HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-02-11 City Council Agenda Packet
City Council
1
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
Monday, February 11, 2019
Special Meeting
Council Chambers
5:00 PM
Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in
the Council Chambers on the Thursday 11 days preceding the meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Members of the public may speak to agendized items; up to three minutes per speaker, to be determined by the presiding officer. If you wish to address the Council on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker
request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to
discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Council, but it is very helpful. Public comment may be addressed to the full City Council via email at City.Council@cityofpaloalto.org.
TIME ESTIMATES Time estimates are provided as part of the Council's effort to manage its time at Council meetings. Listed times
are estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the meeting is in progress. The Council
reserves the right to use more or less time on any item, to change the order of items and/or to continue items to another meeting. Particular items may be heard before or after the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur in order to best manage the time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public. To ensure
participation in a particular item, we suggest arriving at the beginning of the meeting and remaining until the item
is called.
HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW
Applicants and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to make their
remarks and up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public have spoken.
Call to Order
Special Orders of the Day 5:00-5:30 PM
1. Fire Safety Month Poster Award Recognition to Palo Alto Unified School
District Students for Excellence in Art Creativity and Messaging
2. Celebrating the City’s Achievement in Dramatically Improving Palo Alto
Street Conditions
Study Session 5:30-6:30 PM
3. Study Session Regarding the Cubberley Master Plan
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
City Manager Comments 6:30-6:40 PM
Oral Communications 6:40-7:00 PM
Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of
Oral Communications period to 30 minutes.
2 February 11, 2019
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
Minutes Approval 7:00-7:05 PM
4.Approval of Action Minutes for the January 28, 2019 Council Meeting
Consent Calendar 7:05-7:10 PM
Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members.
5.Appointment of the 2019 Emergency Standby Council
6.Authorize the City Manager to Execute Agreements for Additional
Severance Payment to Employees Impacted by Service Delivery
Changes at the Palo Alto Animal Shelter
7.Adoption of an Amended Salary Schedule for the 2016-2019
Management and Professional Employees Compensation Plan to
Increase the Salary Range to $136,593-$204,880 for the Chief
Transportation Official Position
8.Approval of the Appointment of Jonathan Lait as the Planning and
Community Environment Director and Approval of an Employment
Agreement
Action Items
Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials,
Unfinished Business and Council Matters.
7:10-8:45 PM
9.PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL, 375 Hamilton Avenue, Downtown
Garage [17PLN-00360]: (1) Adoption of a Resolution Certifying the
Final Environmental Impact Report, Adopting Findings, a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act for the Project (CEQA); (2) Approval of a
Record of Land Use Action Approving Architectural Review Application
[File 17PLN-00360] for a new Five-story, Nearly 50-foot tall Parking
Structure With Height Exceptions for Elevator and Photovoltaic
Structure, With one Below Grade Parking Level Providing 324 Public
Parking Spaces and Retail Space on the City's Surface Parking lot
Zoned Public Facilities; and (3) Approval of Contract Amendment
Number 1 to Contract Number C17166279 With Watry Design, Inc. in
the Amount of $352,977 and Authorization for the City Manager or his
Designee to Execute the Contract
8:45-10:00 PM
10.PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 18.18
(Downtown Commercial District) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code (PAMC) to Repeal Section 18.18.040 Regarding a Non-
residential Square Footage Cap in the (CD) Downtown Commercial
Zoning District to Implement and Conform to the Updated
Q&A
Q&A
3 February 11, 2019
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
Comprehensive Plan; and Section 18.18.040 Implemented Policy L-8
of the Prior 1998 Comprehensive Plan, Which was Removed as Part of
the Adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Update. California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this Ordinance is Within the Scope
of the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
Certified and Adopted on November 13, 2017 by Council Resolution
Number 9720 (Continued From December 3, 2018)
State/Federal Legislation Update/Action
Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements
Members of the public may not speak to the item(s)
Adjournment
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA)
Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact
(650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance.
4 February 11, 2019
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
Additional Information
Standing Committee Meetings
Policy and Services Committee Meeting Cancellation February 12, 2019
City Council Meeting Cancellation February 18, 2019
Schedule of Meetings
Schedule of Meetings
Tentative Agenda
Tentative Agenda
Informational Report
City of Palo Alto Investment Activity Report for the Second Quarter, Fiscal
Year 2019
Property Leases Entered Into by the City Manager Under Palo Alto Municipal
Code Section 2.30.310(h), and Reported per Section Code 2.30.710, Fiscal
Year 2018
Auditor's Office Quarterly Report as of December 31, 2018
Public Letters to Council
Set 1
City of Palo Alto (ID # 10052)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Special Orders of the Day Meeting Date: 2/11/2019
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Achievement in Dramatically Improving Palo Alto Street
Conditions
Title: Celebrating the City’s Achievement in Dramatically Improving Palo Alto
Street Conditions
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Public Works
Attachments:
Attachment A: Proclamation Honoring Achieving PCI Score Goal
Proclamation
PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX SCORE GOAL ACHIEVED
WHEREAS, in 2009 the City of Palo Alto’s Pavement Condition Index (PCI) was 72 and well
below our neighboring communities; and
WHEREAS, in 2011 the Council established a goal of achieving a city-wide Pavement Condition
Index (PCI) of 85, representing very good to excellent condition, by 2021 as recommended by the
Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission. In 2014, Council accelerated the timeline to 2019; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Engineering Streets Group manages the street resurfacing program,
whose annual budget increased from $1.8 million to $6 million in response to Council’s goal. Since
2012, the total investment in the street resurfacing program has been $45 million; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Engineering Streets Group developed five-year paving plans and
performed street surveys and revised them annually to meet the PCI goal; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Engineering Streets Group rolled up their sleeves, worked tirelessly
and met the goal one year early; and
WHEREAS, Palo Alto now has the best streets in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties and is
anticipated to have one of the highest PCI scores in the region once the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission compiles its upcoming annual report.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Eric Filseth, Mayor of the City of Palo Alto on behalf of the entire City
Council do hereby recognize the Public Works Engineering Streets Group in achieving the PCI goal of
85.
Presented: February 11, 2019
______________________________
Eric Filseth
Mayor
City of Palo Alto (ID # 10016)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 2/11/2019
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Study Session: Cubberley Master Plan
Title: Study Session With the City Council Regarding the Cubberley Master
Plan
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Community Services
Recommendation
Staff recommends that City Council provide feedback on the status of the Cubberley
Master Plan.
Background
The Cubberley Community Center is located on a 35-acre site in south Palo Alto that
was previously home to Cubberley High School until 1979. Of the 35 acres, the Palo
Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) owns 27 acres and the City of Palo Alto owns 8
acres. The City leases PAUSD’s 27 acres and operates the community center on the
combined 35-acre site. The lease has since been amended multiple times and the
current amendment will expire in December 2019. The lease amendment includes a
condition that the City and PAUSD will jointly develop a master plan for the entire site
by December 31, 2019.
A Cubberley Citizens Advisory Committee (CCAC) representing a cross-section of
Cubberley tenants, city-wide neighborhoods, schools and city-wide representatives,
and other relevant organizations, was formed in 2012 to cooperatively explore all
practical joint uses of the Cubberley campus for both educational and community
service needs. The result of the CCAC process was the recommendation that the site
be designed for shared City/School District use and for the City and the School District
to work cooperatively toward a phased development to support both school and
community needs. The final report of the CCAC can be found at
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/33455.
On March 9, 2016, the Palo Alto City Manager and PAUSD Superintendent signed a
Cubberley Futures Compact to demonstrate the commitment between the City and
the School District to collaboratively plan for the future of the 35-acre Cubberley site.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
City and PAUSD staff began working together on a scope of work and request for
proposals for professional services to assist with the master planning effort and
community engagement.
A professional services agreement with Concordia, LLC was approved by City Council on
June 18, 2018 to assist with engaging the community to develop a vision and master
plan and for the 35-acre site. The City and PAUSD are sharing equally in the cost of the
master planning effort. On December 17, 2018 City Council approved the addition of
the adjacent PAUSD properties Greendell School and 525 San Antonio Road to the
project area and scope of the master plan, increasing the project area by 7.7 acres.
Support to include these two properties into the study area for the master plan was
expressed by community members who attended the first two community meetings, as
well as members of the Parks and Recreation Commission. Members of the City-School
Liaison Committee also showed support for inclusion of these two properties at their
November 15, 2018 meeting. The addition of Greendell School and 525 San Antonio
Road into the master plan area provides a wider distribution of programs and services
for educational and community use.
The June 18th and December 17th City Council Staff Reports can be found at:
https://cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/65435
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=63453.06&BlobID=6
8173
Discussion
The Cubberley community co-design process began with two community meetings at
the Cubberley Pavilion on September 27, 2018 and November 1, 2018. At these
meetings and with assistance from a team of community “fellows”, participants
engaged in activities that would help define additional or expanded programs to
complement the existing uses at Cubberley and allow for a future school at the site.
At the first meeting, participants nominated over 200 unique ideas to enhance or
improve the existing programs and services at Cubberley. For meeting two, these
ideas were organized into common groups and themes and participants were asked to
rank them and describe their vision in more detail. The highest ranked ideas included:
• Adult education
• Theater/performing arts space
• Green space
• Makerspace/workshop
• Senior/multi-generational programs
City of Palo Alto Page 3
• Health and wellness center
• Café
• Flexible rental space
Participants were generally in favor of sharing space between the community center
and future school where possible. The recommendations for shared space include a
theater, gymnasiums, arts classrooms and gallery space, a community kitchen,
makerspace, and a large flexible event space.
Participants also engaged in activities designed to understand the community’s
preferences and tolerances toward building height, parking and amount of green
space using existing zoning limitations as a guide. Participants expressed a tolerance
for 2-3 story buildings and preferred underground parking to maximize the site for
green space.
Results of the first two meetings including program recommendations, preferred
building height and site layout, and future shared uses is presented in the Cubberley
Co-design Program Document (Attachment A). The full document is available on the
project website at:
https://www.pausd.org/sites/default/files/Cubberley%20Program%20Document_final.
pdf
The third community meeting on January 24th used a draft massing (building shape,
form and size) and program organization model to begin conversations around site
circulation, program layout, and aesthetics. The model was developed from the
community input received during the first two meetings. The model is a working
concept for discussion to plan and organize the array of recommended educational
and community uses that exist and were recommended. The model also provides an
opportunity to analyze site circulation and potential phasing.
The first two activities asked a series of questions related to site layout, program
organization and adjacencies, and site circulation and parking. The final activity was
to understand the architectural and landscape style preferences of meeting
participants. The activity sheets used for this meeting are included as Attachment B.
Results of the third community meeting will be included in the staff presentation to
City Council.
All project information and deliverables are available on the project website at
www.pausd.org/cubberleycodesign.
Resource Impact
There are no resource impacts at this time. The costs for the Cubberley Master Plan are
funded through the Cubberley Community Center Master Plan Project (CB-16001).
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Next Steps
The PAUSD Board of Education will have a study session on February 12th to provide
feedback on the same content presented herein. The progress on the master plan will
also be presented to the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) at their
February 13th meeting. The Parks and Recreation Commission provided input on the
co-design progress at their January 22, 2019 meeting. Feedback and input received
from the community, City Council, Board of Education, PTC, and Parks and Recreation
Commission will help inform the next phase of plan development. Additionally,
Concordia has hired a sustainability subconsultant and a transportation subconsultant
(Fehr & Peers) to provide technical expertise and design guidance.
All the information gathered will be used to develop a draft master plan, which will
include several conceptual design alternatives, cost estimates, and phasing scenarios.
The fourth and final community co-design meeting to present the draft master plan will
be May 9, 2019. A joint City Council/PAUSD Board of Education study session will be
scheduled in spring/summer 2019 to review the draft master plan.
Environmental Review
Preparation of a master plan is considered a project under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). A CEQA document will be completed for the master plan by an
environmental planning consultant as part of the master plan process.
Attachments:
A: Cubberley Co-Design Program Document
B: Cubberley Community Meeting #3 Activity Sheets
Attachments:
• Attachment A: Cubberley Co-design Program Document
• Attachment B: Cubberley Meeting 3 Activities
• Attachment C - Public Letters to Council ID# 10016
CUBBERLEY
CO-DESIGN
PROGRAM DOCUMENT
01.08.19
Prepared by Concordia for the City of Palo Alto
and the Palo Alto Unified School District.
Attachment A
2
INTRODUCTION
The Cubberley Community Center is a highly utilized and beloved community asset
in south Palo Alto that serves a diverse range of people and functions. Cubberley has
ϐ Ǥ ǡ
̵ϐ Ǥ
The City of Palo Alto has an interest in maintaining the vital services and programs
that Cubberley currently provides to the community and increasing programming
ϐǤ ϐ ȋȌǡ
this is the only large site that can accommodate a full high school or large middle
Ǥǡϐ
the site at a future time.
Ǥ
end of their functional life and the current site layout cannot accommodate both
community center and school needs in the long-term. A large proportion of the site
Ǧ
Ǥ ǡ
ϐ
Ǥ ǡ ǡ
support the community’s needs in the future.
Co-design Process
Ǧ ʹͺͻ
Ǥ
ϐ
from their thorough report describing the need for a joint redevelopment plan to
Ǥ
ǡ ǡ
ǡ
understanding of this project's needs and constraints.
Ǧ ǡ
activities to inform the physical parameters and goals of the design.
3
Goals
ϐ ϐ
ǡǤ
adjacencies and joint uses are recommended to reduce duplication of resources. Multi-
use indoor and outdoor spaces are recommended to accommodate many different users
Ǥ
the outdoors on site is a major priority of the community. The recommended programs
ǡ
ǡ
Ǥ ǡ ͵ͷǦ ǡ
ͷʹͷ
ǡ ǡͶ͵Ǥͳ Ǥ
Document Summary
ͳǡ̶
ǡ̶
Ǥʹǡ̶
ǡ̶ ǡǡ
ϐ Ǥ͵ǡ̶
ǡ̶ ǡ
ǡǡ ǡǡǤ
Ǥ
Ͷǡ̶ǡ̶
ǡ ǦǤ
Next Steps
This document is the programmatic road-map that directs the design phase. There
Ǥǡ
ʹͶǡʹͲͳͻǡ
design direction and aesthetics.
ϐǡͻǡʹͲͳͻǡ Ǥ
honored and ultimately incorporated into the architectural design for the Cubberley site.
4
Methodology and Goals
ǡ
ϐ Ǧ
and begin designing the future for Cubberley. This process synthesized the needs
ǡ ǡ Ǥ
Ǧǡ
ǡ
school principals on the Cubberley and Greendell sites.
Fellows
̶ ̶ Ǥ
individuals volunteered their time to help provide outreach and meeting facilitation.
ͳͻǡͳͳͺ
Ǥ
Ǥ
ǡ
conversations and ensure all could participate equally in the activities.
Outreach and Research
ǡ
programs to better understand current space usage and program needs. When
ͷʹͷ ǡ
ǡ
Ǥ
program-providers. Concordia also studied other nearby facilities and program
ϐǤ
5
High Schools Middle Schools
Elementary Schools
Gunn Palo Alto High Fletcher Greene
JLS Middle
Fairmeadow Elem.,
Hoover Elem.,
Multi-Use Sites
Cubberley,
Greendell, & 525
DuveneckHays Addison Ohlone Palo Verde
El Carmelo Briones Nixon EscondidoBarron Park
49.7 acres 44.2 acres 34.7 acres (+8 City)
33.9 acres
22.5 acres 14.3 acres
(Leased –
Fremont Hills)
School District Needs
ǣDz ǡ
overriding consideration regarding Cubberley is the need to provide for potential future
Ǥǡ
Ǥ
ͷǦͳͲǤ ǡ
facilities...”
ͷͲȂ
Ȃ
built at some point in the future through a phased approach to design and construction.
ǡ
ǡ
Ǥϐ
ǦǦǡ
Ǥǡ
or able to be converted to school use in the future.
Figure 1. PAUSD land: Cubberley is the largest contiguous piece of land after Gunn and Palo Alto High.
6
ǡ
ǣ
ȋ ʹȌǤ
ϐ ǯǦ
Ǥ ǡǡ
ǡǡ
of Greendell. Their programs meet the needs of young children and their families
ǡ
ǡ Ǥ
ǡ
ǡ
ǡǡǤ
ǡ Ǧ
school hours.
Figure 2. Site map showing ownership, the PG&E gas easement and protected trees
PAUSD
Greendell
5 acres
PAUSD
27 acres
City of Palo Alto
8 acres
Mi
d
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
R
d
Sa
n
A
n
t
o
n
i
o
R
d
Protected Trees
P
G
&
E
1
0
’
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
PAUSD
525 San Antonio Rd
2.7 acres
TOTAL
43.1 acres
N
100'
1000'
7
City Needs
ǯ ǡǦ
that should be addressed soon. Because the buildings in
ǡ
for the Cubberley Community Center is a pressing need.
ǣ
ͳǤProvides a multi-cultural and multi-generational
learning environment;
ʹǤSupports the visual and performing arts; and
͵Ǥ ȋϐǡ ǡ
Ȍ ǡ
emotional and physical health of people of all ages
and abilities.
Community Needs and the Co-Design Process
The co-design process focused on uncovering
Ǥ
ʹͳǡʹͲͳͺǤϐ
ǡ
Ǥ
ͲͲʹͳͻ
ǡ
Ǥ
ǡ
ʹ Ǥ
ǣ
• Adult education
• Theatre/performing arts space
• Green space
• Ȁ
• ȀǦǡ
•
• Cafe
•
Ȅ
importance of preserving and improving them. The full results summaries from both
Ǥ
ǡ
Ǥǡ
Ǧ
ǡ ǡǤ
Ȁ
8
Ǧ
Ǥǡ
ǡ
health programs reorganized into a Health and
ǡ
ǡϐǦ
spaces.
Concurrent to the program-related activities at
ϐǡ
in design-related activities to communicate their
preferences and tolerances for building size and
Ǥ
not infringe on the competing desire for more
Ǥ
ʹǦ͵
ǡ
ǡ
Ǥ
structured and underground parking are more
ǡ
ϐ
Ǧ
community enjoyment of the site.
ϐ
ϐ
Ǥǡ
programs share spaces so that the site can serve as
ǡ
small footprint. Many programs requested at
Ǥ
ϐȀǦ
gyms or rentable classrooms. Because of these
ǡͻͲΨ
ȋ Ȍ
ϐ
meeting can be accommodated in the program
Ǥǡ
the programs they prioritized and elaborated on in
ʹ Ǥ
15 2005 10
Top Programs by number of votes at Meeting 2
Theatre/Perf. Space
Green space
Makerspace
Sen./Multi-Gen. Programs
Wellness Center
Café
Ǥ
Pool
Consolidated Dance Cen.
Cardiac & Stroke Care
Walking/Biking Paths
Rehearsal Space
Courts
Student/Teen Center
Afterschool Care
Ƭ
Ballroom Dancing
Community Garden
Ǥ
Ǥ
Chinese Reading Room
Ƭ
Ȁ
Art Gallery
Art Classrooms
Skate Park
Affordable Housing
Figure 3.
9
Program Clusters
by frequency Vote
at Meeting 2
Conceptual progression of Program and Space Size
ǡ ǡ
ǡ ǡ
ǡǡǡ
ǡ ǡ
Ǥ
ǡǡ
Ȁ
school needs.
Ǥ
ǡ
ǡ ǡ
ǡǡ Ȁǡ
ϐ
the community center and a future school. Participants
ϐ
Ǥǡ
ͳͲͲǡͲͲͲ
Ǥ ǡ
ϐǡ ǡȀ
inclusion of more programs that participants requested.
Program Clusters
by frequency Vote
at Meeting 2
Existing
Building GSF
School UseCommunity
Center
Shared Use
Spaces
Teacher
Housing
PAUSD
Offices
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Sq
u
a
r
e
F
e
e
t
(i
n
t
h
o
u
s
a
n
d
s
)
Addition of
High School
Add Programs to
Community Center
Share
Uses
Add PAUSD Offices
and
Teacher Housing
Figure 5. This graph shows the progression of assumptions developed for the long-term plan. Sharing uses such as gyms, and a theatre
UHGXFHWKHRYHUDOOIRRWSULQWDQGPDNHDGGLWLRQVRI 3$86'2IÀFHVDQGRUWHDFKHUKRXVLQJPRUHSUDFWLFDO
Figure 4.
10
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
)
2211111122221122
1111111
Site Conditions
ǡ
ǡͷʹͷ Ͷ͵ǤͳǦ
ǡ Ǥ͵ͷǤͶ
ͶͲͲͲϐǡ ǤͻǦ
ǡʹǤͷǦ ϐ ȋȌ
Ǥ
ͷǤͲǦ
ǤͷʹͷʹǤ
ǡ Ǥ
ͳͻͷͲǡ
ͳͻͲǡ Ǥ
ͳͻͻ
Ǥ ͳͻͺͻǡ
Ǥǡ
Ǥ
Ǥ
ǡ
ǡͳͻͻͳǤ
Ǥ
Architectural drawings from 1969 by Clarke, Stromquist, and Potter
11
Green
space
14.9
Buildings
5.6
Hardscape
14.4
Parking &
Roads
8.2
)
O RE
AL
ELE
CCCCCCCAMAMAAM
ININOOOO
EL
CA
IIOOOOOOOOOOO
AMAM
I
AMAM
EL
CCA
EL
CL
AA
EL
CL
AAAAAAAAAAAA
EELEEEEEELELELELELELELELELELELEEEELELELELELEELEEEEEELELELEEEEEEE
MMMMMM
NNNINNNNNINININNNNNNNININININ
LLLELLLLLLELELELELELLLELELELLLLLLLELELELELLEL
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAAAAAAAAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAMAAAAAAAAAAMAMAMAMAAAMAMAM
R
ALAL
ELEL
LLALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLALALL 1333313133333333131311133311111111
8888888888888
7
4444444444444
101011000
1110
8888
777777
2222222222 1881888888888
MiiddddledleeMiddddddJLSLMMSMMMMMJJLLLLLLLLSSJLLLSSSSMMMMMMMMidMiddSMMMM Mitchell PMitMitMitheelctcchheitParkaPkrkrkPMitP PPllPl Pl P
CCCCCCCCuubbberleeyyyCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCuu
CenterrCeCeeCCCCeeeerrrrrrrrrnnniittyyCCCCCCrerttentneneCeeCCCCCeeeeeeeeCCmommmunuuunnnununituuuunommCmoCmmmunmummCoomCommmmmmnnnniiiiiiiiitttttrr
Palo AAltolPPPPPPPtooooAAlttoAAAAlllttAooaPPaPPPaaFaFmiillyyyYYM ACACFFFFYYYMMMMYYMAAyyyyyYYYMMCAACCCCCCCAAAACCCCCCAACCCMCAAAAAmiamFmmmmmmmmamiFFFaaFalyyil
ǡ
ͲǤ ǡ
̈́ͳǤͺ ϐ ǡ
ǡǤ
conditioning and are not constructed to meet the energy requirements of today's CA
ʹͶǤϐ ǡ
Ǥ
Ǥ
ǦǤ ǡͶ͵ǤͳǦ ʹͷͲǡͲͲͲ
ǡ ȋ ȌǤͳ͵Ǥ
occupied by surface parking and other underutilized paved areas.
ǡϐ
Ǥ
ǡ
Ǥ ϐǦ
create the possibility of increased interior area to accommodate the long-term vision of
Ǥ
Cubberley
Greendell
525 San Antonio Road
Total
(acres)
35.4
5
2.7
43.1
(sq ft)
188,000
40,700
24,500
253,200
(acres)
4.1
.93
.56
5.8
.12
.19
.21
.13
(acres)
4.1
.93
.56
5.6
(% site)
11%
18.6%
20.7%
13.0%
(sq ft)
180,000
40,700
24,500
245,200
Site CoverageFloor Area FARSite AreaSite
Existing Site Use
(acres)
N
200'
1000'
Figure 6.
12
Existing Uses
At Cubberley, rentable rooms account for approximately 35% of the building area. This
includes two gyms, the auditorium, pavilion, theatre, meeting rooms, classrooms, dance
studios and other small rentable spaces. These rooms are rented out on a regular basis by
many groups on campus and off, including the PAUSD Adult School.
The rest of the facility is leased to other groups selected through an application process.
We've categorized these programs as Health and Wellness (22% of the interior program),
Education (21%), Visual and Performing Arts (9%), and Other Community Center Services
+HDOWKDQG:HOOQHVVSURJUDPVLQFOXGHSURJUDPVIRUVHQLRUKHDOWKDQGÀWQHVVGDQFH
martial arts, and soccer club rooms. Educational programs include a Chinese language,
culture, and history program, after school programs, preschools, childcare, and summer
enrichment programs. Visual and Performing Arts programs include artist studios for the
Cubberley Artist Studio Program (CASP) and music practice and classrooms. The other non-
SURÀWDQGJRYHUQPHQWRUJDQL]DWLRQVRQVLWHLQFOXGHWKH&XEEHUOH\DGPLQLVWUDWLYHRIÀFHDQG
RIÀFHDQGVWRUDJHVSDFHVIRUVHYHUDORWKHURUJDQL]DWLRQV
*UHHQGHOOLQFOXGHVWKHÀYH*UHHQGHOOSURJUDPVDQGWKH$GXOW6FKRROGLVFXVVHGRQSDJH
525 San Antonio Road is currently leased to Athena Academy and Genius Kids.
Preschool programs
Gym B
Friends of the Palo Alto Library
Dance rooms in former auto shop class space
13
Cubberley
Rentable Rooms
Pavilion
Classrooms
Lecture
Activity
Meeting Room
Dance Studios
Gym A & B
Gym Activity Room
Theatre
Auditorium
Music Room
Health & Wellness
Avenidas
REACH
Cardiac Therapy/Heart for Life
Art of Living
Ranger Taekwondo
Silicon Valley Karate
Dance Connection
Dance Magic
Dance Visions
Zohar
Palo Alto Soccer Club
Stanford Soccer Club
Education
Children’s Preschool Center
Good Neighbor Montessori
Genius Kids
Living Wisdom School
BrainVyne
Imagination School
Ivy Goal Education
Make X
Acme Education Center
Chinese for Christ
Hua Kuang Chinese Reading Room
Children’s Museum and Zoo
Visual & Performing Arts
Artist’s Studios
California Pops Orchestra
Palo Alto Chamber Orchestra
Melody’s Music
Community Center Services
City of Palo Alto - OES
&XEEHUOH\&HQWHU2IÀFH
Palo Alto Historical Association
Palo Alto Humane Society
Minority Project
California Law Revision
Friends of the Palo Alto Library
Greendell
Young Fives
Transitional Kindergarten
Special Education Preschool Program
Springboard to Kindergarten
PreSchool Family
PAUSD Adult Education
525 San Antonio Road
Genius Kids
Athena Academy
Existing Program Distribution
N
200'
1000'
Figure 7.
14
Bike Lane (Class I & II)
Bike Boulevards & Shared Roads (Class III)
Walk and Roll to School Suggested Walking/Biking Routes
Bus Routes- Rte. 32, 35, 104
Caltrain Line
Free Crosstown Shuttle (M - F)
Key
Historic District
PAUSD Land
Public Parks
Community Centers
Grocery Stores
Fire Stations
Schools
Restaurants
F
Walk and Roll to School Suggested Walking Route Only
1/4 MILE1M1//4 LEMMIL
1/2
F
Crescent Park Child rk CkescPa dCCrent Park ildDevelopment CentermeDDelopopmnt Cent erntet
GrSSSSS
GreenmeadowoGw meaeadreenm wwwww w
Community PoololPoooy Pooommollooloo
Greenmeadow Historic Districtc DisGenreeeeGremeadooww Had ttorricDstrDisDHistoric DistrictHistoric Districtttt
Cubberley Community CeeyCmmumunmmmmty Ctyytyitynitiom
rkRamos Pararkarkrkk
hinee SunshSuunnshinehinneneshinshhinhhneennininenhoollPreschoescchPrescPreoolhooPrescPrescsPrPrssscs
CharlestonCharlestonCharleston CharlestonChaarlnCenterCent
Ne
l
s
o
n
D
r
.
Dr.
Ne
l
so
n
Ne
’s Fine Foodss Fin Fo dsFioodse Fneza’s FPiazza’zza’szza’aa’s Fa’s
Herbert HooverHerbert HooveElementaryEElee
lubver Kids’ Clubovvoovooover Kids’ C ublubHooovooooHHHHClubClubClubvovvooooolubovoolubovoo seeHouseseHeseStevenson HenStenson HHHHHHHH
Challenger School
ededeeedniteUnitniteAbilities UnitUninititiettttttUnitenitedteiteUnUnUUnUnUnUnnnUnnUndddddDog ParkkD
Mitchell Park LibraryPark LMMMiell P LiPa aryary
e gMagical Bridge MMM idgMagicge gggeeaygroundPlalayPlayyggg
chieve Kidsieve chiihieiehieve KKiddsAchchAch
Little League Little Little LLittle eeueue
ouseClubhoClubhoClubhoee
g
Palo Alto Pa AS. PSP ooltoPPPPPPPPPPPPPPaPPFood ClosetososFoFoFoFo
Fire Station #44FStaStati#4n44n
rk kMitchell Pa karkkrkMMMrk Mitchell ParMiMMii
JLS MiddleeJLS MiddMM
m.m.mFairmeadow ElemmFaFairmeadow EleemElmmm
Chinese SchooChinese Schooll
onal Preschoolchal esnaa InternationaonatinaerSora InSa IntInte onanoononn
Almost Eden AAlm enest EGarden ProjectGaectjectctPrProjroardrde
essstonesstotonsMileststostesssss
oolooohoooPreschPPhoohoohochhoohooooooooooooooooo
Tennis Courtso
Adobe
C
r
e
e
k
Mi
d
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
R
d
Wa
v
e
r
l
e
y
S
t
Al
m
a
S
t
E Mea
d
o
w
D
r
E Me
a
d
o
w
D
r
E Cha
r
l
e
s
t
o
n
R
d
S
1/4 mile 1/2 mile
Figure 8.
15
MILE
Gideon Hausner er sndeonusGJewish DayDayayJewis
Genius KidsKniuGK
D Adult SchoolhoAAduultSSthhhhhoPAUSDAUAUSPPDDD
hena Academencaa AaA deemyenAthethethe
uth hhYoututhYuthtthtthCommunity uniCom y nityCoCooCoCoCoCCoootyy
ServicevicerviSSeSSS
reendellSchoolS
nterr Crossroads Speciality FoodsCroCsroiii
Peninsula Youth TheaterPPP
Mike’s BikesMike’s B
Studio KicksStuo o
Sequoia AcademySeuqq
Sue Mann ViolinnVioMS
Family JCCy JCCCOshman FmanhmOsFFF
Palomo Archeryalomo A
Kehillah Jewish High SchoolKwish High S
Mid
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
R
d
Sa
n
A
n
t
o
n
i
o
R
d
S an A
n
t
o
n
i
o
R
d
Mo
n
t
r
o
s
e
A
v
e
Lo
u
i
s
R
d
Neighborhood Context
The neighborhood surrounding Cubberley is
Ǧͳ
Ǥǡ
neighborhood is an historic district comprised
mostly of single-story mid-century modernist
Ǥ
Center are nearby assets of particular relevance
Ǥ
ϐ
Antonio Road. Bike access to the site includes
those streets and Nelson Drive and Montrose
Avenue.
Historic homes in Greenmeadow
N
16
Charleston Shopping Center
Cubberley is the Charleston Shopping Center to the north
ϐǤ
ȋȌ
ȋ
ȌȋȌǤ
Current tenants of this shopping center include Piazza’s
ǡǯǡ ǡ
ǡǯǡǡ
ϐ ǡǡ
ǡ ǯ
ǡǣǡ
ǡ Ǥ
many commercial uses near the site to the southeast along
ϐǤ
ʹͲͲ
Ǧϐ ǡ
and a gas station. Another gas station is across the street
ϐǡ
ǡ
ǡ Ǥ
Mitchell Park
ǡͺͲǦ Ǧ
ǡϐǡǡ
ǡǦ Ǥ
ǣ
ǡ
Ǥ
ϐǣǦǦͺǡ
Ǧǡ ȋ Ǧ
ϐȌǡǯȋ
ǦȌǡ Ǥ
ǡ
Ǥ
ϐ ǡ
ǡȋ
Ǧ Ȍǡ
ǡ ǡ
ǡǡ Ǥ
ǡʹͲͳͶǡ
ǡ ǡǯ±ǡ
multipurpose spaces.
Piazza’s Fine Foods at Charleston Shopping Center
Mitchell Park
17
Nearby Lap Pools
Rinconada Park pools
Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts
Greenmeadow Community Pool and JLS Pool
Ǥǡ
ǡ
Ǥ Ǥ
comparable to the popular Rinconada pool in north Palo Alto.
This facility provides a template for a lap pool and a separate
recreational pool.
Other nearby assets
Some other nearby assets are of note for their
programmatic relationship to Cubberley. The
a large facility near Cubberley that includes
ϐǡǡ
ǡ Ǧ
ǡǤ
ǡ
ǡ
Center for the Performing Arts. The City of
̵Φ
radius of the site.
