HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-05-18 City Schools Liaison Committee Agenda PacketBIG CREEK ELEMENTARY
Palo Alto Unified School District
Melissa Baten Caswell, Board Member, Chair
Ken Dauber, Board Member
City of Palo Alto
Liz Kniss, Council Member
Eric Filseth, Council Member
Staff
Cathy Mak, District, Chief Business Officer, Staff Liaison
Khashayar Alaee, City, Senior Management Analyst, Staff Liaison
1. Oral Communications
2. Approval of Minutes – April 20, 2017
3. Review of Recent City Council/PAUSD Board Meetings
4. Discussion about Public Employee Housing
5. Discussion and Update about Project Safety Net
6. Update on City/District Cubberley RFP
7. Review of Upcoming Agenda Items
School/City Liaison Committee Meeting
Thursday, May 18, 2017
8:00 AM to 9:30 AM
Palo Alto Unified School District
Conference Room A
25 Churchill Ave
School/City Liaison Committee
Special Meeting
Agenda
City/School Liaison Committee Meeting
Page 1
SCHOOL/CITY LIAISON COMMITTEE
PALO ALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
CITY OF PALO ALTO
DATE: April 20, 2017
MINUTES FOR MEETING OF April 20, 2017
Opening The School/City Committee held a special meeting in the District Conference Room A at 25 Churchill
Ave, Palo Alto. The meeting was called to order at 8:02 a.m.
* All handouts can be viewed in the Business Services Office 25 Churchill Ave.
Palo Alto Unified School District Representatives:
Melissa Baten Caswell, Board Member, Committee Chair
Ken Dauber, Board Member
Cathy Mak, Chief Business Officer
City of Palo Alto Representatives:
Liz Kniss, Council Member
Eric Filseth, Council Member
Khashayar Alaee, Senior Management Analyst
Oral Communications Nelson Ng addressed the Committee about the Castilleja expansion. They might have seen signs
around town from the group against the expansion. As a Palo Alto homeowner, he is very concerned
about the major impact with the removing of houses and trees. This will also have major impact to the
bike boulevard and a lot of parents are not aware of these issues. Ng presented a diagram of plans
submitted by Castilleja. The plan is to have the cars coming from Embacadero Road turn left onto
Bryant Street before turning into the planned parking garage. Bryant street is a major bike boulevard
and may cause an issue to students and their transportation. Cars coming on Emerson Street will
feed into Embarcadero Road; this will cause major traffic back up. The construction will take five plus
years. Caswell asked that a copy of the diagram be submitted to the City School Traffic Safety
Committee.
Approval of Minutes –
February 23, 2017 & March
16, 2017
MOTION: The February 23, 2017, and March 16, 2017, meeting minutes were approved.
Review of Recent City
Council/PAUSD Board
Meetings
City Council: Filseth reported there was no material change to ADU ordinance. They directed staff to
move forward with parking garages in the California Avenue and University Avenue area.
Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) plans to eliminate the afternoon bus route 88. VTA does plan to
have a bus run three times in the morning. City staff proposed adding a new shuttle that will run all
day and covers the area to the California Avenue train station and comes up on Charleston Road.
The issue is funding and how often it will run; the estimate is between $600,000 and $1 million. They
directed staff to seek how to cover the funding. VTA ridership costs are higher than any other
transportation provider. The morning seems to be impractical since there is not enough transportation
to accommodate the demand of students. Caswell asked if the three buses in the morning align with
school schedules. Filseth said yes. Caswell asked will they also align with the upcoming schedule
changes at Gunn High School. Filseth said that he does not know. Caswell asked Mak to ensure they
align with the school schedules. Caswell asked if they could use a letter from the District in support.
Kniss said it never hurts but even more helpful would be to speak to someone on the VTA board. The
next VTA board meeting is on May 4 and she highly urges someone attend. They know Jeannie
Bruins for the County from Los Altos. Dauber mentioned Penny Ellson may be handling this issue
and voicing her concerns.
