >> I'm sorry. The garbage >> the trash enclosure. enclosure would be from the rear of the building, you know, >> at the at the rear. But I believe we because of transformers and switches that are above grade at the very rear of the building, the trash enclosure has doors that open to the >> to the towards the alley. Yeah. Right. >> Mhm. >> But we don't envision, you know, the the green waist trucks coming down the alley. I was wondering just in general thinking here between yourself and the future housing issue. Um you have uh made a significant effort to to have the end of the vehicular way. You didn't mention it as a design feature, but your ends are open and light filled from the perimeter uh perimeter surfacing. So uh is it is there some way in which you're going to as as the future considering the future housing maintain some kind of light consistency there? Well, so the um the portion of the wall, >> so the the the perforated metal stair at the front, the housing does not come proud of that. All right. So, wherever the wall of the housing is defined, um it's from the edge of that front PF metal between there and the solid wall of the building that you see here. However, the back portion of the building where we have the metal work along the PO there, the flat bar, um that will need to be filled in um when the housing is proposed or built next door because that becomes a firewall essentially. H but so if there were some kind of an easement at that point relationship to the housing if the housing were separated by a light well of some sort with an easement >> uh you might be able to keep keep that feature. >> There's all way all kinds of ways you could you could keep it. It's really a matter of how desirable the site remains for you know getting a reasonable yield on the housing on the housing. >> Yeah. I think we had five floors of three units on each floor. I think we had 15 um 15 units um in the mass massing diagram. Um so if you had that carved out at the back um in order to have an unprotected opening, the housing would have to have a solid wall facing this metal work. Yeah. >> Unless it were kept separated by a light well of some sort. If it was a light well, the housing wall that faces that would be to be solid solid and then this could be open and there'd be a 10 foot >> okay >> light well. >> So I was wondering in the thinking you know maybe there's a way in which when you provide some kind of I don't know how coordination with with the future housing that you could maintain that feature because it's a very nice feature. >> That would be great. You know, you know, I think you should not forget the fact that you have that at the very at the very end of the building facing the back of CVS, you also have that feature. >> Correct. Yeah. Right. So, you'd see it repeat, right? >> Yeah. >> I think that's all for the moment. Yeah. >> Okay. >> And I'll ask some a follow-up question on that. So, just to clarify that uh this metal screen on the right >> y >> um if the housing perimeter wall is 10 ft away, then the housing cannot have any windows facing that. Correct. >> That's right. Well, I mean, they'd have >> they couldn't have traditional windows, right? >> Yeah. Um they would have to go another 10 ft before it can get any windows. Um, so it'd be a choice in the future of whether the garage gets light or the housing gets windows. Um, >> right. But we had that um, in our initial studies that we showed council, it was all circulation along that side anyway. Elevator, two stairs, and there were some mechanical spaces and so on. So the housing was oriented towards Waverly, towards the PO and towards Hamilton for all that's light and air. >> You know, I can come back on that a little bit. It seems to me that, you know, for for our sake it uh uh to consider the fact that that really the corner should be of your garage should be seen. It's really an important visual. Um, it it would seem to me that there that we we should be seeing something about, you know, I feel like it's kind of lack lacking. Is my voice coming through? Okay. Yep. Yep. >> Um, that it's lacking that we should really have seen at least a sketch with some suggestions of how the housing could work relative to the garage so that we know what we're approving. That's a future piece of uh architecture in the city here for the city then >> it certainly the housing >> I mean it is something we would like to see. >> Yeah. So in your packet you've probably at the end stumbled across the there's a couple pages that show what the the future housing massing might be. >> Yeah. Sheet 3.13 in the larger packet. >> Yeah. And one two >> and 3.12. Yeah. And in in >> I think there were sort of ghostly images there, you know. >> Yeah. It wasn't it wasn't a very specific but you know in a way I I would almost be more interested to see setback lines and uh visual visual um description of how we will see the garage relative to to it to the massing you know and the thought of a a light well or some some means of separation if that's possible in the planning you know of the housing Um >> well I mean if we have a firewall at the edge of the garage um which is that solid which is the solid wall let's say um you could do anything you want on the housing side of it. I mean you could have a skylight up there that washes that wall with light and then the housing would be you know on the other side of that. So the the housing could have the circulation kind of a wash um in light, but it's um you don't find that a whole lot in low-income housing. >> No, you don't. But it certainly is a possibility. I mean, if it were if it worked out with a plan that there was just an area way >> without without a skylight, you know, so there's no connection between the buildings at that point. and and in some form of easement that allows that to remain for the sake of the garage. I think it's a feature that I would like to see continued. >> Right. I >> it's going to remain one property, >> correct? >> Will it remain one? It's one property, right? Or are we going to actually subdivide? >> I'm actually not sure on that. >> Okay. I mean, council's direction to us was to reserve an area for future housing and move forward with this garage. That is their >> verbatim wording. So, not a lot of detail there. >> And and for clarification, there's just that's there's no timeline for that housing project. There's no nothing on the agenda, nothing on the boards. They have not been paid or asked to design that yet. So, it's just everything that they've provided is purely correct >> as a benefit for us to imagine what could be there. Correct. Yes, that is correct. >> It's a blank slate. >> So, yeah. Follow-up question on that is uh so it would be so the garage would continue to be city- owned um and the property uh when it gets developed as housing would be a city-owned building that would be rental property. Is that how the council is thinking about it? >> I'm not even sure that's true. I think we would somehow provide a lease. We would own the land but not the building. Similar to what's happening >> with ground leases for city >> ground lease. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Uh 100year lease or something like that. Yeah. >> Exactly. >> Mhm. >> Okay. Um so I have a few questions if you're Go ahead. >> Um so on the I think in that um ghost image it was kind of shown that the housing would Oh, sorry. Yeah, you can go to that. Perfect. Thank you. So, this notches back. So, in your pedestrian diagram, you had kind of because your stair angles out, your um pedestrian access is kind of angled into the um the housing property rectangle, the 4,000 square ft. Um, so I guess the question is if it's a small triangle, but if it's ground lease, then that walkway would be would require to be maintained by um the design and ownership of >> Yeah. >> the next um is that at all concern >> is that a concern? >> Yeah. Well, it's a concern that whatever housing project is developed there takes that into consideration as a site constraint. >> Yes. What you're looking at right here, we've kind of created that notch um in this option and you'd come down the stair. We'd have the notch between the two buildings. So, from a fire standpoint, we're good. Um, and then we're trying to kind of create an open space under this can levered portion of the housing. So, so it still responds to pedestrian access in and out there, but it would also be a way to also address the um the fire separation issue. The other option and and and you know, these are not they're not options that have been presented to anybody. Okay. Um, this would be completely set back. So, this would set back 10, 15 feet to allow the corner of the garage to be exposed. This one leaves the facade back on the left hand portion, but can levers the housing portion closer to the corner. >> Mhm. >> Um, and uh to get more floor area for the housing, but it doesn't do it at the ground level. keeps it open for pedestrians is what we were thinking. >> I think both could work. uh just because we're relying on the you know the unknown of the future housing uh and the kind of splitting out of the stair is nice but did you already consider whether like you leave a 5-ft or so walkway within this uh garages rectangle instead of your uh pedestrian walkway diagram going into the rectangle for that future housing. I think it was one of your early slides. >> Am I still sharing? >> Yes. >> Am I lost? Okay. >> Yes. So that that would the stair will either need to pull back if we if we strike a line in line with the solid vertical wall defining the plaza and the garage. Um but I I believe >> a couple that may already later you have a diagram that shows >> pedestrian. Yeah, there we go. >> Yeah. Mhm. >> So that space is open in both those housing options that I showed. And so, you know, along the lines of board member Hirs saying that there might need to be some kind of an easement um at at that location to allow um pedestrian access um or we pull the stair back. I actually think the stair has been pulled back. There's five feet, right? I was going to actually point out that on the again the large packet on sheet 4.1 that shows sort of the landscaping diagram and it might be in your presentation there. The stair looks much skinnier at the base and with ample space to walk past it without ever imposing on that plaza. So it might be worth taking a look at that and just understanding which there right that one. Correct. So in this area oop hang on don't have my pen on. >> Um yeah so in this area here you can clearly see that there's plenty of space to walk past. So the question would be which is it going to be? >> Um one of them clearly has an issue that um board member pointed out. >> Yeah. So one would one would need to be coordinated with whatever future housing goes there. Um or we ignore that and make this self-sufficient which is probably the preference of the city. Um and uh I can't answer the question why our plan doesn't match that but um I do remember the discussion. Yeah, Gordon. >> Sorry. My name's uh Gordon Nolles. I'm with Watery Design. We're the structure engineers and parking architects. Um what you're seeing here on the landscape design was a slightly earlier version of that stair where we did study the 5-ft um rotation uh opening for the stair. um the architectural plans in the rendering you're seeing shows a kind of wider flare and a kind of grander stair which I think was our takeaway when we were looking at that opening from the the previous ARB the informal review. Um we were talking about trying to keep that corner as open and as grand as possible. So that stair flexed and as Ken was saying would require some sort of easement to allow the pedestrian area to open up on that corner. I think what we heard last time was the concern that if we do close off and pull the residential right to the building line there, we create quite a tight pedestrian exit. And what we were seeing is we've got a grand gesture with the cladding and a grand gesture with the stair. So with the addition of that easement, you keep a kind of pedestrian plaza at the end. We can narrow the stair um so it's it's more of a typical width. We've got all the width we need for escape. The the extra flare is really kind of a design and urban impact. So what you're seeing here is kind of the early that answers your question of what we would do if we we needed that entrance and we needed to keep that property line. We're restricted on moving the stair too far back because we obviously have a drive aisle on the upper levels and as we move that back it moves the circulation into what's quite a tight um parking plan above. Thank you. Um I have um another question which has to do with the PV canopy. Uh either one of you wants to respond on it. Um on the renders it looks like the top is solid um at the PV canopy like the one on the right on the cover. >> Correct. >> Is that the future PV? >> That would be the PV. >> Okay. So without the PV is it um just the beams that we see in the renders? >> Correct. The structure is part of the scope. >> Okay. But it's pretty open. There's no like a trellis or anything in its place. >> No. >> And um a question related to that is are you said the PV is future. So it's kind of future ready. Is it I don't know the current code on parking garages. Is it not required to provide any PVs by 2025? CBC. it don't believe we are required to carry PV at the moment. Um, >> so I can take a stab at answering that. So, in the past we've tried to add PV uh because it's just the perfect installation on our parking garages. I imagine this PV installation would be bid as an ad alternate to this project when it goes to construction. um because we've done that in the future like in the recent Cal Avenue garage. Um we did end up building it. We bid it as a ad alternate and we did install the solar panels as part of that construction. >> Okay. But based on the current code, you are not required to provide any. >> I don't believe so. >> No, I don't believe so. Just because of the nature of the building type. >> Okay. We we often have PV on garages if they're associated with um a building say with an office building. You're providing demand for that. Um and often we are putting PV on the garage to kind of offset the requirements for the the other buildings. Uh but here because we're a standalone parking garage, we have um more exceptions and and less limitations. >> And um is the I assume the garage is going to be sprinklered. >> Yes. Yes. So this top level would also be sprinklered in preparation for >> yes we have connections for as soon as the PV went up and it became a coverage we would have um connections at the upper deck to provide sprinkler underneath the canopy. >> Okay, thank you. Um this so actually this might be a question for Ken. Um I'm going back to the ground floor actually this plan right here. Thank you. Um actually can we stay on that site plan? Oh, >> thank you. So over here you mentioned we have uh you've got a fencing um to which becomes the side of that po as you walk down that way, >> right? >> Um can you elaborate on that? And is there any eress from uh Taipan or the next door >> that comes out here that blocked? So, there will need to be a gate coming out of that fence to because there's a rear entrance um rear exit from Taipan. >> Um and then there'd also need to be either a gate or this is probably just an opening um no can't be an opening and that's a property line. So, there'll be a gate um from uh this building as well because they have their own trash back there. So this fence will hide the back of the buildings in a consistent way but will need to have gate perforations in it. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> So just to continue on that one just for a moment the they will they will be be maintaining their garbage in the open areas I guess behi behind their building and then bring it out during uh garbage collection. In this case, they probably would um bring it out on on collection day, although it's it's fairly close. Um green waste will open up. >> Garbage. Yeah. As long as it's within 25 ft of the property line. >> Other if you're further than that, they want you to bring it. >> They'll move it. They'll move it on the day. Yeah. >> That's true. So the fence goes to about right there and then this part of that property is open. >> Correct. So yeah. So if that's open there. >> Yes. Oh, you're right. Uh-huh. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It goes to the edge of the garage. >> Okay. >> So it would stay open. Yeah. >> Yeah. So no gate there. >> Mhm. >> Okay. And then uh for Taipan, they will have a gate somewhere here and they will take their trash to this. >> Right. No trash on site there. Right. Actually, you we'd have to take a look at where the doorway is from Taipei. >> The present existing doorway. >> Yeah, I believe it's down towards the bottom. >> Oh. >> Oh, there it is. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. Great. >> And um uh thank you. I think that's last of my major questions. I do want to ask the city one more time though, the public restroom that is being provided now uh is being removed and it I understand it's not required per se, but it's an amenity that's being available. Has there been any discussion of being able to provide that public amenity again? >> The public restroom on that corner was already removed about three or four years ago. It hasn't been there for quite some time. Um >> hasn't been there quite a while. Yes. So, yeah, we the city does not want to install a restroom at any of our garages at this time. >> Um, I have a additional question. Uh, I pointed out that I don't exactly maybe both of you. Um, it's a it's a more intricate question. I think that the the access to the elevator is is really a pretty remote situation here from the front. The almost clearest way to get there without in being interrupted by traffic and making a difficult is to come in this rather narrow area and avoid the traffic by going around it. you know, you come in, you go to the end there and then you cross over when the traffic is coming in and turning and going up the ramp, etc. Have you um and the other is part of this issue is that the main the main entry to this building is really the architectural element of the corner of the building. So you almost would imagine that you want to invite more activity in through through that to make it a functional piece of work. You know u coming down the stair is one thing going up the stair I don't think people will use the stair if they had to go to the third or fourth levels you know at that point but the coming down is very reasonable. So, you know, to me it seemed that the it would be better if you included the elevator um closer to the front of the building and with access, a clear access that you made sure that the handicapped parking happened on that level so that there was a sort of a limitation of the parking and an easy access. Sorry. >> So, I was wondering why you wouldn't uh wouldn't consider >> N more central. >> Yeah. So, Gordon, you want to >> Yeah. >> Uh I don't have that in my >> Oh, yeah. >> So, you know, among other things, I wanted just to make a point. There's more parking in the front of the building than there is in the rear. It's pretty close, but it's there is more in the front. So, you're you're likely to see all of the areas in the front filling up pretty well. >> I I think the location of the elevator and the staircore to the kind of north west of our our plan is a result of the geometry of the parking ramp and the parking circulation. on the the plan we've got up on the screen at the moment, you'll see that we need a certain length in the ramp to to get us up floor to floor and and make those rotations and turn. The south area of the plan on the site is the only place we have enough depth for both parking and ramp to make an efficient parking plan. Um I think in the very the previous uh design back in 2018 we had an elevator but it was further east on this plan and that is the area that is now um kind of aotted for the future residential. So by placing that we we eat into the residential area by putting the elevator say to the the east of the stair you're seeing now. Um, if we put it actually more central in the building, we we put the elevator within the parking area. We we lose parking stalls. Oh, I don't think you could uh if you didn't have the elevator in the back, you could uh compress your stair and get this replacement parking in in that same location to the uh and and this way you would, you know, this this garage sort of in comparison to the other garages in probably your more standard garage anywhere is going to have like the three garages in our downtown right now. I'm probably sure you know about them. They all have the everything at a corner next to the public uh right ofway, the the traffic areas or the pedestrian ground level areas. And this one is a different kind of a garage that way because it splits splits the parking. So, it just seems to me that the it's more con it would be more convenient if you had had that on the other side. I'm not suggesting any change in your circulation plan, but that you had pedestrian entering that corner and the elevator sort of allowing with a direct access straight across the handicap maybe place to to the to the street and freed up the back for more parking and uh and kept the staircase as a direct access to the and then people don't so for example example, you know, going down in the future. Uh, in the future, you have uh um that long PO, which you describe as a it's a nice one once you get there, but you're going to be going past perhaps the garbage of the of the housing or who knows what, but it's it's a very long passageway once you put the housing on the corner. >> We have a question that we're still in questions actually. >> Is it a question? It's a it's a discussion. >> Yeah. I I suppose one of the other considerations >> and it really needs their input. >> One of the other considerations we we need to account for is the the requirement that the elevator is within 200 ft of any stair that doesn't have its own elevator. And so the location we have for the elevator at the moment is in that central location. And so that that 200 ft travel distance to the the two stairs is maintained. If we separate the elevator too far from the stair, we and we we'd have to again I think this was part of one of the early studies we did when we developed this layout. Um we would need uh possibly either a second elevator or we would have to um have one of the stairs operating only as an eress stair and not as a circulation stair. So there there's there's one of those aspects there. Um, and >> you're saying 200 ft from what? >> If if we have a if we have a stair uh any stair that is used as a circulation stair, it has to be >> egress stair. >> No, no, no. Just a circulation stair. >> Just a circulation stair. >> It has to be within 200 ft of an elevator. So if we move it further than 200 ft, it can only be used as an egress stair. So you can't use that as just movement around your building. It has to be a dedicated fiery grass stair. >> I think you I think you you would meet those standards if you kept even if you kept the stair where it is right now. You know >> that Yeah. I think there's there's certainly a a number of criteria affecting where it is. But I I understand your point. >> Can can I make an argument for where the elevator to stay where it is? >> So, >> well, you can just disagree with between us. I think that there's also a safety element here that needs to be considered. When you're standing here and you're walking towards this back end of the parking lot, it can get dark. It's not on the street faces. It's a lot more isolated. So, by providing a central um circulation space, you're really sort of invigorating that central portion and making this dead end here feel not quite so dead. So, from a safety aspect, when I'm thinking about walking through this parking lot by myself at nighttime, I'm thrilled that that's right in the middle there, and that it's easy for me to get to my car at a short distance with other people sort of coming and going from that location. I think if the elevator was over here and I had to walk to my car all the way down here by myself at night, I would be a lot more sketched out. Oh, >> and that would also be the account if if you were exiting from the top left of the garage and you were having to walk through that whole garage floor to get to the elevator at the >> right. Yeah, I really wasn't suggesting that location. I was suggesting um how can you how can I write on this? >> Hit the little uh drawing button >> and pick a different color so we know who's who. Help me somebody. Y >> come over. >> Oops. >> Why? Why' we get this plan? >> Sorry. >> Right there. >> Oh, okay. Stop moving. >> So, I was suggesting this this area right here >> on the ground floor that location. If you had a little plaza at that end of the of the ramp and you were visually able to see, you know, when you came out of the elevator to see cars coming around from every location, >> wouldn't that be better? On the ground floor, you could come straight out, but >> but we still have to have our stairs operating as an egress stair. Even if it's egress in circulation, >> you keep the stair you keep the stair where where it is. So we're having that would create three circulation cords. >> Yeah. And this this is Yeah. You need do you need to have a stair always next to immediately next to a stair? >> No. What I'm saying is you would have an elevator core and two stair calls. So you would have three pedestrian destinations on the floor plate. >> And and this is a drive aisle. This is a drive aisle. This is a drive aisle. So, you're putting that elevator, which is likely to be the most used thing, right in the island, completely surrounded by cars, which feels a little bit more dangerous than the potential of just walking right here without ever having crossing a car path. >> On any typical floor, you have to walk through a car path, right? If you're going to use the corner stair coming up to the upper floors in any ways, you'd be crossing the car path always. >> I I I agree. But at the the ground floor is where you have uh vehicles entering and exiting and they're typically paying less attention to their parking their movements and you have 100% of your vehicles going through that area exit on the ground floor. So >> on the ground floor the all of the vehicles going up the ramp uh could avoid that location that I just showed you. >> They could avoid it. It is much less a problem because you don't have a a seller in this area. So the cars will be coming there. As I pointed out before, if you had more handicapped access parking, >> this is the ramp going up. Also, the ramp that cars are coming down. crossing. >> If you're coming into the elevator, like if you're coming from like where they have it right now is kind of where all of the pedestrian walkways meet, >> right? >> This this is a pedestrian entrance coming in here. Well, I understand they have the the rear one, the po, and then the corner one would work, but the not the not the one which you have as your main entry to this building, which which directs people towards towards that uh >> staircase that's right there >> or across the floor to an elevator. But if you're using this staircase, David, you're likely. So, for example, there's the there's the parking structure, if you don't mind me uh jumping in here. There's the parking structure between High Street, Hamilton, Elma, and University, right? And we use that one all the time. That one again, you've got your staircase at the corner and your elevator at the front corner. If we're going up the first floor, four flights of stairs, that elevator is dark and gross and doesn't smell good, so we take the stairs. Right? If you're using this front staircase, you're likely going up one of the first one, two, three, maybe even four flights of stairs. You'd never need the elevator. Right here, you've got public access from pedestrian only like circulation to that elevator. Same thing here from this side. Same thing even here from this side. It's really all right here in a way that you never have to cross vehicular traffic with the exception of this little spot right here. >> I mean, I frequently have gone w seems to make sense on the edge like like where it is. It seems to be it's kind of this confluence of all these pedestrian paths coming together and it's still on the edge of the building which I think is important because it's important to identify the elevator and the stair I think where you're going. Um and uh you know and we don't have >> we can't do two elevators. Oh, no. I understood. I realized that's the case. >> But board member Hersh, I mean, this for all the kind of the reason I I I I I understand what you're saying. Our first studies had the elevator at the main feature stair. But as as we really got into it and had these other pathways coming together and working with water in terms of travel distance, this 200 foot thing, it seemed like this was a reasonable place. It's still on the edge. It's at this confluence and it central to the building. So that it made sense. Now, we showed it here at the preliminary back in December and there was no discussion about about that. Well, you know, sometimes it takes a little bit longer to think out real problems. Uh so this one happened after that meeting, of course. Uh but you know, personally, I think uh elevators ought to be a very convenient and in an area where you can uh get to them quickly from the outside. They are that way on all of our other garages in downtown. It's not fast about about this that that's not a whole lot different. >> What it what is what is what is going to get you to go there? Your entire entry is focused on the corner where you're opening up the the structure. >> So I guess >> you're inviting people to come to that corner. That ought to be the ought to be the place. And I agree with you that putting another elevator in is not a good idea. But if you put it in the front section of the building separate from the stair, you could make up the dis the the change the change in the number of unit of st of car locations in the back. >> Right. But if but if it's not coupled with that stair, it's not really achieving what you're after. Is it wouldn't you want it coupled with the stair? I don't see if you're going to take a people who want to take a stair and and coming down from their depositing their car easily can use any stair they'd like. You know, it's convenient. >> David, I think u we should wrap up this uh item, but we uh >> I'm kind of with the designers that it's I think it's two things. One is um what's a visual entry and identification of the the garage which that stair definitely helps but it is a city garage that is at an intersection of two streets and people are using it from four different directions. Um so where they have it kind of like what Kendra was saying it's central to all the um pedestrian pathways because that's what the elevator is for. Um, but let's wrap up our question section and um, uh, no, we don't do any public comments right now. All right. So then, um, we'll close this. >> One teeny tiny question. >> Sure. >> Do you guys have lights down the POS as well? It's in the renderings that you got the little the Fest tune string lights. Yeah, they go down the P. >> Thank you. >> No worries. Thank you. Um, all right. So, we will switch this to internal discussion. Um, who wants to start? >> Well, I I'm going to start by saying that uh uh I think that that aspect needs more study. I I really I feel strongly that uh I find it to be an an issue that that isn't re resolved in this particular garage because because this garage is not your typical garage and opening the elevator for people who want to get to the upper floors to a more visual area as you come into the garage from that corner from the new corner opening is uh will be a a significant benefit. You you really don't need the exit to be the same location. Uh the people who were in the back of the building will use the back of the building staircase and go down the PO but and the people in the front will have a alternative possibility of using the elevator or the side stair. >> All right. Um Kendra, any comments? Yeah, I'm gonna This is one of those times where David and I butt heads. I respectfully disagree. I think that by putting the elevator where you guys have designed it, it's sort of again um enlivening that back portion of the parking lot that may otherwise be somewhat neglected and or avoided. Um the front has the desire to be parked in because of the light, because of the air, because of the beautiful staircase. And I think by having that elevator back there, it's actually quite beneficial to people, as um board member Adcock said, coming from all directions, including the alleyway. So, I'm a big fan of this as designed. Um, of course, you guys do um impeccable work on many, many different types of projects and to see the care and attention that you guys put into something as simple as a parking lot is really nice to see. Um, my questions were minimal because I don't have a lot of comments. It's really a very well done project in my mind and um I'm I'm good good with it. Thank you. >> All right. Yeah. Thank you um both architects for your presentation and very thoughtful design. Um, I'm going to not discuss the elevator anymore. I, but I agree with um, Kendra that it is in the ideal location based on um, all the desire lines of getting to this um, parking garage um, from all of the businesses that are in this area. That parking lot as is now is very heavily used and I expect this extra um, parking will be of huge benefit. Um my uh other comment is about that uh what I was asking earlier about the stair that's laid out. I think it looks to be maybe over 14 ft wide at the bottom as it is now, but it is kind of pinching on to that next future uh property. Um we since we don't know anything about it, I don't think planning for an easement from an unknown project is the best course of action. So, I would urge you to reduce the width so you at least have a 5-ft walkway and all of your pedestrian walkways are within your design without counting on what happens in the future. Um, I uh the we didn't even talk about materials and all of that which uh we reviewed previously as well and um here we go. Um they are all very uh beautiful materials and uh very well designed and proportioned. So, hats off to the design team for making a parking garage um this appealing um for the city. I know it's not required, but I do hope you can get uh PVs on this. It's it's a good investment of um in day one instead of hoping some fine day PVs get added because really no projects get PVs added in the future if it's left for the future. It's very very rare. So I urge you to find the resources to do that and make it a public benefit. Um I think with that I think um the uh >> I'd like to make it >> sure I I I don't I don't want to leave this project >> microphone. We're okay. I just don't want to uh not say that the this is a a a very nice project. You know, the the materials are really nice. The concept of uh of the um corner treatment of course is really going to be quite amazing on the block. It takes away from the fact that the AT&T building is so ugly. Um uh so but but I think it it requires um you know being very careful about how the housing would work with it because I'd like to see it from down the street somewhere. You know identify it. So in a way the projecting of the housing is is unfortunate there. you know, I' much rather see the massing even, you know, go all the way up to the line of the top, I guess, of of the solid wall before the metal at the top. Uh, so there so and keep it keep the facade uh of the housing back. But I think uh you should you should consider recommending this strongly to council through through planning here. uh in order to maintain your the aesthetic of the garage itself and that specifically that corner, you know, so so we can see it from everywhere. Um, and uh, of course I would like to ask you to look into the the circulation because I don't think it changes the design of anything in particular, only the circulation to move an elevator to the front and consider that possibility despite my cohorts here up on the podium. Thank you. Thanks for a very nice project. >> Thank you, David. Do we have a motion? Yeah, I move to approve the project as presented today with maybe the one condition of re-evaluating the splay angle of that bottom stair to make sure that there's at least a 5ft passage next to it. I >> stuck with that one. >> I I can't recommend approval today, but I would >> I guess we should um uh >> have a motion second and then you can >> I can't I I vote I have to vote no just on the basis. >> We don't have the voting yet um David. So all right, I will second the motion and um >> and you got to vote your conscience. That's all we can do. >> Go with it. >> All right. Can we have a call to vote? >> Board member Hirs. >> No. >> Vice Chair Rosenberg. >> Yes. Chair ad hoc Sorry. >> Yes. >> And then typically typically anyone who desends gets a moment to speak to their life to speak on your descent. >> Well, I don't think I have to say anymore, do I? Motion passes. >> Motion passes. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you um team for your presentation. We will take a 8 minute break and come back at 10:05 >> and congratulations. back up. All right, we will move on to the next part of our agenda, which is a public hearing. Another um public hearing quad quasi judicial for 762 San Antonio Road request for recommendation on a major architectural review application to demolish three existing commercial buildings and construct an 8-story multifamily residential building containing 228 residential apartments. 13% of these units, 30 of them would be deeed restricted to serve lower income households. The project is propo proposed in accordance with California government code uh for builder's remedy. Senate bill 330 pre-application was filed January 9th of 2024. SQA status is that an addendum to the previously certified environmental impact report for the housing incentive program expansion and 70 788 San Antonio mixeduse project has been prepared and the zoning district is uh commercial a service commercial and the recommendation is to consider the addendum to the previously certified EIR and recommend approval of this project. So with that, can we have the staff report? >> Good morning. Uh my name is Christina Dubavichas. I'm the associate planner with the city of Palo Alto and I'm here today to present um this project which is um builders builder remedy project at 762 San Antonio Road. Um a little bit about the background background about the project. The applicant submitted a compliant Senate bill SB330 pre-application back in 2024. Accordingly, the project has been evaluated based on the development standards in effect at that time. The project is also pro uh proposed uh pursuant to California governmental code section 55 65589.5D5 commonly referred us to a builder's remedy project which qualifies for additional protections under Assembly Bill 1893. uh a builder's remedy project. Uh proposal includes requested density bonus incentives and waiverss consistent with the state law f uh for formal major architectural review application. This one was submitted back in April 2024. In August uh 2025, ARB provided preliminary design feedback. Um and here we are today um um looking at the um revised drawings based on the architectural review board feedback. Uh the city acting as a lead agency prepared an addendum to the previously certified EIR for the housing incentive program expansion uh and 788 San Antonio mixeduse project uh which concluded that no new significant environmental impacts occur beyond these um those that were previously evaluated. and following second ARB hearing today and ARB's recommendation on the project. Uh council's decision is anticipated in August this year. Um about the project site, it comprises two parcels located at 762 San Antonio and also unadressed parcel on Lagghorn Street. And these two will be merged to form a 2acre site. Uh the project uh would replace the existing truck rental use by demolishing three existing commercial buildings and constructing an 8story 228 unit multifamily residential development. uh project includes 30 units which is 30% of the proposed units to be uh deed restricted at below market rate to lowincome tenants and we have 248 above ground parking spaces with entrances on um both San Antonio and Legghorn Street because the project is proposed under builder's remedy the city might only apply objective standards s that would allow the proposed density based on the project's proposed density which is 114 dwelling units dwelling units per acre. Uh the floor uh area ratio is 3 3.45 45 to1. The El Camino Rial focus area standards are the applicable zoning framework for this project. And under the state law density um density bonus law, uh applicant may also request waiverss uh for standards that would physically prevent development at the proposed density. uh project includes three levels of above grade parking. Uh the ground level is accessed from San Antonio Road. The upper two parking levels are internally connected and accessed from the Leg Street uh via separate entrance and exit. We also have bike parking provided in two ground floor bike rooms with access from both uh both frontages, lobby and the garage. Um, the project includes, as I have already mentioned, um, 228 long-term bicycle parking spaces as well. Uh back in August 2025 last year, uh ARB provided preliminary design feedback that focused on reducing the perceived massing, improving architectural articulation, enhancing ground floor activation, strengthening landscape and open space design, and improving circulation and rooftop usability. Since the preliminary hearing, um applicant revised the project to include um um to uh increase the unit count from uh 178 to 228 units uh and by also adding one additional story from seven to eight stories. Um the revised project has also been a redesigned to reflect refinements to massing uh facade articulation open space design. Um also in response to ARB's comments um staff finds that the revised design reflects meaningful refinements of the building form and architectural expression as well. Uh these are the proposed materials um which are slightly different from the board that you have um materials board you have in person. Uh these are the revised simplified color palette. Um overall staff finds that the project complies with architectural review findings for approval as detailed in the record of land use action attachment B. Although the project requests waiverss from certain objective development and design standards uh primarily within Palto municipal code chapter 18.24 24. The project deviates in a manner that is consistent and allowed pursuant to state law. Pursuant to state density bonus law and the project's builder's remedy status, the inconsistencies do not constitute a basis for denial where the requested waiverss and um are necessary to accommodate the proposed density and where no specific adverse impact to public health or safety has been identified. The project remains within the scope of the impacts analyzed in the certified uh EIR back in 2020 and all applicable mitigation measures continue to apply and accordingly an addendum prepared um based on the section 15164 SQUA is appropriate and no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required. Accordingly, staff recommends that architectural review board today considers the addendum to previously certified um environmental impact report and um recommends approval uh of the proposed project to the city council uh based on the findings and subject to conditions in the record of land use action. Thank you. This concludes my presentation. Uh we also have applicant present and they also have a presentation. Thank you Christina. Do you have any questions for the staff? >> I have one minor question. If you can go back to your slide deck. >> Sure. I think it's like three or four slides back. The um it was a rendering. >> This one? Maybe that one? Yeah. Sorry, it's a little slow. This one. Um I think further back. No, actually. Yeah, that one. Number nine. Um that is from that view. I was trying to um figure out which view that is compared to >> this is interior um which is we'll give you this side plan. This side >> the long side. Okay. >> Cuz that was a little different from what we've seen on the packet. So, um on that elevation cuz, um that's where it's pretty close to the property line and and not much in the way of setbacks. Um so, uh maybe there's a question for the applicant, but those um eyebrows that are at the very top, is that within the property lines? >> That whole mirror facade looks like it has a 10ft setback. That's correct. It's a 10 foot setback. >> But yeah, it'd be nice to know what the dimension of those eyebrows is. >> Let me see if if I can find this on the plants. Sorry, I don't recall seeing that on any of the sections. So, I'm just trying to figure out where that that's the render on 331 is the same image. So it looks like it is and maybe applicant can respond to that after their presentation. It looks like it encroaches into that 10-ft setback and we just want to be mindful of that. Any other questions? All right. If not, we can um if the applicant can move forward with their presentation, you'll have 10 minutes and please state and spell your name. >> Sure. Matt H. >> Good morning, owner of Trucks at 762. At our first meeting, I shared a bit about our family's long history on the site, why we believe this property can continue serving the in a new way. Since then, our team has listened carefully to the board's feedback and made several refinements to the proposal. One of the bigger changes is the move from seven stories to eight. Goal is not simply to make the building taller. It is to use the site more thoughtfully by providing additional housing in a location that is well suited for it while improving the project's design and its relationship to the San Antonio Road Corridor. We appreciate the board's guidance and the time spent reviewing the project. >> Chris Mark Johnson, managing director of the Acclaim Companies were the developer. Um, yeah, since we were last here, um, you can see some fairly significant changes and we consider improvements to the project. Um, we took your feedback seriously and we've incorporated many of your suggestions. I I want to particularly acknowledge uh uh board member Hirsch. He he spent quite a bit of time actually sketching some things out for us. He came to my office. He met with me. We had a very constructive dialogue and we took his feedback to our team and we've incorporated a lot of of his ideas and I wanted to thank you for for that. You can see, David, the lobby is where you wanted it to be. We've relocated the elevator core. Uh the leasing area, the the all of those activated areas on the ground floor have been repositioned in addition to the bike room. So, we we appreciate I I see this as the functioning of a you know, of a committee and a you know, using your professional input. More eyes is better. And so, thank you all of you for your input. Um some of the other things that um that we've done is um we've actually and and Chris will talk more about this um vertical break along San Antonio Road. We wanted to make sure we preserved the what is I guess the Grand Boulevard San Antonio road plan. Um we've also elevated the garage entry that to allow oversized delivery and service vehicles. everything will be able to be contained and accessed within our our parking structure to a avoid any stacking along San Antonio Road. Um and and there's there's several other improvements that that Chris will articulate, but um but anyway, collectively these revisions reflect a lot of your previous comments regarding circulation access and functionality and the overall pedestrian experience. and we believe the project is substantially improved as a result of your feedback and so we appreciate it. >> My name is Chris Lee C H I S L E Studio Tsquare Architect. Um like Mik, we incorporate several um changes summarized in this page. um not just for the sake of answering question but really take serious look into the option and make the project better. So thanks again for the taking time to review and comment. um uh the summary page I didn't mention the number one is provide a vertical break to eliminate one of the waiver that we previously request and number two in the plan is relocate the course so in more centralized uh area and serve better not just the typical level but also the ground level we we made some improvement and third one is uh we have a double height uh space gl uh storefront all across the Centonio Row right now to activate a street batter. And number four, we provide also direct access from the east east wind uh stair all the way can direct dial to the San Antonio road sidewalk. Number five, we convert uh those leftover pod space into a private deck so they can better uh maintain and enjoy those uh space on the podium. And number six, there's some concern about the flat roof accumulate trash for uh for the corridor to look into uh in the future before we we incorporate some metal roof on that area. So still have a a lower medicine but use this metal roof to eliminate the trash issue. And number seven, we create a little bit more um step down on that area and uh add another uh roof deck for the amenity space. Those are the highlight of the changes. And we also simplify color color and material board to eliminate one of the color that is similar uh in the shade. Next, please. Next slide, please. Um so on the ground level we I can say right now it's all we moved the bike room to the back because bikes still need to screen uh for the uh privacy security reason. So we moved the bike room to the back so open up the whole uh storefront on the centonial road to activate the street which through our double height space with very uh grand stair and masoning space. I think it will be it will be more interesting to when you walk into this uh space. Um and and also we provide um delivery um directive from Centonio Road. We reorganize the garage. So we allocate two delivery and the Uber drop off pickup location inside the Centonio entrance. Next please. Um so right now you see the ground level plan um the s centonio entrance has you know delivery and pickup and all the moving and trash pickup would those heavy surface will come from the lake street on on the lake lake home side and the red line also shows uh the direct connection from the east wing the stair people can go down the stair directly go through that pathway into the Centonio sidewalk. Those are the uh the change we incorporate some of the great comment that you guys provide. Next, please. Uh the third level we added um to the project. It's really has um the garage was wrapped around by the unit. So there's no exposure. We carefully not to have garage exposed to the street. So it was wrapped around by the liner unit. So very efficiently um to to strike strike the balance between the parking and the residential unit. Uh so from the from the street is there there no more garage was exposed or uh activate from the from by by the unit windows. Next please. Uh the podium level remains similar. We have a a pool deck facing the south. Take advantage of the south sunlight and surround by the fitness clubhouse and the wellness center. Next, please. On the roof level, we have a twostory massing drop down on the south side or the centonial row and we also add another roof deck on the north side near the lake home. So the amenity program will be um add up from the previous version. Next please. Uh this is a view from the south side. You can see the massing was very compatible to the existing uh hotel the south and future development to the north in this grand um centonial area plan. Next please. U the elevation um this is the street side elevation. The upper is Antonio, the lower is Lakeome. Then we use more vertical smaller element to um activate the street also bringing more residential smaller module fabric to the to the street front for the project. Uh and upper level step back and lower level use more enhancement material. I think that's uh to in to pronounce the base, middle and top expression. Next, please. The perspective view you can see the on the south side the roof deck drop down two level really uh relieved the corner and also made the entrion more u pleasing to look at. Next, please. Um the rear side of elevation we also take very serious look into it. There will be future development look into this. So we feel like that's also very important elevation. But instead of use smaller module I think there will be um because a longer elevation we use larger element um more dynamic and playful massing to interlock with the base middle top expression. Um so provide more interesting uh elevation from from the rear side too. Next please. Uh so that's the corner looking from the mountain view side into the the project. So this is a combination of um transition from the centonial row into the oil change and then to the lakeome. I think we in keeping with the modulation uh throughout the the street view. Next, please. Material pretty much in keeping similar. >> You're out of time, but you can have another 30 seconds to wrap up. Thank you. >> The next please. Um the section you show lower level has some weather protection, upper level step back. Next, please. The detail showing the the step back and the recess of the corner. Next please. The last one is the landscape design. We strike a balance of usable paving space and the planter space. The planting um area we meet the ODS requirement including um the stone treatment area. Uh we also have some small group paving area. So for residents to can can use that uh in a and also break up into smaller groups so more people can enjoy the the roof deck and the the pool deck. Next I think that conclude the presentation. Thank you. I just want to high um just answer the question about the rear uh elevation the canopy. It is um within the property line enclosion to the setback but our setback is more than the coal require. We have 10 foot setback. I believe the coal require 5 foot. So I think we still within the co allowed setback. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um I forgot to ask for disclosure. So um can uh David you want to start? >> Yeah sure. Um yes I as noted I met with the developers and we had a very useful conversation and I did not visit the site again but did the previous time? >> Nothing to disclose. I visited the site. >> I visited the site last time but have not recently. >> Thank you. Um so with that, do we have any um actually I any public speakers on this um item? >> We do not have any public speakers from this item. >> Thank you. Um then do we have any questions for the applicant or the staff? David, do you have any questions? >> Um, could could you describe the uh parking in the um San Antonio entry area there? Who who will be using the parking spaces there? >> Uh yes. Can we put out the plan? It's better to >> 101 >> the ground level plan. >> Yeah, it's uh I can I can share the plans if it's easier. Okay. Yeah. So San Antonio road entrance only serve this level and then the second level will enter from the lake home. So we don't have a ram connect to the upper level. So the the first I forgot the the count probably uh roughly 20 store will be gas parking. So for future tenant for the gas they can park at before the gate. There will not be a gate enter into the first area which can be Uber pickup can be Uber e delivery or in that area as well as the future tenant or the gas parking um at the first area before the gate and then we have a gate on the right hand side past the gate will be all assigned parking. So people if you don't not assign in this level you will not go through the you'll not be able to go through the gate to park. So after the gate will be all assigned parking for the residents. Yes. So this is outside and then there's a gate here and >> Right. Right. >> Okay. Does does that work for uh Whimo as well? That would they be I hate to do this to you, but uh it's a question because uh it's becoming obvious around town there's a lot of Whimo cars. >> That's very good question. I didn't have option. Um I think they I hope they map this into the into their system. I recall another it was either a pre-screening meeting for one of the projects on San Antonio Road. I don't know if it was a in front of the ARB or the city council and uh or it was parking transportation commission meeting. Uh there's a member there. It's a employee of Whimo and they said that Whimos do not go inside of buildings at this time. >> Yeah. Commissioner G is uh works for Whimo and expressed that it's difficult for it to back out and go into buildings. But yeah, >> I mentioned the option because Lakeome in my mind probably want to if Whimo want to go to this property better to map into the Lake home area to drop off. We have a secondary uh lobby there too. Currently, Whimo picks up in the oil changers parking lot right there on the corner. >> Any other questions, Stephen? >> Uh, well, I wait for future hearing. >> Pardon? >> Couple small questions. Uh, it looks like you have a pet washroom in the uh first floor inside the garage. Is there any intention to make that? And then the sort of a tied question is um you had shown a dog run area, but I couldn't locate it. Um so I'm wondering where that location of a fenced in dog run area is going to be. >> Yeah, it's around the the car wash the the oil change area. Yeah, that L shape the reverse L shape from Lakeome to the Yeah, >> that whole thing. >> Yeah, the whole >> Okay. And that pet wash is right next to that, but not directly accessible. Okay. So, you'd have to walk out of that into the garage and then to the dog run area. >> I think the intention is have a door to go out to that. Okay. We'll probably miss the door there. >> Yeah. No, there's a door, but it goes into the parking lot. And maybe this is super nitpicky. So, apologies for getting into the hyper weeds here, but I love my dog. So, um it's it would sort of be a question about whether that door is oriented properly and whether the specific location of that spot is as best as it could be um for considering what's going to happen in that room with wet animals being transported to and from apartments and um in and out towards that dog run area. Again, not anything that needs to hold up the meeting. Just wanted to ask about that and thank you for clarifying where the dog run area is. >> Right. The intention is to have another door just through that around that parking and then go out to that. >> Understood. Okay. Thank you. Um unit types and plans. Again, I like getting into the weeds and some of this stuff. Um residential plans. So you guys have shown on sort of the following pages from this one like the A20 uh let's see A106 105 104 all of those. Thank you. any of these will do. Um, these are not these are the only sort of indications we have as to what these units are going to look like. We have no but not been provided with any further details of the unit types. Is there a reason for that? >> Uh, we have 90% of the unit have a firm out layout but because um the time constraint and many uh changes we incorporate for the last round. just a few probably two or three of the special unit type we haven't >> like totally figured out. >> So we elect to not show them. >> Um >> that's my one hesitation is it's hard for me to you know approve a plan when we don't know what's going actually on its side. Um that being said it looks like you've got a nice mixture of um apartment types. Could you please refresh our memories with how many are single unit studios? Do you guys have an overall count for that that you could please state for the record? >> Here we go. >> All right. Those are the unit mix. We have um studio one bedroom, two bedroom, and three bedroomedroom all in the mix. >> So that's right up there. We also provide probably uh more than normal threebedrooms for the family so they can enjoy the community. >> Great. And if we can flip back to one of those, you know, floor plan levels, any of them, A103, four or five, doesn't really matter. Um there's one unit in particular that I sort of have um some questions about, which is part of the reason I wanted to see what the actual floor plan is. Um keep going. There we go. That's fine. So, it's this unit right here, right? That really inner elbow unit. Um, that's one of those that it's always sort of concerning when we see those in buildings because those get the least amount of light and air naturally. Now, it looks like you've sort of pulled the facade of this back in to allow for light and air, but because we don't have the flow plan, it's really difficult to assess how this unit is truly laid out and how it's truly going to function. Um, so I would just raise a concern about that being that we'd want to make sure that that's actually truly a functional unit and especially I believe it's being considered a Sorry, my eyes are old. Is it a onebedroom? >> Unit two. >> Oh my god, I can't see anything. Um, do we know how many bedrooms are in that one? >> Two bedroom. Okay. And then right next to it, it's a studio. So there's like a a little studio here and then a bedroom unit here. Is that correct? Sorry, my pen is suddenly no longer not working. >> Yeah, the skinny one is the studio and then the one next to it that's sort of um zigzag shaped is a two-bedroom, >> but those we usually plug in that into our in we call the inner corner um twobedroom. >> If you go to themes at Centonio Row um they have that unit work out actually very successfully. >> Yeah. As a designer, we we look at that as inferior unit, but from the leasing nature is some people like that because it's more uh it's not open to the outside noisy. >> Yeah. >> And the light is not that bright into their window. So there I didn't um something people might might like if they they they enjoy more privacy. Okay. >> Yeah. I guess the question would be was there any consideration to combine I don't have my pen working. Um to combine those two units to being maybe a three-bedroom unit there and then just giving that one unit at least a little bit more of a stretch of windows by combining it all into one larger unit. You'd get a bit more of that light and air exposure overall. Was there a consideration for that or was it really >> Yeah, we can we can consider that. Yeah. And again, I understand I'm getting to the weeds here, but it's it's those sort of units can become problematic pretty Oh, there we go. All the things. Um, it can become problematic pretty quickly. So, I just want to keep an eye on that one. Um, and then going to the landscape. And I think that's going to be my last question now. Let me try and find it. Going to the landscape. So, just to make sure I'm understanding everything correctly, the And this is I'm looking at L101 is a great visual for this. um that enlargement plan of the fourth floor where this pool deck and everything sits at the fourth floor. So, it's actually quite high up and then you only have four floors above that. Is that correct? So, it's not quite as much in a well as it might be. It's not down on the first floor and then you've got eight stories above it. It's really at fourth floor and then you've got four stories above it, >> right? Um it's at level on top of level three. So, we have five level above it. >> Five levels above it. So, one, two, three. Okay. And then um seventh floor plan has the sky lounge right next to it. >> And then the eighth floor plan, does that have a lounge next to it as well? >> Yes, >> as well. Perfect. Okay, so that's the sky lounge here. And then that's the lounge for this one, >> right? >> Great. Okay, that's it. Those are all my questions. Thanks very much. All right. I have a few questions that are kind of follow-ups on the same. Um on the uh I'll start with the garage. Um so you have the first level that's only access from San Antonio and then the upper two levels that are only from Legghorn. >> Um are they all assigned parking? So the residents would know which entrance to go from. >> Correct. Correct. >> From the lake home and the sec second and third level are all assigned parking. Okay. Um and I guess it's a question for um the city if because San Antonio I mean the the intent is that cars don't stop there. So if Whimos or other self-driving cars can't come in to the garage then if they're waiting they would potentially be outside on the street. Is that correct? >> Yes. There is no loading spaces on San Antonio or Legghhorn at the moment. >> And for um the applicant right now uh from your presentation the um the waiting area otherwise is on San Antonio entrance side. Correct >> for Uber Eats and pickups and all of that. >> I think uh with the drivers delivery and pickup we will be inside the garage. This is not necessarily your problem, but if um self-driving vehicles cannot come in, that's something for I think it's a larger question for the city for all of these developments. Um I have a another question regarding the pool as well cuz um level three garage has that pool um equipment room which is directly below the pool, but the pool is larger than that. And I was trying to find your floor to floor Oh, here it is. Uh, is about 10 ft from level three to level four, 10 foot two. So, does that account for the pool depth? And how deep is the pool? >> Yeah, I think we intend for a raised pool. It's about 4T of up the ground and then we will have a accessible ramp associated with that and the fans around it. >> Is that shown in the plants? Uh I so um I couldn't see that. >> I'm on A101 and I don't quite >> I think there's a ramp incorporated in there. >> Yeah, if I can direct the uh room's attention to L101. It does appear to show that it although I did miss it. I didn't realize that there was a significant grade change there. says plus two feet >> on the north side of the pole. >> I'm sharing the section drawing. >> You can see the pole >> in the section drawing >> on the plan it says plus 2 ft to that level on the So is that what it is? Two up and >> three down. L101 says plus two feet. >> We have half down half raise. >> Okay. That seems quite shallow for I don't know what's your intended depth for this pool. >> About 4 feet. >> Yeah. Okay. Um and I have another question about the unit types as well. the particular I had I was um looking at the same one Kendra was uh when I was reviewing this over the weekend and because that the units that are right in the knuckle are also other than one floor is designated as the bill of market rate and it does seem like the least desirable corner. Um, so without floor plans of, you know, where the bedrooms are, who has access to windows, and I think it was a project that we reviewed last week or maybe the last time or time before where um some of the bedrooms were interior and planning on doing borrowed light through the living room. Is that your plan as well? Um I think those unit I can say it's a proven work very well unit uh in the build project. We feel confident that can very liveable project a very livable unit but all three uh room has window even they look at maybe look at their own unit but the the benefit is more privacy that's why we learned from building those unit. Yeah. We can supply the the actual unit plan to you. Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. We would I in the same boat if without seeing unit plans for at least a typical unit plan, it's really hard to tell what you're intending to do here. Um >> maybe I can describe. Basically the middle module is a living room >> and then on the left and on the right side the two bedroom separated by the living room. >> Okay. Um I want to go to that um the axon view elevation um axon view that or perspective view that shows the exteriors any one of them. Um Christina can you bring that back up? Sure. On the San Antonio side, it seems like the where you have the canopies over um that's on the cover of your drawing set over the balconies that seems organized with like the overall um composition. When you turn around to the other elevations, I'm curious what the logic is for those eyebrows. They cover some windows but not all. Or is what is the design intent? I'm on page say um A331. Yeah, you just passed it. >> Yeah, here please. Thank you. So, for instance, here this window up. Let me find my pen again. This is not and this is not extended on that uh overhang. that was. So the question is, is that intended as a sun shade for certain rooms? What's behind these windows that are not being covered? And at the same time, this is the same exposure as that. So what is the logic for where you have uh canopies versus not? I think that that was intent for accentuate the corner a little bit more and not to have too big an element that appear to be too large. So we try to break down the medicine, break down the elements with the smaller component. That's a design 10, but I get a point. Um, especially on the west side, we might want to incorporate even a smaller c canopy can help. Yeah, maybe not continue, but add on smaller canopy for each one. >> Yeah, this is western exposure. So until something else major gets built over here, all of these window this this side will have lots of natural light but also a lot of um heat gain. Um, so I'm just curious like if there's a logic to it like at least compositionally like some of these that are covering pairs of windows similar to San Antonio side seems to have a compositional logic which kind of falls apart here. So curious what the intent is. >> I intend not to make the canopy too large and appear to be um to add to the bulk of the the massing. But we can look into the the heat gam for the I think this is east side so a little bit better but we we can we can still look into it. >> Okay. And this side is north right. Um so am I correct about that? >> That's a north side. >> Yeah. >> That's a lake home. >> Yeah. So, if it was for sun shading, you actually wouldn't really use it on the north side quite as much or not equally. So, um any other questions for applicant or staff from anyone on the board? Yeah, I'm I'm I'm comparing the previous plan that we reviewed with this one and I just want to make sure I understand it correctly. So, the previous plan you submitted had 197 units and this one has 228. Is is that >> correct? >> Roughly right. And then um the total square footage was 36,000 square ft and now it's 42. So it's about 15% larger. >> Mhm. And then Yeah. And I is is it true that most of that comes from additional amenity space? No. >> Oh, the amenity space actually went down. It went up from 30 13,000 square ft to about 15,000. Okay. Like I I just wonder like where is the limit? Like I think last in the last meeting maybe this is a question for staff or I don't know but I think one of one of the previous comments was this is already too big um and then you come back work on it and then you return with something even bigger so like I don't I'm just like big you know in big game like we have another meeting and it's going to even bigger I understand it's a builder's remedy like you know kind of what is the limit here? >> Yeah, I mean um it's uh it is allowed under builder's remedy um but uh you have the right to provide your comments on that. Okay. >> Thank you. Okay. >> I um I'm trying to find the Oh, here we are. Um because the development standard that applies to this site is the El Camino Real F focus area, right? Which is um it's cut off on the top of package page 60. Uh but the allowable height on El Camino focus area is 85 ft and this project is 84 and change which the number is hidden on our U packet page. Um so I guess to answer Arton's question that is the limit right the previously submitted seventory you know seventory uh was below 85 and in this revision they've come back with just hair under 85 so still within focus area development standard is that correct Christina >> request a >> there are a lot of waivers right here. Um I guess the uh that's a good question though. Are they allowed to ask for I forget if it would be a waiver or concession to build the higher than 85 if that was to be the case? >> They could. Uh I believe it might push them into another um level of construction if they did that. Um so I don't know that there's an interest on their end to do that but um I believe that they would be allowed to um ask for a you know under builder's remedy um propose this and ask for a waiver um related to that. I'd I'd like to add something to this and this discussion because I noted that on the zoning it was the it was stated that it was in F4. Um and I think that in your des in planning's description it was less than four uh and the focus area F4 is is what is used. So I think it kind of conforms to the decisions made for the focus area. >> Right. So the project was analyzed in comparison to the El Camino Riale focus area which is what we are required to apply to this site under AB1893. Um so is the um because on in your revision your third level three has garage on the interior and then uh residential on the exterior um perimeter. So is this um concrete podium construction with five levels on top? >> Correct. >> So that the units on that third floor would be concrete construction. >> Correct. All right. Any other questions for the applicant? All right. Then um thank you. We will um um move on to inter internal discussion. Does anybody want to start? >> Are there any outside speakers on this? >> Uh we asked already. There weren't any. >> There weren't any? Yeah. Who wants to start on any uh comments? >> All right, I'll go. Stand off. Um uh to the applicant, thank you. Uh we desperately need housing in Palo Alto. We're looking to move things forward. Um I think this is a very wise use of the space. I'm actually very uh fond of the two unit access points. The one that's for sort of the main ground level and then the sort of side entry. I think that's actually a very clever way to get residential parking um off of San Antonio. Um we of course always have concerns about Whimo and Amazon and things like that. And I think just designating spots right at the entrance off of San Antonio nice, clearly marked to very visible, painted bright yellow or whatever it needs to be um I think helps a lot. Um, excuse me, not Whimo, but like Door Dash, Amazon deliveries, things like that. Because with a unit type that has over 200, remind me again the final number, 22 >> 28. I mean, that's a lot of Door Dash cars and a lot of Door Dash deliveries and a lot of Amazon deliveries. So, that's one of those that we always want to um make sure is considered. Um, also the trash is always an item and you guys have thought about that quite well. Very pleased to see that that's um moved forward. I think overall the design is nice. Um, you know, it's very much in alignment with everything that's going on on San Antonio. I think it'll be another beautiful addition to the row of San Antonio. Um, I think you guys got a little bit lucky here in regards that the the the shape of the lot really makes it so your front facade on San Antonio is not so imposing, right? But you get a lot of that structure on the back side um where it's just the visibility is not going to be that much of an issue. Um, so I think it actually creates a quite proportional and beautiful front facade along San Antonio. So well done with that. Um, I also would like to say that I appreciate your 10 foot setbacks. I mean, everybody's trying to max these things out, getting it edge to edge, and it's just very, very difficult when we talk about life, safety, air, sunshine, fire, all of that. And just giving that 10-ft buffer creates such a world of difference. So, I really really want to thank you for taking that sort of sacrifice and making sure that you've you've got those setbacks maintained around the entire perimeter and then utilizing one of them as a dog run is quite lovely. Um, I'm also pleased with your landscape plans. I think that those are nice and I like having them at different levels. I think that's a really nice feature so that when you're on the eighth floor and you're so far from that fourth floor deck, you can just sort of run out to your little skyard on the side if you just want a little sunshine and to work outside for the day. Um, and on that note, the work from home lobby I think is brilliant. Um, I think that we're going to see quite a few more of those um in the future and I think that that's just a really nice feature to have for your tenants. So, other than that, um, I don't have a lot of comments. I think it's a well done project and it'll fit in quite nicely along that new San Antonio stretch. So, thank you >> David or Martin. Any thoughts? >> Once again, >> I didn't do it. >> Okay. Can you hear us now? >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Um yeah, it's a it's a I agree entirely with the positive statements made previous person um previous member. Um a few few thoughts here. U I think you should consider u locations or maybe you have and you can answer the question uh for maintenance trucks. do they do if you have spaces for them within the garage so they'll be able to pull in somewhere because it you know eventually you'll you'll need them. So I just leave that with you to consider that also again on that sort of similar issue. Uh it would be nice if you uh provided handicap parking very close to probably the rear elevator. Um, so so that they had access to the center of the building that way and could get into their units. I wonder if it's really necessary to have the fire control room right up in the front where the lobby is. Recognize that most of the people coming and going from this building will be by car and uh but but in a way it's sort of what is that doing in almost right there in the front? Could it move across the way to the other side further north? But consider that maybe it's okay to have a passageway through, but it makes makes a more exciting kind of entry to the elevator lobby to have a little more space there. Just consider that if it if it works for you. Um I mean you know I would just want to say that uh for me the amount of public use spaces in this building is just terrific. You know the proportion really works nicely for a big building like this. So, it's going to become a kind of a community building just because of the aspect of the public's amount of public spaces. And I would hope that uh in the future, you know, on on a projects like this that the amount and consideration that you've used for all of the public use spaces is really excellent. Um, see if I I just concerned about the ramp connections from the lower parking to the next level and whether they're really working. It's it's a you know you have people backing cars back potentially backing out into that direction and I'm just concerned that uh you make sure that that really works well for safety sake. Um, I think that dividing up the bike parking areas has been a is a really terrific solution and getting them out the sidey yard is a good way to treat all of the bike traffic or or on leg horn. Um, you know, I mean, yes, I double double agree with my uh board members that the board member that that the facade is really going to be a really wonderful facade and hopey sort of almost sets a standard for the articulation of the detail on San Antonio Road. Openness, the glassiness of it, and the scale of everything is is is really really terrific for San Antonio Road. And uh the choice of materials which you showed us today also uh is uh is well considered the fact that the pool area the largest of the public areas is facing in that direction and it's going to be open to you know you we've seen other projects in which uh the pool is is kind of in internal uh and it won't get as much sunshine. This one is is terrific for its lo its location. So your conceptual planning in the beginning was very very thoughtful. Um, I think that uh the open-ended questions are the questions of what to do on San Antonio and that really is it it's in stud it's in this I just this mic I don't know if you can hear once again it's okay um the um Whimo issue the front of the building issue really is a issue that they have to come back to you with. If there's absolutely no parking, it uh no possibility of a Whimo sort of being a pickup spot in front of this building, I think it's going to be unfortunate, you know, that it doesn't work. Somehow or other, you have already a access to the front of the building. And it seems to me that with the amount of length of of this site in the facing San Antonio, there ought to be some way in which you could make uh pickup parking work this but it's a coordination with the city and what's what's done in the front of the building. another project had a layby within the within the 25- ft setback and it seems like that might be a possibility or if there's no parking the create a well a layby lane of some sort where the parking would work. Now, I admit it kind of interferes with the bike paths and etc., but has to be worked out with San Antonio Road and the scheme for San Antonio Road. Hope planning can catch up on on this one so that this front of the building is worked out so that so that that's a solved solution. Otherwise, I just want to congratulate you on a really terrific project and looking forward to getting in the ground and getting it up. Yeah, I would like to echo with what the other board members had said. Um, uh, you know, my my my question, you know, before was was more like a surprise. It was not a critique in a you know in a sense but like you know I looked at this table and um you know ARB comment and applicant respond like I saw these are the main changes but for me the main change was an increase of the house by you know the the building by almost 20%. So, I think that would have been just kind of nice to communicate by either the applicant or staff. I think it's kind of an important uh information, but um but I think it's um uh you know, I think it's great to have this kind of a building on San Antonio. Like for me, San Antonio is like the new Palo Alto. There's old Palo Alto here and that's like the new Palo Alto where you know it's is it's close to the highway you know there's good access and I think you know to have these kinds of developments there is is is really good and you found a way to maximize it maximize the square footage and um yeah I think like the way you know you did the uh the seven uh the seventh seventh floor um kind open area. Uh yeah, I think sevens and then you have like another floor above. I think that's really nice. Like that that gives the building uh you like is is has like a stepped uh facade. I think that's very that's very nice. I think it would be much worse if that you know if that if that out outdoor area was on the eighth floor and then on San Antonio we would have such a high high facade. I think that's that's really positive. So, you try to step uh step it down. I think it's also nice to have multiple outdoor areas and it looks like from the plan is that all those areas are uh open to the public, you know, to the to all all of the residents. So, I think it's really nice to be able to distribute, you know, these many people across three, you know, kind of three main outdoor areas. Um and um uh I I I really appreciate uh that uh you know you you you met with the fellow board member and it seems like you had a terrific collaborative session. Um, so I mean I don't really want to say anything negative about this because because I mean you don't have to meet with the board member. You did and you know you you did you know you you you you did what he asked you. So like who am I to tell you no uh is not good. So I think I think you went out of your way um to uh you know to create a great you know great project and I really appreciate it and you know thank you thank you David for take you know for taking the effort and I think you made you know you made a big difference. Um yeah I think uh the you know you you created that that that drop off area on the first floor in the garage. Um, I mean it's it's just kind of like a personal, you know, feedback at this point, but I think I think it's going to be really hard to use because it's very hard to turn around as far, you know, it's not um, so I don't I don't think that's a good, you know, drop off for anybody. I think the drop off is like one of you said, it's going to be on Lghorn Street. Um so that that drop off area on the first floor it's going to be utilized only by people who don't know that lack horn is better but I think you just have to figure out some somehow with traffic management you know hopefully there will not be too many accidents or uh you know there will be a lot of people backing up so you know maybe you can put mirrors or you know I don't know what traffic management solutions to you know ensure it's safe and because the building is so big and is now even bigger, I think the it the drop off area on Lehorn, you know, might be, you know, might be a challenge. Um, I don't I'm I'm not sure you have enough space there. Um, but you know, you'll deal with the consequences somehow. You know, I hope the delivery drivers are not going to get too many traffic tickets. Um but yeah, I think overall I think this is a really nice project is is pretty you know your materials are are you know are beautiful. The facade is is uh you know is balanced. Um I think you uh I I think you are also not you know negatively affecting the neighboring properties. I'm al always thinking about that oil change business. they're like, you know, that's that's probably a different owner. I don't you probably don't, you know, so that person will come back to this, you know, to this board probably in a couple years trying to build something and it's kind of a small lot compared to yours. But I think because of the setback, you know, that you have um you know, there is an opportunity for him or her to to do something too. So I think that's that's that's important uh as well. So yeah, so overall uh this is a very good project. Congratul Congratulations. >> Thank you Martin. Um so yeah, thank you to the applicant um for this project. Yes, builder's remedies are hard, but I think you've done a really nice job with the composition, the design. Um I hope in your final, you know, as you go through construction documents and all, you're able to maintain this uh overall uh look. I'm slightly I like the screen that becomes a trellis at the roof, but uh hopefully the structure for it won't be so heavy that it kind of takes away from the lightness of that um what you have in the image. Um, as other board members have said, the amenities that you've provided in this building looks uh quite good and the my only um concern like we've already said is not having any unit plans to really understand. I assumeies are within the units since I don't see any like shared laundry areas. Um, and uh the the roof the pool deck level is quite lovely and I hope you can get a goodiz pool with the depth that you know families can really enjoy. Um, I also appreciate all of the the window proportions in on the all the elevations. They look quite large and these are pretty some of the units are quite small. So having that access to natural light and views are really important. Um, I think the sill heights are uh low enough that you can really experience the outdoors out of those windows. So, I definitely appreciate that. Um, I Yeah, overall a nice project and uh obviously very needed housing. So, thank you. So, with that um do we have a motion for this project? >> Can I move it? I'd like to move the acceptance of this project from our board. I'll second. Can we have a vote, please? Board member Joearth, >> yes. >> Board member Hirs, >> Vice Chair Rosenberg, >> yes. >> Chair Adcock, >> Motion carries 40. Thank you. All right. Um, next on our agenda is approval of minutes. Does anybody have any comments on this? The minutes from uh May 7th. I just would like to note for the record on May 7th, uh, board member Joearth was absent. >> I move to approve the minutes as written. Second >> board member Hirs. >> Yes. >> Board member Georg. >> I abstain. >> Vice Chair Chan. Oh, sorry. Vice Chair Rosenberg. Uh, yes. Chair Adcock. Yes. >> Motion carries. 301. >> All right. Next on our agenda is any board questions, comments, announcements. On that I would like to um confirm we are cancelled for next time. Correct. >> Yes. >> And I'm also going to be absent on July 2nd. So, uh Vice Chair Rosenberg will be leading that meeting. >> And I will be happily sitting in in yourstead. I will be jetlagged. Just fair warning. >> All right. All right. Um, next on our if we don't have any other comments, we'll go on to our next agenda item, which is any virtual comments. Do we have any uh requests to speak? >> We do not have any requests to speak at this time. All right. Thank you. I think with that we shall adjourn. Thank you.