Images of Greenmeadow pool.ImImImIIImImImImImmImmImmmmIImImmmImmIIIImmImIIImImmImmImImIIImmImImImmmImImImIImImIIImImImmImImmImImImmmmImmmmImmmmIImImmIIIImmIIImmmmIIIImImmIIIIIImImImImmmImmIIIImmIIIIImmmmmmmmmmmmIIIIIImImmImmmmmmmIIIIIIImImmIImIIIIIIIIImImmmmmImmmmmIIIIIIIIIImIImImmmmmmmIIIIIIIIImmmmmmIIImIIIIImmImmmmmmmIImmmmIIIIImmmIIIIImmIIImmmmImIImmImmmmmmImmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmImmmmmagagaaaaagagagaagggaggagagagagagaggggagagagagagagggggggagagagggaaaggggggagagaggaagagagagagggggaggaggggggagagagagagaggagagagagaggagagagagagaaaggaggagagaggagaggeseseseseseseesesesesesseseesesessesesesesesseessessesseseseseeesseesesesssssesssssssssssssssssseesssseeesessssssssseesesssssseessssesesseessessseess oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooff ff fffff ffffff ffff fffff fffffffff fffffffffffffff f fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff fff ff fffff ffffffffff ff ffffffffffffffffffff GrGGGGGrGGrGrGGGrGGrGrGrGGGrGrGrGrGrGGrGrGrGrGrGrGrGrGGGrGrGGrGrGGrGrGrGrGrGrGrGrGGrGGrGGrGrGGGGrGrGrGGGGrGrGrGGrGrGrGGrGGrGGGrGrGrGrGGrGrGGrGGGrGGGrGrGGrGrGrGGGGrGrGGGrGrGGrGGrrrGrGrGGGrGGrrrrrGrrGrGGGGGGrGGrrGGGrrGrGrGrGrGrrrrrrrrGrrrrrGrGrrrrGrGrGrrrrrGrGrGrrrGrGrrGrGGGGrGGGGGGrGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGrGGGGGGGGeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnmnmnmnnnnnnnmnmmnmmnmmmnmmmnmnmmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmmnmnmnmnmmmnnnnnnnmnmnmnnnnnnnnmnnmnmnmmmmmmmmnmnmnmmnmnmnmnmmnmmnmnnnnnnnmnmnmnmnnmnnnnnmnmnmnmmmmnmnmmmnmnmnmmnmnmnmmnmnnnnmnnmnmnnnmnmmnmnmmmmmnmnmmnmmmnmmnmnmnmnnnnmnmnnmnmnmnmnmmmmmmmnmnmnmmnmmnmnmnmmnmnmnmnmnmnnmnmnmnnmnmnmmnmmmnnnmnmmnmmnmmmnmmnmnnmnmnmnmnmnmmmnmmmmmmmmmmnmnmnmnnmnmnmnmmmmmmmnnmnmnnmnnnmmmmmmnnnmmmmmnnnnmnnnnmmmnmmmmnnnnnnnnnnmnmmmmnmmmmnnnnmmnmnmnnnmmmmmnmnmnnnmmmnnnnnnnmnmmmmnmnnnnnnnnnmmmmnnnnnnnnmmmmmnnnnnnnnmnmmmnnnnnnmnnnnnnmmeaeeaeaeaeaeeaeaeaeaeeaeaeaeaaeaaeaaeaaeeeaeaeaeaeaeaaaeaeeeeaeeaeeaeaaaeeaeeeaeeeaeaeaeaaeeaeaeeaeaeeaeaaeaeeeeeeeaeeeaeaaeaeaaaeeeeeaeeaeeaeaeaaeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaeaeeaaaaaeeeeeeeeeeeeaeaeaaaeaeaeaeeeeeeaeaeaaaaaeeeeaeaeeaeaeeeeeaaaaaeaaeaaeaeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaeaeeaeeeeeeaaaaeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaeeeeeaaaaaaaaeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaeeeeaaeeeeaaeaaaeeaeeeeeeeeeaeeeeeeaaddddododddoddodododdodododododododododooododoododododdodododddodododododooododododododddodddodododdododdoooododdddddoddododododoooododdodododddododododoododoooooddododododdododoodododooddoddddddoddddododododddddddddddddddoddodododdododooddddddddddddddddodoodooddddddddddodododooododdodddddddddoddoooododdddddddddododododoodododddddddddododdddddoooooooooodododddddododddddooododododododdddodddddoooooooooododdododddoooodddoooooodododdooodddoododdodoodododododdodoododdodododoodoododddddooddddddoodddddddoddddooooooddoooooowwwwwwww wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww wwwwww wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww popopopoppppppoppopopopopppopoppppopopopopopopopooopopopoooopopopopoppppopoppoppopppopopopopopopopopopoooppopopoppppopoppopppopopopppopopopopoopoppoppopppoppopopoppooooopooppoppopopppopoppopopopoopopopopopooppopopppoppopopopopopoppopppppoppoooopopoppppoppopoppopopoopopopoopppppppppopppopopooopppppopppppppooopoopopppopppppopopppoppppppopopoppopppppppopppppppopppppopppooppppppppopopppppppppppppopooooppppppppoppooppppppppppopoooooooopppppppppppoooooooopoppppopoppopoppooooooooooooooooooppoppppoooooooooooooooooooopppppopoooooopopoopooooooooooppoooooooooooppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppoolololololoollolooloolololoololollllololllolololoololololoolollllolololololoolollololooooloollololllololololololollolololololololollololllllolloloolollollllllllololooolllllolololooloolllllllolooolollllloloolllllllololoollololololoooooooolollloloooooollolooooooooooollolooooooooollooolooooolloooooolloololoooolllooolooolooolllllollolololooloollllllloololooooloooololollollolloolooooooololololollllooolooooolooloololloooooolloooollllloooollooooooooolooooollooooolololooooooooooolooooooooooo............................
18
Site Access
ϐǡ
ϐ ǡǤ
ϐǤ ǡϐǡ
Ǥ Ǧ
Ǥ ǡ
gated and is not usually publicly accessible.
Pedestrians and cyclists have more options for site entry. The site can be accessed
ϐǤ
Ǥ
entrance. There is also a pedestrian connection to the Charleston Shopping Center
Ǥ
pedestrians and cyclists.
ϐ
ǡ
ǡ
Ǥ
JLS Middle School
WALK AND ROLL TO SCHOOL
SUGGESTED ROUTES
Enrollment Area
Traffic Signal
Parks and Open Space
Est. Walking Time
(Biking Time)
XX (X)
Marked CrosswalkCrossing Guard Location
Bicycle Parking
Pedestrian and Bicycle
Bridge or Tunnel
Crosstown Shuttle Stop
Suggested Route(Walking and Biking)
School
All-Way Stop
Suggested Route
(Walking Only)
Multi-use Path
Pedestrian Beacon
The Palo Alto Safe Routes to School Partnership encourages JLS parents
and students to use this map to explore options for commuting
between home and school. Parents are responsible for choosing the
most appropriate option based on their knowledge of conditions on the
different routes and the experience level of their student.
For more Safe Routes to School information, please visit:
www.cityofpaloalto.org/saferoutes
Waverl
y A
v
enu
e B
i
k
e P
at
h
Mid
d
l
efield
Ro
ad
East Meadow Drive
t Alger Drive
Waverley
P
at
h
Mitchell
Park
JLSMiddleSchool
JLSMiddleSchool
Cowper Street
Mitchell ParkLibrary
B
ryant Street
Inset
17 (5)
32 (9)
22
21 (6)13
2 (3)
36 (11)
28 (8)
47 (14)
26 (8)
21 (7)
18
34
Baylands
Preserve
Mitchell
Park Ramos
Park
Cubberley
Community
Center
MitchellPark Library
JLS
Middle
SchoolFairmeadow
Elementary
School
Hoover
Elementary
School
Palo VerdeElementary
School
Ki
p
l
i
n
g Gree
Wes
t
B
ay
s
ho
r
e R
o
ad
Br
ya
nt St
ree
t
Loui
s Ro a d
East Meadow Drive
CharlestonRoad
Mayview Ave
San Antonio RoadMac
kay
Shasta
NelsonDu
n
ca
n
Ev
ergree
n
Ar
butus
Creekside
F abia n Ro
a d
Driftwood
Aspen
Alm
aSt
ree
t
El Verano
Mid
d
l
efield
Ro
ad
Waverley
P
ath
1/2 Mile
1/4 Mile
Caltrain
01/41/8
Miles
For more information on the free
Crosstown Shuttle schedule, stop by
the Student Activities Office or go to
www.cityofpaloalto.org/shuttle
See Inset
Figure 9. Recommended biking and walking routes provided by the Safe Routes to School Partnership.
19
City of Palo Alto Zoning Map
Zoning
ȋ ȋȌǡȌ
Ǥͷʹͷ
Ǥͷʹͷ
ǦͳǡǦǡǡ ǡ
ǡǦ Ǥ
ǡ Ǥ
ǣ ǡǦͳǡǦͳͷǡǤ
ǡ
ǦǦǦͳͷ
immediately adjacent to the site on Byron Street. The zoning limits for building coverage
ϐȋ ȌǤ
1/4 mile 1/2 mile
N
Figure 10.
20
Maximum Height
ǡ
Ǥ
ǡ Ǥ
ǡDzǡdz
ǡ
ǤͳͷͲǯǡͷͲǯǤ
ǡ
ͷͲǯǤ
͵ͷ̵Ǥͷʹͷ
͵͵̵Ǥ
Figure 11. Typical zoning envelope for Cubberley and Greendell
Environmental Considerations
ǡǡǡ
ϐ Ǥϐǡ
ǡͳͲ
ǡ ͳͲͲǤ
Figure 12. Weather Averages. Source NOAA via Google.
Rainfall (inches)
Highs
Lows
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Temperatures (F)
2121
PREVAILING WINDS
WINTER WINDS
CAR ENTRY
BIKE ENTRY
PEDESTRIAN
ENTRY
SUN PATH -
SUMMER SOLSTICE
SUN PATH -
WINTER SOLSTICE
N200'
1000'
Figure 13.
Sun and Wind Diagram
22
AdAddison Elementary.......................Ad
EDUCATIONONALON
Public Educucation Facilitesuc
ANIZATIONALORGANANOOO
ernment, EmergencyvernmnnmnnvernGovernGGovernmvvernmv
Walter Hays Elementary.................
Duveneck Elementary....................
Ohlone Elementary.........................
Palo Verde Elementary...................
El Carmelo Elementary...................
Fairmeadow Elementary.................
Herbert Hoover Elementary............
Juana Briones Elementary..............Jua a o es e e ta yJuana Briones Elementary
Barron Park Elementary..................
Lucille Nixon Elementary..................
Escondido Elementary....................
JLS Middle.....................................
.Fletcher Middle................................
...........Palo Alto High.............................
.................Gunn High..........................
PaloAAltltoo CiCitytyty HHHallalal...................................
PAUSD D Offficfie................................................
US Justice Departmenent.t.....................
Chamber of Commercrce.e .....................
Fire Stationss)
1
22
3333
4
5
6
7
888
999
1011
12
13
14
.....Greene Middle..............................15
16
17
dult School....Greendell/Palo Alto Adudu 18
111
33
4
5Palo Alto Police Deparartmtmmeneentt.t...........
6Santa Clara Coununtyty SSuuuperrrioioior r CCt.....
22
Libraries
nesEducationalZonene
SOCIALSOCIAL
Healthcare, Clinics, Senior Services, Food Access
CULTURAL
Arts, Theater, Museums
Sttananfofoforddd HHoospital/Clinic...............................
Paalolo AAltto o HHeealth Center...............................
GeGeneneraaaral NNeNeurological Clinic.........................
Sttananfoffordrdrdrd CChhildren’s Health...............................
Luucccicleeee PPacackakardrd CChihildlddrereren’n’n sss HoHoHospspspititit lal..............
SSSSStanfoffrd Hospital/ER..................................
Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital..............
PaPaPlolo AAltltoo VAVA..................................................
Grocery Stores
The Stanford Theater......................
Palo Alto Arts Center......................Palo Alto APalo Alto Arts CPalo Alto Arts CentePalo Alto Arts Cente
Palo Alto Players............................................
Haymarket Theater............................
Cubberley Theater.............................
........Palo Alto History Museum.....y ....
Museum of American Heritage.......eeee
Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo.....ooPaPaoo
1
2
5
3
44
6
7
8
StSSananfofordrd AAgging Adults Servvicicee.....................9
Palo Alto Sub-Acute Rehabilitaiton Center..10
Webster House...........................................11
Channing House ........................................12
Jewish Fammily and Chilllldrdrddenen’ss SSerer ivicecs........13
Family and CChildren’s SeSeSeSeServvicceses of Silicon Valleyy 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
ECONOMIC
Top 10 largest employers in Palo AltoPalo APalo Aalo Altalo Al oo
PHYSICAL
Public ouside amenties, community gardensmmmm
Stanford Health Care......................................
Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital
Stanford University.........................StanfoStanf
Veteran’s Affairs Healthcare...........n’s An’s A
VMware,Inc..................................................
SAP.............................................................
Space Systems/ Loral....................................
Hewett-Packard...........................................
Palo Alto Medical Foundation.........
Varian Medical Systems..................VarVa
Tesla...............................................slasla
Lytton Gardens...............................................LyttoLytto
Rinconada Community Garden...................mmmmconada Cconada
Guinda St. Pollinator Garden......................GG linlinPollinaPollina
Arizona Gardens (Stanford).........................izona Gizona G rderde StanfordStanford
Public Parks
1
2
333
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1
2
3
4
100-Year Flood Plain1010
Economic Zonesmic Zonesmic Zones
Bike Pathshh
Bus Routes
SOCIALSOCIAL
Healthcare C, Clin S Sics, Senior Services, Food Access
CULTURAL
Arts,Theater,Museums
Sttanananfofoofofffforddddd HHoospital/Clinic...............................
Paaloo AAAlttoo HHeealth Center...............................
GeGeneenraaaarral NNeeNeNeurological Clinic.........................
Stt nananfoffoforddrddrdrdrrrrrr CCChhildren’s Health.............................
Luuccciccleeee PPPPacackakarddrd CCChihihildldldrereren’n’n sss HoHoHospspsptitit lal..............
SSSSStanfofffrd Hospital/ER..................................
Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital..............
PaaPaPlolo AAltltoo VAVA..................................................
Grocery Stores
The Stanford Theater......................
Palo AltPalo Altoo ArtsCenter......................Palo Alto APalo Alto Arts CPalo Alto Arts CentePalo Alto Arts CPalo Alto Arts Cente
Palo Alto Players............................
Haymarket Theater.............................
Cubberley Theater............................
........Palo Alto History Museum.......y ....
Museumof American Heritage.e......eeeee
PaloPa Alto Junior Museum o& Zoo.....ooPaPaPaooo
1
22
55
33
4444444
66
77
8
StSSananfofofofrdrd AAgging AdultsServviccee.....................9
Palo Alto Sub-AcuteRehabilitaiton Center..10
Webster House...........................................11
Channing House ........................................12
Jewish Fammily and Chilllldrdrddddenen’ss SSerer ivicecs........13
Family and CChildren’sSeSeSSeSeSeSeSrvvicceses of Silicon Valleyyy 13
1
22
33
4
55
6
77
88
ECONOMMMIMICCCCCCCCCC
Top 10 largeest est empmpplollooyeyeyey o Altorsrs rs rs ss issrsssrsrsrsrsssrsrrsn Paalo APalo Palo PaloPaloPalolo Palolo o Aalo Ao AloA oo
PPHYHYYYYYYYYYYYYYSSSSSSSIIICCCAALALLAA
Puublicousousousousousiiide e i aamentiees, ccocmmmmmmmunitty y gardddeensmm
StStannfoord rd HeaHeaHeHeaaeaaaaltltththththlththththhlththlththhlthlthlhththlthtttttl CaCCaCaCaCaCaCaCCrereee...........................
LucLucucucucucucucucuccucuuuccuuuuilililileileiliiileileePaPPPaPaPPPPPaPaPaPaPPPP kkckckackakcrdd d dd d CCChiChiChiCCChiihildldldrldreen’sHoosppitpitala
StataaatatataStStataaStStStSSSnforfoororddUd Uddnnniversityy............................StStaaatStatSSSSSSSSSnStStaaatSSSSSSaSS
VVeVeteteterarnn’’s AAfffaairffs HHeaalthcare............AAn’s AAn’s AsAn’s A
VVMMwarree,Incc...........................................
SSAAP.............................................................
SpSpSSpaace Systteems/LLoorraaal............................
HeHewewetttttt-Paccckkaard.........................................
PaPaaloolo AAAltlto MMeMeMddicalFFoouuundationon.........
VaVarVVVianian MMeeMddicaal Slysstetems.....................aaVVVaaVVVaVVVa
TeeTeslaslaa.ssslas........................................................slasssaslaslaaslslla
LLyLyLyyyyyyyyttotttotttttttotttttttttttnn Gn GnGnnnnardrdaae .....nss...............................................LyttttttotLLytLLyttytttotttt
RRincccococcccccccccccccccccccccccnnnnnn mmuunity Gaardddadaadaa Commmaaaaadaaaaa en...........................mmmmmmmmnadaaanononadaaaonnnnnadaaaa
GuGuininndnddinnininnininiiia Sa SSSSa SSaSSSttt. . Poollillinaatoor Garddenn...........................GGGG ilnnlinPoollinaPPollina
AArizonzzzzoonoonzzznnzononnnaaa Ga Ga GaaaGaaa dennrderdss (SStanfordd).......nfo ..........................onnnanizoizoooonnnaizozooooznnnnnaaa dededdede tanforSSttaanfSttaannfo
PuPuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuublibbbcccccPPPaPrkks
11
22
33333
44
55
66
77
88
99
100
111
111
2
33
4
1000-YeYeeeeeeeeaaaraaaaa FFFlFFoodd PPlaiaiainn10110
EcoEcoEcoEcooEEEEEEEEEEEEEnonommnnnicc cZZonesessZZZZonesZZonesiccZZoneessZonesicZZonesZZZZiZZoneess
BiBikkkekekeke kekkkkkekkkkekekekkekekeke PPPPPPPPPPatatatataaaahshssshhhhhh
BBusussssssssssssss RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRoooooooututuuuuuees
City Scale Context
ǡ ǯ
ǡ
Ǥ ǡ
property after Paly and Gunn.
Ǧ
Ǥ
ǡ ǣ
Ȉ ȋȌ
Ȉ ʹͲ͵Ͳ
• Walk and Roll Recommendations for Greendell/Cubberley
Ȉ ʹͲͳͺǦʹͲʹͲ
• Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
• Public Art Master Plan
Ȉ
Ȉ
All of these plans and reports provide useful information and perspectives that
Ǥ ϐ
Cubberley; the CCAC Report’s recommendations undergird the overall intent of the
Cubberley Co-Design Master Plan. Other plans here provide more general goals that
the Cubberley plan can help address. Concordia intends to align the master plan
these plans.
23232333
N
1/4 mile
1/2 mile
Figure 14.
24
Trees
There are many trees on site that should be preserved if possible. Some of these
̶ ǡ̶ Ǥ
ͳȌ Ǧ
Ǧ
ǢȋʹȌ Ǣȋ͵Ȍ
heritage tree designated by the city council. Most of the protected trees on site are
ȋͷȌǡ
Ǥ
͵Ͳ̵ͳͲͲ̵Ǥǡ
ǡ Ǥ
112
4 5
6
3
~100'
Photos of protected trees on site. See map on following page for corresponding tree locations
25
Utilities
ϐ
Ǥ ǡǡ Ǥ
ǡ Ǥ
ƬϐǤ
ͳ͵ʹͳͲͻʹͶdzͶͲͲǤͳ͵ʹ
ǡǡͳͲͻͷǯ
ͳ͵ʹǤ ͳͷͲͲǡ
Dzͳdz
ǤDzʹdz
evaluate the potential risk that these lines pose to people on the site.
ǡͳͲǯ
Ƭ
ǡϐǤ
ͳͻͲǡ
Ƭǯ ǡǤ
Ǥǯ
ƬǤ
Ƭ
ͳͲǯǡ
ǤͳͲǯ Ǥ
ǡ
Ƭ
a pipeline in the future.
Figure 15. Map of protected trees, PG&E easement, and PG&E lines. See images on previous page for photos corresponding to the
numbered perspectives below.
PAUSD
Greendell
5 acres
PAUSD
27 acres
City of Palo Alto
8 acres
Mi
d
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
R
d
Sa
n
A
n
t
o
n
i
o
R
d
Protected Trees
P
G
&
E
1
0
’
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
PAUSD
525 San Antonio Rd
2.7 acres
TOTAL
41.3 acres
PG&E Gas Lines
4
6
1
3
5
2 3333
44
N
100'
1000'
26
PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS
ǡ
during the programming phase of the Cubberley master planning process.
ǡ
ǡ ǡ ǡ
to complement the programs that make Cubberley the vibrant community hub that
it is today.
ǡ
Ǥ ϐ
Ȃϐ
Ȃ
ǡǡ
ǡ
and respected in this programming proposal.
ǡ
Ǥ
27
28
Health & Wellness Center
Health, Wellness, and Senior Programs
Dance and Martial Arts Studios
Outdoor Sports Club Rooms
Gyms
Community Center Services
Cubberley Admin. and Tenant Spaces
Rentable/Flexible Spaces
Large Flexible Event Space
Commercial Kitchen
Performing Arts
Theatre
Lobby/Café
Music, Rehearsal, and
Accessory Theatre Spaces
Visual Arts
Visual Arts Classrooms and Media Lab
Art Gallery
Visual Arts Studios
Makerspace/Woodshop
Educational Programs
Cubberley Childcare and
Preschools
Primary/Secondary and Enrichment
PAUSD Adult Education
Greendell Elementary
Potential Future PAUSD Uses
Future Middle or High School
School District Offices
Teacher Housing
Indoor estimate
Estimated Size*
(sq ft)
86,000
16,300
26,400
3,300
40,000
54,000
32,000
12,000
9,000
1,000
24,000
13,000
3,000
8,000
37,000
10,000
3,000
16,000
8,000
101,500
15,500
14,000
36,000
36,000
207,000
<125,000
30,000
52,000
<509,500
Estimated Size*
(sq ft)
647,000
510,000
20,000
~60,000
~30,000
~16,000
~6,000
~5,000
149,000
48,000
5,000
~40,000
~6,000
~30,000
~18,000
2,000
475,000
375,000**
20,000
~80,000
~1,271,000
Greenscape
Existing Track and Fields
School Quad
Flexible Open Space
Natural Habitat Plantings
Amphitheater
Dog Park
Community Gardens
Hardscape
Tennis and Pickleball
Playground and Outdoor Exercise
Walking/Biking Track
Skate Park
Pool
Pedestrian Circulation
Bus Stop Waiting Area
Parking & Vehicle Circ.
Car Parking
Bike Parking
Vehicular Circulation & Drop-off Areas
Outdoor estimate
* All sizes are estimates. Sizes subject to change during design phase.
aLQGLFDWHVDJUHDWHUGHJUHHRI ÁH[LELOLW\LQWKHSURJUDPVL]H
** Parking needs will be determined in the design phase and informed by
DWUDIÀFDQGSDUNLQJVWXG\VTIWLVURXJKO\HTXLYDOHQWWR
parking stalls at a ratio of 1 stall per 325 sq ft, which accounts for driving
lanes in a parking lot.
PROPOSED FUTURE PROGRAM LIST
Indoor Programs Outdoor Programs
29
Future Middle or
High School
Existing Track & Fields
Car Parking
Pedestrian
Circulation
Internal Streets and Drop-off areas
Bike
Parking
Flexible Open
Space Natural
Habitat
School
Quad
Dog Park Gardens
Tennis/
Pickleball
Walking/
Biking Track
PAUSD Adult Education
Performing
Arts
Center
24,000 sq ft
Cafe
Music
Rehearsal
Theatre
Artist Studios
Art
Classes
Gallery
Childcare
&
Preschools
Greendell Elementary Large
Flex
Space
Offices
and Tenant
Spaces
Rentable
Gyms
Health,
Wellness, &
Senior
Dance
Skate Play
Pool
Maker
spaceCubberley
Educational
Programs
School
District
Offices
Teacher
Housing
Amphi-
theater
Greenscape
647,000 sq ft
Potential Future
PAUSD Uses
207,000 sq ft
Ed. Programs
101,500 sq ft
Health &
Wellness
86,000 sq ft
Community
Center Services
54,000 sq ft
Visual Arts
37,000 sq ft
Parking and
Vehicle
Circulation
475,000 sq ft**
These rectangles
are proportional to
the program size
estimates on the
preceding page.
Hardscape
149,000 sq ft
30
Health & Wellness Center
Health, Wellness, and Senior Programs
Dance and Martial Arts Studios
Outdoor Sports Club Rooms
Gyms
Community Center Services
Cubberley Admin. and Tenant Spaces
Rentable/Flexible Spaces
Large Flexible Event Space
Commercial Kitchen
Performing Arts
Theatre
Lobby/Café
Music, Rehearsal, and Accessory Theatre Spaces
Visual Arts
Visual Arts Classrooms and Media Lab
Art Gallery
Visual Arts Studios
Makerspace/Woodshop
Educational Programs
Cubberley Childcare and Preschools
Primary/Secondary and Enrichment
PAUSD Adult Education
Greendell Elementary
Potential Future PAUSD Uses
Future Middle or High School
School District Offices
Teacher Housing
A
A1
A2
A3
A4
B
B1
B2
B3
B4
C
C1
C2
C3
D
D1
D2
D3
D4
E
E1
E2
E3
E4
F
F1
F2
F3
ID MODULE CLUSTER WEEKLY USE TIME TABLE
SHARED USES
Community Use
Shared/Alternating Use
PAUSD Dedicated/Primary Use
WeekendsWeekdays
During
School
After
School
31
PROGRAM SIZE BY USER GROUP
PAUSD Dedicated/Primary Use
PAUSD + Shared Use
Community Center + Shared Use
TOTAL
Community Center Use
Greendell Elementary
Future Middle or High School
School District Offices
Teacher Housing
Gyms
Large Flexible Event Space
Commercial Kitchen
Theatre
Lobby/ Café
Music, Rehearsal, and Accessory Spaces
Visual Arts Classrooms & Media Lab
Art Gallery
Makerspace/Woodshop
Primary/Secondary and Enrichment
PAUSD Adult Education
Health, Wellness, and Senior Programs
Dance and Martial Arts
Outdoor Sports Club Rooms
Rentable/Flexible Spaces
Cubberley Admin & tenant spaces
Visual Arts Studios
Childcare and Preschool Programs
243,000
36,000
<125,000
52,000
30,000
145,000
40,000
9,000
1,000
13,000
3,000
8,000
10,000
3,000
8,000
14,000
36,000
121,500
16,300
26,400
3,300
12,000
32,000
16,000
15,500
<388,000
269,500
<509,500
E4
F1
F2
F3
A4
B3
B4
C1
C2
C3
D1
D2
D4
E2
E3
A1
A2
A3
B2
B1
D3
E1
Shared/Alternating Use
Estimated Size
(sq ft)
32
Health & Wellness Center
Community Center Services
Performing Arts
Visual Arts
Educational Programs
Potential Future PAUSD Uses
1-3
1-3
1
3
1-2
2-3
40,333
24,000
24,000
12,333
58,000
< 82,667
< 241,325
86,000
54,000
24,000
37,000
101,500
<207,000
< 509,500
# levels Est. Building
Site Coverage
(sq ft)
Elevation
Diagram
PHASING, BUILDING COVERAGE, AND ADJACENCIES
MODULE CLUSTERPHASE Est. GSF
1
2
Site Use
ͳ͵ǡ
ͳ͵Ψ Ǥ ǡ
Ȁ ǡ ǡ
increase green space on site.
EXISTING
Cubberley
Greendell
525 San Antonio Road
Total
PROPOSED
Cubberley
Greendell
525 San Antonio Road
Total
(acres)
35.4
5
2.7
43.1
35.4
5
2.7
43.1
(sq ft)
188,000
40,700
24,500
253,200
368,500
85,000
52,000
505,500
(acres)
4.1
.93
.56
5.6
8.46
1.95
1.19
11.6
.12
.19
.21
.13
.24
.39
.44
.27
(acres)
4.1
.93
.56
5.6
4.06
0.98
0.60
5.64
(% site)
11%
18.6%
20.7%
13.0%
11%
19%
22%
13%
(sq ft)
180,000
40,700
24,500
245,200
177,167
42,500
26,000
245,667
Building Site CoverageIndoor Area FARSite Area
Module Cluster Building Area and Footprint
33
Existing
Building GSF
School UseCommunity
Center
Shared
Use Spaces
Teacher
Housing
PAUSD
Offices
500
400
300
200
100
0
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
(i
n
t
h
o
u
s
a
n
d
s
o
f
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
)
Phase 1 Phase 2
Phasing
developed in detail in the master
Ǥͳʹ
several sub-phases to minimize
disruption to ongoing programs
during construction.
School
District
Offices
Affordable
Teacher
Housing
Performing
Arts Center
Adult Ed
Cubberley
Childcare/
Preschool
Ed.
Enrichment
Greendell
School
Future middle and/or
High School
Gyms
Visual Arts
StudiosVisual Arts
Classrooms &
Gallery
Makerspace
Other
Community
CenterEvent
Space
Health &
Wellness Center
Site Organization
ǡǡ
ǡ
community center use on the City's property.
to sensible adjacencies and site constraints.
The area planned for a future middle or high
ϐ
as surface parking or green space prior to
ǡ
parking once the school is built. The area
planned for future teacher housing can
continue to be leased educational space until
housing is constructed.
N
Not to scale
Pages 34 -95 of this document includes supplemental information. The full document is available at:
https://www.pausd.org/sites/default/files/190117%20Cubberley%20Program%20Document%20Draft-
r.pdf
Program Organization and Massing - DRAFT
Complete Site (Phase 2)
Site prior to future school
Mi
d
d
l
e
f
i
e
l
d
R
o
a
d
San A
n
t
o
n
i
o
A
v
e
San A
n
t
o
n
i
o
R
o
a
d
N
e
l
s
o
n
D
r
i
v
e
Charleston Shopping Center
Mon
t
r
o
s
e
A
v
e
We would like to get your
feedback on this draft massing
and program organization.
Do you agree/disagree that this
massing model fulfills community
goals for the site?
Program organization
Massing/site use
What is working well about this
site organization and program
adjacencies?
What is not working well or needs
more attention?
What activities or events would you
like to see accommodated in the
outdoor spaces?
Add other thoughts or comments
you have about this massing and
site organization.
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
disagree
Neutral
agree
A2
A1
A4
(fitness gym)
A4
(2 main gyms)
D1-3
B3
D4
F1F1
F1F2
F3
C
E3, E4
E1, E2, B1, B2
Small Skate Park
Pickleball
Playground
Tennis
Softball and soccer fields
Parking below structure
Pool
Fitness Plaza w/ exercise equipment
Amphitheater
Flexible Green space
Secure playground for young children
Surface Parking
Bus Stop
Greendell Parking
Greendell Playground
Community Gardens
Structured Parking
Drop-off/pickup area
Outdoor Cafe Seating
School Quad
School Entry Plaza
Drop-off/pickup area
Flexible Green Space
Community Center Use
Shared/Alternating Use
School District Use
Teacher Housing
Key Pedestrian paths
Bike paths
Bike parking
Car access roads
Car parking
Greendell Parking
Cubberley Parking
Flexible Green Space
N
N
Amphitheater
Amphitheater
Fitness Plaza
Parking below courts
and playground
A4
C
C
D1-3
A4
A1 A2
A4
F1
D4A4A4
A4
Attachment B
Site Circulation and Parking - DRAFT
500’
1000’
N
500’
1000’
N
Phase 2 Circulation
Middlefield Road
S
a
n
A
n
t
o
n
i
o
A
v
e
S
a
n
A
n
t
o
n
i
o
R
o
a
d
Nelson Drive
Charleston
Shopping
Center
Montrose Ave
We would like to get your feedback
on this draft circulation plan. Let us
know if you agree with the following
statements and tell us why with Post-its.
Does this plan seem safe and easy to
navigate for:
Pedestrians
Bicyclists
Cars
Does parking access look convenient for:
Bicyclists
Cars
What issues or concerns do you have
about site access and circulation?
Add other comments or notes on the
diagram or below.
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
disagree
Neutral
agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
disagree
Neutral
agree
N
Signal or traffic
calming measures
Signal update at
Montrose AveRight turn in onlyProposed new bus stop
Possible new signal
~276 spaces
~70
spaces
~100 spaces
(some underground)
Two-way bike path
One-way bike path,
Two-way walking/jogging path
.4 mile loop
Two-way bike path
~30 on-street spaces
~60 spaces
~680 spaces
in 5 story
garage
(one story
underground)
Greendell Parking
136 spaces
378 spaces
~130 spaces
~35 spaces
500’
1000’Scale
Pedestrian paths
Bike paths
Bike parking
Car access roads
Car parking
Car entry/egress
Bike & pedestrian entry/egress
Key
= 100 bike
spaces
approx.
1,800 bike spaces
1,380 car spaces
Parking required for Phase 2
by code with 20% shared use
reduction: 1,315 spaces. Traffic
experts and City staff to advise
on final parking and circulation
needs.
Community/Parent Drop-off
Greendell drop-off
A2
E1, E2
B3
D4
F1
F1
F1
C2
C1
C3
C3
E4 (first level)
E3 (second level)
B1, B2
A1 A4
(fitness gym)A3, A4
(2 main gyms)
D1-3
School bus drop-off
Community/Parent Drop-off
Loading Access
Loading Access
to maintenance &
mechanical below
Community Center Use
Shared/Alternating Use
School District Use
C
D4
E4 (first level)
E3 (second level)
Diagram showing the occupiable roof
over surface parking.