District: Dauber reported they are moving forward on summer repair projects at various schools, the
Gunn central building project, and Paly building renovations. They are also authorizing the next
District master plan which will serve as the basis for the next bond. Caswell mentioned they are also
moving forward on budget cuts but still working on some of the items. The District’s new calendar
City/School Liaison Committee Meeting
Page 2
MINUTES FOR MEETING OF April 20, 2017
was approved; the only changes are the whole week of Thanksgiving is off, and winter break has one
week in December and one in January. Kniss asked why the change. Caswell said the union felt
strongly about these changes. Kniss asked the schools start date. Caswell said August 14th. Caswell
said Gunn and Paly are changing their block schedules slightly and it might have an impact on traffic.
Dauber added the Board discussed extending the dark fiber agreement with the City and also solar
will be on the next Board agenda. Caswell said they submitted a letter in support of AB1261 which is
for people suicide prevention.
Cubberley Introductions were made. City Manager James Keene stated that in March 2016, he and
Superintendent Max McGee signed a contract to symbolize their commitment to developing a
process to design the Cubberley site that reflects the community’s and educational needs. City and
District staff met about a week ago to catch up and discuss Cubberley. The existing lease with the
District expires in 2019. The City owns eight acres and the District owns 27 acres. The City is ready
to start master planning on the eight acres for community serving uses. Clearly the eight acres could
effectively serve more needs if they were to build more than one story and that is their interest. That
said, they have always been committed and believe they would all be best served with an integrated
master planning process for lots of reasons. They have always been interested in the potential
connections in the educational role of the District and community serving programs. They have both
near term and long term joint concerns, there are parking needs that need to be satisfied that would
be best handled by planning them together. They also have existing field use that is very important to
the community. Maintaining both parking and field maintenance along with their planning and District
needs.
Kniss clarified the District has more land than shown in diagram. McGee said they also have 8.5
acres on 525 San Antonio. McGee reported the District is in an enrollment decline. They have no
doubt the enrollment will be driven back up, certainly by Stanford and the City’s own housing plan will
impact enrollment so they are not going to part with any of their properties at this point. As enrollment
increases, it will have an impact on their secondary schools. They have a bubble that is moving
through that put a lot of pressure on the middle schools. Caswell clarified they have empty classroom
space at the elementary schools but the tightness in terms of facility space is at the middle and high
school level. McGee added enrollment will increase again and they will have large classrooms
moving through the secondary schools. Although they have empty classrooms in elementary schools,
and a couple of sites that could be used for elementary schools, they do not have sites to reopen for
a secondary school except for Cubberley. They do need to preserve space at Cubberley for a couple
of different options, one might be some kind of secondary site, a small high school, a 6-12 site, or K-8
site to take pressure off of the large middle schools. At some point they will have those conversations
again and part of this depends on decisions at the City level and what happens with Stanford. They
would be interested in combining the District office and an educational facility at Cubberley. District
and City staff visited the Emeryville facility that has a District office, a small high school, and some
City services. The District is interested in something like that and it would open the current District
office space for anything from a special academy high school, expanding preschool, or faculty
housing. They have a current Board member who is very interested in finding affordable teacher
housing. Another possible option is an educational facility for special education students because
they are placing special education students out of the District at a high cost. This could be another
opportunity for Cubberley to have an educational facility that will serve the community. They are
eager to participate in the master planning. He does understand the fields need to be in the
community use but there are 35 acres and it does not mean they cannot use 20 of those acres. That
will be part of the master planning, how they use field space or address parking issues. Golton added
the District is currently working on a new master plan since the one in place is ten years old.
Kniss confirmed the District has no intentions of selling any land at Cubberley. McGee said no. Kniss
stated that is the more important message here and starting out with that premise, it makes it far
easier.