Okay. Shall we start? >> Recording in progress. >> Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the May 21st, 2026 architectural review board meeting. Can we have a roll call, please? >> Yeah. Uh, Chair Chen, >> present. >> Vice Chair Adcock, >> Board member Hirsch, present. Board member Jojo >> present. >> Board member Rosenberg >> For the record, we have quorum. >> Thank you. Next is agenda changes, additions, and deletions. >> No changes planned for this meeting. >> Okay. Thank you. And we will move on to in person public comment. This is the time for anyone uh in the chamber who wanted to speak an an item that is not on the agenda. If you like to speak an agenda item, you will have it later this morning. Do we have any? >> Um through the chair, I've not received any public comment cards at the moment. >> Okay, thank you. Uh and um if you h if you're if you join us virtually and you have general public comment, you will have it at the end of this meeting. Thank you. So next I will hand over to Steve for city official report. >> All right. Well, good morning at our second meeting in May. Let me share my screen here. So, I just have one update of a coming or should I say newly submitted project that's located at 2197 East Bayhore Road. So, that's a site and design application that will construct 62 residential town home units. And as for some upcoming items, we're looking at our June 4th meeting of having the city parking garage located at 375 um Hamilton Avenue as well as a builder's remedy project located at 762 San Antonio. And we do have some upcoming planned absences. Uh we will be cancelling that um June 18th meeting due to uh a lack of quorum as indicated by those absences. Uh if there's any more planned absences uh that come up, please direct that to staff's attention. >> And I just found out actually I cannot be here next meeting. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> We'll mark that down for the record. And with that I can entertain any further questions. Any questions to the staff at this moment? >> Just looks like the tier one and two wireless is canceled for next time or not in next time's agenda. >> Correct. I believe that was in the the staff report, but there's been some shifting of of projects. So, >> okay. Thank you. >> Okay. If not anything else, we will move on to our action item two, which is a public hearing quaso judicial 788 to 790 and 796 San Antonio Road review of a an application to reszone the subject properties from CS to uh PCPHZ and to redevelop the site with an 80 8story mixeduse building with 167 residential rental units including in 28 below market are uh rate units and approximately 1,400 square ft of ground floor retail space. Uh SQA status is an addendum to the previously certified housing incentive program expansion and 788 San Antonio mixeduse project EIR is currently being prepared. Um any disclosures? Yes, I visited the site. >> Same. >> Same. The same. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh and then I will hand it over to Joey for staff presentation. >> All right. Good morning. Morning board members. Joey Den with our uh planning department. So I'm here to present to you item number two on today's agenda which is as you mentioned 788 San Antonio um which is for a planned community planned home zone reszoning. Uh next slide please. So, similar to um our last meeting, since it's this project's first review with ARB, um staff is requesting some um initial feedback on several um architectural and site planning topics that will relate to the findings ARB has to make later on to go along with a more formal recommendation. So, I just kind of wanted to frame that um early on um to guide our review. So there'll be things like building height, massing, stepbacks, transitions to uh ne nearby properties, the frontage design, especially along San Antonio Road uh frontage, the treatment of that ground floor uh retail corner facade articulations, materials, open space, and the way the garage access, garbage, loading, and fire access all kind of integrate into that design. Um so no formal recommendation is being requested today by staff. Um the environmental review so departmental reviews are still ongoing. Um but again the intent for today is to receive ARB's initial feedback so that the applicant can consider any refinements before uh the project returns uh to ARB for a formal action. Um after A or B the project will then go to PTC for their formal recommendation and then finally the project would return to council for a final decision. Next slide please. So the site is located on the corner of San Antonio Road and Legghorn Street. Um this corridor is currently dominated by onetory, twostory um commercial and service uses but that corridor is in the transition process. Um there are several uh projects nearby either approved or proposed um housing projects um such as the 808 San Antonio Road which ARB reviewed at our last meeting. um the six the 762 San Antonio Road project to the south which is a builder's remedy and then the 824 San Antonio Road project to the north. Next slide. So the San Antonio road area plan um this is not yet adopted. Um but since this site is in that plan area the future vision for this corridor is relevant to this project. um especially when we explore that frontage design um taking in mind the special setbacks and then any potential for future multimodal improvements. The area plan is expected to head to council in June. Um staff will be looking for a recommendation on what the preferred or core scenario for the area plan um will be. The plan does present several options, but based on all the feedback um that was received through all the prior study sessions that were done, um the most likely recommended option will include some form of highdensity housing um with the maximum permitted heights up to 90 ft more contemplated along the southern side of San Antonio. to the side that this project is on. Retail um or active ground floor uses at key corners um and several um and there were several options for multim modal improvements. Um but that's something that staff is hoping for council direction on um with but it in no matter what it will include some sort of enhanced pedestrian or bicycle facilities. Next slide please. So this is the proposed PC PHC which is shown on the left side here and that's being compared to what's currently allowed or required under the base zone district of uh service commercial um and through the housing incentive program. Um, so the what the project is proposing is an eight-story building the with maximum heights up to 89 ft to the parapit or 94 ft to the top of rooftop equipment. Um, this is contrasted to what is um they're allowed currently which is 50 ft. They're also proposing 167 units 28 of which would be lowincome BMR units. This would equate to approximately 20% using the city's weighted PHZ calculation. Um the project also will include approximately 4 1,400 square ft of ground floor commercial. Um this is compared to what the base zone requires um which is a minimum of 6,500 square ft of ground floor commercial. Um they are also proposing a floor area ratio of 3.75 whereas the HIP only allows up to a floor area ratio of 2.0 and they are proposing approximately 74 parking spaces whereas city standards requires 184 approximately. Next slide please. So this is the site plan um for the project which kind of shows also how the project operations will be organized. Um note that the San Antonio frontage is designed with that retail corner with at the corner of Lake Horn which is shown at that pink box at the corner right there. Um it also this this ground floor also includes a residential lobby, a co-work space both along that San Antonio frontage. Um open space and landscaping along there and also a bike room. Um now vehicle access and most if not all of the operations are shifted onto Lake Horn Street. So no curb cuts will are being proposed along San Antonio Road. Um but it does place all that operational activity on Lake Horn. So that means trash staging will be on site. trash pickup, fire access, loading, all of those services on Lake Horn. Um, and then just because we already have it on the screen, the bike room has approximately 167 long-term spaces, which is approximately one space per unit. Next slide. So, going to parking mobility, the project is proposing those 74 spaces where 184 is typically required. Um, additionally of those spaces, some of those are proposed as car share or um, guest/ future resident spaces. So, this roughly equates to a ratio of44 spaces per unit. Um, the applicant did provide a draft transportation demand management plan that presents and kind of addresses this lower parking calculation. Um, but this is still currently under review by the Office of Transportation. Um, let's see. So, while the specifics of parking calculations may not be a decision point for ARB, staff is hoping for feedback on this since it will affect the overall parking strategy. Um, which will then affect the site circulation and design um things like the garage access. Next slide, please. So, speaking of which, this is the proposed um garage entry um and arrival area off of Legghorn Street. Next slide, please. These are the typical floor plans. Now, floors one and two are those podium floors. Um mostly those garage spaces and that ground floor area. Um so, all that operational and staging again is on the ground floor. the most of the there are some residential units on the second floor but mainly those the residential units start on the upper floor starting on level three um and then the ground floor level three and eight is where the open space and landscaping is. Next slide please. So the proposed open space is mostly along the San Antonio frontage area on that ground floor and it's mostly along that adjacent area to that retail, the lobby, the bike room and the co-work spaces. Next slide. And then the other areas for open space are primarily on the podium courtyard on level three which is on the left side and then also on the roof terrace on level eight as well. The landscape and plant pallet being proposed is mostly native and drought tolerant species. Next slide. So the project was revised after the council pre-screening to address feedback that was received on massing and stepbacks. Now this plan shows that courtyard break that's facing San Antonio Road which is roughly an average step back of 55 ft from that property line. Um, and then also to note there is a upper level setback on the corner of San Antonio and Lake Horn. Um, which you can kind of see from that elevation right there. Next slide. These are the building sections showing the vertical organization. Next slide. So for elevation materials, the design uses a mix of stucco, various materials, panels, cladding, metal elements, especially along the railings and canopies, and storefront glazing. Next slide, please. So transition and privacy. Now, this project is adjacent to um that 808 San Antonio Road project. Um and this does that site does have an existing residential PC on it. Um it's currently under review to change but because that PC is ina is in place the special requirements as identified in the staff report or uh also um code section 1838150 would be applicable. This slide shows the privacy exhibit that was provided showing that northern elevation. So this is what's would be facing um the adjacent 808 San Antonio Road project. It identifies facade bras, reduced glazing, some solid balcony railings, and interior window coverings. Um and so similar to the previous discussion at the previous um ARB meeting, staff is hoping for feedback on the transition and privacy concerns and any impacts to light and air um in particularly to this northern elevation that faces San Antonio or 808 San Antonio Road. Next slide. So, I'll close by restating that um no formal recommendation is being requested today. Um but staff does recommend but the recommending action that staff does recommend is that A or B um take uh or would provide initial comments and feedback and then continue to a continue their project to a date uncertain. Next slide. that staff is available for any questions. The applicant team is also available on Zoom and I believe they have a presentation as well. >> Okay, thank you very much. So before we moving on to applicant uh presentation, do we have any questions to the staff at this moment? >> I have one quick question on clarification on lot coverage that it states 67%. Um that is on the ground level, correct? is um not the podium level. It just looks a lot at least in planned graphically looks more than 2/3 filled on the site. So I just wanted to confirm where that was coming from. >> I mean lot coverage is based on the ground level. Um there are certain projections if on upper levels um if the canopy comes out more than 4 feet that do count toward lot coverage. Um I believe we've included everything that should be included in lot coverage though. >> Okay. >> But we'll take a second look at that just to be sure. >> Yeah. >> Okay. And then if I could direct your attention on the plans, that would be a 0.1 um that denotes the lot coverage and those amounts >> um or 0.11 >> underneath the project data table on the far right hand side. >> What was that? Oh, 0.1. Yes. Yeah. No, I I did uh catch all of those, but you just just want to double check just because graphically it looks more full than 67%. >> No other questions at this time. Thank you. Um, I have a question about how the trash comes out because that trash you were saying is going to be staged over on Legghorn, but it really is sort of on that residential um the residential trash is denoted on the opposite side of the um building behind bike storage. So, are they going to come out this sidewalk, go towards the back, and then roll it all the way out as opposed to just coming out the short side and heading out to San Antonio? I believe their plans, operational plans is to roll that trash through the site and then onto the staging area. Um, but I'll defer to the applicant to confirm that. >> Okay. And then just out of curiosity, do we remember what the 808 I couldn't remember off the top of my head if the 808 is also they're staged on San Antonio for their trash? Correct. >> Their their trash would be staged on site. >> On site, correct? >> Okay. Okay. Great. Thank you. Actually, I do have another minor question on the slide that showed um the entrance. Um it's the the plan that's on a 0.11 um and the 74 units. The blue box for I guess loading um was different than what I see in the plan. So, I was just curious if that was reducing one more parking space. >> I'm sorry. Could you repeat that? >> If you want to go back to your slide, show it like cuz I don't know what slide number this was, but I just made a note on the graphic. >> You said this was for uh the slide with the site plan and >> maybe if I keep talking, this you won't catch it. Zoom in on me. >> I believe that's slide six. >> Bear with us while we pull that up. >> It's sheet A0.11 in the package. Yep. >> Yep. That's the one. Um, so the blue are loading areas, correct? Is that what you mentioned? The blue boxes? >> Yes, I believe those are the loading areas. >> Okay. And in uh our plan, it's the one on the right is noted as future resident parking. So, is that reducing from 74 to 73 parking spaces? This is uh you're referring to floor two, correct? Oh, the one on Yeah. So, those >> Sorry, you're correct. I I was on the lower plan and you're on the upper. Thank you. >> I I have a question regarding the retail parking. So, based on the proposed size of the retail, uh how many parking space do does it require? I know it they didn't propose anything but based on the code like if there is >> so the code does have an allowance for um 1,500 square ft or less of retail to not have a parking requirement. Um that said this is a planned community reszoning so um all aspects of the uh development standards are you know as negotiated. Yeah, understand. Thank you. So, if no additional questions, uh, David, you have >> Yeah. Uh, out of curiosity, bike parking, does that also include, u mechanical bikes, uh, scooters, whatever scooters you can take to your apartment, but bikes that are motor driven bikes or, you know, do you know what are the rules on that so far? I mean, yeah, you can have like EV or motorbikes. I don't know that they're designed, you know, some of the motorbikes are a little bit larger. Um, I don't know that these are specifically designed. Um, we could look into that. Um but certainly um there you know our office of transportation has been trying to encourage people to put um plugs and stuff into the bike rooms because there are more ebikes um and people like to be able to plug them in when they're there. Um so that has been something that we've been pushing for and that some applicants have been providing. >> Um it is a voluntary thing at this point. um you know certainly as part of a PC you could negotiate it but um it's not in our code as a requirement right now. >> I I mean I bring this up specifically here to this project which is somewhat remote from other areas in PaloAlto and low in the number of vehicles on site. So it would seem like a natural progression. The other question is uh you're looking for feedback in privacy areas. Is that the is that where the question came up? The uh adjacency to the neighboring building? >> Yes. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yes. We are looking for feedback on uh transition standards and privacy um you know along the entire the project's impact on the corridor but also primarily um along that northern elevation that's facing um >> the nature correct neighboring building. >> Correct. Yeah. So could you just repeat for for the record here what what are the decisions that you have already kind of been studying uh in that area in that with of that >> for privacy. >> So the uh plans currently show um they the building currently employs some facade breaks um they reduce some of the glazing or windows in that area. Um they also proposed that they're going to pro be providing internal window coverings to those units. Um and also those balconies along that elevation would be of solid material. >> Okay. So so the edges will not be glazed as they are in the most of the rest of the building then. >> Correct. >> They'll be solid which provides a certain degree of privacy. Okay. Uh so there was a discussion between planning and and the and the applicant here uh regarding that and it is you know it's going to affect us all the way along the corridor here. >> So it I don't know if we discussed that on the last project that we reviewed. Uh out of curiosity do you go back on issues like that and discuss it with the previous applicants? Um yeah, I mean that's something that we'll certainly discuss. I you know the context of this is that there was there was some early discussions about stepbacks um from these neighboring um buildings. Uh and I think both uh both of the developers had some concerns about how much that would affect you know their ability to provide the number of units that they would like to provide. And so the discussion was around how much is related to privacy and might be things that could be addressed and how much is related to massing. Um and so your feedback on those components I think generally where the planning commission um uh landed was that you know stepbacks weren't necessarily warranted. Um we wanted to see more stepbacks on the San Antonio frontage. Um but huge larger setbacks on the um between the buildings weren't necessarily um needed. Um so the developer at 808 did make some changes to their design to have the masting set back a little bit but then did add some balconies. And so then that discussion became more around privacy concerns and how are we making sure that those uses can um you know both you know live together basically. >> Thanks. Uh you know I come from New York and we have zero lot line. It's a completely different world. >> All right. Thank you for the questions. Any additional questions? If no, we will just move on to applicant presentation. To the applicant, please state and spell your name for the record and you will have 10 minutes. Thank you. >> Good morning. My name is Edward Kim. Uh, Ed Dw. Oh, perfect. Good morning. Uh uh board members and thank you staff for the presentation. Uh my name again is Edward Kim, project architect with KTGY uh representing Grub Properties uh this morning uh for the proposed project. Uh next oh uh I'd like to note that the applicant team um and the design team are available for questions um after the presentation. Uh the current design uh reflects feedback from the city council pre-screening um as mentioned by by Joey and and city staff. Um and we're also actively evaluating the parking approach um in response to PTC feedback. Um in today's presentation, I would like to focus on the architectural elements um massing, street frontage, ground flooror activation, privacy and materials. The project is organized with the intent to support the San Antonio corridor's uh planned transition towards a pedestrianoriented and mixeduse um environment. Uh next slide please. Uh along San Antonio uh road, the building is expressed as two primary wings um with a recess central courtyard. Uh the goal is to reduce the continuous length of the street facing elevation at the ground floor. Uh the base is further defined into or divided into smaller facade segments aligned with program areas uh entries and material changes. Again with the intent to create a finer grain pattern at the pedestrian level. Um, one one thing I'd like to note, um, is that the proposed project also incorporates, as as Joey mentioned, retail at the corner of the intersection between Leg and San Antonio. Um, and this is the only project, uh, in terms of the adjacent properties, uh, 800 and 762 or sorry, 808 and 762 that provide that retail. Um, and again, that was in response to the, uh, city council pre-screening. Um again I think the the proposed building scale aims to be consistent with the adjacent properties and the proposed developments upper story stepbacks, recess courtyards, materials and facade articulation um aimed to differentiate the building uh relationship with its neighbors uh while contributing to a um a diverse San Antonio corridor. Um next slide please. Um the project's goal is to reduce the apparent mass um through three primary moves. A a recessed courtyard upper upper level step back and changes in the facade plane. Uh the deep San Antonio road facing courtyard break um provides breaks and uh reduces the building volume and provides daylight into the interior facing units and amenity areas within this courtyard. Um, this courtyard is designed to connect indoor and outdoor amenity spaces at the podium level. Um, including a gym with a spillout zone, spa, sund deck, and landscaping. Um, at the upper level on the project corner, uh, the rooftop club room and outdoor terrace address the suggested step back from the pre-screening to reduce the perceived mass at that corner. Um together these elements can distribute activity across multiple levels of the building while breaking down the overall scale. Um in addition the project integrates multiple standards of the ODS base middle top facade artic art articulation wall modulation um and wall plane changes that range from 2 feet to 5t in depth accompanied by material color and or textural changes. Um, next slide, please. Um, with no residential units at grade, the ground floor's primary goal is to enhance the pedestrian experience. Uh, the the project's ground floor design includes the 25- ft required special setback. Uh, incorporates ODS standards for the public realm and sidewalk character uh, widths and the landscape area percentages. Um, our goal again is to provide a pedestrian zone that highlights active and both at both active and passive gathering spaces uh with abundant landscaping. um internal to the program or internal to the building. The residential lobby, retail, co-working amenity and bicycle facilities are intentionally positioned along San Antonio Route providing San Antonio Road providing day-to-day use storefront glazing and pedestrian cyclist access points. The design intent is a continuous activated frontage where ground floor program and landscaping work together uh not as separate layers but as an integrated sequence from the uh from the public realm into the building. Um next slide please. Um the existing site has a total of five curb cuts um out on the out on site today along San Antonio and Legghorn frontages. Um, in contrast, the proposed project consolidates these into one um, access singularly off of Legghorn. Um, the goal is to reduce conflict points between vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists um, along the San Antonio corridor um, and support a more continuous multimodal path. Um the consolidated entry uh shown in the kind of orange yellowish uh arrow um on the on the site plan um serves as a primary arrival point for residents and guests with materials consistent with the broader exterior pallet um as seen on the two renderings on the on the right. Um this vehicular entry is intended for clear wayf finding um for the building entrance and parking access. Um next slide please. Um along the northern facade um the project provides privacy measures um outlined in the ODS standards and a few additional strategies. Um as Joey mentioned right glazing is limited to the required maximum of 15%. Um facade brakes are provided to meet and exceed actually the the required minimum of 4t wide and 2 ft deep. Uh that occurs every plus or minus 40 ft or so. Um the two balcony stacks serving 12 units on this project are offset uh from the adjacent building as feasible and are provided with solid railing um as as mentioned to reduce direct view and sight lines toward neighboring property. Um unit windows are positioned to the extent feasible um to avoid direct alignment with the windows on the adjacent building. Um and lastly, management uh provides all units. Um again, this is a a management um uh offering uh for interior window um covers and privacy treatments. Uh next slide. Um the the project's goal is a cohesive material strategy across all elevations um utilizing the permitted building materials um outlined in the objective design standards. Uh the the palette consists of oo skin um GFRC panel and three finishes for a very subtle or for a subtle variation um in what we're what we call kind of a terracottaike expression. Um large format tile stone veneer, smooth finish stucco and storefront create a distinguishable base. Um fiber reinforced cement panel um is proposed at the roof terrace and the leg horn elevation. Um and stucco and colors cohesive to the overall pallet are applied throughout the building. Um warmer and natural tones are prioritized um on this project to highlight a residential scale while material changes are coordinated with facade modulation. Um next slide please. Um so as this project began uh with city feedback and has been revised through each stage of review um with updates to the massing ground floor frontage site access and material strategy. Um the current proposal reflects our team's design objectives uh reducing apparent building mass uh increasing ground floor engagement with the public realm consolidating vehicle access points and applying a consistent material approach across the building facades. uh we look forward to your feedback. Thank you very much. >> Okay. Thank you for presentation. So before uh questions to the applicant, we will open it to public comments >> and uh to the chair uh I do have two requests to speak. Um if there's any members on Zoom uh that would like to speak, you may raise your hand. Um our first speaker is Steve L. Good morning. Um I have no experience as you know in architecture but I want to talk about the parking which I think will be a issue of contention throughout year the PTC and the council's deliberation. This project is about the future in three important ways. First, as the applicant said, they won't rent these units for at least four years. 762, 808, and perhaps the Toyota site will follow. So, we're talking about housing coming online in the next 5 to 10 years. As an unfortunate note, this project in its various forms has been around since either 2017 or 2018. Why that time frame is important? You have the San Antonio area plan that will provide one significant mobility enhancements to allow residents here and along the corridor to move more smoothly walking, biking, and perhaps with shuttles and eventually transit. And second, as of Monday night, you have the Cubly renovation going forward and its ability to enhance the close by Charleston shopping center. Third, this is a future city goal to reduce ownership if possible and car use for the enormous environmental benefits. I don't know how many parking spaces will end up in the project. I don't know how successful all of these efforts will be to increase mobility. I have myself who does not drive and two friends who have for their entire adult life functioned without a car ownership. We have options for ride share. We have the now exploding Whimo option. We have the potential for zip car and rental cars. There are lots of ways for people who are interested to eliminate the cost um which is quite substantial in increasing of car ownership use and insurance. So, please, as you move forward, think about the enormous benefits that this project and the San Antonio area plan enhancements will bring to the city and meeting its city goals with regard to reducing car dependence. Thank you. And I'm not dissing you by leaving. I have a plane to catch. >> Thank you. Our next speaker is Herp B. >> Chair Chen and board members, uh like the like the previous uh speaker, uh I rely upon uh the board for its expertise on on design on the environmental issues. Uh this comes to you under the plan community district zone regulations but also on something called planned home zoning that has never been included uh in the zoning code as uh required by law either as an amendment to the PC zone or as its own zone district regulation on other uh environmental issues. This is also in a general area where there have been concerns about oversized uh vehicles uh in which residential zones uh sorry with the letter R are uh excluded as an areas for overnight parking. But we have previous plan community zones before the PHZ and now these with PHZ which should be included in the definition of residential if a majority of the floor area is residential in those uh in the oversized vehicle ordinance. So they're treated the same way as other residential projects. There are other environment issues which have probably been discussed in uh the previous uh EIR uh but change circumstances uh need to be taken into consideration for such things as sea level rise adaptation. uh we we have an idea of how much uh in the past uh sea level rise would affect this area but it's changed and I think more so similarly with uh underground water uh water table where projects uh build uh garges anything underground they their walls create a dam so where uh the underground water level you know previously in part were under those projects Now it's going to be shifted to other projects such as this one. And in terms of earthquakes, Hayward fault is overdue and there's lots more active in the San Andreas fault. So the Earthquest Crayola Crayola maps need to be uh considered for the for for that. Um uh overall the fact that uh the these you know PHZ zones so-called uh have been approved you know that doesn't uh mean there's uh precedent set that you have to do this as well. Well, I mean, I'm old enough to remember a comments Senator Sam Irvin made at at the Watergate hearings where he talked about where people were getting away with sometimes killing people without suffering consequences or stealing uh without suffering consequences. But that doesn't make didn't make you know murder meritorious or lararsen illegal. In the same way, the fact that there have been PHZ zones adopted in the past doesn't mean uh that if someone would be challenging this issue on uh the lack that it's in the zoning code, uh those other things are are not a precedent. So, I appreciate looking forward to discussing a design, but no one's going to challenge the project in court based upon the design. Thank you. >> Thank you. and uh through the chair we have no other requests for to speak. >> Okay. Thank you very much. And then we will move on to uh uh so uh to the applicant you will have 10 minutes rebuttal. Do you want to respond to any public comment? >> Uh no just thank you for your comments. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. And then uh it's back to the board. So do we have any questions to the applicant who want to start? Kendra. >> Sure. And um if we can ask the applicant, you'll be at the podium for a few minutes at this point. >> Great. >> Appreciate it. Um so I'm going to dive into some of the the nitty-gritty here. Um first I'm going to sort of reiterate my question that I asked the board is that um the trash, how's that going to be handled? >> Yeah. So on-site management would be using the termination room within the building and moving it and locating it within the trash staging area just outside of the building frontage on Legghorn. So it would come sort of out that side yard. If there's any way to pull up that floor plan, that'd be great. >> Yeah. Here. Um and do you have the set um available or >> Yeah, if we can. >> Or if not, then yeah, we can pull up >> staring intently. >> If you want to pull if you want to pull up slide number get to the slide number seven, >> please. >> I can just pull up the plans if you just want to refer to the the sheet. >> Yeah, that'd be great. >> Sure, that too. Um, a 2 Z. >> That's right. Uh, we can go to A 1.0. >> That works, too. >> Yeah. So, the line work is on 1.0 is just a little bit crisper. >> Sure. Um and so the termination room on the left side of the building plans would then be on-site management would be responsible for carrying it through the residential gate, the enhanced entry zone um and enter the trash staging area that is shown kind of as a hatch where the 130 um dimension currently lies right now. And so you'll see a pair of doors um 6 foot wide that we've coordinated with um environmental waste um during a series of coordination meetings. And so then on-site management on day of service would be responsible for bringing all the bins and um and service for that moment into the trash staging trash waste hauler. >> I'm sorry. What was the uh uh sheet number? >> Oh, sorry. >> 1.0 A1.0. Yeah. Thanks, Joey. Up, up, up. There we go. >> There we go. >> Beautiful. And if you can zoom in just a little bit, Joey, that'd be awesome. >> All right. Beautiful. >> Great. Thanks, Joey. >> So, there's your residential trash on that lefth hand side there. >> Correct. So my question is, are they going to come out down this sidewalk across the back of the building and stage over here? >> Uh, no. Everything would happen internal to the building. >> Internal. >> Correct. >> Okay. So how would they get from this residential to and am I accurate in saying that this is the trash stage and over here on Lake Horn? >> Uh, correct. So where the where the dimension 130 currently sits, there is a hatch zone with double doors or double gates. Um, that would be representing of the trash staging area. >> Oh. Oh. Oh, okay. Over in that zone. >> Yeah. And so Yeah. Yeah. And so the waist hauler on day of service would come and stage along Leg horn um where the hatch is currently shown um on the street. Uh the waste hauler themselves would then um access the trash staging area, pull the necessary bins, locate them back into that trash staging area, and then on-site management would be responsible for re moving the bins and maneuvering the bins back to the the termination room labeled residential trash. >> Understood. Okay, great. Thank you. Um, and secondary follow-up question to that is that for the residents to be bringing their trash, where do they go? >> Yeah. So, if we go to an upper level, um, Joey, if you can go to, um, A2.2. >> Beautiful. >> Um, and as you're pulling that up, um, and so, um, coordinated with the termination room on the left side of the building, or I guess the >> the north edge of this building, uh, you'll see a trash vestibial with two shoots dedicated. um that terminate into that residential trash. And so there'd be a single uh location for all residents. >> Beautiful. And so basically in theory, right, B5 would walk all the way down here with their trash to to locate that. >> Correct. >> Okay. Um but there is a trash shoot on every level. >> There's a trash shoot on every level. >> Beautiful. >> Um Okay. So, if we don't mind staying here for another minute, I will follow up with a couple points here. It it appears that this A4 is a studio apartment. It doesn't look like it actually has a separate bedroom. Um, so I just wanted to clarify that point and your counts and everything like that because just the way that it's laid out, it appears to be a studio, but it's colored as a onebedroom and I believe it's counted as a onebedroom >> and that's on all levels. >> Sure. Yeah. >> Clarification point and making sure that the counts are accurate. Um, and also on this note, there's several plans specifically the A1's and variations thereof. It also is attack uh affecting A6, A7, these two here and then that guy right there. Um, all of these seem to have an internal layout for that bedroom with no exterior windows. It seems to be that the window is sort of through the living room. How does that work? And isn't there a light and air? Bless you. Isn't there a light and air requirement for a bedroom? >> Yeah. So, the borrowed light um uh code requirement would be triggered here. And so, there is light and air. Absolutely. Um but uh the quantity of glazing or the openness of that bedroom to borrow light from that living space uh would be adequate enough for this to be a um kind of a inset onebedroom. >> Mhm. And so for this A1 like specifically here there's a reason that you would not make this a studio because you got a little bit extra width to make sure that it's a onebedroom. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Correct. Yeah. So all the internal spacing um complies and meets the standards for living and um sleeping areas per code. Um, and then the light and air as mentioned would be addressed through all the openness through the sleeping area. >> Okay. I would just uh I'm a big believer that I understand that it complies with code. I don't think most people want to live in a bedroom that has no fresh air. So, any place that you can get those bedrooms to the exterior, I would just strongly encourage it. I think that that's um just healthier living. So, that would be my two cents on that. Um, and that's all my questions for the moment. I'm sure I'll have more as my fellow uh board members come up with things, but those were my questions for today. Thank you. >> I can go next. And actually, if we could go back to A1.0. Um, I have a follow-up question on the trash route. Um, yeah, you can go here. So, um, can you Yeah, we can leave it here. Zoom out. That's fine. Uh, so I understand this Whoops. Where's my pen? area. Um the fenced area is that uh where the trash would go and then >> correct >> then there's a note here that trash loading is here. So early morning or something um management will take the bins and roll it out to the street. uh to be determined in terms of service time. What we've coordinated so far with environmental waste is um because the service time duration uh tends to be unpredictable um we're anticipating that on-site management would take it out uh early in the morning. >> Yeah. >> Just to clarify that on the street would be just the loading area for the truck itself, not the bins. >> Correct. So the Yeah. the personnel or the staff for the waste hauler themselves will come and pull the bins out of the fenced area >> and service each individual bin separately one at a time. >> Okay. And then this area is also noted as move in move out. So um move in moving truck would stage out there. >> Correct. And so on and on-site management would be responsible for maintaining um hours of operation, hours of when resident loading would happen so it doesn't overlap with trash service days. And >> I guess question for staff is there I can't remember if there's a bike lane or anything on Legghorn and how would you know moving trucks sitting there impact bike routes? >> There's no bike lane on on Lake Horn. Is it a shared bike lane with cars? >> Not I don't believe so. No. >> Yeah, we can double check that, but I I don't believe it is. >> Yeah, I'm just looking at the little symbols on the ground. It's like we've got the shared bike path on San Antonio there. I I'm not sure if this is the same here at Legghorn. So, we would just need to double check that. But it does, at least from this image, sort of appear that maybe the bike lane is shared with traffic based on that symbol. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Right now in San Antonio, it's shared with traffic. >> Yeah. So, >> same level. >> A similar situation is here. It also lo labeled as loading zone and I'm not sure how it will impact the bike lane. >> Yeah, we're we're not going to allow a loading zone on San Antonio. >> Okay. So, this this place here will be gone. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. Bike safety is extremely important and we don't want to have accidents because a moving truck is sitting on >> right and and that with the changes to that corridor we just don't expect that that's going to be viable in the future. So >> yeah and I guess similarly um a follow-up question on that because it does you know moving trucks will sit there for at least an hour or so depending on how you know how big a family is moving in. So that's close to an intersection. That's a lot of, you know, blocking of potential bike route and pushing bikers onto um traffic. So not a fan of that. But anyway, we're in question stage. Um where are deliveries like such as Door Dash coming and also like ride share? Is everybody just like Whimo or Lyft, Uber are coming into the enhanced entry zone? Uh >> yeah, so it it's to be determined. I think we're working in evaluating that solution. Um I I think the plans that you're currently looking at right now um was the the initial feedback that we had received from the city after submitting this was that San Antonio road San Antonio road corridor would not um have any parallel parking or loading. And so I think we're still evaluating um how to strategize those op those services >> particularly with a lower number of parking spaces and encouraging ride share which totally support but that also means places for white ride shares is important. So on the same plan, I'm curious how this ramp is successful like how there's no turn radius and a super tight turn. Is that one way, two-way? >> It's it's two ways. Um it's two ways. There is there is some flexibility I think for the diagram itself. We've shown it at right angles. Um but there is a way to chamfer it and round the corners. Um for that um the ramp >> potentially lose parking space, right? Um potentially I think we we can absolutely study uh where that turning radius and whether it's 5T 10 foot inside turning radius I think we can study that. Um but in terms of the the ramp slopes themselves uh they would be compliant or I guess they would be um meet the transition requirements and so we're trying to speed ramp up to level two. >> Yeah. Yeah. Your ramp um triangles makes it look like you have no space for radius and also parking spaces. So, >> okay. Um, what's your construction type? I don't remember seeing. >> Yeah, it's type three construction. So, wood lumber. Um, five levels of wood lumber over uh three levels of type one. So, um concrete, steel. >> So, the uh on the second level you have some apartments and on the third level of apartments would also be concrete construction. Correct. >> Correct. Yeah. Type one. Okay. Um, so, uh, kind of in the weeds question, your Florida floor is 10 foot three or 10 foot n, I forget. Um, but on your seventh floor, you have 11' 3. Just curious why that is. >> Yeah. Um, so we're trying to make up uh an accessible path out to the roof terrace um within that club room space. And so for um to meet accessibility threshold requirements, we're popping up that upper floor an additional um 12 in so that we can make up the transition. Um the construction of that roof terrace is going to be on pedestal system and so we've got to be able to flush out the transition between indoor and outdoor space. And that so that's essentially what's accommodating um the uh accessible path. >> Okay. Actually that leads me to questioning your second floor podium. Is that is that outdoor terrace also on pedestal pavers? >> Yeah. Uh yes, it will be. But that slab will also be depressed. Um and so we can actually keep the head clearances required for parking and mechanical back of house uh plumbing routes while still accommodating a flush condition with the courtyard and the interior space >> apartments under that as well on the second level. >> Correct. Correct. And so the the location so again we're going to we'll continue to refine and coordinate the plumbing jobs. Uh but we'll reant anticipate the drops for the courtyard and the drainage slopage that would need to accommodate for that. Uh we tried to be as far away and remove from those residential units as we could. >> Okay. >> Yeah, cuz you're right up against that 90 foot with 89 something and your floor to floor with particularly with the terraces seems very very tight. >> Um okay, next question is about this is more operational question. tandem parking in a rental environment. How how is that um going to be managed? >> Yeah. So, I think all parking would be available as on kind of an as needed basis per tenant. And so, the tandem stalls would be dedicated to any of the two-bedroom or larger units that need um that may have multiple vehicles. Um and so we anticipate the allocation to be done all through management. >> So, all the tandem parking would be for the same tenant. uh would be for the larger units potentially. Yes. >> Okay. Um I'm going to go to the landscaping question. >> Yeah. >> Uh or does somebody else want to ask questions and I can come back to mine? >> You can go ahead. >> Yeah. >> Um okay. Thank you. Um between particularly between uh 788 and 808 the feels like a canyon between the two buildings. You have a a green hatch in your landscape plan. um curious what that is and would there be any space for even any tree planting both for like even you know columnary trees like cyprress both for privacy between the two but also more importantly I'm concerned about you know views of any kind of greenery from any of these apartments on the north side for one and even within your courtyard like the apartments that Kendra was pointing out to with the onebedrooms you're looking out your window or balcony onto the wall, the other wall of your building. So that internal courtyard is similar situation as the next building over. So what's the landscaping plan that would make that a little bit more greener? And >> yeah, so I I think um maybe I can take that kind of in in two separate um uh responses regarding the north. Um so we've got a fire separation distance that we're trying to um comply with for eg um for fire access around this building for hose reach and fire incident. Um and so uh the path that you see there right now is dedicated to um access uh to the rear for fire incident. Um the green hatch that you see along that north is also trying to accommodate for some type of bio retention or or storm water treatment. Oh, sorry. Uh yeah, for storm water treatment as well. Um and so I think we will absolutely explore what kind of vegetation um makes the most sense and is viable uh in considering those conditions. Um but yeah, but I think um we can we can absolutely look at that. Um uh jumping to the podium courtyard and the units that are um kind of fronting on maybe a side of an additional unit. Um again, I think there are um and so I'm looking at Yeah, perfect. Um and so again there's still the need for bio retention or filter um uh planters on this Kodium courtyard to for storm water treatment as well from the roofs. Um but there is some landscaping that can absolutely um be uh planted within those spaces. Uh the storm water treatment also is raised and so the landscaping it's not like you're looking out the window and seeing landscaping at the same finished floor as the pedestal system, right? And so all of those would be elevated. And so from a resident experiencing within that space, uh you're probably looking at a planter that's maybe 36 in up and then planting on top of that. And so you're more likely being able to see some type of vegetation directly outside the window. And that would just be for the third floor level or maybe up to the fourth and above that is >> Yeah. Yeah. So only only affected the um or that would be the scenario for the level three units. >> Um just to ask is there any possibility of having some kind of green walls along at least some of these walls that don't have balconies. So when you're looking out from the balconies you have greenery instead of a blank wall. Joey, do you mind going up uh two levels or one level? So going to L like the next sheet or maybe the one sheet after that. >> Yeah, it it's it's certainly something that we can study in. >> That's it. Now go back. You can go back to that one. Right. So So M just to make sure um understand. So when you're on like level six and you're sitting here in this bedroom and you're staring out, you're looking at a solid wall there and that's problematic. >> Mhm. Yeah. >> Um, all right. I'm going to go to a question about the retail space, which is quite small. What are the potential retail options for a,400 foot space? >> Yeah, it's coffee. Um, kind of quick dining pickup, right? I think they're they're um still community serving or resident serving retail that can still thrive within that footprint. Um so yeah. Um, and I guess slightly on the practical question, that space looks like has a little trash area. And if it is any kind of coffee and stuff, you would need some storage space, some behind the bar space or um, seems too small for a restaurant, but could be, I suppose. But by the time because you also need to have space for a kitchen and all of that. Is that all within this, 1400 foot space? >> It it would be. Yeah. >> Okay. Um and I assume and we don't Oh >> yeah, sorry. Go ahead. >> Yeah. Um this we actually have a project up in Oakland and the coffee shop that we have there is actually just around 1,000 square feet. So this size when you include back a house, a restroom is actually uh really spot-on for a coffee shop type use in our experience. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> And just to jump in for a point of order if you don't mind stating and spelling your name for the record. >> Sorry. Uh Megan Watson with Grub Properties. M E G A N W A T S O N. >> Thanks. >> Thank you. >> I have one last question. Um on the material board, um it says terracotta, but you mentioned it's GFRC. >> Uh it should be GFRC. Yes. >> Okay. Um >> and so the oo skin um that we're currently proposing right now. Um it kind of gives the overall look of terracotta. um where we know the the the terra cotta itself can be um fairly difficult when in terms of structural weight and attachment and so forth. Um so this is a solution that kind of brings some of that terra cotta look and feel um in a much more readily available applicable application of an exterior facade >> but it would still need GFRC also needs a framework. It >> it would it would still need framing. It still be a rainscreen system. Yeah. But it's substantially um more accessible to be able to put it on a building. >> Yeah. >> And I'm just going to talk for a minute while I'm holding this up to try and get the uh the visual of this on the record. I don't know if the video will zoom in. There we go. Um just so it's and and then on that note, we're using all three of these in a mixture. >> Correct. >> Okay. Great. Thank you. >> That's it on my questions right now. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for these questions. Who want to go next? Uh I'm I'm okay. Um a curious question about uh retention. Uh can you do this on the roof? Is it conceivable to have it on the roof since it seems to be lacking on this site? you know, it seems to be a limitation on of the site and there it's a reach that you have all of these separate areas. >> So, I'm not clear what what you're asking about retention of >> water retention, rainwater retention, >> storm water, >> storm water. >> I don't I don't know the answer off the top of my head for that. I don't know if the applicant happens. >> And the applicant, have you ever done it? >> Yeah. uh for a roof structure it gets extremely um heavy and so we tried to put that at least always on the ground or on a concrete podium um to be able to accommodate the the additional loads. Once we stop putting them up on a on a wood frame building um the roof becomes extremely complicated from a structural standpoint. >> I guess maybe that's why we do it in New York because we don't have wood frame. >> Yeah, possibly. Um, so that's a that's a tough one unless you were able to make a section of the building concrete that would be able to carry that. Uh, but it looks to me like from the discussion here, it's it's so far a question that hasn't been solved. The retention the amount of retention areas are really not shown on here. So, um I wonder if you could tell us a little bit about what's going to be the way in which you use uh the San Antonio road uh as access for your building. And if you you know if it's a large number of people having indoor garage access accessible connection to vehicles that are either delivering people you know to the site or picking up you know it seems like it's an over overkill for an interior area that the street would be more and your front entry is right there. What is How are you going to use the street? Have you thought about it? >> Yeah. Yeah. Um so if uh Joey, if you could turn to a 0.10, please. Um this would be the pedestrian and and bicycle circulation diagram. Yeah. If you can and if you can just kind of zoom into um the San Antonio corridor. Yeah. So, so um there there are substantial uh um opportunities for ingress and egress along San Antonio and that's kind of the primary goal for having all these external facing um access points for residents, guests uh and especially the retail as well. And so we imagine that again within the special setback and ultimately where the bike lane um sits or the dedic kind of the the dedicated bike lane sits within that zone um you'll see the green arrow or the green dash line continues the San Antonio corridor bike um kind of multimmoal path and then all the red arrows from San Antonio Road leading up to I guess what looks like a purple dot on the screen would be points of connection for residents, guests and also retail. And so we anticipate that ultimately in the kind of the full buildout of the San Antonio corridor and the vitality of this retail at the anchoring corner uh that residents would be activating that street frontage pretty frequently to be able to get to you know coffee shop or whatever the retail may be. Um and again if if there's ride share and there's bike path ultimately when everything is kind of envisioned and built out for San Antonio corridor uh we imagine that that's going to be a pretty um highly utilized uh access point for both pedestrians and bikes. >> Well, you're kind of not discussing motor vehicles and pickups and drop offs, etc. >> Yeah. And so I I think the the thing that we've got to strategize and we will absolutely do that is um uh with the latest information about San Antonio corridor not having parallel parking or striped zone for loading or ride share pickup. I think we've got to strategize exactly how we solve for that um within this building or along the Legghorn. Um but in terms of the dayto-day use for vehicular access um right residents would be parking within the garage and then accessing it internally. Um and but we again I still think um you know ultimately the vision and the goal would be to bring everyone out towards San Antonio. Um I think this is an opportunity that we can take advantage of. I know we're uh one of the few first projects prior to a San Antonio corridor area plan being um and so I think there is challenge absolutely being first or being kind of one of the first. Um, but I think ultimately when this plays out, I think it' be a great addition to it. >> Just to raise the issue because uh we discussed it in the neighboring building and I think they had a layby on on the site if I correct to that. Yeah, they had a layby so their cars could pull off the off of uh San San Antonio onto and drop off or pick up. Uh, I'm not saying that's the best solution and hopefully maybe San Antonio's will. >> Uh, yeah. Okay, that's working. Uh, so maybe um maybe you're waiting to get the re feedback from the San Antonio study. Is that possible? >> Yeah, it's a little bit of both. I think there's still coordination that we've got to do with our team and the San Antonio corridor kind of what's envisioned and so uh something that we will absolutely study. >> Yeah, I don't just don't think you can really depend upon your garage to be the space aim I don't think has digital information about the inside of your building here. You know, they're not likely to be picking up that way. >> Sure. Uh so you know I I think you really I think you have to make sure that uh between yourselves and the city and the study that is being done there's a some sort of a solution to the San Anton it's a very you know it's a very busy kind of periodically very very busy street you know on and off and um >> uh if if the parking along the street edge were designated in some way, you know, and not just parking spaces, you know, that would be a possibility or on site, you know, but somebody's got to solve the problem of of uh this and coordinated with all the other transportation issues that are the issue the ma one of the major major issues of San Antonio Road. Um I just a quickie on the color of material is a sort of a pinkish color to the to the uh facial material whereas that color is on the board that that color and then there is the color of the of the sophet wood which is a wood color. Is that the color or is it in the works? >> Well, it it's it's yet to be finalized. Um, but we are anticipating that it is kind of that pinkish orang-ish tone. >> Uhhuh. >> And so again, I think there's there's material nuanced selection in terms of color. Um, and so we can kind of further refine that. >> Okay. I mean, we could wait on that until you're finished further further down the line here on the next presentation. Um, I noticed that in the lobby area you don't have any area designated for mail and package delivery. What are you going to do about that? >> Yeah, hasn't been space planned just yet. Uh, but we are anticipating that we will need package parcel room and mail for USPS. >> So, uh, are some of the areas adjacent to it? I mean, the commercial is a certain area right now, and as you say, it could be a coffee shop, but might be better if it were accessible and open to the building so that when you're on your way out, you're attracted to go in there. Uh, can you steal from the other side if you need need space for that? Because at the present moment you seem to have a an appropriate space for an entry lobby and it's all designated with the outside double height, you know, double height space. >> Sure. >> Where where you going to get the space for that? >> I I think it's worth studying. >> Okay. >> I think it's worth studying. Yeah. Yeah. >> I'm I'm willing to wait. Uh I guess I could uh hold off. I think that the other questions that were raised uh I I would I would say that an opinion about the garbage being at the remote end of the building. I think that was really kind of raised already. Do you think that that collection is the best spot for it or wouldn't it be better to have something closer to the ent uh to the elevator side of the building even though I understand it's an out outside more pleasant area for an apartment give up enough space to create a room for garbage collection? >> Um, no. Yeah. No, good question. I I don't I don't think it's very um it's uncommon for on-site management to be able to pull bins and maneuver them to be able to get to this trash staging area. Um >> I'm not worried I'm not thinking about that. I'm thinking about throwing their garbage down the chute. Why wouldn't that be better off on the way to the elevator? >> Yeah, I I mean we can study it. I I think there's many projects that and we we can share precedents as well where elevator or elevator and trash vestibules are disconnected. Um and so I think for us it was more about trying to get elevator access to the priority amenity spaces. Um and yeah, so we can we can take a look at it. >> Okay. Um I think we would hold that one for the future too. At the moment I have no more questions I think. >> Martin. >> Sure. Um, thank you. Yeah, I have um a couple questions. Um, one is, you know, so this building will have probably a lot of dogs or at least some dogs. Like, have you thought about dog hygiene? Yeah, so we do. Uh, let's see if we go to uh a I guess we go to our architectural site plan uh a 1.0 um again. And so we do have a dedicated sort of location for pet spa, pet wash um on the ground floor. Um we know residents are likely going to be taking their pets uh also kind of direct access when possible to a pet relief area or pet dog run. And so along the northern edge um or sorry the that would be our eastern edge there's a spot dedicated for dog run. Okay. Yeah, if you want to zoom, uh, it would be on the western or the eastern edge plan north. >> So, behind the building >> behind there. Correct. >> That's right. Um, and so we would be providing access uh from the lobby to the kind of western edge to a dog run along that. >> That's that uh >> kind of that peachish tone. >> So, how how how do I get there? >> Yeah. Yeah. So, you'd be coming through the lobby space through the bank of elevators across the entry enhanced entry zone within the garage all internal to the building and then access it off of the western the uh eastern uh boundary the property edge. >> Oh, I see. >> Yeah. Um and then right adjacent to the bike storage uh you'll see a kind of a zone dedicated for a pet spa. >> Yeah, I I I saw that one. Yeah. Okay. I didn't Okay. Okay. Um the other question you know maybe more important than dogs kids like is there any space for for kids in this development? >> Uh I think right now in terms of the offering for the unit typologies um not necessarily heavily family oriented uh these are primarily studios and one-bedroom units. um if there is the occasional cap, but we're not putting a entire amenity package specifically for family oriented um uh market. And so this would be kind of working individuals u maybe young couples kind of in the the kind of tech industry or whatnot around here. >> Mhm. Yeah. Um you know, maybe maybe that's you know your your intention, but it's it's quite common for you even families to live in one bedrooms or two bedrooms. there also a lot of single, you know, single parents who might not afford a larger home and um because you know what um yeah, I think um I guess we can get back to it in the comments uh later. Um so the other uh my next question is about uh bicycle uh circulation. >> Yep. And um so if we go to 0.10 and it looks like there are really two areas to access or two two doors to access the bike storage. Um, so I'm um so you of course in both cases the the bike has to pass the the sidewalk. Um, and then the the Why did you highlight one of the entrances with the red arrow and not the other one? >> Yeah, both could be highlighted. Um I think both serve as access points. Um they'd be secured for residents. Um >> yeah. >> Um probably the one that's has or or the one that's highlighted. It looks like it's like a zigzag shape. Um maybe not as convenient for bicycles. And I can It looks like even the one in the back, you know, would probably be a zigzag. Um what you know what I'm what I'm trying to get at is is like how do we make this entry safe for the pedestrians. >> Sure. Um and also, you know, convenient for the bikers. Um yeah, I think one thing to note, um with the the within the 25 ft setback, I we're we're taking it on ourselves to kind of show at least a bike dedicated bike lane that's separate from vehicular traffic. Uh, I think my understanding and and um Claire and Joey feel free to chime in is ultimately as this corridor is built out and envisioned where that bike lane sits within that 25- ft uh special setback is is up ultimately up for um discussion, right? Um and so I think currently we're we're taking a first pass at just kind of showing that there is a dedicated and separate bike lane. Um but there is some flexibility ultimately uh when the San Antonio corridor area plan is is is adopted. >> Yeah, we um I'll jump in. Uh and we we are hoping to get more clear direction from council this June. Um so coming up very soon about what their possible preferred option might be for the San Antonio Road area plan. Um and so we're hoping that that that further direction will give us some more guidance um that we can then apply to this project. For now, we have discussed that we will be asking for an easement u as part of this project. Um but we haven't um gone into detail about whether that will be you know the full length of the ease um the setback um or if you know we might ask for a lesser setback um which we did on the previously approved 808 San Antonio project. Um but we'll at least have a sense of what kind of the maximum that we would be looking for is I think by June. >> Okay. Um I have some comments on that but I'll save it for later. Um so if we go if we go to um let's say building plan level 4 to 7 8 2.3. So we already spoke about those two apartments that are looking um how do I make the these ones? Oops. Oops. these ones. Um, have you thought about flipping like mirroring the the floor plan so that the balcony is closer to the courtyard area? Uh, you know, also for for this apartment, that would also mean the bedroom is not directly behind the elevator might be quieter. And, you know, mirroring the rooms will um result in more light. Yeah, I think there will be further refinement. Um I think one thing that's ultimately driving this is also structural um columns, right? This level, oh actually sorry, level below that would still be in type one construction. So we've got to coordinate both living spaces, interior layout of those units with structural columns. Um and then typically we want all the plumbing and mechanical to stack for the residential units above. And so yes, for the refinement, absolutely. >> Yeah. Um then >> uh that's it for uh for now. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I have one little question if I may. >> Sure. Go ahead. >> Um hopefully a little on the pool on the second floor deck, you're showing a pool which is like 14 by 22. It's a small little pool. It came up. I forgot to ask about this. Um, so it looks like it's three steps up from the pool deck. I'm on sheet L0.01. Want to go there? >> It's above the one more up. There we go. So, there's a pool deck and there's steps and a ramp next to it to go up to that level here. Um, so that all makes sense. So how deep is this pool given your very tight floor to floor? >> Yeah. Um so the pool would be slightly depressed. Um and where that occurs and so I think we're imagining a 4ft or uh 3ft 4ft pool. Um if you go to sheet sorry I'm going to point you somewhere else real quick. Uh a2.1 and we can toggle between 2.2 2 and 2.1. Um, but essentially that pool sits right above where we're showing the spa equipment. And so the use or the depression of that spa um is accommodated with the space below that, right? Because all of that space won't be necessary for equipment room. And so um we're trying to make sure that there's no impacts to head clearances below that. And so we can isolate equipment kind of around wherever that pull depression occurs. The spa equipment is the pool um >> is directly below. Yeah. >> And that's the the pool heating equipment. Okay. >> Exactly. >> Right. Thank you. >> Mhm. >> Speaking of families, that's what I forgot to ask about. >> Thank you. And I have a couple questions. So, um first I will start with the parking. So compared to the previously approved park uh plans, so you provided underground parking and it's a five-story building with less much much less units compared to what you proposed now. It's eight story now, but now you get rid of the underground parking and also provide less parking space with more units. could you please walk through us about why you make this change? >> Yeah, I I can I can probably expand a little bit and um maybe uh Megan can expand just a little bit extra, but uh the the cost to be able to go down and dewater and dig and excavate um tends to make projects infeasible um in current in in kind of today's economic um uh kind of construction costs. And so the the strategy is to be able to deliver a project kind of quickly through the the construction process is to take all that um parking that was originally sunk in and subt and bring that up. Um and so that that's essentially kind of I think the biggest um kind of delta or change between what was previously entitled um or sorry previously uh proposed and what you see today. >> Okay. And and you know your neighbors also proposed the underground parking there, right? >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Yep. Um, and another question is about the floor to ceiling height for the fitness center on the third floor. If we go to sheet A4.0, we can see the sections. If we zoom out. Yeah. On the upper left to show the So the floor to ceiling height for the fitness center is about nine 9 foot high right for the fitness center. And then since it's building type construction type one and then you will have the duck work below the structure which means for the 1,500 fitness 1500 square foot fitness center most likely you will have only like 8 foot tall ceiling something like that. >> Yeah. So I think at the ultimate the finish of it we're probably looking somewhere like 86 um right with drops offs or venting as well. Um we we make every conscious decision trying to get make sure that there's no plumbing routes coming from up above uh that those can get routed prior to entering into this space. >> Um and so we try to maximize absolutely the head clearance including finish in that space. >> I think it depend on what kind of equipment and activities you will put there but 8 foot for 1500 finish it seems like it's kind of low >> but and another question about the elevations. So um on the railing types you propose two different types of railing. One the front and side the street front are different from the ones along the back. Could you please >> tell us why is that? >> Yeah. So um we wanted to prioritize the visibility on San Antonio and on Lake Horn and so that's why you're seeing the glass railing um so that there's always kind of activity and um kind of residents that you can see at multiple levels. uh once we get to the rear um right we we don't necessarily know ultimately what's going to happen on the Mountain View property. Um but again I think for us you know if 15 20 years down the line if another project kind of comes in with a closer proximity then you know we may be looking at um uh you know a different treatment there for glass railing or um for railing in general. And so, uh, we wanted to kind of prioritize edges and kind of what's our priority frontage, uh, with the glass railing. Um, and then the rest of it becomes kind of metal railing and then obviously on the north as described becomes solid railing. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Have no more questions. How about the others? >> I have one for staff. Um I forgot to ask about the um historical resource um evaluation that was completed and um the conclusion is that um it does appear to qualify for a listing under category 1. Um I wonder uh I don't remember if the previous cuz there was a previous SQA on this. Did that um provide like mitigation measures for demolishing this building? >> Correct. Ex. It did. Yeah. So, we made overwriting considerations when we adopted the EIR for that. So, it would streamline the SQL we're doing for this project is an addendum that would streamline off of that previously approved EIR. Um, so the demolition of that historic building and the mitigation and overwriting considerations have already um been considered and approved. >> Thank you. >> And I have a very brief question, super brief. Um on level eight, uh the club room, if we don't mind jumping to A2.4. Perfect. Um to get to that roof terrace, you either must go through the club room or you must go through that stairwell. Is that correct? >> Yeah, we would be going through the club room. >> Okay. Is there any intention that the club room gets rented out and that it would be like for private events, things like that? And then if yes, does that mean that the roof terrace is automatically included with that private rental or I mean for like people in the in the building I would assume. Um but what if someone wanted to get to that roof terrace and there was an event going on? >> Yeah. Yeah, good question. Um no, we haven't resolved that just yet. >> Okay, fair enough. >> Oh, we got a comment, please. >> Um yeah, as a practice we do not do that with our amenity spaces where we would host private events. Any events that we would have would be uh directly for our residents. So it would be open to everyone at the building. >> Sure. >> Let's say someone had a like kids birthday party or something and they wanted to have their own thing there. Nobody else would be allowed to use the club room. Or is it that the club room is always accessible to anyone in the building? >> It's the latter. Operationally, we don't do it for private. >> Okay. Great. Thanks for the clarification. >> All right. If you have additional questions. Okay. If no more additional questions, we will close the public uh session and you can sit >> have a seat and we can have internal discussion. So who want to start? >> Kendra, >> you want to start? >> Sure. So I think I think overall um uh I I I I like I like this project. Uh, I I think it it it it uh you know, looks pretty, you know, I like I like the materials. Um, you know, I like I like the setback on the corner. Um, I think that's a big plus. Um, I think the height, you know, is is higher than the kind of the the existing zoning, but it's it's similar to the other buildings around you. It's not, you know, more high than that. Like to me this is kind of the new Palo Alto kind of there's kind of the University Avenue and kind of old Palo Alto and there this is the new Palo Alto. So um you know I like I like that you incorporated retail. I think that's that's really nice. Um I think the recess courtyard on the level three is uh you know is is is excellent. So I think this project has a lot of you know things that um that you know I like and probably we like and you know we would like to see in other projects too. So I think overall it's um you know a really nice project. Congratulations. Um kind of couple points for discussion. I mean of course parking is is um you know is is a big topic and um you know I it also somehow feels like um you know you would like to have you know eat the cake and have it at the same time you know you are saying okay we don't want to provide parking spaces because everybody will be car pooling etc. On the other hand, I don't see a really good solution for pickups and drop offs. You know, I don't see a solution for uh ebikes. Um I think, you know, if so many people are supposed to use bikes and ebikes, I think the entrance into the building is, you know, not as convenient. So um you know for for bicycles and so I think that's just I think something um you know I just would like to comment you know comment on I think it's I think it's an interesting idea to to emphasize a car-free society but you know what what are the other implications you know for that like you know you have to I I um yeah so for ebikes, access into the building, you know, the pickups. I think you have two designated drop off spaces on on uh on on San Antonio. Now, just imagine it's between 8 and 8:30 and there there are going to be potentially 100 people going to work with Whimo. You know, the average car, you know, let's say waits for 5 minutes, you know, so that that, you know, that, you know, results in, you know, potentially, you know, 10 Whimos standing in front of the building. between 8:00 and 8:30 like where are they going to be? Um so I think that's not that's not resolved. So um so I think that's number one comment. Um number two comment is um you know this is a really big in development with you know 67 units and I think when it comes to these big developments um you know just speaking for myself I would like to see um you know more of um uh uh a more of a heterogeneous mix of residents, you know, like, you know, this is not, you know, I don't want to see like a student residence with, you know, just the same type of students or yappies, you know, living in the building. I think it has to be a mix between those people and families and you know uh you know potentially single families uh older people and um I um you know that was that was my question about the kids space and you said you know you don't you don't want kids in this building or you don't you didn't plan the building for kids. Um well that's just not the kind of a building that we are looking for. I I I I'm looking for like I'm looking for a building that serves a wider spectrum of society. Um you that's just a comment you know this is a you know discussion section. Um so that would be my other you know comment is you know what you know uh you know think more about you know how you can accommodate kind of a broader spectrum of of society. Um yeah and I think some of the details um you know that we discussed like that you know the garbage I mean I 100% agree with you know those comments um I think that could be you know over uh you know thoughts through and um yeah so I guess these are these are my two you kind of major uh major comments and I think you'll be back you know later and where we can, you know, I can we can probably talk about more details, but these were I think the biggest, you know, the biggest one. But overall, I think the building is is, you know, is is pretty and you you listen to the previous uh commissions and hearings and I really appreciate that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Who want to go next? David, >> hopefully this working. Um, I think that I'd like to say something about the detailing and the way in which you've put this building together because you spent a lot a lot of time on the outside of this building. The aesthetics of it are really quite excellent. Uh, my opinion is the way you've scaled it down with a expressed slab on every other floor. um the ground floor with a canopy continuing continued black line that sort of integrates the slippage which is something that nobody's mentioned so far which is a hell of a clever idea. uh uh it just breaks the scale down in a certain way that gives it that a certain urban quality to it that is a way of dealing with urban facades that I like very much in what you've done here. It is on the major avenue and it's an expression when you turn the corner it's different and the back is different and the side other sides are you know but the facade is the real facade the change in materials the massing breakdown uh I hope some other people pick up this kind of way of dealing with a bu a big a big building like this idea of course in initially to create that kind of center common space. You know, it's a great big space and it's a great organizer for a building. I think it it leads to some problems in the sense that the side wall where it's adjacent to another building that's equally massive is not going to be the best of all places. But I'm thinking about this. We never didn't ask the question, but this is going to be a rental building, isn't it? >> Yeah. I mean, that makes a big difference because people are in and out of a rental building, whereas ownership of an adjacency where you're that close to neighbors, I don't think is is is so great. uh you know I talked about the fact that as a New Yorker it creates other problems but at least it doesn't have that particular problem of closeness to one building to another and uh clearly the zoning would have had to have had that discussion a long time ago and so we're living with this kind of possibility of closeness between apartments that uh you need to create extra privacy for that whole facade. And in some cases where buildings are going to be between two other buildings like this, you know, it's even more common. Uh um however, you know, I don't want I don't want that to say that the building that you've designed is not very attractive because I agree with my cohort here. It's a really attractive building. and the selection of materials is really well thought thought out. So I have some other concerns though. I think that for one uh you haven't addressed the some of the elements of the entry the mail room and the package room and those sort of things really ought to I hope you'll get it in the next presentation. It may mean that you have to adjust the functions that are along the street side there. uh the uh San Antonio and reduce them a little bit. You've kind of recognized I think with this very large um bike storage room, you know, it's terrific. I don't see any problem with your I disagree with my partner here that uh it's a it's a major concern when you come out of that room. Maybe you need a bigger door, glasser area. I don't know quite quite what you need for access to the to the street, but you have plenty of room to work with at this point. And it is the transportation issues are as mentioned the most critical element here. And I think you're addressing it by saying, look, we're looking into the future where more of the uh transportation is really going to be in whatever the term would be used for the cars that you either rent or that you call up and get, you know, that whole thing is changing day by day clearly. Um, uh, so I don't see how it can be, I mentioned before, I don't see how it can be done in the garage. I think it's going to have to be something that's part of the study along San Antonio Road. And they better do complete that study quickly because you you guys are coming online faster than the solution to the San Antonio road is getting there. So it's a difficult issue here. Um I think that the garbage room really I hate to do it but I think it should be the it shouldn't be at the far end. I'm I'm for reducing the distance that people have to go to drop their garbage. You say I understand you say it you've done it before. That's it is com commonly done and I've seen it in other projects. So I can see it's coming along as a but but to put it that far, you know, it's a couple of hundred feet that somebody has to take their garbage to every single day that they're throwing out garbage, it just seems to me it's going to be picked up on Legghorn. It ought to be at the Legghorn area. and I firmly would vote for that one if my fellow board members would agree to that. Um, we always talk about garbage anyhow, which is so annoying to have to do that, but you can see and I know about that. Um, so, uh, I think that some of the apartments, you know, I have a hard time with this ventilation issue, saying you're borrowing the light. Uh, I don't that that I don't think they they would allow it in New York. So, I don't know. It it concerns me that you're borrowing light from a living room window that you can't even see from the bedroom. uh that kind of it unless you prove to me that that it's commonly done now here and I I mean I think in terms of ventilation you can take care of it but in terms of light you're really that borrowed light for a bedroom off to the side the standard way of doing these is the opposite right is to put the bedroom on the outer wall and a bathroom which clearly have to ventilate uh is inside somehow. Uh I I mean I've seen it never seen it done this way so far. This is the first time I've seen it. I don't know. Have you ever planning ever seen anything like that before? >> I'm not sure. >> Put you on the spot. Sorry about that. Um, a two, you have the units that are deep into the notches. Can I just say it that way? You know what I'm talking about. I think that whole apartment that's in the furthest end of the notch needs to be redesigned. I think to get more light, it's it's a very tight area. You're looking just at a wall. Frankly, I think you carry it all the way across to the dead wall of the unit next in front of it and use that space. Uh, and then it's looking differently. You know, you don't have to take all of it because you want some privacy separation between it and its neighbor, but I really think it's a it's a possibility to use use the space and have the view out towards the pool, etc., you know, even if it's around the corner, there's more light out there. Think about doing something else with that. It's a dead end. To me, it's a dead end. Anyhow, um, uh, well, I think we've had plenty of discussion about the the the relationship to the neighboring building. Um, one of the things I didn't mention that is really a positive element about this building is that you've gone flipped over backwards to make places for people to enjoy themselves in this building. you know, the exercise spaces, the room at the top, the uh just the size of the of the and location of the bicycle planning has been really terrific this way so that you have a percentage of of uh rooms that are common rooms for this building. So I agree with my fellow here who says that uh it would be nice to have a broad swath of the population of PaloAlto here in this building and I think you've accommodated most of them. Maybe it's not family housing but frankly we're getting a lot of town homes. Uh that's family housing. Uh plenty of family housing will be built here as a matter of fact. So that element of it with lots of kids I think will likely go towards town home projects whereas this building is really a more rental type that uh smaller families perhaps turnover as well you know so different people will occupy it at different times I the population in terms of the number of kids. I think you have to almost look at the whole city to see exactly what's happening in terms of it. And we're getting ever increasing number of town home projects. Um, you know, I'm going to let somebody else get in here because I'm taking too long and I want to read my notes. >> I can go next. I'll follow on some of your comments, David. Yeah, thank you for the presentation. I agree with David on the exterior design of the building and I wish the interiors were equally successful, which I don't think it's quite there yet. Um, I'm with my fellow board members on trying to get the apartments to be a little bit more familyfriendly that you can have a larger cross-section of people. While there are town homes, not everybody can afford to buy a town home, which is very different from renting an apartment. So, I think that's really important. And that leads me, you know, looking at the individual plans of um