Phase 1 Circulation
1.Discuss what architectural style you’d like to see at Cubberley.
2.Grade the elements of the precedents on a 1-5 scale.
3.Rank the four styles shown.
4.Add comments and/or suggest other precedents for how the buildings should look and feel. Let us know about precedents we should look at.
Materials
Windows and openings
Fit in the neighborhood
Roof shape 1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
OVERALL RANK
(among the four precedents)4
COMMENTS/ ADDITIONAL PRECEDENTS
Materials
Windows and openings
Fit in the neighborhood
Roof shape 1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
OVERALL RANK
(among the four precedents)4
COMMENTS/ ADDITIONAL PRECEDENTS
Materials
Windows and openings
Fit in the neighborhood
Roof shape 1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
OVERALL RANK
(among the four precedents)4
COMMENTS/ ADDITIONAL PRECEDENTS
Materials
Windows and openings
Fit in the neighborhood
Roof shape 1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
OVERALL RANK
(among the four precedents)4
COMMENTS/ ADDITIONAL PRECEDENTS
Mission Style
Red Clay
Gable Cream
Stucco
Siding
Portico Raised Planting Beds
Contemporary/
High-Tech
Polished
Concrete
Flat Roofs
Curved Aluminum &
glass wall
Scored Polished
Concrete Siding
Arts & Crafts
Solar
Panel
Roof
Floor to
Ceiling
Windows
Shaded Exterior
Circulation
Wood
Siding
Aluminum Siding
Wood Accent Ceiling
Wood
Accent
Ceiling
Mid-Century Modern
Exaggerated
Roof
Exaggerated
Roof Overhang
Gable
Gable
Solar
Panel Roof
Gable
Exposed
Rafter
Tails
Exposed
Rafter
Tails
Red Clay
Gable Roof
Arcade
Cream
Stucco
Siding
Shingle
Exterior
Brick Accents
Look and Feel: Architectural Style Preferences
Together your table will work together to create overall design guidelines.
Shapes and Forms
Landscape / Hardscape
Paving Color Palette
Look and Feel: Landscape Style Preferences
1. Discuss and choose where your group’s preferences lie on each of the three style spectrums below.
2. Add suggestions for how the landscape should look and feel. Let us know if there are precedents we should look at!
Together your table will work together to create overall design guidelines.
Organic
Native Landscaping
Warm Cool
Hardscape
Orthogonal
1
Carnahan, David
From:chuck jagoda <chuckjagoda1@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, January 25, 2019 10:13 PM
To:WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Aram James; Stop the Ban Google Discussion Group; Jen Hoey Padgett;
Michelle Ogburn; Loquist, Kristina; Dave Cortese; dprice@padailypost.com; Robert Aguirre; Sandy
Perry-HCA; Palo Alto Free Press; Council, City; Seelam Reddy
Subject:Cubberley and Housing
Hi All,
I attended the third meeting of the Cubberley Co Design (?) Project
on Thursday night (1/24/19).
I found that the committee (group) has done a very thorough and
transparent job of assembling community input. None of the
principals who ran the meeting had lived in the area for more than
a few years and knew little of the recent history of Cubberley or
local CC politics. Nice folks but I had to explain a lot to them to
make my points.
My Points:
1. Cubberly is a community resource, a "commons." It used
to be much more of one. Homeless people were expelled from car
and ground camping and access to the the showers and bathrooms
were cut off, people were evicted, and that function/community
service has not been in effect since 2013 (?) It should be
reinstated. What justifies the continued exclusion of the poor? Do
you think it would stand up in court?
2. There is a trend in the area to decrease the number of
shelter beds. Thankfully there has lately been a COUNTER trend
but consider these facts: the Clare-Mateo Women's shelter was
closed for repairs in 2013. It is still closed. The "de facto homeless
shelter" at Cubberley which has been a part of the community
2
forever is forever lost (as of now). We need MORE shelter, not
less.
3. Housing Supply. Speaking of increasing the number of shelter
beds, there is a slow pivot to increasing residences if not
shelters. The headline in today's POST is a group of successful
business types pledging half a billion for housing. MSFT did the
same thing in Seattle on Jan 16. There is a dawning of recognition
of what activists have been preaching for years-- there are not
enough residences and there are getting to be fewer.
4. ) Housing Supply Two. We must stop bending over, laying
down and giving it up to Stanford, Google, and Facebook. If these
rich, white, masculinist power centers want more land for
workspace, let them build housing to help with the long standing
shortage they've helped cause and THEN let's talk about them
building more housing to house the workers for the workspace
they're asking for.
*There was not one word at the meeting of using any of
Cubberley to add to shelter or residence inventory.
Chuck Jagoda
Palo Alto Poverty Press
1
Carnahan, David
From:Connor McManus <cmcmanus@concordia.com>
Sent:Thursday, January 24, 2019 10:48 AM
To:Karen Schreiber; Bobbie Hill; Golton, Bob; Kristen.O’kane@cityofpaloalto.org; Council, City
Subject:Re: Third Cubberley Co-Design Meeting
Hi Karen,
Thank you for sharing those concerns. We have heard similar concerns from others about the car access onto
San Antonio Ave, and we are discussing them with our traffic consultant to arrive at a safe solution.
We don't yet know what the management scenario for the pool will be ‐ that will likely be for the City to
decide ‐ but we will bring that into the discussion over the next several months.
Thank you, and congratulations to you and your daughter!
Connor
Connor McManus
concordia
O: 504.569.1818
D: 337.654.5873
From: Karen Schreiber <kpsphoto@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2019 12:36:28 AM
To: Bobbie Hill; rgolton@pausd.org; Kristen.O’kane@cityofpaloalto.org; City.Council@cityofpaloalto.org; Connor
McManus
Cc: Karen Schreiber
Subject: Third Cubberley Co‐Design Meeting
Hi to all,
I live in Greenmeadow on Creekside Drive. I am unable to attend the meeting January 24th, 2019. I am helping out our
daughter in Seattle who just had a baby.
I am concerned that the following student bicycle routes need to be protected from cut through traffic. Students who
bike on Nelson Drive, Scripps, Mackay and Ferne need to be protected from drivers cutting through the new campus
driveway onto San Antonio and then right on Ferne or Mackay to Nelson via WAZE to avoid traffic signals on Alma or
Charleston. This area is already in gridlock in the evening commute on Charleston to 101 or Charleston to 280 or
Middlefield to Charleston.
My second concern is about who will manage the two new swimming pools. The City of Palo Alto has already outsourced
running the city pool at Rinconada. Who will mange the new pools?
Sincerely,
Karen Schreiber
CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
February 11, 2019
The Honorable City Council
Attention: Finance Committee
Palo Alto, California
Approval of Action Minutes for the January 28, 2019 Council Meeting
Staff is requesting Council review and approve the attached Action Minutes.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Attachment A: 01-28-19 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOCX)
Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk
Page 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 1 of 10
Special Meeting
January 28, 2019
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council
Chambers at 6:08 P.M.
Present: Cormack, DuBois, Filseth, Fine, Kniss, Kou, Tanaka
Absent:
Closed Session
1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
THIS ITEM WILL NOT BE HEARD THIS EVENING.
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
None.
Minutes Approval
2. Approval of Action Minutes for the January 14, 2019 Council Meeting.
MOTION: Council Member Cormack moved, seconded by Mayor Filseth to
approve the Action Minutes for the January 14, 2019 Council Meeting with the
following change to the discussion in Agenda Item 7:
AMENDMENT: Council Member Tanaka moved, seconded by Council Member
XXX to require glazing on the rear egress windows.
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
Consent Calendar
Council Member Tanaka registered a no vote on Agenda Item Number 3.
MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Fine to
approve Agenda Item Numbers 3-5.
3. Approval of Contract Number C19171177 With Smith Group for a Total
Not-to-Exceed Amount of $2,212,100 to Provide Design and
Construction Support Services for the Operations Center (WQ-14002) at
the Regional Water Quality Control Plant
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 2 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 01/28/2019
4. Approval of the Acceptance and Appropriation of State of California
Citizens Options for Public Safety (COPS) Funds and Approval of a
Budget Amendment in the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services
Fund
5. Finance Committee Recommends the City Council Approve the Fiscal
Year (FY) 2018 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR);
Approve Amendments to FY 2018 Budget in Various Funds; and Approve
a FY 2019 Budget Amendment in the General Fund
MOTION PASSED FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3: 6-1 Tanaka no
MOTION PASSED FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBERS 4-5: 7-0
Action Items
6. Request for Approval to: 1) Negotiate Agreements With Midpeninsula
Community Media Center (Media Center) to Purchase its Building at 900
San Antonio Road, Using PEG Fees; and 2) Negotiate a new Agreement
Between the City of Palo Alto (on Behalf of the Joint Powers Board) and
the Media Center for Public, Education, and Government (PEG) Access
Channel Support Services; Approval of Amendment Number 2 to
Agreement Number C12142180 Between the City of Palo Alto (on Behalf
of the Joint Powers Board) and the Media Center to Extend the Existing
Agreement to June 30, 2019.
MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss
to:
A. Direct Staff to negotiate agreements (real estate purchase and building
use) to purchase the Media Center’s building at 900 San Antonio Road,
using cable television public, education and government (PEG) fees;
B. Direct Staff to negotiate a new agreement between the City of Palo Alto,
on behalf of the Joint Powers, and the Media Center for PEG access
channel support services that will conform to the terms of the real estate
purchase and building use agreements; and
C. Approve Amendment Number Two to Agreement Number C12142180
between the City of Palo Alto, representing the Joint Powers
communities, and the Media Center to extend the existing agreement
for six months to June 30, 2019, to allow time to complete the new
arrangement for the use of PEG fees.
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 3 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 01/28/2019
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add that the Media Center shall be provided the
first right of refusal should the JPA choose to dispose of the asset.
MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Council Member DuBois moved,
seconded by Council Member Kniss to:
A. Direct Staff to negotiate agreements (real estate purchase and building
use) to purchase the Media Center’s building at 900 San Antonio Road,
using cable television public, education and government (PEG) fees;
B. Direct Staff to negotiate a new agreement between the City of Palo Alto,
on behalf of the Joint Powers, and the Media Center for PEG access
channel support services that will conform to the terms of the real estate
purchase and building use agreements;
C. Approve Amendment Number Two to Agreement Number C12142180
between the City of Palo Alto, representing the Joint Powers
communities, and the Media Center to extend the existing agreement
for six months to June 30, 2019, to allow time to complete the new
arrangement for the use of PEG fees; and
D. The Media Center shall be provided the first right of refusal should the
JPA choose to dispose of the asset
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 7-0
7. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Various Sections
of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Related to Residential and
Mixed-use Development Standards Including, but not Limited to;
Minimum and Maximum Unit Density, Unit Size, Floor Area Ratio,
Height, and Open Space Including Rooftop Gardens; Parking
Requirements Including, but not Limited to; Regulations Related to In-
lieu Parking for Downtown Commercial Uses and Retail Parking for Mixed
Use Projects; Exclusively Residential Projects in Certain Commercial
Zoning Districts; Ground-floor Retail and Retail Preservation Provisions;
the Entitlement Approval Process; and Other Regulations Governing
Residential, Multi-family Residential and Commercial Zoning Districts,
all to Promote Housing Development Opportunities in These Zoning
Districts in Furtherance of Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan.
CEQA: Determination of Consistency With the Comprehensive Plan
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Certified and Adopted on November
13, 2017 by Council Resolution Number 9720. The Planning and
Transportation Commission Recommended Approval of the Proposed
Ordinance on October 10, 2018 (Continued From December 3, 2018).
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 4 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 01/28/2019
Mayor Filseth advised he will not be participating in this part of the Agenda
Item due to owning property in an RM-15 zone.
MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss
to exempt 100 percent affordable housing projects from meeting the minimum
1,500 square feet neighborhood serving retail requirement in RM zones, with
an average not to exceed 60 percent of the area median income, except for a
building manager’s unit.
AMENDMENT: Council Member Fine moved, seconded by Council Member
Cormack to change the Motion to state “…not to exceed 100 percent of the
area median income…”
AMENDMENT FAILED: 3-3 DuBois, Kou, Tanaka no, Filseth recused
INCORPORATED INTO THE WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND
SECONDER to change the Motion to state “…not to exceed 80 percent of the
area median income.
MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Council Member DuBois moved,
seconded by Council Member Kniss to exempt 100 percent affordable housing
projects from meeting the minimum 1,500 square feet neighborhood serving
retail requirement in RM zones, with an average not to exceed 80 percent of
the area median income, except for a building manager’s unit.
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 6-0 Filseth recused
Council took a break from 8:17 P.M. to 8:25 P.M.
Mayor Filseth returned to the meeting at 8:25 P.M.
Council Member Kniss advised she will not be participating in this part of the
Agenda Item due to owning property within 500 feet of the California Avenue
CC(2) zoning district.
MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member XX
to direct the Planning and Transportation Commission to study interactions
between the RPP districts and these Ordinance changes.
MOTION WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER
MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Fine to
approve the following modifications to the Ordinance related to the California
Avenue CC(2) Zoning District:
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 5 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 01/28/2019
A. Unit Density. Eliminate the unit density requirement restricting the
maximum density, which is currently 30 dwelling units per acre;
B. Residential Only Development. Allow housing-only projects to be
constructed, except on properties in the retail shopping (R) combining
district or where the retail preservation ordinance applies;
C. Driveway Approach. Reinforce existing City policy and guidelines to
preclude curb cuts on California Avenue, except for City-owned parcels
or City-sponsored projects;
D. Open Space. Allow rooftops to qualify for up to 60 percent of the usable
open space requirement for the multi-family residential portion of a
project, subject to objective performance standards;
E. Housing Incentive Program (HIP)
i. Increase residential FAR from 0.6 to 2.0;
ii. Allow Affordable Housing Overlay development standards (without
legislative process);
iii. Discretionary review by ARB required; and
F. Direct Staff to analyze the interaction of housing production in the CC(2)
zones in regards to the hotel FAR and methods to match increases in
residential FAR with a decrease in commercial FAR for mixed-use
projects.
MOTION PASSED: 5-1 Kou no, Kniss recused
Council Member Kniss returned to the meeting at 9:30 P.M.
Council took a break from 9:19 P.M. to 9:31 P.M.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to
approve the following modifications to the Ordinance related to properties
adjacent to El Camino Real in the CN and CS Zoning Districts:
A. Unit Density. Eliminate the unit density requirement restricting the
maximum density, which currently ranges from 15 to 30 dwelling units
per acre;
B. Open Space. Allow rooftops to qualify for up to 60 percent of the usable
open space requirement for the multi-family residential portion of a
project, subject to objective performance standards;
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 6 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 01/28/2019
C. Residential Only Development. Allow housing-only projects to be
constructed except on properties where the retail preservation
ordinance applies;
D. Ground Floor Residential Design Standards. Adopt objective design
standards to create an attractive active appearance for residential
development on the ground-floor, while also maintaining privacy for
residents:
i. Individual dwelling units shall not be permitted on the ground-
floor fronting El Camino Real. Instead, the ground-floor frontage
on El Camino Real may include common areas, such as lobbies,
stoops, community rooms, and work-out spaces with windows and
architectural detail to create visualize interest. Ground floor
residential would be permitted beyond the common areas or if set
back away from El Camino Real;
ii. Parking shall be located behind buildings or below grade, or,
where those options are not feasible, screened by landscaping,
low walls, or structured garages with architectural detail;
E. Housing Incentive Program (HIP).
i. Increase residential FAR from 0.5 (CN) and 0.6 (CS) to 1.5;
ii. Eliminate 50 percent lot coverage requirement;
iii. Allow Affordable Housing Overlay development standards (without
legislative process); and
iv. Discretionary review by ARB required.
MOTION PASSED 6-1 Kou no
MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Fine to
approve the following modifications to the Ordinance related to city-wide
Rooftop Open Space Performance Standards:
A. Permanent fixtures on the rooftop shall be placed so as not to exceed
height limit for the applicable zoning district, except:
i. Elevators, stairs and guardrails may exceed the height limit to
allow for access to the rooftop useable open space as and to the
extent required to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act
(ADA). These fixtures shall be designed to the lowest height and
size feasible;
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 7 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 01/28/2019
ii. Permanent fixtures associated with the useable open space, such
as trellises, shade structures, furniture, and furnishings such as
planters, lighting and heaters, may exceed the height limit by up
to 12 feet;
iii. For the height limit exceptions in (i) and (ii) above, all fixtures
shall not intersect a plane measured at a forty-five degree angle
from the edge of the building starting at the rooftop garden
surface sloping upward and inward toward the center of the
property;
B. The rooftop garden may be located on the second or higher story or on
a roof deck;
C. The rooftop garden shall be accessible to all residents of dwelling units
on the parcel, but not to commercial tenants of a residential mixed-use
development;
D. Structures or fixtures providing a means of access or egress (i.e.,
stairway, elevator) shall be located away from the building edge to the
extent feasible or screened to minimize visibility from the public right-
of-way and adjacent buildings and privacy impacts. These access
structures or fixtures, when exceeding the height limit, shall be subject
to the provisions of subsection (A)(iii) above;
E. Any lighting shall have cutoff fixtures that cast downward-facing light or
consist of lowlevel string lights. Lights shall be dimmable to control glare
and placed on timers to turn off after 10:00 PM. Photometric diagrams
must be submitted by the applicant to ensure there are no spillover
impacts into windows or openings of adjacent properties;
F. At least 15 percent but no more than 25 percent of the rooftop shall be
landscaped with raised beds for gardening, C.3 stormwater planters, or
other landscaping. All required landscaped areas shall be equipped with
automatic irrigation systems and be properly drained;
G. Rooftop equipment that emit noise and/or exhaust, including but not
limited to vents, flues, generators, pumps, air conditioning compressors,
and other protrusions through the roof, shall be directed away and
screened from the useable open space areas;
H. Rooftop open space noise levels shall not exceed exterior residential
noise level as defined by Section 9.10.030(a) of this code;
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 8 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 01/28/2019
I. The use of sound amplifying equipment shall be prohibited. Signs shall
be affixed adjacent to access elevators and stairs within the rooftop
garden providing notice of this prohibition;
J. Change the Ordinance Section 10, B to replace “second” with “third;”
and
K. Change the Ordinance Section D to state “or screened.”
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion a new Part L “Include in the
Ordinance Citywide up-lighting requirements.
MOTION: Council Member Tanaka moved, seconded by Council Member XXX
to remove Part B from the Motion.
MOTION FAILED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND
MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Council Member DuBois moved,
seconded by Vice Mayor Fine to approve the following modifications to the
Ordinance related to city-wide Rooftop Open Space Performance Standards:
A. Permanent fixtures on the rooftop shall be placed so as not to exceed
height limit for the applicable zoning district, except:
i. Elevators, stairs and guardrails may exceed the height limit to
allow for access to the rooftop useable open space as and to the
extent required to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act
(ADA). These fixtures shall be designed to the lowest height and
size feasible;
ii. Permanent fixtures associated with the useable open space, such
as trellises, shade structures, furniture, and furnishings such as
planters, lighting and heaters, may exceed the height limit by up
to 12 feet;
iii. For the height limit exceptions in (i) and (ii) above, all fixtures
shall not intersect a plane measured at a forty-five degree angle
from the edge of the building starting at the rooftop garden
surface sloping upward and inward toward the center of the
property;
B. The rooftop garden may be located on the second or higher story or on
a roof deck;
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 9 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 01/28/2019
C. The rooftop garden shall be accessible to all residents of dwelling units
on the parcel, but not to commercial tenants of a residential mixed-use
development;
D. Structures or fixtures providing a means of access or egress (i.e.,
stairway, elevator) shall be located away from the building edge to the
extent feasible or screened to minimize visibility from the public right-
of-way and adjacent buildings and privacy impacts. These access
structures or fixtures, when exceeding the height limit, shall be subject
to the provisions of subsection (A)(iii) above;
E. Any lighting shall have cutoff fixtures that cast downward-facing light or
consist of lowlevel string lights. Lights shall be dimmable to control glare
and placed on timers to turn off after 10:00 PM. Photometric diagrams
must be submitted by the applicant to ensure there are no spillover
impacts into windows or openings of adjacent properties;
F. At least 15 percent but no more than 25 percent of the rooftop shall be
landscaped with raised beds for gardening, C.3 stormwater planters, or
other landscaping. All required landscaped areas shall be equipped with
automatic irrigation systems and be properly drained;
G. Rooftop equipment that emit noise and/or exhaust, including but not
limited to vents, flues, generators, pumps, air conditioning compressors,
and other protrusions through the roof, shall be directed away and
screened from the useable open space areas;
H. Rooftop open space noise levels shall not exceed exterior residential
noise level as defined by Section 9.10.030(a) of this code;
I. The use of sound amplifying equipment shall be prohibited. Signs shall
be affixed adjacent to access elevators and stairs within the rooftop
garden providing notice of this prohibition;
J. Change the Ordinance Section 10, B to replace “second” with “third;”
K. Change the Ordinance Section D to state “or screened;” and
L. Include in the Ordinance Citywide up-lighting requirements.
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 6-1 Kou no
MOTION: Vice Mayor Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to
approve the proposed modifications to the definition of “usable open space”
in Section 18.04.030 of the Ordinance.
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 10 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 01/28/2019
MOTION PASSED: 6-1 Kou no
MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Mayor Filseth to
approve the following modifications to the Ordinance related to properties
adjacent to El Camino Real in the CN and CS Zoning Districts:
A. Exempt 100 percent affordable housing projects (120 percent AMI and
below) from the retail preservation requirement, with an average not to
exceed 80 percent of the area median income, except in the building
manager’s unit.
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
State/Federal Legislation Update/Action
None.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 P.M.
CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
February 11, 2019
The Honorable City Council
Palo Alto, California
Appointment of 2019 Emergency Standby Council
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the selection of former Council
Members to serve as the 2019 Emergency Standby Council as follows:
-Bern Beecham
-Pat Burt
-Peter Drekmeier
-Karen Holman
-Greg Scharff
-Greg Schmid
-Cory Wolbach
BACKGROUND
The Charter of the City of Palo Alto provides that "the Council may, by Ordinance or
Resolution, provide for the preservation and continuation of government in the event
of disaster which renders unavailable a majority of the Council."
On August 7, 2006, the City Council adopted amendments to Section 2.12.090 of
the Palo Alto Municipal Code regarding the selection procedure for the City's
Emergency Standby Council. The adopted policy states that the Council shall
consider the following criteria for appointments to the Emergency Standby Council:
residency in the City of Palo Alto, availability, interest in serving and a lack of
conflicts of interest.
Seven members serve on the Emergency Standby Council. Members of the Standby
Council have the authority delegated to them under Chapter 2.12 of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code. The members of the Emergency Standby Council continue to serve
until the Council appoints or reappoints the members at the beginning of each year.
Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk
Page 2
City of Palo Alto (ID # 9994)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/11/2019
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Authorize City Manager to execute severance agreements
with PAAS employees
Title: Authorize the City Manager to execute Agreements for additional
severance payment to employees impacted by service delivery changes at the
Palo Alto Animal Shelter
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Human Resources
Recommended Motion
Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to execute Agreements for
additional severance payment to employees impacted by service delivery changes at the
Palo Alto Animal Shelter, both represented (SEIU local 521) and unrepresented
(Management and Professional group).
Discussion
On November 26, 2018, Council approved changing the service delivery model for the
Palo Alto Animal Shelter. As a result of this change in operations, four positions
currently represented by the Service Employees’ International Union (SEIU), Local 521,
and one unrepresented management position will be eliminated from the City’s budget
(formal action anticipated to be taken as part of the FY 2020 budget process). The
current memorandum of agreement (MOA) between the City and SEIU requires a
written layoff notice be issued to the impacted employees, along with one month’s
salary as severance pay. Under the MOA, when City services are contracted to an
outside entity the City is also obligated to meet and confer with SEIU in good faith
regarding the impacts of the transition.
The City and SEIU have concluded the meet and confer process and agreed that it is in
the best interest of the City to provide additional severance pay to those employees
who are impacted by the transition. Palo Alto Animal shelter employees have
demonstrated outstanding service, loyalty and a commitment to a successful transfer of
operations. As such, the attached Side Letter Agreement provides additional severance
pay as follows to the impacted SEIU- represented employees:
City of Palo Alto Page 2
1. In addition to one month’s salary of severance pay provided under the current
MOA, one week of salary for every year of service, to a maximum of eight
weeks; and
2. Payment to cover the equivalent of four months of health, dental, and vision
premiums.
The additional severance pay under the Side Letter Agreement will be provided to the
impacted SEIU-represented employees working as Animal Services Specialist, Veterinary
Technician, Administrative Specialist, and General Laborer (Hourly). To be eligible for
the additional severance pay, the impacted SEIU-represented employees must remain
in their positions until February 21, 2019.
The attached Side Letter Agreement specifies the additional benefits and acknowledges
the formal conclusion of the meet and confer process required under the MOA. On a
positive note, PIN has extended job offers to the impacted employees covered.
For the one unrepresented management classification (Veterinarian), staff recommends
extending similar severance benefits. The current Management Compensation Plan and
Merit Rules provide no severance pay for this position. In recognition of many years of
service, continued commitment to the Palo Alto Animal Shelter, and assistance in
transition of services, staff recommends that this impacted employee be provided with
one month’s salary of severance pay and 1 additional week of severance pay for every
year of service up to 8 weeks.
Resource Impact
The City will incur one-time costs of $50,023 for the additional severance pay and the
payment to cover the equivalent of four months of health, dental, and vision premiums.
In the FY 2016 budget process, Council authorized $250,000 to support transition costs
for the Palo Alto Animal Shelter. To date, $110,000 of these transition funds have been
spent on transition costs including concept/design planning ($50,000) and a fundraising
feasability study ($60,000). Sufficient funding ($140,000) remains of the authorized
transition costs to fund the actions recommended in this report.
Attachments:
Side Letter of Agreement- Animal Shelter- Final
Side Letter of Agreement
Between
The City of Palo Alto
And
Service Employees International Union, Local 521
This agreement acknowledges that Service Employees International Union, Local 521 (SEIU 521) and the
City of Palo Alto herein referred to collectively as “The Parties”, bargained in good faith and came to
mutual agreement on the below terms:
(1) The Parties acknowledge that the meet and confer process for both the decision to contract out
and the impact of contracting out of Palo Alto Animal Shelter services was conducted in good
faith and resolved by the execution of this agreement;
(2) The Parties acknowledge the conclusion of the meet and confer process and the waiver of any
future rights to fact finding under the Meyers-Milias-Brown-Act (MMBA) or grievances related
to this matter under the SEIU 521 (Memoranda of Agreement (MOAs) with the City of Palo Alto
covering Classified and Hourly Unit employees;
(3) The City has agreed to pay severance payments to all SEIU 521 members employed at the Palo
Alto animal shelter, effective January 1, 2017; who have remained in good standing and are laid
off from employment with the City as a result of the City’s agreement with Pets in Need, a local
non-profit, to provide ongoing Animal Shelter services (qualifying employees);
(4) The City has agreed to pay the following as severance payments to qualifying employees:
a. The equivalent of four (4) weeks of pay, as defined within the MOA between the Parties.
Additionally, the City has agreed to 1 week of pay per complete year of service up, to a
maximum of eight (8) weeks of pay;,
b. For benefited qualifying employees only, the City will pay to qualifying employees or
directly to COBRA administrator if possible the equivalent of monthly COBRA premiums
for each month they are eligible for COBRA up to a maximum of four (4) months;
c. For qualifying hourly employees weekly rate of pay will be calculated based on a 10
month look back period from the effective date of layoff, with approved and/or
protected leaves being excluded.
(5) Employees in “good standing” defined under Section 3 of the agreement above:
a. Employees must be without any active or ongoing formal discipline
b. Employees must not be currently on any formal performance improvement plans
c. Employees must not be currently on any formal attendance improvement plans
(6) Each qualifying employee will sign a waiver of rights to any grievance or appeal process related
to the City’s agreement with Pets in Need to operate future Animal Shelter services;
For the Union: For the City:
City of Palo Alto (ID # 10003)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/11/2019
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Chief Transportation Official Salary Midpoint Increase
Title: Adoption of an Amended Salary Schedule for the 2016-2019
Management and Professional Employees Compensation Plan to Increase the
Salary Range to $136,593-$204,880 for the Chief Transportation Official
Position
From: City Manager
Lead Department: City Manager
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt an amended salary schedule (Attachment
A) for the 2016-2019 Management and Professional Employees Compensation Plan to
increase the salary range to $136,593 – $204,880 for the Chief Transportation Official
position.
Discussion
The recent organizational restructuring involved functionally moving the Transportation
Division out of the Planning and Community Environment (PCE) Department to become
a separate Office of Transportation. This reorganization brings with it higher levels of
independent leadership and responsibilities with a direct reporting relationship to the
City Manager’s Office. The restructuring change is reflective of the significant scale and
complexity of transportation in Palo Alto as transportation is consistently in the top
three City Council priorities annually. Palo Alto residents care deeply about
transportation services, programs and projects and the City has an interest in
strengthening this unit.
The City’s Chief Transportation Official (CTO) position has been vacant since October
2018. After the vacancy occurred, the City Manager’s Office and Human Resources
engaged the services of an external consultant (Municipal Resource Group – MRG) to
support and to complete a review of the scope and staffing structure of the Office of
Transportation (staff report for the MRG contract available online here:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/67242).
While the organizational review and recommendations are still being developed, the
City of Palo Alto Page 2
recommended salary range adjustment is being advanced at this time due to the time
sensitivity of recruitment. Once finalized, they are intended to provide the City with
choices to consider for an effective and efficient organizational structure for
Transportation services that currently includes traffic operations/traffic safety, capital
project management, development review, safe routes to school, parking operations,
and other transportation programs. Organizational recommendations will be presented
to the City Council in the coming months with the potential for additional personnel
actions recommended for inclusion in the fiscal year 2019-2020 budget.
Based on the work done to date and market comparisons, staff recommends an
increase to the CTO salary range before beginning the CTO recruitment process in
February. Staff’s recommendation is based on the need to:
1) Appropriately recognize the accountability, scope and responsibility of the
position;
2) Align with the Assistant Director of Public Works, which has similar scope
and responsibility; and
3) Compete more favorably in the transportation management job market,
which is a specialized and difficult market for recruitment and retention.
The City of Palo Alto’s Management and Professional Compensation Plan establishes
salary ranges that start at 20 percent below and extend to 20 percent above a set
midpoint. Employees may be appointed at any salary between the minimum and the
maximum of the range, based upon their qualifications and other factors such as
internal equity. Employees may not be paid above the established range.
The current CTO salary range is $123,281-$184,912. The recommended adjustment to
$136,593 – $204,880 is an increase of approximately 10.8 percent. The proposed
amended salary schedule is attached as Attachment A. During the Fiscal Year (FY)
2020 budget process, staff will bring the discussion about the placement of the
Transportation Office in the City organization.
Staff will begin the CTO recruitment process in February and hope to have a new
person on board by late spring.
Resource Impact
The recommended adjustment to the salary range is an increase of 10.8 percent, or
approximately $20,000 annually at the top end of the range. Fully-loaded costs,
including additional pension contributions and variable benefits are approximately
$8,000 annually, for a total increase of approximately $28,000. It is anticipated that
these costs can be absorbed in FY 2019. The ongoing implications of this increase will
be incorporated into the development of the FY 2020 Operating Budget. Of note, an
increase in the CTO salary range does not guarantee that a new CTO will be brought in
at the top of the salary range. It simply gives the City Manager the needed flexibility to
City of Palo Alto Page 3
be able to attract the most qualified candidates.