Keene stated in their view, the absolute best way would be to jointly plan this in an integrated way. A
City/School Liaison Committee Meeting
Page 3
MINUTES FOR MEETING OF April 20, 2017
little bit of the difficulty is the City does have more general boundary of what their needs are and the
District has a variety of needs that may unfold over time at a different pace but he does believe it will
provide the opportunity in the planning process to design the area in a way that does set some
solutions but then keeps areas for the District to use in various different ways in the future. He does
not mean to jump ahead with building solutions but certainly fields will be maintained where they are
for some time but perhaps parking underground with a field above it that allows more flexibility and
reconfiguration that could serve both uses. If the District were to only do an administration building for
the next ten years, it would be problematic for the City to wait for all of that. Lastly, they will need to
go out for some sort of bond measure. They should be thinking of what would a joint City/District
bond measure with a vision the community embraces, what could that mean for both entities and not
miss that opportunity.
Caswell mentioned the Board gave McGee direction to work with Keene on the City’s master plan.
Kniss asked when the buildings at Cubberley were built and are they seismically safe. Golton said
they were built in the 1930s and were in conformance with the code at the time. Keene pointed out
the District’s buildings are in better shape than the buildings on the City’s side.
Golton clarified the diamond shaped building was built at a different time. Kniss clarified that
Cubberley itself was built in the 1960s. Golton said, correct. He will get the Committee the exact
information.
Public Comment:
Alison McCormack would like to see a lot more happen in the Cubberley area. In addition to the
comments online, on Facebook, people stop her at the grocery store, text, and phone calls to discuss
Cubberley. There are a plethora of ideas that go beyond what the City and District have suggested at
this meeting. There is a great deal of support for many of the existing uses. She asked that they not
lose sight of the fact it is a 62 year old building. She remains skeptical that after 38 years of not
needing Cubberley for a school that the District will need it for another school. McCormack agrees
special education students and teacher housing are important. She believes nothing should be off the
table; they should be innovative and creative. This is an incredible opportunity. A number of people
who live in Greenmeadow have discussed the construction aspect with her and she encourages the
District to work closely with the Greenmeadow neighborhood, they have a lot of thoughts on that. She
is delighted to hear a bond mentioned since one will be needed. A District and City joint effort will be
incredibly powerful and complicated. Cubberley needs help and they can make that happen.
Public Comment:
Sheri Furman distributed a handout on Cubberley. Furman served as a member on the Cubberley
Community Needs Subcommittee and she is here to light a fire to get this going. Cubberley is
deteriorating and they have been talking about this for decades. She is representing the community
needs side, they have potential for a population explosion in town and Lucie Stern is small and
Avenidas is small. They use Cubberley as their community center and they will need more
community services. The comp plan talks about youth, teens and seniors but there is something in
between and that is community services. She believes housing is not a good idea there, problems of
conflict of uses can occur when there are children and adults so they have to be careful of what they
plan there. Students can be impacted by adult uses. There is potential to do a great community
center at Cubberley. They could do a land swap so it gives the District more flexibility so the
community could have something now.
Public Comment:
Nigel Jones is the President of the Friends of the Palo Alto Library founded in 1938. They have four
locations; three are retail locations and one is a storage location. The three rooms are their main
room, their bargain room, and children’s room that retail outlets generate about $200,000 a year. In
the children’s space they have about 10,000 books in that room with a face value of about $450,000.
He just wants them to be aware that they do have a presence at Cubberley. They pay $70,000 a year
City/School Liaison Committee Meeting
Page 4
MINUTES FOR MEETING OF April 20, 2017
on rent. They have given several million to the City over the years. Please be aware of their presence
at Cubberley. They are concerned about the future of Cubberley. They would like to be included in
future conversations on Cubberley.
Kniss stated the process is really difficult and has been brought up so many times. She does not
know what it will take to get it going.
Dauber clarified the City has eight acres but in the master plan that could change. Keene clarified the
City has eight acres and the District has 27 acres. In the lease agreement and in conversations
during the Cubberley Advisory Committee (CAC), they mutually agreed a reconfiguration would be
ok. There is a lot of logic to the existing reconfiguration. They believe they are on schedule and they
want to bring a design consultant to begin the process to think about this space. Their thinking is this
is the eight acres the City will maintain. If they would like to reconfigure, he would say let’s get on the
stick and make that decision.