the units. The B's are quite successful with the larger units, but like you have so many of the A's, the A8, A1 with the interior, bedroom, and a bathroom towards the exterior wall. It's like the apartments in the layouts feels like it's intended to not spend very long in your apartment which people you know outside of work do spend a lot of time at their home of any type. So I think making them their their homes more pleasant uh have and more pleasant place to live. I think it's really important um is so while you know yes you might have the code required borrowed light maybe maybe not please go beyond code and make it much more pleasant living environment for people um two-bedroom I had kids in a two-bedroom apartment you need space for kids toys and all that stuff so having common spaces be have more space than giant bathrooms just things like that just think about the types of people who you want to invite to this space and make it a little bit more family friendly, more um a larger cross-section of people can live here. Um I stand by my earlier comment about greenery. Actually last week I went to a really great presentation by a Stanford faculty member about how uh seeing greenery from their workspaces and living spaces really enhances their personal well-being. uh and the that you know I agree with that even before I went to that presentation and I even uh and I would like you to consider that as you design these places with you know views of greenery as you come out as you're in your apartments in common spaces more so in the apartments it feels a bit lacking um last one about like you know uh other uh board members have already mentioned about ride share deliveries it is you know while it's 167 seven apartments. It is a relatively small site uh especially with not being able to use San Antonio for a lot of that. Um so how you organize your leg horn side of the street to be able to get ride share deliveries and all on the street versus Yeah, I don't I guess um you can ask a Uber driver to pull into your garage, but I don't know how you say that to a whimo. Um and in the future there's going to be more and more of um the you know the autonomous vehicles for ride share. So um think about that and try to organize the site please because I don't think it's quite there right now. Um, I think that's Oh, on the materials, um, the fake terracotta, GFRC, and the Stuckco to go with it is a little too pink. Uh, which compared which does not quite match with your render views. Um, I think your renderings are a lot better than your sample colors. Um, and I know every print and every screen image will have a different color rendering, but these are quite um off on the look of terracotta. So, I would like you to reconsider those with a little bit more orange and less pink orange and brown than pink on the colors. And that's it on my comments. Thank you. I'm going to echo a lot of what my fellow board members have already said. Um, I actually overall really like the building. I think that the layout of the sort of U shape with the central courtyard is lovely. Um, I do have concerns about, as uh, board member Adcock called it, the canyon between this building and the next eightstory building over. However, I also understand that's just sort of the nature of the beast in its situation. um thoughtfulness regarding those window placements, especially when we know what the neighbor is doing. Being able to shift our windows one way or the other, having a 15 degree angle um so they're not staring directly across that canyon um into the neighbors is definitely going to be beneficial. And yes, window coverings are fine and they work, but um you know, those moments that you do want the window open, you really just don't want to be staring at your neighbors. So, anything you can do in sort of shifting gently, um maybe even putting some frosted glass on the lower portions and then clear glass on the upper portions, things like that to just really try and mitigate that facade I think will be beneficial. Um my biggest issue overall with this project really is level one. Um I think that there's a lot to be said for I really like your enhanced entry zone. I think that is going to be sort of the solution for the Whimo and the Amazon drop offs. And um I think once you know there there's ways to have it so that you pin like when you go to the airport there's zone 3 versus zone 2, right? There's going to be a way to say, "Hey, when you're a lift, pull into this little parking lot, pick me up." Right? So I'm a little less worried about that than maybe some of my colleagues are. However, anytime there's a gate and there's a parking space right next to the gate, like butdding up right against it, it's always a little problematic um in in in true functional state. So anytime you can get sort of even just a couple feet of relief for a walking path, something like that, right next to the gate. So just reanalyze where your gate is placed, whether it should be actually a column back, right, something like that, or maybe a column forward, just to really be thoughtful about that gate placement. On that note, um the gate at sort of the setback line where you go from the angled driveway into the actual building itself, maybe you flank both sides of that with electrical spaces and then um instead of having one side be this really long and deep electrical and the other one is parking spaces like right at the gate again. So again, understand that gate is going to be open during most of the day and it's the secondary gate which is going to be the one that's predominantly closed. understanding all of that. Just again having someone sort of trying to pull in and pull out right at that gate, especially when you're transitioning from uh a visual atmosphere. Imagine it's a sunny day out and you're going from really bright sunshine into that shaded space of the underground parking, right? It your your eyes have adjusting to the glare and somebody's pulling out right in front of you. So, anytime you can give that breathing space, I would encourage it. And since you're going to sort of reevaluate the parking spaces down here anyway, um as board member Adcock had mentioned, the turning radius of that ramp once that gets reevaluated, just keeping these things in mind as you go through some of this um re-evaluation of parking layout. Um I'm also going to in in that same vein, I'm going to throw that big wrench in there that board member Hersh had mentioned. I really think that trash needs to be next to the the elevators as well. It's just a functional daily thing that everybody's going to the elevators every single day. And people will constantly say, "Oh, I'm going to bring my trash out as I leave for work." Right? It's much more difficult to get people to really take their trash out when they have to do it in the middle of the day, go to the opposite end of the building that they never go to for any reason other than the trash. And I know you guys do this for a living. I'm sure you've got buildings where it's just fine. While you're re-evaluating that whole area, just really try and see if you can make that work cuz I think having the trash next to the elevator is going to be a big benefit. And again, that will domino affect things upward as well, right? having that trash on level one right behind the elevators will affect some of your parking which in theory you're going to be reevaluating anyway. You know, it looks like there's sort of a little nook kind of primed and ready to go right next to the elevators on the upper levels. It doesn't need to be big. It's just for the trash shoot. So, that makes some sense. Um but maybe on maybe you'll be reevaluating some of the A1s or A1.1s and maybe those become a two-bedroom unit, right? Maybe you need a little bit of space behind the elevators to make this work. I don't know. It's up to you guys. Um, on that note, just a friendly reminder that the A4 really is a studio and not a one-bedroom. Um, again to echo the sentiments that I don't like the bedrooms on the inside. I know it's code compliant, but people need to be able to look out their windows. I'm sorry. So, maybe that again that A1 and A1.1 maybe that can combine into a two-bedroom, right? Maybe that's a better use of that space. Again, I'm not sure. You guys will figure that out. Um, love the courtyard. Love the pool area. Uh, I think the fitness going out to the pool area is really nice and that's one of those things I'd almost say you might want more doors because a lot of people do like to spill out their their fitness and their workouts and some people might want to do yoga outside or something like that. Um, what else can I say? I love the the concept of the pets having that pet spa. My one comment would be maybe that's something that you embrace a little bit more again when you're reorganizing things. Maybe that's something that actually is accessed from the outside and maybe that's something that becomes sort of a use for the people as well as for outside, you know, maybe it's more of a retail space. Maybe it's a little bit bigger and a little bit more embraced. I don't know. But it's um it's a really nice amenity to have and also partnered with the dog run in the backside. I think it's going to be really beneficial. Um, the reason that I think it'd be kind of nice to have it outside is I can imagine someone sort of leaving for work again, dropping off their pet at the thing, going to run groceries, coming back, picking up their pet from the spot. If that's an amenity, or if it's really just they shower their own dog, they might want to take their dog outside to walk right afterwards as opposed to showering and then bringing them right back up to their apartment still so wet. So, um, again, just food for thought there. The roofing and that setback terrace, I really appreciate that at the corner. I think that's very well done. Um, to echo the sentiments of my fellow board members with the materiality, I am so pleased to see that you guys did something other than white and gray and black. I am like pleased as punch that you guys have terracotta here. I think it's going to be great. Little bit pink in the samples. So, it's one of those, but I I like the materiality um texture change. I think that that's going to be sort of a nice variation that's going to create a really interesting effect. Just making a little more orange. And then again going back to this wood in your renderings this is a bit more brown and in person it's a little orange. So just really dialing in those. But I'm just pleased as punch that you guys are doing color. So I think that's all my comments for now. I think uh mostly in agreement with everybody else here. So uh thank you very much for your presentation. Looking forward to seeing the project built. >> Thank you. >> Um sorry to interrupt. Uh a quick thing that might impact your the trash shoot thing. Just remember there's a code requirement for elevators to be within 200 feet of stairs. You might be exceeding that. You might end up with another elevator by the other stair which might help with your trash comment. >> Thank you. >> I'm going to jump in on that one because she she stole it from me. I was about to say that I said missing to because the thought struck me that you know you're going to have act you can create it with access to the parking garage if you had an elevator at at the far end. You could create it to an additional exit entry for the the building, you know, but in particular exit because somebody taking the trash is probably going out, you know, afterwards and could could this would keep at least keep the trash at the same end of the building, you know, and you your process could could work the way you've described it before. But one ele extra elevator. Think of all the money you're saving by not cutting a big hole in the ground there. We're letting we're letting you off on that one. Spend a little bit of it on another elevator. It would fit at that end without a great deal of problem with uh the planning at that end of the building. You know, it's not going to take up that much space. An elevator versus the actual trash room. itself, which does take up a hell of a lot of space, especially at the ground. And having it at that back end is a good idea where it is now, and your process could work. But an extra elevator would reduce the load during the morning rush and the evening rush, whatever, for the whole building. It's a big building. You need to you need to do that. >> And then I did have one last minor comment. really happy to see that there's retail. It's one of those that oftentimes because of the way that the code is requiring extra parking spaces, things like that for retail that whether it's for sale building versus a rentable building. I mean, when we see just nothing but like lobby lobby lobby lobby going all the way down San Antonio, it's going to be really problematic. So, I'm thrilled to see that you guys have retail. And I would be very actually disappointed if you guys are penalized being required to have extra parking spaces because of the retail. I'd rather you keep the retail and have a little less parking. So, for whatever food for thought that's worth, thank you very much. >> All right. Thank you very much for all your comments and thank you to the public uh to the uh to the applicant for your for your presentation, for your design. And when I look at the rendering, it it looks quite exciting and I think it's well designed for the exteriors and the way how you break down the huge building and also apply different different materials on it and also you stagger the uh terraota tiles between different floors. I think it's all different kind of treatment that you apply to this building break down the massing and also I like I do like the way that you use the black canopy to connect the third floor transition to the sec to the double height lobby and retail space and wrap around the corner. I think it really helps and all those glazing areas and also co-work space all those um amenities all um activate the the street front. I think it will help it it's really uh along with the landscape it make the street really uh pedestrian friendly and welcoming. Uh and for the circulations uh I agree with my um fellow members. I agree with the trash issues. I think ideally the trash shoot should be close to the to the elevators and also um I also don't like the the non-wind uh uh bedroom uh design. I think bedrooms always have the should always have the exterior windows and also um it seems like I'm not I might be the only one who might think we need more parking here for this project. It seems like everyone else is fine. But when you look at this, it's a 167 uh units and you only provide 74 spaces and also a number of them are still tendon parking. So it would be a challenge for the tenants. Uh if you could provide more parkings, I understand it's market driven parking nowadays especially this is a PhD zone as you proposed. But I think if you could provide more parkings, it could allow you to widen your your potential uh tenant selection and also it could promote your list of up um velocities. So I would encourage you to provide more parking in this case. And also u when I look at the lobby again, it seems like the lobby could be um less used than it is proposed because when when you see on the first floor plan, people go down the elevators, they go left to the bike and then they go right if they want to have go to the parking space or to the parking garage or to the uh Lhorn Street for the right share. So it seems like there is very few circum circumstances that people will really go through the lobby and uh use that area. So I'm wondering whether it makes us understand because the San Antonio road it doesn't allow the loading zone there. So I'm almost wondering whether the retail and lobby could switch so that the lobby could be at the cer and then it has the it also facing the black horn which is close to the right share the loading zone space while you still don't lose your retail and or maybe switch between the co-work and the lobby so that you're close to the back storage. I don't know. But uh uh and also uh for the for the upper floors, I do concern about the ceiling height you provided at the fitness center because of the 8 foot high ceiling. It seems like it's quite low for commercial fitness center and it will limit your uh equipment selections. And also I would encourage you to match the railings because currently it might look like the back of the building and the front of the building. It it looks like two different buildings because the materials you apply are different. The reading types are different and the back of the building are more flat compared to the variations you did for the front. So I think if there are some more connections between the front and back it will make the entire design to be more cohes cohient and I think that's all my comments for now and anyone else want to add something? No. Well, I'm just concerned some of the Yinx's comments here would alter the entire ground floor plan. Um, and it concerns me that seems to me that there's a good arrangement on the ground floor. Uh, the off center is very much a part of the design too, uh, with a black element that moves through the facade. Um, so I I don't I don't see where there is a conflict in entering this building. If you're a pedestrian, certainly you're the location is fine, close enough to the corner. If you're a biker and you're coming into the building, there's a connection on the ground floor back to the elevator, right? So where where where do you see a conflict in circulation? >> No, I mean I I'm not talking about like the conflict of of the circulation. It's more about the lobby itself. It's like who will go through the lobby itself. As you said, for the backlist, they will use the corridor that connect to the >> to the uh to the elevator and then for whoever the pedestrian it is who entering who is going to the site, they will >> going to Legghorn Street. Is that what you mean? >> Yeah. >> Why why would they go to Legghorn Street particularly especially because it's a garbage collection area >> that is the drop off area, right? because the car cannot drop off people along the San Antonio. >> Well, I think that's something that's they're studying right now. I don't think that's a a given at this point. >> Building next to us has a layby, the car has would be pulling into the >> closer. Yes or no? If the if the long-term the eventual goal is to promote the bike safety along the San Antonio, then it would be good to cut off the bike. >> It may not be a perfect relationship, right? That you'd have to wait till bikes go by if that's the case, you know, or they have a priority. Somebody has to work that out. And then I don't and with this building the facade of this building is much much longer than the depth of it. >> Right. >> So how how to make the side street into a way more kind of delivery a pickup area just doesn't seem reasonable that garbage is coming out there. From what I heard that is what proposed >> but you know it's not going to work for any other any other project along the street edge there on San Antonio. >> Pull up the site plan again so that everybody is on the same page. >> Bear with us while we pull that up. And yeah, just to clarify that um you know, while we're still seeking direction from council on the preferred options, we don't anticipate that there will be parking anymore along this frontage. And so there would be no area for a loading area um necessarily along this frontage >> along the San Antonio >> frontage >> frontage. Correct. >> O that's all I can say. It's going to be a disaster if you don't have some kind of a solution for the San Antonio. I the side. It's pretty obvious here. You wouldn't put the entry into a garage off of San Antonio. So, they've put it on the side and look at the amount of space it takes up. So, how are you going to actually have and you have aund and some 50 people potentially looking for ride share situation here? How how's that going to work on a side street? And the buildings all along the main corridor >> don't have that capability. Are are you so I mean that that's why we require something on site and it's not being provided on site. So but the facade has been set back and there's the possibility of doing it on a sort of a layby that uh area on that frontage even though it conflicts as described with a with a bike passage. to put it on a side street does not work because there aren't so many side streets. So this >> for for vehicular, you know, drop off and pickup, are you suggesting that they have something come up as a curb onto the site? >> Is that what you're suggesting? >> Okay. >> It has to be it has to be studied relative to the frontage on on San Antonio. I just I think it's unrealistic to to suggest, you know, they've gone out of their way to provide something inside the building that that takes the place of it. And I think everybody here was saying they don't really think that's going to work. You can't you can't get people in and out of of a building by coming into the building. It's just I don't think it works. I'm not a transportation engineer, but this does seem to me to be a major problem. >> I honestly can't remember how the next door project is doing the drop off. Is it >> So, they have it as a K turn. So you come into their parking garage and then they have a area that you pull over. Uh >> so similar to this. >> Yeah. So they've designed it where you come into the parking garage too. >> So it's so it's more of a development for this area to be able to have enough space for ride share. And maybe some of these are not parking for residents, but rather ride share pickup, drop off areas and also Amazon deliveries and door dash and all those things that uh will make some of the parking reduced, but that's going to be necessary. Um, to Yingshi's point about the lobby, while yes, this in-n-out is probably not that used, I think, as a massing, I think that's what you're getting at as well. Um David um on the overall um you know elevation of this area of you know demarcating the entry lobby as the highest um in the hierarchy that highest priority and then the retail like in that elevation with the with that design. Sorry I'm drawing your elevation on top of your plan the lobby the retail in which this slips into being fitness with the outdoor space uh next to it. I think that's a really great composition. So, moving that lobby while it is not going to be the most used indooroutdoor um access I think is still successful as a massing design. >> Okay. >> Any other comments? Well, it just it's too bad the San Antonio study wasn't sort of started earlier, you know. Uh it's just it I think it just has to come together, you know, and uh all all due speed is necessary here because you just don't want a nonfunctional building here. a beautiful building, a wonderful building, an addition to this community. Really, I love it. But, uh, I'd like to see the San Antonio piece answered. And starting with the thought that, oh no, we're not going to have any of that. You know, doesn't work. Just tell you straight out does not work. It won't work. That's a feeling I have. I'm not a transportation engineer, but you have to study really the whole block and the number of people who are going to be here. You know, it's New York is a good example here because we we have sides we have sidewalk pickup all along major streets. Um it's an this is now becoming much more of an urban area, a denser urban area and you have to deal with those issues. A thought on that is also like I think this is bike parking correct and there's a little bit of bike parking over here. Um, a while. Oh, my app wants to update. Cancel. Cancel. Remind me later. Sorry. Um, I don't know what happened to my screen. It just Yeah. Um, so I think if um all more of the bike parking got moved to San Antonio side, you would have a little bit more breathing room on this uh right side on Legghorn side um to deal with this loading. Uh while you don't want to get too close to the intersection, just food for thought on how you could potentially use a little bit more of the Legghorn side of the street. >> So if >> So I'd love to do kind of a consolidated summary. Yeah. Do you think you could put that on a word? And so we have a few notes we kind of put together um of the things we feel like we heard. Um so we'll throw that up on the screen and just want to kind of confirm if we missed anything or Sorry. So first one is uh further evaluate the turning radius in the garage as well as the parking space design. Um, I think the component of the parking space design was um partially related to board member Rosenberg's comments about the electrical. I don't know if you want to be more specific. Um um I think in general, but um kind of also going into comment number two, um the project's designed with limited parking, but doesn't accordingly include drop off and pickup spaces, improved bicycle areas, improved pedestrian entrances, etc. Accordingly, this needs to be reconsidered. One board member expressed the need for more parking. >> You can make the two >> two. Okay. Second one, just two board members there. Yeah. Um, >> can we add can we >> we add to that coordination with the uh uh San Antonio road uh study is required. >> Yeah, we should definitely add that. Thank you. and and no, you keep going with that thought, but when you're done with that thought, I put a little pink line up there for um >> uh >> I think coordinate with syrup. That's fine. >> Perfect. So, where the pink line is, I think maybe we just add in um consider distances from gates to parking spaces. And that would just be part of that comment one. Yeah, perfect. Have the comment. That's it. Perfect. Thank you. >> Um so moving on the further study the lobby parcel pickup and drop off area. Um and uh I don't know if that captures fully if there were other specific components of the in mail boxes mail drop. >> I think it's important to include but I also just want to like you know to be on the uh applicants advocacy side here is they they clearly said that they're thinking about it. They just haven't gotten there yet. So just making sure that it's on their list of things to consider and and how to do that. Um and then um need to really study between you and the city's work. Oh, you know, I I kind of added um your thought on coordinating with the syrup as a separate item, so we can probably remove that bullet point. Um there um consider the color of the tiling material. It should be more orange and less pink. Um, reconsider the location of the trash to be closer to an elevator and closer to Lghorn. May want to consider adding another elevator. Encourage the units to be designed. >> Uh, can we just say uh uh if uh if garbage stays where it is, consider >> Okay, >> good point. They might already be code required to add an elevator. >> Okay. Double double check the 200 foot distance. >> Could we add to that uh related to this study the access to the garage uh and the exterior from the the secondary elevator? >> Oh yeah. Uh, so related to this access to the garage from the second elevator >> garage and exterior and exterior. >> Exterior what? >> And just exterior in general. >> Yeah. >> Um, yeah. >> From the elevator. >> Sure. Yeah. >> From second elevator. >> Thank you. uh encourage the units to be designed to accommodate a larger cross-section of people. Um this might be kind of a subcomponent of the very last um um point too. Um but uh some of the spaces with borrowed light should be reconsidered to go beyond the code and make it more pleasant environment such as having a window for the bedroom. consider making common spaces larger and having smaller bathrooms. So, that that last point was kind of related to the larger cross-section of people, making the living spaces a little bit more livable for potentially for families. >> I don't know if we want to add like kid-friendly. >> I just do feel like I need to put on the record. I actually sort of descent from the rest of the group at this point. I think that this since this is rentals, I'm a little less fussed about it. So, just, you know, putting that out there. I understand that basically everybody else is in a disagreement with this and that they all think that it should be more family oriented. I'm less concerned about it. So, I just did want to put that on the record. >> Yeah, I will also echo on that. >> I I I agree with that point of view. >> Oh, okay. So, there's two of us that want more family oriented and three of us that don't really mind the way that it's designed as is. That's I'm glad we clarified that. >> Okay. So, should we still be looking at a larger cross-section of people or is this still a point that >> Well, I think it's a market driven. >> It's a market driven. I'm about to say yes. >> I was going to say to the two board members that were really sort of pushing for this, I think that it's well worth considering if that's something that again, if it's market driven and if they can get more of that, that'd be great. But again, it's one of those that I I just wanted to sort of clarify that I I'm not sure it's like a requirement as more of a suggestion for what we think will actually be beneficial, right? And and but I would rather the two people that are for this speak to it rather than me. So >> I would say just refinement of um plan designs that uh provides more family space whether it's couples or kids within apartments than um as you refine the design I should say. It's a refinement of design to accommodate um >> family space. >> More family space where they're coup. Yeah. >> And common I would say common areas too, you know, especially the outdoor spaces. >> Okay. Um, so maybe let's take out the Yeah, maybe take that out. Um, and then the very last sentence on the last bullet we can probably remove too. >> Um, okay. >> I think there was one other comment. I think it would be good to coordinate the window placements with uh 880. Of course, that can change because they can move their windows any time, but sorry. Uh okay. What? Yeah. 808. >> I think it would also be in their interest to coordinate. Uh do you also want us to note I'm realizing now uh window placement as it relates to the balconies as well um on some of those kind of interior. >> Yes. >> Um >> neighboring buildings >> neighboring units >> facing their neighboring units. It was like on the interior of the courtyard >> future undecided certain situation. Well, the the ones I was specifically referencing were referencing the interior to the lot that were interior to the courtyard. Um, there were some of the balconies are facing a wall. Um, >> yeah. >> Yeah. Or >> consider refinement to the >> Yeah. >> the balcony design or balcony placement. and light and air and light and air with light and air considerations. >> With light and air considerations >> I think the applicant knows which light up to them to figure that one. >> Yeah. >> Can we add light air and views? Not just light and air. >> Light air and views. Yes. Okay, that's are everyone comfortable with the two different types of the balcony railings or they have to be consistent? Any opinions on that? We have similar comments for the other projects before. I think in this case the um glassier balconies are nice when they can be glassier. Um it so I'm personally I'm fine with two kinds of balconies to be able to have more privacy where needed and um be more >> right. How about the ones facing the rear? >> That's a good point. I think kind of thinking about the future really uh other than the um San Antonio and Legghorn frontage, the other two sides should anticipate future development and and plan for a little bit more privacy instead of having to change it out in 15 years or whatever. >> Yeah, just look at the rendering they provided on a sheet sheet A10.2. When you look at the building here, the rendering in this angle is it could be just a totally different building from the one you look from the front, right? >> It's it may not be because just because of the rating types, but also materials. So if we keep the some of the materials consistent it will be help. Speaking of um you know railings for the you know for for the balconies um I'm always you know worried that the balconies will be used for storage uh in especially on the left side of the you know the building where there are two balconies next to each other like on on on San Antonio. Um and uh you know one of there are two balconies there. One of them is for a a onebedroom the other one is for a studio. So I am especially worried that the person with the studio who doesn't have storage and he will use the balcony for for storage and it's going to look messy from the street. So for that reason, I definitely like more the the design that you have uh in the in the balconies that have the terracotta where where where the bottom part of the balcony is solid and the top is glass. Do you know what I mean? like like here like if you store you know stuff in the balcony I'm not going to see it from the street. So to me that's uh you know that's preferable to glass only here but >> or maybe the glass will discourage storing stuff in on the balcony. It should somebody should right to make the building much more solid because all of a sudden you know you're dealing with this separate issue. >> Maybe it could be frosted glass or you know something that >> Well, that's a possib Yes. Okay. >> Hide the mess. >> Yes. Rather than solid frosted glass. >> Frosted glass would solve it. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I feel like the thing that most people will store on their balconies is bicycles, right? Like even though there's storage, I just know a lot of people that are I I totally understand that, but I know a lot of people are like, I just want to bring it to my own apartment. >> Um but yeah, I'd also say anything we can do to discourage storage on the balconies is probably a good idea. >> Maybe maybe you could take care of some of this with a lease arrangements. You do Okay. You know, it seems to me that that's the place it has to happen because the city can't do it, you know. So, it's up to you to have a good-look building. >> But frosted glass isn't a bad idea. >> Okay. No more comments? >> Yeah, I I do. the the two balconies that you have on the north end of the facade on San Antonio Road are the two closest balconies in the whole project. And it would be nice if you could figure out how to split them. They're they're they're a few feet apart. It seems to me, isn't you know, >> look at your elevation. >> They're very very close to each other >> different. If you know it, those almost require a side panel of some sort to create privacy between those two units. If you're going to keep them that close, for sure. But still, if it's possible to separate them by a few more feet, I think it would be better. Maybe the side panel, like if they keep the balconies as is, but they put a side panel, maybe that could be interesting architecturally, too. >> So, that would be another another possibility to explore. >> The corner one is A8, which has a in a bedroom further back. So, even if they adjusted for the bedroom to be at the corner, the balcony off of the the bedroom, some something like that, that could help separate the two balconies, which might be nicer than adding a wall in the on the balcony. >> I think that architects are very capable to study that one. May we just um may we just note that uh cons consider separating the two balconies on the north end or east end of San Antonio. Thank you. If no additional comments then we will just close this item. So I move to continue this project to a date uncertain. Do I have a second? >> Second. Thank you. Can we have a call for vote, please? >> Yes. Um board member Rosenberg. >> Yes. >> Board member Jar. >> Yes. Board member Hirs. >> Yes. Uh, Vice Chair Adcock, >> yes. >> Chair Chen, >> Motion carries 5-0. >> Thank you. >> And we have two more items here. Do we want to have a five minutes break? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, we have a five minute break and we'll come back on 11:16. Okay, everyone is back. Shall we continue? So, we will move on to our action item number three, election of chair and vice chair. We don't have staff presentation for this or do we? >> I just have two quick slides. >> Okay, go ahead, please. Well, it's that time of year again, so let's jump into those elections. I just wanted to kind of orient ourselves here as detailed in that um staff report. It is in the architecture review board bylaws uh to hold the chair and vice chair elections. So, we're there and the recommended process just to kind of speed things up is provided on the screen. Before we jump in, I would just like to note that we can accept public comment on the item and then proceed. >> Are the public comments open to what twice like one for chair selection and one for vice chair or is just open now? >> Just one item. >> Just one. >> Okay. Do we have any public comments for this item? >> Yeah. And to the chair, I've not received any public comment cards and no raise hands on Zoom. >> Okay. Thank you. and then we will just open the floor for nominations for the position. We will start with the chair. So I will take the advantage and I will nominate uh vice chair atcock to be the uh chair for the next term. >> I'll second that. >> Rats. >> All right. So also brief statement. Do we need to or >> Yeah, let's make this quick. I accept the nomination. >> Great. >> Yeah. So, yeah. So, as everyone can see, um she she has the knowledge to do it and she has been as vice chair for the last year and she knows how the board runs and she is qualified for this. I'm looking forward to hand it over to her. If I may say a few words as well, I think that you're smart, competent, and ferocious, and I think that that will serve uh very well as chair of this uh board. So, looking forward to it. >> Thank you. I especially like the ferocious. >> All right. So, >> then I make a comment, too. So, I had the pleasure uh of working with Musam uh on the California Avenue activation project. And uh I don't know if that's normal for sub uh for sub uh sub committees but we met at least five or six times um two to three hour meetings and um and it was such a pleasure to work uh with Musam like she has so much um such a deep expertise and um you there was also a lot of work reviewing the plans uh you know between meetings. she always provided uh you know that the the written feedback. I was really I was really impressed and I learned from you a lot as well. So that was amazing. Thank you. >> Yes. So shall we proceed with the roll call award? >> Yep. Um board member Hirs. >> Yes. Yes. >> Board member Jojart. >> Yes. >> Board member Rosenberg. >> Vice Chair Adcock. >> Yes. >> Chair Chen. >> Yes. Motion carries 5-0. >> Congratulations. >> And next we will move on to the vice chair. Any nominations? I'll move to nominate um Kendra um uh board board member Rosenberg who has been vice chair and chair previously and uh ran our uh board very effectively and um I think she can totally handle one more round of that. So I am going to nominate her. >> I'll second. Do we have any other nominations? If no, we will do accept. >> I gota make a statement. Well, thank you. I uh I appreciate your continued faith in me and I'd be happy to serve as your second in command. That would be great. So, thank you. >> Any other comments? >> No. >> Good choice. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Very good choice. And can we have a call for a vote, please? >> Yes. Uh board member Jart. Yes. Board member Hirsh. >> Yes. Bo member Rosenberg. >> Yeah. >> Uh, Vice Chair Adcock. >> Yes. And yes. >> And Chair Chen, >> yes. >> Motion carries 5-0. >> Thank you. >> Congratulations to both of you, >> guys. I appreciate that. >> And we still have one more item for this meeting. So that is approval of meeting minutes for uh April 16th, 2026. Do we have any changes adjustment for this meeting minutes? >> And if I may just note for the record that all of the board members were present, so there's no need for any abstensions from voting. >> Okay. Thank you. If no, I move to approve the meeting minutes as it is. >> Second. >> Can we have a call, please? Um, board member Rosenberg, >> yes. >> Board member Jar, >> Board member Hirsch, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Adcock, >> Chair Chen, >> yes. >> Motion carries 5-0. >> Thank you. And next is board member questions, comments, announcements, or future meetings and agendas. Do we have any announcement at this point? >> And I have a question. Uh, with board member Chen being absent next week, does that mean board member Adcock is just hitting the ground running next week? >> As the new chair? >> Yes. >> All right. >> Congratulations. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. All right. Thank you for the clarification. And next is I think it's really last item is the virtual public comments. This time we will open our floor to our virtual public who wanted to speak a general comment. Yeah. And to the chair, we have not received any raised hands on Zoom. >> Okay. Thank you very much. and meeting a journ.

Mhm. >> Mhm. >> 14th, it is 6:00 and we're calling to order the Human Relations Commission regular meeting. Would you like me to take roll? Commissioner Ansari. Here. Commissioner Stemler. Here. Chair Kraus. Here. Commissioner Rosenberg. Here. Vice Chair Causey. Here. Commissioner Baru. Here. Commissioner Karnam. Here. For the record, all present. Commissioner, would you mind turning on your microphone? Thank you. Minka, the ghost of Minka. It's only she always make. Are there people here that want to make public comment online or offline on items not on the agenda? We currently have no requests for in-person public comment. Um, just as a reminder for the commission, um, as a result of recent City Council action, we'll be hearing remote public comments at the end of the agenda and I will, um, I will let you know if we receive any comments for that portion of the agenda. >> Okay. >> Thank you. And Chair, before we move on, um, I just want to point out the obvious that we no longer have Elena. Um, she is no longer with the city. So, we're going to have a rotating cast of clerks, um, and other wonderful helpers with us. Um, Christine is with us today. Um, and we want to thank Elena for all her service, um, for the HRC and we're sad she's not here today. All right. Are there any agenda changes, additions, or deletions? Okay. Let's move to the approval of the minutes for April 9th, 2026. Do I hear a motion? Um I would move that we approve the minutes of the April 9th meeting. And I need a second. I'll second. Okay, please call the roll. Before we take the vote, I would just like to note for the record that there were no requests to speak for this agenda item. And now moving on to the vote. Commissioner Carnahan. I. Commissioner Barr. Yes. Yes. I. Chair Krouse. I. Vice Chair Kazi. I. Commissioner Stahlin. Commissioner Rosenberg. Can I abstain? Yes. Okay, I abstain. >> here. You abstained. Uh Commissioner Ansari. I. Motion carries 6 to 1 with Commissioner Rosenberg abstaining. Thank you. Now we're going We're going to go to business item is the first. We want to have a discussion of the rules of the road because we have so many new people. And Chair, do we want to introduce our new person really quickly? I would love to. Raizel, would you like to say a few words? Hi, I'm Raizel. It's really good to be here. Uh I don't know what to say, but um I'm an engineering manager at Beve, and I'm excited to serve the city however I can. Welcome. We're very happy to have you. We now have a full slate, and it will be so helpful because we have a very full work plan going forward, and a lot of responsibilities and more responsibilities that are coming our way. Now, in terms of the rules of the road, you have to, if you can, attend meetings. And if you're going to be absent, staff or I will talk to you about the way you can attend remotely. And when you've been absent more than two, we will have a discussion. Okay? Because we have a great deal of work that's uh on our agenda. Now, behavior. Unfortunately, we can't get up and walk off the dais unless it's an emergency. And then just signal me and we will stop the meeting. If you're in an emergency, we're always here and always willing to do what we have to do. Now, there are restrooms in the back, but there's a back door open. So, if you're having a health emergency, a bathroom emergency, just let us know. And then finally, discipline on speaking. Please look to me if I'm here as the chair or my vice chair, uh Katie Causey. Um we have to acknowledge you, and we have to have the quorum. We cannot just speak. It doesn't work that way. So, we're running like a formal meeting and we'll acknowledge and call upon you. All right? And let's go forward and have a good time. Our first item is Well, it's the second item. Is the presentation on the Pride event. In terms of introduction, this is the first Pride event held by the city. It is on June 7th from 2:00 to 5:00 p.m. And we're really exciting. Um it's an opportunity to acknowledge, to see, and be seen. I'd like all of you, and I don't know how we work that out with the Brown Act, to be able to be present. And Recording in progress. I apologize, technical problems. And I'll take that offline with staff. Uh I don't know what that means and if we're allowed we have to stagger. I I turn to you. But we'd like all of you to be involved. Yes, Don. Um from past experience, my understanding of the Brown Act is that at public events, any number of the commissioners can be there. It's just that the commissioner should not talk to other commissioners, maybe one commissioner, but they should not talk to more than one commissioner about anything to do with the business. But we we are each welcome to come to public events. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> That is correct, Commissioner. Um thank you. So, we have our presentations coming from the organizers of the Pride event. I'd like to recognize the executive director of YCS. Would you like to go first? Or would you like Sure. Um we actually have some I can't hear you. Good evening, everyone. Uh my name is Mara Omen. I'm with YCS, Youth Community Service. Um we would first like to begin if we could with um uh our youth who have been on the planning committee for our Pride event. So, they are in a program right now, but they will join via Zoom. Are they in the waiting room as yet or They are not yet online. Okay. Um what I think we told them a certain time. Is that right or 6:10. Okay. So, um I'll begin actually. Could we pull up the dry drag brunch? >> [sighs] >> So, this uh so a preview uh leading up to our Palo Alto Pride event, we have an event uh this Sunday, May 17th, from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. So, we do invite everybody everybody here, everybody in the community. Uh this event is organized by the Q Corner and it's called dry drag brunch and the flyer is up on the screen. It'll be at Lucy Stern Community Center. And they invite everyone from um to enjoy a free refreshments, resources, performances, and education about substance use safety, and all ages um and this and it's a space without judgement. So, there's a QR code where you can RSVP. And again, [snorts] it's on Sunday, May 17th from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. So, please join us for this event at Lucy Stern. And I'll be joined by um Reverend Tom Harris as well to share a little bit more about the Pride event. And we also have a limited edition prior to the event that we have uh for you. It's the wonderful stickers that were designed by the uh committee. So, I'll pass this on to It's for the commissioners. There will be more, but those will only be given out at the actual event. Um are our youth on this yet or I don't see them online. I'm happy to resend the invitation if you'd like. Okay. Um Do you want to go first? Okay. Why don't you go first? >> Good evening, commissioners. Hi. I'm Tom Harris. I'm uh on the planning team for Pride and I'm uh the pastor of First Presbyterian Church Palo Alto. Um we are just so thrilled that this event is happening. As Commissioner Klein said, it is the first ever Palo Alto Pride Festival. And it's going to be 3 hours of joy and celebration and diversity on June 7th from 2:00 to 5:00 p.m. This has been a youth-led initiative. The adults are there to do the supportive work, but the youth voices have been privileged from the very beginning. And it's important considering all of the things that we know have been going on in our community that that be the case. We have It's intergenerational, but the youth are very much at the center of the planning process. On the day of the event, we're going to have a flag raising, a pride flag raising with uh Mayor Vinker raising the flag and some introductions. And then we have an incredible entertainment lineup. We'll start off with the Silicon Valley Gay Men's Chorus. And then we have two wonderful dance troops that are international in flavor and LGBTQ forward and affirming and celebrating. It's the Batuki dance group and the Folklorico dance group. School of Rock will perform and then we have a 30-minute drag show that will set all all about celebrating the incredible diversity of the human family. We have tabling that will be on Hamilton Avenue. Hamilton is going to be blocked off in front of King Plaza. Right now we have 30 different organizations signed up to table and those include service organizations, community organizations, advocacy groups, faith communities. We have five different faith communities that will be there letting the community know that we are supportive and LGBTQ+ community. We think we have room for another 10 or 15 canopies and tents, but we were just out there measuring. So, if folks want to get it information out about a organization they'd like to have table there, please let them know soon because spaces may fill up. There are there's no food vendors, so the local restaurants that are in that area are going to be thrilled to have all of this extra foot traffic to support them. And we have a great list of sponsors that Laura is going to tell you about. And I do see our youth online if we'd like to turn to them now. Iris and Alex, feel free to unmute yourselves. Hello, my name is Iris Blanchet. My name is Alex Abramova. And we're both a part of the of the planning the Pride Planning Committee. We're we're some of the youth leaders and we just wanted to to hop on and really just voice our support for this amazing amazing event. Yeah, Tom really exhausted a lot of our list of what we were going to talk about. So, so you for that, Tom. Thank you for being very informative about this event. Uh, but as um, on the on the behalf of youth leaders who are participating in the planning of this uh, event, I just want to say that um, our our role has been very um, centralized in the planning and we have um, a few different um, sort of subgroups of planning and a lot of um, the youth are leading those. Uh, which has been an amazing experience. Um, and we do have um, GSAs of uh, Gunn High School and uh, potentially Foothill College uh, joining us for the event as supporters. Um, and um, we are going to advertise to local youth um, high schoolers and college students. Um, yeah. You're you're muted. Oh, yeah. Sorry, we were we finished talking. Um, actually real quick I would Can they tell us a little bit about why they you think it's so important to have youth voices centered in the planning process? I was actually just about to say that, Tom. So, you're really we're we're synergizing here. Uh, I want to say that it's very important first of all because we have such a large youth LGBTQ community here in Palo Alto and I think we've experienced a lot of loss recently in this past year from members of the LGBTQ youth community and I think it's important for their voice to be heard. It's important for them to feel like they're not alone in the city and I think it's really important for them to have not just an opportunity to attend this event but an but an opportunity to be part of the planning process for this event because you know, at the end of the day, we're the ones who are going to be going to this event. We're the ones who really kind of spread the word of mouth for it. So, it's important to get youth involved in the planning process and I'm really happy to say that we're going to have um, multiple youth speakers at the event. We have a lot of amazing queer youth speakers lined up in the program for this event. And honestly, I'm just happy that this isn't going to be just a one-time thing. I'm really, you know, the reason why I signed on was because I realized, "Hey, this is an event that's going to be going on year after year." So, I'm really proud of the fact that we're giving youth an opportunity to plan this sort of annual reoccurring event. That's really important. Thank you. Well, thank you so much, Iris and Alex. And um I want to say that yesterday we were at a Project Safety Net meeting, and one of the things they said there was having one adult um trusted adult presence makes a difference in people's lives. So, I want to invite every adult in the community to please come out. Let's magnify that magnify that multiple multiple times, and let our youth know that we're here for them, and that they um they they matter. So, uh please, everybody, do come out to our event. We could not do this event first without the planning committee that has been meeting on Sunday evenings for many many months now. And so, I especially thank the staff who have been making time to join us on a Sunday evening, and we've had um many elected officials join us as well. So, we've had Mayor Vinker at almost all of the meetings. Um Councilmember Julie Lythcott-Haims has been coming to all the meetings as well. So has Chair Kraus. And uh we thank everybody, including Commissioner Rosenberg, who joined us at the May Fête parade, where we had a wonderful table for our event, and lots of community members came by and were interested. Uh we couldn't do what we are able to do in a short period of time without our sponsors. So, I just want to uh give a quick shout-out to our sponsors. Of course, the City of Palo Alto, which included every Palo Alto City Council member voting to uh money from the contingency plan put towards this event and then there were other pots of money that we were able to find and they were able to put towards this event. So, thank you so much. Uh a huge shout out to Kristin O'Kane that's sitting behind us who's made so much of this happen. So, thank you. Um the Palo Alto Weekly Foundation and I uh sit on the board of the Palo Alto Weekly Foundation. So, thank you to them for supporting this. Um we also are thankful to Stanford Health Care, uh Stanford University, the Embarcadero Media Foundation, which is the Palo Alto Weekly that is providing us with the gold level of marketing and promotions. So, we're I hope you'll um see our ads in the newspaper and online when you visit the news um their website. Um Grocery Outlet in Palo Alto uh has been a generous donor as well. Um Rivian uh also Society of Hearts' Delight, uh which is a nonprofit in the area. And then the Palo Alto University Rotary as well has um contributed financial support for this event. We've had community members who uh as individuals have donated money. So, Jennifer DiBrienza and uh Jesse uh Dora Gotsker and Yudi Deng uh have been the individuals who've donated towards this as well. And if you go to the website, which is on that uh flyer, there's more information about all the tabling organizations, including links to their websites, which are a wealth of information. So, if if for some reason you're not able to attend the event, please check out the resources that are available. And that website also will be updated as we assert um the the program is there as well. If you can only come for certain amounts of time, uh there will be uh an after-party as well on the street. We're working on the details of that. Um the street right in front of us Hamilton will be closed and that's where a lot of the table and organizations will be. So we're really grateful for all the different city departments that have come together to make this event happen as well. So may this be the first of many many more. Thank you. We're here to answer questions if that's how things are run. Thank you. One question I have is what is this going to cost to to make happen? What's the budget? Um and what do have to raise before June 7th? Um yeah, thank you. Actually have the budget up here. So uh our budget is $34,000 and so far we have raised $29,300. So we have 5,000 left to come in. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Um as a former Stanford professor, I am aware that there is a substantial LGBTQ community among Stanford students. Are Stanford students involved in this event? Uh if not, I would really encourage to reach out to the Stanford students and encourage them to participate. Mhm. So we actually have a call with their the the department that oversees all the different uh student clubs that would be affiliated with the LGBTQ+ community tomorrow. Uh it is around graduation time, so things are a little bit busy for them, but we have been reaching out and we look forward to and it was actually one of the requests from uh our students here that they wanted to see more of Stanford students present. So thank you. This way. I just want to give a tremendous thank you to the youth who organized this. Um I just wanted to give a tremendous thank you to the youth who organized this. Um as a proud member of the LGBT community who grew up in this and who grew up in Palo Alto, this has been so deeply needed for many years. I remember floating this idea years ago, writing an op-ed for it and trying to find different pathways. So, the fact that so many youth were able to come together and and make this reality, thank you so much for all your hard work. Thank you. You definitely inspired us, so thank you, Kate. I leave it. Does anybody else have any Yes, Commissioner. Uh is there a way HRC can help in any way? Uh Yes, uh we'd love your support and you al- we already have your support uh with the uh weekly presence of your chair at our meetings on Sundays. Uh and also your more most recent member was at our event, but we did um fill out an app- a sponsorship form, so that is somewhere in the works, yeah. So, we'll we will formally be going after that af- over that after this. Thank you. I want to say thank you. It's so important uh to be seen, to be heard, to be acknowledged for all peoples, period. And particularly our children who have been feeling so disenfranchised. Uh it's time to come together and I heartily support the efforts that you've made. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thanks. Okay, let's go to item number three. If If I may, Chair, I apologize for interrupting, but may I just say for the record that we do not have any requests to speak for item two. Forgive me for that. And nobody online? Correct. We have no requests online or in person. Okay. Item three, which is the consideration of HRC support for the Pride event on Sunday, June 7th, at King Plaza at 250 University, a cute 250 Hamilton Avenue in Palo Alto. And do we have some discussion and then we'll go to public comment or public comment first? So, I think we just did public comment, so I think we're good there, but if everyone wants to turn to page seven in their packet. Just to clarify, that public comment was for item number two. We have We have not taken public comment for item three yet. I think often though we do the staff presentations first. Um so, yeah, if you want to pay turn to packet page seven, um you will see the HRC application to request support. Um again, this is for the Pride event. Um I'm not going to go through the entire thing, but if there if you guys want to take a brief moment to go through it and then have if you have any questions or concerns, um we can raise them after. And again, it's been submitted by Alex, which is the youth-led component of this event. >> And do we have a flyer that can be put up digitally? So I notice that there are two specific requests under the support requested. One is a request that the commission um Actually there's there's three. One is the HRC name as an event supporter. Two, that a commissioner would speak at the event our program. And three, a request for funding although there isn't a specific request for any amount of funding or the purpose of the funding. But this Yeah, it it would it would appear that the um the first the first one um I think that um it it would take a motion to for the commission to support the uh for the upcoming um we call it a the upcoming pride event. Is that Because uh I I feel strongly that that it's the type of public activity that our commission should support. So I would actually move that the Human Relations Commission um support the upcoming uh pride event in on King Plaza. Just give me one second. I just want to read what I wrote for the >> I actually have a question first. Um Please. This is such a technical question, but I know it will come up with future events. So, I know we've had questions in the past of Can somebody remind me when somebody submits a request for HRC support, do they have to have all the sponsors finalized? Can we just be kept in the loop about other sponsors, event sponsors? I don't think that's a requirement for our consideration, technically. Am I Am I wrong cuz we've had an issue in the past. Can you clarify the question? Is the question whether you'll be kept in the loop of other sponsors or whether you'll know them off the bat? >> Sure. So, let me clarify. Um in the past, we have had requests to sponsor events. The city has also had requests to sponsor events. They've sponsored it, and then other sponsors have joined on that the city did not feel comfortable having city HRC on the same branding as. Um so, I was recalling that if somebody had to submit a request for sponsorship, there was some some guidelines of they had to and they have listed some of the other sponsors here. I would just note keep us in the loop about any further sponsors. So, I think we could include that as part of the motion um or alternatively, because I am seeing that there's a request for funding and not a specific amount, you guys could push this off. We could ask for more clarification, and then we could move or we could move this to our next agenda. Um but we could do it either way. A motion with qualifiers or I would prefer a motion with qualifiers and to this specific the sponsorship issue the HRC did not support that event. It was individuals that were on the HRC Thank you. >> that individually supported and when the sponsors were brought on that were not acceptable the city removed their support and the other individuals removed their support. It was not an HRC >> Thank you for that clarity. >> Okay. Thank you. >> in any way, shape or form. Do you Katie do you have something? Yeah, but we then we did have issues even with a an event after that because they didn't have the full list of sponsors available. Oh, sorry. I just it is an important point and I'm glad that Katie raised it. Commissioner Vice Commissioner Kazi raised it because I do want to make sure we're being fair to everyone and in the past there's a time we revoked support but there's also a time that we required someone to have all of their sponsors because of that previous issue and in this case they don't have all the sponsors. So I think we should at least we should qualify the motion that the HRC should be informed of any of any future sponsors before the event. And the sponsorship deadline is tomorrow. Okay. It's the 15th of the month. So we could um support a motion with qualifiers for the final submission because our next meeting will be after the Pride event. So, do we have a motion? Uh we have a motion that's currently up. Do we want to do friendly amendments? I apologize, Chair Cross. Before we do that, um may we have a second, please? the motion. >> the motion. Thank you. Okay. Now, friendly amendments. I just answer I'd ask a quick question. I notice at the bottom of the sheet of the thing on the screen, um Palo Alto Pride is listed at the paloalto.gov website. Um how is it that the Palo Alto Pride got permission to be part of the paloalto.gov website? Christine? Hi, good evening, Commissioners. I'm Kristen O'Kane, Community Services Director. So, ultimately, while this is a community-planned event, it is a city event and a city-sponsored event. So, we're hosting the website um and doing a lot of the, you know, the marketing and the graphics and things like that. So, that's why it's on the city's website. Which which offices of the city have supported it Um Community Services, City Manager's, Police, Fire, Public Works. So, Okay. And that's that's how you got access to the paloalto.gov website to have the Palo Alto Pride listed as a paloalto.gov event. I'm sorry. Could you repeat that question? Um, well, if on on the the flyer that shows the at the very bottom uh is the website of the Palo Alto Pride and it's on paloalto.gov/paloaltopride. Right, it's on the city's website. >> Right. Actually, the city has approved it being part of the city website. The only people who can put something on the city's website are city staff. So, and especially well, our chief communications officer is the one who manages that, so. >> That That That was This how I wanted to clarify. Thanks. You're welcome. Thank you. So, we have a first, we have a second. Do we have any other comments? Would we like to go to public comments, Chair? Yes, I would. Uh we currently have one request to speak. Our first speaker is Mora O. Thank you. Good evening, everybody. My name is Mora Omen. I'm the executive director of YCS and also on the Palo Alto Rec Foundation. Uh I just presented earlier. Since then, I just got an email that Kaiser Permanente is also supporting the event at $1,000. Uh and I also wanted to clarify uh that we did receive the form um from you all, the HRC application request support, and it came to me and there was a short deadline. So, I'm actually the one who filled it out. It wasn't Alex. I just wanted to clarify that. And um I would love a tutorial on it. There wasn't a place to ask for a specific amount that I could see, but perhaps I'm mistaken there, so um you know, we do have, for example, uh we want to get colored canopies, which are expensive, but if that's something you all would like to support, um it would be a cost of $5,000 to get those colored canopies, but I think it would really enhance and the cohesiveness of the event and the welcomeness of the event. So, that is an example of an expense that we have that would be a nice to have. So, um thank you. Commissioners? That concludes public comment on agenda item three. Okay. And commissioners, any other comments? Mary? Um does anyone I I I unfortunately we don't have any money to give them, right? I'm sorry? Just uh regarding the request for funding, I don't believe we have any money to give them. Are we Well, I mean the HRC doesn't. >> They've applied for emergency uh emergent needs grant funding, but I don't think we have any funding within the HRC that we could allocate separately. Yeah. Yeah. So, that's what they've come to us with. >> Uh it's an emergency emergent needs application. That's great, but we won't be deciding that in in this meeting anyway. Okay, and then the other thing I would just say is um maybe I don't know if there's like a checkbox, but in the form maybe we should make it more clear in the future that people I just don't want people thinking, "Oh, there might be a pot of money." So, maybe in the future we could just clarify um that funding has to go through the emergent emerging needs grant rather than through this form. And for the motion, I think we need to specifically uh comment on all the support requested. So, um we're moving that we're supporting the event, but I think we should also include um the request that a commissioner speak speak at the event, and then again that request for funding. So. But, as a citizen, does a commissioner need the commission's permission to speak at a public event? If you're speaking on behalf of the HRC, you would need to go through the you would need to go through this, but if you're speaking individually, then no. Exactly. Because we have the mayor who is involved, she is raising the flags in a formal ceremony. And doing, I think, a formal resolution supporting this activity for years to come. Um This is a joyous opportunity. So, let's call the the vote. If we're comfortable with this, or do you want to I do have one more thing. Is there any way, because I know we're talking about this as a one-time thing, but it sounds like they really had to scramble this year to get everything pulled together and to find the $38,000. Is there any chance of them Like, is there any way we could also do a resolution a motion around recommending that the city plan on this in its annual I know that the annual budget for the city is contentious, but something like a a motion also to support it this year, but also to that the city plan on this for next year, so that Absolutely. In in next year's review of the community development block grant CDBG funding uh we could certainly recommend that there be a fixed amount for a annual pride event uh in in the city. Well, but that won't be for several months. And to clarify, they would still need to go through an application process, but we could definitely add them to the bidder's list. Right. I'm sorry, is that the only way for them? There isn't a way to put aside money besides the community block grant process? I think I can get back to you guys on that. Um, I think you could make a recommendation to council to put aside money for that, but I think that's something you might want to think through a little bit more, but I can bring back more information. Yeah, that would be great. I mean, just now while it's on people's plates, otherwise, you know what will happen. It'll happen, people will be like, "That was amazing." And then like, next year, it's going to be the same hustle all over again. All right, thanks. What? Yes. >> one of the things that Alex probably started in their presentation is that it's not a recognized body or something. So, maybe uh, we should formalize that organization that's organizing. Is Is that how it works? In We are not a formal organization, but a group of passionate activists. Uh, does that make a difference or do they need to have some form of a formal organization within Palo Alto then they'll have access to funds, permissions, and Yes. Thank you. So, um, I think the city, our plan is to continue this event annually. So, this will be a new annual event that the community service department likely leads with support from our other departments, and then we're welcome to have our community members, our youth, um, collaborate on that planning. So, um, I think I don't think it's necessary to form a real, you know, established group that works on the event cuz we'll be taking the lead and welcome anyone to participate. >> Thanks. Mhm. Okay. May I seek clarification on the motion, please? So, Commissioner Barr um spoke about uh adding part of this to the next year's CDBG funding. Commissioner, was that something you'd like added to the motion? No, that's just a suggestion to the commission, but it wasn't actually part of the motion. Thank you very much. Uh likewise, that my recommendation that any HRC commissioner in support of this should go and volunteer to speak at the event, but not necessarily as a formal representative of the HRC. So, I didn't include that in the motion. If If somebody else wants to change that, that's fine, but I thought it was just it would be um to say, "Hi, I'm I'm Don. I'm a member of the Human Relations Commission. I'm happy to be here to support uh this event." is something that would be appropriate for for someone to do. I think we Yeah. We do have a formal program that we're working on with speakers. So, if it is something the HRC wanted to include, we would like to know that um soon very soon if you would like someone to speak cuz we do have our program that's pretty packed and don't have room much room. So, please let me know as soon as possible. And to clarify, I think in our motion, we will want to comment on what Commissioner Barr is talking about if you guys do or do not want to have a commissioner speak at that at the event. We've really deferred to the youth members uh in in programmatic development. So, if they choose to have someone [clears throat] speak from the HRC, we would be ready and able, but I think that's up to the youth members because they've driven the program. Um that's my two cents. You know, they want us, we're here. They don't want us, we'll be quiet. To clarify, that is their request. The support requested is a request for commissioner to speak at the event or program. So, are we adding that to the motion then? >> That's fine. Thank you. Before we add it to the motion, may I get the consent of the mover and the seconder, please? Um I would I would uh be okay to add um a uh and and that the HRC will request that one of its members speak at the event. I second it. Could we clean up the language of could could we be be informed of any and all sponsors before the event occurs? And is that all right with the first and the second? Yes, and not to be dis- seconded by Vice Chair. Mrs. Don, is that okay with you? >> Yeah. Yes. Okay. And did the um commission want to add um another section of the request was to use the HRC name as an event supporter? Well, that's that's the first sentence of the motion that the Human Relations Commission supports the Pride event. And then it should be plural. Supports. And then I think we need to add something about the request for funding. >> [snorts] >> Uh I I left that out on purpose. Okay. We we don't have any money. I think we should clarify that we are not funding it. I think we should speak to MS. I think you should speak to each of the areas of support requested. So, the third one is request for funding. Yeah. Uh at this point in time, the HRC is not financially supporting the event. Maybe okay. So, Not will not. Is not. Move to that though. You want to At this point in time, what they whether they get an emerging emerging needs grant is to be determined. >> emerging Yeah, but I think that those queries I got uh the first and second I I accept all the changes. Small correction, I believe it's emerging. Accept all. Correct all changes. Okay. Yes. >> Should we suggest the name of the commissioner that at the wish Uh I I personally I I purposely left out the name of the commissioner who's going to speak. And I thought that that was something that could be negotiated through the chair of the commission and the vice chair. I will. Yeah. Can you call the roll? Commissioner Rosenberg You guys, it's not grammatically correct. I'm really sorry. >> [laughter] >> What? It's just not grammatical. It's Can I read this out loud? Commissioner Barr, seconded by Vice Chair Kazi, moved that the Human Relations Commission supports the Pride event on Sunday, June 7th, 2026 at King Plaza, and the HRC be informed of any and all sponsors before the event can occurs, and a commissioner speak at the event, and the HRC is not financially support. It's just The HRC supports HRC be informed a commissioner speak. There's so many subjects in this sentence. Is there Is it Does it have to be a single sentence? Okay, so can we make it Human Relations Commission supports a pride event? Done. The HRC be informed of all sponsors before before the event occurs, period. And a commissioner speak and then commissioner speak at the event. >> [snorts] >> Or supports the event with a commissioner speaking or something like that and then the HRC is not financially supporting. >> [snorts] >> of a commissioner to speak at the event or program. Yeah, to speak. Yeah. Sorry, I'm just thinking. It'll be more clear. At you were Okay, we're missing a word. At to speak at Yeah, that looks good. And maybe the last sentence it it is still to be determined whether the pride event will qualify for You got it. These are friendly amendments and our first and our second have concurred. Can we call for a vote? Commissioner Rosenberg. I abstain. Commissioner Barr. I. Commissioner Stemler. I. Vice Chair Kazi. I. Chair Kraus. I. Commissioner Ansari. I. Commissioner Karnam. I. Motion carries 6-1 with Commissioner Rosenberg abstaining. And also oh no. I apologize. >> [snorts] >> Okay. Perhaps we will move to city official reports. Let's first hear are there any commissioner reports? I just wanted to say it was wonderful to walk in the May Fete parade with um city council members, school board members, and uh commissioners from other commissions. Any other reports? Um I discussed the safety commission today with our police chief because the numbers are quadrupling in the senior community uh for fraud and we will plan together another workshop and hopefully with some of the service providers specifically to address the senior community and the kind of fraud that's now escalating. It's becoming very difficult to stop funds transfer because of the modification of instruments. So, it's very important that they know and are instructed of how to shut it down before there's a chance of funds transfer. So, that's going on and again on the safety area I then had a conversation with uh the fire chief and we are looking forward to having uh a presentation at our next uh meeting on fire avoidance because the lessons from Pasadena, Altadena, Malibu last year is that it can happen anywhere. And at this point we'd like to work very closely in getting knowledge out to [snorts] the community going forward. And in the fall do a reassessment with the fire department working closely with us. Um and hopefully we will not have any fires of magnitude this summer. So, those are my reports. Council liaison Oh. we also for the RV dwellers and the homeless, we had I was present at the ribbon cutting of the Homekey project. And I want to thank the staff, Melissa McDonough, and all the work that she's done and Sophie Pigman for the work she has done and is still is to do going forward. Um There are 88 beds, the units, excuse me. There's more beds. Did I get that right? Okay. And they can handle 161 people, or am I wrong on that? It's 88 single units and Okay. >> 24 26. 24 26. It was an amazingly excited and joyous opening today. Uh everyone had a tour. I would welcome you to get more knowledgeable uh because Palo Alto is trying very hard to move the needle forward and their work on homelessness. Um LifeMoves uh is a management consultant of the operational aspect. Am I correct? So, LifeMoves is contracted by the county to run the operations of Homekey. Yes. This is very exciting. Commissioner Ensalaco J- just a Oh, I'm sorry. Did I interrupt? Uh I was looking that way. The other project Homekey in Mountain View uh has run up against a problem that this one may, which is I believe the housing is for 12 months targeted. >> And I would like to remind you all that this is not an agendaized item, so um we need to tread carefully with how many questions we ask here. Okay, anyway, just just um it's not permanent housing. It's it's It's long-term housing. I think that's the word. It's called permanent supportive housing. Thank you. Commissioner >> permanent supportive housing. I just have an anecdote to share actually. Um one of the projects that Commissioner Simler and I are working on is a is a wider services nonprofit convening in the fall, and it's on the community services um bucket. And I think one of the goals of that is to try to get the community kind built into the infrastructure of our and aware of the service providers. So one of the things that we're trying to do is understand the ecosystem, and because we've had La Comida come out here a few times and speak, um I had a lot of fun. I actually went and volunteered a couple of weeks ago to serve the seniors at Stevenson House. It's a lot of work. I was a dripping in sweat. I had no idea it was such an operation, so efficient. Um but as a result of that, my kids got really interested, and so now there's a whole group of high school kids that are planning to volunteer throughout the summer. And so we are going to be working seeing if we can work with the organization, but it's like a really great way of kind of like getting the community involved into the ecosystem and seeing if that can actually help the nonprofit. So it was super fun. Just thought I'd share that. It was a good way to get involved. And also the youth mental health subcommittee Commissioner Carnahan, Commissioner Ansari, we've got some plans coming forward and some possible dates. Um the August 19th or 20th to do a back-to-school parents-focused uh workshop at Mitchell Community Center. Would you like to speak to that? Sure. Um so I I think it kind of came up at Was it last session or the one before where we talked a little bit about maybe getting the elementary school kids involved as well or the parents involved and just kind of understanding more about things to look out for, understanding the whole landscape around mental health. A lot of us are just not versed. So we met, we talked talked about, you know, just we're going to split it up in terms of what we're going to do for it and um just trying to figure out the right timing with back to school. And um yeah, that's it. I mean, I I think it'll be an ongoing thing. Once you do the first one, you kind of understand how it's going to go and how to build upon it. But um it'll be fun. If we can help one parent, it's worth it. Yeah, um with with uh I I think we've planned to figure out, you know, the the overall agenda for it and we'll speak to someone who's an expert in in terms of how we coach the elementary school parents in terms of um you know, what they can do and not not do. And you know, learn about youth uh sorry, youth learn about youth mental health when the kids are in elementary and then proceed further. So we'll we'll figure out the curriculum, like what is the best way and invite the parents, uh do it in one or two places and see if it can be repeatable. Thanks. Yeah, and just one last thing on that. I think one of the ideas for the first event is to really hear from the parents and kind of what what they want to what they want to learn. I know I want to learn a lot. So, what what what we're experiencing, what we're seeing, what we're concerned about, so we can kind of build a program built around that. And bring in the right experts. Thank you. Anything else? Can we hear from our council liaison? Are you still there? Yep, still here. Thank you, Chair. Um yeah, a lot already discussed with a Project Homekey opening today, incredibly exciting. Uh the Pride event, we're all looking forward to supporting that this coming June. Uh 2 weeks from tonight, we'll be swearing in our new police chief, James Reifschneider. And so, that's an a an exciting opportunity as well for the city. He's been currently serving as our chief right now, but he has been our acting chief since the since the fall and has been with the department for many years now. We're excited to be able to officially kind of welcome him into this this role as as chief on the on May 28th. Uh there's some been I I kind of gave an update last time I presented on youth mental health and reference that we were going to be having the Churchill item coming back to council. Council voted unanimously uh to to keep Churchill open to traffic and pedestrians, but to to kind of to explore a more long-term contract uh to be able to keep Trackwatch there for beyond a year to expedite quiet zones both at Churchill and across the entire corridor and to really work with the Jed Foundation as well to really identify more clearer uh action items that we can that we could do to try to mitigate the risks at our at our four train crossings across the community. Speaking of the Jed Foundation, we're anticipating their initial report at the end of at the end of June and they'll be working with us again throughout the throughout the year as well on have additional policies to repose for the for the city to be able to implement. And then on kind of budget we're we're going through budget hearings now. The full budget is anticipated to be adopted on June 15th. As of now, it looks like council is not recommending that we would fund the kind of that phase one nonprofit work plan that that we were able to do last year cuz since we we had money to spare last year, this year we're looking at some pretty significant deficits and so that funding is likely to not not continue. But we're hoping that that is just going to go on hiatus for one year. This on Tuesday this week at our Policy and Services Committee meeting we we discussed what the future of that might look like and what the future of HIS RAP will look like and so the motion that came out of Policy and Services that will I believe go towards the full council in June is essentially for Policy and Services to to take a look at at HIS RAP this fall and to to try to identify ways in which the HIS RAP process can be improved for for nonprofits from the city side, how can we avoid any redundancies or or maybe just a process that takes too long for everybody. The HRC's role in that within that discussion there was an acknowledgement of the expertise that the HRC has on his rep process and wanted to make sure that your voices are elevated as well being able to weigh in on how can his rep be improved and um kind of a feeling that there's just too many pots out there of kind of of non-profit money and it would be nice if we can kind of centralize that maybe into his rep and if it doesn't work out, that's fine. But it's again just try to make the process a little a little easier for everybody. So that's I would say that's probably the the biggest issue that's going to be that we're going to be working on in in the coming months that I can definitely see a very strong HRC focus and and and request for support from all of you. So that is my update. Can we ask questions or Yes. Uh Council Council member Council member Stone, I have a question about um the city's approach to developing housing on downtown parking lots that the city approved potential housing affordable housing on parking lot T on Lytton >> Commissioner Burt, I don't want to interrupt you but because this is the liaison Council liaison report and it's not an agendaized item, we can't actually ask him any questions at this time. >> Oh, sorry. No problem. John, I had a question. Anyway, should we go to staff? And it was really nice to see Minka today at the grand opening. She looks happy, rested and as willowy as ever. Um so staff report it's very beautiful if you have a time to go by there. Um we're really excited for the actual opening when that happens. Um we are also in the process of planning the resource fair for our unhoused community. Um that is slated to happen in June. So when I have more specific information, i.e. a flyer, I will get that out out to all of you. And that's all for me. Commissioners, do you have questions? Do we have any virtual public comment? No, we do not. I sure. Do you want to remind people to meet with their subcommittees? Yes, I would. I'd like to urge you to move forward with your subcommittees. And that in the next meeting, I'd like to have everybody to come back with the reports. I'd also want to urge you to be more community involved wherever your interests fall. Uh we'd like people to be involved. Um I know you have busy work lives. Trust me, I have a quadruple calendar, but we make time for the things that we care about. Anyway, let's adjourn and have a wonderful next couple days in the heat. >> Mhm.