Attachments:
• Attachment A - Proposed Amended Salary Schedule
Job
Code
FLSA Status Classifications Grade Codes Min Hourly
Rate
Mid-Point
Hourly Rate
Max Hourly
Rate
Min Hourly
Rate
Mid-Point
Hourly Rate
Max Hourly
Rate
Min Hourly
Rate
Mid-Point
Hourly Rate
Max Hourly
Rate
Approx Mid-
Point Monthly
Salary
Approx. Mid-
Point Annual
Salary
190 Non-Exempt Accountant 690P $32.89 $41.11 $49.34 $33.72 $42.14 $50.57 $36.25 $45.31 $54.38 $7,853.73 $94,244.80
76 Exempt Administrative Assistant 750P $28.37 $35.46 $42.56 $29.08 $36.35 $43.62 $29.81 $37.26 $44.72 $6,458.40 $77,500.80
115 Exempt Assistant Chief Building Official 405M $46.08 $57.60 $69.12 $47.24 $59.04 $70.85 $48.42 $60.52 $72.63 $10,490.13 $125,881.60
132 Exempt Assistant Chief of Police 100A $75.43 $94.28 $113.14 $77.32 $96.64 $115.97 $79.25 $99.06 $118.88 $17,170.40 $206,044.80
108 Exempt Assistant City Attorney 165A $63.94 $79.92 $95.91 $65.54 $81.92 $98.31 $67.18 $83.97 $100.77 $14,554.80 $174,657.60
109 Exempt Assistant City Clerk 630M $37.21 $46.51 $55.82 $38.15 $47.68 $57.22 $39.11 $48.88 $58.66 $8,472.53 $101,670.40
107 Exempt Assistant City Manager 20E $78.36 $97.94 $117.53 $80.32 $100.39 $120.47 $82.32 $102.90 $123.48 $17,836.00 $214,032.00
2026 Exempt Assistant City Manager / Utilities General Manager 10E $98.47 $123.08 $147.70 $100.93 $126.16 $151.40 $103.46 $129.32 $155.19 $22,415.47 $268,985.60
73 Exempt Assistant Director Administrative Services 120A $64.47 $80.58 $96.70 $66.08 $82.60 $99.12 $67.74 $84.67 $101.61 $14,676.13 $176,113.60
126 Exempt Assistant Director Community Services 150A $61.72 $77.14 $92.57 $63.26 $79.07 $94.89 $64.84 $81.05 $97.26 $14,048.67 $168,584.00
1007 Exempt Assistant Director Human Resources 155A $59.65 $74.56 $89.48 $61.15 $76.43 $91.72 $62.68 $78.35 $94.02 $13,580.67 $162,968.00
2001 Exempt Assistant Director Library Services 160A $59.03 $73.78 $88.54 $60.51 $75.63 $90.76 $62.03 $77.53 $93.04 $13,438.53 $161,262.40
10 Exempt Assistant Director Planning & Community Environment 130A $63.23 $79.03 $94.84 $64.81 $81.01 $97.22 $66.44 $83.04 $99.65 $14,393.60 $172,723.20
143 Exempt Assistant Director Public Works 140A $62.49 $78.11 $93.74 $64.06 $80.07 $96.09 $65.67 $82.08 $98.50 $14,227.20 $170,726.40
168 Exempt Assistant Fleet Manager 585M $39.11 $48.88 $58.66 $40.09 $50.11 $60.14 $41.10 $51.37 $61.65 $8,904.13 $106,849.60
102 Exempt Assistant Manager WQCP 240D $50.52 $63.14 $75.77 $51.78 $64.72 $77.67 $53.08 $66.34 $79.61 $11,498.93 $137,987.20
30 Exempt Assistant to the City Manager 390M $48.82 $61.02 $73.23 $50.04 $62.55 $75.06 $51.30 $64.12 $76.95 $11,114.13 $133,369.60
118 Exempt Chief Building Official 290M $59.99 $74.98 $89.98 $61.49 $76.86 $92.24 $63.04 $78.79 $94.55 $13,656.93 $163,883.20
2008 Exempt Chief Communications Officer 135A $62.89 $78.61 $94.34 $64.47 $80.58 $96.70 $66.08 $82.60 $99.12 $14,317.33 $171,808.00
112 Exempt Chief Planning Official 220D $53.61 $67.01 $80.42 $54.96 $68.69 $82.43 $56.33 $70.41 $84.50 $12,204.40 $146,452.80
95 Exempt Chief Procurement Officer 235D $50.72 $63.39 $76.07 $51.99 $64.98 $77.98 $53.29 $66.61 $79.94 $11,545.73 $138,548.80
2010 Exempt Chief Sustainability Officer 435M $54.75 $68.43 $82.12 $56.12 $70.15 $84.18 $57.53 $71.91 $86.30 $12,464.40 $149,572.80
82 Exempt Chief Transportation Official 204D $56.40 $70.50 $84.60 $57.82 $72.27 $86.73 $59.27 $74.08 $88.90 $12,840.53 $154,086.40
82 Exempt Chief Transportation Official*** 140A $65.67 $82.08 $98.50 $14,227.20 $170,726.40
96 Exempt Claims Investigator 660P $34.56 $43.19 $51.83 $35.42 $44.27 $53.13 $36.31 $45.38 $54.46 $7,865.87 $94,390.40
24 Exempt Communication Specialist 615M $37.43 $46.78 $56.14 $38.36 $47.95 $57.54 $39.32 $49.15 $58.98 $8,519.33 $102,232.00
89 Exempt Contracts Administrator 585P $39.11 $48.88 $58.66 $40.09 $50.11 $60.14 $41.10 $51.37 $61.65 $8,904.13 $106,849.60
186 Non-Exempt Coordinator Library Circulation 675M $32.95 $41.18 $49.42 $33.77 $42.21 $50.66 $34.62 $43.27 $51.93 $7,500.13 $90,001.60
191 Exempt Deputy Chief/Fire Marshall 125A $63.71 $79.63 $95.56 $65.31 $81.63 $97.96 $66.95 $83.68 $100.42 $14,504.53 $174,054.40
11 Exempt Deputy City Attorney 375M $50.04 $62.55 $75.06 $51.30 $64.12 $76.95 $52.59 $65.73 $78.88 $11,393.20 $136,718.40
71 Exempt Deputy City Clerk 720M $29.80 $37.25 $44.70 $30.56 $38.19 $45.83 $31.32 $39.15 $46.98 $6,786.00 $81,432.00
55 Exempt Deputy City Manager 115A $65.31 $81.63 $97.96 $66.95 $83.68 $100.42 $68.63 $85.78 $102.94 $14,868.53 $178,422.40
195 Exempt Deputy Director Technical Services Division 200D $63.52 $79.39 $95.27 $65.11 $81.38 $97.66 $66.74 $83.42 $100.11 $14,459.47 $173,513.60
20 Exempt Deputy Fire Chief 110A $66.38 $82.97 $99.57 $68.04 $85.05 $102.06 $69.75 $87.18 $104.62 $15,111.20 $181,334.40
81 Exempt Director Administrative Services/Chief Financial Officer 50E $75.11 $93.88 $112.66 $76.99 $96.23 $115.48 $78.92 $98.64 $118.37 $17,097.60 $205,171.20
72 Exempt Director Community Services 45E $75.68 $94.60 $113.52 $77.58 $96.97 $116.37 $79.52 $99.40 $119.28 $17,229.33 $206,752.00
1012 Exempt Director Development Services 145A $66.45 $83.06 $99.68 $68.12 $85.14 $102.17 $69.82 $87.27 $104.73 $15,126.80 $181,521.60
133 Exempt Director Human Resources/Chief People Officer 55E $71.58 $89.47 $107.37 $73.37 $91.71 $110.06 $75.21 $94.01 $112.82 $16,295.07 $195,540.80
128 Exempt Director Information Technology/Chief Information Officer 25E $78.21 $97.76 $117.32 $80.17 $100.21 $120.26 $82.18 $102.72 $123.27 $17,804.80 $213,657.60
City of Palo Alto
Management, Professional and Confidential Salary Schedule
Effective 7/1/2016 (2.5% Increase) Effective 7/1/2017 (2.5% Increase)Effective 7/1/2018 (2.5% Increase)
*Effective 02/18/2018
**Effective 06/23/2018
***Effective 02/16/2019 Page 1
Job
Code
FLSA Status Classifications Grade Codes Min Hourly
Rate
Mid-Point
Hourly Rate
Max Hourly
Rate
Min Hourly
Rate
Mid-Point
Hourly Rate
Max Hourly
Rate
Min Hourly
Rate
Mid-Point
Hourly Rate
Max Hourly
Rate
Approx Mid-
Point Monthly
Salary
Approx. Mid-
Point Annual
Salary
Effective 7/1/2016 (2.5% Increase) Effective 7/1/2017 (2.5% Increase)Effective 7/1/2018 (2.5% Increase)
131 Exempt Director Libraries 60E $70.84 $88.54 $106.25 $72.61 $90.76 $108.92 $74.43 $93.03 $111.64 $16,125.20 $193,502.40
2028 Exempt Director of Emergency Medical Services 215D $55.58 $69.47 $83.37 $56.97 $71.21 $85.46 $58.40 $73.00 $87.60 $12,653.33 $151,840.00
2005 Exempt Director Office of Emergency Services 215D $55.58 $69.47 $83.37 $56.97 $71.21 $85.46 $58.40 $73.00 $87.60 $12,653.33 $151,840.00
49 Exempt Director Office of Management and Budget 120A $64.47 $80.58 $96.70 $66.08 $82.60 $99.12 $67.74 $84.67 $101.61 $14,676.13 $176,113.60
134 Exempt Director Planning & Community Environment 40E $75.86 $94.82 $113.79 $77.76 $97.20 $116.64 $79.71 $99.63 $119.56 $17,269.20 $207,230.40
135 Exempt Director Public Works/City Engineer 30E $76.84 $96.04 $115.25 $78.76 $98.45 $118.14 $80.74 $100.92 $121.11 $17,492.80 $209,913.60
121 Exempt Director Utilities 10E $98.47 $123.08 $147.70 $100.93 $126.16 $151.40 $103.46 $129.32 $155.19 $22,415.47 $268,985.60
2002 Exempt Division Head Library Services 260D $46.36 $57.95 $69.54 $47.52 $59.40 $71.28 $48.72 $60.89 $73.07 $10,554.27 $126,651.20
172 Exempt Division Manager Open Space, Parks & Golf 245D $49.84 $62.29 $74.75 $51.08 $63.85 $76.62 $52.36 $65.45 $78.54 $11,344.67 $136,136.00
TBD Exempt Division Manager Planning** 220D -----$56.33 $70.41 $84.50 $12,204.40 $146,452.80
1005 Exempt Executive Assistant to the City Manager 705M $32.09 $40.11 $48.14 $32.90 $41.12 $49.35 $33.72 $42.15 $50.58 $7,306.00 $87,672.00
139 Exempt Fire Chief 35E $76.41 $95.51 $114.62 $78.32 $97.90 $117.48 $80.28 $100.35 $120.42 $17,394.00 $208,728.00
163 Exempt Hearing Officer 480M $45.34 $56.67 $68.01 $46.48 $58.09 $69.71 $47.64 $59.55 $71.46 $10,322.00 $123,864.00
101 Exempt Human Resources Representative 735P $29.08 $36.34 $43.61 $29.80 $37.25 $44.70 $30.56 $38.19 $45.83 $6,619.60 $79,435.20
90 Exempt Landscape Architect Park Planner 510M $43.16 $53.94 $64.73 $44.24 $55.29 $66.35 $45.35 $56.68 $68.02 $9,824.53 $117,894.40
2015 Exempt Legal Fellow 755P $37.11 $46.38 $55.66 $38.04 $47.54 $57.05 $38.99 $48.73 $58.48 $8,446.53 $101,358.40
171 Exempt Management Analyst 585M $39.11 $48.88 $58.66 $40.09 $50.11 $60.14 $41.10 $51.37 $61.65 $8,904.13 $106,849.60
79 Exempt Manager Accounting 235D $50.72 $63.39 $76.07 $51.99 $64.98 $77.98 $53.29 $66.61 $79.94 $11,545.73 $138,548.80
2007 Exempt Manager Airport 210D $55.59 $69.48 $83.38 $56.98 $71.22 $85.47 $58.41 $73.01 $87.62 $12,655.07 $151,860.80
2023 Exempt Manager Budget 360M $53.84 $67.29 $80.75 $55.19 $68.98 $82.78 $56.57 $70.71 $84.86 $12,256.40 $147,076.80
38 Exempt Manager Communications 525M $42.11 $52.63 $63.16 $43.16 $53.95 $64.74 $44.24 $55.30 $66.36 $9,585.33 $115,024.00
154 Exempt Manager Community Services 630M $37.21 $46.51 $55.82 $38.15 $47.68 $57.22 $39.11 $48.88 $58.66 $8,472.53 $101,670.40
169 Exempt Manager Community Services Sr Program 585M $39.11 $48.88 $58.66 $40.09 $50.11 $60.14 $41.10 $51.37 $61.65 $8,904.13 $106,849.60
1013 Exempt Manager Development Center 495M $44.24 $55.29 $66.35 $45.35 $56.68 $68.02 $46.48 $58.10 $69.72 $10,070.67 $120,848.00
63 Exempt Manager Economic Development 220D $53.61 $67.01 $80.42 $54.96 $68.69 $82.43 $56.33 $70.41 $84.50 $12,204.40 $146,452.80
44 Exempt Manager Employee Benefits 450M $45.81 $57.26 $68.72 $46.96 $58.70 $70.44 $48.14 $60.17 $72.21 $10,429.47 $125,153.60
45 Exempt Manager Employee Relations & Training 235D $50.72 $63.39 $76.07 $51.99 $64.98 $77.98 $53.29 $66.61 $79.94 $11,545.73 $138,548.80
93 Exempt Manager Environmental Control Program 419M $46.91 $58.63 $70.36 $48.08 $60.10 $72.12 $49.29 $61.61 $73.94 $10,679.07 $128,148.80
1116 Exempt Manager Facilities 445M $46.50 $58.12 $69.75 $47.67 $59.58 $71.50 $48.86 $61.07 $73.29 $10,585.47 $127,025.60
2030 Exempt Manager Finance* 223D - - - $54.59 $68.23 $81.88 $55.96 $69.94 $83.93 $12,122.93 $145,475.20
127 Exempt Manager Fleet 255D $46.97 $58.71 $70.46 $48.15 $60.18 $72.22 $49.36 $61.69 $74.03 $10,692.93 $128,315.20
2018 Exempt Manager Human Services 540M $41.08 $51.35 $61.62 $42.12 $52.64 $63.17 $43.17 $53.96 $64.76 $9,353.07 $112,236.80
32 Exempt Manager Information Technology 230D $51.85 $64.81 $77.78 $53.16 $66.44 $79.73 $54.49 $68.11 $81.74 $11,805.73 $141,668.80
2006 Exempt Manager Information Technology Security 230D $51.85 $64.81 $77.78 $53.16 $66.44 $79.73 $54.49 $68.11 $81.74 $11,805.73 $141,668.80
158 Exempt Manager Laboratory Services 495M $44.24 $55.29 $66.35 $45.35 $56.68 $68.02 $46.48 $58.10 $69.72 $10,070.67 $120,848.00
78 Exempt Manager Library Services 565M $38.61 $48.26 $57.92 $39.58 $49.47 $59.37 $40.57 $50.71 $60.86 $8,789.73 $105,476.80
92 Exempt Manager Maintenance Operations 469M $43.33 $54.16 $65.00 $44.42 $55.52 $66.63 $45.53 $56.91 $68.30 $9,864.40 $118,372.80
26 Exempt Manager Transportation Planning 345M $50.71 $63.38 $76.06 $51.98 $64.97 $77.97 $53.28 $66.60 $79.92 $11,544.00 $138,528.00
51 Exempt Manager Planning 415M $46.96 $58.70 $70.44 $48.14 $60.17 $72.21 $49.35 $61.68 $74.02 $10,691.20 $128,294.40
103 Exempt Manager Real Property 235D $50.72 $63.39 $76.07 $51.99 $64.98 $77.98 $53.29 $66.61 $79.94 $11,545.73 $138,548.80
2011 Exempt Manager Revenue Collections 250D $47.64 $59.55 $71.46 $48.84 $61.04 $73.25 $50.06 $62.57 $75.09 $10,845.47 $130,145.60
160 Exempt Manager Solid Waste 330M $51.30 $64.12 $76.95 $52.59 $65.73 $78.88 $53.91 $67.38 $80.86 $11,679.20 $140,150.40
*Effective 02/18/2018
**Effective 06/23/2018
***Effective 02/16/2019 Page 2
Job
Code
FLSA Status Classifications Grade Codes Min Hourly
Rate
Mid-Point
Hourly Rate
Max Hourly
Rate
Min Hourly
Rate
Mid-Point
Hourly Rate
Max Hourly
Rate
Min Hourly
Rate
Mid-Point
Hourly Rate
Max Hourly
Rate
Approx Mid-
Point Monthly
Salary
Approx. Mid-
Point Annual
Salary
Effective 7/1/2016 (2.5% Increase) Effective 7/1/2017 (2.5% Increase)Effective 7/1/2018 (2.5% Increase)
57 Exempt Manager Treasury, Debt & Investments 235D $50.72 $63.39 $76.07 $51.99 $64.98 $77.98 $53.29 $66.61 $79.94 $11,545.73 $138,548.80
86 Exempt Manager Urban Forestry 436M $45.50 $56.87 $68.25 $46.64 $58.30 $69.96 $47.81 $59.76 $71.72 $10,358.40 $124,300.80
178 Exempt Manager Water Quality Control Plant 205D $57.08 $71.34 $85.61 $58.51 $73.13 $87.76 $59.97 $74.96 $89.96 $12,993.07 $155,916.80
39 Exempt Manager Watershed Protection 330M $51.30 $64.12 $76.95 $52.59 $65.73 $78.88 $53.91 $67.38 $80.86 $11,679.20 $140,150.40
1008 Exempt Office of Emergency Services Coordinator 525M $42.11 $52.63 $63.16 $43.16 $53.95 $64.74 $44.24 $55.30 $66.36 $9,585.33 $115,024.00
2024 Exempt Performance Auditor I 750P $28.37 $35.46 $42.56 $29.08 $36.35 $43.62 $29.81 $37.26 $44.72 $6,458.40 $77,500.80
100 Exempt Performance Auditor II 585M $39.11 $48.88 $58.66 $40.09 $50.11 $60.14 $41.10 $51.37 $61.65 $8,904.13 $106,849.60
148 Exempt Police Chief 15E $84.96 $106.19 $127.43 $87.08 $108.85 $130.62 $89.27 $111.58 $133.90 $19,340.53 $232,086.40
2021 Exempt Chief Assistant City Attorney 101A $77.36 $96.70 $116.04 $79.30 $99.12 $118.95 $81.28 $101.60 $121.92 $17,610.67 $211,328.00
2016 Exempt Principal Business Analyst 310M $54.06 $67.57 $81.09 $55.41 $69.26 $83.12 $56.80 $71.00 $85.20 $12,306.67 $147,680.00
2029 Exempt Principal Planner 469M - - - $44.77 $55.96 $67.16 $45.89 $57.36 $68.84 $9,942.40 $119,308.80
2003 Exempt Principal Management Analyst 360M $53.84 $67.29 $80.75 $55.19 $68.98 $82.78 $56.57 $70.71 $84.86 $12,256.40 $147,076.80
2009 Exempt Project Manager 570M $39.36 $49.20 $59.04 $40.35 $50.43 $60.52 $41.36 $51.70 $62.04 $8,961.33 $107,536.00
2012 Exempt Public Safety Communications Manager 495M $44.24 $55.29 $66.35 $45.35 $56.68 $68.02 $46.48 $58.10 $69.72 $10,070.67 $120,848.00
166 Exempt Public Safety Program Manager 585M $39.11 $48.88 $58.66 $40.09 $50.11 $60.14 $41.10 $51.37 $61.65 $8,904.13 $106,849.60
117 Exempt Senior Accountant 525M**$40.08 $50.10 $60.12 $41.09 $51.36 $61.64 $44.24 $55.30 $66.36 $9,585.33 $115,024.00
2013 Exempt Senior Business Analyst - M 420M $47.01 $58.76 $70.52 $48.19 $60.23 $72.28 $49.40 $61.74 $74.09 $10,701.60 $128,419.20
187 Exempt Senior Engineer 300M $53.90 $67.37 $80.85 $55.25 $69.06 $82.88 $56.64 $70.79 $84.95 $12,270.27 $147,243.20
106 Exempt Senior Executive Assistant 450M $45.81 $57.26 $68.72 $46.96 $58.70 $70.44 $48.14 $60.17 $72.21 $10,429.47 $125,153.60
157 Exempt Senior Human Resources Administrator 545M $39.93 $49.91 $59.90 $40.93 $51.16 $61.40 $41.96 $52.44 $62.93 $9,089.60 $109,075.20
14 Exempt Senior Management Analyst 465M $45.77 $57.21 $68.66 $46.92 $58.65 $70.38 $48.10 $60.12 $72.15 $10,420.80 $125,049.60
130 Exempt Senior Performance Auditor 510M $43.16 $53.94 $64.73 $44.24 $55.29 $66.35 $45.35 $56.68 $68.02 $9,824.53 $117,894.40
53 Exempt Senior Project Manager 300M $53.90 $67.37 $80.85 $55.25 $69.06 $82.88 $56.64 $70.79 $84.95 $12,270.27 $147,243.20
33 Exempt Senior Technologist 420M $47.01 $58.76 $70.52 $48.19 $60.23 $72.28 $49.40 $61.74 $74.09 $10,701.60 $128,419.20
155 Exempt Superintendent Animal Services 540M $41.08 $51.35 $61.62 $42.12 $52.64 $63.17 $43.17 $53.96 $64.76 $9,353.07 $112,236.80
83 Exempt Superintendent Community Services 480M $45.34 $56.67 $68.01 $46.48 $58.09 $69.71 $47.64 $59.55 $71.46 $10,322.00 $123,864.00
1117 Exempt Superintendent Recreation 480M $45.34 $56.67 $68.01 $46.48 $58.09 $69.71 $47.64 $59.55 $71.46 $10,322.00 $123,864.00
2022 Exempt Supervising Librarian 675M $33.07 $41.33 $49.60 $33.90 $42.37 $50.85 $34.75 $43.43 $52.12 $7,527.87 $90,334.40
161 Exempt Supervisor Facilities Management 600M $38.24 $47.79 $57.35 $39.20 $48.99 $58.79 $40.18 $50.22 $60.27 $8,704.80 $104,457.60
113 Exempt Supervisor Inspection and Surveying 540M $41.08 $51.35 $61.62 $42.12 $52.64 $63.17 $43.17 $53.96 $64.76 $9,353.07 $112,236.80
146 Exempt Supervisor Warehouse 660M $34.56 $43.19 $51.83 $35.42 $44.27 $53.13 $36.31 $45.38 $54.46 $7,865.87 $94,390.40
181 Exempt Supervisor Water Quality Control Operations 525M $42.11 $52.63 $63.16 $43.16 $53.95 $64.74 $44.24 $55.30 $66.36 $9,585.33 $115,024.00
2027 Exempt Utilities Chief Operating Officer 60E $70.84 $88.54 $106.25 $72.61 $90.76 $108.92 $74.43 $93.03 $111.64 $16,125.20 $193,502.40
184 Exempt Veterinarian 555M $40.08 $50.10 $60.12 $41.09 $51.36 $61.64 $42.12 $52.65 $63.18 $9,126.00 $109,512.00
905 Non-Exempt Human Resources Technician 830C $25.08 $31.34 $37.61 $25.71 $32.13 $38.56 $26.36 $32.94 $39.53 $5,709.60 $68,515.20
903 Non-Exempt Legal Secretary-Confidential 820C $25.70 $32.12 $38.55 $26.35 $32.93 $39.52 $27.01 $33.76 $40.52 $5,851.73 $70,220.80
67 Exempt Secretary to City Attorney 800C $30.55 $38.18 $45.82 $31.32 $39.14 $46.97 $32.10 $40.12 $48.15 $6,954.13 $83,449.60
1004 Non-Exempt Senior Legal Secretary - Confidential 810C $28.37 $35.46 $42.56 $29.08 $36.35 $43.62 $29.81 $37.26 $44.72 $6,458.40 $77,500.80
Confidential Classifications
*Effective 02/18/2018
**Effective 06/23/2018
***Effective 02/16/2019 Page 3
City of Palo Alto (ID # 10026)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/11/2019
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Appointment of Director of Planning
Title: Approval of the Appointment of Jonathan Lait as Planning Director and
Approval of Employment Agreement
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Human Resources
Recommended Motion
The City Manager recommends that the City Council consider the following motion: To approve
the appointment of Jonathan Lait as Planning Director and approve his employment
agreement.
Recommendation
The City Manager recommends that Council approve the appointment of Jonathan Lait as
Planning Director and approve his employment agreement.
Executive Summary
The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires that the Council approve the City Manager’s
appointment of Jonathan Lait. The City Council must also approve any employment terms or
benefits that are not already included in the Compensation Plan for Management and
Professional Personnel.
Background
The City Manager makes appointments to the position of Planning Director with the approval of
City Council (Municipal Code section 2.08.020). In accordance with the Municipal Code, the
main responsibilities of the Planning Director include: completion of planning studies and
reports as may be required; recommending proposals and procedures pertaining to land use
and development, use and development of public properties and special zoning matters, and to
administer the zoning ordinance and the comprehensive plan; advising the public on matters
relating to planning procedures as outlined by law, and to review and transmit to the proper
authority requests of the public which are within the province of the department; giving
technical assistance to, the planning commission, the architectural review board and the
historic resources board; and maintaining maps and records as may be necessary for the
fulfillment of these functions.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
Discussion
The City Manager requests approval of the appointment of Lait to the position of Planning
Director. Mr. Lait was hired by the City of Palo Alto in September 2014 as the Assistant Planning
Director and has over 24 years of experience in California Public Sector Planning. Mr. Lait
graduated from Humboldt State University in Natural Resource Planning and Interpretation and
has a Master of Art in Organizational Leadership from Woodbury University. Mr. Lait has
successfully filled the role of Acting Planning Director since the Director position became vacant
in June 2018.
Mr. Lait’s annual salary will be $238,368, which is within the Council-approved salary range for
the Planning Director position. The employment agreement specifies that Mr. Lait will accrue
200 vacation hours annually and will receive a one-time deposit of 160 hours to his existing
vacation leave bank. Mr. Lait will be an “At-Will” employee, which means he will serve at the
pleasure of the City Manager and can be terminated or asked to resign at any time. The
employment agreement includes 12 weeks of severance pay, increasing by four weeks after
each additional year of employment, to a maximum of 24 weeks of severance pay. This
severance pay provision is comparable to Planning Director positions in other comparable
agencies. All other benefits offered are consistent with the Compensation Plan for
Management and Professional Personnel. Mr. Lait’s appointment and employment agreement
will be effective on February 16, 2019.
Resource Impact
Sufficient funding is available in the Planning Department Fiscal Year 2019 Adopted Operating
Budget for this employment agreement and no additional appropriation is required. The
ongoing costs will be incorporated into the development of the FY 2020 Operating Budget.
Policy Implications
This recommendation is consistent with existing City policies.
Attachments:
Attachment: Jonathan Lait Employment Agreement
1
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY OF PALO ALTO
AND
JONATHAN LAIT
THIS AGREEMENT is between the City of Palo Alto, a municipal corporation and chartered city
(“City”) and Jonathan Lait (“Lait”). It is effective on the latest date next to the signatures on the last
page.
This Agreement is entered into on the basis of the following facts:
A. City, acting by and through its City Manager, wishes to employ Lait as its Director of
Planning and Community Environment (“Planning Director”), subject to the terms and conditions set
forth in this Agreement, the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Charter of the City of Palo Alto (the
"Charter").
B. Under the Chapter 2.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the Planning Director is
appointed by the City Manager with the approval of the City Council. Notwithstanding any provision of
the City of Palo Alto Merit System Rules and Regulations, the Planning Director serves on an at-will basis,
with no expectation of continued employment, and with no right to pre-or post-separation due process
or appeal.
C. Lait desires to be employed by the City as its Planning Director, subject to the terms and
conditions in this Agreement, the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the Charter, the Palo Alto Merit System
Rules and Regulations, and all other applicable laws, resolutions, and policies.
D. The City and Lait wish to establish specific terms and conditions relating to
compensation and benefits and related matters.
BASED UPON THE FOREGOING, THE CITY AND LAIT AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Employment. The City appoints Lait as its Planning Director for an indefinite term to
begin on February 16, 2019 (“Employment Start Date”). Except as otherwise provided herein, Lait’s
employment with the City shall be governed by the City Council-adopted Compensation Plan for
Management and Professional Personnel and Council Appointees, as it currently exists and may be
changed from time to time.
2. Duties of the Planning Director. Lait will perform the duties established for the Planning
Director by the Palo Alto Municipal Code, by direction given by the City Manager, and as otherwise
provided by law, ordinance, or regulation. Lait agrees to comply with all federal, state and local laws,
ordinances, rules and regulations applicable to or associated with these duties.
2.1. Full Energy and Skill. Lait will devote his full energy, skill, ability, and
productive time to the performance of his duties.
2
2.2. No Conflict. Lait will not engage in any employment, activity, consulting service,
or other enterprise, for compensation or otherwise, which is actually or potentially in conflict
with or which interferes with the performance of his duties. Lait acknowledges that he is subject
to the various conflict of interest requirements found in the California Government Code and
state and local policies and regulations.
2.3 Permission Required For Outside Activities. Lait will not engage in any
employment, activity, consulting service, or other enterprise, for compensation or not, without
written permission of the City Manager.
3. Salary. While performing the duties of Planning Director, Lait will receive a base salary within
the range provided in the City Council-approved Compensation Plan for Management and Professional
Personnel and Council Appointees, as it currently exists and may be changed from time to time. Lait will
receive an initial gross base annual salary of Two Hundred Thirty Eight Thousand Three Hundred Sixty
Eight Dollars ($238,368), beginning on the Employment Start Date. This amount is subject to authorized
or required deductions and withholding, prorated and paid on City's regular paydays. Lait is an exempt
employee under applicable wage and hour law and his base salary shall be compensation for all hours
worked. The City agrees that the amount of Lait's base annual salary will not decrease, except as part of
a permanent decrease that is consistent with the Fair Labor Standards Act.
4. Benefits, Allowances and Obligations. Lait will be eligible for, and shall receive, all regular
benefits (i.e., health insurance, PERS contributions to the extent paid by the City, etc.) and vacation, sick
leave, and management leave, as are generally provided to management employees under the City
Council-approved Compensation Plan for Management and Professional Personnel and Council
Appointees, as it currently exists and may be changed from time to time. In addition, Lait will assume all
obligations and make all regular contributions (i.e., employee assumption of a portion of the employer
PERS contribution) as are generally required of management employees under the City Council-
approved Compensation Plan for Management and Professional Personnel and Council Appointees, as it
currently exists and may be changed from time to time.
5. Additional Benefits and Allowances. In addition to the benefits specified in section 4, Lait will
receive the following additional benefits and allowances:
5.1 Severance. If Lait is terminated or asked to resign, he shall, upon execution of a
release of all claims against the City, be eligible for a severance payment equivalent to twelve
(12) weeks of salary and benefits. The amount of the severance payment shall increase by four
(4) weeks, up to a maximum of twenty four (24) weeks, on February 16 of each year beginning
with February 16, 2020. No severance shall be paid if Lait is terminated for serious misconduct
involving abuse of his office or position, including, but not limited to, waste, fraud, violation of
the law under color of authority, misappropriation of public resources, violence, harassment, or
discrimination. If Lait is later convicted of a crime involving such abuse of his position, he shall
fully reimburse the City as set forth in Government Code section 53243.3.
3
5.2 Vacation Leave Upon Start of Employment. In recognition of his prior public service,
Lait will be credited with vacation leave at the rate applicable to an employee with nineteen or
more years of continuous service, currently a rate of 200 hours annually, prorated and credited
according to the City’s normal procedures. On the Employment Start Date, Lait’s vacation leave
balance will be modified to receive one-time adjustment of additional 160 hours, in addition to
the accruals noted in this paragraph.
6. Additional Expenses of Employment. The City shall pay the cost of any fidelity or other bonds
required by law for the Planning Director.
7. Duration of Employment. Lait understands and agrees that he has no constitutionally protected
property or other interest in his employment as Planning Director. Lait waives any and all rights, if any,
under the Merit System Rules and Regulations, including without limitation, the right to pre-or post-
disciplinary due process. Lait understands and agrees that he works at the will and pleasure of the City
Manager and that he may be terminated or asked to resign at any time, with or without cause. Lait may
terminate this agreement (terminating all employment) upon 30 days written notice to the City
Manager.
8. Miscellaneous.
8.1. Notices. Notices given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be
either: a) served personally; or b) sent by facsimile (provided a hard copy is mailed within one
(1) business day); or c) delivered by first-class United States mail, certified, with postage prepaid
and a return receipt requested; or d) sent by Federal Express, or some equivalent private mail
delivery service. Notices shall be deemed received at the earlier of actual receipt or three (3)
days following deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid. Notices shall be directed to
the addresses shown below, provided that a party may change such party's address for notice by
giving written notice to the other party in accordance with this subsection.
CITY: Attn: City Manager
250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301
Phone: (650) 329-2226
Fax: (650) 328-3631
LAIT: Jonathan Lait
250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301
8.2. Entire Agreement/ Amendment. This Agreement constitutes the entire
understanding and agreement between the parties as to those matters contained in it, and
supersedes any and all prior or contemporaneous agreements, representations and
understandings of the parties. This Agreement may be amended at any time by mutual
agreement of the parties, but any such amendment must be in writing, dated, and signed by the
parties and attached hereto.
4
8.3. Applicable Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be interpreted according to
the laws of the State of California. Venue of any action regarding this Agreement shall be in the
proper court in Santa Clara County.
8.4. Severability. In the event any portion of this Agreement is declared void, such
portion shall be severed from this Agreement and the remaining provisions shall remain in
effect, unless the result of such severance would be to substantially alter this Agreement or the
obligations of the parties, in which case this Agreement shall be immediately terminated.
8.5. Waiver. Any failure of a party to insist upon strict compliance with any term,
undertaking, or condition of this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of such term,
undertaking, or condition. To be effective, a waiver must be in writing, signed and dated by the
parties.
8.6. Representation by Counsel. Lait and the City acknowledge that they each did, or
had the opportunity to, consult with legal counsel of their respective choices with respect to the
matters that are the subject of this Agreement prior to executing it.
8.7. Section Headings. The headings on each of the sections and subsections of this
Agreement are for the convenience of the parties only and do not limit or expand the contents
of any such section or subsection.