Dauber clarified the City would rather proceed with the plans on the eight acres than engage in an
uncertain process with no clear time in the horizon. Keene said he thinks so. Kniss said she supports
that. Keene added he assumes the District would not want more adult centered activities than more
student activities at Cubberley.
Dauber asked if they were to engage in a master planning process, the precise boundaries or
location of the City’s eight acres could shift through the reconfiguration. Keene said yes, it could
change.
Dauber stated they have given them the charge through the contract to make progress on this but
progress has not been made. What is the obstacle and what do they need to do to make this happen.
McGee said the obstacle from the District’s perspective is the uncertainty in enrollment and the
funding. The Board came up with a 3-2 vote when talked about an alternative high school so will that
switch with the next election, who knows. How can they commit to an educational facility on this
space without more clarity? They know they will need it because enrollment is going to go up. The
District may be the obstacle but they keep getting new information with the Stanford impact and the
City’s scenarios on housing which obviously impacts enrollment. Kniss said it might be tempting to
think of Stanford having this huge impact on enrollment but she does not believe the kind of housing
they are doing is not very family oriented. Maybe the District knows something the City does not.
McGee said no, they have a Board member who is very active in analytics in this whole piece and he
contends that the impact will be more from Stanford. Golton pointed out they should remember that
City Council has had discussions on the very substantial growth scenarios. Kniss said they have.
Golton stated that type of growth is related to student generation. Keene said yes but the Council
within a year will make that decision what that is and that will at least start to anchor the District’s
scenario planning a little more realistically. The concern he has is they have a lease that ends in
2019 with a commitment to master plan. It is pretty obvious they will need to renew the lease for
another five years which is called for in the agreement and it will take them through 2024. He does
not want to continue having the same conversations in 2024 and not have any progress made. He
believes that they can master plan this so it allows for flexibility. They had a dreamy idea in which
they tried to get the D School at Stanford involved to have some funky classes at Cubberley and turn
it into a design studio with the community there. Also, 18 months ago he attended an Architectural
Foundation of America event in Dallas on urban design on architectural educational planning for the
future and he asked one of the principal presenters if he could come out to view the site for
community and educational needs. They are ready to go to Council with an RFP for a design
consultant to start work. They will need to figure out ways to engage the issues with the District as
part of that so they will deal with adjacencies and the like.
They do need to practically look at the funding piece time frames. If the District would move the
administration office, they would have this great space next to Paly that could be part of another
compelling narrative to the community.
City/School Liaison Committee Meeting
Page 5
MINUTES FOR MEETING OF April 20, 2017
Dauber said it seems unlikely the District will reach certainty about the full use of this site in the time
frame that they have but it would be really unfortunate to miss this opportunity so on their end they
need to figure out how to engage in a master planning process that recognizes the uncertainty that
the District has so it will not block this opportunity. Dauber asked Golton how easy or difficult would
that be. Golton stated they are kicking off the renewal of the ten year old master plan. The logic was
they would do one bond and based on the progress made, do another bond. The current bond has
been very successful. However, ten years ago they were not talking about wellness centers or STEM
classes. It is not of matter of checking off but rather updating their thinking about how schools will
look like. They had a conversation with Tom Hodges who is with the District’s current construction
firm fs3|Hodges and they can design a generic secondary school there. The District is ready to do the
update of the master plan and the architect and the construction firm are involved in thinking about
the District’s role at this site.
Community Services Assistant Director Kristen O’Kane pointed out that it is important to note that
while the City moves forward the District will be a partner the whole time. They have been drafting a
scope of work of how that will look like. It has been through multiple drafts as the climate changes. It
would still be a joint effort. Keene mentioned that by default they are proceeding with the design and
consult to pay attention to the adjacencies but if the District moves ahead with their update on the
master plan, it seems they are stuck in this old way of thinking about how they can do this together.