yourself. >> I will. Yeah. Okay. Good afternoon. I'm uh calling to order the council appointed officers committee for March uh sorry for May 14th of 2026. If the clerk would please call the role. >> Vice Mayor Stone >> here. >> Chair Lowing >> Mayor Vinker >> here for the record. All present. >> Thank you. and we have an agenda and also our consultant is here and our uh head of uh HR. So we're going to jump into the process and uh propose changes to CAO performance evaluations. So we all got these in advance and I'll just hand it over to Dan to kind of walk us through it. Chair, if I may, real quick before we start, um, just for the record, since public comment for items not on the agenda is first, uh, there are no requests to speak and no hands are raised on Zoom. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you, Chair Lowing. It's a pleasure to see you all again and kick off the process. Um, so attached to the staff report that Sandra provided to you is a draft timeline, drafts of the prompt questions, and drafts of the interview questions. So we can walk through them one by one. My suggestion with your indulgence is to kind of follow the suggested agenda on page two of the staff report starting with the timeline which is attachment A or one. Um and uh the mayor was not on the subcommittee last year but the other two of you were. So you saw this in our we had a debrief in November. >> I actually wasn't. >> So you're the one that was. Yeah, I knew only two of you were on. Right. >> I I was on the year before, >> right? Apologies. Well, all of you are more or less familiar. You're all familiar with it, but >> yeah, >> but last year's subcommittee, we did a debrief and and talked about some suggested tweaks to the process and the timeline. I've subsequently updated that. So, in the draft, you see anything in red is a a change from what you saw in November. really just trying to uh zero in more specificity and lockdown dates and and things. So, um so if you look over that calendar, we're starting the process today. Um the next main step would be taking whatever comes out of today's meeting to the full council as a consent item and then talking to Sandra, look like we'd probably shoot for June 8th. Um that's right if everything goes smoothly today. And then um again just filling in the dates. The process is pretty much the same. The one thing that's changed in the process from last year which we noted um the the debrief process was in years prior I would send the draft evaluations to all of you give you a week or two to provide written feedback to me and then I'd try to incorporate that and have a final draft to send out to you. Frankly, that has never really worked all that well because a the feedback I get from any one person is that one person's opinion, not the majority opinion, and people don't provide the written feedback or whatever. So, I'm suggesting we basically drop that step that I'll send out the draft to you. And if you want to share written comments with me, you're welcome to, but we'll use that first close session as a time for everybody, you know, to collectively provide and hear and decide on the feedback. So, it's not a it consolidates the process and b everybody's in on the decision-making and I'm not trying to pick and choose, you know, which which edits to include and which to not. um because it just hasn't worked all that well. So that's also again part of our overall goal. One of the messages we got from the appointees last year was to try to squeeze the process down. Last year I think we didn't end until um mid November. And this year I'm hoping we're essentially done with the process at the end of September if we stay on schedule. So uh to that point the interviews will basically be the same schedule. They'll start during your spring break for any of you or your summer break for any of you that are around, but they extend after you get back. So, those of you that aren't around can still come within the time period to keep us moving forward. And then the key change, and again something we talked about at our debrief last year, was to potentially hold the closed sessions nights that either only have a study session or our special meeting nights just because last year one of the big uh challenges was finding times for those close sessions and they would get bumped off for other agenda items or whatever. So what I'm hoping is that to today and then through the full council we lock into these exact weeks for the three close sessions. Um the first one would be the first week of September or um and that would be where you would review the draft evals and give me your feedback to finalize them. Then we'd take two weeks off for that process to happen, turn them around, get them back to you. Then we'd have the city manager's evaluation sometime the week of September 21st and the attorney and the clerks uh and the compensation discussion the week of the 28th. Um this is all assuming we are not doing an evaluation for the auditor this year and that's a later agenda item but that was discussed last year as well. So that's kind of the working premise >> for the auditor or the city manager. >> Audit. >> I mean the city attorney. No, we would do the attorney, but it would be slightly different since he's new, but it would still be more or less the same process. We talked last year about not doing it for the auditor >> because of the the timing issue. I mean, we were talking about her goals for next year in November. She already had an adopted work plan that she was five months into. Um, so it didn't really make sense. So the thought was let's skip over this year and then you know the the the feedback that you gave her in close session last November. It is intended to be built into her now being built work plan for the upcoming year. So there's really nothing concrete to evaluate this year. But again we can talk about that separately and you can um decide otherwise. Uh so that that's the main stuff. Again, just kind of tightening up the schedule there. And >> are you ready for some feedback on the reds? >> Yes. Well, the whole thing, but the reds in particular. >> Okay. Yeah. In terms of consent calendar, you can figure out when that fits, but it's just going to be consent to this. So, it should be pretty simple. 1st or eighth. And you noted that this does go through the break, but that doesn't mean that people have to do it at the break, >> right? >> Yeah, we we've I've allocated a three plus week period, 3 to four weeks for the interviews. So based on everyone's schedules, hopefully somewhere in that time chunk, um you're all available. So just take one of the people like the city manager. You're going to do interviews between the 21st of July and the 13th of August. >> No. Well, those are the interviews with the seven of you. >> Yeah. >> So, and I'll ask you about all the appointees. >> Yeah, that's what I meant. That's what I meant. So, we would give you input on the city manager. >> Right. >> Then, Right. >> Um, >> and then you submit a draft on the 3, >> right? So, I'll have all the interviews and then between August 13th and September 3rd, I'll somehow turn that into a consensus document uh and get that draft out to you in early September. >> But you're skipping comment on that and then we just go and do it all in a um closed session without the CEO in there, right? >> Correct. >> Sorry. >> Yep. The first closed session would be just uh the seven of you and me without them so that you can give feedback on the drafts and they will obviously have not have seen the drafts until after you give it final approval. >> Yep. >> For what it's worth, um I really like this. I think that it's better to have it condensed. I think that uh it's better for us because we can stay focused on it more. It's better for the CEOs because it's not this long drawn out process where they write something up in June or July and we come back and talk to them about it, you know, six months later, everybody's forgotten what was in the original. Um, but also um part of the reason you can condense it is you are skipping the stat step where you're waiting for feedback from us and I've been not good in terms of getting it back because it never seems like the biggest crisis in front of us and so it it um A and it did feel odd that those who could find the time to write up a lot of detailed stuff, all of a sudden all their stuff's in there and the others of us who have may perhaps just as detailed thoughts but haven't had time to put them give them to you. We got to figure out how to work them in around the edges and or do we It just puts you in a very awkward spot. And I I think that if we look at I mean you're a pro at this. You have you know us now. You know this the the CEOs. you've been through this with us a few times. I think you can put together a really good first draft and then to talk together because honestly when I hear what my colleagues say and share their experiences or their thoughts, it'll trigger thoughts in me and say, "Oh yeah, you know, that's something that might be constructive to address." And so we're actually I think by throwing out some of that time um we can can accomplish two good things. uh condensing the schedule and sort of co-creating what gets to the CEOs, which I think is fair to them anyway. So, kudos. I agree with everything that's been said and I I like as long as we can stick with this schedule trying to really get everything in September because that tends to be kind of our last that I mean nothing is light anymore but this seems to be one of our lighter se you know August and September tend to be our some of our lighter months before we really start to ramp up again in October and November. So I agree with everything they said and yeah agree. >> Well and a side benefit um which I actually did not think of when I was doing this is you know it is election season in November and you know frankly it is in everyone's interest to get this done before it's too close to election season. >> Thank you for that. I think that's an excellent thought because we don't want one to affect the other. Um, and ballots drop now in early October. So, getting it done before that happens, I think, just keeps them cleaner and separate. >> And I I mentioned this to Maha earlier, but the pressure is going to be on her and the city manager in terms of scheduling those. But I think the key is if if you and the full council commit to those three close sessions in those three weeks now, you know, we can lock in a date relatively early and get it on everyone's calendars because it's obviously harder to schedule the closer you get to to that time. I mean, I would defer to the or I would in invite Well, you've been mayor. You've been we've all been mayors and uh you know, you've been a city manager, so we can I think commit is a strong word. we can calendar them, but you know, crazy stuff comes up and that's kind of the thing that we're but but but we might add meetings or do something, but I think we should, you know, commit to getting them done in September and just, you know, those are the dates we've got now, but um we'll have to figure out as agendas evolve. >> So, we have consensus on this timeline, right? >> Yep. Okay. All right. >> Okay. very on. >> Um yeah, and just to just to reiterate on the closed sessions, you know, there was discussion and more or less agreement last year that you're open to having those on non-regular meeting nights. And I think that's an important point to point out in the the staff report that goes to the full council because I know nobody likes more meetings than they have to go to, but sometimes the only way to schedule these and to have the time to do it well is to do it on a different afternoon or evening. That's great. >> Okay. So, moving on to the next attachment, which is the prompt questions. And these I think really first started two or three years ago where this subcommittee asked um there be specific questions that the appointees respond to in their self-ealuation. So, each year we've tweaked it a little bit. This year I'm suggesting a few more tweaks you see in strikeout and red. Um, so, uh, the if it's not changed, it was there last year. And obviously the attorney, there's a kind of a note at the bottom there. Um, he will not be able to report out on, you know, adopted goals and whatnot because he didn't have them, but he can still report out on what he thinks are the accomplishments and what he sees as the issues coming forward and his suggested goals for next year. Can I may I >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Go. >> Okay. >> Um so yes uh with respect to the city attorney um the city attorney will be final you know have now have a feel for his staff. um the legal demands from the city, sort of the nature of you know how council at least this council behaves in closed session and um I I I I think this is what is intended here but the what are your observations so far in the organization it's more have you identified needs or perhaps new directions might be too strong, but um new uh organizational um ideas for the department, you know, needs, strengths, weakness, things because, you know, he'll come in and look at the staff. The staff's inherently different without Molly, um even though we have the rest of the same lawyers. And I would be very interested in hearing if he has any um organizational thoughts about how much we use outside counsel, inside council, is everything hunky dory, do we need another paralle? I don't know. I I just think that those kinds of organizational things since this is kind of his first shot would be very interesting to hear. Um, I don't know if you have other things on the city attorney because I have one other thing on another question, but I can hold it. >> Just just one to add to that. I know part of our concern with any new significant leadership change like that is what h the kind of attrition rate within a department and I know we don't really get those reports. So, I think that'd be a good opportunity to ask him about what type of turnover has happened over the last year and then and and I could go into that to the hiring question as well because I think that will give us really good insight too as far as what is the current department really how how are they all feeling about this transition. Yeah, I just add that um the mayor asked me to as the chair of this committee to meet with him, which I did early on, and remind him that we authorized, you know, coaching options for him, and he should think through what kind of coach he wants, and it doesn't have to be about legal expertise. It could be about X or Y or Z that supplements that, and um what whatever that is, he should put on the table and we'll fund it. But I also said we would expect you to be in a honeymoon period and looking at a lot of things here. Um, so we're not going to say give us a 30-day report on what your org should be, but when you're ready, we do want to hear that. So that's sort of the I sort of set up what you're exactly what you're talking about here. So it may be that we don't want to wait till midepptember if he raises the the hand on that but I think the content uh that uh Vicki mentioned is exactly right. >> Okay, great. Yeah, so I can enhance the questions or the prompts for him to get a little bit more specific about kind of his view of the organization, the department, how it's operating, any changes he thinks are appropriate. And that's you know it's a perfect time for that kind of input from him. He's He can say he can say none. >> Yeah, >> there's no good answer there, but he can say whatever he wants to say. >> But yeah, usually, you know, 3 to 6 months into the job, you're kind of like, okay, I got a feel for it. I know kind of what what needs to be done or what I think needs to be done. So, >> yeah. No, I'm actually excited to hear because um we all thought tremendously highly of Molly and uh the work product that that department provided. However, yeah, I've practiced law in a bunch of different places and I took some learnings from each of them and took them to the next place and this fresh set of eyes on how we operate and our legal needs, he might have some very interesting suggestions and learnings from the other places he's practiced law. So I think this is a great opportunity um for him to share those with us and for us to understand perhaps maybe there's a better way to tweak one thing or another in that department. I had one suggestion. I I I'm fine with all the changes. I just wanted to suggest that we talk about perhaps one other. So I'm looking at uh Yeah. So again just on the general ones on G, what is your characterization of the effectiveness of appointed official slasheleed official relationships, availability, responsiveness, communication, open-mindedness, etc. Um, and I want to um compare and contrast that like with D. How are your direct reports performing? Blah blah blah. Um, I would like to put a finer point on G. Um, and just say describe the quality of the AOE relationships and what works well and what should be improved, including what both the AO and the EO could do. So, I think we as elected officials, if there's things we could be doing that are helpful, it would be nice to hear that. if there I also would like sort of the self-reflection um from the appointed officer. So that would be my suggestion. >> It's interesting on uh on D I underlined productivity because to me that didn't give us a a qualitative metric. I mean, yes, we got through the week, we got through the month, we hired a few people, but you know, how are you feeling, CEO, about, you know, the the quality or the performance level, not just uh quantity of work coming out? So maybe that could be blended in there because that's what you're speaking about in G is sort of a quality. >> Exactly. Um I I think that it's not just effectiveness um although that's topline important um but I think the the quality the ease with which we achieve effectiveness um is is helpful um and I think there sort of in this 360 I we don't we don't do a 360 actually um with our city manager in particular I'm thinking about um So I I I just think that thinking together I I would like to hear more about the the relationships with us and whether we asked too much too little, how that could be you how our needs could be met, how you know his needs could be met better. Just just really outside of any particular um you metrics would getting you know checklist. It's more um what's the quality of the communication, what's the quality of the support both ways, that kind of thing. I'd be very curious to hear more about that. And I I don't know how appropriate this is, but we do we tend to do this throughout the evaluations in particular with the city manager. And it's kind of hinted there with with G uh sorry with D about the direct reports. It's like it's good to hear about how city manager feels about his direct reports but there's not there's there is a question in our evaluation nine. Is there any feedback you would like to provide about the operation of departments but not people specific? And I feel like that has been a a challenging area of these evaluations because direct reports to the to any CEO is a is a large reflection on them and the work that they're able to accomplish within the within the department. So I guess Dan, I'm curious kind of your your thoughts on maybe how can we revise that a little bit to cuz I know you've been in that room and you've seen how these have played out occasionally. um how maybe we can invite that. >> Yeah. Um well, let's uh so I mean these are crafted fairly specifically to walk a fine line. Um you know it's not uncommon for there to be concerns or questions about the performance or productivity of staff members. Having said that, you know, that is the city manager's job, not your job. Um, and so that's why it's worded that way to specifically say, you know, we don't want you to say, you know, Joe's terrible. You got to get rid of him or, you know, whatever. >> What number? I'm sorry, I just missed the >> nine on the >> This is But we're kind of on the the interview questions, but I think we can table this until we get there, but I think you were relating that back to >> D on on this line on this list. So, you know, I my experience is Ed's been I think he's done a really nice job the last few years where he would go department by department and say kind of not only what the accomplishments are but what are the challenges and you know he words it carefully um but you can kind of understand what he's saying. Um, so you know, I I think you get that. I don't know. I mean, I don't I don't know what else you would want to ask in the prompt. Um, so sticking specifically on this form for right now. Um, >> yeah. Yeah, I mean I guess if if it would be appropriate to kind of make it sound a little more like D in his own in his own questions. But I understand like you're you know there's an awkwardness to it of we don't control those direct reports but it's a part of >> the evaluation of any CEO the staff that >> yeah so moving to the to the next page in number nine there and feedback on you know the operations you all are not uh shy sharing your way >> your opinions I mean it's never you know outright on a person so to speak but you know I think you can convey concerns about an operation a division of responsiveness or lack of quality or whatever those kind of attributes that might be frustrating to you. Um, and you can convey that to me and and to the appointee without getting into the, you know, so and so by name is not cutting it. Um, because I think again it's a it's a fine line and I don't think we want to cross that line. Well, I know we don't want to cross that line, but I don't think we want to get too close. I mean, I guess the question is, you know, would you change anything in D on this on the prompt? Um, you know, that's that's pretty direct, >> right? >> Right. Um, you know, how are your direct reports performing? Um, and if you know, if if there are specific kind of examples that you that might articulate what you're getting at a little bit more, we could add that in there. Um, >> I guess I I mean if we were to just rem I feel it odd to kind of instruct council members to not like it says not people specific in question in question nine. Um, and >> well that I mean that's on purpose because >> I want to hear more about that. So here here's why. Um, I'm fine with D, but I have a similar concern on nine. I don't want to get in there and review a thousand people. I don't want to get in there and review all his direct reports. That is not our job. That is his job. However, if I were he and I was telling him that I wasn't loving um you know particular performance from a particular department, I'd want to know why. I don't know how we explain that if we can't ever use a name. I know we can be careful and whatever and it's not, you know, if it's Bob, he can, you know, it's up to him to then think hard about it and think, you know, I think they have a misperception about Bob. Bob's a star. Or, you know, I've had not thought about that. I'm looking at it now. I should go talk to Bob. Or whatever it is he does. That's that's his job, not ours. But if we're so vague, how does he really know what our issue is? >> Yeah. I mean, it is a fine line. I think yeah we could just drop the parenthetical not and just say provide um you know to the question to you it would be is there any feedback positive or constructive you'd like to provide on the operations of the departments and leave it a little bit more open-ended. I I like that because it is ultimately about the functionality, right? So it's it's it's he needs to provide the person and and nurture and their their development of his staff, not us. But if we're saying, you know, this this function isn't coming along the way we wanted or this function has malingered for a while or I've noted a sudden issue, maybe it's temporary, but just want to flag it for you. Um, I I think we have to be specific enough that he understands the feedback even though we're not directing him what to do about it or, you know, because he's accountable for the performance of his staff. >> Yeah, absolutely. And I think it's okay. Again, it's just it's a fine line and you don't want anything you say to be perceived as direction to him regarding a specific employee. Yeah, you can say I have concerns with the performance of this division and probably I suppose you could even say this person. Um, and you know, the way you framed it is appropriate. It's up to him to then decide what to do with that feedback. But again, it's just it's a fine line kind of the perception of interfering or telling him how to do his job. And I think you can ex in your one-on- ones with council members if they feel like they're going in that direction when we're in the closed session. I think for you to share that feedback is helpful. But definitely, yeah, I I like that edit of removing the not people specific. I just hope Bob's not watching and getting nervous. >> I'm hoping there's no one named Bob because I was not >> that was a hypothetical for the record. >> Total hypothetical, >> but for that that was my only my only one. Thanks. >> Okay. So, let's just make sure if we can just jump back for a second to the prompt any of So, I'll beef up the city attorney stuff a little bit more specificity. Um, one other thing I wanted to note, it's not on this sheet, but I was looking back at my notes and at the end of the process last year for the city manager, council explicitly stated you wanted him to report out kind of give updates on the areas that were identified for development in his performance evaluation. So, I would just add that explicitly here as a prompt so it doesn't get lost in the shuffle if that that's okay. Yeah. So, >> yeah. So, any any other U changes? We'll we'll make that one change on number nine. >> Well, we kind of we kind of went back and forth. manager elect. So it seems like um he and that. >> Yeah, I guess my response would be without thinking it all the way through, so just talking out loud here is that that kind of is what nine would be getting at. I mean, I think again, you're evaluating the city manager and so, you know, six is how does he in this case specifically give you what he needs? And you I mean I guess you could infer you know everything rolls up to him. So if again poor Bob who we're picking on um you know doesn't doesn't get you something you need ultimately you're holding Ed the city manager accountable. Um so you I would argue you still want to you know the question to you is how's the city manager doing? Yeah, that that's who you're evaluating and nine would get at how you know his people are doing. Um, but that's kind of my my gut reaction. >> Yeah, I I think to to echo Ed's point here, I I think the reason you're hearing us ask these questions about six is this is a big city with a lot of employees. And because of that um as I understand it, Ed has taken sort of the role of more of the outward facing and like Kylie is number two is more of the inward facing. So we are inward people and so when we're looking at you know services or interaction or getting information um from staff, it's it's essentially his delegate. um like sometimes he'll be the person but sometimes he'll refer us to a department and you know we copy him and all that um so we don't do the wrong thing but um that they are his his proxy they're his agent they that he is and so that that's why I think when if if we're then interacting and working and relying on that person and there is an issue the issue is that he's not there's an issue with the services we're expecting from him. So that's why I think it's his performance um in providing the service to us via Bob for Bob. Um so I think that's kind of what's underneath what you're hearing. It's not that we want to review Bob. I don't want to review Bob. But if if Bob's a proxy for Ed on task A and I'm h or maybe I think tax A is t task A is fabulous and I want to make sure he knows. I'm thrilled. I'm going to say Bob is great. So I it's just hard to do that without ever referencing Bob. >> Well, yeah. I mean, but I think we've taken care of that in nine. And yeah, we can we can tweak six. Absolutely. whatever you you you all want. But I would argue that, you know, if Bob, Mary, Kylie, whoever isn't performing or getting you what you need, ultimately it's Ed you're holding accountable for that. >> I had written >> I had written in as a suggestion just how does the city manager and his staff provide the elected officials with etc. If you think that's implied, we don't need it. But >> does a loner be a staff or something? Something but something to that effect that we're only talking about staff. Sorry. Something that indicates we're only talking about staff to the extent it's a city manager function that's being carried out or a service provided that he's in charge of. Correct. We're not allowed to go directly to them. Right. So, >> correct. But I I'll give you example because I commented on this publicly at the uh finance committee meeting. Um I stated that in the transportation department there is constant discussion about the fact that everything just takes too long under prior management and under this management and what can we do to speed it up and if that requires extra headcount then we need to know that. So, I was opening the door to say if there's, and I use the words critical, if there's a critical issue you can't get to because you don't have a staff person, then you should be telling the finance committee and then the council, I can't get it done, but I can with the staff person and then we'll make the call, but we shouldn't have to just put up with constantly slow uh deliverables. So, I would that that's another sort of example. So, we have consensus to add and his staff on that one. Okay. Uh, okay. So, we've got the two changes on that page. Anything else for those. All right. So, moving on to the attorney. Um, again, the red and strikeout are changes from last year. If anything pops out at you, obviously some tweaks just given that he's only halfway into his first year. >> Yeah, I thought they were fine, but I'm the only non- attorney on this panel. Would this be where where the mayor provided some already some thoughts earlier than I and I kind of weighed in with is that where this would go? >> Uh well those thoughts as I understood them would be in things we would ask him in his self evaluation to to be more detailed. Okay. >> These are the questions I would ask you to then >> write up the the consensus. Yeah, >> I I would suggest that we incorporate I think into item one I think is probably the best place issue spotting because we don't want just advice when people raise issues with us. We don't you know it's not just the quality of the analysis when it happens. It's the fact that you are watching what's going on in the city and you spot issues and you flag them and you raise them. So >> love that. Love it. So, well, how did how does that relate to number six? I think that was what we're trying to get at in number six, >> right? I think you were >> I see. But you're suggesting that item six might do that. >> Yeah. >> Um, so I would say I would say spot and anticipate because some are if you know something's coming on, you might anticipate that, oh, this person might have a problem with it. sometimes. Yeah. When when when just things come to council and you think so maybe just I think you're right, Dan, that that's a good that's very close to what I was saying. I would just want to say spot and anticipate issues. >> Other two okay with that? We can just add that in there. >> Okay, great. Uh anything else for the attorney? And moving on to the clerk. >> Hang on. I'm still I'm um You don't mind? I just want to check one more time. So, is there something to us about the city attorney's staff? And again, it's the same kind of, you know, different lawyers will show up at council and close sessions if there's an issue in their area expertise. That's great. Um, but I think in overall like our um our our issues explained to us during pub, you during meetings by the attorney and or staff because again, I I think that's a really important thing. Um, seven. >> Uh, >> no. >> Yeah, I think you want to be a little I mean, what you're getting at is a little broader. Uh, I don't see anything that's >> I think >> specifically about his staff. >> I think there's kind of two things that now that I'm thinking about it. Um there's support during public meetings because that's that's a tough one to do like legal analysis on the fly or you know answer our questions live um in in close session even. Um so I think especially for somebody who's new giving feedback on those two points um even a boy you know that that we're happy I think is is really meaningful at the the start. Um but then in addition um the and the staff piece would be just acknowledging the fact that when it comes to a specific uh expertise issue area expertise it is not always the city attorney but yet he's responsible for them and their performance. Um, I'm trying to see how did we word that for the city manager. I'm thinking if if we kind of modify number nine for the city manager which was kind of the feedback on his departments but you know basically for the operations of the staff or the staff attorneys >> um something like that >> something like that does that work >> yeah and and part of it is that I'm hoping that again being you know six nine months in it would be helpful to him to know that gosh Gosh, I'm going to make up stuff that we don't do. Gosh, the person that explains patent litigation is just not communicating to me in a way that's helpful, right? Like that he may not he I would want to know that if I was him managing it, but gee, the person who explains, you know, securities and emerges and acquisitions is fabulous. Um that would be interesting to me as a management, you know, as as managing that function because things that might be easy to take in and understand from his seat might be harder for counsel and that's part of his service delivery. So, um something that would elicit that might be helpful. >> Okay. So, we'll I think um I think it's probably cleanest if we add that as a freestanding additional question. So, we will do that. Uh okay, going once, going twice. Now, to Maha, uh the clerk's questions. Um there just a little bit of clean up here. wondering if we want a a a question that's a little since so much of the role is this kind of um kind of just the the help of managing of managing meetings and well there doesn't seem to be um a question kind of just focused on on some of those key responsibilities >> uh beyond what you've identified as her priorities. Um cuz like I see three is more how the clerk like on availability, responsiveness, communication. I feel like that's much more kind of our internal communications with the with the clerk's office. >> Uh well, we could beef up three to to specifically call out meeting management or or you know, meeting operations or organization and Maha may have some some thoughts on that. Um >> but what you know so I I will share my bias of this process having set on the other side of the table is you know trying really hard to have you focus on the high level kind of strategic priorities for that person. um you know we go through the process, we come up with their goals and priorities for the next year and then you hold them accountable for those specific hopefully relatively high level strategic things. Um so I'm always my bias is to not get too in the weeds but I don't disagree with your premise that meeting management is a kind of a critical portion of the of the job. So I think my suggestion would be to add it as kind of a parenthet part of that parenthetical there or >> maybe even under question four says the clerk's leadership and how she effectively meets the needs of council her team community and well I don't know like meeting management potentially or is it more so >> well I guess yeah I guess the question is is it more about how she supports you in your job or >> nice or effective. >> Yeah, three three is a little bit more specific about um providing the elected officials with the support needed to do your jobs and you know a well-run meeting is certainly a key part of that. >> I think it works well in three in the parenthesis. >> Hey Tim, >> okay so we'll just add in something about meeting management. Um what so one thing that I think I don't see reflected here that we talked a lot during the um recruiting process about um that I think is um a role that's in some ways different for the clerk's office than others is um the interaction with the public and the public facing role of the clerk's office. This is where they come to to get information and things. Um, I don't know that I have a ton of insight into that, but but since that's a part of the role, um, I don't really see us asking about um, you know, how how the the clerk interfaces with the public and represents us and that kind of thing. Um, >> I know you I know you care about that and I think that might be something good to elicit. >> We do have a guest speaker tonight that could maybe address that. Exactly. That's what I'm Yeah. >> And how big a part is that of the job and what is it? >> Um I mean I I do see that as a key I guess priority for my myself and my office. Not sure how how I would necessarily um report on that besides with city events or maybe other engagements that I'm invited to go to or my responsiveness to community members. I'm not sure exactly how I would um >> yeah that I I would argue that it's sort of alluded to in question four and maybe we can articulate it better but that's you know how is she doing meeting the needs of of you her department you know her leadership and the community so you know if she's not interacting well with the community I think this is where you would bring that up but we we might want to tweak the wording there. >> Yeah, I think you're right that it's um the same idea as what's called out in four. It's just I think it's the emphasis. I feel like it was emphasized so much more. I I maybe I'm just thinking back to the recruiting process and not just with you, but with the various candidates with what we put out that we supposedly wanted it feels like to have it one word out of nine questions feels disproportionate to what the emphasis that were in the hiring criteria. So it just because it it I hadn't really the reason it strikes me now is it hadn't really struck me before we did that and that was something we cared about and um so if we did and we still do just wanted to throw it in there or at least maybe lift it up a little more. So one idea maybe then would be to take out the an community in number four and add a new question is sort of what's your perception something along the lines of what's your perception of the clerk's effectiveness in interacting with the public and the community or something like that >> something like that and people may say I don't know and that's an okay answer for us but um I just think I don't know it just seems like something that we should talk about and if we want to know more and hear more then we should through this process, tell the clerk that next year we'd like to understand it. But I I it's just it's just something that feels like we had talked about and I'm not seeing. >> Yeah, >> I would appreciate hearing from the council on on that aspect of things because I do take that um part of my job seriously. So yeah, >> I'm happy having it magnified. I'm not sure it has to leave four there. You could just say her team and broader community interface or something like that. Yeah, I guess the only reason I'm suggesting maybe pulling it out is a it magnifies it, but b the the way for is worded now is kind of her leadership. Um, which I don't know in some ways to me is more kind of internal versus okay, how she interacts with the community. >> Um, but you whatever you all want, but my suggestion would be a new question that just says, you know, what's your perception of her effectiveness? It's because it's really more her effectiveness and responsiveness to the public and you know something like that. Does that work for you? >> Okay. You okay with that Vicki? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> The only thing I would add here is that um we just had in a couple other cases a discussion of the direct reports and we're not actually discussing that at all here. So, do we want to have that sort of built in? Um, because it's obviously so crucial to each one of these CEO jobs, >> especially if I might add, given that we are adding a new position that's reporting under myself, that that might be a topic that the council may want to weigh in on with a specific question. >> This a new council support position. >> Yes, it's a new pilot. >> I've heard something about that the last few years. >> Yes. Um, yes. Maybe we can >> revis. >> So maybe mirror what we come up with the attorney in terms of the performance of of your staff. Is that what we're getting at here? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. And I'm also thinking because um one of the things that the clerk's office has done is become fully staffed and that there are some new people and I think you know that perhaps feedback on that would be helpful. Um because Yeah. >> Okay. So, yeah, we'll parallel what we what we come up with for the attorney. Okay, great. Um then we can if you want move on. Um, oh, one one other suggestion that because Mahad in my opinion did a fabulous job and thoughtful job in her self-evaluation and that you then carried out into her formal evaluation on KPIs. In number two, we talk about, you know, she's going to report out or I'm going to ask about uh, you know, how she did in achieving her goals, but I'm wondering if we should call out KPIs in that question or is that maybe just too specific? I mean, she'll report out in her self-ealuation. So, I'm not sure now that I think about it that you all will have enough information to on the cuff of an interview to say how she did on her KPIs. So maybe we not do that. I'm just correcting myself. But either way, >> it's just >> has the committee talked about the KPIs yet or are we getting to that section? >> No, we we're getting to that. But this is just whether or not we call out in my interview questions of them how they think. We're going to, you know, I will ask how they think you did on your goals. >> Yeah. >> Which your goals were very specific and included detailed KPIs, >> but as I think about it, when I'm sitting one-on-one in the middle of summer, they're probably not going to be in a position until well, they will have read your self-evaluation that >> so I don't think it's a big deal either way. It's not worth losing sleep on. We'll just leave it the way it is. Okay. So that then takes us to the next agenda item, which is KPIs. >> Um, and this is really just kind of a clarification. You know, this was a pretty big issue maybe two years ago, and we've kind of tweaked it and fine-tuned it each year and every year. It's still a little bit uh not awkward, but not super smooth. and the city manager has some, you know, opinions on how and when and what KPIs should be. So, yeah, I think it would just be good if we all go into the process with clear eyes on a do you want them do you want to have KPIs at the end of the process, in which case we would ask them to draft some thoughts about them in their self-evaluation that you could then react to. But if the KPIs haven't been helpful or effective or meaningful to you, do we want to keep doing that? >> I just wanted to take a um moment for a time check because I believe Mayor Vinker may have a hard stop today. >> I have to be in Sunnyale at a meeting pretty soon, so I'll I can stay another few minutes. But are is this the last item? I mean, because it looks like I think I looked through that bullet point list. I think we pretty much covered the others. >> Yeah, we need I think the attorney we're in good shape. The auditor, we just need to confirm that we're not going to do her if if you're in agreement on that. Um but other than that, yeah, we're in good shape. So, yeah, KPIs and we don't have to change anything. I just want to make sure we're kind of explicit going in what the expectations so they know what the expectations of them are. My recollection for the city manager last year, the way it was left was um in your annual goal setting in January, he would come forward with KPIs related to the council adopted goals. So that's all I know. I don't know if that happened or not. >> I don't think it did happen. Did Did we have I'm sorry. I don't know this. Did we have them for you? We said >> she said something said >> or for your KPIs. >> Yeah. Yeah. The the clerk was very obviously Molly didn't do anything because she was leaving. Um and the the auditor hers are in her plan adopted plan. So Maha had some very detailed KPIs. I I don't recall that they were even changed at all. may be tweaked a little bit, but >> okay. So, we have them for the uh the city clerk. That's great. I I I remember now because the awkwardness with the city manager is that the uh city priorities, which should be his as well, are off cycle with the reviews, right? Isn't that because we do a calendar year of city priorities and he's on fiscal year for review essentially? >> Yes. I mean, that's I think that's the gist of it. when you adopt your priorities in January. I'm not clear on this step of it. Like when we did our council priorities, they would be for the next fiscal year. So I don't know when you adopt your priorities in January, are they effective immediately? Um so the fiscal year that he's working on now was two different calendar years. The evaluation that had his goals for last year, you know, was based on what you knew then. Yeah, >> I might suggest though that I mean I hadn't been very focused on KPIs previously, but the more I think about it, I I think it it would be good. And I think they have to be somewhat I mean certainly informed by and consistent with but separate than the priorities because of this weird timing thing. Um or you know perhaps there's a mid-year adjustment to them or something. So in other words, I would love to see as part of this review process that some KPIs be set for the following fiscal year. Um certainly informed by our current priorities, but there's also like just management and administrative things that should be there regardless. Um and um you know, police, fire, utilities, there's there's just a lot of stuff that's just going to happen. Um and we we we acknowledge that this year with our priority setting. we finally got back to what do we want to do this year understanding that there's still big goals and and bodies of work that are going to and must be moved along. Um so it would be interesting I think to see some set for the next fiscal year and then if needed following the 27 council priority setting we would welcome tweaking them in some sort of process. >> Yes. as as my bogggginess of this process un unwinds and and Sandra and Maha may remember better my recollection as part of Ed's concern or premise was you adopt this list of you know these council goals all of which have milestones and metrics and things that generally are measurable on them and that those should therefore essentially be his KPIs versus something that's done in this close session kind of confidential process. Um >> that got all convoluted because we told him that those are I used the word a bunch of objectives that are important and we're going to strive for them. And then this year we changed it even more because we're not using those objectives as goals for the year. We have very actually quite specific ones like Cubberly as you mentioned in one of your speeches. >> Yes. >> Recently and so on. So that wouldn't even be maybe too huge for him. I don't know. >> I it it's it's um and it's certainly not comprehensive what we're doing now. >> So in other words, he could hit it out of the park with our council priorities and drop the ball on being city manager. >> Exactly. because we don't touch much probably most of what does happens in this building with with our priorities because they're because that's what they are. They're not how you run a city. They're what we really want to make sure doesn't slip to next year. >> It's an annual priority is the new focus there. So >> yeah, we we've kind of tweaked that a little bit. And now that said, I would expect the city manager to also prioritize what we have said as as city prioritize priorities, but like there's no climate thing in there. There's not really a public safety thing in there. We sure as heck have to do those things and I would hope he would help oversee them to be done well. >> Yeah. I mean, obviously, he's responsible for the gamut of everything that happens. I think you know and when we go through this process the end of the day you come up with three to seven you know kind of priorities for the next fiscal year for him to report out. That doesn't mean he's still not responsible for doing everything in the organization but you've given him the things you want particular focus on. And so you know remember at the end of his evaluation is your priority and and you know he makes suggestions you tweak them and then it's adopted and I don't have them in front of me right now but um >> that's a good way of putting it because that matches with what we're doing. >> Yeah. So, so for example, and maybe it's I'm not understanding what KPIs are, but um I would think um like I think one of the things we've emphasized is um vacancy rates, right? That's across the city. That's not that's not like Cubberly, right? So, it's not a project. It's more how you're managing this business this this, you know, city as a business. Um, I would think that, you know, if we wanted to say improving vacancy rates or balancing the budget or you know, fiscal something, those are those are those are different than saying we need for you to close the negotiations with X or or get a capital project done. You see what I mean? Like as opposed to just a project, it's more of a how you manage. And are those not KPIs? Well, so I think we are mixing our termin or yeah, our understandings of the terminology. So, you know, again, he'll have three to five or however number actual goals. And I believe Cubberly might have been one of them for this year. But, um, you know, so make progress, close the deal, whatever it is on Cubberly, and he'll report out on that. He did that for all those things. But the but the KPI is and the intent behind them a few years ago when this conversation got started was specific measurable things. So it's not just you know we're doing a great job on Cubberly. It's like you know and I'm making this up of course but you know by X date we will have a ballot measure done. we will have you know I mean think they have to be things within his control right it's not the voters will approve because that's not his control but specific in the intent of a KPI and this comes from you know the business folks on the council who wanted measurable indicators of success so you you would take your goal which is fairly broad and then say okay how are we going to break that down into something that we can quantify and that may or may that's why I'm raising this subject is is that next step of specific quantifiable metrics important to this process or not? >> And I think I was asking the question about and giving examples of KPIs that might differ somewhat from the council priorities to show that there could be some value in setting them for a fiscal year that they don't have to tie 100% to that year's priority. They they might, but they don't. Like, in other words, reducing a vacancy rate or something could be something we we we see as more in his Bailey wick and we want him to do, but it ties into perhaps our um government efficiency goal. Um so, it's under our broad priority, but for him, it's a measurable thing. Um >> yeah, I mean I think if if reducing vacancy rates was one of his, you know, identified priorities for the year that you gave him, then it would be very appropriate. I mean, frankly, whether you gave him a specific KPI or not, my guess is he would report out this is how we, you know, numerically this is how we did on that. But not all goals always line up super well with a quantifiable thing. Um, so that's part of it too. But again, I think kind of the bigger question is do you want to ask them to draft and do is the assumption that you want measurable things through this process. Now after you know they do their self-ealuation after I write up the report. you know, and you decide what the priorities are. It may be like of these five priorities, really only these two we're going to do something measurable on. And that's fine. You don't, you know, I don't think you want to force a KPI if it doesn't make sense or isn't appropriate. But you could also say, you know what, we're going to let him give us a a narrative or them, not just him, you know, a narrative description of how they did versus a very descriptive or prescriptive you know, metric. >> You could ask the council members when you interview them if they think that we should have metrics as a guideline or we could just say each CEO can be different based on mutual uh decision like it worked for Megan and that worked for us too. Maybe it doesn't work for the city attorney. So, >> I agree. I I I think that there are some things that are very important that are very hard to quantify. And I'm okay if we had a mix if that's where we came down to. But as I'm thinking through this in terms of the timing disconnect, maybe this is just kind of a catch-up year. Maybe we try to work through this process. Although it is awkward because you don't end it till September. So then you only have a stub year, right? there's always going to be a timing disconnect to some extent. Um >> if it were half a year, like you could say, "All right, so here here we could for right now say here are the KPIs that we would like by the end of the year and and they're informed by the council priorities then in January when the council priorities are set, which although >> honestly that doesn't happen until a couple months later because we start them at our retreat and we don't usually pass them until a couple months later. So say March. Um and then as part of that we could tweak the um the uh sorry the the KPIs for the city manager and then those would be part of the evaluation process and could take us through to the next cycle. So it wouldn't it's almost like we need one catchup year somehow. >> Yeah. Where are we this year? Because I didn't know that he was supposed to come back in January. Was that a decision out of this committee last year? I should talk about an open session what was in his confidential performance evaluation. Um, >> but did he have an assignment of coming back with KPIs in January of 26? >> I I'd have to go back and look and and maybe you and I can talk offline. >> Sure. But my recollection was you there were no specific KPIs in his adopted performance evaluation and the thought was that after council adopted his goals um some could be developed >> or not his goals the council adopted the council priorities. Um my suggestion and we can have that conversation offline but my suggestion is maybe we um are more fluid and we ask them in their self-evaluations you know okay they're going to identify what they think should be their priorities for the next year. We can ask them to selfidentify as appropriate for those priorities. What would be some measurable things for them and they may say, you know, no on these two and yes on these three or whatever. And then when we're in the close session and reviewing um you know, you'll have their self-evaluation and you'll have my summary report. um we can decide collectively and in conversation with them, you know, whether or not c specific KPIs are appropriate for whatever you decide the goals are. But at this point, we would ask them to at least still be thinking about it and propose what they think might be appropriate. >> Okay. >> Does that work? >> Yep. >> I like that. Um I I I think that it lets us ease into it. it gets input from the CAOs as well as from council. And I would just add the uh preface to your question to them of in light of council's priorities. What KPIs do you think would be appropriate for your role? And it doesn't have to be limited to that, but it can be informed by that. >> That could vary as that could vary as well. You know, I mean, Cubberly because we're talking about that that it may be that Maha's life looks the same >> whether or not Cubberly has worked on this year or next year or never because of the underlying stuff that she does. >> 100%. Yeah, >> it could be. It could it can that's why it might not affect certain CEOs or affect them in different ways, >> but but it's informed by them because you can look and say, "Well, that doesn't really affect me." But, um, that way at least we're synced up to the extent we should be. And then as Dan says, through his process talking to us and then us talking together and us talking with the CEO, hopefully we could come out the other end with some that make sense and at least try it. At least get it going. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> We'll give it a shot, see how it goes. >> And the the working assumption on the consent calendar is the 8th, you said. Um, yes, that's the date we can uh work on the staff report to get it onto the council agenda, but we will need a recommendation uh from the committee for >> to do it that day. >> Um, >> well, not that day, just to do it. >> Well, you have to provide a recommendation to council >> on this report >> on this report, right? on the timeline uh the amendments to >> Yeah, let's let's go ahead and formalize that with a motion. >> Someone want to move recommendation? >> Yeah. And it can be just as modified by the comments made in this meeting and I'll I'll clean it up. I'll run it by you um Chair Lowing um before we submit it for uh the council report. Yeah. >> All right. I'll move that the um CAO committee recommends to council the um CAO evaluation schedule uh in the packet and the uh questions as modified during this discussion today. >> Second. >> Perfect. >> Mayor Vinker. Yes. >> Chair Lowing. >> Yes. Vice Mayor Stone. >> Yes. >> Motion carries unanimously. >> Okay, great. >> Thank you. >> Dan, anything else? >> No, we are good. I will uh I'll get in touch with you on the cleanup of this and then Sandra will get a report to you for the 8th and then I won't see you again until interviews in July. >> You can always stop by if you want. >> You may, you know, may see you walking around the neighborhood, but >> Okay. Thank you. We are adjourned.