LAIT
___________________________
Jonathan Lait
Date: _____________
CITY OF PALO ALTO
___________________________
City Manager
Date: _____________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
Deputy City Attorney
City of Palo Alto (ID # 9263)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 2/11/2019
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Downtown Garage 375 Hamilton Avenue
Title: PUBLIC HEARING QUASI-JUDICIAL, 375 Hamilton Avenue, Downtown
Garage [17PLN-00360]: (1) Adoption of a Resolution Certifying the Final
Environmental Impact Report and Adopting Findings and a Mitigatio n
Monitoring and Reporting Program Pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act for the Project, (2) Approval of a Record of Land Use Action
Approving Architectural Review Application [File 17PLN-00360] for a new
Five-Level, Nearly 50-Foot Tall Parking Structure with Height Exception for
Elevator and Photovoltaic Structure, With One Below Grade Parking Level
Providing 324 Public Parking Spaces and Retail Space on the City's Surface
Parking Lot Zoned Public Facilities, and (3) Approval of Contract Amendment
Number 1 to Contract C17166279 with Watry Design, Inc. in the Amount of
$352,977 and authorize the City Manager or his Designee to Execute the
Contract.
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council:
(1) Adopt a Resolution (Attachment A) certifying the Downtown Garage Project Final
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and making required findings under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), including findings related to
environmental impacts, mitigation measures and alternatives, and adopting a
mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP); and
(2) Approve a Record of Land Use Action (Attachment B) approving Architectural
Review Application [file 17PLN-00360] for a new five-level parking structure,
with one below-grade parking level, providing 324 public parking spaces and
City of Palo Alto Page 2
2,026 square feet of ground floor retail space on the City's surface parking lot
zoned Public Facilities, as recommended by the Architectural Review Board
(ARB); and
(3) Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached
Contract Amendment No. 1 to Contract C17166279 (Attachment I) with Watry
Design, Inc. for basic design services including $352,977 and $35,298 for
additional services for the New Downtown Parking Garage capital project (PE-
15007). This amendment results in a revised total contract amount of
$2,287,866.
Executive Summary:
The objectives of the Downtown Garage Project are to:
(1) increase the number of parking spaces within the downtown to maximize the
accessibility and convenience to downtown visitors and workers,
(2) include neighborhood-serving retail and street frontage that contribute to the economic
vitality of the downtown,
(3) incorporate a pedestrian- and bike-friendly layout, and
(4) create a structure that is visually appealing and compatible with the downtown
character and nearby historic buildings.
The proposed garage’s 324 parking spaces would replace the 86 existing parking spaces on the
site. The 238-space increase is to support public parking demand within the Downtown; this
number includes six parking spaces for the proposed ground floor retail space. In addition, one
parking space would be provided in the structure to serve the property at 550 Waverley
(replacing one compliant parking space on the private property). The garage would feature a
parking way-finding system to help guide people to available spaces on each floor.
The proposed building requires exceptions to the Public Facilities (PF) standards, which Council
is enabled to approve given the project context and recent PF zone text amendments. During
the ARB review process, plans were modified to increase the Hamilton setback and resulted in a
13-space reduction in the overall number of parking spaces to be provided. A three-foot
setback is proposed from the Hamilton Avenue right of way as well as provision of a wider
sidewalk and safe pedestrian access from Hamilton through the garage to a pedestrian alley.
The Draft EIR (Attachment C) (viewable here:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/65110) was circulated for
comments beginning May 18, 2018. The ARB hearing of June 21, 2018 allowed for public
testimony on the document. The ARB recommended Council approval of the project on July 19,
2018, based on the findings and approval conditions reflected in the proposed Record of Land
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Use Action (RLUA). The Final EIR Addendum (Attachment D), published August 10, 2018, is
viewable here:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=64168.64&BlobID=66312.
The Final EIR Addendum includes responses to Draft EIR public comments made by members of
the ARB; staff received no other formal comments on the DEIR.
The Downtown Garage Project documents are found at this link:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/downtowngarage. Council certification of the Final EIR is
required (via adoption of the attached Resolution) prior to Council action on the RLUA.
Mitigation Measures are contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP, incorporated with the Resolution).
Staff also seeks Council approval of a contract amendment with Watry Design, Inc. for design
services related to the Downtown Garage.
Background:
Council Input and Downtown Parking Supply and Management:
The proposed public parking garage, with auxiliary retail space, was among nine key projects
included in the 2014 Council Infrastructure Plan, which prioritized unfunded projects and
defined a funding plan for the projects. The City took steps to maximize use of existing off-
street parking facilities and address spill-over impacts into adjacent residential neighborhoods.
To reduce overall parking demand, the City established a Transportation Management
Association. These measures did not fully succeed in addressing the parking demand. The EIR
section 2.1.2 discusses the City’s monitoring of the Downtown parking supply and
management.
Staff analyzed the feasibility of constructing a parking garage on six existing surface parking lots,
and identified the two best candidates: Lots D and G. On December 12, 2016, Council approved
Lot D as the location, and approved a contract for design and environmental assessment
services. On April 3, 2017, Council provided direction for the Public Facilities (PF) zoning code
text amendment, which it then adopted on June 11, 2018. The building would be set back three
feet from the Hamilton Avenue right of way but provides a wider sidewalk and safe pedestrian
access from Hamilton through the garage to a pedestrian alley. The PF code modifications allow
Council to approve the Downtown Garage with the exceptions to development standards
including setback exceptions.
On January 22, 2018, Council discussed the potential for the use of mechanical lifts for the
Downtown Parking Garage. Council received an informational report (Staff Report #9484
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/66389) on August 27, 2018 that
Public Works staff prepared in response.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
PTC Input
On May 31, 2017, the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) conducted a meeting to
take comments on the scope of environmental review for the project. The meeting minutes are
available here: (http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/58628).
Commenters requested a study of parking demand, contextual compatibility, improvement to
pedestrian walkways, and use of new parking technologies. Concerns were expressed about
oak tree replacement, loss of natural light for adjacent property, vehicular access to the rear of
Waverley-fronting properties (Lot 84 and Lot 85) including related to future expansion,
provision of a delivery zone on Waverley Street, and loss of parking during construction.
Discussion regarding review of the project under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) is provided at the end of this report. Other than the 2017 scoping meeting and review
of the PF ordinance (Ordinance 5445) Council adopted in June 2018, the PTC did not review the
Downtown Garage (and Retail) Project.
ARB Review
The Record of Land Use Action (RLUA) captures the Architectural Review findings reviewed and
enhanced by the ARB. The ARB reviewed the most recent project description and plans
(Attachment F and G) finalized for the July 19, 2018 public hearing. The Discussion section of
this report provides additional summary of the ARB review process. Links to staff reports and
minutes are provided below:
• February 15, 2018 ARB:
o Staff report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63384
o Minutes: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/64585
• June 21, 2018 ARB:
o Staff report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/65550
o Minutes: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/66097
• July 19, 2018 ARB:
o Staff report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/65901
o Minutes: Excerpt Minutes Attached to this report (Attachment H).
Project Description, Location and Setting
The EIR Chapter 2 includes a complete description of the project. The project site has an area of
29,200 square feet (0.67 acres) and currently provides 86 existing, hourly, diagonal, surface
parking spaces with one‐way circulation, and a paid public restroom facility on the eastern
corner. The existing pavement, curbs, planters, utility items, restroom, parking lot trees, and
two driveway curb-cuts on Waverley, would be removed. The new structure, hardscaping and
landscaping, one driveway along the Hamilton Avenue frontage, and amenities would be
constructed and installed. Sidewalks would be widened on Hamilton Avenue and Waverley
Street to create a safer, more inviting pedestrian route and experience. The increased sidewalks
City of Palo Alto Page 5
would work in conjunction with road improvements on Hamilton Avenue (including removal of
the current mailbox island), and improvement of the pedestrian crossing point at the junction
with Waverley Street. Amy Landesberg has developed public art for the building, which was
approved by the Public Art Commission.
The new public parking garage would increase the number of public parking spaces by 238
spaces (a change from the 239 space increase shown in the 50% design plan set reviewed by
the ARB), and a parking way-finding system is proposed. The garage would include eight
accessible spaces, and 81 stalls (down one stall in plans developed after the ARB hearing) would
be enabled for electric vehicle charging capacity (with 17 to be installed initially). Six of the
stalls would serve the new retail area, and one stall is provided to serve 550 Waverley. None of
the spaces are proposed to utilize mechanical parking systems. The building will be designed
with infrastructure to allow for the future installation of photovoltaic (PV) panels mounted
above the top parking deck. The garage design includes substantially open sides to provide
natural ventilation for all levels except the basement level, which is mechanically ventilated.
The primary site ingress/egress is proposed on Hamilton Avenue near the south corner of the
lot. A secondary vehicular exit is proposed at Lane 21. Ingress to the garage from Lane 21 would
only be permitted in the event that the Hamilton Avenue access is restricted. Vehicle access will
be restricted in the new alley to service vehicles. The alley will be enhanced with architectural
paving, new planting, benches and lighting. Vehicle access will be restricted in the new alley to
service vehicles. A common refuse storage room is proposed at Lane 21 to serve the new retail
space on the project site and the Waverley-fronting businesses.
Requested Exceptions to PF Standards
The building will exceed the 50 foot height limit. An exception is requested for the six foot
extension of the photovoltaic (PV) structure and for the elevator volume (to the elevator
ceiling), both of which will reach a height of 56 feet above grade. The elevator mechanical
equipment (within a volume above the elevator ceiling) would reach a height of 63 feet above
grade, but in accordance with PAMC 18.40.090, does not need an exception; because the
mechanical equipment area is not habitable; it may extend up to 15 feet above the height limit
(up to 65 feet). The building will be shorter than the adjacent AT&T building, which reaches a
height of 75 feet.
The building would encroach four feet into the seven-foot special setback from the Hamilton
right of way property line, and would have a zero setback along Waverley (matching the zero
setbacks of the majority of retail buildings on the block) where the PF zone standards otherwise
require ten foot setbacks from street frontages. The new sidewalk widths will improve the
pedestrian experience adjacent to the new building.
City of Palo Alto Page 6
Discussion:
While the new Downtown Garage requires exceptions to the Public Facilities zone standards
(setbacks, height, and FAR), the design and provision of ground floor retail space along
Waverley results in a project that meets Downtown Urban Design Guide Goals, as well as the
project objectives. The RLUA provides findings for approval of the reduced setbacks, increased
floor area and height, as well as relevant Comprehensive Plan policies, with notes about related
project features; these are also cited in the EIR. While the adjacent property owner continues
to have concern about access, the Public Works staff have provided assurances described
herein.
Exceptions – Setbacks, Height, Floor Area
A zoning table (Attachment E) describes the requested setback, height and floor area
exceptions the Council is enabled to approve, given the recently modified PF zone standards
language for parking and essential service facilities.
Setbacks: The Public Facilities district states, “no yard adjoining a street shall be less than 20
feet and no interior yard shall be less than 10 feet”. However, the adjacent CD zone properties
have a zero setback requirement on Waverley and at the interior lot lines. The retail storefront
is aligned with the other storefronts along Waverley. The width of the sidewalk on Waverley,
currently about ten feet, will increase to approximately 18 feet. The sidewalk width on
Hamilton is going to increase from ten feet to 12 feet, and the Hamilton Avenue wall will be set
back three feet from the property line along Hamilton, where a seven foot ‘special setback’
would otherwise be required. The building will provide a two foot setback to the AT&T
building, a 16-foot setback from the rear property line of the Waverley-fronting properties to
the garage wall (and ten feet to the planter wall), a ten feet interior setback from the south-
facing window wall of the adjacent building (Tai Pan), and ten foot setback from the edge of the
alley fronting CVS Pharmacy.
The ARB determined that, combined with the wider sidewalk along Hamilton Avenue, the
encroachment of the building into the special setback on Hamilton Avenue was supportable.
The ARB further determined that the encroachment into the Waverley Avenue setback is
supportable, given the context. While the building is large, the design team employed measures
to reduce mass, and the design employs public art and landscaping. Public art is proposed at
the corner stair tower and above the parking entrance on Hamilton Avenue. The perforated
metal shroud at the corner stair was refined during the ARB review process into a more open,
transparent structure and the mass/apparent mass of the stair covering was reduced. Vines
would be trained to grow on cable grid to visually soften the board-formed concrete wall that
has a pattern of square penetrations or indentations. The ARB requested that the squares be
penetrations in order to allow glimpses of the post office from inside the garage.
City of Palo Alto Page 7
Height: The height of the structure proposed to support photovoltaic (PV) panels would exceed
the 50 foot height limit. The ARB supported installation of the structure for the PV panels, even
if the solar panels are not installed, noting that it “provides an elegant top, and it's important in
helping the building achieve harmonious transition and mass-scale character with the adjacent
building.”
Floor Area: The floor area ratio (FAR) for the project is 3.9:1 (based on a gross floor area of
114,048 SF), which would exceed the maximum FAR of 1:1 within the PF zone. The ARB noted
the project is “still going to look like a big garage, especially the Hamilton façade” and “the City
should expect some criticism of the bulk [but] the garage is responding to a need for parking.”
The ARB was of the opinion the changes to the design during the process really helped to
address or minimize the bulk represented by the parking garage.
The additional conditions recommended by ARB for the PV structure and shear wall
penetrations were not included in the original project scope and are expected to add
approximately $1 million to the construction cost estimate.
Pedestrian Experience
The building is proposed to be set back 10 feet from the north property line shared with 560
Waverley. Openings will allow natural ventilation into the parking garage, and light to reach the
existing windows at 560 Waverley. The pedestrian alley would provide a visual connection to All
Saints Episcopal Church, and would be visually enhanced with architectural paving, plantings,
benches and decorative lighting features. The pedestrian alley width would increase to 16 feet
at the rear of the Waverley buildings, but a planter wall restricts the clear width to ten feet.
During the ARB review process, the first floor ceiling height at the first floor of the garage was
raised to 12’-4” and the fourth floor ceiling height was reduced to keep the same overall
building height. Pedestrian experiences were improved with a small entry plaza near the 50-
bike, 702 SF bike storage room near the main vehicle. Pedestrians will be able to move through
the garage from Hamilton via a pathway through the structure to Lane 21 near CVS.
Pedestrians will find wood benches and other seating around the building. Pedestrians on the
sidewalks will also be sheltered by new street trees - two Gingko trees add to the two existing
Gingkos on the Waverley frontage, and two Gingko trees and three Oaks will be planted along
Hamilton frontage; the oaks compensate for the removal of the one protected oak tree in the
parking lot.
City Staff Conditions Requiring Resolution
The applicant has addressed the City’s Public Works Engineering (PWE) requirement for a third
party review of ‘C3’ stormwater design and claification of the easement along Hamilton
Avenue. The Urban Forester has approved the July 12, 2018 landscape drawings, as also noted
in the memo, and the UF approval conditions provide expectations for dimensions specified for
City of Palo Alto Page 8
the suspended pavement areas (width, length, depth, and volume), the type of system/product
to be used, and standard details/drawings. The applicant team is also discussing how to meet
the outstanding Utilities comments; these are also addressed in the attached memo
(Attachment J).
Downtown Urban Design Guide (Guide)
Replacement of this surface parking lot with the proposed garage and retail space supports the
Guide’s district goal to promote Hamilton Avenue as an active, mixed use district and meet the
goal for complementary outdoor amenities to offset the urban intensity, by provision of:
• 324 automobile parking spaces,
• Approximately 50 bicycle parking spaces,
• Improved pedestrian circulation around and within the garage,
• Provision of 2,026 SF of retail space,
• Additional street trees,
• Bench seating with planters along Hamilton Avenue,
• A parking guidance system that will make parking in the upper and lower garage levels
more convenient,
• Strong corner building and plaza treatment (stair covering mass was reduced in
response to ARB comments),
• Direct access to the retail space from the corner plaza and from the Waverley frontage,
• Public art and low plant material along Hamilton contribute to pedestrian friendliness.
Adjacent Property Owner Concerns
The City has responded in writing to comments made by the property owners of 550-552 and
558-560 Waverley Street. Letters were attached to the ARB reports of June 21, 2018 and July
19, 2018. The topics addressed therein included garage access for on-site parking, dedicated
parking spaces in the garage, access to clean out servicing, and aesthetics of the garage. The
City’s response noted:
• Any request for access easements would be revisited if and when applications for
redevelopment of the properties are submitted, and the formal parking space allocated
to 550 Waverley per the City’s Assessment Roll is replaced in the garage plan. The City
has offered to create a loading zone on Waverley Street for deliveries.
• The grease trap service vendor for 560 Waverley currently utilizes the public parking lot
and improperly blocks the drive aisle to service the clean outs, and the garage design
allows a typical large pump truck with a 100’ hose to park adjacent to the trash
enclosure to perform servicing operations.
• Unchanged are the 10 foot pedestrian alley width (required to allow openings for
natural ventilation into the garage and to construct the basement level) and the eight
feet long canopy lighting.
City of Palo Alto Page 9
• The elevator hoist way is designed to have clear tempered glazing to provide patrons a
better view of the historic Post Office and Hamilton Avenue streetscape.
Contract Amendment
On April 11, 2017, Council directed staff to proceed with design of a garage at existing surface
parking Lot D that should include five levels above and one level basement level (Staff Report
#7492). The contract amendment with Watry Design, Inc. includes environmental assessment,
design development packages and construction documents for the addition of a basement level
which was not included in the original contract scope. (Staff Report #7418). The scope also
includes soil testing and design of traffic signal modifications at the Hamilton Avenue/Waverley
Street intersection in coordination with construction of the new garage.
Policy Implications:
The attached Record of Land Use Action cites Comprehensive Plan Policies applicable to this
project. The recently adopted 850,000 SF cap on office and research and development space
does not impact this project. The Downtown cap set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code
18.18.040 pertains to all commercial floor area. Approximately 26,373 SF of commercial area
remains of the 1986 cap amount. This number was derived after removing ‘pipeline’ projects;
the proposed 2,026 square feet of retail space in the project has been counted as part of the
pipeline projects. Staff had recommended deletion of the Downtown cap for consistency with
the adopted Comprehensive Plan, the PTC recommended rejection of recommended
ordinance, and the matter has not been set for Council review.
Resource Impact:
As presented in the Proposed Fiscal Year 2019 Capital Budget, the total project cost for the new
Downtown Garage Project is estimated to be $29.1 million. The project cost estimate will be
updated during the Fiscal Year 2020 budget process to reflect that additional $1 million
resulting from the ARB recommendations and any other increases. Pursuant to the Council
Infrastructure Plan, the majority of funding for this project will come from the City’s Capital
Improvement Fund Infrastructure Reserve and University Avenue In-Lieu Parking Fund.
Funding for the contract amendment is available is available in CIP projects PE-15007 New
Downtown Parking Garage and PL-05030 Traffic Signal and Intelligent Transportation Systems.
The funding allocation is as follows:
Funding Source Contract Additional Services Total Encumbrance
PE-15007 $320,977 $32,098 $353,075
PL-05030 $32,000 $3,200 $35,200
Total $352,977 $35,298 $388,275
City of Palo Alto Page 10
Staff time processing the CEQA document and ARB application is subject to cost recovery.
Currently, no development impact fees are imposed upon this public project.
Timeline:
Final design and construction documents are expected to be complete at the end of 2019 with
construction starting in early 2020. Construction is expected to last 16 months.
Environmental Review:
The EIR Executive Summary provides a project overview, project objectives and approach, four
alternatives to the proposed project, and a summary of impacts with level of significance
described in a table. In 2017, a Draft Initial Study and Notice of Preparation had been circulated
to the State Clearinghouse and notice was provided under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). The Draft EIR was circulated to the State Clearinghouse for comments, with notice
provided for a public comment period extending from May 18, 2018 through July 2, 2018. The
ARB hearing of June 21, 2018 fell within the public comment period and allowed for public
testimony on the Draft EIR (Attachment C). Comments by ARB members on the Draft EIR were
addressed in the Final EIR (Attachment D).
A mitigation monitoring and reporting program was prepared for Council action in conjunction
with certification of the Final EIR. The topics with mitigation measures required are:
1. Biology: Mitigation measures address potential impacts related to nesting birds, tree
preservation and protection, tree replacement. The tree measures require the arborist report
of May 2017 to be implemented, with no net loss of canopy, and the planting of Gingkos and
Oaks along Hamilton and Waverley are part of the mitigation.
2. Cultural Resources: Mitigation measures are in regard to resource and human remains
recovery procedures, and unanticipated discovery of tribal cultural resources.
3. Geology and Soil: Mitigation measures relate to geotechnical investigation for basement
structures, and temporary basement shoring, slopes and cut, and require implementation of
the geotechnical report recommendations and best management practices.
4. Hazardous Waste and Material: One mitigation measure requires preparation and
implementation of a health and safety plan, and implementation of standard measures for
collection, transport and disposal of material if hazardous material is exposed during
construction.
5. Transportation: Three mitigation measures require a construction traffic control plan, a
vehicle queuing analysis (in the event a paid parking component with gates is implemented)
City of Palo Alto Page 11
and a parking structure access and exit safety improvement (a stop sign at the intersection of
Lane 21 and Bryant Street.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Resolution EIR AND MMRP Downtown Garage (PDF)
Exhibit 1 to Attachment A (Resolution) MMRP (PDF)
Attachment B: Record of Land Use Action (DOC)
Attachment C: Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) - online (DOCX)
Attachment D: Downtown Parking Garage Final EIR Addendum (PDF)
Attachment E: Zoning Table (DOCX)
Attachment F: Project Page and Plans Viewing Directions (DOCX)
Attachment G: Downtown Parking Garage Project Description (PDF)
Attachment H: July 19, 2018 ARB Excerpt minutes Downtown Garage Project (DOCX)
Attachment I: Watry Design Inc- C17166279 Amendment 1-Final (PDF)
Attachment J: Correspondence (PDF)
Attachment A
1
Not Yet Approved
Resolution No. ______
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Certifying the Adequacy of the Final
Environmental Impact Report for the Downtown Parking Garage Project at 375 Hamilton
Avenue, Making Certain Findings Concerning Significant Environmental Impacts and Mitigation
Measures, and Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, All Pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act
RECITALS
A. The City of Palo Alto (“City”) has proposed the Downtown Parking Garage Project,
comprised of a multi-level parking garage with ground floor retail space, on a City
surface parking lot at 375 Hamilton Avenue in the Downtown commercial area in Palo
Alto (the “Project”).
B. Approval of the Project would constitute a project under the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, together with related state and local
implementation guidelines promulgated thereunder (“CEQA”).
C. The City is the Lead Agency pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21067 as it has
the principal responsibility to approve and regulate the Project.
D. The City, in compliance with CEQA, prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to
provide an assessment of the potential environmental consequences of approving and
constructing the Project and approving associated zoning code amendments.
E. A Draft Environmental Impact Report (“Draft EIR”) was circulated for public review from
May 18, 2018, through July 2, 2018, during which time the City held a public hearing to
receive comments on the Draft EIR by the City’s Architectural Review Board (ARB) on
June 21, 2018.
F. The City considered the comments received during the Draft EIR public review period
and prepared a Final Environmental Impact Report (“Final EIR”). The Final
Environmental Impact Report is comprised of the Draft EIR, together with the Final
Environmental Impact Report (Addendum) published on August 10, 2018 (collectively,
all of said documents are referred to herein as the “EIR”).
G. The Council is the decision-making body for approval of the proposed Project.
H. CEQA requires that in connection with approval of a project for which an environmental
impact report has been prepared that identifies one or more significant environmental
effects of the project, the decision-making body of a public agency make certain findings
Attachment A
2
regarding those effects.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Certification and General Findings
The City Council, in the exercise of its independent judgment, makes and adopts the following
findings to comply with the requirements of CEQA, including Sections 15091, 15092, and 15093
of the CEQA Guidelines, based upon the entire record of proceedings for the Project. All
statements set forth in this Resolution constitute formal findings of the City Council, including
the statements set forth in this paragraph and in the recitals above.
1. The City Council was presented with, and has independently reviewed and analyzed the
EIR and other information in the record and has considered the information contained
therein prior to acting upon and approving the Project, and bases the findings stated
below on such review.
2. The EIR provides an adequate basis for considering and acting upon the Project. The City
Council has considered all of the evidence and arguments presented during
consideration of the Project and the EIR. In determining whether the Project may have a
significant impact on the environment, and in adopting the findings set forth herein, the
City Council certifies that it has complied with Public Resources Code Sections 21081,
21081.5, and 21082.2.
3. The City Council agrees with the characterization of the EIR with respect to all impacts
initially identified as “less than significant” and finds that those impacts have been
described accurately and are less than significant as so described in the EIR. This finding
does not apply to impacts identified as significant or potentially significant that are
reduced to a less than significant level by mitigation measures included in the EIR. The
disposition of each of those impacts and the mitigation measures adopted to reduce
them are addressed specifically in the findings below.
4. Mitigation measures associated with the potentially significant impacts of the Project
will be implemented through the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
described below, which is the responsibility of the City.
5. The EIR considers a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives, sufficient to
foster informed decision making, public participation and a reasoned choice, in
accordance with CEQA.
6. The Final EIR contains responses to comments received on the Draft EIR. The Final EIR
also contains corrections and clarifications to the text and analysis of the Draft EIR
where warranted. The City Council does hereby find that such changes and additional
information are not significant new information under CEQA because such changes and
additional information do not indicate that any of the following would result from
approval and implementation of the Project: (i) any new significant environmental
Attachment A
3
impact or substantially more severe environmental impact (not already disclosed and
evaluated in the DEIR), (ii) any feasible mitigation measure considerably different from
those analyzed in the Draft EIR that would lessen a significant environmental impact of
the Project has been proposed and would not be implemented, or (iii) any feasible
alternative considerably different from those analyzed in the DEIR that would lessen a
significant environmental impact of the Project has been proposed and would not be
implemented. The City Council does find and determine that recirculation of the Final
EIR for further public review and comment is not warranted or required under the
provisions of CEQA.
7. The City Council does hereby find and certify that the EIR has been prepared and
completed in compliance with CEQA and reflects the City of Palo Alto’s independent
judgment and analysis.
8. The City Council does hereby make the following findings with respect to significant
effects on the environment of the Project, as identified in the EIR, with the
understanding that all of the information in this Resolution is intended as a summary of
the full administrative record supporting the EIR, which full administrative record should
be consulted for the full details supporting these findings.
SECTION 2. Findings on Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the City
Council hereby makes these findings with respect to the potential for significant environmental
impacts from approval and implementation of the Project and the means for mitigating those
impacts.
These findings do not attempt to describe the full analysis of each environmental impact
contained in the EIR. Instead, the findings provide a summary description of each impact,
describe the applicable mitigation measures identified in the EIR and adopted by the City, and
state the findings on the significance of each impact after imposition of the adopted mitigation
measures. A full explanation of these environmental findings and conclusions can be found in
the EIR. These findings hereby incorporate by reference the discussion and analysis in the EIR
that support the EIR's determinations regarding significant project impacts and mitigation
measures designed to address those impacts. The facts supporting these findings are found in
the record as a whole for the Project.
In making these findings, the City ratifies, adopts, and incorporates into these findings the
analysis and explanation in the EIR, and ratifies, adopts, and incorporates into these findings
the determinations and conclusions of the EIR relating to environmental impacts and mitigation
measures, except to the extent that any such determinations and conclusions are specifically
and expressly modified by these findings.
The EIR identified a number of significant and potentially significant environmental impacts that
the Project will cause or to which the Project would contribute. All of these significant effects
Attachment A
4
can be fully addressed and reduced to less than significant through the adoption and
implementation of standard project requirements incorporated as part of the Project and
feasible mitigation measures. Those impacts, along with the standard project requirements and
mitigation measures to reduce them to less than significant, are listed below as referenced in
the EIR.
Biological Resources
Impact BIO-d: Potential Impacts on Nesting Birds. The project could interfere substantially
with the movement of a native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established
native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in Section
3.3.3.2.d of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measure will be adopted and will be
implemented as provided in the MMRP, and as further described in the remainder of
these findings:
MM BIO-1 Nesting Bird Surveys and Avoidance. Construction of the project and any
other site disturbing activities that would involve vegetation or tree removal, shall be
prohibited during the general avian nesting season (February 1 to August 31), if feasible.
If nesting season avoidance is not feasible, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist,
as approved by the City of Palo Alto, to conduct a preconstruction nesting bird survey to
determine the presence/absence, location, and activity status of any active nests on or
adjacent to the project site. The extent of the survey buffer area surrounding the site
shall be established by the qualified biologist to ensure that direct and indirect effects to
nesting birds are avoided. To avoid the destruction of active nests and to protect the
reproductive success of birds protected by the MBTA and CFGC, nesting bird surveys
shall be performed not more than 14 days prior to scheduled vegetation clearance and
structure demolition. In the event that active nests are discovered, a suitable buffer
(typically a minimum buffer of 50 feet for passerines and a minimum buffer of 250 feet
for raptors) shall be established around such active nests and no construction shall be
allowed within the buffer areas until a qualified biologist has determined that the nest is
no longer active (i.e., the nestlings have fledged and are no longer reliant on the nest).
No ground disturbing activities shall occur within this buffer until the qualified biologist
has confirmed that breeding/nesting is completed and the young have fledged the nest.
Nesting bird surveys are not required for construction activities occurring between
August 31 and February 1.
c) Finding and Rationale. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
identified in the EIR. The only wildlife that is anticipated to be present within the project
area is wildlife associated with the built urban environment such as rodents, other small
Attachment A
5
animals, and native and migratory birds. These small animals are not restricted by the
type of developments in the project area. Tree removal activities have the potential to
disturb resident and migratory birds resulting in a short-term reduction in potential
nesting and foraging habitat as well as directly destroying active nests; however, it is
anticipated that resident and migratory bird species would resume nesting and foraging
behavior once the construction is complete, and would utilize existing nearby nesting
and foraging habitat during construction. With implementation of MM BIO-1, the
project would have a less than significant impact on these wildlife species and their
movements in the area.
d) Remaining Impact. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 specified above would reduce all
potential impacts to less than significant.
Impact BIO-e: Conflict with Tree Preservation Policy/Protected Trees. One of the existing
trees, of the species Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia), is protected under the City of Palo Alto’s
Tree Regulations. Although it is designated as a protected tree, this tree will be removed from
the site due to previous imprecise pruning leaving it in poor condition and with the potential for
breakage. Thus the project could conflict with a local policy or ordinance protecting biological
resources, such as the tree preservation policy or ordinance, if the protected tree is not
replaced.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in Section
3.3.3.2.e of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures will be adopted and will be
implemented as provided in the MMRP, and as further described in the remainder of
these findings.
MM BIO-2 Tree Preservation and Protection Plan. To avoid disturbance and injury to
onsite trees, the recommendations for tree preservation in the Arborist Report dated
May 2017 shall be implemented. These recommendations include, but are not limited
to, tree protection fencing to enclose as much of the TPZ as feasible around City trees
on the sidewalks, no grading encroachments closer than 6 inches to the tree trunk
diameter, and periodic inspections by the Site Arborist during construction activities.
MM BIO-3 Tree Replacement. The removal of protected Coast Live Oak tree (Tree #8 in
the Arborist Report prepared for the project) is subject to the City of Palo Alto’s tree
removal ordinance in Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 8.10. Trees removed will be
replaced according to replacement tree mitigation measures using the Tree Canopy
Replacement Standard in the City’s Tree Technical Manual, Section 3.00. The
replacement standards outlined in the Tree Technical Manual will be utilized to achieve
no net loss of canopy per Policy 1.G of the Urban Forest Master Plan; specifically, three
native oaks will be planted in the Hamilton Avenue right of way at the project site. Site
preparation and soil volume requirements shall apply so that newly planted trees have
Attachment A
6
the potential to mature to desired size and thrive.
c) Finding and Rationale. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
identified in the EIR. Implementation of MM BIO-2 and MM BIO-3 to protect, preserve,
and replace trees, the project would not contribute to cumulative adverse impacts.
Therefore, impacts under this criterion would be less than significant with mitigation
incorporated. As a replacement, three new trees will be planted on site. The City’s
Urban Forester has determined that the planting of three native oaks in the Hamilton
Avenue right of way at the project site is appropriate as mitigation to replace the loss of
the one Coast Live Oak on site, subject to the standard requirement to provide
adequate soil conditions to ensure the replacement trees will thrive. A total of nine
trees would be planted on the project site as part of the landscaping plan. There will be
no net loss of trees.
d) Remaining Impact. Mitigation measure BIO-2 and BIO-3 specified above would
reduce all potential impacts to less than significant.
Cultural, Paleontological, and Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact CTR-c: Eliminate Important Examples of California History or Prehistory.
Impact CTR-d: Adverse Change in the Significance of an Archeological Resource.
Impact CTR-e: Disturb Human Remains.
Impact CTR-f: Destroy Paleontological Resource.
Due to excavation of a significant depth being a necessity to construct the basement of the
project, there is a potential to disrupt, alter, or eliminate undiscovered archeological resources
including those of human remains.
a) Potential Impact. The impacts identified above are described and discussed in Section
3.4.3.2.c, d, e, and f of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures will be adopted and will be
implemented as provided in the MMRP, and as further described in the remainder of
these findings.
MM CTR-1 Resource Recovery Procedures. In the event that archaeological or
paleontological resources are unearthed during project construction, all earth disturbing
work within the vicinity of the find must be temporarily suspended or redirected until an
archaeologist or paleontologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find.
After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. A Native
American representative shall be retained to monitor any mitigation work associated
with Native American cultural material.
MM CTR-2 Human Remains Recovery Procedures. If human remains are unearthed,
Attachment A
7
State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall
occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to the origin and
disposition pursuant to the Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are
determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the
Native American Heritage Commission. Additional surveys will be required if the project
changes to include unsurveyed areas.
c) Finding and Rationale: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
identified in the EIR. Mitigation Measures CTR-1 and CTR-2 would reduce impacts to less
than significant regarding disrupting intact archaeological resources, paleontological
resources, and human remains to a less than significant level.
d) Remaining Impact: Mitigation Measures CTR-1 and CTR-2 specified above would
reduce all potential impacts to less than significant.