He knows they are not ready to the degree they are but it seems they should be integrated in what
they are doing.
Caswell asked what the barriers are to coming together and doing a master plan for the Cubberley
site together and how do they overcome them.
Kniss asked when the agreement expires. Keene said December 2019 with an extension for five
years.
Dauber asked how they can get on board; what they need to do next. He heard Golton say they can.
McGee said yes, they can. Caswell asked what the obstacles are. McGee said it would take time,
money and the ability to deal with ambiguity because the design phase will start framing it towards a
certain direction. Caswell mentioned it will be helpful for someone to come in and show them what
could be done with the site until then it would be hard to say whether they have time and money for it.
Dauber stated if the District engaged with the City now in the process of settling on a joint planning
process and engaging professional partners, it would get them much closer to where they need to be.
McGee asked about the RFP. O’Kane said they do have an RFP to have a consultant to help with the
master planning process.
Golton said they are going to do a master plan for the non-Cubberley facilities. They are
acknowledging that in the master plan they will speak to Cubberley. Caswell said but that is for the
whole district. Golton said yes but that is part of the District. He believes the first step is to bring a
person in to facilitate this process.
Keene said they have ambiguity too and they will have more requests than the eight acres can
address so there will be a decision making process.
Caswell said they will have to look at the needs they might have in the next number of years. The
most ambiguous for the District is what kind of school they will need. Also, what are the pros and
cons of having those needs at Cubberley or somewhere else?
Dauber said the City and District need to get together to work on a Cubberley master plan and is it
best for this to be part of the whole master plan or do a master plan just for Cubberley. How do they
get to a joint planning process and not a parallel process?
City/School Liaison Committee Meeting
Page 6
MINUTES FOR MEETING OF April 20, 2017
McGee asked about the RFP. Keene said he does not think they would want to incorporate the
Cubberley master plan into the whole District master plan. O’Kane said they have a draft scope that
would be incorporated into an RFP for a design thinking consultant to come in and work with the City
and District jointly. They have drafted multiple versions of this scope depending on where the District
is and how involved they want to be. Ideally they will work on this together. Caswell said as a
community member it would scare her to know that the City and District are not jointly working on
this.
Keene said for a long time the situation at Cubberley has essentially been this since the CAC that the
District does not know how to use this site. They need to move forward together. Doing the joint RFP
process together will be the training wheels to the more complicated piece that will come after.
Dauber said this is the first time he heard of the RFP and he is glad to be hearing about it. McGee
said they have been working on this for some time. Dauber asked if the next step to bring the RFP to
the Board. Golton said the next step is to bring this initial effort to the Board with a budget.
Filseth stated this is great and having this done together is essential. As for RFPs, do they not have
to decide what to place there first? Keene said they bringing a design consultant to support a process
for both engagement and discussion. O’Kane said the RFP is not to get construction drawings, it is to
help them facilitate going through the master planning effort and who do they engage from the
community. Also, building on the Cubberley Advisory Committee report.
Caswell asked that this process not be constrained by what they have at Cubberley today. For
example, they could have playing fields but they do not necessarily need to be right on the site.
Otherwise they will not optimize this site. Keene said as long as that extends to every component
they discuss, to not be constrained. He believes the community will unconstraint them if they do this
right. He suggests jointly bringing the same RFP to both their jurisdiction to bring them to the next
phase of planning this.
McGee said he would like whoever runs this process to develop three scenarios to bring back to the
Board. The Emeryville facility was eye opening in how the District and City services can be together.
Kniss said Las Avenidas will be located there for the next two to three years and it will give the
community a good sense of what is it like to have a senior center in that part of the community versus
where it is currently. She believes people will find that very appealing.
Dauber stated he is really happy hearing about the joint RFP and would like an update on the
progress on this effort at the next meeting.
Future Meetings and
Agendas
The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 8:00 a.m. at the District office.
Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:34 a.m.