Good morning everyone. Welcome to the May 7th, 2026 Palato Architectural Review Board meeting. Can we have a roll call, please? >> Yes. >> Uh, Chair Chen, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Adcock, >> present. >> Board member Hirsch, >> Board member Jojart. Board member Rosenberg >> present. >> For the record, we have quorum and noting board member Jojart is the absent. >> Thank you. Next is agenda changes, additions, and deletions. Do we have any? >> None today. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. And next is public comments. This is the time for anyone who want to speak an item that is not on the agenda. If you want to speak an item that is on the agenda, you will have it later this morning. And please note we we made some change this time. So this time is only open to people who are in the chamber that you can speak for virtual uh public comments. You will have time later this morning. Thank you. Do we have any public comments at this time? >> Um through the chair I've not received any public comment cards uh at the moment uh for inerson public comment. >> Okay. Thank you. So next I will hand it over to Claire for city official report. >> Thank you Claire Rayold manager of current planning. Give me one moment this up. Oops. Good morning board members. Um stepping in for Stephen today as the liaison. Uh just a couple of quick updates. Uh so the um items uh that have come before the ARB that are coming up to council soon include uh the 7 3781 El Camino Rial, a builder's remedy project scheduled for uh next Monday, May 11th. Um and on May 18th, we currently have scheduled the Coverly Community Center and uh the retail ordinance. Uh upcoming ARB meeting, we are planning for the 375 Hamilton parking garage as well as the 788 San Antonio um reszoning project and uh meeting schedule. Um forgot to note today that uh board member uh Joe Garth is uh absent. Um and just noting again that we will be cancelling the 618 hearing as we don't have a quorum. Uh please let us know if there are any uh dates that you'll be uh planning to miss so we can ensure we have a quorum for any other um dates. And with that I'll turn it back to you. >> Thank you. Do we have any questions at this moment? If no, we will move on. Do you have a question? >> So, uh, in the agenda, we for next meeting, we did have the vice chair and vice chair elections. That's still happening next time. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, we do have the chair and vice chair elections. Yes. Thank you. >> Okay. So if no more no additional questions we will move on to our first action item which is public hearing quasa judicial 450 lit avenue request for a streamline housing development review to allow the construction of a sixstory >> sorry uh approximately six uh 76,400 square foot multif family project consisting of 72 residential dwelling units on a 0.43 acre parcel. The project is 100% affordable housing and accordingly requests concessions and waiverss persuade to a state density bonus law. The city is evaluating illegibility for the for an exemption persuade to AB 130. With that, can we have the staff report, please? Good morning board members. Um my name is Nashida Kandikupa. I'm the project planner for the 450 Littton Avenue project also referred to as LT affordable housing project. Um during this presentation I will introduce the project um discuss the project scope uh the applicable local and state codes and any requested deviations that the applicant is requesting under state density bonus law. The applicant has prepared a presentation and will discuss um the design intended approach. Next slide. The project site is located in the downtown north neighborhood of Paul Alto uh one block west of the University Avenue um strip. The sit the site is zoned as a public facility or PF district and is currently a surface parking lot with uh 52 uh parking spaces for permit holders and visitors. The adjacent uses are primarily commercial um with the exception of a multifamily building um diagonally across the street. The project is also adjacent to a category 3 historic structure located at 430 Kipling Street. Next slide. Since the LTI affordable housing project is a publicly funded project, um the project was discussed with city council at several occasions previously. The site was first introduced to city council in January of 2025 um and identified as a viable location to develop an affordable housing project consistent with housing element program 1.4 which plans for the redevelopment of surface parking lots um in the downtown Paul Walto area. In June 2025, uh the city formalized partnership with Alta Housing to develop the project and Alta in conjunction with Py Talk Architecture um presented a preliminary rendition of the plans to city council in October of 2025. The revised plans were formally submitted for staff review um in late January of 2026, which brings us to today at the ARB study session. The application is also anticipated to be heard by city council in August 2026. Next slide. A quick overview of the project scope. The project seeks to redevelop a city parking lot um consisting of 52 parking spaces into a six-story multifamily building for um with 71 units for rent um at affordable housing units and one manager unit for a total of 72 residential units. Although the project is proposing to build at zero lot line, the massing along the rear and the right, which is the two interior property lines, um has been accommodated to have um building facade variations to support light and air conditions for the residents or the units that are facing those sides. The proposed building height as measured to the top of the roof is 62 ft. Um and as measured the top of the parapit will be 66.5 ft. No private open space is required within the public facilities districts and none has been proposed. Um but a large common open space is proposed um which could be accessed for residents from level two. Um and it's oriented towards the right interior property line. Next slide. Here um the slide shows the unit and affordability mix of the proposed project. Uh the project plans for four studio units, 28 one-bedroom units, uh 22-bedroom units, one of which will be the manager's unit and 23-bedroom units for a total of 72 units. The units will be restricted to households making no more than 60% of the area median income with further breakdown for extremely low and very low-income households as shown here. Next slide. I've also included a site plan here um with the red arrow indicating the primary entrance into the building on Linton Avenue. The project proposes to add street trees along both Kipling um as well as Littton um and also will accommodate for uh visitor bike spaces in the public rideway. Next slide. On level one or the podium level um will be the entry lobby, the mail room, property management office, bike storage room, electrical and mechanical rooms and the refuse area. Level one also includes a parking garage for um residents with total of 34 spaces inclusive of compact and ADA spaces. These spaces will either have EV chargers installed at the time of um you know proposal or will be EV ready for future EV charger installation. Next slide. Levels 2 through six consist of the 72 residential units along with amenity spaces including community meeting rooms, service offices and laundry rooms. Specifically on level two, there is a common open space proposed in the form um which is enclosed on three sides and is open to the sky. Next slide. Um here's a quick glance at level three. Next slide, level four. Next slide. Level five and level six. um where the red arrow is denoted um with the roof access hatch. The roof access hatch is also shown on the roof plan um along with placeholders for solar panels and rooftop mechanical equipment uh which will be proposed at the time of building permits. Next slide. Um this is the street view of the proposed project um as seen from Linton Avenue um with Kipling um street to the left and the 7-Eleven or the commercial property to the right. Um the proposed street trees are depicted in gray. Next slide. And this is the street view um as looking from Kipling Street with Linton Avenue to the right and the category 3 historic structure at 430 Kipling located to the left. This applicant has also pro has also provided a rendering um to better envision the building in context with the surrounding neighborhood. Next slide. Um some key considerations um for the ARB um include that the project may not be denied based on inconsistency with the zoning ordinance um objective standards which the project is utilizing um or the comprehensive plan land use designation. Under state density bonus law, um the city will not impose any maximum density on projects located within half mile of a major transit stop. Um since the project is located within half mile of the Palo Alto Cal Train station um and is 100 100% affordable housing project um it is utilizing the affordmentioned density bonus clause. Um whereas the wherein the applicant can request up to five concessions and or incentives and once these are exhausted the additional waivers may be requested um and reviewed by staff. Um and the list of these waivers um or concessions has been listed in the staff report. Next slide. Um lastly the sequest status. Um the city is evaluating the project's eligibility for u processing this project in accordance with AB130 which exempts infill housing projects meeting certain criteria from SQA and also sets uh six strict timelines for city review and decision. Staff is consulting with um Tamian Nation in according with tribal consultation periods provided under AB130. Next slide. Um staff requests ARB to conduct a study session to provide feedback and discuss any adjustments to the application such that it would better comply with the city's objective standards um and pursuant to streamline review for housing projects. Thank you for your time. >> All right. Thank you very much. So before uh uh before the applicant presentation if we have any questions to the staff they say the time. Do we have any questions to the staff at this moment? >> Um just one question. You mentioned you know there this has to be reviewed at a um kind of a faster timeline. What is there months in that um like what's the timeline for uh approval of this project? >> The uh review timeline is contingent upon AB130 when the final consultation is completed. Um so at this time there's no final date when the decision has to be made. Um but that will be determined soon. >> Sorry, just to note it's final consult consultation as well as um being deemed complete as well. Um yeah, >> so this is not complete yet. Is that correct? >> Uh and generally we under AB130 um we basically have 60 days um from the date that those occur. Um, and one 90-day extension at maximum could be requested. We are hoping to move this project forward to council by August though. >> I have a question. uh there some of the letters that we've received have mentioned uh the conflict between it being a parking lot at present and that there are some requirements in the city that have been stated I don't know if they are important or not but for um the parking lot project which is sort of tied to this one is that a correct analysis Sorry, I'm not I'm not entirely sure I understand your question. >> Okay, I'll repeat it and expand on it. Mhm. Is it correct that the it is tied in some way to the parking lot that's on Hamilton that is intended to replace as well the part number of parking spaces that are presently on this lot? >> The parking spaces that are currently on this site are intended to be replaced at that lot D parking garage. And Kyle, maybe you could I don't know if you want to expand on that at all. >> Um, >> no, that's correct. Uh, the the idea is under the housing element program 1.4, uh, when we when the city redevelops any surface parking lots, uh, it >> it will have to replace it somewhere. it will need to replace any parking that is eliminated. And so the idea here uh was to uh replace those parking lots with the proposed garage at uh Waverly and Hamilton. >> Is there any legal connection there between those two projects or can it be done in any time frame that the council decides on >> uh the the new parking facility? There is there is no legal connection. This is a this is a a a housing element program that we are trying to implement. >> And so um you know while we are meeting that housing element program there are no you know hard and fast timelines or sequencing. Um I I do know as a practical matter that the lot D garage uh has been before you all for a major architectural review for one round of comments. receive another round of comments. Uh, and the, uh, city council does have that garage as part of its, uh, capital improvement, uh, proposed capital improvement budget for, uh, this year or next year. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> And their funds are are there somehow for that in case that question comes up. >> Uh, the there is >> funds for the for the garage. >> Yes. So there will be a combination of funding sources used for that project. Um and uh but as as currently budgeted, yes, there there will be funds. >> Thank you. >> Just to clarify on that, so is it required that the garage is constructed and completed before this these parking spaces are displaced? >> There's no sequencing requirement in the housing element. Um I think just as a practical matter uh we are trying to uh expedite the garage or expedite probably not the right word but we are trying to ensure that any disruption in the parking inventory is uh minimized by uh by constructing that garage. um at least as close to the same time that we would construct or the the city would construct the um proposed project at LTI. But there is no nothing in the housing element imposes a specific uh timing deadline as as to the construction of of the replacement parking. >> Any additional questions? If no, we will move on to the applicant presentation. To the applicant, you will have 10 minutes and please state and spell your name for the record. Thank you. >> Good morning, members of the board. Uh my name is Carlos Castanos. I'm vice president of real estate development at Alta Housing and I'm joined here uh with uh by Adrien Stikkin from Pay Talk Architects and we will be presenting to you um the proposal. We're excited to present to you the proposal uh that we have here. Um just real brief background, Alta Housing has been in um a affordable housing developer for 56 years based here in Palo Alto. Uh we have I believe 24 uh other housing communities in the in the city limits and um this is a great opportunity for us to move uh to to continue building into the downtown. Can we go to the next slide please? Thank you. Uh just to give you context, um I know you've already seen the aerial plan, but I just wanted to put in context to our portfolio that uh we have uh additionally 200 other uh residents or um um have apartments in the neighborhood here within 11 block radius. And so this is a great addition to to the housing that we already have um providing affordable housing within the downtown area here. Uh next slide. Uh on this slide again this you've you may have seen this slide previously for our our context on this one is that we we see this as a great opportunity to uh have a very efficient uh cost-effective development on a very nice rectangular site and uh we had this great opportunity to partner with the city on on making this uh possibility. Next slide. Yeah. And here's just some context photos of of the area just uh you know showing us how how the current situation is. Any next slide. And um what I again as we mentioned as the staff mentioned this is 100% affordable and we're looking really at targeting uh families here. um looking at um uh half of the units at least are going to be either two bedrooms or three-bedroom units and um really looking at opportunities to to build opportunity to have opportunities for the for workforce and for u residents who already live in in Palo Alto to be able to stay and in Palo Alto. And um we are also uh like I said the partnership with the city provides a great opportunity for us to to uh maximize um the development opportunities and to minimize the the the constructibility and costs associated with the with the development. We're trying to really control costs right now. our financing um situation. Uh uh really actually having a city-owned site where we could lease our the property and build on it really makes uh for a very um uh um s the financing would be very um have have a good opportunity to get financed there. Um next slide please. And just quickly going over before I turn it over to Adrian, uh our our site what we're looking at as as staff mentioned is a six-story development. And um that is a decision that that we did a lot of analysis with staff and city u u encouraging to see how high we could go. Uh we we we did uh look at at higher densities and then realized and came to a conclusion that that having the six-story development uh really maximizes the financing opportunities that we have out there. There's almost like a a tipping point after when you get taller than this. And so we felt that we were we were very much maximizing the opportunity that we have here getting 72 units almost at about 150 units an acre on this site. Uh and um we are parking almost at about half a parking space per unit here too. And um really I think at this point I'll I'll turn it over to the next next slide. I'll turn it over to um Adrien to continue talking about the the design. >> Good morning. Adrien Styen Pychek Architects. Um you could go to the next slide. What we're we started with is extruding the the site boundaries. Um next slide. and then starting to carve away. We've we worked with um staff and council on orientation of the open space. So, we've carved uh at the interior rear of this or side of the site depending on how you want to look at it. Uh next slide. Uh and then further uh refining the massing to allow for light and air at units to shape and make sure that this is an attractive building from all sides. um that there is opportunities for fenestration on on every frontage. Uh next slide. Uh and then making sure that there are pockets for landscaping and improving the public realm along the ground floor on both Littton and Kipling. Next slide. Uh and so you can go on to the next slide. Um we've shared these exonometric renderings uh both looking south and showing the building in its context of of downtown. Next slide. Um as well as looking northeast um away from the Cal Train and showing some of the taller buildings that are away from from Cal Train and showing it in the context of those structures. Next slide. So ground floor which you've seen 34 parking spaces uh 72 bicycle spaces the residential lobby entry on uh liten um with residential management offices and uh associated building services spaces required for the operation of the building like me uh mechanical electrical uh etc. Uh there's a significant carveout on the ground floor for a site transformer. Um and that we are using as part of the massing strategy to reduce the volumes. Um so taking advantage of that uh desire from the city uh and using it to our advantage to create some massing breaks in the in the facade. Uh next slide. Um, you can see the very simple she C-shape uh podium courtyard with uh community room uh and community resident community kitchen. Um some service offices all sort of associated with that ground uh second floor podium landscape area. Uh there's also a laundry room on this floor. You can go on to the next slide. Um actually go back one the the other uh spaces where we have carved the building to create light and air opportunities those are being used for um storm water management planters. Um so where we're not creating outdoor uh habitable space we we are using it for storm water management. Uh next slide. Um and so the building repeats on uh the floors above the carveout for the transformer um created the studio unit. Um the stair on Linton actually goes all the way to the roof um and has a stair penthouse on the roof. The stair on Kipling is the one with the roof hatch. I can keep going. So you see there the roof hatch um for the stair to Kipling and the stair to Linton coming to the roof and that's been done in coordination with with city departments. Uh next slide. Uh street landscape. You can see some of in the pockets and the recesses. We're doing what we can to maximize and balance parking but also make sure that we're making an inviting streetscape for pedestrians. um and treating all of our on-site and off-site uh storm water management um in in the right of way or on-site as appropriate. Continue uh some examples of the street landscape items um uh public uh bench seating uh planters uh some special paving at the front door, storm water management, uh public bike parking. Next, uh again on the courtyard, a trellis, some screening trees, um some children's play areas appropriate for family affordable housing, uh some benches and lounge lounge seating. Um we'll of course do um bay friendly landscaping and um low water use plantings and then as I mentioned in the setbacks, the bio retention planners um taking water from the roof. Next slide. Uh some examples of those landscape elements um a play structure uh seating uh trellis spaces and of course paving paved areas. Next uh some perspective renderings from the street level uh the intersection of Kipling and Littton. We have um really tried to emphasize the the front door of the building on uh Littton without making a big sign about it. Um there is a raised twotory um stonelike facade material that is um adding emphasis to the corner and then we're dropping that down as we move away from the corner and into the other massing elements. Next slide. And those are further trimmed with um uh cornises to to break down the massing and create a base metal top in the facade in the fenestration. Uh next slide. Uh here a closeup of the perspective rendering on uh for the main entry. And you can move on to the next slide. I see that I'm over time. Um go ahead to the next slide. a view uh at lit at night uh from that same intersection. That might be our last slide. Next. Nope. A night rendering of the entry. Next, uh materials, building materials called out um provided for you. I'm happy to answer any questions. Again, um and more detailed views of the renderings of the elevations, and you can continue on. Uh so breaking it down into multiple masses along the longest facade, making sure that we have fenestration on the interior lot lines um where possible. And next and that's it. Thank you. Thank you very much for presentation. So before the board have questions to the applicant, we will uh hand it over to the public comments. And do we have any do we have material boards here? Is it over there? Thank you. Uh do we have any public comments at this moment? >> Um yes through the chair we have um three public comments. Um I will start with our first public comment. Um one in person and two on Zoom. Our first public commenter is Herb B followed by Echol. So I'll invite Herb to the mic. >> Okay. Thank you. You will have three minute and please state and spell your name for the record. Thank you. >> My name is spelled the same way it is on the card. I submitted Herb Borak HB B O R O C K uh uh Cherinian board members uh when when the ARB was uh created to uh replace a a staff committee that that had in the past done design over 50 years ago. Uh it became involved in the public process including the environmental review process. And so while you would like to have your meetings you limited to the design issues uh if the environmental issues have not been addressed uh it's important to bring those to your attention. I appreciate the comments from uh board member Harrison and Cher Chen relating to the financial and timing respects of the replacement of the 52 public parking spaces that are uh being removed. uh but that doesn't address the environmental issues which are that uh the two parking uh projects are segments of a single environmental project and each segment cannot be analyzed separately for environmental review which means uh that you can't look at this project solely under AB130 you have to look at the combination of removing the 52 public parking spaces from here and replacing them uh at the uh garage at 375 Hamilton Avenue across the street from the Hamilton Avenue post office. Uh depending upon where uh you know the other project is an environmental review, it may may lead to me having to then consider those are financial and timing issues. But to the extent that uh I know the environmental uh document hasn't been prepared yet here uh they do need to be uh considered as a single project for for California Environmental Quality Act. Also uh the parking lot that's there now replaced on Linton Avenue with two structures. There was on the corner of Linton Kipling, I believe, a resale shop and next to it um a uh known as the Palata Peace Center which had a variety of uses and there's already a history with with the Fry site of memorializing a historic situation even though there's been an intervening use. Uh it was originally for the concerned citizens against the Vietnam War. Uh the uh the resistance draft resistance also moved there. the Palo Alto Tenants Union and their food conspiracy that bought food you collectively in San Francisco markets uh and uh the US China people's friendship association was housed there uh and after the project was approved and prop 13 came along it was the site of the initiative campaign for rent relief to get on the ballot an initiative petition uh to get the promises made in Prop 13 for residents. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Christopher B. Christopher, you may now speak. >> Uh, can you hear me? >> Yes, we can hear you. >> Awesome. Okie dokie. Um, I want to say a lot of things and I don't have a lot of time, so I may not be as eloquent as usual, but I was looking at this project quite a bit. Obviously, I care a lot about Palo Alto and um, boy, there's just no setbacks. I mean, you guys are just want to push this right up to the edge of the street. And um you know, I've been observing this sort of uh development in downtown Redwood City and I can't believe how much worse it is. I mean, it just creates such a claustrophobic effect compared to having nice open places. And it's very important to have an interactable streetscape, especially with a large building in a walkable neighborhood like PaloAlto. So, I really don't like that you've pushed this out to the edge here. The building should be set back and there should be plants on both sides of the sidewalk. You've provided minimal on your side, which is just pretty offensive. Honestly, it's very unhealthy to live in a urban environment. You cannot really breathe very well out here with all the pollution and you absolutely need to have more plants. So, this has got to be pushed back and you know, if you got to put an extra story or whatever on top of that, that's okay. I'm wondering if the courtyard is interactable by the public, that would make this a lot uh more of an asset to the citizens of PaloAlto. But I couldn't really tell from the uh stuff I was looking at today. Um I feel compelled to speak out. Um I hear a lot of this um we're going to build affordable housing. It's going to be cheaper. But um affordable housing is subsidized housing which means that this project will raise the rents of every project around it even more than all all projects do that but subsidized projects will do that even more. So in the effort to lower housing prices this will not help. Um, but I should also say because I've been hearing a lot of hysteria, building houses in PaloAlto will not lower the price of housing. Housing is a global commodity. There are about 2 billion houses in the world. So, you would have to build, you know, a 100 million, 200 million homes to significantly uh put a dent in the price. I'm running out of time here. So, thank you for listening. >> Our next speaker is Echo L. Echo, you may now speak. >> Oh, hi everyone. Um I think uh with respect to the proposed San Antonio resoning, has the city and the school district completed a you know comprehensive assessment of the potential impact on public school cap uh cap capacity within the affected attendance area. So specifically, could the increased uh residential density result uh from the resoning create enrollment overflow pressures at the school? Um especially for the middle or high schools and if so uh what sort of mitigation measures are being planned to address potential over uh crowding, you know, CL size increase or boundary adjustments? Um yeah, thank you. Our next speaker is Jeremy L. Jeremy, you may now speak. >> Hey, good morning uh ARB. Uh really lovely conversation presentation from staff. Uh I'm Jeremy Lavine speaking on behalf of Palo Alto Forward. We are committed to promoting housing affordability and multimmobility transit options in PaloAlto and we're really excited about this project. We think it would be a lovely addition to our downtown. It's designed really thoughtfully. Uh we're hopeful that the ARB will provide its architectural insights and urge this project to move forward just as the council did unanimously when they last discussed it. So, thank you all for your time. I'm looking forward to your discussion. And uh through the chair that concludes public comment on this item. >> Thank you. Thank you all for your comments. So we will back to the applicant. You will have 15 minutes to rebuttal uh if you want to respond to any public comments at this time. You don't have to if Okay. Okay. So we will turn we will close the public portion for this project and we will turn it back to the board. Do we have any uh questions to the applicant who want to start? >> Sorry, the applicant does have an opportunity to respond to public comment and rebuttal if they would like. >> Oh. Oh, I'm sorry. I missed that. I'm sorry. >> And they declined. >> So, uh >> I I had one question. >> Yeah. Uh just sort of for clarity sake, you're you're going to be leasing the project uh the property then, huh? Uh out of curiosity, uh what's the term of that kind of lease? >> Uh we are right now working with city staff on on the terms, but usually it's a very nominal ground lease, annual ground lease, and it's usually the term would be uh hopefully close to 99 years. So, it's it's a very long-term grounds with the building's going to be there for a long time. So, we're trying to keep it a long-term lease. Yeah. >> Thanks. >> I have a question a couple of questions regarding um I guess set back and exteriors. Um so, um as one of the public commenters also mentioned, it is right up to the lot lines. Um I guess two questions. One is especially on the south and east side where it's right up against adjacent properties. Um one is if either one of the one is a historic building uh I forget if it's eligible or listed and the other is not if say five, six, eight story building came next door. How does that impact the residents of this in terms of daylight um livability? Yeah, the um south interior property line to the 7-Eleven. Um we did study actually an orientation of the building that opened the courtyard north um with staff and uh that study reduced the quantity of units because in order to provide adequate uh separation of the building and provide sufficient daylight and access to air, we really need to set back at least 10 ft. and we are right around 10 ft for um the units that do face that interior property line to the south. Those units do orient actually towards the courtyard and so those are secondary windows to that unit um on both sides actually of the courtyard. The units that are most impacted by future development are the ones on the east interior property line. Um we did provide about an 11 foot um setback for those units to provide adequate light and air and separation to the interior property line. It also provides some relief for light and air to the adjacent structure by setting that building back. Um, so that's what we've been able to do to sort of maintain a usable uh and adequate courtyard, but also make sure that we're providing some variation in facade and make sure that we give light and air to um the residents in this particular project. Hopefully that answers your question. >> Um, yeah. So, is that also true for the unit that's on the south east? Because that's the three-bedroom unit. Yeah, that's it's really the only unit that faces directly south and it is set back um at least 10 ft from the property line. >> So, what is that dimension from the south property line to that? Um >> I think it's 10. It might be as much as 11, but it's not more than that. >> Looks like 9 something in the >> It's probably 9 ft to the inside of the wall, but 10 plus to the property line itself. inside of the wall of the podium. >> I see. Um so related to that um and so that side is 9 ft. I think the need my glasses. The um west side is less than that. I think it's like eight something. Um so are those windows operable? Um or do they need to be fire rated windows? >> They're allowed to be operable when the separation distance is over 5T. Um, so we we have less we can provide less openings 5T to 10 ft, but we can still provide openable windows and they do not have to be fire rated at that distance. >> So are these are >> and they are planned to be openable and not fire rated. >> Okay, that's it for right now. >> And uh thanks to board member Adcock. I was jumping and uh asking her questions on the side cuz I had similar questions to her. >> Um I'd like to talk a little bit about the exterior um styling of the building. So you've got on the the top you've got these beautiful details for these corbals things like that on the top especially at the Linton and Kipling corner. Um >> around the windows it appears on the renderings that they're pretty flat. Um however I did note that there was a a sort of call out saying that there was going to be some metal trim around the windows. Can you please clarify how you're going to treat the the the window trim? >> So, what we've proposed is a a what's called a deep backset or self-panning window on the street facads, which provides some additional depth from the plane of the building, the exterior facade of the building to the plane of the glass. Uh, and then we're also proposing um a thin fin, a metal trim fin that would project no more than four inches, probably two to three in that would uh create some additional perceived depth um of the window and create some additional shadow lines on the facade. >> Would you consider sort of the overall style or aesthetic of the building? Would you consider it traditional or modern? It's trying to walk a very fine line between both of those things, I would say. Um, we did look to um downtown buildings, including the hotel >> um that have sort of a Spanish style to them. Uh we looked to uh simulated divided light windows. We we that are um there are real divided light windows on that project probably. Um, but we were looking to those kinds of buildings around downtown PaloAlto for our inspiration. Um, and recognizing it's a modern building, it needs to use modern materials. Um, but also still uh reference back to the fabric of downtown. >> Okay. Thank you. And then on the entry area, you have this sort of >> plinth overhang. Um, not quite sure how to describe. And that's also angled as well. Correct. Can you tell me how far that sits over the top of the sidewalk? Cuz that one does project past property lines. Correct. >> It does. It is. It is really the only thing other than the very very top cornis that projects over the property line. Everything else is really contained within the property line. Um that projects over the property line I think at its greatest depth maybe 40% of the sidewalk width. >> Okay. Uh, and then it reduces down to more like 25% of the sidewalk width. >> Great. Thank you. And then for the residential garage entry, can you tell me a little bit about what that system will look like? Is it going to be a garage door? Is it going to open and close overhead? Is it going to >> swing in? Is it going to be chain link? >> We're planning for a overhead door. Um, we haven't gotten into that level of detail, I will honestly say, about how exactly it'll operate, but there isn't sufficient clearance for it to swing um or to roll. So, it will be some sort of overhead operation. >> And then in terms of styling of it, do you guys have any ideas of how you're going to angle this, the aesthetics of it? >> Say your question again. Sorry. >> Sorry. What? So, right now on sheet like A3.04, it basically looks gray. >> Yeah. >> Right. with panels. So, I guess the question is >> we will color it. Yeah, it's a placeholder. We will color it so that it is consistent with the rest of the facade materials. >> All right. And then I'm also gonna hold up the green color. >> Yeah, >> I got to ask about it cuz the in the renderings the green looks much darker. Now, I'm obviously I'm a fan of this color. My phone matches it, but I'm curious where where this sort of green came from in particular. >> Yeah, I think we we have been moving around on that color for sure. Um, and looking for something that is soft and quiet, honestly, as an attitude for the color. >> Go away green. >> Not a go away green, but a but a retreating um not trying to be big bold color. >> Got it. Okay, understood. All right, that's all my questions for now. Thank you very much. >> Uh, come back to a previous question. So, you did mention that the windows are operable and I did find uh on your sheet A3.07 07 that they will be single hung windows which goes back to Kendra's question about you know the style >> of this and your elevations have a 1/3 2/3 proportion on the windows >> but a single hung window would be 50/50 >> it could be 50/50 in this case as a type 3 building we don't have to provide egress um from windows or rescue from windows and so the opening percentages can be smaller um in a family building we also want to be considerate of fall protection for small children. Um so we are still I think working out the details of that exactly but the um the other consideration is operationally and for maintenance the single hungs operate and maintain better than a casement window would >> um in the same configuration. It isn't a single hung window. Correct me if I'm wrong. Kind of the line is down the middle. >> It doesn't have to be. It's most commonly. >> Sorry, I'm going to jump in here. I didn't know that they you guys don't have to have emergency egress compliance with the windows >> in a type three. >> You do not. >> It It's a building code thing. Um it's not a planning code issue. So in theory, if there was a fire in this building, the windows would not be an easy access escape route for the people who are living in this building. >> They're not required to be >> understood. And the way that they are designed right now with the 1/3 2/3 that opening would basically be a 1/3 opening. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> I have a couple of questions on the parking garage as well. Sure. So for the parking uh parking space here are they assigned to the uh units above? You have 72 units and then you have 32 34 spaces. our property management would um when they lease up to the residents that there's not an assigned unit uh parking there would be assigned once the the the units the parking spaces are are determined with the residents who are coming in whether they have a car or not and then that would be an assigned space. Yes. >> Okay. And since this is a rental uh rental property so how will you deal with like the moving conditions? Is there like loading space for frequent moving moving in moving out conditions? >> The um is the loading is that the what we have on the street? I'm trying to remember the design right now. What's >> we don't have a loading zone specified yet? >> Okay. >> We we don't have a loading zone specified yet. >> Okay. And so that is something you will consider later or it's >> I think that's something that we still need to work out with staff. >> Okay. Okay. >> Yeah. to clarify there there's no um there's a car size loading space that is required. There's no uh truck size loading space that's required. Um there isn't sufficient space on Kipling, but we're still discussing um loading on Linton um and what we would like to have onsite, what we'd like offsite. Um technically with the move in um typically what would happen is they would get some sort of um encroachment permit um to temporarily have a truck parked there um for loading. Um that's our you know standard process that um people go through if they need to use the uh ride ofway for moving. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh >> I ask a related question to that. Where's the elevator in this plan? the the elevator if you uh enter in from from Littton, it is uh in front and just to the right of the >> Oh, okay. >> There's a pair of elevators there. >> I see. Thank you. So, it's not access from the garage side in >> there's there's a door from the garage >> into that lobby where the elevator is. >> So, that that lobby becomes that mixing zone of coming in from the street, coming in from the garage. >> Okay. Thank you. And for the uh biking storage currently you only have one door that is connect to the lobby. So do you have any consideration that it can connect to the street directly like connect to the have a exterior door on the kipling? >> We're we're not currently showing a street door for the bike parking. Um I what we have found in properties is that that door is not used to the street. Um people prefer the security of coming into the lobby. um they may or may not put their bike in in actuality in the bike parking room uh bike parking spaces because they may prefer to keep it in their apartment um even though the space is provided for them. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And I think we also have some other uh response. >> Yeah. through the chair. I just wanted to to mention that uh in regards to the the loading that may come with um house uh households moving in or moving out. Uh just one other thing that we mentioned to staff when we came up with the unit uh plan that we came up with is that we are trying to minimize the number of studio units have more onebedrooms, twos, and threebedrooms because in our our portfolio we we notice there's less turnover and people t they tend to be more desirable to live in and grow and so so we also anticipate it would be maybe an initial move in and occasional move in move out. the that in terms of the maybe the larger vehicle um loading area otherwise it'll just be incidental dropping off of people. Um I think that the objective standards state that uh it is preferable to have uh the parking entry on a on a auxiliary street or side street rather than on a main street. I live very close to this project so I go by it all the time and I walk on the sidewalk as well. Why didn't you consider the option of putting it on on Kipling Street? There's a sort of a direct connection that and an opportunity to do that. >> Yeah, I can't recall why we we did look at that and study it and consider it and I can't recall exactly right at this moment why we discarded that option. >> Okay. >> Um but we did look at it and study it >> for sure. the predominant location of utilities is also on on um uh Kipling and so yes >> well I mean the >> yeah strangely there's there's good utility access on Kipling and that makes it a better location for all the utility spaces strangely. >> Well we know that the you have a electrical recess there for the >> Mhm. transformer. uh is what are the other uh utilities >> there? There are um there's storm and sewer in Linton, but there I think all of the utilities are in Kipling. >> Are they at the area where you would have if you could do if you would do that connect into uh the major entry into the building off of Kipling? Are they in that area at all? I don't recall off the top of my head. I'm sorry. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Um >> there should be utility drawings in the set uh that we could refer to. >> Um let me just get back to my list here. So um the other issue is that the actual parking on you know on Littton the actual entry on Littton that that is perhaps now a a somewhat heavy trafficked road >> to Middlefield and up to um Alma. But the area is going to grow in the future. There's going to be more traffic on Linton for sure. There are advertisements, as a matter of fact, out on the street saying some building is for sale nearby. So, one would imagine that the that area would grow. Is it possible to move the parking to Kipling? And I have an alternate thought about that, but mentioning it, I think I'll mention it now. You know, the street itself, the street front, the um uh the 7-Eleven store has a dead wall all along that side. >> And then you're going to come to your parking area, you know, your your entry, garage entry as a pedestrian street. Littton is certainly more used than Kipling is. What made you make a decision to put a parking your parking entry on that street and further interrupt the potential kind of passage of pedestrians on on the street >> as as I I'm going to go back to I know we studied looking at different garage entries and maximizing the parking um at the request of both staff and and council Um but I don't recall at this moment why we chose one of over the other. Um Litton is a larger street um and has better access to the network and the arterial network connector network of the city. Uh and so in that sense I think it is uh not an inappropriate location for garage entry. Um >> yeah, >> we we can certainly look into that um further before this uh project goes before council. Um I I do have a vague memory that um there was some component of considering the historic uses as well and trying to um have the garage not be located um across from those residential and his um from the historic uses. um >> on the on the north side of Kipling. >> Yeah, exactly. Thank you. >> There really only three or four houses there, right? >> Um >> could you repeat the question? >> Across across Kipling >> there there are six. It looks >> there are six of them, but I think they're all currently um commercial uses except for one. Yeah. Mhm. Mhm. >> It it was also I'm not I can't recall if it was part of the consideration, but Kipling is also a very narrow street. Um >> it's fairly narrow. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um yeah, just uh the you know I walk that street all the time and uh I think that uh thinking about about well you know maybe this should come afterwards in our considerations here. >> Let us uh leave it for the moment. Um uh you know, why did you decide that the community room needed to be uh on the same level as the uh outdoor space versus the possibility of it being on the ground floor where it might serve the community as well as the building itself? >> Yeah, I'll address that. Um, what we refer to as a community room means the community of residents. And so it would not be available to the larger neighborhood. And it's it's really and it works really well with the outdoor courtyard that allows for um resident events that would be able to spill out into the courtyard and use in and depending on weather also use the interior. Is it directly connected to the courtyard >> or do you have to go into the hallway to go around? >> No, it's sorry. >> It's directly connected to the courtyard. So, the trellis that you see in this in the plan is immediately outside of the community resident community room. >> Well, the the other reason I'm sort of suggesting the ground floor is it animates the street, you know. So you have a definitely that's an alternate choice. I I think you could have think about the possibility of if the entry were on Kipling, you could have animate that street with the the community room. I I I don't disagree with the activation of the street and the light sharing the life of the building out onto the street I think is a incredibly positive um benefit to the street life of any downtown any walkable downtown. The challenge that we face in this project is the desire for um resident parking um and the demand of utility spaces on the ground floor leave us with not a lot of options to put that community space on the ground floor. It comes it comes at a cho it's a choice. >> Uh yeah I mean clearly it would impact the parking as well. Yeah, >> but there are other possibilities there. Stackers or some some portion of the of the garage could be stackers for longer term parking and they would they could offer the possibility of uh even increasing the the parking if it were necessary. >> Stackers would increase the overall building height um to >> not really not really. you could lower the floor level from garage to to the part to the stacker area so it's sloped and you had and there's always the possibility of going down in stackers rather than going up. I just want to mention too that uh there's from a development standpoint there's cost implications and and we are trying to be very costefficient that the stackers if normally even if if you have to do a a sub half subterranean garage it's going to cost more or are doing the pit and also if we do have to raise the the um the first floor height then and thirdly is that we have um ongoing maintenance costs that will affect the operations of the building. It'll be more. We'll have to have an annual additional costs that that we have to factor in trying to keep the rents low. >> Yes. But you'd have to think about it and you certainly analysis of that is going to be important to you. I can understand that. I've spent most of my life doing affordable housing, you know, supportive housing in fact. So, we were always conscious of costs. Um, and but it would be an analysis that you could make and make make it reasonable to have more access to the sidewalk, etc. the uh community room on the sidewalk. And you know, in all of my projects, and in fact, I think even in your Wilton Court, you have a community room on the ground floor. >> We do. Um we do have a community room on the ground floor at Wilton Court. Um we did also dig down to do a second level of garage. Um that was that coupled with the um the EV requirement was a significant cost add to the project that would not have been present without having to um excavate that project. Um, I have another project in another jurisdiction that um planned for stackers and ultimately removed them uh for cost reasons. Another uh affordable housing project. >> Did it just out of curiosity, did it include uh stackers for the whole of the garage area? >> Yes. So this might only be small percentage of stackers because it's only making up for the floor space that you're you'd be losing if you moved a facility down. Uh and the other thing to think about is that actually you have around your open court you have a lot of resident mostly residential units. You have the community room but you also have mostly residential units looking out. So, it wouldn't be wrong to increase the number of units uh to fill in the community room if you moved it to the ground floor. >> The Yeah, certainly the trade-off is um an additional unit or two on the second floor um and loss of parking and so the parking ratio would go down >> or stackers would make up for it. I I think that it's unlikely from a cost perspective that the project would utilize stackers. I'm I'm saying that as an architect and what I see happening every time we consider stackers, they get removed. >> They get killed. They get killed in the process. Yeah, >> I could imagine that if it takes maintenance, a lot of maintenance, and I could definitely imagine it if there were a lot of them. But if there were not a lot of them, it might be a reasonable alternative. >> We we can look into it, but I do also have two anecdotes of two projects. one that just started construction in downtown Mountain View that we removed the stackers to get the project to actually be able to finance and and now it's under construction and another one that we're going to start construction this fall in Mountain View as well where we remove partial they're both partial stackers like partial stackers. >> Yeah. And in the this the second project I'm talking about the one start starting this fall is the first floor had some stackers. We had two levels of parking. So actually we still kept the two levels of parking but we took out the stackers and and it really saved on and reduced and lowered the building height and saved a lot of money. So I also but I but I I understand the point and we we can uh revisit looking at it. I think the idea of activation is important to us. >> Thank you. That's a pretty good answer. Um, just see >> David, can I jump in here with another question about the parking lot while we're still looking at it? >> So, I've circled on the screen this one parking space in pink. Do we really think that's going to be a usable parking space for someone to come in and make that 90° turn to park there and then as they're trying to back out to get out this way, right? Like, it's it's a tight spot snug up against that wall there. Can you comment? >> It's a tight spot. It has the same clearance to the wall that other spaces have in the garage which meet the parking standards of the of the city. >> Understood. But when you've got a car coming in this way and this one's like trying to back out, right? It's >> Sure. >> I I imagine that would be an expert rear in parker and somebody with a motorcycle is going to take that one and just call it a day. I mean, is there any is there any thought to like turning it into motorcycle parking or something like that that's just got a little bit more maneuverability because I'm just I'm I almost don't want to count that spot cuz I just don't see how people are going to have a easy enough time getting in and out of there. >> I >> And then I I don't disagree with you. >> Yeah. Sort of related is if you guys did explore this concept that this is an inn-out space, you've already got these sort of corners nicely notched out and then in theory this would be your one two three spaces there. But it does look like you would lose those two spaces overall. So you'd be down net two. >> I think we would only the the drive aisle is 24 feet, so it's not quite wide enough for three spaces. >> Got it. >> So I think it would be replacing the two at the alternate entry with >> two over here. >> The two over there and the loss of the two on the inside corner. >> Then you'd be netg -3. Okay. Yeah. Perfect. >> And and that may have been the reason why we didn't do that. >> Okay. Well, I'm just learn that one's not there anyway. >> Yeah, >> that's that's all right, though. Okay, thank you very much. And David, thank you for letting me interrupt. >> Uh how how important is the room that is kind of uh in the center of the building there? Um yeah, right there. >> Yeah. How important is that? >> Maintenance, office, and storage. Um there's often um additional refrigerators, um an additional range, um equipment to maintain the building is kept there. Uh these are really usable spaces by the operation and maintenance team um for the building and uh it doesn't take up valuable frontage uh because it's predominantly a storage space. David, am I seeing where you're trying to go with this? >> Yes, I'm I'm thinking about how about >> Can you zoom out just a touch? >> How about a double, you know, how about we've seen in >> tandem spaces? >> Yes, exactly. You got it. >> The and and I are I don't have property management here with us, but we tend to stay away from tandem because unless and perhaps if there's a way you can assign them to the same unit, >> it becomes a real management night. >> Yeah, it seems to Yeah, maybe it's more used in places where people have two cars and Yeah, I could see that. I mean, certainly town homes, you know, is always that way a possibility. >> Um, so it's it it but you haven't explored the possibility of using a piece of that space that way. Well, maybe you have. I think you know overall I I see the the planning of this building is pretty tight in terms of the way you fitted fit all the units in. But some of these things we've been talking about, it seems to me you might consider might be considered especially this uh use of the secondary the kipling for main entry for the parking because the issue of of uh to me of the uh uh litten sidewalk is really kind of critical there, you know, and if you consider that it would be something that would animate the facade on on Litton. I think it's really a very important thing to consider. You know, I I would hope that my fellow board members see that too and walked to we didn't we didn't discuss whether we all looked at the site, but since I'm the one who goes by all the time, I know exactly what the feeling is there. And the uh um the the 711, you know, wall is is disgusting, frankly. And the 7-Eleven entry of cars from both sides is also just not a working corner. It's a terrible corner and it doesn't make a corner either. You know, it's a dead parking lot corner there. >> So, um, my point is I think you understand my point here. >> I do. If you were able to move the community room down, you gain two units there. That's a a net gain in units in the building. I don't see why you wouldn't consider this very seriously. >> I think we'll work with staff on that. >> Okay. >> Do you have any additional questions? >> Oh, no. I I think I'm done. If if you don't mind, I I I do have a a couple of additional questions. So, for the trash collection, uh will you uh take the sideway during the trash collection day like staging the the the beans there or along the sidewalk? How how >> I think they would stage right in front of those doors. Yes. Uh, not on the sidewalk on the street because there will need to be a curb cut there. >> Okay. >> Sorry. >> So, it wouldn't be a parking space anyway. >> I I believe they would actually just be pulled out of you think >> Yeah. Typ typically we you know we design it so it's along the frontage so that it can be pulled out of the room so that it wouldn't have to be staged on the street. >> Okay. Thank you for >> pull pulled out lifted put back pulled out lifted pul put put back >> uh >> for all the different waist >> say lifted >> or for the trash truck. >> Oh yes. Yeah, exactly. >> So there will be a guy who closely watch when the truck coming and then they they're ready to pull it out. >> So there would be a curb right there so that there's no parking. So the trash truck would come along, >> they would get out, pull it out and have it Yeah. served. And as long as it's within >> I can't really remember the exact distance. I think it's like 25 or 50 ft. Um they they will do that without additional charges. >> Okay. >> I think it's 25 ft, but it would also be staged like right at the curb, not in the middle of the sidewalk. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And I think it we're we're saying staged, but I think it's for the moment that the bin is pulled out and then >> put in a few more minutes. Okay. >> Yeah. Okay. And I do have a question about the stairs on the staircase along the litten. So it seems like the roof shape the roof if we go to the elevations it seems like the roof shape the materials used here are different from the rest of the project. Can you share with us about the thoughts? >> We are planning to shape the roof so that it is as minimal of a penthouse as possible. Mhm. >> Um and would I think we probably have a little bit of more refinement to do on exactly how that's constructed. Uh but the intent is to shape it so that the street edge of it is no higher than the rest of the parapit. Um and then it lifts up to grant um fire access to the roof. >> Okay. And another thing is about the laundry room on the on each of the floor. So since this is a family orientated uh property, is it possible you have the laundry in within the unit instead of like shared with different? >> It's highly unusual in affordable housing to do in-unit laundry. It is very very common to have um a centralized laundry facility and in this case we're choosing not to do a single large laundry room but to actually put um two sets on each floor um which we think it makes that more accessible to families and not having to tuck their laundry all over the building. >> And then on the sixth floor you have it noted as a music room. >> Yeah. And then we have an an sort of an extra room. Um we're providing the the required amount of centralized laundry uh plus one actually uh and then have this additional floor. I think we could easily make it another laundry room. Um if that was desired by property management, but it's also just an extra room for teens to go hang out in, for somebody to practice music, to have a quiet study room. um it creates an additional facility for the residents um with the addition of that space. So basically for the people who live on the sixth floor, they will go down the stairs and you share with the other ones. Okay, gotcha. I don't have any other questions if is it time for us to discuss to have internet and comments. >> Thank you. >> Who want to start? Thank you guys very much for your presentation. Um, I admit when I first saw the cover image, I went, "Oh, an old school downtown PaloAlto building. I love it." Um, I have to admit that I'm a little bit disappointed by the straddling of the line between traditional and modern. I kind of wish you would pick one. And if I could nudge you in one direction, I think follow what you're doing with the Corbals. Go a little bit more traditional, a little more articulation around the windows. I understand that affordable housing every every bit matters and having trim at every single one of these, you know, 150 windows is going to be a lot of trim. However, I think that your building would just be quite lovely if you just articulated these windows a little bit more from the exterior, gave them a little bit more life and made it just a little bit more traditional, lean into that cuz the downtown is already highly traditional and I think this would nestle right in with everything else that's going on there. So, if I could nudge you in a direction, it would be that. Um, on that same note, I would prefer just again aesthetic-wise a true um, half height uh, single hung window. Um, the comment about safety, I very much appreciated that that was a thoughtfulness. Now, my argument to counter that is that the sill height is really the biggest issue. So, if it's, you know, a foot and a half tall for a toddler or 2t tall for a toddler of an opening, they're going to climb out if they want to climb out. So, that would be my comment in that. Now, if you're only opening at 4 in, 6 in, that's different. But if they're going to open at least 18 in that a little kid could get out. So just either understand that and and sort of embrace it. But I I see where you're going with the third height. I just personally I think it would look better with a half height. Maybe you guys explore that. Maybe I'm wrong. I mean just it's worth a second look. Um especially when you add a little bit more articulation to the window trim uh on the aesthetics as well. The green um not my favorite, but you know I think you guys are still dialing that in. So I'll cut you some slack there. And uh maybe it tilts a little bit more yellow like it does in the front rendering where it looks more like almost a leafy or um uh living green, right? This one tilts a little blue. I mean, I know I'm getting really nitpicky here, but this one just looks a little um commercial, for lack of a better way to say it. So, um I like the stonework at the base. I actually find a lot of um value on the inside and how you've laid this out as well. I think that the trash is lovely to have. I always like seeing a centralized trash and there's a shoot on every floor and it makes it nice and easy. It keeps the building functionally clean because people don't have to go all the way down. They're not going to leave their trash in the hallway because they're just they don't feel like bringing it down, right? People move the trash through, which is a great benefit. Um I'm very appreciative you put parking in. You didn't have to, right? And so it was noted in the packet that this is not a project that's required to have parking and I really appreciate that you did it. I also on a personal note I I'm not a fan of stackers or tandemss or anything like that cuz you're always fighting with somebody to get your car in and out. Um in the vein of you know these uh Uber andyft and we're seeing more and more self-driving cars and we're seeing the you know the um cyber taxis and things like that. I think we are going to have less demand on parking over the next 10 years than we've traditionally seen. So, some people like me probably will always have their own car, but you know, there's going to be a lot of people that can can do without a car. And so, I think that this is um a nice balance, as I would put it. Um garage door. I would love to see that a bit a bit more information on that. I don't I think if it's just a plain gray or god forbid like a slatted steel one that looks like it's, you know, blocking something off, that would be a huge problem. To David's point as to whether or not the parking should be or the entrance should be on Kipling or Linton, I'm kind of ambivalent to be honest. I kind of like that the facade of the garage door next to the entrance, there could be some balance there. Maybe it's a woodlook metal, something like a clope garage door. They do woodlook metals. Uh I know that's residential, but something like that um could add a little bit more life and vitality to that streetscape. Um getting a little bit nitpicky here. Uh the studio has a massive bathroom. I mean, that thing is like dancing space inside that bathroom. So, I would maybe just re-evaluate the uh distribution of square footage in those studio apartments. Um, while I like the concept of the music room, I think that's actually kind of a really nice idea. Um, I think that it's going to be more beneficial for the people to be a laundry room. I really do. I think that for that sixth floor people to have to just go down a floor, it's just that one extra little bit of nuisance that if there was just those two extra units on the sixth floor, call it a day, everybody's lives are just that much easier. Um, I'm going to wrap up here cuz I know everyone else has comments as well. Um, I think my last item was that the the manager's unit being on the sixth floor. Um, I'm curious why that would be on the sixth floor versus the courtyard floor. I'm I'm wondering if actually being on the courtyard is a benefit or a hindrance and whether that's going to be a easier to rent unit or if it's better to put the manager at the ground level on the courtyard and then if there's people in the courtyard too late at night, the man juror can holler out their window. Um, so I would just put that out for the consideration that maybe the manager's unit is actually one of the ones on the courtyard and also close to ground level and also close to front offices, but again that's a operations question and clearly not up to me in any way, shape or form. So um, last comment. I also really appreciated your exonometric drawings of the downtown area. whoever did those spent some time on them. And it's very helpful to see this building and something so massive in the context of everything that's going around, especially having the um the historic buildings across the street, understanding the, you know, the building we're in now is quite a tall building and being able to see that in the distance. So those Axon drawings were excellent. Very, very helpful. And I appreciate they were cartoony and not like hyper realistic because again, it gives you that impression without forcing things in too tightly. So overall, well done. I think it's a very thoughtful project. Um I'd like to see a little bit more stylishness on it though, if you don't mind. So that's my comments. I'm sure some of my uh counterparts may disagree with me here, but thank you very much. Appreciate it. >> I can go next since a lot of my comments you already took care of. So thank you. um do not love the green and I think it needs to be a little bit richer um more timeless green then this is very going to get dated very quickly on the style as well I think um I agree with Kendra on the the windows and needing a little bit of trim you're spending money on fins I think trim and embracing the traditional look is a better use of that money than the two or three inch fin that you were talking about it's not going to give you any sun shading with that might as they'll use it for detailing the window instead and having a standard um single hung. Um I think uh while you may not so required a deliver or move in moveout space, I think even just designating a a parking space for a box truck cuz it is a rental property. There's going to be at least a couple of families moving in and out every year if not more frequently in a 72 unit building. So, I think making it convenient for people to be able to move in, move in their stuff. I mean, these are pretty small apartments, so it's not going to be a massive U-Haul, but just being able to bring your stuff in and out easily, I think, is is important. So, I'd urge you to think about that. Um, agree with the laundry on every floor. These are, you know, intended for families with children. Um there's going to be a lot of laundry um to deal with on the um overall massing. I I am a little sad about like the blockiness and daylight and views particularly, you know, like you said, you're going to lease this property for 99 years and we don't know what's going to happen in the 7-Eleven property in the future. if you can step it back at all on maybe fourth level or something just to make sure that if there is another larger building next door that daylight and views are not you know completely compromised for these units. I think the garden on the community space on the second floor is great. And I actually disagree with David on the the community room cuz in a a place like this, like I used to live in a townhouse community where having a community room and outdoor play area adjacent is so important. Like kids like these all these kids are going to want to have birthday parties, have like friends over. That community room where you can serve your pizzas and kids play outside. That pairing to me is a lot more important than activating the street with that community room because if there's no outside play area, it won't be a birthday party space anymore. And I think that's really important in this uh to make this a vibrant like amenities is what makes this place uh you know a nice place to live, not just your little apartment. So I think that's really really important to maintain that. So thank you for this project. I think it's as you already know it's a much needed project and I appreciate you bringing a for Thank you, >> David. >> Well, I'm sorry you disagree with me. Um because I I think there would be ways to animate the uh street uh make it into a walking street and consider uh a future neighborhood here. Um because the neighborhood will be changing. Um there'll be more more uh both pedestrian traffic and uh uh an increase in uh vehicle traffic as well on on Littton for sure because it's such a a major connector. Um, and you know, at at present, in fact, there's uh neighboring parallel streets to Linton that are being used from uh Middlefield that would be better served, frankly, if there were a little less traffic because they're all residential streets. Um and and Litton after all being next to in the downtown part of the downtown area is is an is an obvious uh area for and it's you know going to have probably probably more commercial than it will have residential in the in the future. or even if it's more residential, it will be uh residential which will uh respect the street a little better than what you're doing here. I don't think what is happening with the garage off of the uh off of Littton is a good is a good idea at all. Um and uh so I I definitely think that the entry uh ought to be on Kipling and uh I hope you do study it seriously. Uh knowing knowing that the traffic turning turns in and turns out etc. from a garage onto a street that is quite busy as it gets down to a middle field and busy during during you know business hours when traffic is is on Linton. And as to you know the community room I don't think really that outdoor deck is is it's a terrific idea you know to have that deck and I think the planning from the beginning has led to what the end result is here. I think it's kind of unfortunate as noted that some of those units are quite so tight to um the property line but I see what you're dealing with. So that in in some way, you know, if you actually had res uh other residential onto the courtyard for two the two units that could make up the um community room space and move the community room down to the ground floor, you would add to the actual community use spaces in the building and that would really be a benefit to everybody. I think a party room etc. uh even a game room for lots of kids that you have here. Uh uh if it's going to be uh it could be easily on the first floor, you know that you have that possibility on the first floor. If it's set back, there could be some separation from the street, but it would animate the street and make the street a much the litten portion of the street much better and not interfere that much with the Kipling, which is a very low uh passenger, you know, low pedestrian street, low low used pedestrian street. Um, so I think I've mentioned it enough, you know, I hope you will look at it again. But my other concern is that the decision, in my opinion, the decision to make a sort of a partially uh traditional building um is unfortunately kind of it's an unfortunate decision. I really think that I know your firm and I know your firm has really terrific capability to design buildings and uh you know you've shown us that that's possible uh with Wilton Court. If you're going to use it, if you're going to go to a traditional form like this, then why not make the entire cornness around the building consistent? All parts of the building. Why should one portion of it not be consistent that way? I just don't think that the breakup and the decision as to how you have done the hierarchy of this building, you've done recesses in order to uh to break the massing into these three larger pieces. um and or maybe it's actually five four four larger pieces you know on the facade that it's to me it it doesn't make sense. I mean the traditional way in which ground floors in Italy are done is you have the ground floor is is one kind of element. The piano noble on the second floor is another element, but the that is the classical tradition of architecture and it's been around for hundreds of years now. And to actually put a facade on two floors of a building and it takes up uh one corner of the building, then go the rest of the way with it and just do do the whole building that way. what but in terms of function it it never makes sense. So that's why I'm thinking that if you turn to a more modern idea and you explored it and really you know what happens in a building like this and I know this for a fact is that you design it from the inside out. You design it for the number of units you need and then you sort of decorate the outside with something that you think is going to fit the neighborhood. I think the proper choice is to use your imagination as architects to do something different. You know, do it with materials uh fresh materials. The build that that street there's such a mixup on that street right now. you know the scale changes so so completely from one end to the other and you have commercial buildings on part of it then you have you know smaller buildings it's a mixed I don't think it kind of hangs together so there's the possibility of doing a more modern building on that corner would would be a much much better expression and how you do it you know then you sculpt it from the outside in some way that you make it work or you use you change materials because you really are using traditional materials in a way that I don't think is appropriate. Um, but if you're going to do it then do the whole thing that way, you know, do do the whole base in in stone up two floors for some reason. It would be nice if it you could change the second floor, but you can't because it's really a restricted housing building the way it's planned and it ought to be planned too. If you had a second floor which with common spaces, etc., etc. Even at the corner, that might be a better way to consider it. You know, if you were going to just do the corner, then do the corner and do it maybe, you know, so that you made a made more of a an expression out of the corner of the building. Those are my feelings. It's aesthetically to me it's not a pleasing building the way it's designed. But, uh, in terms of the planning, I think it's been very well thought out. Um except I don't agree with the parking the way it's working. >> Thank you. Thank you again for your presentation. You guys did great. You are most almost cover everything I want to speak. So uh yeah. So I I I think generally speaking uh this project in this location is wonderful idea. Um it is in the north Palatoto and it's close to downtown. So, so I think and especially this project is family oriented. I think it's really a good addition to downtown area. If we zoom out to see citywide, we have lots of multifamilies on the south side along San Antonio and El Camino Rail. So, this project is a good balance between south and north and also it could be a good relief from the north south side of the Palatoto. So, I do appreciate it. And speaking of the parking uh entrance, at first I thought, yeah, uh Kipling could be a better solution, but when considering since you already speak about you studied and compare the two entrances and also the staff mentioned there may be some restrictions because of the historic building across the street. So if that is the case, I think it makes sense to just leave the garage entrance as it is. And for the um massing of the building, I do appreciate that you add additional details on top of the roof, the coral on on the top and also bring the stones up to the two uh up to the second level to treat the corner unit to be different and also lower the storm stone portion to the rest of the the building. So, um I think it's a good uh treatment for this entire building. But, uh in the me meanwhile, I think the entire building, if you look at the massing of the building, I do appreciate the breakout, the vertical breakout that you created to make the massing smaller. However, uh I'm wondering whether you could do the rest of the building. Say if you want to emphasize the building corner, the corner element, could you please uh consider at the top you also have like an additional horizontal band to visually lower the rest of the building. And then you can the corner element to be more emphasis just like what you did for the stone material on the lower floor so that it could make it different. Other than that I don't have any additional comments uh to my colleague if you want to have any other additional thoughts on that. If not, we will close. Or do you have any questions you have for us? >> Okay. All right. >> If you'd like, it might be helpful. Um, I was just kind of putting together a quick summary. I just want to Do you think that's okay if we can maybe run through, make sure we captured your comments? >> Yeah, that would be a great idea. Would you mind to put it on the screen or uh >> Hold on. I don't quite have it in a format. Hold on. They're still in kind of rough notes, but let me pull it together. >> Um Um Yeah, >> I'm not sure if you Give us one moment for sure. All right, they're up on the screen now. >> So, they were still a little bit rough, but um you know, generally we're noting um consider the program music space to be another laundry room. Uh reconsider the color of the green that's proposed. uh explore modifications to the windows design to have a more traditional look and a detailed trim rather than adding a fin. Um take another look at the studio apartments and the ratio of the bathroom to the rest of the unit as well as the location of the manager's unit. Uh continue the corell I'm not sure about this one, so correct me if um this wasn't didn't quite capture, but continue the coral at the top of the structure to have more consistency across the building. Um, and then, uh, consider emphasizing the corner element by adding a horizontal band at the top, um, to help visually lower the rest of the building. Um, and consider the plan for move in and space to accommodate a U-Haul truck. Um, there uh, there were a couple of these additional items that maybe we didn't have consensus on. Um, but we can, you know, certainly speak to a little bit more as part of the council report of looking into the community room on the ground floor. Um, and looking into revising the parking garage entrance and and maybe why we selected um the Linton Avenue does that >> coral is actually con uh cornis. >> Yeah, sorry. I wasn't sure exactly what was said there. So, thank you. I think you're right. Well, there's a cornice with corbaline. So, just and can you clarify maybe what I I believe that was board member Hersha's comment about um kind of maybe what you were looking for there extending the cornice. Okay. And hopefully that's a s generally good summary. Let us know if there's anything we missed. >> I guess just on consensus right now as designed there's the corner is different with the double height uh twotory um the stone portion and then the corbold cornice and just that corner. So I guess it's kind of um you know not to you know u direct too specifically to the architects but either if that cornice with with or without coral is continued to the other sides than other blocks then that whole you know corner being different gets more watered down. So then consider how that would then uh impact the other facades as well. Okay, thank you. Noted. Okay. Yeah, looking good here. Okay. So, I will close this item here and we will take a 10 minutes break and come back at 10:29 27. Thank you. Okay. So, welcome back. So, we will move on to our action items number three. U public hearing quasa judicial 800 8008 814 San Antonio Road proposal to reszone the subject properties from PC-5622 to a new planned community planned home zoning and to redevelop the site with uh with an eightstory 174 unit residential building with 35 below market rate units uh squa status an addendum to the previous certified housing incentives program expansion and 788 San Antonio mixeduse property EIR is currently being prepared. Um so uh can we have the staff presentation please? All righty. Good morning board members. Uh my name is Joey Den. I am a senior planner with our current planning team and it is my pleasure to present to you item number three which is as you mentioned before 808 San Antonio. It's for a planned community planned home resoning. Next slide please. So, this since this is the project's first review with the ARB, I wanted to frame some of the design concerns that staff is hoping to get feedback on such as um project massing, stepbacks, um the San Antonio road street frontage, the ground floor design, parking and service areas, open space, and also the just the general relationship to the San Antonio uh road area plan. Now, no formal recommendation is being requested today. Um, environmental review and departmental review is is still ongoing. So, the project will return to the ARB for formal recommendation at a later date. Um, but following ARB's uh second hearing and formal recommendation, the project will then go back to uh PTC for their formal recommendation. And then finally, with PT PTC's recommendation, the project would then return to council for a final decision. Next slide, please. So the site is located on San Antonio Road near Lake Horn Street. This corridor is currently characterized by one and twostory commercial and service uses. It is in the transition process um because there's several nearby either approved or proposed housing projects um including San Antonio Road which I will mention later on in this presentation. Um, also 762 San Antonio Road and 824 San Antonio. Next slide, please. A little bit of the project overview. So, for this PCPHZ, the project is proposing um an 8story residential condo building. The listed maximum height is 88 ft 6 in. This is measured to the top of the roof parapit. But I also just want to note that um additional height may be associated with the rooftop garden trellis and um any other mechanical enclosures which will be determined as the plans get refined. They are also proposing 174 residential units of which 35 will be BMR units. Um no retail is proposed. The floor area ratio is 4.7 and they were also proposing 202 parking spaces to go along with it. Um I just wanted to note the current site plan that or the current plan set that we have shows it as 202 parking spaces. Um this is revised from the 203 parking spaces described in the staff report if you caught that. Um, I also just wanted to compare it to the previously approved PC which was, you know, a five-story much lower building. So, essentially the project is now taller, denser, um, and no longer includes the previously approved commercial space. Um, last note is a separate vent uh, vesting tenant map is going to be required to merge and redivide the lot. Next slide, please. So, for the site plan, the primary access will be off of San Antonio Road. Um, this includes pedestrian access from San Antonio Road to uh giving ground floor access to the residential lobby. Um, trash pickup, loading, and also the ramp to the underground parking garage will be located along the singular driveway on the it looks like the north side of the site plan. Now, the current proposal maintains a 24 foot special setback along that San Antonio road frontage. Um, this is really going to preserve any future multimodal improvements being studied through the San Antonio road area plan. Um, staff just wants to notes that PTC recommended an easement over the setback area uh specifically for those future multimodal improvements, whatever they may be. Um so piggy piggybacking off of that um any ARB feedback would be helpful in how this frontage functions in the interim um before those future improvements are constructed and whether this frontage as proposed supports uh pedestrian oriented design. The duck out in the staff report or the rolled curb as proposed is shown here is proposed for emergency vehicle and fire access but this remains to be uh under fire uh department review. The again on the commercial space the current proposal removed that um the previously approved planned community included approximately 1,000 square ft of ground floor retail. Now, this change was made after the council pre-screening to address concerns about right-of-way usage for projects serving operations such as trash pickup or loading. Um, during PT PTC's discussion, there was generally expressed support for having that trash service on site even at the expense of the retail. Next slide, please. So the San Antonio road area plan is not yet adopted. Um so it's not yet the adopted regulatory standard for the project, but this site is within that plan area. So the future corridor vision will be relevant to um any feedback that we get on the frontage design um such as for the special setback and any multimodal improvements. Um the the plan is expected to head to council in June. Um staff is looking for a recommendation on what the core scenario for the area plan will be. Now there's there were many options presented in this draft plan and based on all the feedback that we received through prior study sessions, staff is developing a recommendation for council consideration for this June meeting. Um but the staff recommend recommended option will likely include um potentially a 90 ft maximum height along the southern side of San Antonio Road. So along the same side as all these residential projects um bike pedestrian improvements are also anticipated primarily within the existing right-of-way measurements also on the same side. So along that southern side of San Antonio Road and then recommending that um neighborhoods serving retail be um only located in specific areas such as the North Fabian area or the CTI neighborhood. So not this site specifically. Next slide please. So these are the site plans showing the uh basement levels for the below grade parking. The project is proposing 202 parking spaces where 275 spaces is typically required. This roughly equates to a 27% reduction um or approximately 1.15 space per unit. Um they are also all of the parking is going to be provided in this belowra automated parking lift system. Um staff is still reviewing this parking system um including anticipated wait times um peak hour operations and just how the system will be addressed in the TDM plan. Next slide please. These are going to be the typical floor plans. Um the project includes a mix of studios, onebedrooms, onebedroom units, two-bedroom units and threebedroom units. um 50 about 58% of the proposed units are two to threebedroom units which um is a point was a point of interest um based on prior council feedback. Next slide please. Now I just wanted to note some of the typical upper level floor plans. Um since they did add three stories, the applicant also added common open space terraces on the sixth, 7th, and eighth levels. Um the open space will be provided through a combination of private balconies, courtyard areas, upper level terraces, and the rooftop open space area. Um all of which will provide at least approximately 150 square ft of open space per unit. Next slide, please. So again on the upper floor plans and and the roof plan staff is really seeking A or B feedback on whether these upper floor terrace terraces and the rooftop area will provide usable common open space and whether those areas will help reduce the perceived mass of the building. Um next slide please. So this is the front elevation. This is what you're going to be seeing off of San Antonio Road. So, after PTC's initial feedback, the applicant revised the plans to include some addition some additional upper level stepbacks and articulation along the street frontage. Um, I also want to note that the garage entrance currently shown in the plan, so on this plan set, it's on the lower lefthand corner. Um, it's going to be most likely going to need to be taller to accommodate access and clearance for typical garbage truck uh pickup and trash service. Um this was noted at PTC and the applicant is aware um they've already confirmed that they will be updating this on on future plans. But for the proposed materials, the applicant is proposing a mix of cy uh fiber cement panels, decorative metal panels, metal siding panels, metal trim, aluminum windows, and ex exterior glazing. Next slide, please. So these are the rear and the side elevations along the eastern and northern side. Um the special requirements under code section 1838150 doesn't doesn't currently apply because the project site was is not within 150 ft of a residentially zoned property or or another existing residential planned community district. But and the reason why this is brought up is because the San Antonio Road uh project does have a pending application for a residential plan community plan home zone. So staff is also seeking ARB's feedback on whether what the proposed side and rear elevations should include any additional articulations, stepbacks or any other privacy measures. Next slide please. So now this side elevation, this is what's going to be facing that San Antonio Road uh project. These two projects are right next to each other and they're both I believe they they are both eight stories. Um so this is pretty much what those two neighbors are going to be seeing. Um PTC did specifically request ARB's feedback on this side elevation. So, there was a lot of concerns about privacy, the massing, and then also just the transition to San Antonio Road, 788 San Antonio Road. I apologize. Next slide, please. So, this is a uh section, a typical section of the building and also kind of depicts the interior courtyard. Um, it also kind of shows the relationship between the building height, um, the interior courtyard and the upper level open space. Um, it does provide a little bit of a depiction of what the shadow will look like. So, it kind of illustrates how this proposed building may affect affect light within the courtyard and also some of the adjacent areas within. Um, but you know, this is something that staff is is looking for ARB ARB feedback on whether or not the courtyard and terrace areas are usable. Um, whether this building form provides adequate access to light and air. Um, or whether you think additional stepbacks or other massing requirements need to be considered. Next slide, please. So that being being since this is the first review with ARB and environmental review is still ongoing. Staff is recommending that um ARB provide your initial comments and also recommend that the project return to the ARB for a formal recommendation at a later time. Next slide. With that staff for any questions and I believe the applicant is also available in person but also on Zoom as well. Thank you. >> Thank you very much for your presentation. So before applicant presentation, do we have any questions to the staff? >> Just one quick question. So the is the previous approve I I can't remember that was formally approved, correct? The previous PC, >> it was formally approved. Yes. >> So that's just out the window and it's a start over. >> It's it is the current zoning of the site. Uh and that entitlement is still active. However, they are proposing this project in lie of that constructing that previously approved project. >> Okay. So, it is um I guess an option for them to go back to that until this is formally approved and replaces it for the same site. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> And was the PC zoning changed based on the previous project? Is it like step one and now that they got their foot in the door, they're switching out for this project or is it like I I need a little bit of clarification here. What's what prompted this massive change? >> Uh that might be a better question for the applicant to answer. >> Okay. But basically, is it still contingent that the zoning is approved based on the building itself or are those two decoupled? >> It's based on the building itself. It's been approved with the zoning for 75 units and that retail component. >> Understand? >> And the design that was previously approved. >> And so if this design is approved, the PC reszoning goes with it. >> Exactly. It would be a new ordinance um reszoning the property. >> Okay. And that would have not have the retail element to it for this version. >> Okay. Understood. Thank you. >> One more question because it went from what was it? five stories to eight and it was 75 units and now it's going to 174. So that's an increase of 100 almost yeahund over three stories. So the um the distribution of unit sizes is start from scratch. Is that how it is? >> I'm sorry. What was that again? >> Like the distribution of units like because there were 75 units before over five floors, right? So that's 15 per floor. But the way it's added now, it's another 30 per floor. Just about 33 per floor. Is that like you know the top three store floors have a higher density of units or like it's a re replanning of the entire building of distribution of sizes and >> I believe it's a replanning of the entire building. I can't recall off the top of my head. Um but >> I believe that yeah like Claire was saying I believe the entire building was redesigned to accommodate those units. It's not just uh higher density just on the top three floors. >> It is a different mix of units overall. >> Yeah. And I also wanted to point out in our packet page 66, it mentioned that the uh city council pre-screening, it also it seems like they're okay with the proposed 120 units with enory proposed five-star building envelope. So it it is more like jumping from 120 to 1175. >> Yeah. I mean um council ex you know didn't make a formal you know decision on that component. It was a pre-screening, so it's just a study session, but there seemed to be um um support from council for considering an application that had 120 units in five stories um which would, you know, was basically a greater mix of smaller units um in that previous design. Um but the applicant has come forward with um a revised formal application that includes a you know taller and more dense building >> and for the sequest status uh they filed an addendum and it seems like it also associated with the adjacent property. So how does it affect this project? >> Yeah. So um the uh EIR that was done for the original 788 San Antonio project uh also included a project specific component of the 788 San Antonio project but it also reszoned uh that project also included um adding the uh housing incentive program to the entire corridor. And so it also served as a programmatic EIR for that evaluated 818 units along this corridor. And so for a number of these projects along this corridor, we are you know doing addendums to that previously approved um EIR u to evaluate you know the project specific components. Um, but overall we've already evaluated 818 units along this corridor. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any additional questions? >> Yeah. Um, on the on the drawings, the red red dashed line, that's the absolute perimeter of the build building. Is that including the setback 25 foot setback? Yeah. Okay. answered by the architect. Um, how did is there an F on this? Uh, I didn't see the I didn't note the zoning. >> Yeah, the proposed F is uh >> 4.7, I believe. >> Yeah, 4.7 >> to one. >> So, >> are you looking for the exact square footage of that? >> No, no, no. 4.7 is the number I was looking for. Yeah. So that how does that match up to the uh the uh zone on El Camino? >> Yeah, the El Camino real focus area allows for a 4.0 floor area ratio. >> 4.0. >> Yeah. So it's it's an increase in that. >> It would be an increase in comparison to that. Yes. >> Uhhuh. Okay. Just thinking about that relative to the size of the building or whatever. Um, yeah. So, the parking as shown is all within uh is it's a within the setback uh on this one here. >> Correct. They wouldn't encroach into the setback at all. >> That's good. Okay. Thanks. >> If no more questions, I will hand it over to the applicant for applicant presentation. Please state and spell your name and you will have 10 minutes. Thank you. >> You the design principal at Li Architecture and thank you for your time today. I appreciate it. Uh I know my client who is phoning in from China also appreciates it. Um I don't know if he successfully logged in, but if you have questions for him, he's probably going to be available. So uh uh I think a lot of the questions revolving around this new proposal have to do with the difference between this proposal and the previous. So I'm going to talk a little bit about that. Uh as you can see from the illustration here, this is a eight-story building and uh uh we I probably should show what we showed to the PTC. It was a very different uh facade uh facing towards San Antonio. We've made a lot of efforts to break down the facade into smaller components and uh we can revisit that as we look at some of the other drawings. This is the previous one and it's actually uh for us a little shocking to even see them side by side. Uh they have a very different aspect. Uh the question came and uh I'll see if I can find the right document for this. Hold on. There we go. So the question was why the change and uh part of the answer has to do with uh sorry this is taking some time there you go is that uh it's when the we were presenting uh to the PTC initially for the 120 unit what uh what followed after ours presentation was our neighbors at 788 were proposing an eight-story building. >> And um the reaction was that to have an eight-story building to uh the south of us would have made this building much less tenable as condominiums. And so that was part of part of it was just to be contextual with what is now appearing to be the desired aspect of the street. And then part of it is just because this is condominiums the somewhat the image and salailability. So that was one of the primary motivators. Uh with that I'll just talk about the uh front of the building is at the ground level very similar. We still have the twotory lobby that looks into the courtyard beyond the site plan. Uh you can see the as uh board member Hirsh pointed out the red dash line represents the setbacks at each of the different sides. We on the front the special setback in front we have avoided being within the setback either with the building with any overhangs and then also as you'll see in a moment with the subgrade which was a question I think in the previous um >> so we've got a fully automated parking system and uh uh this is essentially what effectively is three levels of a uh shuttle cassette system that takes your car and uh when we go up to the So you'll see, but what I wanted to point out is that the entire footprint of the garage is within the setback lines, which was a question before the previous one. As you can see, I don't have the setback lines on here, but you can see that it came very close to the property lines and was bleeding out into the setback area. This new scheme avoids that. It's much more compact. Um, we still have some work to do on the first subtraing level. You can see on the back setback, we're still easing out into it. I believe that with some further refinement, we can avoid getting into any of the setbacks on any of the sides. So, uh I'll just take a moment here to pause and talk about the operational aspect of how this works. Uh the user experience is effectively you drive down, you pull into this bay here, this parking bay. it is uh it is uh accessible. So in other words, when you move your car in there, if it's a van, an accessible van, or if it is just a standard accessible car, the way that the dock is set up, it is it complies. You effectively get out of your car and you move, you know, on the circulation spine to the elevator. Then the system takes your car away. And uh there's uh I think I included some links to videos that maybe had a chance to see uh Santa Clair. And it's really fascinating. Um it takes what it does. It takes parking which really consumes so much space that we are trying to set aside for housing and it compacts it because it removes the maneuvering space needed to get your cars in and out. The system does it. the according to the manufacturer the uh return times are a minute and a half. So once you call your car the maximum you'd have to wait is about a minute and a half and then what it does is that it delivers your car so that it's facing out of the portal here. So you get in and you just drive up. Um so all of the maneuvering is taken care of by the system. And then this this again this is the old footprint. You can see that both on the back property line and on the front uh or excuse me the setback we were uh over the setback line which we now been able to avoid. I think the other big feature and we spent a lot of time discussing this during the last round was the trash uh element of having it in the basement and uh I know many of you may still remember that discussion. We had an ad hoc committee about it and uh I think it was very educational. Uh with the additional uh density it was really imperative that the trash operations move to the ground level to the front. And so what you have here, what's shown in the kind of pinkish is the maneuvering of a trash truck as it would come onto the site, would pick up trash in this area, would be able to back out and then move off the site going head forward back into traffic on San Antonio. It uh removes what we previously had, which was a pull out and trash would be picked up at the curb side. Now it's all happening completely within the envelope of the building. That loading dock would also function for uh moveins and uh for uh casual pickup uh so like uh uh self either not self-driving cars which we found out apparently one of the PTC me uh committee members is working for a self-driving car and he said they won't they won't drive into that. uh but for Uber and Lyft that would also act as a pickup spot when it was not being used for those other operations. Uh so one of the points that the staff has pointed out and uh thank you Joy for that excellent report is that we are we've replaced the retail with an additional unit and part of it is that we had um the functions that formally occupied the zone where the trash pickup that took up a bunch of space that we needed to find other homes for. And to compensate, we have the the uh two-bedroom now immediately adjacent to the lobby. You see the bike room is back on this back corridor, one of the bike rooms. There's also a long-term bike room down the basement. So on this level, we have a gym addressing the courtyard. And uh just as a reminder, this is the older scheme where we had the commercial, we had the bike room on the front, switch gear, etc., fire pump. All of that has been relocated. And then uh one of the things you'll see is and part of the reason for the addition of the unit on the ground is that in order to accommodate the fire truck or no, excuse me, the garbage truck operations. This footprint in the upper left has a it's a double height space so that the truck can lift up the bins without colliding with the building. And then we have a series of additional open spaces on the upper levels. And this has two functions. One is to provide more open space for the building. A variety of different types of open space. And then also when we get to the sections, which I'll go to really quickly here. I'm just going to pass through this. I think Jerry showed those very well. I want to point out here this section shows the step back at the uh top two levels. Uh something that was missing in the previous iterations and then this shows the step back um addressing 788. So we are pulling back to allow more light into that uh space between there you can see the front step back on the top left and the ramp. And then here is one of the other reasons for the terraces. You can see that on uh on the lower section on the right hand side, we've removed those units to allow more light to penetrate into the courtyard. Now, this is not going to be a very sunny spot. We uh openly admit that. Um in these days and times, actually having something that's a little bit more shaded for an outdoor recreation or a lounging space is desirable. uh just because it's getting hotter and so we have a variety. We have the roof deck if you want to go sun yourself, but if you want to be outside in the shade, we also have the the courtyard and the terraces. And then this just shows a uh perspectival section of the courtyard, the terraces, and then the adjoining building. And then the material pallet is effectively the same as we had for the previous version and I've included it here for reference. All right, that concludes um oh I know that one of uh I got a note from Claire that there were questions for the landscape architect. Unfortunately, Claire, they were not able to make this meeting time. Um but uh if there are additional questions I can pass them along. Okay, that is um happy to answer any questions or go back to any of the illustrations for clarity. >> Okay, thank you very much for your presentation. Before questions to the applicant, we will open it to public comments. Do we have any public comments for this project? >> Um to the chair. At the moment we have one request to speak and if there's any members of the public um we have two requests to speak. Um our uh first um public commenter is Herb B. So I'll invite uh Herb to the podium. >> Thank you. You will have three minute to talk. >> Thank you Chair Ch. Uh this project has been introduced to you uh as a planned community planned home zoning uh project. But there is no such thing in the zoning code for planned home zoning. Uh the plan community uh zone district regulations are for sight specific uh projects. Uh and the plan home zone alleged regulations are really general regulations, the kinds that you would find in a general zoning district. Uh there there are two ways to enact uh PHZ uh regulations either as an amendment to the existing plan community zone district or as a separate uh zone district regulations, but that has never been done. And although there have been projects approved uh with with uh these ledge regulations uh nobody has had the inclination or the resources to challenge him in court. However, I think it's important to to set into the record that uh there is no such thing as a PHZ uh zone regulations in the zoning code either as a separate uh zone district or as a portion of the regulations uh for plan community zone uh district and that at some point uh somebody may decide that uh that should be challenged and that would put whichever project happens to be challenged uh at at risk of uh going forward. in this particular case uh from what I've heard of your questions that there's already some other project approved at this location and maybe uh that would be considered uh in place and not challengeable but certainly this one in its current state since it's applying for a zone change as part of the project uh would be subject uh to legal challenge if someone chooses to do it for the reasons that I stated now and that are also described uh in the uh letter that uh I submitted by email to you that's part of the administrative record. Thank you. >> And then um I I did want to offer uh Chris B a chance to speak. He uh put his hands down on Zoom. Um, Chris B, if you did want to speak to this item, I just wanted to offer you that opportunity once again. Oh, hey. Okay, Chris uh B, you may now speak. Hey, can you hear me? >> Yes, we can hear you. >> Awesome. Um, I'm on the road here. might be a little more discombobulated than usual, but I live across the street from this development, and so it's um important to me that it be an interactable uh piece of land that the uh community can walk by and kind of, you know, maybe there's some grass or some trees or something, something nice, you know, if it's just a big building, you know, you're walking around. It's really not an enjoyable experience at all. And besides the uh, you know, aesthetic part of that, it's really not a healthy thing to be around, which you really don't want to do. I mean, there is so much traffic on San Antonio, guys. I don't know if you've been out there in rush hour, but like people are literally in the intersection. Like, you can't you can't even move most of the time. I believe uh Ed Lowen gave us an F on our uh movement. So, what you really won't want to do is have all these buildings really close to each other and create kind of like a stagnation of the air. You really want that air to keep moving. Otherwise, people are going to be breathing. Very toxic chemicals. Um, it's really not appropriate to put a huge building here. It's very close to the bay and so it will sink. Um, this is a problem all across the nation, all across the world that people are just not thinking about these sort of things. Um and large buildings are sinking and it's going to be a problem. And um I was reading that New Orleans is going to experience about 7 feet of uh sea level rise very soon and much of the city will be underwater. This is one of those places in our city. This is probably the worst place for that. So having a a very large building is really just not a good idea. Um, and I think this project encapsulates what I'm dealing with throughout the city and throughout the uh Bay Area with this housing hysteria. I mean, you know, it's an appropriate place to expand. Like, there's there's nothing wrong with expanding. We have a relatively robust economy and it's been a while. Like, why not why not expand, right? And then so you have a very reasonable like like an expansion but still fits within the community and doesn't you know destroy all of our values about the environment and stuff. And then for some reason there's just some very loud voices and some very oh something's going on with people where they're like no we need to build as much as we possibly can. Like let's just build as many units as possible. And it's like that's just like what's the point of that? It's not It's not worth it. I'm really not into it. Um I did like that that I saw all the setbacks and stuff. Um there's a lot more to say, but I'm running out of time. So, thanks for listening. I hope you all have a nice day >> and uh to the chair. Uh that concludes public comment. >> All right. Thank you. Thank you for our public speakers for your comments and so we will return to the staff. So, could you please address the the comments from the first public speaker about the zoning questions? >> Sure, I'm happy to speak to that and then the um applicant also has an opportunity to speak. Um but uh to the first speaker's um comments, uh this is through the planned community uh reszoning process. So, they are proposing to reszone the property through um that process which is set forth in 1838 of the code. Um the planned home zone reference um was a term that council coined um that is is the planned community reszoning process um under a different name but same process. >> Okay. Thank you to the applicant. Uh you will have 10 minutes rebuttal. So, if you want to uh speak anything or respond any public concerns, questions, it's time for you to do it. Okay. Thank you. Uh so, now back to the board. Do we have any questions to the applicant? Who want to start? Well, I have one. Have you uh seen the parking operation working somewhere? >> They have several installations actually and uh as I said earlier, happy to share video. It's actually fascinating to watch. This is a company that started out in Manhattan and as you know from your experience there, land is at a premium. So, how do you jam as many cars as possible into the smallest volume? This company, Automotion, has figured out the formula. They're not the only one, though. We have actually been approached by a couple of other manufacturers who are interested in the project. Uh, I think there is there's just growing interest in fully automated parking because of the spatial footprint is so much smaller. Okay, >> just want to jump in here. So, may I know how long the video it is? Is it possible to share if there's two not too long? So, that I think everybody had questions about how the garage working >> two. It's about two minutes. Um, we allowed to share. >> Are we allowed to share that? >> Uh, >> we would like to note this is not an advertisement purely forformational purposes for the public record. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Click the >> Give us a moment and we can >> the uh panelist link. Okay. Got it. >> Sorry. Give me one second. I'll pull it up. >> Thank you. >> Should I jump in and ask a couple of questions? Go ahead. It's being pulled up. Um so and one thing is very obvious is compared to your previous you know street elevation to now the building next door also is much closer to the property line right than previously. So and and it's right on the your cover page as well. It's quite close. So, um I have obviously have concerns about daylight and all that, but other than that, cuz you're like 6'7 from the property line. Um I don't remember my code exactly, but I think you're allowed 25%. >> That's correct. >> Um for the areas of the facade that are within the 5 to 10 foot zone, it's a 25% window allowance. >> So, you are hitting the 25% as planned. >> I'm going to provisionally say yes. I'll have to double check with my team, but we did do window calculations and uh I believe that's correct. And then we have a further setback to the porch the um >> upstairs >> terrace porch doors and so that is under a different standard. >> Correct. Yeah. Um on the um and are these going to be operable windows? >> Yes. >> Okay. So these are large um squares. So, is that case mint? Like what? >> That the that level of detail hasn't been determined yet, but uh typically in a luxury product, we would probably do a case mint. >> Okay. Um and then um I was going through the plans. I didn't quite count exactly, but it looks like most of the units have balconies, but some don't. >> Is there a certain number that is does not have balconies, and is there a reason? It it primarily has to do with um the location. For instance, I think there's a studio in the courtyard that doesn't have balcony. Um there's one at the corner in the southwest corner, so at the bottom left that doesn't because the transformers are located on the ground right at that location. And so nothing is allowed to uh obtrude into that space. But generally speaking, we've tried to be uh Oh, then there's also I think a onebedroom that is located at the northwest stair that does not have one. But typically, except for those studios, um there's one that faces the special setback. >> Actually, >> I don't know if any of the studios have a balcony. And as far as the encroachment into the setback is concerned, the um souththeast right side in plan. >> Yes. >> And the southside and plan are encroaching into the setback. >> That's right. The balconies are permitted. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> It looks like Joey's ready with the video. We have the video. Uh sorry for that interruption earlier. No >> autootion works. The driver pulls into the entry and exit room. Light sensors measure the vehicle's dimensions and with the help of laser scanners properly places the vehicle on the pallet. The driver is then prompted to exit the vehicle and answer a few questions at the automotion kiosk. The door closes and laser scanners and motion detectors scan the entry and exit room ensuring the safety of the vehicle driver and any passengers. The car is then photographed from several angles. The driver receives the automotion ticket and exits the garage. Once the scanners and sensors determine everything is safe, the pallet holding the car is automatically transported into the system and the quick change process begins. The occupied pallet is transferred onto the storage and retrieval unit or SRU. Simultaneously, an empty pallet is placed on the elevator, allowing the system to process multiple cars at the same time. The SRU rotates the pallet to deliver the car to its appropriate parking space and properly positions the car for retrieval. In a continuous cycle, the automotion system is ready to receive the next vehicle, minimizing processing time. When the driver returns, they simply insert their Automotion ticket and swipe a credit card to initiate the retrieval process. The system identifies the correct pallet. It then activates the storage and retrieval unit and delivers the vehicle to the entry and exit room. The >> Sorry, technical difficulties. Just give me one second. >> I mean, I do feel like we all get it from there. The driver is then able to leave by driving >> two minutes without anyone ever having touched it. >> Automotion parking systems. Park, swipe, leave. >> And then the primary difference, of course, is that you wouldn't be paying. You would just be swiping your resident card uh if you have a parking space. Now, now I do have to ask based on the uh quality of the video and the year of the car in there, how long has this system been in operation for? >> I I would have to find out for you. It's been >> It looks like less than a current vehicle in the commercial. So, I'm curious. This has been around for a decade or so. So, >> I think that's about right. >> Okay. >> 7 to 10 years, but I can find out. >> Okay. Thank you. A related question to the parking. Uh so on the on the basement level one uh you have three stalls there but it seems like only two open to the tenants. Is it correct? Well, what is the third one for? >> Let's see here. >> Um sheet eight. >> Oh those are those are the entry bays. So this means that there are three entry points. The one on the top is for nonaccessible vehicles. The two lower bays. So the the garages that you saw the person driving into, that's what is represented in each of these three. I can see that the third one is drawn incorrectly. There should be a garage door on that. >> Okay. Okay. Gotcha. So So there should be three spots. That's right. >> Three uh three bays to operate. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions? No questions or Yeah. So, uh I have a question on the bike room accessible. So, you also have a bike room on the level one basement level one. So, how do people get from the street to this biking storage? So, the options are to drive uh your bicycle down the ramp or to enter into the elevator that's located adjacent and to take it across the courtyard. Um, and that that's more of an operational question. I would turn to uh the owner to answer specifically what would be allowed, but those would be the two possibilities. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, and on the on the first level, uh, can I turn on the, uh, first level four plan sheet A 2.1 on the screen? >> Oh. Um, do you have that? >> Can you repeat the the page number? The >> sheet 2.1, the first floor, the ground floor plan. Uh >> there it is. >> 82.1. >> Yeah, A2.1. >> So, uh I want to clarify. Is this the mail room location in the courtyard? >> Yes, it is. Uh it is. It has access from both the courtyard and from the corridor, but it is just a covered space rather than enclosed. >> Okay. So, it's covered. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. And and on the on the front elevation, you show some screen at the front at the street level units. Can you show me on the plan where are they? >> The screens. >> Yeah. The fence or the screens on the ground level to create a courtyard or something like that? Um, and this is the San Antonio facing units. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Excuse me. Let me see if I can find the right reference here. Um, so on page A3.0, zero. Um on drawing one, which is the top drawing, you'll see that there are two screened in enclosures and those would be for those units. >> Okay. So, if we are back to the the ground ground level floor plan, are they projected into the setback or is >> No, no, it's right up along the setback line. >> Okay. Thank you. I don't have any other questions at this moment. >> I have one question if we can go back to the first floor plan. I meant to ask this earlier. Um so if I if we look at A2.1 um there and I think Joe you were trying to explain this earlier. This uh crosshatch in gray is fire access >> proposed fire access. Okay. So the uh the challenge with the special setback is that uh ladder access cannot occur from the street. It's too far away. What we were proposing u this of course has not been decided. We're still working with uh the planning department and fire is at the southern end uh where the number 18 is. >> Mhm. We would have a rolled curb so that firet trucks could make it up onto that surface and we would ensure that the surface can support the required weight 75,000 lbs and then they could fight the fire from within a special setback zone and then when they left they could use the driveway. >> Okay. Um cuz if I go to the landscape plan on L1 um that is um agave planting. I'm trying to like >> Yeah, that that's incorrect. >> All of that would need to be removed and replaced with paving. We uh the directions the direction we got for the special setback zone is not to have anything permanent. If in fact we end up with firefighting access in that zone, all that stuff that you see there will change to a surface as appropriate. Um and I think that uh as I understand it for a ladder truck it has to be a minimum of 15 ft away from the building. So, we would still have a little bit of that zone that could be planted uh as a a buffer. >> And you said from the street, I guess from the driving part of the street cuz you have the step the setback and then there's sidewalk, >> right? That's right. >> Towards the street. So, you are not hitting the 15 to 30 ft for aerial access because you're so far back. >> That's right. That's right. Um, I think it it ended up being something like 40 feet to where they would park. >> Okay. Um, and I guess you're not getting any leeway from the fire department to be 40 ft away versus 30 ft away. >> No, I as I understand it, it's not that they wouldn't want to. It's that the truck itself cannot operate under those conditions because of the can lever. But I would have to ask the fire marshal. I do I do want to clarify that um we are still in discussions with fire about what the appropriate solution is um on how we address the fire. I I know that they do have significant concerns about um the building not being within 30 ft of the curb or the apparatus not being able to park without being able to go up on this um area. Um but we are trying to kind of work out what the solution would be. Um and it is anticipated that um this would require an alternative means and measures report um to document how you know what was agreed upon in terms of compliance with the uh fire code. >> Yeah. Because they're kind of between a rock and a hard place because they have to put the 20 foot step back but now they can't hit the aerial access distance. >> Exactly. Um since this is we're proposing a type four building now rather than previously it was type three over type one uh there may be some relief there that we haven't quite delved into um just in terms of increased fire resistance from the structure itself. So for instance in a type one building you don't need aerial access um you just have enhanced like stand pipes in the stairs that kind of thing >> that might be another direction that we explore with fire. >> Okay. is would be nice to have a landscape frontage versus page. >> It would be >> okay. Thank you. >> If no more questions, we will just turn it back to the board for internal discussion and comments. Anyone want to start? David? >> Yeah, happy to start. Um yeah, there are a lot of uh technical problems to solve in this. Um it's become quite a substantially more complex project, but I'm really really pleased with a number of things. You know, I'm pleased with the garbage. We'll have our little common laugh on that one. Uh, of course it it it means you're using private private haulers instead of the city, I guess, then, huh, for this is that how it what allows you to do this? >> Um, actually the the maneuvering requirements came directly from uh the uh keep what is the name? I'm sorry. Uh, keep it green. No, what is the uh trash >> trash people? >> The trash people, whatever. >> I knew there was green in there. >> Um yeah, >> their their regulations in >> That's right. their their recommendations on the apparatus and the clearances. >> So, they can handle it then >> as we understand it. >> Yeah. Good. Great. Uh well, it's it's just terrific to get all that stuff out of the front of the building. And then the second part of this is the access and the way in which it works. I think you know this is a prototype for the street itself somehow. Uh, and I planning I hope planning is looking at all the buildings along here because it now it clears up the issue of the 25 ft setback and the building extending out into the court into that space, you know, and all kinds of other things. And uh I'm I'm really impressed with that because it's a it's a opposed to the comment we heard from the phone, you know, uh it uh it's an kind of an answer to a busy street that will now have some real access. And so there'll be a lot besides we haven't said anything about the uh delivery and so on automatic cars yet coming into the space. They'll they'll have to figure it out too. Uh but uh that's a real real improvement for San Antonio Road and look to hopefully maybe other people will pick up on that idea, you know. Um but we lose we lose the idea of uh landscaping and it it becomes a little more difficult with the bike path etc on the street too. U however you know I hope that that there's some ways in which that can everything can be put into this package of what happens in the 25 foot setback so it really solves in San Antonio road. Um so in terms of the uh lobby uh I I would like to ask another I did forget to ask here the clubhouse. What is what is the clubhouse? >> Um effectively it is a lounge in the lobby space and uh uh I think the term is maybe slightly misleading but it's just a lounge space. >> A lounge space. So, you know, my my opinion is that uh you don't need it here. This is really taking up space in what is really a very nice entryway into a much larger building. And the object is to get the people in and get them to their apartment somehow. And then there's waiting space for pickup or whatever, you know, and that could happen within this lobby. And with even floating furniture would just work fine in that space. It's a wonderful space and you're kind of cutting it in half with this this separate lounge area. I just don't see the sense of it there. However, a a clubhouse seems like a good idea somewhere else. I don't know if it's possible to stick it on the roof in the corner in the southwest southeast corner of the building up there where it would be easily accessible and then you could related to other functions on that. Now that does that does that further create a problem with the height of the building? Is there some way in which you can zone an exception for a clubhouse on the roof? Just seems like a good idea. Fit the functions, you know. Um I don't know how you would do that, Claire, with the zoning. Is it possible? >> Say that one more time. uh that you could just allow for a clubhouse on this roof structure where there's a landscaped area and people are going to be up there, you know, and it's a great space for clubhouse. >> Are are you speaking to a public clubhouse or p just private >> private private to this building? >> Certainly, they can propose something along those lines. Uh but um I can't recall I can't recall how that would affect uh the height I suppose of the building. Um yeah, because mo you know on the upper floor I mean it would be changing around how you were designing unless you were adding another floor. Um I don't know that there would be support for adding another floor if that's what you're asking. Well, I'm asking for one ex one minimal exception, a kind of a room up there for for community use that allows the the rooftop to be used for people who might want to have a room like this. Seems like a kind of a room that would be very useful on the roof. I could also see it in the one of the projections into the courtyard one floor down, but uh uh definitely out of the front lobby. That's just not a place for it. You've got a terrific lobby space there. And for the size of this building, you need all of it. Um, and then access to the elevator has, you know, if you didn't have the clubhouse, you could create a nice wide access to these two elevators. And, uh, I've I've always been bothered by so, you know, by the fact that you really hadn't emphasized the access to the elevators in every building that I've gone into in New York. You know, that's really important. Um, so you could carry the flooring all the way to the front of the elevator, you know, and it leads you right there. Uh, the front lobby areas is just, you know, it just struck me there are things that you could do to improve it. You could maybe steal a little bit from the trash room and put the put a uh put the mail right there in the front lobby. Uh, so you went into it and back out of it the other side. You keep it open that way for the mail room. And then maybe what you call the mail room could be uh something like a package room because there's always packaging coming into buildings like this and they need a place to go. Just those are just planning considerations as you get into the building a little bit further on. Um I I just noticed that all these patios that are facing the side that were discussed before uh some of they're there the one in the studio is uh in into a living room, dining room, kitchen area, but the ones that are in the two bedroom units are Is it possible to lose a little bit of the area of the living room, dining room, kitchen when you plan these units so that the patio could be part of the living room instead of part of just in the bedroom area on the first on those floors facing on the side. consideration. Also, um, another minor detail, but I don't understand really why you need these projecting glass elements on the front of the building because there's no privacy issue. You have this fin sticking out there. I don't think it really benefits the building that much to use it. If you were using it as a privacy wall, then I could understand it. But it those those balconies are set in. Am I Look, is that is that in fact the case with all of the front of the building? All of the balconies are set back like that. >> Yay. Yeah. >> I I just personally I think that the forms of these the forms, you know, the form of the front of the building is better off. uh without without that little fin. Maybe projections around the windows might make a little bit of sense because it would add a bit more texture to the front of the building and shadow lines, etc. That they're pretty severe shapes and they could be softened by something like projecting surrounds for the windows. I'm sure you guys can figure out what that would look like. Uh the from the front of the building, I really like the way the uh gray material comes down from the top all the way down to the bottom and sort of creates a separate turning element at that corner. And I of course like the way in which you've set these things to the angle of the front of the building too and the back as well. Um but I seems to me that you unfortunately you change from that gray material to something tan on the left hand side. It would really be nice if that were complete all the way through the base of the building. These are sort of hopefully improvements in the design, but um I think you this is really quite an improvement from before. Not just those little technical issues, but the shape of the face of the building is really quite something now. And it seems to me that it sets a again a principle for the whole street here because the scale is brought down to something very un reasonable here and separated it by its shapes. It it's a terrific I you know it's really doing a good job. I think you should consider in all of your public spaces, maybe except for the well, even if you had a little on the roof, too, toilets. If you're going to go to these community spaces, you know, and your room happens to be on the other side of the building, your apartment, it's a hell of a way to go to have to go all the way back there, you know. So, think about the think about think about that possibility. Um, the back of the building, you know, I get a little confused about maybe you wouldn't need some of the balconies and you wouldn't have all of the privacy issues. You could reduce them somewhat. you know, the the units themselves, the the the number of balconies in the back where they're balcony next to balcony seems like a overkill. And so some of them might not have balconies or you rearrange those balconies in some way so that they don't interfere with each other. But the balcony, but the back of the building needs those either it needs the privacy or it needs some rethinking as to your uh use of the balconies where the where you have them. Uh uh um okay. I don't know if we'll have a second round of of it. Of course, you know, the parking is I got to fingers fingers crossed that you can really make a system like that work, you know. Uh I mean, I think it's again, you know, you're right. It's a minimal amount of space for a lot of people. And this is the idea of San Antonio Road. As far as I'm concerned, it should be for more housing and and this kind of housing really works there. Uh see if I have any we'll let I'll let somebody else start jabbering like me. >> And I I'll I'll happily jump in next if that's all right. And uh I admit I am uh I'm a lot less favorable on this project than David seems to be. So David and I like to knock heads. Um I actually found this project to be a bit disappointing to be honest. It's um we have this concept of sort of base, middle, top. It applies very well up to about six stories. And with the previous design, it was, you know, beautiful. We worked it in and everything looked great. This feels like it was just sort of it extruded. And when you do that, it loses some of the the beauty of the relationships and the proportions, right? It feels like there's just sort of this extra big white chunk in the middle and then there's this thing on the top and it just it lost some of its elegance in my mind. Um, it feels like very reactionary architecture. It's very reactive to the building next to it. Okay, they got tires higher so we want to go higher. And while I understand the the theory that it would negatively impact the people living in this building, and I understand why you would want to go taller, um it it didn't feel like the intent that you applied in the first round was applied here. It felt like it was just reacting. They went taller. We're going to just stretch this, make it taller. Um and I do think that there's something lost on the exteriors in that way. Um, the front facade leaves me wanting. Um, I appreciate the blue highlight to remind you where the door is because honestly, it would get lost if it wasn't bright blue. You can't see it. It's not anything super special. Um, I'm going to go on a personal tangent here. I absolutely hate these two build these two units on the ground floor right next to the front. That two build unit and the other one next to it. And then there's a door in between them. And I'm like, is the door going to the balcony of the one-bedroom unit or is it going straight to the street? Why is the door there? Why is the hallway there? That whole little area needs to be just take a second look. Um, and I think part of that is because there was a loss of retail, right? And it's uh one of those things that we've been trying to push for retail in a lot of these larger projects because we do want to keep um invigorating and animating the street level. And this one has an opening for uh cars. Totally get it. Trash. Totally get it. Lobby. Sure. And then two units. And then a switch gear. And it just feels like again reacted, not thought about. Um to David's comments, I completely agree that the clubhouse in the lobby is just taking up sort of unwanted space and especially by extending beyond the end of that second bedroom, it's really creating sort of a pinch point down into that hallway. Um, the mail room could very easily move into part of that location and it would definitely change things. I can't understand why a mail room would want to be outside. That sort of baffles me. Um, I'm wondering if this idea of David brought up a clubhouse as well, which I actually fully support. I think it's a great idea and especially with a large building like this, having at least one community space to gather is a great idea. So, again, I understand that we can't necessarily tell you what to do, but these would be my suggestions, right? um that second bedroom, that two-bedroom unit right next to the front lobby, that could be a clubhouse. It could, you know, orient towards the lobby. It's right across from the elevators. It could walk across the hallway into that open space. There's a lot of potential there. Having a two-bedroom unit right there just logically doesn't doesn't do it for me. The one-bedroom unit, maybe if you, you know, kept the the ground floor really shaded properly and went through the columns and something like that, you could you could make that work. But this two-bedroom unit is really needs some needs some help. Um, I appreciate the efforts for the balconies. Everybody having an exterior balcony. You know, they're they're not always perfect and sometimes they're off of a bedroom instead of the main space like David commented and and that's that's still better than nothing. um to city council's comment on this southern facade um plan at the bottom of the sheet where it will be facing the next door neighbor who is sort of instigating this whole height increase to begin with. Um it's again it's just sort of a lackluster um facade there. But is there anything wrong with it per se? No. Is there anything that that facade is going to be able to accomplish without major overhaul? No. Um, you're going to have privacy issues staring at the building next door. It just is. That's that's going to be what it is. And in highdensity residential, there's some things that we just sort of accept. Now, as a 10-ft buffer, like if you've got 5T on your side and they have 5T on their side, is 10 ft enough to do privacy? Probably not. If the next building lines their windows up directly across from yours, right? So, in those cases, the best bet that we can ask for on either one of your buildings is, can you angle the windows 15°? Right? We've talked about this with some other projects previously. Even a slight angling of those um windows can help with privacy. Having um them staggered and offset from each other can help with privacy, things like that. But again, knowing what's going in next door and being able to react to it is uh only beneficial if you're, you know, trying to compare where their windows are versus yours and things like that. So, um I completely agree with David on the blue fins. I'm confused by them. They're on the north sides of the chunks of building that they're on and they're sort of not providing shade because the the units that are directly north of them are uh recessed balconies. So, they just feel like they're going to be sort of a waste of time, effort, and money. Um, yes, they're adding some color, but looking at your facade, there's so many other opportunities to add color. Uh, I agree with the concept that metal fins sticking out from the windows, especially if they're angled to some extent. you've got some angles in this building, like dig into that, you know, embrace that a bit. Um, so doing angled metal fins at the windows could be beautiful. Could add that bit of texture without necessarily needing these blue fins just sort of protruding off the facade. Um, and then they would also provide sun shading as well. On the note of color, this is all, you know, repetitive gray, white, gray, white, little bit of beige here and there. And I understand the need for a trena or the desire to add some blue. Maybe it's actually taking one of these white chunks and making that a whole different color. It would really break up the facade if it was like a white and then sort of a I don't know muted dusty blue and then something else. It would make this building feel less monotonous. So, actually just changing the color of portions of the white, right? Um I think could actually go a long ways. I'm going to very briefly touch on the interior courtyard elevations. Thank you for providing them. the other project did not have those and that was one of the things that I sort of had been wanting to see and so I was very happy to see that they were on your project. Um again, however, the interiors are just white kind of top to bottom on especially on A4.4 um section south number one drawing. It's just white top to bottom, right? It's very uniform. Same thing on the A4.3 drawing number two section east. Again, white top to bottom, right? And while the white will help with reflectivity and getting some of that sunlight to bounce around the inner courtyard, it's a great idea in that component, you've got such a better successful item on section west number one on that same sheet where you've got that brown texture coming in and even the living wall is beautiful, right? So, I'd say just give it a little bit more um you know, give it another pass and a little bit more love. Um with the interior courtyard, I'm always a big fan of interior courtyards. I think they're great uses of space and I appreciate your new terraces. I think that the new terraces are a great addition and I love how sort of by layer you went there. Uh level six being the largest, level eight being the smallest. I would love to see level seven maybe grow a little bit and instead of being a match to eight, maybe it splits the difference between seven and eight. Um, again, I'm sure you have a reason for why you put it where you put it, but just food for thought that maybe it's sort of six is the biggest, seven's the middle, and then eight is the smallest. Um, roof plan is great. I love it when you guys do uh active use on that roof terrace. I think that's going to be a huge space for people to go and gather. Um, going to raise a very minor concern about a fire pit up there, whether that's attended or unattended or on a timer. Um, so just knowing that there's a fire element on the rooftop might want to just understand how to make sure that that's turned off remotely or set to some type of timer or something like that. I'm going to let this go to somebody else for the moment, but that's sort of my uh my thoughts on this. Um, I I appreciate the amount of housing that this is going to put back into the city and I appreciate your thoughtfulness and trying to move that forward. Um, I just really would like it to have one more pass over it. So, thanks very much. So, I'll go next. Um, yeah, thank you for um sharing this project. Similar comments to uh previous board members, so I won't go too far into it, but um the first floor um of you know the entry lobby, clubhouse, mail room, redundant room, which in the landscape plan looks like another room. So, it seems like there's some you know plan resolution to happen in the first place. Um, I think the mail people get packages more than mail lately. So, just having making sure it's a room where there's space for packages instead of a pass through into the uh open space, this doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I think to um Kendra's point as well, that two-bedroom lobby, sorry, two-bedroom apartment and then, you know, that hallway to the the exterior because stair 2 needs direct access to the outside. Um that whole area needs some rethinking. I think the elevators and the stairs if it actually faced the lobby I mean the elevator lobby is not essential. You can use smoke guard and variety of other ways to not need an enclosed room but make the lobby much more of a welcoming presence versus down the hall or at least do doors on hold open. So like you know where you're coming in to your uh apartment is or condo is you know a gracious welcoming um path. I mean it's all about you know making this a nice uh place for people to live. So all of those you know as how do you enter how do you get to your place how do guests come to your apartment? Just think about those sequences and you know improve on that. And on the same vein like you have a donut circulation and you have this other elevator also very useful but then it's got doors and um in into the hallway again use uh different you know smoke uh prevention method so that the circulation is very open welcoming you can find your apartment not hit a dead end with a with a door. I'm also in favor of clubhouse on the roof cuz again kind of similar to the previous project having places where you know these are pretty small tight apartments to have any kind of gathering with your friends would be great to do that on the rooftop. So having a place where you can warm up food or you know even bring in Door Dash whatever and bathroom like having some you know access restrooms accessible from the the roof garden. Same with the open space the gym area on the first floor. I um you know if you're living on the fifth floor and you're gathering with your friends like anybody need some water restroom you're you know go to the fifth floor. That seems like a lot. So like just make it a lot more pleasant place for people to live but and also welcome their friends and family. Um I think those are all important ways to make the living community attractive to people. Um yeah circulation. I think those are uh my key thoughts on this. Do not love the fins but do like the idea of having color. Thank you. Well, thank you all. So, yeah, agree. There is a huge uh improvement for the on-site trash pickup for this project. I I think this set up a good example along the San Antonio corridor. And I think it not not only uh solved the problem of on-site pickup but also huge improvement to for the bike safety along the road so that we don't need to staging the trash along the along the sidewalk and and interrupt the bike route. Uh I agree with with my colleagues on the clubhouse lobby. I think it's it will be beneficial to open up the clubhouse, remove the walls and have a more welcoming lobby. And also um I understand that I I agree the two the two units facing the street are not desirable, but I also understand you lose the some um some additional space on the second floor due due to the on-site trash pickup. So um I want to ask my colleagues so what if uh they switch the twobedroom and onebedroom unit with the gym and have the gym to be street front. Do you think that would be a better solution or Okay. Yeah. Yeah. I think maybe you can reconsider that route and Yeah. because of the on-site trash pickup. I think I'm okay with with the expense of the retail and also I do appreciate the amenity space at different levels, the open space on the ground level and some terrace on different levels and also the roof garden. You also provide different options between shaded area and the one that is uncovered. So, I think all all of them are nice. And I do agree with the the blue things on the on the street front. Although I think it's it's a good feature for this building, but I just don't understand how how it works and and what the purpose of that. Or maybe you if you really like those blue fins, maybe you could use it as your railings. Instead of glass railing, you could replace it with the uh the blue fins. And yeah, so um on the south side, I know you want to keep the good size of the patios and balconies on the south side facing the adjacent development. I'm wondering whether you could push it back a little bit because so that it it will not be within the setback. It seems like the living room and the living room areas could be a little bit smaller, but we don't have the dimensions here, so I don't know. But if everything could be within the setback, it will it will be better. And that's all my comments for now. Any additional thoughts for this project? sort of second time around, you know, you you're kind of white projecting structures in the front. Uh I think you could I think you could work with patterning, you know, consider some alternatives to, you know, some color color added to that those elements. You know, if if for example the window surrounds had created some shadow and then there was patterning of your material, you know, it's a it's an opportunity. You know, there's so many details to that you've needed to solve here, but you're at a point at which you could play around with some patterning and make that work. I leave it open to you to think about that. Um, I think that, yeah, there's a there's a conflict on the ground floor with the elevator and the unit across. I don't know whether a club club clubhouse down there is a good idea. I think on the roof it's so much better. Um, I would I would keep the unit, but work very hard on making access to that apartment, not right off of that corridor somehow, you know, or or a lobby into into the apartment that creates a way of getting in there. Um but I other than that I really owe there was one one area I I thought about you know you have that uh looked at the plan the black area that's on the top very edge on the right hand side of the elevation there's only like a foot or a foot if if that could be accentuated a little bit more I think it really needs some dimension at the top that it is too tight right now to to change material like that. So think take a look at that. Just see what you could do. But I want to really say once again I think is this this building is is a really nice scale for San Antonio Road. Um, I would hope that other buildings wouldn't wouldn't be too monolithic because it's it's a very big building now, but really uh really useful to have this number of units for the city. Uh, it's a it's a plus for the city if you can make everything work. >> All right. Thank you. So if no additional comments, uh do you want to go through the summary again or just to make sure if you don't mind, could you please pull up on the screen? I have a list. I'm not sure if um Jerry has anything to add to this. I'm going to share my screen. Hold on one second. All right. Um, so some of the things that I captured were consider the location of the um, mail room and bringing it closer to the project frontage. Um, and reconsidered the lobby design in general. um reconsider the location of the community room, including consideration of bringing it up adjacent to the rooftop open space. Um concerns regarding uh the loss of retail um and the ground floor unit design. Uh the color along the main facade is very repetitive. Um, and uh, I think I was still kind of typing this out, but um, I think there were some general concerns about massing and proportionality. Um, one suggestion was consider taking one of the large areas of white facade and making it a different color instead. >> Can I jump in there really quick? >> Yeah, that would be great. >> So, really quick, um, the one bullet point above concerns regarding the loss of retail in the ground for unit design. I think that's two different bullet points. And I think that the retail, if I understand correctly, when they go to condos, it has to do with they can't if there's retail, it completely changes how they can sell these units, something like that. So, understanding that just might be a moot point. Um, but the the ground floor units um at the onebedroom and the two-bedroom specifically um on the front on San Antonio. So, we consider the ground floor unit designs facing San Antonio. So, I would just be that specific about it. Does that sound good to everybody? >> Yeah. >> Oh, sorry. >> Go ahead. I was just gonna had I had a question about the retail because I think only one board member kind of raised that point. So should I you know is that something Okay. >> I don't think I'm sorry. I don't think that we really any of us really felt that it was a big loss. >> It's it's me. It's I get that. And also I do understand I mean I don't know if there's a way to note like concerns regarding the loss of retail but understanding that it might be a mood point right like I'm totally fine with that like just I get that if it has to do with legal ease of how you can consider these units for sale that's fine. >> Um >> is it a concern about like activation of the street um >> which moving the gym to that uh to the front could be a little bit more lively? >> Exactly. the two units. It's not necessarily a retail per se, but >> I mean I mean it is I I would love to see more retail along San I want that to be a walkable street. I think we've talked about >> for retail the parking requirement would be different. Right. >> Exactly. So understanding that like >> I can want all I want. Right. But like it's a real project with real constraints. So, um, but yes, I think activating the street is really the primary, if we zoom really far out, the primary goal is to activate the streetscape so that when people live on the street and they walk down this street, if there's retail, maybe it's not at every building, but that there's something they're walking past as they're getting to their coffee shops and that completely agree and fully support my fellow board members on just sort of re-emphasizing the activation of the street is really the the big picture goal here. So if you lost the one apartment and it became retail down the ground floor, >> it wouldn't not not in this project. I think that that would change everything. So it's like either they have retail and they should go big with it or they don't have retail because of I mean from my understanding from some of the other projects if they have retail there's parking issue requirements and then as far as I understand there's as it's a condo and they're sold then it's also a different thing. When you have rentable apartments retail is easier but when you're selling >> separate garbage etc you know it gets complicated. Exactly. So, I understand if they're just like no retail, I get it. Um, and I think if I'm understanding this project correctly, that's that's what happened here. Um, but that being said, yeah, activating the streetscape so that as people walked, this is going to be a super busy street soon, right? This is 170 units next door is probably about the same. Uh, the Cenote project just a few doors, two doors down on the lefth hand side is going to be elderly residents as well. It's going to be great. Um, but just making sure there's something that they can see as they're walking down the street and it's not just like repetitive, mundane, uh, facades. So, um, I'd also like to say the color along the main facade is very repetitive. Concerns about massing. So, consider taking on large areas of the white facade and making a different color or texture. To David's point, he had said maybe the the line work or something like that on the white. I mean, we see a lot of these projects where they've got control joints. We get it, but like it's been done also. So, let's let's see if they can push the envelope on that a little bit more. So, maybe different color or texture to that. >> Okay, sure. >> Yeah, >> thank you. Um, so just uh moving on, reconsider the interior courtyard elevations as well for the users of the courtyard. Uh, so the south section is designed very nicely, but the other facades aren't broken up as much that generally capture. Um, consider modifications for the fin design. Uh there was support for the pop of color, but the fins themselves don't seem to be functional and could either be revised to be more functional or otherwise modify the design to still have a pop of color integrated in a different way such as using it in the glass railings. >> Uh consider making the gym uh street. >> Did you mention while you're thinking of that the window surrounds >> exactly where I was going to? Yeah, if we add a second bullet point there and say uh reconsider window surrounds to potentially have >> more more >> more depth >> more detail to the facade >> depth slashdetail. Good. Perfect. >> And I just realized I think this >> Yeah, move that up with the other one and we're good. >> Yeah. >> So, are we all thinking about moving the gym to the front? because I I really kind of like it sort of animates the courtyard at the same time. I I would say it, you know, look into the possibility of it. But >> yeah, I'm I'm sort of like if they had like for me personally, I think that the clubhouse, like we talked about with the previous project, the clubhouse being like right next to the um the open space is great. They have the clubhouse, the party flows out to the courtyard. So for me, I think that the clubhouse at the ground level on the courtyard is a great idea. and maybe switching the gym to where that two-bedroom is and maybe they can put another onebedroom next to a half a clubhouse or something, right? But there's possibilities here. Clubhouse, gym, figure out which one wants to go where. Um, so I'm I'm more open to which one's which and then but I know that all of you guys wanted a clubhouse up on the roof. So >> something up there, you know, you have no enclosure too. This is an eighttory building >> with 174 units. >> It's the rear of the building. You won't ever see it from the street side. still if the building height is not a problem, >> right? >> Yeah. >> I think it's the going back to activation of the street. So, >> um a gym like even if it's like, you know, not visible, it's might have larger panes of glass, have some color graphics that will make the the street frontage much nicer than >> Yeah. gray fair wall with a couple of windows. >> Yeah, I'm open either way. I just want people, not private residences. >> Yeah. It's not going to be a pleasant unit on the street. >> Are we good with what's on the screen? David, >> still thinking. Any questions from the applicant? >> Okay. And >> do you need a package? Do you really need a package room for a building like this this scale? And >> since there probably there won't be a concierge, it's likely that the it will be a package locker and we're seeing more and more and more of those. So >> yeah. Okay. >> Yeah, we can figure it out though. I think there's plenty of space in the front to rearrange. >> Yeah. And we do need a recommendation to the cont to continue the project to a date uncertain. Okay. I move >> I move to continue the project with a date uncertain. I second. >> Can we have a vote, please? >> Um, yeah. Board member Rosenberg, >> yes. >> Uh, board member Hirsch, >> Vice Chair Adcock, >> yes. >> Chair Chen, >> Motion carries 40. Okay, thank you. With that, we will Yeah, great job. You solve lots of problems in a complicated situation. So, next we we we will move on to board member questions, comments, announcements or future meetings and agendas. Do we have any comments, questions? Is it? No. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, next we will open our floor to virtual public comment. So, if anybody connected remotely, this is the time for you to speak on an item that is not on the agenda. >> Can I ask is this a permanent change moving forward that the virtual ones go to the end? And why why is that? We've unfortunately had quite a number of um Zoom bombings um where um there was a lot of uh racial um lovely counselors. So um >> we can't have nice things. Okay. >> Modified. >> Okay. Thanks very much. Appreciate that. >> Yeah. And uh through the chair, I've not received any requests online. If there's any members of the public that would like to speak, they can raise their hand. Uh to the chair, I see none. >> Okay. Thank you. Meeting are journ. Thank you everyone. Thank you.

Okay, good morning. Shall we start now? >> Recording in progress. >> Good morning everyone. Welcome to the April 16, 2026 ARB meeting. Can we have a roll call, please? >> Um, yes. Um, Chair Chen, >> yes. Vice Chair Adcock >> present. >> Board member Hirs >> Board member Jojarth >> present. >> Board member Rosenberg. >> Uh for the record we have quorum noting board member Rosenberg is absent. >> Thank you. And next is agenda changes, additions and deletions for this meeting. Do we have any Stephen? >> No changes planned for this meeting. >> Okay. Thank you. And next is the public comment. This is the time available for anyone from the public who want to comment on this item that is not on the agenda. Excuse me. If you want to uh speak about an agenda item, there will be time for it later this uh for the later in this meeting. Do we have any public comments >> um through the chair? At this moment, I have not received any public comment cards. Um I would invite any members of the public that are joining us via Zoom if you would like to speak uh to raise your hands. Uh I am not seeing any. >> Okay. Thank you. And for the record, board member uh Rosenberger just uh joined us for this meeting. >> Thank you. >> Apologies for my tardiness. >> And next we I will hand it over to Steven for city official report. All right. Well, good morning. Having a little difficulty with Zoom here, but um just note a few items. So, on Monday of this week, we had a builder's remedy project that received approval. So, that was 366 El Camino Rial. Uh that is the 321 unit apartment building located uh in between the cross streets of Matadero and Kendall Avenue. And um if we're thinking of some upcoming items for our next meeting, uh the lot t streamline housing development project as well as holding the chair and vice chair elections. And um as for uh meeting schedules, uh if there's any planned absences, please direct that to staff's attention. And we'll note that for the record um based on some previous feedback that 6:18 meeting will be cancelled due to a lack of quorum. So I can entertain any questions. >> Any questions to the staff at this moment? >> No, I just want to note that I'll be away um July 2nd as well. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. And if not, we will just move on to our action item for today, which is recommend to the city council on outdoor activation standards and pre-approved park plans for the carfree portion of California Avenue. Uh with that, I will hand it over to Bruce for staff presentation. Thank you. >> Great. Um good morning everyone. It's really a pleasure to be here. been looking forward to having this opportunity to to present the work we've been doing and working in collaboration with Musam and Martin the last several months. So been really a very productive process. So I'm very thankful for their participation. So um we can go to the first slide. Yeah. So, u what I what I'd like to it's a probably about 15 or so minute presentation. Um want to just go over a few things. Um council direction. Um some of the merchant perspectives that we've had in working with them on developing these outdoor activation standards and pre-approved parkletit plans. Um a little bit about our ARB ad hoc process. Um, and then I'll get into the really the heart of what the challenges were and the opportunities with the out outdoor activation design. Um, and then go over the pre-approved parklet plans and then uh a pedestrian and bicycle concepts, next steps and recommended kind of actions. So that's my that'll be the content. Okay, next slide. you know, um the direction for council for Carfree Cal Avenue actually started way back in 2023 when they initiated looking at California Avenue for the design of the street uh to be carfree. Um, and then back in March of last year, they made an action to permanently close California Avenue from Birch to El Camino and to designate that as a community street as a car-free environment. Um, for the outdoor activation program, we presented that in June of last year, uh, and received quite a bit of public and merchant and community comment. And after that, what was really clear is the direction from council was to pursue developing standards for for parklets on the carfree portion of California Avenue and consider how to do that for all year round outdoor dining and then to utilize the ARB for design recommendations and review process. And then there were some details about planters, but also looking at the total area for outdoor dining to make sure that's equal to or close to the existing amount of outdoor dining that's there. Um we've also um when talking about California Avenue also been talking about bikes on California Avenue and council direction really back in 2023 was to look at having two-way slow bike lanes down the center of the street and we assume that as sort of a base for how we've looked at the design. Um and they made lots of recommendations in sub subsequent meetings about speed pedestrian conflicts parallel routes using Cambridge etc. So, um, we developed our design concepts, uh, with that in mind. But then when we went to the economic development committee, excuse me, uh, on March 18th and showed them that concept, which we have in this presentation and materials you've been provided, they said, can we look at, please look at exploring alternatives to bike lanes that prioritize uh, you know, pedestrian use of and public space for pedestrian use where bikes are really allowed. So, that's been the direction that we've had. Next slide. Um, so we've been we have ongoing meetings with the Calavan merchants. We meet with them basically monthly. And at those meetings that are on Cal Avenue, um, we've been having ongoing discussions around parkletits and outdoor dining. And just to summarize at kind of a high level, what we've been hearing, um, is they really want to have a a range of investment options. different businesses have different kind of like business models and so somewhat we want to do custom for our you know our for the for our um customer experience others are like well what's the minimum that we can do to be able to make sure we have really nice outdoor dining um the other things they wanted to see permanent solutions um Cal Avenue the car-free portion of it's the only part of the parklet program citywide ongoing that doesn't have uh permits for parkletits so they really said, "Look, have add parklets and have parklets be part of the the uh permit process." So, we've looked at that and permanent solutions interested in pre-approved ones to see uh because they see that that can help expedite um permitting and then look at solutions for all year round dining um take care of speeding bikes. But basically, they're saying if they're going to be investing in the public rightway, they want to have the best possible customer experience for their diners. Next slide. Yeah. So, you know, um after we heard council direction in June, we kind of regrouped to staff uh and then developed a process where we had um Mama and Martin join us as the ARB ad hoc committee. We really went through we've been meeting basically like twice a month which is really quite a lot. Um but it's really necessary in order to really uh thoroughly go through what was what was needed here. But we looked at updating requirements. Um some of that has to do with public utilities. There's a gas mans and gas laterals that are on the street and we wanted to look at what to do about protection and setbacks from those. We looked at precedent parkletits. We looked at examples, excuse me, not just in PaloAlto but you know Mountain View, Sonteo, Albany, Alama. We looked all around the Bay Area, examples of those things to talk about what's working, what's not working. Um, we looked at the the street itself and how it functions. And then we develop these sort of activation standards and pre-approved parklet options. So that's what we've been doing. Um, we've been meeting with merchants every month and saying this is where we are with our ARB ad hoc process. They had a chance to see the results of that, provide feedback, and we've used that feedback to advance the work we were doing. Um, so I think it's been a robust process. Next slide. Yeah. Okay. So, you know, I know that sometimes these slides are also part of the public record. So, I have a lot of text on some of these slides, but I think that the main message here on Cal Avenue is that what seems like should be simple problems with design intention actually have very contradictory challenges around how to actually solve them. And this tension around simple intention but complex challenge for actually resolution has been part of the part of what I think has led to a really interesting and very Cal Avenue specific set of solutions. For example, it's supposed to be car free, but it's not really car-free because every weekend you have service vehicles and therefore farmers market where you have over 80 vendors. Um, you're supposed to separate pedestrians and bikes for safety, but we can't put in any vertical delineators or anything that's sort of in the space because it's really needed for that for emergency access. You can't do the normal things that you would do to separate things out. Want to talk about having to be open and transparent in terms of the parklets because you have no cars, but we also want weather protection and that if you do weather protection that blocks views to being able to see storefronts. So, there's all these contradictions. want permanent parklets, but you can't have foundations or attachments to the pavement. You want to have equivalent area, but we've got to reduce it because of setbacks for emergency eress. You want universal solutions that work everywhere, but the sidewalk varies everywhere. So, you're going to have unique solutions for everyone. And then you want to utilize the roadway for parklets and there's a gas man in there that you can't build on top of. So, it it really created a lot of challenges. The next slide, please. So um yeah, great. So the way we the way to think about the street, we'll talk about the street first. Um is there were really like 10 12 really key design problems. And what ended up happening is you had to really design really a unique designing a unique outdoor dining solution for almost every single business. Um it's not like University Avenue or El Camino where you have just a fixed sideway down the whole street. It varies all the way. It's some places there's no sidewalk, others it's 10 feet or 12 feet or 14 feet or 22 feet or 30 ft. It's all over. Um we need to um really have the central emergency eress, but we have to have emergency eress for each building. Uh and working talking with George Hoy, our building officials, like because the the restaurant density is so high on California Avenue, you have like basically 20 to 25. Waltz is 22 and then all the be up probably up to 25 year um of dens. So they're almost it's almost like one right next to each other. And so if you're going to introduce anything that's going to be a structure, you have to make sure there's adequate space. So if there's a fire in the building that people can get out the to the rightway and then not have the sidewalk cluttered also too much so people have a place to evacuate to. So we had to look at all 30 buildings and what's needed for emergency egress for each building and then how to do that equitably. So so every building has what it needs. So they have to split and share space between each building. So that was a big issue. The sidewalks the tenant front is all very there's a gas man which I mentioned the roadway itself is all over the place right because it's parallel angle parking bus stops turnouts medians. There's all kinds of things in the road that don't make it clear how to use it. in a kind of simple way. Um, and so and then there's all these sidewalk barriers, right? Because you have planters, street furniture, artwork, walls, plant, you know, bike racks, newspapers, think all kinds of things. So what what I'm showing here, this drawing right here is really an illustrative view of if all the businesses wanted to have a pre-approved parklet and they wanted to have equivalent outdoor cafe seating that they have now, how would that lay out on the street given all these constraints? And so that's what this drawing this drawing shows. Basically 19 out of 20 restaurants can have a a pre-approved parklet that could be in front of their their business. to figure out ways to do that. Um, so I can get into the details of that more, but that's just kind of the big picture on why that part was a little more challenging. Next slide. You know, the other things that you know this is sort of a detail. Um, on the left is sort of how to think about the street in terms of its the frontage of a building and its activation zone. We've been looking at the street as you know has the frontages, has a pedestrian pathways, has sort of street furniture, curbside zone, and then these activation areas where you're really using the roadway for um commercial use for activation. And then you have the access way. And so this this plan sort of shows here you have the building frontage, building front, and then you have the frontage zone, pedestrian zone, street furniture, and it also shows this gas man. This a typical it's about six feet away from the it's 29 ft from the face of the building. and and then you have the setbacks and we're doing is 4 foot setbacks from the property lines for each business. So you have basically 8 feet between parkletit structures for emergency eress. Um and and so that's the way the the the space is available for for outdoor activation. So this is how to maximize the public rightway for commercial use of the sidewalk and the roadway. Now given all those constraints, the the drawing on the right is really an illustrative drawing of showing how you can lay things out. And this is has a seat density of of 15 14 you know seats per square foot. Uh but you have the dining that's right along the building frontage. Okay. It can have an awning over for example umbrellas uh you know matra deep sand you know menu stand areas. And then you have the parklet which is an extension of the sidewalk. And then you can use some of the street furniture zone also for dining. So that shows that and this is assuming if you're to be serving alcohol that you can have railings and we've worked with public works being able to attach railings to the sidewalk even with a mosaic glass sidewalks. So you can actually create a slightly deeper parklet because of the narrow thing with the gas mate. But I think the thing people don't realize is because of the gas line you can you actually have the opportunity to have cafe seating on the roadway beyond the parklet. Okay. So you have basically the access way, some planters or however you want to do your barrier, uh cafe seating, ADA ramps to take you up to the sidewalk, you have your parklet, sidewalk dining, frontage zone dining. So that's the basically the the opportunity for how it could be utilized. Next slide. Um so that's like all the site planning stuff, sort of the first layer of trying to think about this. The next one was about well what do these things look like? How are they organized? um uh what are their characteristics that make them, you know, unique to California Avenue as a car-free street. So, we looked at a lot of examples. Um here's Evia. A lot of people like Evia. There's things that I think are really fabulous about Evia, and there's some things I think they're challenging about Evia if that was to be applied to Cal Avenue. Um May House was another one that we we thought was very good. That's on Emerson. And then the barrel bistro and wine and on be street in site was another very good precedent and we can in the questions and answer we get more details about that. What we created was basic guidance learning from what we learned from these about what to do for Cal Avenue and that's like how do you maintain storefront visibility keep things light and transparent minimize enclosure massing stay open to the sidewalk be operable for weather where it's retracted or it's not in use. So you can you can see in this two sketches a sort of sun sunny windy raining areas but in this cross-section which is a section of the plan we just saw before having the uh parklet roof can lever over the sidewalk because the parklet's a little bit shallow is a way to be able to use that street furniture zone and incorporate dining as part of that. I think that was a big innovation and thinking about the plan of how to really make things work. Um, and then what's so beautiful about that part of Cal Avenue is it's like it has almost two furniture zones. It has the old one. We have street trees and it has a pedestrian walkway and it has the new one that's so 22 ft wide. So it really takes advantage of of all that. Next slide. Yeah. And so we we after looking at that, the next thing we tackled was pre-approved parklets and how do we adapt them to California Avenue? Now in the in the current plan you current parklet program you you have basically wood structures or you can have steel structures and what we found out is that very few almost no no businesses were in were actually implementing steel structures. So we said we got to look at maybe another way to to think about this. But the there's two problems that were really paramount. One was how do we create a structure that has no foundation or attachments and like so that took a little innovative thinking as you might imagine because when we went and did the precedent work when we talked with all these fabricators about their beautiful pergolas they all needed foundations so we had to come up with something unique. So what we came up with, our engineer came up with this um is doing flat steel plates with basically a sleeve or collar that's welded onto that and then then then you can actually have your posts in that and the structural frame for all the lateral loading which is basically wind is the moment frames and the connections that are in the roof. So by doing those two things, we were able to create a structure that's actually quite transparent and open and adaptable for any of the street environments that we have on Cal Avenue, whether it's flush like in front of Zen or whether there's a curb or whether you want to be partially on the curb sidewalk and on the on the pavement. So that was the basic structural innovation that I think was really great. Um, the second thing is we thought for Cal Avenue, we should do something that's pre-approved that relates to all the conversations we've had about the character of the street. And part of that been it's mid-century modern kind of quality, the sort of eye clear like quality of residential things. We said, can there be a structure like a cabana versus a pergola which kind of recalls some of those mid-century things without overdoing it, but actually is the minimum amount of structure in order to be able to create enclosure, protect people from the sun or rain. So, we came up with that and then we did the pergola. And the pergola has these um corner brackets that are welded that are able to be quickly assembled on site. Um that is a way to frame up being able to do a a laterally resisted structure with minimum structure and minimum roof. So you have these two different ideas. Um and then you can also have roofless parklets which don't have the 350 foot limitations. So that's kind of that's what we did here. I'm I'm really excited about how they look. They look at cable railings as a way to keep things open. You don't have to have the barriers that most parklets have to protect people from cars. So we removed all that. So we've created options to create a very transparent you know environment and you could see in the cabana view you could see parklets across the street too. So you get sort of a sense of just like the street environment in terms of how these elements would be being be introduced. Next slide. Um so you know we had to do some data analysis. Um this is just showing to address council direction about equivalent area. You know 2024 was 12,620 ft. The red is roadway, the blue is sidewalks. 2025 where we actually able to measure and count. It had contracted quite a bit um for many reasons but the main one was that it there was really kind of post-pandemic adjustments as to what businesses actually need in terms of area. Um and then we look at our activation plan. Um and if you're within the setbacks of all of that then that that would increase in total area. And then if we do encroachments, which is what you have today, where outdoor dining is in front of other tenants, other businesses that are adjacent, if we continue that uh that pattern that's out there, then that can expand even further. And this is through a letter of consent thing. You have to when you um go to get your permit for that year, you have to make sure you have consent from your neighbors that that's okay. So, you know, the key thing is that we're able to meet that requirement. Um 19 to 20 restaurants as I mentioned have pre-proof parklets. And the other thing is that those 400 foot tents that are permitted out there, those will no longer be permitted. So that will actually shrink some of those areas. The covered area be no more than 350 square ft max per park, two per business. But next slide. Yeah. So I'm going to kind of pivot here a bit. And now just a couple of things about pedestrian bikes. Um, you know, we originally supposed to look at how to have a two-way bike lane down the center of the street. Uh, when thinking about that, we thought it needed to be bigger than the 20 ft for this the emergence of the standards for fire trucks for access. We looked at 22. It's much bigger than the 16 ft that's out there now. Um, and when we looked at this, as you can see, this is an illustration from the National Association of City Transportation Officials. They really create the national standards. They're brilliant. They're fabulous. They're state-of-the-art. It's really how cities are evolving and thinking things about mobility. It's a great resource. Um, and then they're looking at shared spaces. This is a a graphic from that. And and what I think is important is that Cal Avenue is a um through bike route. It's commuters go from Cal Train to Stanford Research Park. It's a a safe routes to school route. It's it's a pretty heavily used bike route. And then in this one area of the bike route, we're looking at actually figuring how to make it a shared designated designated space. And the guidance has always been do that, but have them be separate. And then the way they've separated it here is they have street furniture elements that really separate the pedestrian areas from the bike areas where these planters, bike racks, and things like that. And we can't do that on Cal Avenue. That's the thing that made it kind of complicated how you do that. But that was sort of the basic guidance in that. So next slide. Yeah. So here are these two different concepts. The top slide is the council direction two-way slow bikes. We created pedestrian prominade. Uh instead of having crosswalks that go from sidewalk to sidewalk, we really looked at limiting crossings for pedestrians to just the bike way and then adding more of them to help slow things down. you know, at the entrances because of the medians, that sort of changing in direction really helped slow bikes down. Um, but when we presented this at the economic development committee, they felt like this is going to encourage bikes to go faster instead of slower. Um, and that it makes the space feel like it's bicycle dominated as opposed to feeling pedestrian prioritized. So, they asked us to look at how to rethink this problem. So the the solution below as as a uh I think an innovative way to think about how to do this. Basically, there's no bike markings that meet any of the C's or you know traditional municipal uniform traffic control requirements. So there's nothing on that now. So it's thought of as really a public space. And then there'll be these sort there'll be an area that's in the center, but we'll be using these thermoplastic stripes along the street to really kind of define the kind of pedestrian pedestrian environment. Now, what we found is that when people are riding bikes and they go over those, there's just enough texture that it's slightly irritating and the faster you go, the more irritating it is. So, they're going to want to ride on the smoother portion of the of the street. Just human nature. Okay. And so we have a little these little oval dots to help separate who goes on which direction, left, you know, north, east or west. And then we added a um what you call is like a tactile um it's like not really a warning, but a tactile delineator strip that allows people who are disabled to be able to track walking in an environment and know where they're going. And we added that along the southern side along where all the restaurants are. So pedestrians can walk on either side, not just on one side. Either side. And and when they're doing that, there's a way for disabled folks to be able to walk safely adjacent to where all the outdoor dining is. So if they want to go to all that, they can do that. Um, you know, we knew it was important. This had to be legible for children because you have so many kids. So we wanted to make it very clear and easy how to do that. And we wanted an environment that welcomes bicyclists. I think today people still feel when they ride their bike on there, they're not supposed to. So they sort of dash through there. So we're thinking, let's let's not do that. Let's make it feel like they're welcome also. Um, so that's that. We can answer more questions if we need to on that. Next slide. Um, so our next steps, we're going to be at Earth Day Sunday, May 20th, we're going to go to economic development uh committee and uh talk about the recommendations we're getting here. And then June 8th, we want to go to council. And then last last slide. Um, and that the recommendation here is council takes final action. So, it's not like you're making a recommendation. It goes to the planning director for their action. This actually goes to council. Um, so it's about the standards that we have here and the parklet plans. Um, and then any feedback you might have on this public space concept. Um, so I want to thank you for your patience for me to going through all that. I know it's a lot. It's a big project. Um, so anyway, thank you. >> Thank you very much for your presentation. And I'd also like to thank our ad ad hoc committee members uh for your time and efforts working on this with the city members. Thank you. Uh so before our questions to the staff uh we will have our public comments for this project. Do we have any public comments? >> Um through the chair I've not received any public comment cards. If there's any members of the public comment please raise your hand and I will add to the queue. Uh it looks like we do have one. Um give me one second. >> Uh our first speaker is Laura E. Laura, you may now speak >> and please state and spell your name for the record. You will have three minutes to talk. Thank you. >> Thank you. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Fantastic. Hi, my name is Laura Ecwall. L A R A E K W A L L. First of all, Bruce, thank you. Uh lovely presentation and I think that it's uh very valuable that you included uh all of the hurdles that you have all been dealing with. I think that that was helpful. Uh one favor is if you could go back and clarify where the bark uh in the last plan with the curvy the last the last drawing that you had, if you could highlight where the bike parking would be. There was uh con um comments a little while back that we might lose the parking in front of our business at Labor Gita and I'm hoping we don't. So, could you clarify that please? Thank you. >> Thank you. Yes, please go ahead, Bruce. Yeah, I think that that um where businesses would like to have the bike parking removed as a barrier to their being able to activate their space, we are collecting all that information around preferences. So, if you want to keep the bike parking there, there's no reason for it to change. Now overall for all this parking we're looking at removing like you know maybe 30 bike racks total we're looking at relocating we were to relocate those towards the entrances for where bicyclists come in. So they'll be at the El Camino intersection and the Birch Street intersection and also at Ash Street and then some additional ones in front of Country Sun Market if you come in from Amosa Lane. So all the ways that you could enter there will be bike additional bike parking. >> Thank you. And Samuel, do do we have any other public comment? >> There is one more request to speak. >> It will be uh Michael E. Michael E, you may now speak. >> Good morning. Thank you very much. Uh my name is Michael Ecwall. happen to be Lara's husband and business partner at Labodita. And uh you know, I just want to uh you know, reiterate what uh Lara said. I mean, I want to recognize um the work that Bruce and his team have put into this effort. Uh I feel like their time uh and energy and the commitment to improving the community and, you know, the the area of California Avenue is much appreciated. Uh however uh I'm going to put a curveball in here. Uh I think that you know what the city promised residents and businesses for you know many years now a European style prominade has um not happened. Instead, after spending what you know we see as hundreds of thousands of dollars on outside consultants, we're left with a plan that definitely is falling well short of the original vision. And I think Bruce kind of articulated some of the challenges that we're having. But I really feel like the the lack of support from what we see as businesses, from the community, you know, and initially as this whole thing rolled out, very few people, probably 1% of the residents actually responded to the survey that got the ball rolling on this project. And you know, the reality is that, you know, the businesses are the ones that are really affected by this plan. And you know, many of us operate with multi-million dollar lease obligations and the prolonged street closure has not delivered the economic businesses uh benefits that we were promised and said we've seen declining business activity, reduced accessibility and delays in emergency services. And I'd suggest that you talk with fire in particular to uh address those issues because we've had very very serious delays in terms of their access to the street. And now what we see is what was framed as a revitalization effort is in practice creating ongoing challenges for the businesses that you know this is really supposed to support. So you know after six years I feel like it's reasonable to ask whether this experiment of a closed street has succeeded. I feel like the budget shortfall that the city has and to be honest, most of the merchants on the street really support reopening the street, you know, potentially as a one-way avenue that stills allow allows, you know, thoughtful limited outdoor dining. You know, these plans that Bruce is laying out to be, you know, easily overlaid into something like that. you know, outdoor dining has always been a, you know, a very healthy part of the business community, but if we're going to have outdoor dining, we do need to have yearround, you know, protected outdoor dining. Um, but, you know, even saying that, I don't think that that requires the full street closure. You know, I think we'd rather return to a more balanced and accessible model that can continue the system that benefits all of the businesses. And I think that we should reconsider opening the street. And >> thank you. That concludes your time >> everyone >> and through the chair uh we have no more requests to speak. >> Okay. Thank you very much and we will close the public uh portion of the meeting and return to the board. So if to our board members uh if you have any questions to the staff it's time to ask. Who want to start? David, >> um, you know, that presentation was fantastic. Uh, thank you so much. The depth of what you've gone through here to solve problems that seemed insoluble has been has been incredible really. We can see your thought process through through the whole thing. I mean, something like the horizontal strips just to slow the bikes is such a clever thought beyond what what you might have come up with. You know, I'm not quite sure what the material is, but I trust your judgment on that one that you'll find something that works permanently more permanently with the street. I have one kind of question is that you know there's the original scheme which we haven't really discussed the original sidewalk patterning and glass pieces to it is quite an exciting piece still there and you you didn't actually mention that uh and I wondered whether or not the uh pattern of the black line that follows the edge of the seemingly the edge of the street represents the air that particular area because I would kind of hate to see that destroyed in some way in particular areas where it's very useful. So that's one question that I have. Let's see if I have some others here. Um yeah, the bike plan is just it seems to me the bike plan has to be a kind of flexible plan and represent representing that opinion, you know, therefore maybe the response to something like that would be movable the movable bike racks in some way perhaps colorful bike racks. You know, that's up up to you as to the furniture design, but it seems to me that uh having more bike racks might be necessary. You know, that as the street becomes just more attractive as it will I think it's going to attract bikes. So, that becomes a significant area of discussion. I know you put it at the cross streets there that those are the important areas. Um and of course they need to be lockable etc. Um and they also can be you know we have so many kind of almost playful ideas for for bike racks that can be part of the character of the street as well. >> Um uh I had a com a thought about the parkletits. You know I looking at some that are kind of that minimal dimension. I have just one little thought about it, you know, and that is that if it if it were possible to have a stronger piece of structure on the sidewalk side facing the merchants, wouldn't it be possible to have more openness? So to study that particular structure might be even if you eliminated one or two of the columns and stretched across worked out a bit more of the detail. I think those parkletits that you're showing are kind of very simple and the ones that you showed us from the other other areas of the city are very elaborate and needless to say they're probably more expensive and that this as the one that any merchant can kind of get through the city quickly and get up and operational makes a lot of sense. So I don't have a problem with the concept there and I've seen some of them that have followed that particular design and were quite successful. But it just seemed to me that the as you enter the those parklets, you know, it's kind of better if you have more space to get in and out so that the food delivery is easy and the furniture could be movable. So maybe you'd think about that a little bit. Uh um you know there's some areas of the street that are really kind of dead areas and I I'm not quite sure how you've dealt with them. Maybe you could come back and just describe some of your thoughts about that. I'm sure you thought about it because it's pretty evident where they are. Uh those are kind of my thoughts at the present. I have a suggestion for you which I'll hold till later. Come back to me because I generally have some crazy crazy idea that I think might make it even better as a street. you know, you have done as much, I think, as you'd be expected to do, but maybe there's something else. >> Thank you, David. Who want to go next? Awesome. >> Yeah, I can go next. Um, thank you, Bruce. It's been really fun working with you on this. Um, the uh I do have questions about the the change in the the bike concept, which was pretty recent. Um and I was wondering if um because this is you know not a super long section of this you know for as far as biking is concerned I don't know if it was considered whether this could be a um you know walk your bike only kind of space obviously it is a commuter direction and all people are going to come through with their bikes and I'm thinking of even you know places at Stanford where at like places that want to be pedestrian and prioritize pedestrian. There's, you know, signs for walk your bike. Of course, like 75% of the people follow the the rules and 25 won't. But at least it discourages biking and kind of from this um the the diagram that um you added with the the stripes and the dots. It's kind of trying to discourage speed biking anyway. Or would it make sense to either it's kind of a timed like you know certain busy times is walk your bike only or like during commuter time in the morning for instance or afternoon when actually you know there's not a whole lot of outdoor dining happening anyway and so the street pedestrian wise is not that busy. it makes sense for biking to be allowed and people get to the train quickly uh or towards school. Um but not like kind of a timed way to discourage biking versus allow biking I should say. Um cuz in that with that in mind, I feel like the the dot pattern while it's interesting is feels a little too wavy to kind of really be a bike path. um if you're just commuting to train and back and um I love to bike and when there's like too much obstacles you're kind of looking down at what you're um trying to like basically do an obstacle course through and you actually don't look up and see people you might be about to hit right um so I feel like maybe a little bit simpler but uh as far as commuter time is concerned but um but otherwise like in busy farmers market times and I'll like just, you know, walk your bike through that section of the street. I'm just wondering if kind of a hybrid solution like that might be more appropriate because the way we were looking at it before where there is a bike lane through the middle that's one end of the spectrum uh and I just want you to think about the other end of it uh so that it's you know not more challenging than necessary. who want to be next? >> Yeah, I just wanted to commend you guys on this work and again, thank you to the ad hoc committee for their information on this as well. You can see how much effort's been put in. Um, I'm actually quite fond of this new pedestrian bike path. Um, of course, there's always two points to every uh every comment here, right? Um, I think it's very thoughtful to have the bike parking at both ends of the street so when they're coming off the commuter train if they want to walk they can sort of park their bike and do that walk. Um, I live down in LA and we had the LA prominade down there and that's beautiful example of how this can work really well. Um, my counterargument to posting signs and saying that biking's not allowed is I think that we have a lot of people who really do respect the rules and I think that that would really just make it, you know, difficult for the people that are just trying to get from point A to point B. Um, I think that this winess pattern is quite lovely and I think it really is going to slow down that bike traffic. So, if someone does need to get from point A to point B, they won't feel like they're breaking the rules, right? But they are going to have to pay attention to the people walking around them. Um, so I think this is a lovely solution. I think that it's actually going to work really well. Um the concept that you've got the uh what's it the the tape coming down on the streets um with that slight rigidity so that people will be inclined to stay on that I think is brilliant. Um to to Mus's point maybe this could be you know a little bit less wavy but overall I think that it's it's a really nice direction to be going. Um, I did want to also comment on the two callers uh from the public that, if I'm reading correctly, their restaurant is sort of down near the front entrance towards El Camino. And it looks like on on the map that there's bike parking across the street right at the entrance. Um, if we can pull up the map, I just wanted to sort of point that out. um and just make sure that there's not, you know, a loss um of overall bike parking because I do think just making sure that we've got bike parking and an ample bike parking is going to be pretty pretty important here, especially if it's to discourage people from biking, right? The only people biking through this should be the people getting from point A to point B. Everybody else should sort of park their bike and walk. Um and so if we zoom in here, it looks like, let me see if I can get my pen going. There we go. So, it looks like we've got some parking here. And if I understand correctly, this is the restaurant from the um people calling in the Ecwells. And there's parking here in front of Country Sun. Again, also I think that that's very clever, right? Cuz people will want to load their groceries onto their bikes immediately. Um and then having the other parking over here at the the right end towards the um as close to the Cal Train as you can sort of be at this point. Um so I think that that's a very clever setup. I I might suggest adding a little bit more to this entrance side as well towards El Camino. Um just again to sort of balance out from both ends where people are coming in, how they're going to park. Um and then just as a thought question is if there's any need for bike parking sort of at this Birch Street entrance and how that entrance is going to be handled because I don't think we've really There's a little bit there. Oh, is it right here? >> Yeah. >> Okay, perfect. Beautiful. Okay. I didn't see that before. Thank you for pointing that out. Um, as a question, see as I'm doing only comments at the moment, has there been any consideration about sort of blocking this area off and making sort of a U-turn where cars could in theory come in, have a drop off zone, make the U-turn, and then leave again? Has there been any commentary on that side of El Camino for any sort of drop off point or making that, you know, shortening this um planter strip to make some type of roundabout U-turn that would be a vehicle drop off point? Um again, that's something that the Prominade has done in LA and it's actually quite effective and with the uh rise of Lyft and Uber and things like that, that might be well worth exploring. Um and there's sort of a natural point there already. So has that been considered at all? >> Yeah, when um when we first started we had these two alternatives adapt and reimagine the street and so that that kind of thinking was started being discussed at at that time. Um for this we were looking at what are the kind of first step improvements needed for bicycle safety and so that's what we did in the design of of this and emergency egress and then we put the planters in as they are now in order to help protect people from you know like what happened in Santa Monica example. Um the trouble we were having with trying to bring cars in and around there is that it kind of conflicted a little bit with the simplicity of what was needed for bikes. >> Mhm. >> Um so anyway, it's a good thought. It's worth exploring further. Um we didn't explore further. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Thanks very much. Um other than that, I I wanted to also briefly touch base on the um the actual parklet designs themselves. They're elegant. They're simple. I think they're going to be really nice and people have plenty of opportunity to um sort of design them up to fit their own standards um while still having a pretty elegant base to get started on. So um hats off for that. I think that this is um very well thought out and um really quite impressed. So thank you very much. >> Sorry, I did have one more question. Um I wanted to touch base really quick on ebikes. So while traditional bicycles I think absolutely they can be ridden very slowly, people can meander through, is there any sort of concept or discussion on whether or not ebikes will be allowed and if so um speed limits, things like that? We've seen kids tearing through the neighborhoods, you know, three of them piled on one bike with no helmets on. Um so on that front, I would strongly discourage those from being maybe allowed in this area. Do you guys have any concepts on that or um any other sort of motorized vehicles being allowed through this pathway? >> Yeah, that that issue is something that our transportation staff are really looking at as part of the overall citywide pedestrian bike transportation plan. Um you know, there was a recommendation that like an 8 mph speed limit be set for for Cal Avenue. Um, that kind of odd number was considered as a way to get people to stop and actually think about what their speed really is. However, it's impossible. Most people have no way of knowing how fast they're riding their bike. Um, but setting some kind of limit, I think, would be helpful because with the opening of a public safety building and you're having more police officers just in in the the area that would give them ability to do some enforcement around that. Um but yeah, it's so it's we're we're looking looking at that. Clearly, it's a real hazard, you know. Um yeah, >> great. Thank you. Yeah, I guess that would be my my one suggestion is maybe it's just as simple as saying ebikes must be walked, but other other bikes could be ridden um just because they can keep a safe speed because it's manpowered, but the uh the electric bikes really just one little one little trigger and they'll be zooming. So, thanks very much, board member Joseph. Well, I I'm not going to provide any further comments because I had, you know, four or five months available to to me to provide comments. But I just uh want to thank you for going through this process and being like so open to the needs of the community and the businesses. It's very hard to satisfy everybody the needs of the different departments in the city. And uh I agree with I agree with David. I think you put you put a uh square peg in into a round hole. So well done. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you very much. And I understand we still in the question session. And so uh I do have a couple of questions. So on packet page 28 um it noted as there are four types of permitted parklet narrow parklet wide park parklet roadway and sidewalk parklet. So could you please clarify when you mention narrow and wide park it will be the covered and the road roadway and the sidewalk is like roofless park. Is it correct? >> Yeah. Um yeah, the way we're we were thinking about the I mean you can have a roofless parklet. Um but uh this was trying to define kind of what the shapes were and how they fit in the in the in the roadway that this is basically saying like the spatial conditions where parklets can be located in ter that's really kind of defining the types. So a narrow ones are going to be like you see in the diagram above, right? the a wider one is like what you see in the pre-approved park plan. of what they would look like. >> And the reason why we we distinguish these is that we had two other exceptions that we we wanted a permit. And that's that if you have a a sidewalk that's 22 ft wide, like basically from, you know, Izzy's Bagels to to not quite Joany's, but like to where, you know, um tea is there or sort of that zone right there was 22 ft that you could actually have a parklet that could be encroached partially onto the sidewalk also. So it could be up to 10 feet 10 ft wide. So we wanted to identify those as opportunities. Um and then also if you have a park if you have a sidewalk that's 30 feet wide >> you know that you can actually do something on that sidewalk too. That's the reason why we >> actually pull up the site plan the overall street view so that we can know which specific sections you're talking about. >> Yeah. Bear with us while we pull that up. Yeah, you can. Um, if you go, we can use this one. Do you want to use this? The other one was the earlier one that had the kind of issues and the challenges with it, but we could we could use this. This is if you go back one more. Yeah, that might be easy to see. Okay. So, you know, basically from, you know, on the south, we'll say south side of the road from Izzy's bagels all the way to really, you know, Mediterranean wrap, that sidewalk's 22 feet wide, right? And then when you look at where the um Yeah, thanks. your basically the the the cat place, Mottown Cats, you know, right there across from Mosa Lane, that's 30 feet wide. And then uh where you have kind of Umei, Sequoia, Labawam, that's narrower. It's I think it's like 14 feet. It's not as wide, right? And then where Jones is is back to 22 feet. So it varies in here. So, we're saying like if you're 22 feet wide, you could take advantage of the curb furniture zone that's on the sidewalk where there's trees and planters, then you can extend your parklet into that area. That's what we're saying right there. For example, and if your sidewalk's 30t wide, like in front of PaloAlto Soul and Son of Wolf where Summit Bikes is over at the Asht Street intersection, right? You could do a 4ft deep parklet cuz basically you have 34 ft from building phase to where the central access way is. But a 4ft parklet's awfully small, right? You really can't that. So we're saying, well, let's think about how do you remove barriers to outdoor dining? You know, we're looking at well, we're looking at some the cost of some capital improvements to be able to, you know, pave over some of those planter areas, put trees in tree grates, remove some of the walls that are in there, maybe relocate public art. We're looking at what's needed for being able to do that because you need permission from the donor of the artwork. But then in an area like that, you could do a a a a park that could be up to 12 ft wide on that sort of area. That's that's the reason why we we did that to sort of make sure that every it's the 23 solutions. It's like we wanted to make sure everyone has an opportunity to do something to be flexible. Yeah. >> Sure. Thank you very much. And thank you Kendra for circling it out for the carrier. Um, another question is I know uh, California Avenue could be different from the standard uh, parklay design. So I want to understand like the maximum 350 uh, square foot requirement is it like so why is that? >> Yeah, the the 300 um, when an applicant files for an encroachment permit, they have to provide sort of structural drawings. They need to meet the California building code with what they're doing with that or they can meet this American Society of Civil Engineers Code for Outdoor Structures. But um after 350 ft, you're required to have sprinklers. So So that's really the issue. Um that's really what's the limit on that. Got >> But if you have no roof, you can have a larger parklet. >> I see. So for uh for the for the uh restaurant or stores whoever have the longer uh street frontage which means they can build two separate parklet >> yes that's correct two parklets up to 350 ft each so that's like 700 ft respecting all the limitations >> understand thank you and I do have another question about the park design thank you so much for providing all those details and and design options But let me see for the plan view. I think I noticed the column to column distance is 8 ft maximum. So I know why because say if there for a regular table for four the table would be 3 ft wide plus the uh the seating area 2 feet on each side that would be 7 ft. And then for 8 ft that is column to column then it's quite minimum like there's no spacing between the seat and even for the wider ones maybe you you will lose one table so that you can serve the the table at more in the in the deep area. Yeah, we we we looked at this um what a couple of things is we talked with our structural engineer about what we can do to increase those spans, right? And his basic response and I know a lot of structural engineers who do this, but um was that because it's a kind of a a roofbased moment frame, you know, and it's no there's no foundations, he needed to have more frequent posts in order to be able to stabilize the the roof. So that's that was the basic issue around that. So I said okay let's talk to our architects and say are what can you do around the seating arrangements and accommodation in that case and we had them look at it and they did like 10 different layouts to show how you can accommodate seating with differentiz tables from two seats to four seats to six seats. And you know for uh in all cases they were able to really come up with the 15 square ft or less per seat. So all those arrangements were flexible and they allow equivalent amounts of dining as is already out there. So we felt like given those two things and if someone wants to do a custom parklet, they could do a custom parklet and arrange it however they want. Um that there's sufficient options to be able to meet all kinds of different dining configurations. Okay. >> Thank you. Do we have any other questions? >> I have a follow-up question actually. >> Sure. >> What you asked about the square footage because I know in this um cuz trying to be all weather almost, you know, 12 months a year. Um they all the pre-approved parklet designs here all have solid roofs which then requires a sprinkler if it's larger than 350. Um, I know we didn't really discuss like could it just be a trellis and in which case I forget if it's like 50 or 75% open then they could be bigger than 350. Um, right. And um, would that have to go a custom route or could we have an another version of the roof that is open trellis and then also allow larger than 350 if there's space allowed? >> Yeah, it's a great question. I think I'll talk to our George Hoy, our chief building official about that. Like what actually is the enclosure of the roof requirement that sets that area requirement? Because if you can have it be mostly trellis, which is probably more than 50% open, >> why not have it be larger? Yeah, I think it's a good question. Great question. Thank you. Yeah, following up with exactly that question. Same question is if a part of it can be, you know, roof structures up to 350 enclosed, trellis could be the other portion or it could be roofless, could that base all still be connected and uniform and it's really just the roof enclosure. So, just going back to that is just understanding where those limitations lie. if it applies to the roof or the foundation. Um, well, I guess not foundation, the base structure. Um, and just understand that better because it would be really nice for some of those larger places to have that flexibility instead of having to build two separate ones that they could build something that connected to some extent. But yeah, I understand we don't have the answer right now. So, thank you. >> Is there any additional questions? If no, oh, go ahead. >> I don't know if it's a question. Maybe a windup comment. Yeah, sure. Then we will we can just move on >> at which point you >> Yeah, we can just move on to the internal discussion now and have your comments or feedback to to the uh to the city staff. So, so uh uh before doing that I would suggest that maybe we could start because there there are so many things that we can discuss. So I would suggest we start with like the high level street scale discussion and then we can move on to the parklay design which is more detail oriented. How about that? >> Okay. Thank you. So, you know, back when earlier work was being done on this, I remember we we looked at the uh El Camino end of the site and thought about the entry. And by the way, I just like to make a comment. I just don't think it's a good idea to have uh have that interrupted by vehicles at that end. It's of course it's a very very busy street. You know, it's periodically kind of a highway and then it's nothing and then it's another highway. It's a kind of a interrupted transit like that. Um but what what we thought about because we we were thinking about how do you make a a symbolic entry to this whole street and I think that might be one of the thing that's kind of missing here. um and something that could sort of carry it over the top and make it really something quite different. And it seems to me these long lozenhaped elements offer a real possibility sculpturally. You know, it reminds me somehow I think about that uh is it Marino the horse big horse sculpture that's all a frame of a horse you know it's seen it's a very dramatic element I'm not thinking of that specifically here but I'm thinking of scale and somehow if the two elements that are the end the green lozenge elements were a piece of combined kind of comment or sculpture that defines somehow the excitement of the street. It could be a lighting could be a part of it. Could be open structures. Must must be some kind of an artist element to this that that is up and beyond the level of the street uh that's in the middle of the street. I think it would animate all of the life of the street in a in a very exciting way. So I would like to see if it's possible for you to find some way to include that, you know, as a object. Maybe it has to take some years to get it done, but it it ought to be a consideration that you have. Um, again the thought of the comment that was made about the traffic end entering the end of it because I think it brings up an issue as to how how the street is used for deliveries, you know, and uh midday type deliveries or days when it's an active street. And I I think you really have to explore your connections to the perimeter a little bit more in order to sort of enter the uh in order to kind of respond to potential sort of delivery issues. I think that, by the way, would hopefully keep the cars off of the street itself because there's plenty of parking all around the perimeter. And I'd hate to see all of a sudden cars reenter entered re, you know, the whole idea is to get rid of the cars and make it 100% pedestrian. and so therefore answer that those issues with the availability of parking and access to it. I think just about everybody in this community knows where the big parking garage is or the very long ones on you know Cambridge. Uh and there's there's a huge amount of parking around the perimeter. So it makes you know makes that street viable. Uh okay anyhow that's my comment I think you know those ideas about the yeah as you can see said the detail of maybe some of those suggestions seem to me to be very interesting. I just want to put my comment in there that open open closed possibility and actually answering the issue of dimension as was discussed I think ought to be part of your package somehow. So that you get your if you had your architects study it then we should see it. It should be part of the package. Um see if there's anything else you know the bikes have been discussed in detail. I think you know you've got re things to respond to to there. Um well that's that's my those are my thoughts. Again, I repeat, I think it's going to make a great street. Thanks. >> Who want to go next? >> Um, I can go next. Just a few overall um comments. Um, thank you again, Bruce, for um this very thorough uh package. Um just following up on what uh David was saying about the ends. I think you know you had your list of challenges uh you know uh that you're dealing with which is really helpful and clear and like trying to make this you know 95% of the time pedestrian and um and then but then you have the deliveries and the fire truck. I I believe if I understand this correctly, the the green bubbles, they have to be flat because that's part of the fire access, right? That's part of your 22 ft is between like on the the right end on Birch Street end of it. Between the two bike lane Yeah. If you could pull up the plan, um between the bike lanes is your fire access. It has to be flat. So, we can't really put a elevated sculpture on. Is that correct? Well, um, >> sorry, it's comment time, but please respond. >> I'm gonna, this is an important question, so I'm respond. The setbacks are greater where you have the medians, >> right? >> So that there's roadway that's available for emergency vehicles. So the median is not included in the space for emergency vehicle access. So you could put artwork in there. >> Okay. Um, that's great to know because I thought that was included in the um the emergency vehicle with um and I think uh yeah because if it's possible it like would be really nice here is to have a layer of greenery as well. We have the street trees in all of um these green bubbles including the uh diagonal parking islands like as part of this activation. Also adding um you know enhancing uh the greenscape of this area would be uh really lovely. Um and kind of like between what I was talking about earlier and Kendra, I I think the I really like the dots um and the lines pattern but just straightening out a little bit between um uh like the intersections just so when people are biking it's relatively simple. But I mean just from you know the hope is that when people with bikes are coming through and there's a lot of pedestrians they choose to just walk their bike for that length. Um so kind of want to make it bike friendly and pedestrian friendly without having conflicts and also not making it too difficult for people who are just trying to cut through the this area. Um I think other than that um this uh I know we you know don't have a budget to make major changes to the streets. I think that's one of the uh uh public comment was uh as well. But I think making it another layer of development in the parkland where if um people are able to make it a little bigger whether it's with trellis and use more of that street um for this activation um other than you know the 22 ft down the middle um from even like both sides like where I'm looking at right in kind of the middle of the plan uh where you have the widest Oh, actually I can pull like Kendra and draw on the screen. U here we go. Um like for instance, yeah, right here um this section of street that's left over is I think wider than 22. Like even if there's a possibility for these park lids to go get a little larger the dining area while leaving the 22 ft open. um or like how that might get developed over time if like I forget what this business is if they wanted a parklet um in the future if that becomes a restaurant. Um how like kind of keeping the 22 ft minimum clear but kind of maximizing what businesses can do from each side. um and loosening that 350 ft if we can um even if it's with an open trellis because sun shading is important half the year and then rain cover for the other half. So, um I know the goal was to really make it 12 months a a year, but if we kind of think about, okay, what are the other possibilities to make this even more increase the possibilities for the merchants would be great. But thank you so much. This is really great. >> And I'll jump in here if that's all right. Um I just want to say hats off again. I really think this is a beautiful design. I think it's going to be a really fantastic space for the street. Um, I think that, you know, just to touch base on, uh, one of the comments that had been brought forward by the public earlier, uh, I think keeping this as a pedestrian friendly area is actually pretty crucial for this city. We have plenty of places where the cars go. Um, and I've been a lifetime resident of here. I've been going to California have my entire life, and it's been such a tremendous improvement in my mind, um, and a benefit to the community to have this being a walkable space that people can really go and sort of spend time at. um right versus driving in, parking your car, and then leaving again. So, um I'm just to make a you know, personal opinion comment on that, I think that it's going to be, you know, much better to keep it as the pedestrian walkways. Um my one comment about the dot line, uh per uh board member Adcock's comment as well, it it looks like it was done with a pencil, right? Very detailed. And I think you need to like get a big brush stroke, and that's how you find that curvature of those dots. But the the plan is good. It's just stretching it just that little bit so all of those curves are just a little bit smoother. Um, and I quite like the color stripes. I think they're lovely. Um, my only comment if I could make a request is to explore the concept of drop off zones at each end. So, the one on Birch Street and the one on um El Camino, if those could be U-turn areas, whether it's shortening a little bit of that grassy zone, but just even at the Birch Street side, whether it's just a pull out area towards that. And again, there's the complications like you brought up where you have to provide access and then also barriers at the exact same time. Um so whether it's a paving barrier or whether it's a speed bump or something like that just to denote where you pull in and don't pull all the way in. um or whether it's you know temporary um ballard something like that but I think that this is a that's that's really my only sort of wishlist item is to have those sort of drop off zones at either end but other than that I think this is a great plan really looking forward to it so thanks very much >> thank you so any other comments board member Joe >> no additional comments >> okay all right thank you so much again for your presentation the and the study I think wonderful work and as all the other members just talked about, I think the pedestrian priority scheme is really successful and we we I think we all love it and yeah, while while it would be hard to ban the bikes entirely, I think like some concepts already mentioned like a time limited access would be helpful or or at certain areas we can just walk our bikes in that career and uh also um similar to to David comments I think it it will be uh helpful to like incre uh create some some like interactive uh activities or uh inst or maybe work with the public uh art uh art for some art installations along the street so that uh other than the commercial zones parklet we can also have some social loans. We could put things like some giant chest there or a connect for for people to kind like stay and play so that when people stay longer it's actually a benefit to the local business. Yeah. So that's all my comment and um other than that I'm not sure uh whether we provide good information on the park park design because you mentioned there is challenge. We want the park to be year round weather protection. So it seems like there is some challenges there because we also want to provide the transparencies for the design. So, anyone have any additional thoughts on that? >> Yeah, I had just you know the suggestions that uh you board other board members here have made might make it worth spending that little extra effort to have one design that's standard part of the standard with uh the open roof concept built into it. you know uh given given giving that option seemed like a reasonable suggestion. >> Thank you. If no more question do you have any additional questions or feedbacks you want to hear from us? No, I I No, I think this has been really great and really good suggestions and I really appreciate the feedback and I'm available if there's any other comments that you want to want to make. >> I'm curious if uh we can go through the packet with just like um for each page the type of options that you've um included. I know we've talked quite a bit about it, but I'd like to hear from other board members um to if this is kind of clear set of options because the whole goal is that merchants can take this packet, you know, checkbox series of choices and they're, you know, 90% there to building this other than, you know, um and then there's color choices and such. Uh but just running through the pages. Um for instance the um starting on the page zero uh A0.1 um like say um I'm just going to make random choices and kind of see if people have thoughts on it. Like say I'm a merchant who wants to use cabana. They have a choice of uh narrow or wide depending on the space they have. And a steel base is a pretty much a a fixed thing. It it kind of looks like a fixed thing on this um for Cabana, but uh Bruce, isn't it true that the platform base could also be an option if they go the cabana route? >> Um so should that be included in this? Um >> that was that I think that's somehow missing. >> Okay. >> Yep. Um and then uh the flat so flat or pitched is an option for cabana but for pergola it's only flat right? >> Yes. >> Um and then the overhangs are pretty clear. And then uh if we go to the next page on a 0.2 two um these are all options on the lowest the lower part enclosure and the upper portion um that's kind of shown slightly dotted um I can't remember if that was also supposed to be options um how would the merchants choose what happens above the railing >> yeah those are um sidewall options >> and they can extend from the platform form up to the full height of 6 feet or they could be above the sort of low wall structure and those are primarily you know um for screening. So they could be the sidewall notes address what those options are. Yeah. >> Because wasn't the screen supposed to be another layer of options? >> Yes. Now roll down screens are another option and that's in the um in the detail sheets there's yeah there's under the sidewall notes there's a section here that says roll down shades too >> okay so uh if I'm a merchant making choices I get to this portion with the check box and then there's a subset for the sidewall notes correct Yes. >> Does anybody have any thoughts or any clarity questions on >> And if I may, it does note uh optional sidewalls shown dashed a note under each of the checkbox options. So um >> one other thing that might be helpful just clarification is that the way the current program works ongoing um is that um an applicant comes in and they meet with public work staff they meeting with John McCarti basically and uh rather than using the um the um parklet they have like a handbook like a you know user guide for the handbook. no one's really been using the user guide. So what they do is they come and they meet with John and John goes through this with them around the selections that they want to make. And so they come up when they leave they have a clear selection of all the elements that they want as and the requirements for what they have to submit in order to advance. So it's there is that part. I mean yes I totally agree it should be completely clear here. Um but also that's just another part of it is process-wise staff is supporting being able to help make those decisions. Yeah, because we want to make it as easy for the merchants to kind of make the choices and come pre-informed when they come meet uh the staff. And uh as I was looking through this again on A2.1, there is the parklet roof uh plan with a trellis. Um but that was not on the checkbox options there. So if you could, you know, follow through with the clarity on if this is one of the options or how somebody might use that has come a long way. Um the developments there's probably another 5% of cleanup to go with this. Yeah. >> My my one I hear that >> my one comment would be is is as we all know going through many years of architecture school often times when there's no comment it's because it's good right so it's it's the nature of this industry is that you only get critiqued right we only nitpick the things that we find that are wrong so the fact that there's very little comment on this I would you know encouragingly say because it's well done um looking at it right now I think my one almost comment would be that you've got this divided to roofless cabana and um excuse me that word just flew out of my head pergola. And I'm I'm almost wondering if you even need that division if it's just really walking through. Okay, do you want a base? Um that's the full base or do you want the steel post? Okay, do you want what do your railings look like? Okay, do you want it to have a roof structure or no? If you have a roof structure, right, then you divide into this further. Do you want covered or open? And then add-on bonus. Do you want the drop down shades? It's it's I I understand why it's categorized into these three different things because that sort of is an easier thing to digest for the public, but it's kind of almost a choose your own adventure from the get-go. Um where just going item by item. What do you want your base to look like? Do what do you want your rails to look like? Do you want a roof structure or not? If you want a roof structure, do you want it to be sloped or flat? Do you want it to be solid or or open? And that's it's pretty straightforward. I think it's very much um like a kit of parts that really works well. Um, so my only comment would be if we even need the three categories, but I understand why you have them. Uh, because it really gets people sort of started in a good direction. So, no complaints. >> I'd like to ask, do do people on the parklets come in with an architect usually or uh do they not have an architect with them? >> Yeah, I I um I don't know the details of all the submitts have been done, but it's really varied. Some do have architects, some just have their contractor come in. >> Yeah. >> So those thoughts could be useful that way. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Mhm. >> If no additional comments, we will close this item and thank you so much for your work again. >> Thank you. Next, we will have, >> if I may, I do want to direct attention to packet uh page eight. Um, I believe that staff was looking for a recommendation for these two items since it is going uh to some subsequent hearings. >> So, we need a motion for this. >> Yes. Okay. Thanks. >> Cool. Uh, >> okay. I'll go ahead and move that we follow staff recommendations one and two as written on packet page eight. I don't feel the need to read them out loud. Um, but as written in the packet page, move to approve that. >> I'll second. >> Second. >> Oh, you second. Okay. >> Um, board member JJarth. >> Yay. Uh, board member Hirs. >> Yay. Uh, board member Rosenberg. >> Yes. >> Uh, Vice Chair Adcock, >> yes. >> Uh, Chair Chen, >> Motion carries 5-0. >> Thank you. And next we will move on to our two approval of minutes. So, is there any changes? and uh through the chair I just wanted to share but briefly that um everyone was present for both of those meetings so no one would have to abstain. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So for the meeting March 5th any modifications on the those meeting minutes? No. If no, I will I move to approve the meeting minutes as it is. Do we do I have a second? >> Sure. Second. >> Thank you. >> Board member Rosenberg. >> Yes. >> Board member Hirs. >> Yeah. >> Board member Jar. >> Yay. >> Vice Chair Adcock. >> Yes. >> Chair Chen, >> yes. >> Motion carries. 5-0. >> Thank you. And for the next meeting minutes is uh April 16th. I do have a minor change. >> March 19th. >> Oh, wait. Oh, yes. Oh, March 19th. Thank you. Uh I do have a minor change on the packet page 86 on the fourth paragraph starting with Mr. Ken commented the package page 50 and then line one two three four five six seven eight nine 10 on 10 line 10 chair chain observe uh observed the taller buildings would be a good sound blocker. It could it should be a sound a sound barrier or sound blocker not sound blocker. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other changes? With that, I will I move to approve the meeting minutes with the minor changes just mentioned. >> Second. >> Thank you. >> Board member Jar. >> Yay. Board member Rosenberg. >> Yes. >> Board member Hirs. >> Mhm. >> Vice Chair Adpock. >> Yes. >> Chair Chen, >> yes. >> Motion car 5-0. >> Thank you. So, uh, next we will move on to board member questions, comments, and announcements. Do we have any? No. >> Okay. >> This is the shortest meeting we've had so far. So, >> thank you guys for your efficiency. >> And the reminder is we will have the election for next meeting. So, if anyone plan to absent, please let Stephen know. And yeah. All right. Meeting adjourns. Thank you.

Well, Greg will join. >> Where's Hal? >> He'll come in. He usually comes. >> I mean, we can't, you know, he describe everything. >> He'll he'll join >> right in the air. Describe that. Do you use um tools now to do any of the note taking and things like that? >> Well, our our our clerk a few years back just did action minutes. So, we don't actually do full note takingaking anymore because we record. Yeah. >> So, it's actually very easy. We used to do notes. >> So, >> yeah, the recording is great. Actually, I was >> looking into one section of it for >> her mind the presentation and that was really great actually to look at that. >> Okay. Well, it's 2 o'clock and uh I think we have a call to order. Get started. Everybody ready? Okay. Do we have to have a motion for starting? No, we just start. Okay, great. But thanks for reminding me >> like I can't remember. So, we have some Do we have any public comments? We have a space for public comments right now. >> We do, but I don't we don't have any >> there's anybody >> anybody registered or online. >> Nobody behind me this time, right? Awkward that one. I was like, >> okay, so no public comments at this time. Um, what about agenda changes, additions, or deletions? I don't have any suggestions. Anybody else? Okay. Nobody has any changes for the agenda. So, the next item is approval of the previous minutes are very short and sweet. So, >> yeah. So, um >> I read them through. >> Yes. Excellent. >> Uh I have no comments on it, but I will move to approve them. >> All right. I can second. >> Okay. Then do we all vote to approve the minutes? Yes. >> Yes. Okay. So, wow. All right. Well, just motoring right through. So, we approved the minutes. >> Um and now we're on to the new business items. Is is grand yet? No, not yet. Well, that's unfortunate, but yours have. Um All right. So, the updated terms is the next item. >> Oh, yes. >> And I was all like, my has time how time has flown. >> Yeah. So, I'll be up for my term in October. >> Wow. >> Yeah. >> Is that after? >> It's my first term. >> After the next meeting is when you're >> That's a good question. We don't know when the next meeting is, do we? >> We'll probably have one before your term expiration. Usually, we have one before October 31st. >> We'll take that. We'll take that into account, I think. Right. because we do will need to do usually October, November time frame. We do >> the previous year's budget actuals. >> Uh I think it would be good to do it with this committee since you guys are reviewing the proposed today. I think that it would only make sense. So we'll we'll >> I'm not the only one who I personally I'll just share this. I'm gonna reapply. So >> Dina Dena is terming out and she's not planning on reapplying. She's been an active committee member for a very long time and she's I mean she's also a mayor. So she's been part of our our um community for a really long time. So >> Oh, there's Greg. >> Hi Greg. Welcome in. Do you know where we are on the agenda now? >> Yes. Do I have to make a statement? I believe >> can't hear you, Greg. Oh, can you hear me? >> Test on the >> Can you guys online hear us? Greg, can you hear us? >> I can hear you. >> Oh, there you go. There you go. Now we got >> Okay. I think I have to make a statement. >> Have we started or should I do it now? >> No, why don't you do it now? That would be perfect. >> Okay. I have just caused to attend this meeting remotely under the Brown Act. I have attended zero storm water management uh oversight committee meetings remotely this calendar year. This is my first. I must attend this meeting remotely because I must provide caregiving to my son in this room. I'm accompanied by no one over the age of 18. >> Thank you, Greg. >> Thank you. >> Get to see the kid that he's taking. >> Yeah, prove it. >> No, no, no. You don't have to do that. So, it's uh Dena, Hal, and Catherine. I'll turn them out October. So, we'll definitely have another committee meeting before that one. >> Um just Greg, just so in case you missed it, we went ahead and approved the minutes of the previous uh meeting. And um so, okay. So, with the updated terms really the only issue is that we all are aware of that and you guys are going to schedule the next meeting appropriately. The other thing is we're actually they're actively commi um recruiting commissioners and they're struggling to find >> um commissioners so you can spread the word. I know that the the one nice thing this is a good entry point to get people engaged because it's not one of those ones where you have to meet monthly and also the packet's not dense. So, it's a good way to get introduced to staff and it's it's not dense in terms of a lot of reading material, a lot of staff reports, I know in terms of that report, but it's a nice way to kind of get exposed to what >> what government work is, that kind of stuff. Um, and not and it's really a fiduciary duty in terms of what you do. So, if there are people that want to just get exposed to being part of the committee and get a sense of what's what it's like to be part of a commission, this is a good way to the the the ask isn't too large. Some of the other commissions meet a lot and the ask is pretty it's a lot of hours. This one's not. So, that's maybe for those that are you guys could help sell it to because we're trying to get some people to to um actually put in for the storm water committee. >> Okay. Yeah, we've had no applications for >> so really appreciate >> like accounting is the main main qualification really when you think about everything we were supposed to do. Well, I think it's interest, you know, we, you know, everything in have to look at that number. Did we do everything we're supposed to and that, >> right? >> That's the audit, you know. So, >> but it's also I mean, I think it's if you're if you're interested in in numbers, but you're also interested in storm water, you're interested in making sure that the fiduciary duties of what the committee is supposed to be doing. And then if you have an also environmental, that's I think those are some things that might be different things. and if you just want to get dabble your foot into what how the public sector is. So those are some things if you're at a a dinner party. >> So is the application link open right now? Refresh. It is so maybe we can reshare with the committee so you guys can share with anybody who might be >> we get emails. >> Yeah. >> Is there is there already the application process open for the October? >> Correct. >> Okay. So that is open. All right. I'll go ahead and >> Yeah, they're actively recruiting now. >> Okay. Um, so I think we have concluded the updated terms. >> Oh, here comes House. All right, let's just wait for him. >> Is there an action meeting? >> I don't think there's an action. >> No, there's no action. >> Unless we had somebody who's not on the committee wandering. Welcome Hal. >> Hello. >> See you. >> You were saying >> Oh, I was asking whether there is an option to do an exception if anybody wanted to extend that term beyond the two years. >> I am not sure. >> No, beyond the two years. >> Between the two terms. >> Two terms. Sorry. >> Oh, beyond the two terms. Yeah, >> they could do more than two terms. >> No, because they just started doing that. So, that's a new thing that they didn't have a term limit. >> So, how might I know? Do you know if there's a No, >> usually knows because he's been part of this committee since >> since the very beginning. >> Well, maybe we could talk to the clerk's office if we still continue not to get any more applicants. Yeah, a current committee member is interested in extending. Maybe we could >> figure something out. >> So, is up to >> Yeah, >> we were just talking about how the term limits for in the recruiting. >> I'm hitting term limits. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. In October. Well, you're hitting the your term is a Catherine, yours, and Dena's. And Dena is not looking for to renew hers. >> Um, and you think you're hitting the term limit. >> Is that what you said, Hal? >> I think so. >> Okay. >> Maybe we check with the We'll check with what that means. Yeah. >> We're not getting a lot of interest in our committee. So we need if you know anyone >> and for how do you want to repeat the next meeting if they happen? >> So we're definitely going to have the next meeting before October 31st. So make sure that we have the current folks that know about our committee. So So that's agenda item two that we're pretty much wrapping up here. No action needed on that. So, if everyone's okay, then we'll move on to uh agenda item three, review the proposed budget for fiscal year 2027. No action needed there, but assume there's a presentation. There is a presentation. Uh Michelle Nelson, senior management analyst for our public works department. I'll be walking through the fiscal year 2027 proposed budget. Uh what that all entails. Uh reminder as you are all well aware uh the purview of this committee is to review our proposed budget for the coming fiscal year. Uh we do that around April time frame and then also review the actuals for the previous year and we do that Octoberish time frame. Uh so we're great >> and we might also add there is a formal audit. >> Yeah. >> By an auditor. >> Oh yes. So in the past we said we assume God is done correctly. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. Goodbye. >> Right. I mean essentially because >> Yeah. >> They do apply the law. >> They do. >> And that's what we're trying to do is by the law of the when with the bond issue. >> Right. Exactly. So uh review and ensure and oversee that we are adhering to what is in that ballot measure. So >> yeah. Uh that will lead me into giving you a little update on our fiscal year 2027 budget development process. Um so where we're at right now, we staff have been working over the last probably six months or so to develop the budget that you're going to see today. Uh that budget has been vetted by our office of management and budget here at the city, our CFO, and our city manager's office. We've packaged it up prepared to present to you all to this committee today. and then hopefully garner your recommendation to our finance committee during budget hearings. The fiscal year 2027 proposed budget hearings for our finance committee are Tuesday, May 6th and Wednesday, May 7th. Believe I have those days right. Let me check. Yes, Tuesday. No, Tuesday is the 5th. Wednesday the 6th of May. So um this budget starts with fisc 2027 proposed budget starts with a fee revenue increase that is also dictated by the ballot measure. We under the parameters of the ballot measure are allowed to increase fees by annual CPI each year or 6% whichever is lesser. So this year the annual CPI index for the area is 3%. So we've updated B revenue 3%. >> 3%. >> That was nice. Remember that >> gasol I mean I don't even know how a trucker works. I mean it's unbelievable. >> So and it's based on a certain index too. So keep that in mind. Right. It's not >> the Bay Area. Bay Area index and that's the standard index we use across the city for general CPI index or CPI increases like this. >> Uh that equates to $270,000 in fiscal year 2027 of increased revenue. So that's what you will see in the revenue increases. The operating expenses, we have very minimal adjustments uh outside of the revenue of the fee, the fee revenue alignment and then some general CPI increases and uh staffing increases through contract. Uh let's see, no changes to maintenance or gsi or innovative project budgets. Those are going to stay set at what the ballot measure set them at. uh brief update on capital. This just kind of a really brief overview. We'll get into more detail on all of this as well. Uh we do have some planned reappropriations of funds in one-time capital projects. So, what that means is we have an adopted budget for the one-time projects and we won't be spending it all in fiscal year 2026. So, we are going to reappropriate it to 2027. So, when you're looking at our proposed budget in the budget book that's published and some of these slides that we'll look at, you'll see some dollars in there that include already approved and adopted budget numbers, just shifting them to next fiscal year, >> but they don't show up in each year. >> So, we'll get into those on the slides. I've I've broken it down. When you look at the main budget book, it gets kind of confusing because it can show up in there, but I've broken out the slides a couple of ways for you guys to see that movement. Um, one of the main points which I think later on in this presentation Michelle Jeremas here will speak to, we have shifted Lewis Road forward in the 5-year plan. It was previously adopted in fiscal year 2027. We're moving it forward a couple of years which uh when we get to CIP updates, Michelle will share the strategy on moving that. So that is a change uh to what was adopted in fiscal year 2026. We're shifting Lewis Road forward to 2027 design 2028 construction where previously it was in 2029. Okay, we can move on to our first budget slide. I keep with the same template and format uh since we've started this ballot measure um just for familiarity and keeping things uniform. Uh today we are you know focused on the proposed budget for fiscal year 2027. I like to provide you with some context and what that means. So you see I also have fiscal year 2025 adopted in actuals as well as 2026 which is the current year adopted projections of where we were at uh this is a couple weeks ago now and then our projections on where we look like we'll end this fiscal year just have some context when you're looking at the 2027 budget how it compares to the last couple of years. So the first section is the revenues. Uh the main component of that is our fee revenue. Uh you can see there from the adopted 2026 to the proposed 2027 that $270,000 increase I was speaking to that equates to the 3% CPI. So that's there in the fee revenue. Uh we have some lesser revenues, the interest earnings and then violation fines and development review. The violation fines and the development review fees are entirely variable and dependent upon external factors and activities. Um fines ideally we don't really want to have much revenue on fines. Um but it's a budget line item and development review fees is you know based upon what kind of >> so that number you have to get tougher on paper. >> Yeah. I mean, ideally we don't want to meet our our fine budget, but um Yeah. >> Could I? >> Yeah, of course. I'll break between each section. Yeah. >> So, fees are for each utility uh user. Uh do those change yeartoear the number of >> So, who we're charging the fee to? >> Yes. >> Yes. I am not as well versed as you are on how we are charging the eru to residents and businesses. How many people get to >> I mean it's probably much but I'm just wondering >> so so we do charge the fees to the resident it's basically similar to any other utility your water gas water whatever so you charge the fees the fees for residential there's broken down by based on parcel size so we collect a certain amount and then based on the commercial build businesses business campuses those pay based on impervious areas so we calculate a certain amount it's basically on ballot measure was 2500 in square feet of impervious areas is one eru. Um, and we do the math and then that gets charged routinely whether or not the project the parcel is developed or undeveloped. So, it's kind of an ongoing thing. As development projects occur, we re-evaluate those fees. It's sort of working with other departments as well, the development center, working with our utilities, um, revenues. So, we do work with them. They don't change so much. I mean, they do change, but I think collectively everyone's paying for their fees and when the rates go up, then automatically those rates go up. >> Um, but for the most part, I think single family residents, the parcel sizes aren't going to change. Um, parcel sizes, which are a large portion of our parcels, you're either a 6,000 square foot or you're over 11,000 square foot. So, you're not changing too much. >> But not but not the co not the cover. I mean you don't change if they have impervious resources per base or >> for the most part I mean the changes are occurring but again it's not not going to affect us since we we're basically on residential parcels we go based on the parcel size not the impervious where the impervious comes in is for the business campuses for the office spaces those are the commercial properties those are the ones that we calculate and those change and those could change especially as more partials are being developed right Um >> I'm sorry. I should have made myself clear. Uh there's a lot of pressure to increase housing. >> Yeah. >> And I suspect that the number of single family >> Yeah. >> homes is not going to increase in any significant fashion. But what happens to you know multif >> family units? Aren't those utility users that >> have to pay a fee? >> Yes, they would. they would pay a fee and but we would charge them based on our eru. So we look at an entire parcel. So for example um we would look at the impervious area that those properties are generated and >> so the entire building >> get >> so there there would be like for example a master um service so that the master pays for the entire say it's a say it's a five unit parcel that gets subdivided we would find somebody for the contract. So maybe it's part of the um um agreement for that development that this is how we break down and then they could decide to split that for each of the five residences that contribute to it. So that that way it's either one followed by one main house um meter not meter but a a service versus each individual. Uh for example, somebody sells that property, you know, they're still paying for it. So everybody else who's contributing to that uh service could still contribute to it. >> So the customers they accepted what you're doing. You think anybody tried to fight it? >> I don't see that there's any issues with it. I mean I haven't heard of any. >> Well I mean they're fighting over ADUs and all that >> but for example so so the single family residence is also includes duplexes. So even if you're adding another ADU on a property that still would consider as a single family residence. So we don't consider that any separate. It's when you're dealing with more than two distinct residents that we start counting it as a multif family or commercial property. >> Multif family is just based on the >> peruse area. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Uh one other item of note on the revenue that I've spoke of before but I want to continue to call attention to under the other revenue category. The bulk of that is the EPA grant that we have, Environmental Protection Agency for GSI and City Park. Um, and we will hear more about that later in the agenda from Pamboo's online. Um, what that project is right now. That grant is sitting in adopted fiscal year 2026 um and not showing in the proposed of 2027. However, um whatever is not reimbursed will ultimately be reappropriated and shown in the 2027 line item, but we're keeping it in 2026 now until we close out the year and see how much reimbursement we get. >> Um again, the main main >> question. So, the EPA grant has stayed as it is or were any changes? >> There have been no changes to the a dollar amount uh approved and authorized on that grant. we've spent a little bit. Um, and then as we ramp up the project, the grant is a reimbursement based construction grant that we have actually in coordination with the city of Santa Clara. Um, as we expend towards that project, then we can file reimbursements to the EPA and receive the income and then draw down that revenue that you'll see here. And that adopted line will shift to increase the actuals, lower the adopted uh until we get full reimbursement, >> but the dollar amount has not changed as of yet. >> And can I ask which project areas this grant is for? >> So Wabionis Park and we will have a more uh detailed presentation later on in the agenda from Pam who will be talking specifically about this project as well as other projects too. So that one is a really interesting one for sure. A little bit worried about EPA money. >> No, >> not for this one. >> Okay. >> No, not for this one. >> So, >> good. >> Yeah. >> Not yet. >> Not yet. No. No for concern yet. >> Two already. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I was just wondering whether there's a need to prioritize utilizing that one. the challenge is is getting it done. It takes time so and and staff resources. So, um but it's there's a lot of uh with the municipal regional storm water permit requirements. It's it's we're working through it. So, yes. >> Andrew. >> Yeah. And we'll have more again opportunity to talk about that specific project. Um we definitely included on the agenda for that reason. Um okay can we ready to move on from revenues? Okay. Expenses uh for this fee are split up into the base program and then projects and infrastructure program. So that's how I try to present you guys our uh fiscal information here. So the base program that's going to be your flood control improvement, water quality protection, emergency response, our in-house maintenance of the storm dream, kind of all those day-to-day operations to keep things moving. Uh administrative staffing costs are are a lot uh most of which are found in this section. Um again, the increases on these items are mostly CPI if anything. CPI and uh staffing increases based on bargaining unit contracts between the city and those >> uh street cleaning deal. Is that could it continue? >> Street sweeping is in the refuge fund actually. So that that's not paid for out of our storm storm water management fee. Uh street sweeping is paid for out of our refuge fund. So that you see uh in your refuge bill for >> as far as we know it'll just keep going I hope >> correct it is we have that's also in public works so you're asking right people >> correct >> yes it's all connected right but it is funded out of a different bucket of money but it's going to keep continuing on yeah for sure >> correct >> yeah uh if you're ever interested in that we can send you some details on that >> I have a quick emergency response. So, I take it that the storms this year didn't >> we did have some storms, but they didn't really cause any challenges. Is that correct? >> Were there any issues that came up? >> I think we had nothing significant I recall, but I do recall a few trees, branches. So, we did have crews u standby. I think we had equipment staged just in case. I think so. I think we've had a few, but I don't think we had anything major that I'm aware of. Well, um I figured from the numbers that that's what what the case was. >> Yeah. But I mean sometimes we we may have something for example um in instance we don't know like we have to something breaks one of the main lines or something breaks in those cases we have to have a crew go out there and place it immediately right >> um or more trees in the in the creek. I think the two years ago the storm washed a lot and the big tree front. >> So >> yeah, but we did get some FEMA two years ago. So that uh didn't totally hit our storm fund a couple years ago. >> Uh I will say on the emergency response, this is on that line item is just a linear projection. I do think it'll probably end up being less than this 145,000 projection on here just because you know the storm season is ending we did have but >> somewhere in between the >> two date actuals and the heat on that one. uh and sorry >> yeah the storm water quality protection and in general all of the expenses seems like it's now April we have already used bunch of that and projection because many of them are higher >> um speak to that a little bit >> and particularly I was interested in the storm water quality protection >> so again that's a I just did a linear projection on that one um where we are at we're at today two weeks ago was, you know, I I anticipate for the water quality protection line item that we will probably come in very close to adopted budget if not slightly lower. Um, it's hard with those ones because some of the budget is contract based and so it's a timing thing. It's not really ideal to do a linear projection on some of these buckets within there. Um, so timing is a piece, but I don't anticipate us coming in over budget like this. Um, and if you look back at previous years, we usually come in right around like 2025, you can see usually coming right around what's there. But that also does include staff time, which um can be somewhat out of our control sometimes with the contracts with the bargaining units. And if someone just retires, so we'll have extra money for staff. >> Yeah. And then vacancies will affect what's in there. >> At least this year. >> At least this year. If we look like we're spending higher, we won't. >> But I don't think, and I can pull up, if you guys are interested, some some several years back Yeah. budget taxuals and on all of this really I have it all on the file. It's just collapsed down for otherwise it would be 10 years long. But I don't think we've ever come in over budget on that area. >> Honestly, where the only places we've ever really come in over budget are in that base pro program component for our in-house crews over times with storms and whatnot. Um that's kind of more the area that we come in over budget. Um, >> yeah. >> Yeah, but we'll definitely keep an eye on that. Yeah. And I I can look at how to better project out on that line item, too, and break it out a little further if that's something you guys are more interested in. I can look at that, too. >> Sure. Okay. Moving on to the project and infrastructure program section. That's going to have our 13 capital standalone capital projects. That's the capital improvement projects bold line. Our storm drain system repairs is the recurring rehab capital project. And then we have the debt service which dropped off a couple years ago. We have the engineering staff that was added under the ballot measure. Then we have the green municipal infrastructure funding and the innovative projects funding. Um, I have a little asterisk that didn't seem to print on here. This screen is not going to show the reappropriations that I referred to earlier. So, that is not double counted. I want you guys to see the clear picture of what was adopted um without kind of those shifts around. can be confusing um when you're looking at a one-time project that the budget might keep moving to different years, but the overall budget always stays the same and doesn't draw down our reserves any further. So those reappropriations are not reflected in this picture that we're looking at here. And then I have another table. Same data just kind of grouped and bucketed a little differently and rolled up some of the revenues so that you can see kind of the most important B- revenue. Uh rolled up some of those base programs so that you can see them in larger buckets and then break down the project infrastructure in a little bit more detail so you can see what makes up the gsi, what makes up the innovative projects. Um, but it's the same dollars just chopped up a little different. However, is easier for you guys to digest. >> And we can send you the one without the packet numbers over the numbers. So, you >> Wait, what? Oh, I have my own. >> Yeah, the packet number right over the actual numbers. >> Well, that's on on the one that we were looking at before, too, or just >> Yeah. >> Copy. We got the PDF. Let me >> Oh, yeah. That's annoying. Let me tell you what that number is. That number is 1241. >> 1241. >> Yeah, it just unfortunately automatically propagated it right over. >> See that it's helpful and not helpful at the same time. >> That's why I printed my own. I'm like, wait, what? Well, I know just a test to see if you're paying attention. >> It's a test to be sure you guys are paying attention. I'm looking at >> and then on the next one, it's the 9776 that you see in the total expenses on our previous one. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Since we're required to put the packet numbers on the thing. >> Yeah. >> Well, maybe I'll have to work with Mariah next time to manipulate my slides so it doesn't go like that. >> Yeah. to figure this out. >> Um, okay. Now, let's move on to the next slide. Uh, some budget information on the projects themselves. That this does include our reappropriation. So, this is going to show you where and I think this is I and if it's not, please, I welcome any feedback. I think when we're looking at the big picture of the fund, we just want to see what was for each one of these projects, what's adopted, and then when we drill down and look at the projects themselves, let's see where those reappropriations move, what years they're going into. Um, kind of in a more granular look here. So, you can see we have one, two, three, four, five, six of the 13 ballot measure projects in the five-year CIP. Most of them are in the coming years and I'll speak to that in just a minute. Uh fiscal year 2026, our office of management and budget added this storm water management fund administration CIP SD26002. That is how the office of management and budget is tracking the salary and benefits on this on on all funds across the whole city. Actually, when you're looking at the budget book, every fund will have a similar project. Um, it's it's a cleaner way for them to break out the salary and benefits spending because when they were charging them to the individual projects, it wasn't showing up in salary as salary and benefits. It was showing up as construction dollars based on what timing and it just kind of got convoluted and and skewed, you know, the actual project hard costs that we want to be able to be really transparent about. So they've pulled them out, put them in this admin CIP. But that is our staff cost for the whole program for the whole CIP program. Those costs do include um support staff, small pieces of support staff, like our accounting department has a little bit of uh FTE in those dollars as well. And then we have the two other projects that are not part of the 13 adopted, the rehab at the very top and the gsi at the very bottom. So when I look at this table, it looks like there aren't any other CIP projects in 2029 and beyond >> yet. So that's where we'll talk about >> some left over. >> We still have, I believe, five projects that we need to budget. >> You're not seeing them planned. I'll remind everybody the five-year CIP only the first year of that is budgeted. So right now we're working on the 2027 to 2031 only the first year 2027 is actually budgeted. The four out years are just a plan. >> Okay. >> Um and then when we get to them there is an intentional reason we don't have anything budgeted here. And this, if anybody was following along with our finance committee rate adoption last week, which will be kind of the next slides we get to, um, we are doing a lot of analysis and work on the remaining years of this ballot measure and the remaining CIPs that we have to construct. Um, the CIPs, the 13 CIPs that were adopted in the ballot measure were defined by the 2015 storm drain master plan. >> And our estimates for those projects are from the 2015 storm drain master plan. So, we're now in 2026, so those numbers are most likely out of date. um we do our design inhouse and at this point in time we don't have any better estimate than those 2015 numbers but we are fairly certain that those numbers are not going to be what they end up costing. Um, so in the financial projections that I've done that we've talked about in previous years on this committee, I anticipate that we would have sufficient budget to build those projects at the estimates from the 2015 master plan. >> So TBD if we will have the funding sufficient funding we don't know what those bids can come in it. So, myself, Michelle Holly Boyd, who's the assistant director of public works engineering services, and Brad Eglesen, our public works director, have been looking at this and trying to get some information on how much the projects that we have completed ended up costing in comparison with the 2015 storm drain plan, the ones that are in construction, how they're projecting to end in comparison to the storm drain uh 2015 storm drain master plan to try to give us some information on on what the next projects might cost. >> Um, we are certainly in the 2028 budget going to start programming some of these projects. We've already started to play around with where we could put them in the out years of the ballot measure. Um, we'll have to start doing some preliminary design work um on Michelle's team to decide if even the scope of those projects is still exactly relevant um based on some of the other work that's happened. Maybe the scope is lesser, maybe it's more. Um, so there's a lot more work that needs to be done on the fiscal side and then on the technical side to kind of see where we're landing in terms of sufficient funds in the ballot measure. >> Um, it's hard to say and it'll be hard to say until we get another one out to bid probably. I would think that until we get another one out to bid in construction, I don't know how how much our projections will be more than just a guess. And I I was going to add we did one of the things to keep in mind is also even though the ballot measure took it into effect in 2027 2017 uh Rejie was working on the Mandadero Creek pump station which was a carryover from the previous ballot measure. Um, in addition to that, I think we needed to accumulate enough funding in order to start some of these CIPs. So, there was a little bit of a delay between when we finished when when this ballot measure took in and the first project that we started working on. Um, Vicki was working on Lom Verde and I think that was during COVID. So, then so there was in-house design that took place. Um, so we are mindful of the projects. I think that there is a couple projects, some that may be easier than others that we can try to take tackle, take a look at. Um, but we've also sort of changed some of our priorities given some of the flooding events that have happened. Um, meaning that some projects get advanced of others. Um, >> what would be examples of that? >> So, the one that we advanced, Hamilton Avenue and center. So those two projects that were lower in the priority list and they were in 13 projects, but we moved that one ahead of Lewis Road, those two ahead of Lewis Road um given the New Year's Eve events and the flooding that occurred. Um in addition to that, we're also tackling in rehab work um outside of the 13 projects and some of that was also brought to light to maybe prioritize Alistister as a rehab project, which is the area around Duban that was flooded. So, we're we're taking some of those in right now as we speak. Um, >> yeah, >> I will also say um I think we'll get some more information on being able to estimate and project out these projects once we move into design and construction uh preparations for center and Lewis. Those are the next two. Uh, also on here you'll notice the rehab CIP is only set at 300,000 per year. The ballot measure allows for about double that in these years. Um, but that's a lever that we are able to kind of shift a little bit. If we need to reduce the funding in that CIP a little bit to divert it to the other ones, we can. Um, so those those out years 28 through 31, you'll see is only 300,000. The ballot measure, I believe, allows for closer to 600 in those out years right now. Um, but we've set it a little bit more conservatively to, you know, just allow for what may come. >> Every time you build something and there's an O andM function that goes with it >> and that is not going down. So you're at some point you have to to but to balance it I would think because you got to keep what you got going. >> Yeah. >> And then you add something else and now it adds more and and that's where back to this very first thing I was talking about. So on and costs are got to be going way up. I mean they have to be. >> So yes and no. I mean replacing 12in pipes for 48 inch pipes >> actually creates efficiency. Yeah. I mean, but there would be an O and M for example for the pump stations, but the two pump stations that she's under working on right now. So, there will be an O and M, but and that's new because they're brand new stations, but they're small stations, but better than the flooding and the >> the costs that we have to spend on maintenance of old uh infrastructure and emergency response, I think balances out somewhat the uh ongoing O andM and those conversations. The the other infrastructure is creates efficiencies. >> Um I just want to say thank you for explaining the intent of this table. >> Yes, that that really clears things up. Um and also >> I guess sort of kind of core to the committee's uh purpose is to also learn more about how you're handling the future. Yeah. >> Planning. I mean, it also goes back to some other stuff that we've dealt with in the committee and I'm looking forward to seeing that and understanding it better because that's kind of why we're here. So, and I'd like to know if any of the other committee members have something to add on their or questions on that for the future or >> No, I think you've covered. >> Okay. Well, I I do think uh it's our responsibility to look at all the 13 projects >> and if any of those I know it's unfair to to ask, but if any of those might fall off the uh >> well, under the last ballot measure, one of them did shift into this ballot measure. So, that did happen. I also want to say um the remaining projects, one of them is one of the most costly in of the 13, but the other ones in magnitude are far less. So I think a couple of them are around $300,000 from the 2015 estimate. Um I think one of them is maybe 600,000. So you know in in the magnitude compared to some of these others that are you see you know corporation way was like four million, Hamilton 7. So even if even if say you know worst case scenario it comes in double it's 600,000 instead of 300,000 it's not great but the impact is not as dire um there is one and I can't and Louis no there's another one Fabian >> no small >> one of them is 6.9 >> um million of the 2015 master plan estimate so that one will be the on to keep our eye on. But I do want to tell the committee, you know, while we do have five projects left, four of those five are far far lower cost in magnitude based on the 2015 master plan estimate. So, um, just to keep in perspective, you know, we do have that one really big one, but all five of them aren't upwards of 5 million. >> And maybe that's something we can put on the agenda for for future where we're at because we're not there yet. So, >> yeah. So, this is something we'll be talking about with the finance committee. >> Um, and then >> then we can come back. >> We can come back. Uh, I do have >> a financial document that projects out the rest of this ballot measure through 2032 with the rest of the projects built in. And like I said, that document, if the estimates come in based on the 2015 >> estimates, we're fine. We're great. You know, enough for reserves, enough for everything. the likelihood that that's gonna happen is is not great, you know. Um, >> your crystal ball, right? >> Right. So, I think I think actually for today's agenda item, we've covered everything. >> Yes, we have. >> It's just I think a a a feeling that we should pay maybe paying attention in future meetings to how the future is. I think that's very smart of you and especially now that we're, you know, halfway through the the ballot measure fee and we're getting, you know, seven years out, six years out from the end, >> right? Is that right? Seven, >> which is awesome, >> which is great. >> We need to start thinking about, you know, how how we're going to finish it out. Um, >> and then we're going to need to upd update the master plan again. And then do we need to go back out to the voters? It is it is a little tricky because for the first few years of this ballot measure, we weren't able to do any capital projects because we had to build up the revenues in order to pay for it. So that just puts us that farther removed from the 2015 estimates. Um, and so not being able to kind of jump on them because we had to wait for those reserves to build up kind of, you know, puts us towards constructing at the latter half of the 15 years. But that's where we're at now. More information to come and we're we're looking at the information that we do have and once Michelle and Rajie and Vicki start delving into design on uh, center and Lewis, I think we'll have some more information. and then be able to refine our estimates and projections. >> Maybe not for today, but maybe in the future, you know, one one of the future meetings, maybe we can have a just a glimpse of what 2015 looks like, what this project comes to. >> Yeah, I think we have that on this next on one of these next slides actually. It's super interesting. Yeah, I think Michelle's got a map. >> My computer died on me. Oh, there it is. Uh I think we have a map if we're ready. Well, We got >> we have I think we have that later in the agenda. >> Yeah. >> Um but I Yeah, let's get to the and we can talk about all of this >> as much as we want. >> I think we're ready to move on >> from this particular agenda item. Okay. And move on if that's okay with everyone. And then we're going to move on to the next one which is about the memorandum for fiscal year 2027 proposed budget. Um, and this is something we do every year. >> And let's see where we're at with the memo as presented in the packet, proposed memo. And actually, I have a question about the proposed memo that's in the packet, but I'll let you all kick it off. Any comments >> to move it forward. May I move the adoption of this proposed memo? Well, actually I have a question about the proposed memo. So then we will I'll come back to you Kathy. >> Okay. >> So in the memo that we uh agreed to last year, >> there was a sentence that we inserted about actually the future and whether we um well I can read you it's not in this memo so I can read it to you. >> Thanks. uh based on current staff analysis, there is no indication that present funds will be insufficient to complete the 13 capital improvement projects. So my question that I came to with uh came to this meeting with was what happened to that sentence and what are we going to do about it if anything? >> I think we intentionally took it out of this memo because of what we just talked about. >> I see. I see. >> I would Yeah. I would say again kind of the update to that sentence from a fiscal standpoint is We have sufficient we I anticipate that we would have sufficient funds to complete all 13 projects at the estimate from the 2015 Storm Bay master plan. That is not that's the reality of that is it it it doesn't Yeah. I mean >> but you understand why we put that sentence. >> Absolutely. Yeah. I don't know if you want to put it in again. That's up to you guys. >> Well, I sort of just asked the question >> I think >> in the presentation. >> Future cost Virginia are difficult right now. >> Right. >> Right now, >> asphalt's going to triple. Diesel's tripled. I mean, everything that we that you use to build something, if we're building things, we can't say it's going to be just doo doo, you know? Right. >> It's tough time right now. Right. We we have the reserves to pay for what? We have the reserves to pay for this. As far as you know, this is for a fact. We have the reserves to pay for this. the rest of the projects. Um, you know, we're tracking. Well, it will it will depend on the design, the scope that comes out of design, the final scope. And I think once we get some bids in on center and Lewis, we'll have a lot more information. And they're right about something to the effect of uh staff is continuing to evaluate um yeah based on >> you know conditions or stuff >> right >> I'm sorry I didn't >> yeah no you're fine whatever you guys are comfortable >> putting in the map >> but you're you just explained u something that I was impressed with that you know how complicated it is to take the 2015 ballot measure and bring it up to date. >> And to me, that's something that I needed to hear. I think the committee needed to to hear that. >> And it would be great if this memo somehow reflected that what I think is a very positive um and responsible uh activities going on. >> Yeah. Um I don't know the language. >> They proposed like staff is continuing to evaluate and monitor the um the the projections of what was in the 2015 ballot um measure of the 13 projects. Yeah. To current >> um construction dollars. >> I mean you saw some breakdowns of what what we're doing, right? And >> that could be one thing, right? some of the breakdowns are going to change. >> They are. I mean, because you're especially if it's physical or if it's equipment related or anything, right? >> I don't think that sentence is letting anymore continue to be evaluated is all I can say, right? >> So, so I I brought it up because I was noticed the change. >> Yeah. >> Uh I'm not I'm not criticizing or or doing the opposite. I was just asking the question. That's >> But as I reread the memo, you know, every time I reread this memo, I So this is about this one is about the 2027 budget. >> Yeah. >> So what happens after 2027 may not be relevant to the memo. I mean, I don't know. I mean, this is very specific and I don't really know how this and the finance committee and the city council >> read these, but if this is extremely specific to the 2020 to the annual proposed budget, then maybe talking about future >> risks or estimates is not relevant. On the other hand, yep, >> on the other hand, as a member of this committee, I think it's it is not that it's actually kind of prudent to say that we as we have seen with the staff are also looking forward. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, but I don't know what a good way to say that is. >> And I think that's you you hit the nail on the head. The reason we haven't had a future-looking sentence in there historically is because, you know, we're recommending the 2027. But like I said, >> as we get deeper into, you know, the 15 years and closer toward the end, I think we have to look ahead and we have to start and our finance committee is as well, um, thinking how we're going to wrap this up. So, I I don't I don't think it's inappropriate to put a future sentence in there. don't know that that sentence is one we want to put in there. I don't think that's a clear picture, but we could certainly in and probably should put something about the future. >> Okay. So, I would be very open to removing the sentence that was in last year's memo as written and coming up with something that's more appropriate to 2027 memo. But I don't really know how to >> maybe you say something like this committee and staff has had had discussion on the future uh fiscal outlook of the ballot measure and have planned to do that at future meetings. Um something like that. Yeah. recognize the complexities associated with the components that create the project, right? Whether it's cost driven based on staff or cost driven based on contractor's availability or >> the price of oil has gone up. So I think yeah, I think we should say something along the lines of and help me out with this. The committee because this is from the committee, right? The committee recognizes that staff is fancy way to say that >> continuing to evaluate >> is is sure is continuing to evaluate the I don't know what the the uh availability or the uh >> resources >> the res something like that that the future is you know continuing to keep an eye on future uh revenue and expenditures. It's really the assumptions that go into the into this estimate. >> Yeah. And then you just continue to evaluate your assumptions. That's typically what you do. And >> so if the assumption 90% of it is based on fuel then but if it's only 2% but so you just look at your assumptions and continue to >> Yeah. >> Because it's it's it's a weird time right now >> and we only have the 2015 master plan estimates to work off right now. Once this team gets into design, they'll have a much clearer picture of what the estimates of these projects will be, >> but um we can't start doing that really just yet for all of the pro. I mean, maybe we can we have some internal discussions on on what's going on. >> That's okay. Let's come up with some actual verbiage that we can get into >> into uh onto the memo. >> I don't know who we have to do that. We should do that. >> We should do that. >> We should do that right now. So did anybody write down? >> I I wrote uh committee recognized staff is continuing to evaluate the future revenue and assumptions that goes into this estimate. >> Yeah, revenue and expenditures and expenses >> and design work I guess and the design work that is in progress. >> This is a key piece. Yes. >> Thank you for writing that down. >> Yeah. Really? So the committee held a discussion on the fiscal outlook and the 13 projects included in the ballot measure with particular attention to the complexity of the individual project components, right? >> And staff is continuing to evaluate and monitor the 2015 ballot measure, you know, and then we can also and then maybe that we're going to try and >> do something else like bringing it up to current >> dollars. Yeah. I don't know. I'm trying to >> I maybe not get into the weeds on that. The committee recognizes. >> Yeah, >> maybe we just had the committee and staff held a discussion on the on the fiscal outlook on the 13 projects included in the ballot measure and just keep it keep it at that. >> Yeah. >> And that's that's enough. Say that again. >> The committee and staff held a discussion on the fiscal outlook on the 13 projects included in the ballot measure >> and we can probably say and it doesn't impact the current budget. >> Right. >> That would be great. Staff will come back >> and that staff will and staff will will return and continue this discussion. >> Yeah, we will continue this discussion. >> Okay. So, do we have enough in the notes to move forward? >> And then what I recommend is what we did last year, which I thought was very good, was staff sent out the revised memo and said, "You have until this particular day, and if we don't get any responses back, then we're moving forward." >> And I thought that was nice. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We'll let you guys have input and make sure the language is exactly how how you want it to look, >> but give us a deadline and if you don't get it back, if you don't get if you don't get input from us, then it's good. >> I suggested a comment or something. >> Good. >> That was good. >> We love it. We love >> um anyway, how are we doing on this conversation? Are we >> I like that you brought it up because we talked about it >> and it didn't show up in this >> chair. Yeah. And you know, I miss Dina, so she was the one who championed this extra language. >> It's I think it's I think like you said, prudent language to include at this point in time. >> Okay. So, if we're all good, the committee's good. >> Um, do I get a motion to move forward on revising it and then finalizing it by email? >> So, move. >> Thank you. A second. >> Second. Okay. Thank you. >> Oh, she got the second. >> Okay, then we have a vote. Is any good? No. Any nays? Nay. Okay. >> Well, thank you very much uh staff for all that extra information and careful discussion. It's much appreciated >> and the work you're going to be doing. >> That's that's kind of mind-numbing. >> That's fun. >> We like it. >> Okay. So, moving right along. Um where are we? Storm water management fee rate increase. No action needed. >> No action needed. Uh we did go last week to the finance committee to get approval of the rate increase. Um I talked about this a little few minutes ago. The proposed increase is a 3% CPI equates to 278,000. We included, in case you guys didn't get a chance to see, we included the presentation we gave to the finance committee. Um very short and sweet. Very short and sweet. uh they had not a lot of questions in that staff report. We did also say that essentially we are not sure if we're going to have sufficient funding but we did say that in that staff report we are you know staff is not sure I don't I don't remember the exact language but it was essentially to the effect that we don't know that we'll have sufficient funding or not and that we will continue these discussions >> uh at the finance committee budget hearings and you know into the future. So they did say that they were looking forward to having more discussion on that end during those budget hearings in May. So follow along. We will be having more discussion with them >> um and getting some feedback on how we can proceed and what what outlook to take, what strategies to take. But uh the presentation here is kind of breaking down the components of the fee. 55% is for the base, 45% goes to project and infrastructure. Um kind of the details, you know, this is a pretty standard item. Whenever you're increasing utility rate, you got to get the approval from the finance committee to do so. So, it's kind of a just a standard operating information, but I did we did want to share the slides with you. And if we move on to the next, the map here is what um you guys were interested in. The 2015 storm drain master plan estimates are on this map. So you can see No, are they not? >> Uh there they are. They are. Yeah. Okay. >> Sorry. >> Um and then also some information on the projects that were are completed now, where we are on the ones that are in progress, and the ones that are not started. So those black ones are the remaining ones that aren't started and aren't budgeted. And you can see Oh, it is Lewis Road. That's 69. >> So, um, by the way, I love this graphic. Love the map with the statuses and all the extra information. My one little question is when was it last updated? Um, I want to say this map there. So, there's two maps. So, there's this one and there's the other one that you've seen that you saw at the board's commissioning. Yeah. Um, this one was probably updated. I want to say because it says design of Hamilton. This one was probably last year. Um, but >> this map needs to be replaced with the one you saw last week. So, I would have to look at the one I saw last week again. Yeah. But I would think it would be valuable for those looking at the content to know when it was last updated. So it might be like a small little updated date somewhere in I know there's just a lot going on, but >> it's just a little question I have. >> Yeah, I'll send the committee the one that we shared the commission presentation because that has a different map, >> right? >> And the finance committee um this this one had to get published before the the finance committee has that had the updated map that Michelle gave me. This one was published before That makes sense. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So, we have a few maps that are they're all the same content just that ours was a little bit >> it makes it makes sense. I think we at one point we used to have data on it. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Well, you have a lot going on. So, okay. Just comment there. >> All right. >> Yeah. But no, there's lots of maps and lots of detail. Um, >> so the rate increase meeting went fine. >> It went fine. And now, so that was the finance committee meeting. It was probably the fastest rate increase approval ever, which is great after the meeting the night before that we had. We're at So, you're uh you are all blessed that your committee chair decided to stay at council till 11 o'clock at night for Michelle and I. >> So, uh thank her and she presented for you on Monday night so last week. So, you can thank her for that. The question remained with the finance committee too and I think everybody you know is 3% enough unfortunately our hands are tied for development or that we can't we can't do more but um the questions that you have are the same as our larger finance committee and they're they're important questions to be asking and looking at and um also something to be thinking about as we develop our next bot capacity upgrades what I see I told and so the basis of the capacity upgrade has to be in part land use change I don't think so. No, >> I don't think there's any land use >> uh for I mean the only You mean >> land use associated with these projects, these individual projects? >> I think that >> um we came close to land use corporation way because we needed to encroach in private property and secure easements. We have another project here in the pipeline that's going to get us the same. East Charleston is going to be another one that's going to be fascinating to work on. Um but land use doesn't change land use for most of these are all in the public road right away. >> So the capacity issue >> the capacity the capacity is the storm drains. So a lot of these are storm drain systems or 12-in pipes meant to handle small nuisance flow but now we've got significant storm events. We've got a lot of the private systems that are draining directly into our storm drains. So we're increasing the capacity to 10year storm events. Um and the capacity meaning it's the capacity of the storm drain system to convey flows before it over tops or it drains floods streets. >> Something happened. I mean everything there is a capacity change. >> Yes. Correct. >> Something drove that. >> Um the master plan the master plan determined and said from here on out we're going to focus on the 10year storm event. Um in the past I don't think we had a storm event that we were designing too. It was >> so the year changing. >> Um right now I don't know if we can. I mean we're designing everything to attain your storm event and that's the capacity and a lot of it. It's also in reality is our streets have so many other pipes underneath them that it's really hard. you're trying to fit designing trying to get around sewer, gas, electric, electric that's actually concrete encased. So, we've got a lot of other infrastructure. We really don't have a lot of room. So, >> last master plan was in 1992. >> So, that was very old >> item. Yeah. So, I don't I don't want to get us too far away. >> Yeah. We should move on. If if we can, I'd like to move on to agenda item six, the CIP update. Perfect. Thank you. Uh so I'm going to start us off but I'm going to hand it to Rajie and Vicki to present the projects. The way we've presented this agenda item number six. Uh I try to convey or try to present to you what the problems have been. As you are well aware of we've got um currently four projects under construction and Vicki is going to get another one soon. So we'll have five projects under construction this remaining spring, summer, fall, winter. Um right now we're focusing on getting the projects built by the end of the year. Um the first project I think we focus on primarily for the purposes of today's meeting just the micro tunneling effort. As you remember corporation way west beayshore and west bay shore capacity upgrades. It's three projects two pump stations and pipeline upgrades on all the all on both east and west bayshore. I've asked Rejie though from the purposes of your benefit focus primarily on uh the micro tunneling component. What does it entail? What does it look like? Forget the pump stations right now. Forget the wet wall. So, let's focus on that. Um Michelle earlier did mention the map. So, we kind of briefly looked at the map here, but if you have any other map questions, I refer back to the October presentation that we did last year. That other map that we shared at the commission is in that. So, go back to the packet from October. there is mapped in there and we can also come back at a later date and give you a better perspective um once we finish up these and briefly just before we hand it to and continue is right now they are wrapping up these projects all these are slated to be completed by the end of the year so next year when we will be picking up a center the design in Lewis Road I think previously before we had these bids on their projects as you might recall corporation. We we went out to bid three times. So, we kind of pushed out Lewis Road and there's two Lewis Road projects. We pushed out the one project we could further out because we weren't sure what the cost on his was going to be. So, now that we have a cost, now it's under construction, we're bringing it back up to 2027. So um once they're wrapped up with a project, one will jump on center, the other will jump on Lewis Road. Both design and then we can try to schedule construction. >> Um with that said, I'm going to leave it up to Rajie. Um first slide. >> Yeah, the first slide is my tonic work on East Road. It's about 640 ft length. Um originally the design was for the open cut excavation but due to a lot of challenges with dearing the water ground water table about 8 ft deep and the depth of the excavation about 2250 >> excuse me the water table is >> 850 from the surface >> 8 ft from the surface >> and there's all ground water and then the whole excavation about 2250 >> so there's a lot of shoring work and there's challenges for the traffic control plan and there a lot of other utilities conflicts too like there's like a 42 in shore line that crosses eastb crosses highway 101 so that in the conflict to 42 shore pipe and there's c gas line there's a 24 in uh PG& gas line that goes all the way to San Bruno that's was right along east shore so there a lot of challenges contractor came back and said look there's too many complex cities out there so we want to propose uh micro tunneling so we looked at it and we said okay I think this is a viable solution so we kind of supported and then we will we will do it. So another big advantage was that to open cut they said that it's going to take us six or seven months for to install that 6740 met of pipe but the micro toning say about four weeks three to four weeks and I think just last week they completed the 630 ft they installed it so the micro toning work is done and this week I think they're they're kind of demobilizing and they're doing all the cleanup work. So next slide. So yeah so uh the challenges are you know the sheep piling so protection of gas line working during rainy season you know uh the other is there's also other challenges like uh we had to look at with the settlements. So one through the microonic work we wanted to check if there's no settlements happening on the surface well and there settlements on the existing utility lines too. So in order to do that we had to establish utility monitoring points and the ground settling monitor it's called SSMP surface monitoring points. Uh so we we kind of look at them. We had our surveyors go in there and then go to the next okay this we had to go to we had our C survey go in there and and do all the surveys for all these points every day making sure that there's no settlements and the settlement the the limitations are not more than one inch >> one in >> one inch. So we kind of monitored every day throughout these four weeks and we found out there was no settlements at all. One inch over what? What depth? >> The ground. >> Yeah. >> 40 feet. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So, there's a not with more than one inch of settlement. >> There's a 40 42 inches shore pipe that's about like 16 ft deep. So, we had we kind of excavated. We pole. We put a cylinder right on top of the shore line. And then there was a disc and we monitor the surveys. Every day we monitored that the SH pipe did not settle and we we found that it didn't settle at it was less than a lot less than H. So it was within the margin we those are the challenges you know and the other slide >> and the other one I will put the vertical settlements. So there's a lot of force that is in for the jacking for like maximum capacity like 800 tons but the force that was used was like about 40 30 to 60 tons and we want to make sure that the vertical soil there was no displacement too. So there was inter for vertical display we installed in it's called the inclinometers like you can see there's a on the first slide the top there's a thirst block over there and there's a inometer over there that does the reading so that there's no displacement of the soil but >> what slide do you want it on >> this is the block >> I thought you said you wanted on the next slide >> that's the inome if they don't meet your criteria of one's >> but there's a lot of first thing we stop right and then the attitude of procedures changes like there's a steering like what what the torque is what the force is or what the speed is so maybe they have to make the changes on that so they try to make the changes on that if nothing works then I don't I have not this is the first time I did a microonic work I don't know what the process are of that but I do know that there's a lot of other operational method that they have to make an alteration on the torque, on the speed, on the force. Maybe they have to make changes on on the jagging force, on the speed, the way the blades when you start rotating it and goes during through the tunnel, the torque, the rotation. Maybe they have to change maybe the direction the way they do the direction on the on the on the cutting blades. Maybe they have to make changes on that. Uh so those are those are the things that they can make and change. Apart from that if it disaster doesn't work then I don't know the work stops but it didn't happen. So we were successful and we completed last. >> Congratulations on that. >> Yeah that's wonderful. >> And the other >> next slide >> next slide that slide is the operating room the computer room that's where everything is monitored everything is the direction of the micro tunneling. They have a laser system that guides the pounding work and you know it's we were I think they were able to hit the target within within one inch the target within a distance about 6 and 40 ft the target point about one inch the difference is one in the margin of error. So >> and you said that's all on site. >> Yeah operate on the site and that's the >> that's the operator working. >> Yeah. And the pipe that is used for micro is the special pipe. The other this is the are the pipes is the fiber reinforced pipes. Those pipes are special pipes for micro. The pipe that we use on cities are usually are all high polyethylene pipes. But these are fiber reinforced pipes. The difference is that this has a capacity of 200 tons. A capacity 20 tons load whereas our SDP pipes normal pipes that we install are only 20 tons. So 20 ton pipe these are 200 tons. So these are really special pipes. This is it's not normally used for stone but it's only special purposes by for micro. Next slide. So yeah this is the on the right side you see this is the hydraulic force. This is where all the hydraulic systems are installed where they use for the hydraulic for the hydraulic forces. This is the water tank that we re with the sea we supply we gave it to the contractor to use from the fire we supply water to for the cooling purposes of the microconding machine they need a cool they need a they need a fresh water they couldn't use a we have recycled water but they said that recycled water a lot of chlorine content so they can't use recycled water for the cooling purpose of the machine they need fresh water so this will be provided fresh water that's the tank u next slide It's in the separation tank. Once once the hydraulic machine goes through the tunnel, what it does is it does a lot of excavation, right? All usually take the dirts out, right? So for all the dirts, it's a slurry field. It's a slurry with the dirts and then is pumped to the separation separation tank separation unit over there and that separates the water with all the dirts. So all the dirts is hauled off. All the water again from the separation it goes back to the tunnel and it is reused. So it just goes on recycling over and over again. And we have all the flow meters and all that out there that show what the total discharge is going to the separation tank and what the total >> water that is going back to the that's the one. These are the flow meters. The flow meter going into the tanks and the flow meters. There's a flow meter that's that show the water that's going back to the toning machine. Uh next slide. So that's the SSM that's those are the settlements. We monitor the settlements through this disc. Once you open the disc, there's a plate. There's a disc over there that goes through the ground over there. And then through that disc, we monitor the elevations for settlements. >> And this was over this 42 in sewer line. >> Sewer line. >> So this is a >> the sewer line and the storm water are completely separated, right? >> Correct. And the storm drain is doing this underneath it. The sewer is crossing it right over it. And we wanted to make sure that it's not moving as we dig underneath it. >> We had to monitor the shor line. And this is a permeable grouting for the shorelines. So like Michelle, there's a shorine crossing going high one. We're doing micro right underneath. So we want to make sure that the shor lines are fully sodium lines are very sturdy as it goes through it doesn't settle. And the way to do it was it's called permeable grouting. >> Uh the grouting contractors came in and from the surface they put the disc they excavated they part hold it and they injected slurry. It's called a bentonite with a b chemical bentonite mix with with cement slurry and they injected it around the sewer pipe. So all around the sewer pipe where the plumbing was going so that once is what it settles is a concrete. It's like a concrete around the sewer pipe. So once you push the pipes underneath the sewer pipe doesn't settle. >> And how thick is that >> coating? >> The coating is about like a foot maybe >> a foot all >> Yeah. All around it. So you inject it all around the store pipe. >> And that was done before the micro. So that >> next slide. So it leaks the night and it keeps it from leaking. Um, >> no, it's not from leaking. It's that's mainly for settlement. The bentonite >> bentonite prevent is a clay layer. So, what what it's not so much for the leaking, but keep in mind we're injecting water through the augur. So, making sure as we're injecting the water, the water doesn't displace the soil around the sewer. The bentonite protects it and doesn't prevent water to infiltrate from from the augur. Yeah. So, >> so what happened was when they I think sometime in 1987 the pipe was installed when they installed it around the store pipe they put gravels around the pipe. >> Oh yeah. >> So between the gravel there's voids right there's void on there's voids. So the contractor came in and said okay when you push the pipe we don't want there's a possibility because of the voids sure the pipes should collapse there's void. So they wanted to inject the slurs around the pipes to fill those voids. Yeah. So that's what they did and the purpose was to fill those voids between those gravels so that it's it's a compact. >> That that wraps up um corporation way west. So now we have Vicki doing presenting Hamilton Avenue. >> So as you guys may know um we have the Hamilton a capacity upgrades project. That project limit is from Roads Drive all the way to Center Drive where that traffic oval is. Um uh we started construction January 5th of this year. Uh right, you know, at the beginning of the rainy season, you know, so um here is project update. So right now we're in the process of installing that 48 in HDP pipe just to increase that capacity. some of those existing sizes are like 12 to 21 in of RCP pipe. Uh and we're installing uh 72 in manholes uh along that street. Uh so in these pictures you can see the picture on the left that is um the base of the manhole. So typically the first part of construction they'll pour the base before they stack on the barrel and top to make that cone shape. Um, and then that picture on the right, we have um, uh, the excavator dropping in that 48 inch pipe into our trench. Um, so that's what's being installed out there. Um, today every day until we're done. Um, next slide, please. Great. Um, over the past few months, we've had a couple of project challenges. Um, a few of these are groundwater, uh, working in wet seasons and utility conflicts. So, I have a picture of each of the challenges that we're facing. So, starting on the big picture on the right, wet season. If you're going to work in the wet season, there's a lot of rain. So, as you can see in this trench, which is like 10 feet plus deep, um, we get a lot of water. So, not only are we getting the water um that is coming out from the streets, it's going to the storm drain and we're starting at the most downstream end of the project at roads. Um we have groundwater, we can capture ground water about 8 ft deep into the ground. So, when we have excavations like this, you can see it can fill up really quick. >> Um so, there are some days that they will be working in the rain. So, they just have to increase um their pumps. So I think we're running about a 6 inch dewatering pump on days like this >> and it's just running continuously. So they'll run it for you know a while until it gets to a low point and then they can start work. >> But you're I mean it's the whole groundwater issue that changed the way stuff is built in in how well to do groundwater zone and you if you start bringing the houses around you start cracking up uh and and things bad things happen. So you still have to look at if you're pumping water, what's going to happen where you're pumping from. You see what I'm saying? So it's a So if you look at that flow flow curve, >> you have to design based on that flow curve because you can't let these guys settle down. And that's what happened to the people that were in the and so you can't build now if you're within 10 feet of groundwater because of that. And same kind of thing here. I'm trying to say. >> Yeah, this is a little bit different though. They're just trying to dewater an active construction site where there's a pipe so they can get the pipe back in. So, a little bit different than what you're talking about. >> Yeah. So, >> and that picture in the top middle groundwater. So, on a non rainy day, I think that's like middle of last month. Not too bad. You know, maybe you got like 18 inches of water. It's not >> used to build a lot in water country. You use you could use a a bed night trench to essentially as a to keep it from coming in on you. >> Clay. Yeah. >> Yeah. So good old Wyoming if they run out of it. It all come all comes out of out of the mind of Wyoming. >> The Amish officer. >> Yeah. >> Um and then we have encountered a lot of unmarked utilities I've seen in some of the pictures. just abundant utility crop is quite in the way of where we want our surroundings. Um so that's been interesting. And then sewer laterals in this uh in this side of town we have a lot of um sewer laterals uh that are made of PCP vrified clay pipe and over time they get really brittle and they break. So, as we're doing construction, we're exposing these laterals and um some of them already have fractures and cracks on them. So, we've had to replace a couple of them or they may break during construction. So, uh those are some of those. Um >> so, do we end up picking up the cost of that or so are plans for it? >> Um the budgeting. >> Yeah. Yes. So for budgeting purposes, we do subt cost a lot of those which I think on the CIP pages when we talk about the master plan did not include that measure. So that's what some of the costes the cost overruns are on things that we didn't forecast in the master plan. Um in some cases if utilities if they know and it's a really correct one utilities might come in. So we end up picking up the cost of staff >> or the alternative was we get contractors. Some contractors are great to work with, some not so much where they call standby. We can't do anything. We're going to stand still until you guys come and fix it. So, we can kind of deal with >> I mean, you you used to do contingency about 10 10 >> 20 or whatever. >> Yeah. But with the unknowns, Val, I mean, that contingency must be going up is what I'm trying to >> It's currently being paid for in the contingency cost via change orders that are already part of the do approved contract. So, right now, it's not increasing the cost, but it if we ran out of contingency, it could. But that's what that built-in 10% is for which is already here in the 20 26th. So it's already part of the project cost the contingency. >> Great. >> Um and here we have the Storm Drive reef head replacement project. Um so this is regarding the 12-in pipe on Alistister Avenue. We did have this as part of the bid alternate uh on the Hamilton Avenue project, but the bids came in insanely high. So, we decided to bid it out as a separate project to get more reasonable numbers. Um, so I just the bid closed April 2nd. We issued the notice to intent that Monday on April 5th. So, right now we're in that process of getting um uh that awarded and getting that on the council agenda. So, we do plan on uh working on this project while school out of session um because it's right in front of Dick Elementary. So, that is the goal is to do it when the kids aren't there. it'll be easier >> and the cost of that is included in this 1,245,000 that you see on the rehab line for 2026. So we have the funding or you budget it. >> Great. So I think that's that concludes your presentation. >> Okay. >> So now we are done with our um agenda item six and we're on to agenda item seven which is also a no action needed storm word compliance updates. area PM online. >> Hello. Good afternoon. This is going to be relatively quick, but I could come back with more information about the EPA project if you have it. Uh the first is just finally an update. We've talked about trash compliance for a while and we have finally reached our 100% trash reduction goal. Uh we have notified the water board. they've accepted what we've done and we are officially there. So that is a >> big >> big feat for us. Uh as you've heard over the years we've been doing different projects and these are just you know an example of some of the things we've done over the years. This is for about 10 years that we've been working on this. So, uh you will still see sometimes litter on the ground, but we have um various actions in place and systems in place to make sure that even if it goes into the storm drain system, we are working in all the hotspot areas to make sure that it's detained in the system at some point so that it's not going to the creeks and to the bay. So, uh it has been a lot of work. Thank you to Michelle and her team and uh public works services u and everyone else who has helped on this. So unfortunately our main lead right now is out u on leave uh but he Brad Hunt who has presented on this more than once u um worked really hard to get us to the finish line. So really really great news for the city. Um, and the next thing I want to present on, uh, Michelle Nelson already mentioned it and I wanted to talk about an EPA project that we're working on. Um, and part of it had already started about a year year to year and a half ago. Um, the big main component is just kicking off now. So, I wanted to talk a little bit more about it. And I'm I'm not sure who knows about this project. So I just wanted to tell you about the overall project that's being funded by the EPA and then what we're working on now. Uh this is a project funded uh no if you can move up to Thank you. Um so we are working on a project that's funded by the water quality improvement fund. It's an allocation from the federal government to the EPA Bay Area region that is focused on protecting water quality in the San Francisco Bay. we got a grant that um is focused on green infrastructure and some other items within it. And so I'll wanted to tell you a little bit about that. So starting like the the second part over to the right where it says gsi projects uh we uh this project is a partnership with a few other um organizations including the city of Santa Clara and we are acting basically as what's called a pass through. We received funding to um to allow them to um construct design and construct a green and storm water infrastructure project in a park um in a parking lot for at a park and we are also receiving funding to design our own project um which is going to be in uh we're proposing that it be in the Hana Bionis Park and I'll show you a picture of what where that is later. Uh we're also uh partnering with the San Francisco Estuary Institute, which is the leading nonprofit organization that does a lot of monitoring in the Bay Area to help uh identify the health of the of the Bay and to evaluate different projects that are happening within the wastewater and storm water world. Make sure that we are indeed improving water quality through meeting our requirements and implementing our projects. Uh so we are going to be monitoring preconstruction and post construction of both the projects in Palo Alto and Santa Clara. So we'll be looking at how storm water quality improves uh with the addition of green storm water infrastructure. The next thing over if you move clockwise the gsi maintenance training we conducted some maintenance training uh through a certification program called the national green infrastructure certification program and we were able to bring someone who um has done similar training in Southern California. he came up who is certified as a trainer in that program and we had a lot of different city staff uh attend from Palo Alto um uh staff from city of Santa Clara city of San Jose and our partners that were working on we're working on this project with grassroots ecology and San Jose conservation corps uh so we provided four trainings that was a combination of classroom and in field training and We provided enough training to meet the requirements of the certification program. If attendees want to move forward and get that certification, they can do so. Uh we made that curriculum Bay Area focused and u I thought it went pretty well. We had pretty good um survey results on that. Part of that involves um of this component of the project involves that grassroots ecology and San San Jose Conservation Corps will continue to train together in the field and we'll then be conducting some maintenance um once we have these constructed on our green infrastructure that we construct through this grant. Um, lessons learned is um, a component where we're going to write a memo of how this project went, how did the storm water engineering specifications work out for us, what do we need to adjust, uh, how did the water quality monitoring results come out? Um, and how did the training occur? So the different components that we are doing in the project basically evaluating them and coming up with recommendations for the Bay Area for similar projects and and including workforce development which is a big need in the Bay Area in terms of green infrastructure maintenance. And the last one, community engagement coming around. Um that is um a pretty elaborate community engagement component that we've put together in addition to public meetings that we're going to have for the project. We are going to have uh be working with grassroots ecology to do some outreach for us as well. And so if you could move to the next page, I'll be talking a little bit more about the project. So um this this kickoff that we just had uh with a consulting firm called Geocentech and some some consultants uh we are going uh kicks off the design of what we're calling a like storm water park green storm water infrastructure measure in the Juan Bionis Park as I mentioned it's a proposed location based on uh preliminary analysis where we looked at basically where can we get more bang for our buck in terms of how can we treat the most imperous surface with the least amount of money and at the same time meet requirements that uh are in our storm water quality permit. Uh this was the lowest hanging fruit in terms of different challenges like utilities that uh you've heard about from engineering just now. Um, so we are now hopefully going to be finished with the design and also construction documents that would be ready to um so that we can then enter into a contract with a construction um contractor um by fall of 2027. And then what's not approved right now is the funding we need for construction. So right now we um have funding for a design and so the project cost is around 800,000 just for the design which I thought was pretty expensive but things are expensive these days. About half of it is being covered by the EPA grant and half of it is being covered by the city through the allocation we get from the storm drain fund that Michelle was talking about. Um, so there is a CIP that's set up. That CIP is in that list of CIPs that you're looking at. The green infrastructure CIP contains the funding that we're using for this project. There is additional funding in that CIP and uh we hope to be able to use that to u for construction as well and we'll be uh we have no idea of what the cost will be so we can't plan for it yet. Uh but we're trying to basically um you know somewhat you know hold on to that money per se to because once we if we can use it for construction then it will allow us to meet um a lot of requirements that we have in the permit as well. Um without getting into the details of that, we've talked about that we're required to treat impervious surface, a certain amount of impervious surface for um per the population in our city. And so we're trying to meet that requirement through this project. If anyone wants to know more about that, I could uh answer questions or bring more information at another time. The community engagement component for this project is going to include two public meetings. I think the first which is going to be tenatively in June will be at the park uh where we can show um the public what the park looks like and what we envision um and we'll have preliminary designs that are around what's called 10% and then uh we will be following up with um more elaborate designs in November. Uh we are also going to have two to three parks and recreation commission meetings where we present feedback from the public where we present our design um proposal and we ultimately request for a parks improvement ordinance that would then be recommended to council where we can where council would adopt it and then we would be able to move forward with the project at the park. >> That's great. It's great to see a green infrastructure project get moving forward with real scope and that's lovely. Thank you so much for the presentation. >> There's still >> hear more about it or >> sorry. >> All right. And then if you move to the next slide, please. So this is it's hard to Well, I'm not sure what you all can see. I can't really um read it very well, but it's right off Charleston Astadero um by a fire station on the corner and out on the name of that street right there. Um but it's >> uh Juan Biona's Park is is basically Kitty Corner. One part of it is at Charlestonero and then the back of it is at an in a neighborhood. So if you go to the Yeah, >> Mayville Avenue. >> I'm sorry. >> Melville Avenue. >> Thank you very much. >> If you go to the next page just so that I can show you a bit of a zoomed out view. So the drainage area that's in light the area that's in light blue is going to be the drainage area that drains to this u place in the park. if you and it's mostly a neighborhood and partly a school. So, you know, if you're looking at storm water pollutants, it's not, you know, they're not from it's not from a commercial or industrial area, but there are a lot of pollutants that are still associated with streets. And so, we are going to be able to capture the pollutants that um come from that area. If I'm sorry, if you could go back to the la the previous slide, what we are planning to do, please make note that we don't have a design. This is an incredibly rudimentary drawing, but it's just to give you a sense of we're bringing, if you look at the arrow on the left, we're going to divert water from the storm drain, put in a new pipe that crosses the street and goes over to the park. So, we're going to when there's rain, we're going to bring it over. Whatever's in that pipe, we're going to bring it over to an area where um Can you There's a part of this slide to the right. Is it possible to look at that? Thank you. >> Yeah. >> So, where that arrow is going, it's actually going to um in the background of this picture that you're looking at on the right, it looks like a bridge. There's a bridge there. Um, and so that water would be going to an area that starts to, you know, depress and then it would be coming down that area that it looks kind of like it's coming toward me when I'm looking at the storm drain and that's where that water would be going. So, it's going to be a pipe that we're going to put under the ground, divert it, and then take it under until a point where we can bring it up to the surface. And then in this area that we're looking at, and it's going to be beyond this the scale of this picture, but we're going to build what we're calling a storm water park. And what's a storm water park? It it can really be anything, but at the end of the day, it's an area in a park. And sometimes it the entire park. In this case, it's a portion of the park where we can capture water, capture storm water, treat storm water, and in this case, add additional features as well. So, if you can go to H forward again, >> the next one. >> You want the ones of the storm water park examples? Yeah. >> Yes. >> Sorry if you can move it over again. Um these are just some examples of other what are called storm water parks might you know some people might just call it green storm water infrastructure or in parks or whatever it is but basically it it will allow us to capture storm water but it will also allow us to you know increase um what's increase the benefits that are for the public at the park whether it's um areas where people can sit whether it's like a walkway across maybe rocks for pe for kids to walk on. Whatever it is, uh we're going to, you know, bring forth some ideas to the public and see what the public would would like. Uh we know that this area, as you know, it's, you know, it's a hill area. We know that the kids do play in that area, but generally that area is not is not used very much. So, it's an area that's currently not used much and we hope to, you know, put in some kind of multi-ben project that will also allow us to improve storm water quality. So, that that's at the end of the day what we're we're planning to do. We just kicked off the project a couple of weeks ago. We're hoping to have the 10% design drafted in June. And once we uh set up the public meeting, we'll definitely add you to the list and and make you aware of any meetings that are coming up. >> Great. Thank you so much. Any questions? >> Um I have one. Uh Pam, why are we thinking about digging and putting a pipe in to get the water? Why not something that's more surface level with maybe a grill to just siphon the water wherever it is needed to go? Like if this is just kind of a water collection and bringing it to a different location I believe you said uh was your question why are we not putting in a surface? >> So why are we digging under the into the why are we digging Pam and moving in the pipes that >> that's be able to >> pipe instead of like something that's more surface level solution. >> We'll be able to capture a lot more storm water if we put in a pipe and divert it. If we want to put something on the surface to try to just capture what's coming down on the surface, we would just be capturing whatever is draining to it from that street. And it would it would be limited because you know at some point the street changes grade and it might flow one direction over another. And so this allows us to capture all that drainage area. That's the only way we can capture a large drain drainage area is when we can bring water over from the actual storm drain pipe. Otherwise, we can only capture whatever is flowing on the surface of the street in that smaller area. >> Can I if I can interject here and I'm not familiar with this project in general when you uh let water sheet flow from the surface, it she flows fast and the soil quality doesn't allow for absorption as fast. So it it it probably the top six inches get filled and moist and water saturates in that area, but we're not taking advantage of the entire depth. By taking water from the street, putting it into a pipe, and then forcing it to pond, basically a ponding area, we're encouraging water. We can change the soil. We can change the material underneath the soil. Um mentioned rocks, putting in rocks and having void space. We can change that by soils and allow more infiltration. So by putting a pipe directing it to an area below grade and in an area that's pvious, we can change the pvious area to allow for more infiltration. Um it's been done in other locations where you do circles and you have water that the deepest and like a target sign the deepest areas at the center of the circle and then as you move up water fills up in ponds. So small storm events can still infiltrate, large storm events have more capacity, >> but this but this all solids still move through and uh so you're really using underground flow to to >> the solids would settle on the surface. So this is sort of a combined effort. I'm talking about the quality component, but there the quantity component, but in Pam's case, she's also dealing with the quality. So the soil, whatever oils, grease that would still get collected or I don't know, whatever napkins, tissues, things that are on the surface would still be collected before it goes into our storm drain system down to like Matadero Creek. >> That's what's so great about the green storm infrastructure is use the plants and soils and all the other things to absorb it, nature systems, right? >> The natural system. And then this the reason why Pam and team picked this one as a proposed site. It was a area that had poor the ecosystem wasn't that great anyway. And so that's part of it too is it's trying to enhance that park area. So they did a lot of research looking at all the different parks. How do we get a watershed area so we get more areas that we need to treat? Moving it into a park that we can treat. Um, so it it helps us in that regard. And then we can get more credits for the storm water permit. >> So that's also helping us and and then we can hopefully then we don't have, you know, the next time we do a project. So we're trying to get the biggest bang for our buck. >> L less utility conflicts. Um, less clay this far further up away from the bay. Less clay. I mean, we're dealing with utility conflict on our end. We're dealing with clay and groundwater. You know, less likely to be that of an issue. So >> that's great. So, we're running a little short on time. >> If we wanted to end on time, there's one more agenda item. >> This is your agenda item. >> Um, so agenda item eight, no action needed. It's a council work plan debrief. Um, do you want me to talk about this? >> If you want, it's up to you. >> Sure. Um, so I was invited as the chair to the city council meeting um, recently and um, and they were uh, reviewing work plans from I think four of the other committees and commissions uh, including the public art one and the health parks and wreck. There was one more >> HR human rights. That's right. And then uh our committee, we were last on the on the schedule, >> which was fine, huh? >> For the whole night, >> and they were running an hour over, which I guess is standard. So, it was all good. It was all good. Um and so, uh staff uh kindly put together some slides. One was the famous and beautiful map slide of all the projects with the color coding to show their status. Um and the other was some accomplishments for the year, some nice photographs um of the various work that was been going on. And then um we went over the work plan or we just the royal we went over the work plan um and uh do you guys remember the work plan? there was that threepoint spreadsheet you know where it said oh with their CIP projects and then we have to comply with regulations within they have to be you know conducted under the umbrella of all the regula all regulations and compliance goals and then we track and monitor the green infrastructure. So those are the three big items. Um, and then there were some questions and um, the one thing they had a comment on was I think the mayor actually said how excited she was by green infrastructure. So, it's great that this project it was nice. I thought, oh, that's great that you have a specific project that'll be, >> you know, in a park where kids play and by school and in a nice community that could really uh, that'll just spruce up that park. So, yeah, it was fun. So the mayor is very involved in our sustainability climate action plan and she's on the escap the that that committee. >> Yeah. >> It's a and so Yes. And so that's one of our goals. >> Good goal. >> And it's part of our sustainability. >> Yeah. So that is why she's very engaged on green infrastructure. >> Cool. >> Yeah. >> So yeah, thank you. you all um created and approved this work plan a year ago, last April. Um because >> they it used to go to council in August uh as a consent item. Uh so we reviewed it in our meeting last April and we're ready to go in August and then the council decided they wanted a more in-depth uh review of these work plans and they bumped it to an action item in April. So, it's a it's a bit lagged to say the least, but it still aligns with the year that we were looking at. Um, but I think we'll we'll shift you guys to develop those work plans a little closer to when we're going to go to council going forward. So, we'll do one in no and maybe in the October meeting we'll work on the work plan for the next year. >> Not that it changes a lot for your >> this committee. It's a little bit different >> more straightforward than some of the other ones like public art. We did update I think we updated the fine print and none of them about what were the current projects or completed projects. >> So thank you guys very much >> and I they're they're actively Dena is actually stepped away so they're trying to do a shortterm bill. So I I sent you the I can send to all of you. They're just trying to find someone for Dena's >> right >> bill but not for yours yet. >> Oh ours ours are >> I got clarification during >> Okay, great. So, we'll just keep our eyes open for it >> should we choose to reapply. >> Please do. >> Please do. We would really appreciate. >> So, but thank you for following up on that. Appreciate it. So, I think uh I think we're done. Do we unless comment? >> Uh did we get a motion? >> Yes, please move. >> I got the second >> I can say. >> Okay. And Greg, uh do you have any comments? I don't want to ignore you completely. >> Nope. Everything was great. Thank you so much, guys. >> Well, thank you so much. Thanks for coming in. >> All right. So, I think we're ready. Are we ready to adjourn? Yes. Okay. I don't want to override anybody. >> Second, >> but thank you. >> Yeah. I'm going to go to that. I got a reminder that there's a >> you know, the meeting protocol refresh course of BC. Yes. >> Oh, yeah. >> I'm gonna go to that. So good cuz I can't attend. That's my son's um 18th birthday. >> Oh, I will not be attending. When is this? April 27th or something? >> That was April >> or Brown and >> Oh, no. My other my another senior night. >> I think it was April 27th. One senior.

meeting to order. >> Recording in progress. >> Um, Chair Roman, >> present. >> Vice Chair O Willis, >> Board member Yolinsquez, >> present. >> Board member Eagles, >> present. For the record, we have quorum. >> Are there any changes or deletions to the agenda? >> No agenda changes planned for today. >> All right. And then do we have any public comment on items not on the agenda? Um through the chair, it looks like we do have one request to speak. Um for general public comment um didn't want to ask if you wanted to allow for the time of the three minutes or one minute. >> We'll do uh one minute. >> One minute. All right. All right. Uh Samir K, you may now speak. Hi guys, I'd like to speak and I would like to talk about that [ __ ] is >> um it looks like they're no longer with us. So that concludes public comment. >> Amazing. Okay, we'll move to the first item on the agenda. All right. Well, bear with me while I share my screen here. >> And uh to the chair, for the record, I do want to share that our council leazison, council member Keith Recdaw, is joining us via Zoom. >> Thank you. >> All right. So, here we are in April. Uh, we have some upcoming meetings as listed on the screen. If there's planned absences, please note that for the record. And I believe that in the packet staff had noted that board member Willis was uh going to be absent for this meeting, but um believe that if there's a planned trip ahead, uh we'll correct that for the record. And just some updates for some events. Um yesterday the uh recruitment was um concluded should I say it was extended from the initial recruitment for the remaining seats on the on the board till April 8th. We have our annual report that will be submitted later this month. And we have the historic preservation conference in Riverside that is at the beginning of May. And we have a tenative date for the city hall lobby for those um Palo Alto historic awards for May 28th. So that is the date that we're targeting uh once we have some confirmation from those property owners that staff has reached out to. And with that I can entertain any questions. Um I'm just curious how many applications for the board uh have you received? >> So the the city clerk manages that but uh to my knowledge we've received I I believe uh two from that last recruitment and that was what was extending. Um so for this uh April 8th what concluded yesterday I'm I'm unsure how many applications we've received but that was the reasoning for extending the recruitment due to the lack of number of applications. A quick question. Uh May 28th, uh it's an evening event, >> correct? So it would be in the city hall lobby uh with that conference room with the glass doors that would be able to open. Um and it would be starting around 5:00 p.m. till 7:00. >> Great. Thank you. I think we can move on to the staff report. All right. Well, let's take a trip to 405 Kipling Street. We have a reclassification request from a category 4 to a category 2 as well as a bonus floor app application. So, to orient ourselves here, this is at the corner of Kipling and Linton Avenue. Uh the zoning is commercial downtown with the pedestrian shopping combining district in the downtown north neighborhood. A little bit about the property. Uh it was built in 1897 by a local builder HL upm and it's an early Palo Alto two-story square box example. The original owner um was one of the 49ers. Uh, so an interesting kind of history for our our town here since it's construction. >> Can you clarify a a prospector or a San Francisco 49er? >> A minor. >> Thank you. >> Yes. >> Clear the record. Um, not pictured not pictured to the right. That's a little bit further down in the um in the bullet points here. So, um, since its initial construction, it's been, uh, minimally altered. There's been some repairs at, uh, the rear of the structure and some interior partitions and some window changes that, uh, we'll get into a little bit later. Um, and some of the the repair work. So in 1901, shortly after its construction, some of the rooms were rented to Stamford students, uh, as well as going a little bit further uh, down the timeline, there was a bookstore in 1955, uh, there was a following bookstore as well as a record store, which the owner is pictured here on the the right, the Turra Book and Music. and that lasted at the property until 1999 when they moved to Redwood City. And since that time, the the property has been a residential use. So, if we go back to 1978, this was surveyed and added to the local register as a category 4 resource. and that is a contributing building um or a group of buildings that are good local examples of architectural styles. So since that uh the property owner uh with coordination through the city uh had Paige and Turbo prepare a historic resource evaluation that was submitted on June 10th of 2025 that found the property individually eligible for a category 2 listing under our criterion two, five, and six. And that criterion two is that the structures are particularly representative of say an architectural style or um a way of life that's important to the city, state or nation. And for that it's the an early example of that twostory square box house type in PaloAlto. And criterion five is that the architect or building was important. And as detailed in the staff report, that is that the HL UPAM was a builder of merit um who made some important contributions to early Palo Alto's uh built environment. And criterion six is that the structure or site contains elements that demonstrate outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, and materials of craftsmanship. So with that, the the building's um remaining uh features that have been minimally altered over the years are outstanding examples of um the two-story box type. Some of those being the shiplap siding, um the molded cornice, uh some of the eve returns, and u the scale cladding. Moving on to the second part of this project request would be the floor area bonus. Uh so floor area bonuses are available uh as part of the say transfer of development rights program to category 1 and two structures that are located in the commercial downtown district or zoned uh public facilities or within our sofa south of Forest area. Phase two, that would be the residential transition 35 and 50 properties. So, this property, should the reclassification request go forward, be eligible as a category 2 property, and it is zoned in the commercial downtown. So, it's a two-part uh recommendation for the reclassification as well as the um rehabilitation and seismic upgrades of the property. So with that, um I think this one differs a little bit from some of the previous examples that we've had that came before the historic resources board. This includes a seismic rehabilitation as well as a historic rehabilitation. So for that additional seismic work grants the property owner an additional 2500 square ft. So that would be a total of 5,000 ft² of bonus floor area that would be available should the property be reclassified to a category 2 and the work that's detailed in the plan set and the staff report commence. So a little bit about the proposal. uh the property owner had submitted plans with their initial request on December 2nd and following that some revised plans were recently submitted on February 13th and just a brief overview of the scope of work. I'll walk us through some of those architectural plans on the following slides, but that would be seismic upgrades with the unreinforced masonry foundation being replaced with a concrete foundation, some window and roof replacements, new windows and wooden siding at the rear edition at the first first floor. A new detached accessory building that would uh have long-term bike storage as well as a trash enclosure. some parking lot upgrades including um some new paving and some additional bike parking along Kipling Street as well as some fencing as well. So if we are looking here at the rear facade of the structure and what would be changing noting that first uh first floor addition on the rear of swapping those windows out um as well as a a window uh in the second floor the roof as well as the trash enclosure and bike storage that accessory building on the left hand side of the screen. Moving on to the Kipling Street facade. Uh noting the gable end of the roof where currently there's an air conditioning unit in that window. So, uh taking that out and replacing it with a inind uh example of say a wooden window. some foundation repairs. Of course, that is that seismic. The unreinforced masonry foundation being taken out and replaced with a concrete foundation. Those bike racks along Kipling Street as well as what we can see on the right hand side at the rear of that accessory structure. And if we're looking along Linton Avenue at the U property, having that accessory structure and the fencing on the left hand side, the roof repairs as well as that foundation work. And throughout the plans, you can probably see a few straggly lines uh that are um cleaning up say electrical uh as well as mechanical items on the on the building's facade. Most notably at the rear of the structure of kind of cleaning that up and letting that wooden siding come come through without the distraction of all of those wires. And again, looking at the eastern elevation. So this would be that shared property line that currently has a fence and having that accessory structure abuing that that wooden fence um and having that foundation work as well as those bike racks at the very front near Kipling. So with that uh staff would recommend that the historic resources board take two actions. Um it can be as one motion but one to recommend to city council to reclassify the category 4 resource to a category 2 structure on the PaloAlto's historic resources inventory as well as recommend to the director and of planning and development services on the project's conformity with the secretary of interior standards for rehabilitation. And with that I can entertain any questions and the applicant is available and believe has a presentation as well. I think we can go to the applicant presentation. Good morning, members of the board, chairwoman. My name is Ken Hayes with Hayes Group Architects. I'll be make making the presentation on behalf of Thoitz Brothers, our client. Uh John Shank with Thoitz Brothers is here this morning. Um, and we are also joined online by uh Barrett Reer from Paige and Turble, the historic consultant uh as well as uh Sher Van Dornne with Van Dornne Abed Landscape Architects in case you have questions on the landscaping um that we're doing. Um you always that was a wonderful presentation uh plan planner uh Switzer uh you've you've covered everything pretty much but I'm going to go through my presentation. Okay, I'll have to be I'll have to start abbreviating these things. I stole the thunder. Right. So, we're proposing an upgrade from a category 4 to a category 2 um on the local inventory um as well as a um rehabilitation plan for your recommendation this morning to city council. Um this is the fourth building on Kipling that um has been elevated um by the Thoitz family um in the last year and a half. The others being 411, which you saw we're actually in for building permit now on that. 431 also in for building permit on for the improvements there. And then 437 was elevated, but there's no rehabilitation plan for that as it was rehabilitated in the 1990s pretty much. Uh we're talking about 405 Kipling today. It was constructed as a home for Norah Smith in 1897. um and built by uh HL Uppam who apparently was also an architect because he's attributed to designing some of the buildings in PaloAlto but in this case a prolific PaloAlto contractor built many buildings in PaloAlto's formative years. It does represent a two-story square box with Queen Anne um detailing and stylistic elements uh which was a common building type in the formative years of PaloAlto. The immediate neighborhood, as I've just kind of talked about, um is an early 20th century residential block where all the buildings are locally listed um as either a category 4, three, or two on the um on the on the historic list. Um other than this rear edition that I'm showing here, um the uh which was added u sometime before 1924 according to kind of the Sandborn maps. Um the uh the building maintains uh its uh original uh form. The front porch, the tuskcen columns, um the carved corbals, the fascia um and cornice and the returns, the fish scale shingles above as well as the shiplap siding um and uh and multi-light uh multi-ite windows. It's actually a wonderful wonderful building. Um in 1985 uh as uh planner Switzer just explained it was uh put on the historic list as a category 4. Um and then recently um through our client in the city Paige and Turbo prepared an historic report that um determined that the building is eligible for inclusion on the city's historic inventory as a category 2 now as a major historic resource. the uh page and tremble report um determined the building is under qualifying criteria two as Mr. Switzer explain number five and number six. I was going to go into detail on that but I don't think I I need to for you. Um and although not required for PaloAlto listing, it does maintain um the uh satisfy the concept of um integrity. So it has integrity of of place um of location, setting, design, materials, craftsmanship, um feeling and association. So we urge you to elevate this building so it can join um its brothers and sisters on on Kipling as a category uh category 2 um historic project or property. Now I'll explain the rehabilitation plan um kind of quickly here. So um the rehabilitation plan that we're proposing uh includes replacing the masonry unreinforced masonry foundation. So, it's an old brick foundation and I've kind of indicated where that occurs with the red line here on this existing plan. Um, also just for reference because I'll go to the proposed plan. Um, the existing parking lot is terrible. Um, it's got a lot of cars but uh they back onto the street um and it's difficult to maneuver in and it's kind of uh uh run down with trash cans. No, no comment on our clients um upkeep of the property, but they recently acquired the property um and uh they're determined to to make this uh a more pleasing experience here. So um we will be reconfiguring that as well. So um we'll be replacing the existing roofing um on the project uh restoring wood siding, wood windows and doors. Um they're going to take the air conditioner out of the window and put a like uh inkind window back. We will remove um the non-historic windows at the rear of the building and put in uh windows that are more um appropriate and um and more I think nicely um proportioned and located on that facade. And we will uh be going through and and inventorying all of the wood trim and siding um and porch floorboards and so on and be making um any kind of necessary um rehabilitation to those um elements. Um the proposed plan we have here um shows the you see the building. We're gonna um my partner work here. Yeah. So we're going to do a new walkway that wraps around this side of the building. It's just a partial one now. Um this will have new landscaping here. We have a new long-term bike storage facility here that doesn't exist today on the property. We're going to put all the trash and recycling um and compost inside um a covered enclosure. And although we're reducing the number of parking spaces, technically no parking is required, but we still want parking. Um, and then we'll be a having five parking spaces there with adequate backup to be able to back up and pull out forward in the forward direction um onto the street. Uh, electrical sub panel is located here. It's kind of a um unkempt area. So, we're proposing this uh new fence in front of that that would then match the vocabulary of what we're doing um at the trash enclosure and so on. So, this is just a view from the corner. Um not a whole lot of landscaping in in this area, although we are replacing a street tree here. Um and that's going to have a new um carob tree. Um and then uh going around the building you see the the fence here that will be hiding the electrical meter and cable infrastructure and so on there. This all gets landscaped. Um the uh landscaping includes uh new shrubbery um some manzanita, some um uh snapdragon um plants and flowering plants. And then you see the trash enclosure in the distance with uh rolling doors to get the trash out. Um, and just a closeup of that and then a fence of the yard. So, that fence will it actually matches what we've been doing at 411 and 431. So, there's some tie-in between uh all of the projects and you can see 411 right here next door. Anyway, so that's my uh my presentation and the city has determined, I believe, that the rehabilitation plan is in compliance with the secretary of interior standards. Um, and we're looking for a recommendation to move this to council. Thank you. I'm happy to answer any questions you have. >> Okay. Before we move to questions from the board, is there any public comment on this item? >> Yes. Uh, to the chair, there is um to request speak at the moment. Um our first speaker is uh John S. Okay. >> Good morning. Um John Shank with Thoitz Brothers and representing the Thoitz family. And I just want to thank you guys again. I it's a lot of your personal time to be involved with these things, but we share your care and your compassion for the historic fabric that is in the downtown. And we're in a way honored to that we get to add this property to the Thoitz portfolio and it's the first residential units they've had in many many many decades. A lot of the buildings used to be residential. Um and and today are not and to have this one is is special for us. Um there's things that you know we can't do under the leases like parking. Residents have parking spaces and we just have to keep these things. But we're excited to take this on. I think it's a beautiful corner. It's a beautiful building and even though Ken Hayes didn't design it, I think it is exceptional. Um, and we're excited to to move forward with your blessing, of course. But, um, I'll leave it there. I just want to thank you guys. Our next speaker is Marinas H uh on Zoom. Marinus, you may now speak. Marinus, are you there? >> All right, the chair and then I believe that concludes public comment. >> Thank you. uh questions and discussions from the board. >> Um I have one question and it's regarding the bonus um square footage. Is the plan to transfer that um right to another owner? >> Thank you for the question. Um, no. We'll we'll we'll we won't use the bonus area on site because there's nowhere to do it. We don't want to mess with the building, but we will retain we'll move them to one of our other properties and wait for a place to be able to use them in the long run. >> Okay. Thank you. It >> this is off topic, but I just thought of it when I sat down. I wanted to mention that it was sort of wonderful for me and also frustrating. There was a I don't know where it was on next door or one of these forms where some residents had seen our sign out front that we have to put up cuz there's a project and there was all this concern that we were going to tear it down and turn it into something else and all these and all this rage and I thought oh I wish they knew that they read you know that was just a histo we're actually going to care for the building but um hopefully they'll see that good things are going to happen but anyway thank you. Was it the the white like Powalto notice of? It says it on the sign. It says, >> I know, but if you just think it's a project, they >> Yeah. >> assume it's going to go away and we're like, "No, no, no." >> Well, that is a sentiment we don't usually get when there's a historic house in a project. So, we'll take that. Uh even though it is misdirected, so sorry about that. >> Other comments or questions? So, uh, I I think this building previously was offices, professional offices >> back in the night >> or is it the other way? It's been >> it's been retail, it's been offices and then it became residential. I think it started as these other uses. >> Okay. And is it residential now? >> It is residential now. And I think in the staff report and the historic resource evaluation u it detailed kind of the change in use. So, initial residence and then from that time kind of transferring over to uh the bookstore and having either a residential as well as um you know the commercial use on on the site and then that transferring in the 1990s uh almost the early 2000s uh with that transfer of that bookstore to uh Redwood City. So, having full residential use since that time. >> And is it a single family residential or is it No, it's multi. because of the it's multi six. Wow, that's a lot. >> There's multiple units. If you look through the plans, you can kind of make out where each unit would be. >> That's great. >> I was wondering why there are so many mailboxes on the porch. >> Well, I I just want to say thank you. Um it's so nice to have that block of Kipling and I think that you know we're going to see a lot more changes in Palo Alto and um it's nice to have a unified area where you can kind of walk in and and see our origins and you know there I can't think of very many other places in Palo Alto where that is possible. So I just want to say thanks. Okay. If there aren't any further questions, um I uh motion to recommend uh that city council approve the reclassification from a category 4 to a category 2 for 405 Kiplane. Um and the board finds and with the recommendation that the board finds it consistent um uh the retrofitting consistent with the secretary of the interior standards. >> I'll second. >> Right. Um board member Yinskis. >> Yes. >> Board member I ch >> yes. >> Vice Chair Willis. >> Yes. >> Chair Roman. >> Yes. Motion carries 40. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Excellent. >> All right, we can move on to uh board business and announcement and comments. >> It will actually be approval of minutes. >> Oh, I'm Oh, >> I'm sorry. Approval of minutes. >> And then um through the chair, I did want to just note that um Chair Roman, you were absent for this meeting. So when we do um do a vote, I would just need you to abstain. >> Great. >> Yep. >> All right. Approval of minutes. >> And just noting that these minutes are from that March 12th meeting and I believe uh we've had some indication from board member Willis of some uh revised uh text to be on. If we go to packet page >> 58 and that would be uh correcting in the record for what is listed as a licensed historian. So, um changing that to reflect uh the professional um qualifications that were being read from the administrative code. >> So, I'll move to approve the minutes >> as amended. >> As amended. >> I second that. All right. Um, board member Eagle Sanchez. >> Yes. >> Um, board member Elinskis, >> yes. >> Uh, Vice Chair Willis, >> Uh, Chair Roman, >> abstain. >> All right. Uh, motion carries 301. >> Okay. Now we can move on to board business. Uh, this is kind of off topic a little, but um our last category upgrade um I was I'm my uh Whoa. It it seemed it just rattled me that this would move up to a category two whereas um the John Hudson Thomas building that was you know um standing on Bryant as part of a sort of a connected duplex and when we downgraded well we didn't downgrade that category but council did and um I just think it speaks to the fact that we need to look at the whole ordinance and bring it in line because the fact that we um basically still have threes and fours where um I think that the our categories have kind of lost their um I don't want to say integrity but they they've kind of lost their meaning. So um threes and fours sound like they're part of the original inventory. Two ones and twos twos are sounding like they're part of new additions to the inventory or changes the inventory. And I I just think we need to really um within the next let's give us 12 months, we need to face up to how we're going to deal with um equalizing our categories or making our categories sink with each other because I feel strongly that um we're kind of floating with um the public's whim, I guess, you know, and hallelujah. some of them are on our side and I'd say the majority of them are probably not. Um I don't know that for a fact but you know they're certainly more vocal and I I feel really strongly that we need to put in place a plan for um re-evaluating our inventory properties and our categories and somehow coming them making them align because we're this is going to get worse and worse. you know, people are going to go, I want it this way. And council seems to go with the owner. So, I want it this way, it'll be this way. I want it this way, it'll be this way. And I think that we need to really put some good language in place so it's clear that, you know, to council that we're not being arbitrary, which is what they basically accused us of with the John Hudson Thomas building. Um, that we need to have support for our decisions. And um and I think it's really important to look at our ordinance update or whatever piece of it we need to do to make this happen. And I I think we need a plan for to get this agendaized and get uh some kind of flow to this process so it doesn't just stall out as it seems to have done for the last 20 years or probably more since we did the original inventory. Can I make one comment which is I think the reason city council went the way they did on the John uh Thomas Hudson building was because Paige and Turnbull recommended it and whatever Pent Turnbull recommends they seem to sort of default to them instead of what our recommendations are. So, do we need to have a strict conversation with Paige and Turnville and say you define the terms and we'll try and agree with your terms because I just feel like I I know you're right. Um, but I I don't really want to out question their integrity. I just want them to explain to us. >> Yeah, I I don't know what to do about that either. Yeah, I think we could agendaize this, but I I I think because they are an external I think the the point of change and turnable is that they are supposed to be um >> objective. >> Exactly. >> Well, they're professional and we're volunteer, >> right? And they're supposed to be objective making an object. So, basically, city council has two objective opinions. one from us and one from the historic consultant to weigh. Sorry, Stephen, I cut you off. >> Oh, uh, if I may, just um I I believe if we recall back to that, um, there was a detailed historic resource evaluation that, um, evaluated the criteria that we have listed in our ordinance. And I >> supported them all. I mean that was a very good report until the conclusion because it supported that it was on the inventory for three good reasons that it was a an amazing architect that it was one of the last buildings of his standing. No, the report definitely supported us. I had no problem with the report except the conclusion and if you recall that report it was very strongly supportive of the building. I mean, I was kind of amazed that they did this great report and then here's their here's their conclusion. >> Right. So, uh I believe, you know, if just to um I think we're getting a little off topic of a decision that was already made off topic. My point is that we need to avoid this in the future. >> So, we need a a plan as a board. We need a plan so this doesn't continue to happen to us that we need to define our categories in such a way that it's totally clear. And I think that when we started adding to the inventory, we're not adding any threes and fours. And I think that to me that makes it very clear that our categories need to be adjusted. So that's my only point. It's not going back to the past trying to change the past obviously. Um, but I do feel like we need to work on our work plan and we need to make some progress and if we're only meeting once a month, we need to, you know, get some something in place where we can move forward during the year and get some results. >> Stephen, what's on the agenda for our upcoming next couple of meetings tenatively? So, there are a few uh projects that are nearing um packet ready, if you will. Um there's a property at the Gamble Gardens that has a a project waiting for uh their plans to be resubmitted. Um and I believe that there's a recent submitt for a category 2 structure. uh it's a residence that will be undergoing some uh rehabilitation and um as of that that's kind of the the notable examples that would be coming forward. Um just wanting to note while I have the board's attention if there's any changes to our ordinance that would need to be directed by council um that would be a council directed initiative not a board directed initiative um to update that ordinance. So >> yeah, so we would need to advocate it advocate for it with council. Um I and I will say as far as priorities for the year the I mean it falls under the work plan trying to get more um up. Did we put that in the work plan? No, we didn't put updating the ordinance. we put education on the ordinance. Um, so it's really up to the subcommittees to to spearhead that and advocate it for advocate for it with council. >> And further on that note, I mean, the board is more than welcome to either prepare some draft language themselves, but if there's an ask of staff, of course, that would go back to say the the council directed initiative. So, um, there there's nothing precluding board members from proposing language or preparing a draft. And uh if that u initiative is coming from the board wanting to present that to council to get some buy in, I think um that would be an appropriate way to approach this. >> Any other comments or committee updates? >> Um I just want to say that May, as we know, is preservation month. Yay. Um and um the past heritage is doing their presentation and their um awards on Sunday May 3rd. Um I think it is from 2 to 4 in the afternoon and also past is doing tours during the month of May. Um some on Saturdays, some on Sundays, 10:00 in the morning. Um I think they have about seven tours. They have a bunch of tours this year. So, I would encourage everybody to check their website um and attend as many as you can. They're sort of branching out beyond Professorville in downtown, so it's kind of nice to learn some more about different areas of town. Um I think that's all I got. >> Thank you, Caroline, for liazing with um past. Um, there was something that I Oh, uh, no, I lost it. I don't have any updates. Uh, >> I'm trying to think. Do I have to call for >> wait comments? So, um, do we want to run through a little bit about the inventory update and what people what we think might be, um, appropriate to put on the web as the sort of list and what might be, you know, what doesn't need to be on that list. No. Okay. >> I can give a brief update that we've been working on the inventory. Um, I Caroline did some great work of um adding uh basically I created the I took our current inventory from 2012 and added um some information to it including the year built um the builder, the architect and Caroline has done a great job of going through and uh updating the year built and I just need to update that sheet. Um, we are hoping to by the fall have something that we can uh turn over to staff for uploading um to replace the current 2012 inventory. >> So, this would be available online for people to Okay, take a look at >> Yeah. and we can provide um a copy when it's more solidified uh for feedback. I can't remember off the top of my head. I thought I brought it with me. Oh, I can bring it. >> I just we've kind of been adding this and that. So, you know, we have um if it's in a historic district, um we have notes if it was known by a different name, historic name. Um and you know, right now it's so bare bones that it's just an address and a category. sorry, address and category and district. Um, and I, you know, we could stick with that and that would be pretty easy, but I think that it would be nice if somebody could click on the list and pull up everything in Professorville or everything that was built in 1896 or um, you know, there's certain categories that we would like to um, be able to sort by. Um but you know maybe um maybe we don't need like otherwise known as names you know maybe those are just on the DPR sheet. So I think if you guys would you know think about what you would really care about having on the master list and if it's more important to have it really simplified and people just click through to the DPR sheet and they don't really need a lot of information on that. But I think, you know, Sam and I kind of started and, you know, went down the rabbit hole and, you know, we added everything and um and I think that, you know, hopefully when we um when we get it on the web, it will in a be in a much more editable form than it is right now. Right now it's in, you know, three different places at least, maybe more. Um, and you know, I I think that that it it it we will be able to change it more easily once we get it done, but I think it would be nice to kind of start as close as we can to what we're looking for in the end. So, if you guys have thoughts on important categories or things that might like to be sorted apart, that would be a great feedback for Sam and I, I think. And if I may, just noting I believe what some previous discussions um there's an announcement if you will uh that the city will be getting an intern and one of those tasks is to do just that. So the work and efforts of uh Chair Roman and Vice Chair Willis um will be greatly appreciated to kind of help shepherd that along to actually have that come uh to fruition and be posted online. So, um, any of that work that you guys have done, I think would be greatly appreciated, uh, to send that over, uh, when you feel it's it's ready and available. I think we might start sending you updates monthly or something, you know, just so you kind of know where we're going and, you know, how far along we are and clutter your mailbox. >> Great. I forget. Stephen, do I need to call for Do I need to ask for public comment on the announcements or No. >> No. >> Great. All right. Well, then I move to adjourn >> or I journ. >> I will second it. I need >> Thank you everyone.