Impact CTR-g: Tribal Resources. Although no tribal cultural resources are expected to be
present on-site, new ground disturbance would be below the level of past disturbance. As a
result, there is the possibility of encountering undisturbed subsurface tribal cultural resources.
The proposed excavation of the project site could potentially result in adverse effects on
unanticipated tribal cultural resources.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in Section
3.4.3.2.g of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures will be adopted and will be
implemented as provided in the MMRP, and as further described in the remainder of
these findings.
MM CTR-3 Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources. If cultural resources of
Native American origin are identified during construction, all earth disturbing work
within the vicinity of the find must be temporarily suspended or redirected until an
archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find and an appropriate
Native American representative, based on the nature of the find, is consulted. If the City
determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under
CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state
guidelines and in consultation with Native American groups. The plan would include
avoidance of the resource or, if avoidance of the resource is infeasible, the plan would
outline the appropriate treatment of the resource in coordination with the archeologist
and the appropriate Native American tribal representative.
c) Finding and Rationale: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
identified in the EIR. Mitigation Measure CTR-3 would be would reduce impacts from
Attachment A
8
the unanticipated discovery of tribal cultural resources during construction to less than
significant with MM CTR-3.
d) Remaining Impact: Mitigation Measure CTR-3 specified above would reduce all
potential impacts to less than significant.
Geology and Soils
Impact GEO-b: Seismic Ground Shaking, Seismic-Related Ground Failure, including
Liquefaction. Development of the proposed project would involve the construction and
occupancy of a new building in a location where strong seismic ground shaking can be expected
to occur over the life of the project. In addition, the northern part of the project site is located
within a State designated Liquefaction Hazard Zone as well as Santa Clara County Liquefaction
Hazard Zone. The project would thus expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving strong seismic ground
shaking or seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in Section
3.5.3.2.b of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures will be adopted and will be
implemented as provided in the MMRP, and as further described in the remainder of
these findings.
MM GEO-1 Geotechnical Investigation for Basement Structure. Building foundations
shall be designed to tolerate total and differential settlements due to static loads and
liquefaction-induced settlement in accordance with the recommendations of the
geotechnical report. The current geotechnical report includes recommendation for a no-
basement building only. The project sponsor shall retain the service of a qualified state
licensed engineering and geology specialist to include site-specific recommendations to
mitigate the potential for risks associated with seismic ground shaking, seismic-related
ground failure and liquefaction for the foundation of a building with basement. The
updated report shall include design requirements for the construction of the foundation
for the basement option.
c) Finding and Rationale. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
identified in the EIR. With implementation of MM GEO-1, the construction of the
proposed project would not expose people or structures to adverse effects involving
strong seismic ground shaking. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant
with mitigation incorporated.
d) Remaining Impact. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 specified above would reduce all
potential impacts to less than significant.
Attachment A
9
Impact GEO-c: Landslides. The construction of the proposed project would require excavation
and fill placement, there would be some potential for constructed (cut and fill) slopes to fail if
they are improperly designed or constructed. The excavation of the project site for the
basement level of the building would increase the exposure of onsite construction workers to
hazards associated with slope failure.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in Section
3.5.3.2.c of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures will be adopted and will be
implemented as provided in the MMRP, and as further described in the remainder of
these findings.
MM GEO-2 Temporary Shoring, Slopes and Cut. The project sponsor’s contractor is
responsible for maintaining all temporary slopes and providing temporary shoring
where required. Temporary shoring, bracing and cuts/fills shall be performed in
accordance with the strictest government safety standards. Excavation during site
demolition and fill removal should be sloped at 3:1 (horizontal: vertical) within the
upper 5 feet. For excavation extending more than 5 feet below building subgrade,
excavations shall be sloped in accordance with the OSHA soil classification. The
contractor is responsible for selecting the shoring method according to their judgment
and experience considering adjacent improvements such as foundation loads, utilities
and pavement. The qualified state licensed engineering and geology specialist in charge
of the geotechnical report shall review the shoring design prior to implementation.
Recommendations of the geotechnical report for temporary shoring are soldier beams
and tie-backs, braced excavation, or other potential methods. The contractor is
responsible or using best management practices to maintain all temporary slopes and
providing temporary shoring where required.
c) Finding and Rationale. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
identified in the EIR. With implementation of the Mitigation Measure GEO-2, the
construction of the proposed project would not expose people or structures to adverse
effects involving strong seismic ground shaking. The geotechnical report prepared for
the project includes site-specific design requirements to mitigate the potential for risks
associated with landslide during construction. Therefore, the impacts would be less
than significant with mitigation incorporated.
d) Remaining Impact. Mitigation Measure GEO-2 specified above would reduce all
potential impacts to less than significant.
Hazardous Waste and Materials
Attachment A
10
Impact HAZ-d: Hazardous Materials Contamination. There is possibility that some construction
activities such as ground disturbance from excavation may come into contact with
contamination that has migrated from other sites.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in Section
3.7.3.2.d of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures will be adopted and will be
implemented as provided in the MMRP, and as further described in the remainder of
these findings.
MM HAZ-1 Health and Safety Plan. The City as project sponsor will implement the
following standard measures to avoid and minimize impacts from hazardous material to
construction workers and the general public during construction: 1) In the event of
exposing hazardous material during construction, the City will implement standard
measures required by the federal, state, and local regulations for the collection,
transport, and disposal of the material to prevent the exposure of workers and the
public to such material; 2) The City will require the contractor to prepare and
implement a Health and Safety Plan that includes a Hazardous Materials Management
and Spill Prevention and Control Plan prior to commencement of construction. The plan
will include the project-specific related hazardous materials and waste operations.
c) Finding and Rationale. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
identified in the EIR. With implementation of MM HAZ-1, the proposed project would
not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment from existing hazardous
materials contamination. Because any contaminated soil or groundwater, if
encountered, would be properly disposed of, there would be no impact to future users
of the site. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation
incorporated.
d) Remaining Impact. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 specified above would reduce all
potential impacts to less than significant.
Transportation
Impact TRA-a: Conflict with Plan, Ordinance, Policy – Circulation. Implementation of the
project could conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of
effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. Construction activities would
generate construction-related truck and employee trips that could create a temporary increase
in localized traffic. Also, if the City implements paid parking at the parking structure, gates
would be required which could slow the flow of the traffic resulting in vehicle queuing on to
Hamilton Avenue.
Attachment A
11
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in Section
3.12.4.2.a of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures will be adopted and will be
implemented as provided in the MMRP, and as further described in the remainder of
these findings.
MM TR-1 Construction Traffic Control Plan. Prior to the excavation, the construction
contractor shall develop the traffic control plan in accordance with City’s policies,
coordinate with VTA and submit for City approval. The plan shall be implemented
throughout the course of the project construction and shall include, but not limited to,
the following elements:
• Limit truck access to the project site during peak commute times (7:00 A.M. to 9:00
A.M. and 4:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M.)
• Restrict construction truck routes to truck routes designated by the City
• Contractor will provide adequate parking or carpool strategy for construction
employees near the construction site, as approved by the City
• Require traffic control in the project entrance driveway, including flag persons
wearing bright orange or red vests and using “Stop/Slow” Paddle to control
oncoming traffic
• Coordinate with VTA to temporarily relocate the bus stop to ensure minimal impacts
during sidewalk closure, if needed
• Maintain bicycle and pedestrian access and circulation during project construction. If
construction encroaches on a sidewalk, a safe detour will be provided for pedestrian
at the nearest crosswalk
• Repair or restore the road right-of-way to its original condition or better upon
completion of the work
• Provide access for emergency vehicles at all time
MM TR-2 Vehicle Queuing Analysis. In the event the project includes a paid parking
component and, therefore, includes a parking gate, the project sponsor must prepare
and submit a queuing study that shows, to the satisfaction of the Transportation
Division, that queuing into Hamilton Avenue would be avoided. Queuing includes a line
of two or more vehicles waiting to enter the structure, which could block traffic on
Hamilton. The study will consider the configuration and the anticipated volume of
vehicles accessing the parking garage during the peak hour. The provisional gates must
process vehicles efficiently such that vehicles do not have to wait to turn into the
parking facility.
c) Finding and Rationale. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
identified in the EIR. Incorporation of Mitigation Measures TR-1 and TR-2 would ensure
Attachment A
12
that the project would not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system.
Implementation of MM TR-1 Traffic Control Plan would reduce the potential of traffic
disruption to less than significant. During the operation of the parking structure, several
measures would be implemented to optimize the operation of the parking structure and
avoid vehicles queuing on Hamilton Avenue. At this time, the City has not decided
whether the parking structure would be a paid parking structure; if paid parking is
implemented, gates would be required and could slow the flow of the traffic into the
garage. Implementation of MM TR-2 would ensure that queues from the parking garage
do not back up onto Hamilton Avenue. For these reasons, the project would have a less
than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
d) Remaining Impact. Mitigation Measures TR-1 and TR-2 specified above would reduce
all potential impacts to less than significant.
Impact TRA-e: Emergency Access Impact. There could be a temporary impact to emergency
access at the project site during construction.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in Section
3.12.4.2.e of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measure will be adopted and will be
implemented as provided in the MMRP, and as further described in the remainder of
these findings.
MM TR-1 Construction Traffic Control Plan. Prior to the excavation, the construction
contractor shall develop the traffic control plan in accordance with City’s policies,
coordinate with VTA and submit for City approval. The plan shall be implemented
throughout the course of the project construction and shall include, but not limited to,
the following elements:
• Limit truck access to the project site during peak commute times (7:00 A.M. to 9:00
A.M. and 4:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M.)
• Restrict construction truck routes to truck routes designated by the City
• Contractor will provide adequate parking or carpool strategy for construction
employees near the construction site, as approved by the City
• Require traffic control in the project entrance driveway, including flag persons
wearing bright orange or red vests and using “Stop/Slow” Paddle to control
oncoming traffic
• Coordinate with VTA to temporarily relocate the bus stop to ensure minimal impacts
during sidewalk closure, if needed
• Maintain bicycle and pedestrian access and circulation during project construction. If
construction encroaches on a sidewalk, a safe detour will be provided for pedestrian
at the nearest crosswalk
Attachment A
13
• Repair or restore the road right-of-way to its original condition or better upon
completion of the work
• Provide access for emergency vehicles at all time
c) Finding and Rationale. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
identified in the EIR. Incorporation of Mitigation Measures TR-1 would ensure that the
project would not result in inadequate emergency access. Therefore, the project would
have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
d) Remaining Impact. Mitigation Measures TR-1 specified above would reduce all
potential impacts to less than significant.
Impact TRA-f: Conflict With Policies, Plans, Programs or Decrease Performance Or Safety for
Public Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrians. The project could conflict with adopted policies, plans,
or program regarding public transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities or decrease their
performance. The project could involve a temporary closure of the sidewalk on Hamilton
Avenue or Waverley Street and a bus stop on Hamilton Avenue in front of the project site.
Furthermore, entries and exits of trucks and heavy constructions vehicles from the project site
in the downtown area could impact the bicyclists and the pedestrians.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in Section
3.12.4.2.f of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures will be adopted and will be
implemented as provided in the MMRP, and as further described in the remainder of
these findings.
MM TR-1 Construction Traffic Control Plan. See above.
MM TR-3 Parking Structure Access and Exit Safety Improvement. The following
improvement shall be implemented to improve safety in accessing and exiting the
proposed parking structure: The City will install a stop sign at the intersection of Lane
21 and Bryant Street.
c) Finding and Rationale. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
identified in the EIR. With the implementation of MM TR-1 and MM TR-3, the proposed
project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or program regarding public
transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities or decrease their performance. Therefore, the
project would have less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
d) Remaining Impact. Mitigation Measures TR-1 and TR-3 specified above would reduce
all potential impacts to less than significant.
Attachment A
14
SECTION 3. Project Alternatives
Public Resources Code section 21002 prohibits a public agency from approving a project if there
are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially
lessen the significant environmental effects of the project. When a lead agency finds, even after
the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, that a project will still cause one or more
significant environmental effects that cannot be substantially lessened or avoided, it must, prior
to approving the project as mitigated, first determine whether there are any project
alternatives that are feasible and that would substantially lessen or avoid the project's
significant impacts.
Because all of the Project’s impacts are being mitigated through the adoption of mitigation
measures described above, and because the Project will thus not result in any significant
environmental effects, the City Council finds that there is no need to further consider the
feasibility of any of the alternatives identified in the Final EIR.
SECTION 4. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(a) CEQA requires the lead agency approving a project to adopt a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the changes made to the project
that it has adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the
environment. An MMRP has been prepared and is recommended for adoption
by the City Council concurrently with the adoption of these findings to ensure
compliance with standard project requirements incorporated as part of the
project and mitigation measures during Project implementation. As required by
Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the MMRP designates responsibility and
anticipated timing for the implementation of the mitigation measures
recommended in the Final EIR. The MMRP will remain available for public review
during the compliance period.
(b) The City Council hereby adopts the MMRP for the Project attached hereto as
Exhibit A and incorporated by reference, and finds, determines, and declares
that the adoption of the MMRP will ensure enforcement and continued
imposition of the mitigation measures recommended in the Final EIR, and set
forth in the MMRP, in order to mitigate or avoid significant impacts on the
environment.
/ /
/ /
/ /
Attachment A
15
SECTION 5. Location and Custodian of Records
The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which the City
Council based the foregoing findings and approval of the Project are located at the Department
of Planning and Community Environment, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301. The
official custodian of the record is the Planning Director at the same address.
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
ABSTENTIONS: 0
ATTEST: APPROVED:
__________________________ _____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
__________________________ _____________________________
Assistant City Attorney City Manager
_____________________________
Director of Public Works
_____________________________
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
EXHIBIT A
DOWNTOWN PARKING GARAGE (375 Hamilton Avenue)
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
The environmental mitigation measures listed in column two below have been incorporated into the conditions of approval for the Palo Alto Public Safety Building and California Avenue Parking Garage in order to mitigate identified environmental impacts. A completed and signed chart will
indicate that each mitigation requirement has been complied with, and that City and state monitoring requirements have been fulfilled with respect to Public Resources Code section 21081.6.
Environmental Impact Mitigation Measure Responsible for
Implementation
Responsible for Monitoring
and Verification Timing Requirements Verification
Signature
Verification
Date
Topic 3 – Biological Resources
BIO-d: Potential Impacts on Nesting Birds
The project could interfere substantially with
the movement of a native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites.
MM BIO-1 Nesting Bird Surveys and Avoidance
Construction of the project and any other site disturbing activities
that would involve vegetation or tree removal, shall be prohibited
during the general avian nesting season (February 1 to August
31), if feasible. If nesting season avoidance is not feasible, the City
of Palo Alto, as the project sponsor, shall retain a qualified
biologist, to conduct a preconstruction nesting bird survey to
determine the presence/absence, location, and activity status of
any active nests on or adjacent to the project site.
The extent of the survey buffer area surrounding the site shall be
established by the qualified biologist to ensure that direct and
indirect effects to nesting birds are avoided. To avoid the
destruction of active nests and to protect the reproductive
success of birds protected by the MBTA and CFGC, nesting bird
surveys shall be performed not more than 14 days prior to
scheduled vegetation clearance and structure demolition. In the
event that active nests are discovered, a suitable buffer (typically
a minimum buffer of 50 feet for passerines and a minimum buffer
of 250 feet for raptors) shall be established around such active
nests and no construction shall be allowed within the buffer areas
until a qualified biologist has determined that the nest is no
longer active (i.e., the nestlings have fledged and are no longer
reliant on the nest). No ground disturbing activities shall occur
within this buffer until the qualified biologist has confirmed that
breeding/nesting is completed and the young have fledged the
nest. Nesting bird surveys are not required for construction
activities occurring between August 31 and February 1.
City of Palo Alto Director of
Public Works, and the City’s
construction contractor
City of Palo Alto Director of
Planning and Community
Environment
Qualified biologist shall be
retained prior to any grading
and excavation. Nesting bird
surveys shall be performed
not more than 14 days prior
to scheduled vegetation
clearance and structure
demolition.
Nesting season is between
February 1 to August 31.
On-going monitoring during
construction activities.
BIO-e: Conflict with Tree Preservation Policy
and Protected Trees
One of the existing trees, of the species Coast
Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia), is protected
under the City of Palo Alto’s Tree Regulations.
Although it is designated as a protected tree,
this tree will be removed from the site due to
previous imprecise pruning leaving it in poor
condition and with the potential for breakage.
MM BIO-2 Tree Preservation and Protection Plan
To avoid disturbance and injury to onsite trees, the
recommendations for tree preservation in the Arborist Report
dated May 2017 shall be implemented. These recommendations
include, but are not limited to, tree protection fencing to enclose
as much of the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) as feasible around City
trees on the sidewalks, no grading encroachments closer than 6
inches to the tree trunk diameter, and periodic inspections by the
Site Arborist during construction activities.
City of Palo Alto Director of
Public Works, and the City’s
construction contractor
City of Palo Alto Director of
Planning and Community
Environment in consultation
with the City arborist
Prior to construction.
On-going during
construction activities.
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
2
Thus the project could conflict with a local
policy or ordinance protecting biological
resources, such as the tree preservation policy
or ordinance, if the protected tree is not
replaced.
MM BIO-3 Tree Replacement
The removal of protected Coast Live Oak tree (Tree #8 in the
Arborist Report prepared for the project) is subject to the City of
Palo Alto’s tree removal ordinance in Palo Alto Municipal Code
Chapter 8.10. Trees removed will be replaced according to
replacement tree mitigation measures using the Tree Canopy
Replacement Standard in the City’s Tree Technical Manual,
Section 3.00. The replacement standards outlined in the Tree
Technical Manual will be utilized to achieve no net loss of canopy
per Policy 1.G of the Urban Forest Master Plan; specifically, three
native oaks will be planted in the Hamilton Avenue right of way at
the project site. Site preparation and soil volume requirements
shall apply so that newly planted trees have the potential to
mature to desired size and thrive.
City of Palo Alto Director of
Public Works, and the City’s
construction contractor
City of Palo Alto Director of
Planning and Community
Environment in consultation
with the City landscape
architect and arborist
Prior to construction as part
of the landscape
architecture drawing.
Post construction.
Topic 4 – Cultural, Paleontological and Tribal Cultural Resources
CTR-c: Eliminate Important Examples of
California History or Prehistory
CTR-d: Adverse Change in the Significance of
an Archeological Resource
CTR-f: Destroy Paleontological Resource
Due to excavation of a significant depth being
a necessity to construct the basement of the
project, there is a potential to disrupt, alter, or
eliminate undiscovered archeological
resources including those of human remains.
There are no known paleontological resources
or unique geologic features in the project site.
MM CTR-1 Resource Recovery Procedures
In the event that archaeological or paleontological resources are
unearthed during project construction, all earth disturbing work
within the vicinity of the find must be temporarily suspended or
redirected until an archaeologist or paleontologist has evaluated
the nature and significance of the find. After the find has been
appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. A Native
American representative shall be retained to monitor any
mitigation work associated with Native American cultural
material.
City of Palo Alto Director of
Public Works
City of Palo Alto Director of
Planning and Community
Environment
Upon discovery of
archeological or
paleontological site and for
the duration of soil-
disturbing activities.
CTR-c: Eliminate Important Examples of
California History or Prehistory
CTR-d: Adverse Change in the Significance of
an Archeological Resource
CTR-e: Disturb Human Remains
CTR-f: Destroy Paleontological Resource
Due to excavation of a significant depth being
a necessity to construct the basement of the
project, there is a potential to disrupt, alter, or
eliminate undiscovered archeological
resources including those of human remains.
MM CTR-2 Human Remains Recovery Procedures
If human remains are unearthed, State Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur
until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to
the origin and disposition pursuant to the Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native
American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native
American Heritage Commission. Additional surveys will be
required if the project changes to include un-surveyed areas.
City of Palo Alto Director of
Public Works, and the City’s
construction contractor
City of Palo Alto Director of
Planning and Community
Environment
Upon discovery of human
remains and for the
duration of soil-disturbing
activities.
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
3
CTR-g: Tribal Resources
Although no tribal cultural resources are
expected to be present on-site, new ground
disturbance would be below the level of past
disturbance. As a result, there is the possibility
of encountering undisturbed subsurface tribal
cultural resources. The proposed excavation of
the project site could potentially result in
adverse effects on unanticipated tribal cultural
resources.
MM CTR-3 Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources
If cultural resources of Native American origin are identified
during construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity
of the find must be temporarily suspended or redirected until an
archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the
find and an appropriate Native American representative, based
on the nature of the find, is consulted.
If the City determines that the resource is a tribal cultural
resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall
be prepared and implemented in accordance with state
guidelines and in consultation with Native American groups. The
plan would include avoidance of the resource or, if avoidance of
the resource is infeasible, the plan would outline the appropriate
treatment of the resource in coordination with the archeologist
and the appropriate Native American tribal representative.
City of Palo Alto Director of
Public Works, and the City’s
construction contractor
City of Palo Alto Director of
Planning and Community
Environment
Upon discovery of tribal
cultural resources and for
the duration of soil-
disturbing activities.
Topic 6 – Geology and Soils
GEO-b: Seismic Ground Shaking, Seismic-
Related Ground Failure, including
Liquefaction
Development of the proposed project would
involve the construction and occupancy of a
new building in a location where strong
seismic ground shaking can be expected to
occur over the life of the project. In addition,
the northern part of the project site is located
within a State designated Liquefaction Hazard
Zone as well as Santa Clara County
Liquefaction Hazard Zone. The project would
thus expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury or death involving strong seismic
ground shaking or seismic-related ground
failure, including liquefaction.
MM GEO-1 Geotechnical Recommendation for Basement
Structure
Building foundations shall be designed to tolerate total and
differential settlements due to static loads and liquefaction-
induced settlement. The current geotechnical report includes
recommendation for a no-basement building only.
• The project sponsor shall retain the service of a qualified
state licensed engineering and geology specialist to
include site-specific recommendation to mitigate the
potential for risks associated with seismic ground
shaking, seismic-related ground failure and liquefaction
for the foundation of a building with basement. The
updated report shall include design requirements for the
construction of the foundation for the basement option.
• Foundation recommendations for a structure with
basement will be dependent on the final basement depth
due to various affects from groundwater, liquefaction,
and other soil conditions at the bottom of the proposed
basement depth.
City of Palo Alto Director of
Public Works, and the City’s
construction contractor
City of Palo Alto Director of
Planning and Community
Environment
Prior to beginning of the
construction.
GEO-c: Landslides
The construction of the proposed project
would require excavation and fill placement,
there would be some potential for
constructed (cut and fill) slopes to fail if there
are improperly designed or constructed. The
MM GEO-2 Temporary Shoring, Slopes and Cut
The project sponsor’s contractor is responsible for maintaining all
temporary slopes and providing temporary shoring where
required. Temporary shoring, bracing and cuts/fills shall be
performed in accordance with the strictest government safety
standards. Excavation during site demolition and fill removal
City of Palo Alto Director of
Public Works, and the City’s
construction contractor
City of Palo Alto Director of
Planning and Community
Environment
The qualified state licensed
engineering and geology
specialist in charge of the
Prior to beginning of the
excavation.
On-going during excavation
and soil disturbance
activities.
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
4
excavation of the project site for the
basement level of the building would increase
the exposure of onsite construction workers
to hazards associated with slope failure.
should be sloped at 3:1 (horizontal: vertical) within the upper 5
feet. For excavation extending more than 5 feet below building
subgrade, excavations shall be sloped in accordance with the
OSHA soil classification.
The contractor is responsible for selecting the shoring method
according to their judgment and experience considering adjacent
improvements such as foundation loads, utilities and pavement.
The qualified state licensed engineering and geology specialist in
charge of the geotechnical report shall review the shoring design
prior to implementation. Recommendations of the geotechnical
report for temporary shoring are soldier beams and tie-backs,
braced excavation, or other potential methods. The contractor is
responsible of using best management practices to maintain all
temporary slopes and providing temporary shoring where
required.
geotechnical report shall
review the shoring design
prior to implementation.
Topic 7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZ-d: Hazardous Materials Contamination
It may be possible that some construction
activities such as ground disturbance from
excavation may come into contact with
contamination that has migrated from other
sites.
MM HAZ-1 Health and Safety Plan
The project sponsor will implement the following standard
measures to avoid and minimize impacts from hazardous
material to construction workers and the general public during
construction.
1) In the event of exposing hazardous material during
construction, the City will implement standard measures
required by the federal, state, and local regulations for the
collection, transport, and disposal of the material to prevent
the exposure of workers and the public to such material.
2) The City will require the contractor to prepare and
implement Health and Safety Plan that include a Hazardous
Materials Management and Spill Prevention and Control Plan
prior to commencement of construction. The plan will
include the project-specific related hazardous materials and
waste operations.
City of Palo Alto Director of
Public Works, and the City’s
construction contractor
City of Palo Alto Director of
Planning and Community
Environment
Prior to construction.
On-going during
construction activities.
Topic 12 – Transportation
TRA-a: Conflict with Plan, Ordinance, Policy –
Circulation
Implementation of the project could conflict
with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system.
Construction activities would generate
construction-related truck and employee trips
that could create a temporary increase in
localized traffic. Also, if the City implements
paid parking at the parking structure, gates
MM TR-1 Construction Traffic Control Plan
Prior to the excavation, the construction contractor shall develop
the traffic control plan in accordance with City’s policies,
coordinate with VTA and submit for City approval. The plan shall
be implemented throughout the course of the project
construction and shall include, but not limited to, the following
elements:
• Limit truck access to the project site during peak commute
times (7:00 A.M. to 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. and 6:00 P.M.)
• Restrict construction truck routes to truck routes designated
City of Palo Alto Director of
Public Works, and the City’s
construction contractor
City of Palo Alto Director of
Planning and Community
Environment
Prior to soil disturbance
activities and excavation.
On-going during
construction activities.
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
5
would be required which could slow the flow
of the traffic resulting in vehicle queuing on to
Hamilton Avenue.
TRA-e: Emergency Access Impact. There
could be a temporary impact to emergency
access at the project site during construction.
TRA-f: Conflict With Policies, Plans, Programs
or Decrease Performance Or Safety for Public
Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrians
The project could conflict with adopted
policies, plans, or program regarding public
transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities or
decrease their performance. The project could
involve a temporary closure of the sidewalk on
Hamilton Avenue or Waverley Street and a
bus stop on Hamilton Avenue in front of the
project site. Furthermore, entries and exits of
trucks and heavy constructions vehicles from
the project site in the downtown area could
impact the bicyclists and the pedestrians.
by the City
• Contractor will provide adequate parking or carpool strategy
for construction employees near the construction site, as
approved by the City
• Require traffic control in the project entrance driveway,
including flag persons wearing bright orange or red vests and
using “Stop/Slow” Paddle to control oncoming traffic
• Coordinate with VTA to temporarily relocate the bus stop to
ensure minimal impacts during sidewalk closure, if needed
• Maintain bicycle and pedestrian access and circulation during
project construction. If construction encroaches on a
sidewalk, a safe detour will be provided for pedestrian at the
nearest crosswalk
• Repair or restore the road right-of-way to its original
condition or better upon completion of the work
• Provide access for emergency vehicles at all time
TRA-a: Conflict with Plan, Ordinance, Policy –
Circulation
Implementation of the project could conflict
with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system.
Construction activities would generate
construction-related truck and employee trips
that could create a temporary increase in
localized traffic. Also, if the City implements
paid parking at the parking structure, gates
would be required which could slow the flow
of the traffic resulting in vehicle queuing on to
Hamilton Avenue.
MM TR-2 Vehicle Queuing Analysis
In the event the project includes a paid parking component; and,
therefore, includes a parking gate, the project sponsor must
prepare and submit a queuing study that shows, to the
satisfaction of the Transportation Division, that queuing into
Hamilton Avenue would be avoided. The study will consider the
configuration and the anticipated volume of vehicles accessing
the parking garage during the peak hour. The provisional gates
must process vehicles efficiently such that vehicles do not have to
wait to turn into the parking facility.
City of Palo Alto Director of
Public Works
City of Palo Alto Director of
Planning and Community
Environment
Prior to the operation of the
project.
On-going basis during the
operation of the project.
TRA-f: Conflict With Policies, Plans, Programs
or Decrease Performance Or Safety for Public
Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrians
The project could conflict with adopted
policies, plans, or program regarding public
transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities or
decrease their performance. The project could
involve a temporary closure of the sidewalk on
Hamilton Avenue or Waverley Street and a
bus stop on Hamilton Avenue in front of the
project site. Furthermore, entries and exits of
MM TR-3 Parking Structure Access and Exit Safety Improvement.
The following improvement shall be implemented to improve
safety in accessing and exiting the proposed parking structure:
The City will install a stop sign at the intersection of Lane 21 and
Bryant Street.
City of Palo Alto Director of
Public Works
City of Palo Alto Director of
Planning and Community
Environment
Prior to the operation of the
project.
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
6
trucks and heavy constructions vehicles from
the project site in the downtown area could
impact the bicyclists and the pedestrians.
1
DRAFT
ACTION NO. 2019-0X
RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE ACTION FOR
375 HAMILTON AVENUE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 17PLN-00360
On February 11, 2019, the Council held a duly noticed public hearing, and after
considering all of the evidence presented, approved the proposed Downtown Garage, including
retail space, at 375 Hamilton Avenue, making the following findings, determination and
declarations:
SECTION 1. Background.
A. On February 11, 2019, Council conducted a public hearing, at which evidence
was presented and all person were afforded an opportunity to be heard, to consider:
(1) The Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), published on August 10, 2018, in response to
comments made during the initial public comment period on the Draft EIR published May 18,
2018, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and
(2) The Architectural Review application and approval recommendation by the Architectural
Review Board, for the new Downtown Garage (and retail) project at 375 Hamilton Avenue.
B. The Architectural Review Board (ARB) conducted three formal public hearings on the
Downtown Garage (and retail) project, on February 15, 2018; June 21, 2018 (which served as the
public hearing opportunity for the public comments on the Draft EIR), and July 19, 2018,
recommending approval of the project on that date;
C. City Council, on June 11, 2018 and June 25, 2018, approved Ordinance 5445
modifying the PF zone development standards and parking requirements in the Downtown and
California Avenue business districts for essential services facilities and public parking garages;
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City of Palo Alto prepared a Draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project in accordance with CEQA, which was circulated
for public review and comment from May 18, 2018 through July 2, 1028; a Final EIR was prepared
to respond to comments and published on August 10, 2018; the City Council certified and made
related findings by Resolution No on February 11, 2019, prior to approval of the decision that is
the subject of this RLUA.
SECTION 3. Architectural Review Findings. The design and architecture of the new
Downtown Garage, as conditioned, complies with the Findings for Architectural Review as required
in PAMC Chapter 18.76. The design and architecture complies with the six findings for
Architectural Review set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 18.76 Section 18.76.020.
(1) The design is consistent with applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan,
Zoning Code, coordinated area plans (including compatibility requirements), and any relevant
design guides. The project is consistent with Finding #1 because:
2
• Given Council’s adoption of Ordinance 5445 amending the Public Facilities development
standards allowing Council approval of certain projects, the project will comply with the
land use and development standards of the PF zone.
• The following policies and programs of the Comprehensive Plan (Plan) are relevant to the
project:
o Policy T-5.6, Strongly encourage the use of below-grade or structured parking, and
explore mechanized parking instead of surface parking for new developments of all
types while minimizing negative impacts including on groundwater and landscaping
where feasible. The project includes below grade and structure parking; mechanized
parking is not proposed.
o Policy T-5.7, Require new or redesigned parking lots to optimize pedestrian and
bicycle safety. The project includes bicycle storage with special entry plaza at
Hamilton, and a dedicated, striped pedestrian pathway on the ground floor leading
to the enhanced, pedestrian alley between the garage and existing buildings.
o Policy T-5.8, Promote vehicle parking areas designed to reduce storm water runoff,
increase compatibility with street trees and add visual interest to streets and other
public locations. Encourage the use of photovoltaic panel or tree canopies in
parking lots or on top of parking structures to provide cover, consistent with the
Urban Forest Master Plan. The project includes storm water features, street trees,
and photovoltaic structures to accommodate solar panels on top of the parking
structure.
o Policy T-5.9, Promote safety for pedestrians in City-owned parking lots by adopting
standards for landscaping, signage, walkways and lighting that reduce crime and
ensure a safe and orderly flow of traffic. The project will include pedestrian, bicyclist
and motorist oriented wayfinding signage and adequate lighting to promote orderly
and safe passage.
o Policy T-5.10, Encourage the use of adaptive design strategies in new parking
facilities in order to facilitate reuse in the future if and when conditions warrant.
The project includes a taller ceiling on the first floor retail space and garage than on
the upper floors; this may assist adaptive ground floor reuse, if desired in the future.
o Policy N-2.3, Enhance the ecological resilience of the urban forest by increasing and
diversifying native species in the public right-of-way, protecting the health of soils
and understory vegetation, encouraging property owners to do the same and
discouraging the planting of invasive species. The project includes planting of two
varieties of trees and multiple varieties of low-growing plant species.
o Policy N-2.10, Preserve and protect Regulated Trees on public and private
property…and related program N2.10.1, continue to require replacement of trees
including street trees lost to new development. The project includes protection of
several trees and replacement of the regulated parking lot trees to meet the City’s
‘no net loss of canopy’ requirement.
o Policy N-4.12, Encourage Low Impact Development (LID) measures to limit the
amount of pavement and impervious surface in new development and increase the
3
retention, treatment and infiltration of urban storm water runoff. Include LID
measures in major remodels, public projects and recreation projects where
practical. The project incorporates permeable pavers and landscape planters
designed to meet storm water run-off treatment best practices.
o Policy L-1.10, Hold new development to the highest development standards in
order to maintain Palo Alto’s livability and achieve the highest quality development
with the least impacts. The project increases the supply of parking spaces
Downtown, provides new ground floor retail space, public art, and amenities
supporting pedestrian and bicycle circulation, and includes high quality materials.
The project will provide benefits for cyclists and improve existing conditions with
respect to trash enclosures, inadequate parking layout, old pavement, and badly
constrained trees, as well as provide an improved street corner, healthier and
bigger trees, and better sidewalks (added by ARB).
o Policy L-4.2, Encourage street frontages that contribute to retail vitality in all
Centers. Reinforce street corners in a way that enhances the pedestrian realm or
that form corner plazas. Include trees and landscaping. The project features a small
street corner plaza highlighting the staircase and retail space, new trees, and
pedestrian level landscaping.
o Policy L-4.3, Ensure all Regional Centers and Multi-Neighborhood Centers provide
centrally located gathering spaces that create a sense of identity and encourage
economic revitalization. Encourage public amenities such as benches, street trees,
kiosks, restrooms and public art. The project includes benches, street trees and
public art; however, the existing public restroom on the property will not be replaced
in the new construction.
o Policy L-5.2, Provide landscaping, trees, sidewalks, pedestrian path and connections
to the citywide bikeway system within Employment Districts. The project includes
new street trees in replaced and wider sidewalks, a new pedestrian alley, parking for
50 bicycles, and pedestrian circulation through the garage ground floor.
o Policy L-5.3, Design paths and sidewalks to be attractive and comfortable and
consistent with the character of the area where they are located. The project
includes enhanced sidewalks along the two frontages, special paving and
landscaping in the pedestrian alleyway.
o Policy L-6.1, Promote high quality design and site planning that is compatible with
surrounding development and public spaces. The site design considers surrounding
development, creates public and retail spaces, and includes components and
features intended to create a contextually compatible garage structure.
o Policy L-6.3, Encourage bird-friendly design. The project includes retail storefront
glass that would face new street trees and storefront glass at the elevator hoist
way; a condition of approval requires bird-friendly glass on these windows.
o Policy L-6.6, Design buildings to complement streets and public spaces; to promote
personal safety, public health and well-being; and to enhance a sense of
4
community safety. The project design includes transparent materials, lighting, and
pavement markings to promote/enhance a sense of pedestrian safety.
o Policy L-6.10, Encourage high quality signage that is attractive, energy efficient, and
appropriate for the location, and balances visibility needs with aesthetic needs.
Retail signage, indicated for placement on retail space(s) elevations facing Waverley
and Hamilton, and parking lot wayfinding signage will be developed and submitted
in a separate architectural application.
o Policy L-8.2, Provide comfortable seating areas and plazas with places for public art.
The project includes stained cedar wood benches adjacent to board formed concrete
planters in the alley and along Hamilton Avenue.
o Policy L-70, Enhance the appearance of streets by expanding and maintaining street
trees. The project includes new street trees on Hamilton and Waverley.
o Policy L-8.5, Recognize public art … as a community benefit; encourage the
development of new public and private art and ensure such projects are compatible
with the character and identity of the neighborhood; and Policy L-8.6, seek
potential new sites for art and cultural facilities, public spaces, open space and
community gardens The project includes public art integrated into entrances.
o Policy L-9.2, Encourage development that creatively integrates parking into the
project, including locating it behind buildings or underground wherever possible, or
by providing for shared use of parking areas. Encourage other alternatives to
surface parking lots that minimize the amount of land devoted to parking while still
maintaining safe streets, street trees, a vibrant local economy and sufficient parking
to meet demand. The project provides underground parking and parking behind first
floor retail, and improves the street safety and street tree count at this site.
o Policy L-9.8 (Incorporate the goals of the Urban Forest Master Plan into the
Comprehensive Plan by reference, in order to) assure that new land uses recognize
the many benefits of trees in the urban context and foster a healthy and robust
tree canopy throughout the city; Related Program L-9.8.1, establish incentives to
encourage native trees and low water use plantings in new development
throughout the city; and Policy L-9.9, involve the Urban Forester, or appropriate
City staff, in development review. The project includes planting of three new, native
oaks and additional street trees to address the removal of existing parking lot trees;
the Urban Forester has worked to ensure project conformance with policies.
o Policy L-9.11, design public infrastructure, including paving, signs, utility structures,
parking garages and parking lots, to meet high-quality urban design standards and
embrace technological advances. Look for opportunities to use art and artists in
design of public infrastructure. The project includes public art and will incorporate
parking guidance system.
o Related Program L9.11.2, Encourage the use of compact and well-designed utility
elements, such as transformers, switching devices, backflow preventers and
telecommunications infrastructure. Place these elements in locations that will
minimize their visual intrusion. The existing transformer and the proposed
5
additional transformer for the project will be located below grade in the proposed
pedestrian alley.
(2) The project has a unified and coherent design, that:
(2a) creates an internal sense of order and desirable environment for occupants, visitors, and the
general community; The project is consistent with Finding 2(a), given:
• The reduction in driveway curb cuts and right-of-way improvements and provision of
parking wayfinding system(s) will improve pedestrian circulation,
• The improvements including the location of bicycle parking and pedestrian plaza near the
AT&T building on Hamilton Avenue, will be convenient and compatible with the design
concept and functions and will improve pedestrian safety along the wider street sidewalks
and inside the garage;
(2b) preserves, respects and integrates existing natural features that contribute positively to the
site and the historic character including historic resources of the area when relevant; The project is
consistent with Finding 2(b), given:
• Although existing on-site trees will be removed to allow for construction of the garage,
replacement trees are proposed along the frontages of Hamilton and Waverley.
• While the setbacks of the building are less than those on the other three corner properties
at the intersection, two of which utilize lawn in the front yard setbacks, the design respects
the historic context of:
o The National Register and Category 1 Local resource at 380 Hamilton (US Post
Office) and 526 Waverley St. Category 3 Local resource designed by Birge Clark,
with incorporation of terra cotta material that is reminiscent of clay roof tiles on
these and other Downtown buildings in the area, and
o The potentially eligible, mid-century modern ‘brutalist’ style All Saints Church, with
incorporation of board-formed concrete planters, walls and columns at the base
section of the building, below painted concrete structure on the upper floors;
(2c) is consistent with the context-based design criteria of the applicable zone district; Finding 2c is
not applicable since the PF zone does not impose context based design criteria.
(2d) provides harmonious transitions in scale, mass and character to adjacent land uses and land
use designations; The project is consistent with Finding 2(d), given:
• The garage is integrated into the context of the downtown rather than being self-conscious
and aggressive, defining itself though program, connections with the site and context as
well as streetscape character, drawing from architectural styles but not replicating them.
• The massing of the façade is scaled to the street with a new canopy at Hamilton and
Waverley that is higher at Waverley Street to relate to the adjacent retail and nearby Post
Office arcade.
• The height of the AT&T building at seventy-five (75) feet serves as a backdrop to our
building that is 50% shorter.
• The retail storefront assists in the transition to retail buildings along Waverley Street.
6
• The materials and architectural forms that establish the character are intended to be
compatible with the architecture of the area including use of:
o Terra cotta vertical louvers and warm color pavers in interesting patterns at the
corner plaza, bike parking plaza and pedestrian alley, as a nod to the character of
the brick pavers and walls of the Wells Fargo building on the opposite corner,
o Square penetrations/indentations in the Hamilton board-formed concrete wall to
echo the Hamilton Avenue windowed-wall of the AT&T building,
o Use of custom, perforated metal panel in burnished bronze as a nod to the mesh
screen on the building at 560 Waverley.
• The photovoltaic support structure provides an elegant cornice; this super structure is
important in helping the building achieve a harmonious transition in scale, mass and
character with the adjacent buildings.
(2e) enhances living conditions on the site and in adjacent residential areas;
• There are no living units proposed on the site; the project is consistent with Finding 2(e),
wherever feasible, with pedestrian friendly landscaping, lighting and sidewalks to enhance
residents’ experience walking along Waverley and Hamilton.
(3) The design is of high aesthetic quality, using high quality, integrated materials and
appropriate construction techniques, and incorporating textures, colors, and other details that
are compatible with and enhance the surrounding area; the project is consistent with Finding 3,
given:
• The materials were selected for durability and construction techniques are appropriate for
the use. The primary construction material is poured in place concrete columns, slabs and
walls. Along the street edges, the building base columns and shear wall are board-formed
concrete in a natural color, similar to All Saints Church.
• Metal flat bars painted a dark bronze color are proposed to infill the first floor openings to
create screening for pedestrians. The metalwork is continued on the runs and landings of
the stair celebrating the metalwork found in the post office and other Spanish revival
buildings.
• An illuminated perforated metal scrim wraps the main corner stair creating a lantern
element that serves as a wayfinding device. This element is also the focus of the public art
program for the building.
• Vertical metal louvers, capped by a horizontal metal channels, wrap the upper stories and
define the cornice of the building. The vertical louvers serve to create a body to the
building while allowing for the required garage ventilation.
• Colors and textures will be compatible with nearby buildings as noted above and with
additional use of quality materials for the pedestrian-amenities, such as stained cedar
benches; dark bronze aluminum canopies; dark bronze painted steel posts, trim, guardrail,
and pickets.
(4) The design is functional, allowing for ease and safety of pedestrian and bicycle traffic and
providing for elements that support the building’s necessary operations (e.g. convenient
7
vehicle access to property and utilities, appropriate arrangement and amount of open space
and integrated signage, if applicable, etc.); the project is consistent with Finding 4, given:
• Ease of wayfinding is one of the garage’s key features. For automobiles, the proposal
includes a parking guidance system, with the main vehicle entry / exit on Hamilton Avenue
near the south corner of the lot since Hamilton is a more travelled way, and a secondary
vehicular exit shall be at Lane 21.
• The mini-plaza on Hamilton, bike plaza and pedestrian alley accommodate seating and
shade for individual passive activities.
• Lighting is provided to enliven the architecture and provide for operations at nighttime:
o Cantilevered light fixtures and festooned string lights at alley
o Uplighting in alley to highlight living walls
o Downlighting in canopies (zaniboni luna 2)
o Linear downlighting hidden in canopy framework (aion T402)
o Full cutoff security downlight in alley
o Downlights (delta-lights) recessed in concrete ceilings at pedestrian entries at
Hamilton, Lane 21, and elevator/stair plaza
o Linear downlight grazing living wall on Hamilton avenue (lumen-pulse lumen-
facade series)
o Point source down-lighting for art mounted to top of wall (eco-sense rise)
(5) The landscape design complements and enhances the building design and its surroundings, is
appropriate to the site’s functions, and utilizes to the extent practical, regional indigenous drought
resistant plant material capable of providing desirable habitat that can be appropriately
maintained; the project is consistent with Finding 5, given
• the use of shade-tolerant plant materials for the shaded pedestrian plaza,
• provision of street tree species compatible with and replacing existing tree species found at
the site,
• use of vegetated planters to handle storm water runoff.
(6) The project incorporates design principles that achieve sustainability in areas related to
energy efficiency, water conservation, building materials, landscaping, and site planning; the
project is consistent with Finding #6 given:
• Photovoltaic panels are proposed to (eventually) provide shading of vehicles at the top
deck of the garage for energy efficiency as a key sustainable feature of the project.
• Suitable street tree planting environments and storm water design features are key
features of the project.
• The building (above grade) will be naturally ventilated and meet California Building Code
requirements to achieve the prescribed open area and length. The basement will be
mechanically ventilated.
SECTION 4. Architectural Review Approval Granted. Architectural Review Approval
is hereby granted for the Public Parking Garage at 375 Hamilton Avenue by the City Council
pursuant to Chapter 18.77 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
8
SECTION 5. Plan Approval.
The plans for the Downtown Parking Garage submitted for Building Permit shall be in substantial
conformance with those plans prepared by Watry Design, Inc. consisting of 34 pages, received May
7, 2018, except as modified to incorporate the conditions of approval in Section 6. A copy of these
plans is on file in the Department of Planning and Community Development.
SECTION 6. Conditions of Approval.
The Mitigation Measures Described in the Draft EIR are incorporated into these conditions. The
mitigation measures are provided in an Exhibit with the Council Resolution certifying the
Environmental Impact Report and mitigation monitoring and reporting program.
1. MM BIO-1 Nesting Bird Surveys and Avoidance. Construction of the project and any other site disturbing activities
that would involve vegetation or tree removal, shall be prohibited during the general avian nesting season (February 1
to August 31), if feasible. If nesting season avoidance is not feasible, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist, as
approved by the City of Palo Alto, to conduct a preconstruction nesting bird survey to determine the presence/absence,
location, and activity status of any active nests on or adjacent to the project site. The extent of the survey buffer area
surrounding the site shall be established by the qualified biologist to ensure that direct and indirect effects to nesting
birds are avoided. To avoid the destruction of active nests and to protect the reproductive success of birds protected by
the MBTA and CFGC, nesting bird surveys shall be performed not more than 14 days prior to scheduled vegetation
clearance and structure demolition. In the event that active nests are discovered, a suitable buffer (typically a minimum
buffer of 50 feet for passerines and a minimum buffer of 250 feet for raptors) shall be established around such active
nests and no construction shall be allowed within the buffer areas until a qualified biologist has determined that the
nest is no longer active (i.e., the nestlings have fledged and are no longer reliant on the nest). No ground disturbing
activities shall occur within this buffer until the qualified biologist has confirmed that breeding/nesting is completed
and the young have fledged the nest. Nesting bird surveys are not required for construction activities occurring
between August 31 and February 1.
MM BIO-2 Tree Preservation and Protection Plan. To avoid disturbance and injury to onsite trees, the
recommendations for tree preservation in the Arborist Report dated May 2017 shall be implemented. These
recommendations include, but are not limited to, tree protection fencing to enclose as much of the TPZ as feasible
around City trees on the sidewalks, no grading encroachments closer than 6 inches to the tree trunk diameter, and
periodic inspections by the Site Arborist during construction activities. A total of nine trees would be planted on the
project site as part of the landscaping plan. Two Gingko Biloba trees would be planted on Waverley Street and four
Gingko Biloba trees and three Quercus Agrifolia tree would be planted along Hamilton Avenue. There would be no net
loss of trees, and Palo Alto’s Urban Forest Master Plan policy for “no net loss of canopy” would be met with the project
via standard conditions of approval requiring replacement of lost canopy within 15 years of planting with the provision
of adequate soil volume at the planting sites. Replacement ratios can be adjusted due to the condition of the existing
tree as long as the minimum replacement for any live tree is 2:1. To ensure “no net loss of canopy” new trees replacing
the site’s non-protected trees to be removed will be addressed through the City’s implementation of standard approval
conditions.
MM BIO-3 Tree Replacement. The removal of protected Coast Live Oak tree (Tree #8 in the Arborist Report prepared for
the project) is subject to the City of Palo Alto’s tree removal ordinance in Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 8.10. Trees
removed will be replaced according to replacement tree mitigation measures using the Tree Canopy Replacement
Standard in the Tree Technical Manual, Section 3.00 (see table below). The replacement standards outlined in the Tree
Technical Manual will be utilized to achieve no net loss of canopy per Policy 1.G of the Urban Forest Master Plan. Site
preparation and soil volume requirements apply so that newly planted trees have the potential to mature to desired
size and thrive. As determined by the City’s Urban Forester, the planting of three native oaks in the Hamilton Avenue
9
right of way at the project site is appropriate as mitigation to replace the loss of the one Coast Live Oak on site, subject
to the standard requirement to provide adequate soil conditions to ensure the replacement trees will thrive.
MM CTR-1 Resource Recovery Procedures. In the event that archaeological or paleontological resources are unearthed
during project construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find must be temporarily suspended or
redirected until an archaeologist or paleontologist has evaluated the nature andsignificance of the find. After the find
has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. A Native American representative shall be retained to
monitor any mitigation work associated with Native American cultural material.
MM CTR-2 Human Remains Recovery Procedures. If human remains are unearthed, State Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary
findings as to the origin and disposition pursuant to the Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are
determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage
Commission. Additional surveys will be required if the project changes to include unsurveyed areas.
MM CTR-3 Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources. If cultural resources of Native American origin are
identified during construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find must be temporarily suspended
or redirected until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find and an appropriate Native
American representative, based on the nature of the find, is consulted. If the City determines that the resource is a
tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in
accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with Native American groups. The plan would include avoidance of
the resource or, if avoidance of the resource is infeasible, the plan would outline the appropriate treatment of the
resource in coordination with the archeologist and the appropriate Native American tribal representative
MM GEO-1 Geotechnical Investigation for Basement Structure. Building foundations shall be designed to tolerate total
and differential settlements due to static loads and liquefaction-induced settlement in accordance with the
recommendations of the geotechnical report. The current geotechnical report includes recommendation for a no-
basement building only. The project sponsor shall retain the service of a qualified state licensed engineering and
geology specialist to include site-specific recommendation to mitigate the potential for risks associated with seismic
ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure and liquefaction for the foundation of a building with basement. The
updated report would include design requirements for the construction of the foundation for the basement option.
MM GEO-2 Temporary Shoring, Slopes and Cut. The contractor is responsible for maintaining all temporary slopes and
providing temporary shoring where required. Temporary shoring, bracing and cuts/fills would be performed in
accordance with the strictest government safety standards. Excavation during site demolition and fill removal should be
sloped at 3:1 (horizontal: vertical) within the upper 5 feet. For excavation extending more than 5 feet below building
subgrade, excavations should be sloped in accordance with the OSHA soil classification. The contractor is responsible
for selecting the shoring method according to their judgment and experience considering adjacent improvements such
as foundation loads, utilities and pavement. The qualified state licensed engineering and geology specialist in charge of
the geotechnical report shall review the shoring design prior to implementation. Recommendations of the geotechnical
report for temporary shoring are soldier beams and tie-backs, braced excavation, or other potential methods. The
contractor is responsible or using best management practices to maintain all temporary slopes and providing
temporary shoring where required.
MM HAZ-1 Health and Safety Plan. The project sponsor will implement the following standard measures to avoid and
minimize impacts from hazardous material to construction workers and the general public during construction.
1) In the event of exposing hazardous material during construction, the City will implement standard measures required
by the federal, state, and local regulations for the collection, transport, and disposal of the material to prevent the
exposure of workers and the public to such material.
2) The City will require the contractor to prepare and implement Health and Safety Plan that include a Hazardous
Materials Management and Spill Prevention and Control Plan prior to commencement of construction. The plan will
include the project-specific related hazardous materials and waste operations.
10
MM TR-1 Construction Traffic Control Plan. Prior to the excavation, the construction contractor shall develop the traffic
control plan in accordance with City’s policies, coordinate with VTA and submit for City approval. The plan shall be
implemented throughout the course of the project construction and may include, but not limited to, the following
elements:
• Limit truck access to the project site during peak commute times (7:00 A.M. to 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M.).
• Restrict construction truck routes to truck routes designated by the City.
• Contractor will provide adequate parking or carpool strategy for construction employees near the construction site,
as approved by the City.
• Require traffic control in the project entrance driveway, including flag persons wearing bright orange or red vests and
using “Stop/Slow” Paddle to control oncoming traffic.
• Coordinate with VTA to temporarily relocate the bus stop to ensure minimal impacts during sidewalk closure, if
needed.
• Maintain bicycle and pedestrian access and circulation during project construction. If construction encroaches on a
sidewalk, a safe detour will be provided for pedestrian at the nearest crosswalk.
• Repair or restore the road right-of-way to its original condition or better upon completion of the work.
• Provide access for emergency vehicles at all time.
MM TR-2 Vehicle Queuing Analysis. In the event the project includes a paid parking component; and, therefore,
includes a parking gate, the project must prepare and submit a queuing study that shows, to the satisfaction of the
Transportation Division, that queuing into Hamilton Avenue would be avoided. Queuing includes a line of two or more
vehicles waiting to enter the structure, which could block traffic on Hamilton. The study will consider the configuration
and the anticipated volume of vehicles accessing the parking garage during the peak hour. The provisional gates must
process vehicles efficiently such that vehicles do not have to wait to turn into the parking facility.
MM TR-3 Parking Structure Access and Exit Safety Improvement: The following improvement shall be implemented
to improve safety in accessing and exiting the proposed parking structure:
• The City will install a stop sign at the intersection of Lane 21 and Bryant Street
Planning
1. The Conditions of Approval document shall be printed on all plans submitted for building permits related to this
project.
2. All future signage for this site shall be submitted for Architectural Review.
3. The project approval shall be valid for a period of one year from the original date of approval. In the event a
building permit(s), if applicable, is not secured for the project within the time limit specified above, the AR
approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect. Application for extension of this entitlement may be
made prior to the one year expiration.
4. As noted in the Civil Site Plan, the drive-by mailboxes and median, signage and striping shall be removed on
Hamilton Avenue across from the project and restriped for four on-street parking spaces.
Public Art
The project will have a public art element commissioned through the Municipal Percent for Art Ordinance No. 5301.
After a competitive process, Amy Landesberg was selected as the project artist and approved by the Public Art
Commission in November 2017. Landesberg came to Palo Alto in December and met with the design team and key
stakeholders, toured the site, and held a community meeting to gather input. She is currently working on a conceptual
design for artwork that will likely be mounted on the perforated metal screens above the main entrance to the garage
and at the corner of Hamilton and Waverley. Once her design is approved by the Public Art Commission, then she will
be issued a contract for the fabrication and installation of the artwork. That contract will require City Council approval.
Transportation
11
The following comments are required to be addressed prior to any related permit application such as a Building Permit,
Excavation and Grading Permit, Certificate of Compliance, Street Work Permit, Encroachment Permit.
1. BIKESTATION DESIGN: As plans are refined, ensure the following features are incorporated into the design
of the proposed bike station:
a. The bike station shall have a two-tier bicycle parking system with the second level equipped with a
lift-assist system to allow users to lift the bicycle storage tray to the second level with little physical
effort. An example of this product is the Dero Decker, manufactured by Dero.
b. The bicycle parking enclosure shall be accessible only to owners or operators of bicycles within it and
doors of the enclosure equipped with key or electronic locking mechanisms that admit only users
and managers of the facility. The enclosure doors must close and lock automatically if released.
c. Adequate horizontal and vertical clearances shall be provided between the bicycle parking fixtures
and walls or other vertical obstructions. A two-tier bicycle parking fixture requires additional
clearance to facilitate bicycle loading and unloading of the second-level tray.
d. Adequate lighting within the bicycle parking enclosure shall be provided.
e. Conduit or similar features shall be provided for future CCTV systems within the bicycle parking
enclosure.
2. TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLANS: As part of this project, traffic signal modifications are necessary at two intersections:
Hamilton Avenue and Gilman Street and Hamilton Avenue and Waverley Street. Traffic signal engineering
design plans shall be prepared and developed in coordination with the Transportation Division.
3. PARKING WAYFINDING SIGANGE: Parking wayfinding signage shall be provided which is consistent with the
appearance and messaging system developed as part of the city’s downtown parking wayfinding signage
program. A freestanding pylon or façade-mounted marquee sign shall be provided adjacent to the Hamilton
Avenue entrance. Sign design details and specifications are available in the city’s parking wayfinding sign
construction plan set.
Public Works Urban Forestry
1. Tree replacements for removals must result in no net loss of canopy within 15 years of planting.
2. The number and species of trees is appropriate to accomplish this except that soil volume and distance between the
trees and building is inadequate.
3. Gingko biloba, a medium-sized tree at maturity, needs 800 cubic feet of soil per tree and Quercus agrifolia, a large-
sized tree, needs 1200 cubic feet per tree.
4. The nine proposed trees require 8400 cubic feet of soil volume at 3 feet deep.
5. If tree wells are combined into a connected soil area, 75% of the combined volume, 6300 cubic feet, would be
adequate to allow trees to grow to full mature size.
6. Combined soil volume can be provided with a suspended pavement system using soil cells, pier and grade beam, or
other methods to provide non-compacted healthy soil under pavement.
Building
The following comments are required to be addressed prior to any future related permit application such as a Building
Permit, Excavation and Grading Permit, Certificate of Compliance, Street Work Permit, Encroachment Permit, etc.:
12
1. The quantities in the Parking Stall Summation Chart shall be maintained showing the required number for each of the
following: a. Van Accessible: 2 spaces, b. Accessible: 6 spaces, c. Standard: 244 spaces, d. Van Accessible EV: 1 space, e.
Accessible EV: 1 space, f. Standard EV: 17 spaces, g. Future EV: 43 spaces, h. Clean Air/ Carpool: 24 spaces, i. Total: 324
spaces.
2. For the 5-Story parking garage to be considered as an Open Parking Garage, it shall comply with the following criteria
from CBC 406.5.2:
a. For natural ventilation purposes, the exterior shall have uniformly distributed openings on two or more sides.
b. The area of the openings on each tier shall not be less than 20 percent of the total perimeter of wall area.
c. The aggregate length of the openings providing natural ventilation shall be not less than 40 percent of the perimeter
of the tier.
3. The vertical clearance within the garage from the garage floor to the lowest ceiling projection above, e.g. ceiling/
floor beam shall be a minimum of 98” (8’-2”) for accessibility. (BC 11B-503.5)
4. The review and approval of this project does not include any other items of construction other than those written in
the ARB project review application included with the project plans and documents under this review. If the plans
include items or elements of construction that are not included in the written description, it or they may not have been
known to have been a part of the intended review and have not, unless otherwise specifically called out in the
approval, been reviewed.
Public Works Engineering
The following shall be addressed prior to issuance of a Building Permit, Excavation and Grading Permit, Certificate
of Compliance, Street Work Permit and/or Encroachment Permit.
1. STORM WATER TREATMENT: This project shall comply with the storm water regulations contained in
provision C.3 of the NPDES municipal storm water discharge permit issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water
Quality Control Board (and incorporated into Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.11). Within 45 days of the
installation of the required storm water treatment measures and prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for
the building, third-party reviewer shall also submit to the City a certification for approval that the project’s
permanent measures were constructed and installed in accordance to the approved permit drawings.
• Provision C3 Form
• Storm Water Treatment Design Certification
• 3rd Party review response letter (stamped/signed)
• http://www.scvurpppw2k.com/pdfs/1112/SCVURPPP_C.3_Data_Form_final_2012.pdf
2. City records indicate there is a small easement running along the Hamilton Ave frontage. Please verify with title
report and show the easement in building permit plans in these locations.
3. STREET TREES: The applicant may be required to replace existing and/or add new street trees in the public right-
of-way along the property’s frontage(s). Call the Public Works’ arborist at 650-496-5953 to arrange a site visit so
he can determine what street tree work, if any, will be required for this project. The site plan submitted with the
building permit plan set must show the street tree work that the arborist has determined, including the tree
species, size, location, staking and irrigation requirements, or include a note that Public Works’ arborist has
determined no street tree work is required. The plan must note that in order to do street tree work, the applicant
must first obtain a Permit for Street Tree Work in the Public Right-of-Way from Public Works’ arborist (650-496-
5953).
4. GRADING PERMIT: Separate Excavation and Grading Permit will be required for grading activities on private
property that fill, excavate, store or dispose of 100 cubic yards or more based on PAMC Section 16.28.060.
Applicant shall prepare and submit an excavation and grading permit to Public Works separately from the building
permit set. The permit application and instructions are available at the Development Center and on our website.
13
5. EXCAVATION: Plans shall clearly identify the deepest point of excavation including below grade basement slab
with note and appropriate dimensions.
6. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN: The plan set must include a grading & drainage plan prepared by a licensed
professional that includes existing and proposed spot elevations, earthwork volumes, finished floor elevations,
area drain and bubbler locations, drainage flow arrows to demonstrate proper drainage of the site. Adjacent
grades must slope away from the house a minimum of 2% or 5% for 10-feet per 2013 CBC section 1804.3.
Downspouts and splashblocks should be shown on this plan, as well as any site drainage features such as swales,
area drains, bubblers, etc. Grading that increases drainage onto, or blocks existing drainage from neighboring
properties, will not be allowed. Public Works generally does not allow rainwater to be collected and discharged
into the street gutter, but encourages the developer to keep rainwater onsite as much as feasible by directing
runoff to landscaped and other pervious areas of the site.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/2717
7. GRADING: Project proposal includes an underground structure. A rough grading plan will need to be present in
submittal.
8. ADDITIONAL DRAINAGE: Garage drains shall have sand/oil separator indicated. Proposed trash enclosure shall be
required to drain to sanitary sewer only.
9. RETAIL SPACE: If any proposed food service is planned a grease trap will be required.
10. UTILITIES: Note that all above ground utilities, such as transformer, backflow preventer, gas meters, etc., shall
be located within project site but accessible from the street. Any new or relocated utilities will correspond with
approved locations from City Utilities Department.
11. BASEMENT DRAINAGE: Due to high groundwater throughout much of the City and Public Works prohibiting the
pumping and discharging of groundwater, perforated pipe drainage systems at the exterior of the basement walls
or under the slab are not allowed for this site. A drainage system is, however, required for all exterior basement-
level spaces, such as lightwells, patios or stairwells. This system consists of a sump, a sump pump, a backflow
preventer, and a closed pipe from the pump to a dissipation device onsite at least 10-feet from the property line
and 3-feet from side an rear property lines, such as a bubbler box in a landscaped area, so that water can percolate
into the soil and/or sheet flow across the site. Include these dimensions on the plan. The device must not allow
stagnant water that could become mosquito habitat. Additionally, the plans must show that exterior basement-
level spaces are at least 7-3/4” below any adjacent windowsills or doorsills to minimize the potential for flooding
the basement. Public Works recommends a waterproofing consultant be retained to design and inspect the vapor
barrier and waterproofing systems for the basement.
12. BASEMENT SHORING: Shoring Plans prepared by a licensed professional are required for the Basement
Excavation and shall be submitted with the Grading and Excavation Permit. Shoring for the basement excavation,
including tiebacks, must not extend onto adjacent private property or into the City right-of-way without having
first obtained written permission from the private property owners and/or an encroachment permit from Public
Works.
13. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: Shall clearly identify the highest projected groundwater level to be encountered in
the area of the proposed basement in the future will be ______ feet below existing grade. Provide the following
note on the Final Grading Plans. “In my professional judgement, the highest projected groundwater level to be
encountered in the area of the proposed basement in the future will be ______ feet below existing grade. As a
result, the proposed drainage system for the basement retaining wall will not encounter and pump groundwater
during the life of this wall.”
14
14. DEWATERING: Excavation may require dewatering during construction. Public Works only allows groundwater
drawdown well dewatering. Open pit groundwater dewatering is not allowed. Dewatering is only allowed from
April through October due to inadequate capacity in our storm drain system. The geotechnical report for this site
must list the highest anticipated groundwater level. We recommend that a piezometer be installed in the soil
boring. The contractor shall determine the depth to groundwater immediately prior to excavation by using a
piezometer or by drilling and exploratory hole. Based on the determined groundwater depth and season the
contractor may be required to dewater the site or stop all grading and excavation work. In addition Public Works
may require that all groundwater be tested for contaminants prior to initial discharge and at intervals during
dewatering. If testing is required, the contractor must retain an independent testing firm to test the discharge
water for contaminants Public Works specifies and submit the results to Public Works. Public Works reviews and
approves dewatering plans as part of a Grading Permit. The applicant can include a dewatering plan in the building
permit plan set in order to obtain approval of the plan during the building permit review, but the contractor will
still be required to obtain a Grading Permit prior to dewatering. Alternatively, the applicant must include the
above dewatering requirements in a note on the site plan. Public Works has a sample dewatering plan sheet and
dewatering guidelines available at the Development Center and on our website.
• http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pwd/forms_and_permits.asp
• http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/64867
15. WORK IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY: The plans must clearly indicate any work that is proposed in the public right-of-way,
such as sidewalk replacement, driveway approach, or utility laterals. The plans must include notes that the work must
be done per City standards and that the contractor performing this work must first obtain a Street Work Permit from
Public Works at the Development Center. If a new driveway is in a different location than the existing driveway, then
the sidewalk associated with the new driveway must be replaced with a thickened (6” thick instead of the standard 4”
thick) section. Additionally, curb cuts and driveway approaches for abandoned driveways must be replaced with new
curb, gutter and planter strip.
16. Provide the following note on the Site Plan and adjacent to the work within the Public road right-of-way. “Any
construction within the city’s public road right-of-way shall have an approved Permit for Construction in the Public
Street prior to commencement of this work. THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS WORK IS NOT AUTHORIZED BY THE BUILDING
PERMIT ISSUANCE BUT SHOWN ON THE BUILDING PERMIT FOR INFORMATION ONLY.”
17. Provide the following note on the Site Plan and Grading and Drainage Plan: “Contractor shall not stage, store, or
stockpile any material or equipment within the public road right-of-way.” Construction phasing shall be coordinate to
keep materials and equipment onsite.
18. SIDEWALK, CURB & GUTTER: As part of this project, the applicant shall replace those portions of the existing
sidewalks, curbs, gutters or driveway approaches in the public right-of-way along the frontage(s) of the property.
Contact Public Works’ inspector at 650-496-6929 to arrange a site visit so that the inspector can discuss the extent of
replacement work along the public road. The site plan submitted with the building permit plan set must show the
extent of the replacement work. The plan must note that any work in the right-of-way must be done per Public Works’
standards by a licensed contractor who must first obtain a Street Work Permit from Public Works at the Development
Center. Include a scan copy of the Site Inspection Directive obtained from Inspector in plan set.
19. OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS: Along with full sidewalk, curb & gutter replacement, street resurfacing is also required
for the property frontage along Hamilton Ave and Waverley St.
20. Any existing driveway to be abandoned shall be replaced with standard curb & gutter. This work must be included
within a Permit for Construction in the Public Street from the Public Works Department. A note of this requirement
shall be placed on the plans adjacent to the area on the Site Plan.
21. PUBLIC RESTROOM: Please clarify the proposed plan for the existing JCDecaux public restroom. The plan indicates a
proposed removal. The relocation of the facility or proposed outcome shall be identified on the plan set.
15
22. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA: The project will be creating or replacing 500 square feet or more of impervious
surface. Accordingly, the applicant shall provide calculations of the existing and proposed impervious surface areas
with the building permit application. The Impervious Area Worksheet for Land Developments form and instructions are
available at the Development Center or on our website.
21. STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION: The City's full-sized "Pollution Prevention - It's Part of the Plan" sheet
must be included in the plan set. Copies are available from Public Works on our website
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/2732
22. LOGISTICS PLAN: The contractor must submit a logistics plan to the Public Works Department prior to commencing
work that addresses all impacts to the City’s right-of-way, including, but not limited to: pedestrian control, traffic
control, truck routes, material deliveries, contractor’s parking, concrete pours, crane lifts, work hours, noise control,
dust control, storm water pollution prevention, contractor’s contact, noticing of affected businesses, and schedule of
work. Include a copy in resubmittal. Guidelines are attached below:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=2719
23. STORMWATER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: The applicant shall designate a party to maintain the control
measures for the life of the improvements and must enter into a maintenance agreement with the City to
guarantee the ongoing maintenance of the permanent C.3 storm water discharge compliance measures. The
maintenance agreement shall be executed prior to the first building occupancy sign-off. The City will inspect the
treatment measures yearly and charge an inspection fee. There is a C.3 plan check fee that will be collected upon
submittal for a grading or building permit.
Fire Department
None
Utilities WGW
The following comments are required to be addressed prior to any future related permit application such as
a Building Permit, Excavation and Grading Permit, Certificate of Compliance, Street Work Permit,
Encroachment Permit, etc. These comments are provided as a courtesy and are not required to be addressed
prior to the Planning entitlement approval:
FOR BUILDING PERMIT:
1. The applicant shall submit a completed water-wastewater service connection application -load sheet per
parcel/lot for City of Palo Alto Utilities. The applicant must provide all the information requested for utility
service demands (water in fixture units/g.p.m., gas in b.t.u.p.h, and sewer in fixture units/g.p.d.). The
applicant shall provide the existing (prior) loads, the new loads, and the combined/total loads (the new loads
plus any existing loads to remain).
2. The applicant shall submit improvement plans for utility construction. The plans must show the size and
location of all underground utilities within the development and the public right of way including meters,
backflow preventers, fire service requirements, sewer mains, sewer cleanouts, sewer lift stations and any
other required utilities. Plans for new wastewater laterals and mains need to include new wastewater pipe
profiles showing existing potentially conflicting utilities especially storm drain pipes
3. An approved reduced pressure principle assembly (RPPA backflow preventer device) is required for all
existing and new water connections from Palo Alto Utilities to comply with requirement of California
16
administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive. The RPPA shall be installed on the
owner's property and directly behind the water meter within 5 feet of the property line. RPPA’s for domestic
service shall be lead free. Show the location of the RPPA on the plans.
4. An approved reduced pressure detector assembly is required for the existing or new water connection for
the fire system to comply with requirements of California administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through
7605 inclusive (a double detector assembly may be allowed for existing fire sprinkler systems upon the
CPAU’s approval). Reduced pressure detector assemblies shall be installed on the owner's property adjacent
to the property line, within 5’ of the property line. Show the location of the reduced pressure detector
assembly on the plans.
5. All backflow preventer devices shall be approved by the WGW engineering division. Inspection by the
utilities cross connection inspector is required for the supply pipe between the meter and the assembly.
6. Existing wastewater laterals that are not plastic (ABS, PVC, or PE) may be replaced at the applicant’s
expense. Ejector pump is limited to 30 GPM.
7. The existing sewer main on Waverley Street is 5.4” PE, only 4” sewer lateral allowed to connect to this
main.
8. The applicant shall pay the capacity fees and connection fees associated with new utility service/s or
added demand on existing services. The approved relocation of services, meters, hydrants, or other facilities
will be performed at the cost of the person/entity requesting the relocation.
9. A new water service line installation for fire system usage is required. Show the location of the new water
service on the plans. The applicant shall provide to the engineering department a copy of the plans for fire
system including all fire department's requirements.
10. All existing water and wastewater services that will not be reused shall be abandoned at the main per
WGW utilities procedures (by C.P.A.U.).
11. Utility vaults, transformers, utility cabinets, concrete bases, or other structures cannot be placed over
existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services. Maintain 1’ horizontal clear separation from the
vault/cabinet/concrete base to existing utilities as found in the field. If there is a conflict with existing
utilities, Cabinets/vaults/bases shall be relocated from the plan location as needed to meet field conditions.
Trees may not be planted within 10 feet of existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services or meters. New
water, gas or wastewater services/meters may not be installed within 10’ or existing trees. Maintain 10’
between new trees and new water, gas and wastewater services/mains/meters.
12. All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto current utility standards for water,
gas & wastewater.
Utilities Electrical
1. Project specific comments: This project is in conflict with existing electric and fiber optic utilities which will
have to be relocated in order for the project to proceed. Applicant shall be responsible for the relocation of the primary
electric utility line which runs through the project. Relocation work includes, but is not limited to, all trenching and
substructure construction and the installation of conduits, cables and equipment. Applicant shall coordinate work with
CPAU – Electric. Applicant shall be responsible for the relocation of the City’s dark fiber optic system backbone which
17
runs through the project. Relocation work includes, but is not limited to, all trenching and substructure construction
and the installation of conduits. Applicant shall coordinate work with CPAU – Electric. All relocation work shall be
completed prior to disturbance and/or demolition of existing electric and fiber facilities. Applicant shall submit a formal
request and application for the relocation of facilities to CPAU – Electric Engineering. CPAU – Electric shall provide
specifications for the design for the relocation of the electric primary lines and fiber optic cables. Applicant shall be
responsible for engineering design and shall submit the design for approval by CPAU Electric Engineering. Applicant
shall show the proposed locations of the relocated electric primary line and dark fiber optic line on the site plan.
Locations of the new electric primary line and dark fiber optic line shall be submitted to CPAU Electric Engineering for
review and approval.
Applicant shall provide space for a minimum of four (4) new electric vaults. The vault dimensions are provided on the
engineer’s mark-up. Applicant shall provide space for a fiber optic communication box. The box dimension is provided
on the engineer’s mark-up. Applicant shall be responsible for the installation of an electric/city fiber joint trench.
Applicant shall show the location of the joint trench, vaults and boxes on a resubmitted site-plan.
Vaults 1820 and 1821, located in the triangle area of the premise, shall not be removed. Applicant shall be responsible
to keep these vaults at grade. The electric room shall be above grade level. Location of electric room on basement level
is not approved. All service equipment must be located above grade unless otherwise approved by Electric Engineering.
If applying for an exception, please state the reason why you cannot meet the standard requirement. Meter
equipment must be accessible to CPAU personnel at all times. Applicant shall adhere to the requirements stated in
CPAU Electric Engineering Standard Drawings DT-SS-U-1002 (Underground Junction Boxes) and DT-SS-U-1003
(Underground Duct Lines). Applicant shall maintain the required minimum clearances between electric and fiber lines
and other utilities as noted in DT-SS-U-1003.
2. The applicant shall comply with all the Electric Utility Engineering Department service requirements noted during
plan review.
3. The applicant shall be responsible for identification and location of all utilities, both public and private, within the
work area. Prior to any excavation work at the site, the applicant shall contact Underground Service Alert (USA) at 1-
800-227-2600, at least 48 hours prior to beginning work.
4. Only one electric service lateral is permitted per parcel. Utilities Rule & Regulation #18
5. If this project requires padmount transformers, the location of the transformers shall be shown on the site plan and
approved by the Utilities Department and the Architectural Review Board. Utilities Rule & Regulations #3 & #16 (see
detail comments below).
6. The developer/owner shall provide space for installing padmount equipment (i.e. transformers, switches, and
interrupters) and associated substructure as required by the City.
7. The location of the electric panel/switchboard shall be shown on the site plan and approved by the Architectural
Review Board and Utilities Department.
8. The customer shall install all electrical substructures (conduits, boxes and pads) required from the service point to
the customer’s switchgear. The design and installation shall be according to the City standards and shown on plans.
Utilities Rule & Regulations #16 & #18.
9. The customer is responsible for sizing the service conductors and other required equipment according to the
California Electric Code requirements and City standards.
10. If the customer’s total load exceeds 2500 kVA, service shall be provided at the primary voltage of 12,470 volts and
the customer shall provide the high voltage switchgear and transformers.
18
11. For primary services, the standard service protection is a padmount fault interrupter owned and maintained by the
City, installed at the customer’s expense. The customer must provide and install the pad and associated substructure
required for the fault interrupter.
12. Any additional facilities and services requested by the Applicant that are beyond what the utility deems standard
facilities will be subject to Special Facilities charges. The Special Facilities charges include the cost of installing the
additional facilities as well as the cost of ownership. Utilities Rule & Regulation #20.
13. Projects that require the extension of high voltage primary distribution lines or reinforcement of offsite electric
facilities will be at the customer’s expense and must be coordinated with the Electric Utility.
14. Transfer of fiber customers will require a minimum of six months to complete from completion of infrastructure.
Existing fiber conduit shall not be disturbed until all fiber customers have been transferred to the new fiber facilities.
B 1. Industrial and large commercial customers must allow sufficient lead-time for Electric Utility Engineering and
Operations (typically 8-12 weeks after advance engineering fees have been paid) to design and construct
the electric service requested.
B 2. A completed Utility Service Application and a full set of plans must be included with all applications involving
electrical work. The Application must be included with the preliminary submittal.
B 3. The applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all existing utility services and/or meters including a signed
affidavit of vacancy, on the form provided by the Building Inspection Division. Utilities will be disconnected
or removed within 10 working days after receipt of request. The demolition permit will be issued after all
utility services and/or meters have been disconnected and removed.
B 4. All utility meters, lines, transformers, backflow preventers, and any other required equipment shall be shown
on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall show that no conflict will occur between the utilities and
landscape materials. In addition, all aboveground equipment shall be screened in a manner that is
consistent with the building design and setback requirements.
B 5. Contractors and developers shall obtain permit from the Department of Public Works before digging in the
street right-of-way. This includes sidewalks, driveways and planter strips.
B 6. At least 48 hours prior to starting any excavation, the customer must call Underground Service Alert (USA) at
1-800-227-2600 to have existing underground utilities located and marked. The areas to be checked for
underground facility marking shall be delineated with white paint. All USA markings shall be removed by
the customer or contractor when construction is complete.
B 7. The customer is responsible for installing all substructures (conduits, boxes and pads) required for the electric
service. No more than 270 degrees of bends are allowed in a secondary conduit run. All conduits must be
sized according to California Electric Code requirements and no 1/2 – inch size conduits are permitted. All
off-site substructure work will be constructed by the City at the customer’s expense. Where mutually
agreed upon by the City and the Applicant, all or part of the off-site substructure work may be constructed
by the Applicant.
B 8. All primary electric conduits shall be concrete encased with the top of the encasement at the depth of 30
inches. No more than 180 degrees of bends are allowed in a primary conduit run. Conduit runs over 500
feet in length require additional pull boxes.
B 9. All new underground conduits and substructures shall be installed per City standards and shall be inspected
by the Electrical Underground Inspector before backfilling.
19
B 10. For services larger than 1600 amps, a transition cabinet as the interconnection point between the utility’s
padmount transformer and the customer’s main switchgear may be required. See City of Palo Alto Utilities
Standard Drawing SR-XF-E-1020. The cabinet design drawings must be submitted to the Electric Utility
Engineering Division for review and approval.
B 11. For underground services, no more than four (4) 750 MCM conductors per phase can be connected to the
transformer secondary terminals; otherwise, bus duct or x-flex cable must be used for connections to
padmount transformers. If customer installs a bus duct directly between the transformer secondary
terminals and the main switchgear, the installation of a transition cabinet will not be required.
B 12. The customer is responsible for installing all underground electric service conductors, bus duct, transition
cabinets, and other required equipment. The installation shall meet the California Electric Code and the
City Standards.
B 13. Meter and switchboard requirements shall be in accordance with Electric Utility Service Equipment
Requirements Committee (EUSERC) drawings accepted by Utility and CPA standards for meter installations.
B 14. Shop/factory drawings for switchboards (400A and greater) and associated hardware must be submitted for
review and approval prior to installing the switchgear to:
Gopal Jagannath, P.E.
Supervising Electric Project Engineer
Utilities Engineering (Electrical)
1007 Elwell Court
Palo Alto, CA 94303
B 15. For 400A switchboards only, catalog cut sheets may be substituted in place of factory drawings.
B 16. All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the Building Inspection
Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before energizing.
B 17. The customer shall provide as-built drawings showing the location of all switchboards, conduits (number and
size), conductors (number and size), splice boxes, vaults and switch/transformer pads.
B 18. The follow must be completed before Utilities will make the connection to the utility system and energize the
service:
• All fees must be paid.
• All required inspections have been completed and approved by both the Building Inspection Division
and the Electrical Underground Inspector.
• All Special Facilities contracts or other agreements need to be signed by the City and applicant.
• Easement documents must be completed.
Public Works Water Quality (Stormwater Management)
1. Submit and follow the “Pollution Prevention – It’s Part of the Plan” construction BMP sheet during life of project.
2. Highly consider using rain chains or similar along vines and other walls/building corners.
3. Stormwater treatment measures
o Consider using low-maintenance permeable pavers for a small demonstration area. Appropriate specs must
be followed. Vendor specs should be reviewed by Parks Maintenance Staff before installation.
o Installation vendor specs should be followed, though vendor specs should be reviewed by Parks
Maintenance Staff before installation. Add this bullet as a note to the building plans.
20
o A clear, detailed maintenance agreement must be drafted and agreed upon by all City staff in pertinent
Departments (Public Works, Parks) before occupancy approval. Contact Pam Boyle Rodriguez, Stormwater
Program Manager, at (650) 329-2421 to facilitate this agreement.
o Must meet all Bay Regional Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit requirements.
o Refer to the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program C.3 Handbook (download here:
http://scvurppp-w2k.com/c3_handbook.shtml) for details
o Staff from Stormwater Program (Watershed Protection Division) may be present during installation of
stormwater treatment measures. Contact Pam Boyle Rodriguez, Stormwater Program Manager, at (650) 329-
2421 before installation. Add this bullet as a note to building plans on Stormwater Treatment (C.3) Plan.
o Install an interpretive sign regarding stormwater treatment and pollution prevention. Contact Pam Boyle
Rodriguez, Stormwater Program Manager, at (650) 329-2421 regarding this text.
4. Bay-friendly Guidelines (rescapeca.org)
o Do not use chemicals fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides or commercial soil amendment. Use Organic Materials
Review Institute (OMRI) materials and compost. Refer to the Bay-Friendly Landscape Guidelines:
http://www.stopwaste.org/resource/brochures/bay-friendly-landscape-guidelines-sustainable-practices-landscape-
professional for guidance. Add this bullet as a note in the building plans.
o Avoid compacting soil in areas that will be unpaved. Add this bullet as a note in the building plans.
5. Stormwater quality protection
o Trash and recycling containers must be covered to prohibit fly-away trash and having rainwater enter the
containers.
o Drain downspouts to landscaping (outward from building as needed).
o Drain HVAC fluids from roofs and other areas to landscaping.
o Establish a street sweeping maintenance plan in open parking lots. Contact Pam Boyle Rodriguez,
Stormwater Program Manager, at (650) 329-2421 regarding this plan.
The following comments are required to be addressed prior to any future related permit application such as a Building
Permit, Excavation and Grading Permit, Certificate of Compliance, Street Work Permit, Encroachment Permit, etc. These
comments are provided as a courtesy:
6. PAMC 16.09.170, 16.09.040 Discharge of Groundwater
Prior approval shall be obtained from the city engineer or designee to discharge water pumped from construction sites
to the storm drain. The city engineer or designee may require gravity settling and filtration upon a determination that
either or both would improve the water quality of the discharge. Contaminated ground water or water that exceeds
state or federal requirements for discharge to navigable waters may not be discharged to the storm drain. Such water
may be discharged to the sewer, provided that the discharge limits contained in Palo Alto Municipal Code
(16.09.040(m)) are not exceeded and the approval of the superintendent is obtained prior to discharge. The City shall
be compensated for any costs it incurs in authorizing such discharge, at the rate set forth in the Municipal Fee
Schedule.
7. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(14) Architectural Copper
On and after January 1, 2003, copper metal roofing, copper metal gutters, copper metal down spouts, and copper
granule containing asphalt shingles shall not be permitted for use on any residential, commercial or industrial building
for which a building permit is required. Copper flashing for use under tiles or slates and small copper ornaments are
exempt from this prohibition. Replacement roofing, gutters and downspouts on historic structures are exempt,
provided that the roofing material used shall be prepatinated at the factory. For the purposes of this exemption, the
definition of "historic" shall be limited to structures designated as Category 1 or Category 2 buildings in the current
edition of the Palo Alto Historical and Architectural Resources Report and Inventory.
8. PAMC 16.09.175(k) (2) Loading Docks
21
(i) Loading dock drains to the storm drain system may be allowed if equipped with a fail-safe valve or equivalent device
that is kept closed during the non-rainy season and during periods of loading dock operation.
(ii) Where chemicals, hazardous materials, grease, oil, or waste products are handled or used within the loading dock
area, a drain to the storm drain system shall not be allowed. A drain to the sanitary sewer system may be allowed if
equipped with a fail-safe valve or equivalent device that is kept closed during the non-rainy season and during periods
of loading dock operation. The area in which the drain is located shall be covered or protected from rainwater run-on
by berms and/or grading. Appropriate wastewater treatment approved by the Superintendent shall be provided for all
rainwater contacting the loading dock site.
9. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(5) Condensate from HVAC
Condensate lines shall not be connected or allowed to drain to the storm drain system.
10. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(b) Copper Piping
Copper, copper alloys, lead and lead alloys, including brass, shall not be used in sewer lines, connectors, or seals coming
in contact with sewage except for domestic waste sink traps and short lengths of associated connecting pipes where
alternate materials are not practical. The plans must specify that copper piping will not be used for wastewater
plumbing.
11. PAMC 16.09.175(a) Floor Drains
Interior (indoor) floor drains to the sanitary sewer system may not be placed in areas where hazardous materials,
hazardous wastes, industrial wastes, industrial process water, lubricating fluids, vehicle fluids or vehicle equipment
cleaning wastewater are used or stored, unless secondary containment is provided for all such materials and
equipment.
SECTION 7. Indemnity. To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify
and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified
parties”)from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the
indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval
authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual
attorney’s fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion,
elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice.
SECTION 8. Term of Approval. Architectural Review Approval. The approval shall be
valid for one year from the original date of approval, pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code Section
18.77.090.
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
22
ATTEST: APPROVED:
_________________________ ____________________________
City Clerk Director of Planning and
Community Environment
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
Senior Asst. City Attorney
PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED:
Downtown Parking Garage
Those plans prepared by Watry Design, Inc., entitled Downtown Parking Garage and consisting of
34 pages, and received May 7, 2018.
Attachment C: Draft EIR
The Draft EIR was provided at the Downtown Library during the public comment period (May 18, 2018
through July 2, 2018). The DEIR is still viewable at Downtown Palo Alto library, Development Center and
online: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/65110
CITY OF PALO ALTO
Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
(Downtown Parking Garage)
Final Environmental Impact Report
State Clearinghouse No. 2017052040
City of Palo Alto
Prepared by
August 2018
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Palo Alto
Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue (Downtown Parking Garage)
Final Environmental Impact Report
State Clearinghouse No. 2017052040
Prepared For
CITY OF PALO ALTO
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94301
Contact: Holly Boyd
Phone 650-329-2612
Prepared By:
WSP USA
425 Market Street, 17th Floor
San Francisco, California 94105
United States
(415) 243-4600
August 2018
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1 - Overview of the Final EIR ............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 - Format of the Final EIR ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 - Purpose of the Final EIR .................................................................................................................... 2
Chapter 2 - List of Agencies, Organizations, and Individuals Receiving the Draft EIR or Notice of Availability . 4
2.1 - State Agencies ................................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 - Local Agencies ................................................................................................................................... 4
Chapter 3 - Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR ................................................................................... 5
3.1 - List of Draft EIR Commenters ............................................................................................................ 5
3.2 - Responses to Comments from the June 20, 2018 ARB Meeting ....................................................... 6
Chapter 4 - Revisions to the Draft EIR ............................................................................................................ 9
Acronyms
ARB Architectural Review Board
EIR Environmental Impact Report
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
1
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
CHAPTER 1 - OVERVIEW OF THE FINAL EIR
The City of Palo Alto (City), the Lead Agency, prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR)
for the proposed City of Palo Alto Downtown Parking Garage, in keeping with State environmental
documentation requirements set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and pursuant to
the CEQA Guidelines, including sections 15086 (Consultation Concerning Draft EIR), 15088 (Evaluation of
and Responses to Comments), and 15132 (Contents of Final Environmental Impact Report). In conformance
with these guidelines, the Final EIR consists of the following two volumes:
1) The Draft EIR (including its appendices), which was circulated for the mandatory 45-day State
agency and public review and comment period, beginning on May 18, 2018, and ending on July 2,
2018, and
2) The Final EIR “responses to comments” document, which includes a list of all commenters to the
Draft EIR during the Draft EIR public review period and speaker comments from the June 21, 2018,
City of Palo Alto Architectural Review Board (ARB) public meeting on the Draft EIR.
Please note that no letters or emails were received from the public during the Draft EIR public review and
comment period.
1.1 - Format of the Final EIR
This document, which includes responses to comments and text revisions, has been prepared in accordance
with Section 15088 of the CEQA Guidelines. In addition to Section 1.0, describing an overview of the
purpose and format of the Final EIR, the Final EIR includes the following sections:
• Section 2.0 List of Agencies and Individuals Receiving the Draft EIR: The agencies, organizations, and
individuals who received copies of the Draft EIR are listed in this section. The locations where the
Draft EIR could be reviewed during the public circulation period are also included in this section.
• Section 3.0 Response to Comments: This section contains a transcript of the comments received on
the Draft EIR at the City of Palo Alto ARB Meeting on June 20, 2018, and the responses to those
comments.
• Section 4.0 Revisions to the Draft EIR: The section contains text revisions to the Draft EIR. Text
revisions can be made as a result of comments received during the Draft EIR public review process,
corrections or clarifications to the text, or to reflect modifications that have been made.
None of the revisions to the Draft EIR represents a substantial increase in the severity of an identified
significant impact or the identification of a new significant impact, mitigation, or alternative considerably
different from those already considered in preparing the Draft EIR. Therefore, the Draft EIR did not require
public recirculation.
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
2
1.2 - Purpose of the Final EIR
In conformance with the CEQA Guidelines (Section 15151), EIRs should be prepared with a sufficient degree
of analysis to provide decisions-makers with information which enables them to make a decision on the
project that takes into account environmental consequences. The Final EIR also is required to examine
mitigation measures and alternatives to the project intended to reduce or eliminate significant
environmental impacts.
The Final EIR is used by the City and other Responsible Agencies in making decisions regarding the project.
The CEQA Guidelines require that, while the information in the Final EIR does not control the agency’s
ultimate discretion on the project, the agency must respond to each significant effect identified in the Draft
EIR by making written findings for each of those effects. According to the State Public Resources Code
(Section 21081), no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact
report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would
occur if the project is approved or carried out unless both of the following occur:
a) The public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant
effect:
1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which will
mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.
3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations including considerations
for the provision of employment opportunities of highly trained workers, make infeasible the
mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.
b) With respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding under paragraph (3) of
subdivision (a), the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social,
technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.
All documents referenced in this EIR are available for public review in the Planning and Community
Environment Department office (5th floor) at 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301, during
normal business hours. The Final EIR is also available for review on the City’s website,
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pwd/infrastructure_plan/new_downtown_garage.asp, and at
the following public library:
Downtown Public Library
270 Forest Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94301
3
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, the Final EIR will be made available to the public a minimum of
ten days prior to the EIR certification hearing.
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
4
CHAPTER 2 - LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS
RECEIVING THE DRAFT EIR OR NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY
2.1 - State Agencies
After completion of the Draft EIR, the Lead Agency (the City of Palo Alto) is required under CEQA Guidelines
sections 15086 (Consultation Concerning Draft EIR) and 15088 (Evaluation of and Response to Comments)
to consult with and obtain comments from other public agencies having jurisdiction by law with respect to
the project, and to provide the general public with an opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR. Under
CEQA Guidelines section 15088, the Lead Agency is also required to respond in writing to substantive
environmental points raised in the Draft EIR review and consultation process.
The Draft EIR was submitted to the following State agencies by the State Clearinghouse:
• California Highway Patrol
• California Department of Transportation, District 4
• Caltrans Division of Aeronautics
• California Department of Fish and Game, Region 3
• California Native American Heritage Commission
• California Office of Historic Preservation
• California Public Utilities Commission
• Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 2
• San Francisco Bay Area Conservation & Development Commission
• California State Lands Commission
• Office of Emergency Services
• California State Clearinghouse
2.2 - Local Agencies
The Draft EIR was submitted to the County of Santa Clara Office of the County Clerk-Recorder.
Note
Additional individuals and groups were notified of the availability of the Draft EIR by e-mail and postal mail,
and the Draft EIR has been posted on the City’s website and in the Palo Alto Main and Downtown Libraries.
5
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
CHAPTER 3 - RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR
CEQA Guidelines Section 15132 (Contents of Final Environmental Impact Report), subsection (b), requires
that the Final EIR include the full set of "comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR either
verbatim or in summary"; Section 15132, subsection (c), requires that the Final EIR include "a list of persons,
organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR"; and Section 15132, subsection (d),
requires that the Final EIR include "the responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points
raised in the review and consultation". In keeping with these guidelines, this Responses to Comments
chapter includes the following sections:
1) A list of Draft EIR commenters (Section 3.1), which lists each individual who commented during the
ARB public meetings and each individual, agency, and organization that submitted written
comments (letters/emails) to the City during the Draft EIR public review period;
2) Responses to the June 20, 2018, ARB public meeting comments, which includes each verbal
comment received on the Draft EIR during the public meeting, followed by the response to the
comment, pertaining to Draft EIR content or adequacy or on a substantive environmental point;
3.1 - List of Draft EIR Commenters
The individuals who commented at the public meetings, and each individual, agency, and organization that
commented in letter/email form during the Draft EIR public review period, are listed below by personal
name or agency/organization name. After the person’s name, each meeting comment and each
letter/email comment received is also identified in parenthesis by a code number, e.g. ARB comments ARB-
1, ARB-2.
Comments on the Draft EIR were submitted in the form of comments from individuals attending the June
20, 2018, ARB public hearing.
No comments on the Draft EIR were received from any of the above State agencies nor local agencies.
No public comments on the Draft EIR were received during the draft EIR public review period.
ARB Public Meeting Commenters (June 20, 2018)
• ARB Vice Chair Baltay (ARB-1)
• ARB Board Member Gooyer (ARB-2)
• ARB Chair Furth (ARB-3)
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
6
3.2 - Responses to Comments from the June 20, 2018 ARB Meeting
The following section includes each verbal comment received during the June 20, 2018 ARB public meeting
pertaining to the content or adequacy of the Draft EIR or on a substantive environmental point, followed
by the response to the comment.
3.2.1 - ARB Vice Chair Baltay (ARB-1)
Comment ARB-1
Comment ARB-1a: The gist of my comments is I think this building does have an impact on the post office,
and I don't think that's adequately addressed in here. I think the architect has mitigated those impacts, but
I think it needs to be discussed in a neutral and thorough way here.
I think the building is as tall as it can possibly be. I don't think it's doing anything to, special consideration
for the area. I don't think that's a mitigation. It's implying that includes consideration of the height. It says
further [reading]: The building will be 49 feet 10 inches below the citywide 50-foot height limit. That's not
including the solar panels, again.
The gist of my statements on all this is that the building is massive, and I don't think we should sugarcoat
that and try to say no, it's not actually that big. I think we do ourselves a disservice. And a big building,
especially across the street from probably the most important historic building in town, I think it's important
to acknowledge that. Further down, the third, fourth paragraph, the proposed project, etc. [Reading]
Furthermore, given the restrained height and compatible design...I don't think this building has a restrained
height.
Comment ARB-1b: I'm looking at page 2 out of 5 of a tree report regarding the condition of the oaks.
[Reading] The three Holly Oaks and one Coast Live Oak tree were determined to be in good health
condition. Fair enough. The trees are in need of appropriate repruning, etc. Poor pruning in the past has
contributed to Fair structures. I'd like to see that last sentence just struck from the statement. The tree is
in good health. Anybody who goes and looks at it can see that. And we're going to mitigate the removal of
the tree, but I don't think we should try to spin it to say it's somehow not okay.
Comment ARB-1c: Add a statement about the sidewalks becoming wider. The widened sidewalks actually
do one thing towards helping the historic building across the street. It just gives you a little more space to
have that civic breathing room.
Response ARB-1
Response ARB-1a: Section 3.4 Cultural, Paleontological, and Tribal Cultural Resources, p.93 has been
revised to clarify that the height of the future photovoltaic panels would be 56 feet and that the height of
the elevator penthouse would be 63 feet. However, several sections of the Draft EIR, including but not
limited to Section 2.5, Project Description, Section 3.1, Aesthetics, and Section 3.9, Land Use, provided
detailed information on the height of each component, including the penthouse and the future
7
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
photovoltaic structures, and assessed the project based on the proposed maximum height of all of these
components. As was already stated in Section 3.4 Cultural, Paleontological, and Tribal Cultural Resources,
p.93, the proposed building would have a lower height than the existing building to the west, which is
75 feet tall. Therefore, although the penthouse and future photovoltaic structures would be taller than the
height limits typically allowed in this zone district, this height would be consistent with the development
pattern of adjacent buildings, specifically the existing 75-foot tall AT&T building immediately abutting this
property, which also faces the Post Office. Page 93 has been revised to provide additional clarity as to why
the proposed height of this building, including these additional features, would not result in a significant
impact on the adjacent historic buildings. In addition, reference to the restrained height has been removed
in response to this comment. The Draft EIR concludes that the proposed project would not have a
significant impact on adjacent historic buildings, including the U.S. Post Office; no changes have been made
to this conclusion. Other potential impacts (e.g. impacts due to construction vibrations or impacts due to
aesthetics) on nearby historic buildings, are further discussed in each respective resource section.
Response ARB-1b: The arborist report, included as Appendix D of the Draft EIR, concludes that the oak trees
have been poorly pruned recently, which contributes to these trees being in only fair health. Because this
statement reflect the professional opinion of the Qualified Arborist that prepared the report, this requested
revision to remove the statement that “Poor pruning in the past has contributed to Fair structures” has not
been made. Other factors that lead to poorer health of the protected Live Oak tree include lions-tailing, a
defective branch attachment known as “Included Bark”, and a trunk wound, as stated in Table 1 of the
Arborist Report included in the Draft EIR. Regardless of the findings of the health of this tree, and as the
commenter accurately notes, Section 3.4 Biological Resources, p.83, of the Draft EIR discusses the fact that
the project is designed to include three new oaks on Hamilton Avenue to replace this protected Live Oak
tree. Therefore, no changes to the Draft EIR or Arborist Report have been made to reflect this comment.
Response ARB-1c: This comment was addressed in response ARB-3b.
3.2.2 - ARB Board Member Gooyer (ARB-2)
Comment ARB-2
Comment ARB-2a: I pretty much had no specific comments, but sort of the same concept of what I've read,
that you're trying to sugarcoat the size of this place. No matter what you do, you can't sugarcoat that. It's
huge. The reality is, we need the thing, so you have to just be a little bit more blunt about stating that that's
the requirement.
Response ARB-2
Response ARB-2a: Refer to response ARB-1a.
3.2.3 - ARB Chair Furth (ARB-3)
Comment ARB-3
Comment ARB-3a: Provide more accurate description-It is a really big building.
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
8
Comment ARB-3b: Include verbiage that the extra wide sidewalk on Hamilton complements the Post Office
(a stepped-back civic building).
Comment ARB-3c: Emphasize non-parking upside such as improvements for cyclists, bigger trees, wider
sidewalk.
Response ARB-3
Response ARB-3a: Refer to response ARB-1a.
Response ARB-3b: Consistent with this comment, additional language was added in Section 3.4 Cultural,
Paleontological, and Tribal Cultural Resources on p.93 to describe the widened, 12-foot sidewalk and to
explain that the visual impact of the proposed garage will be softened by the widened sidewalks on
Waverley Street and Hamilton Avenue. The widened sidewalk on Hamilton Avenue will complement the
two-story U.S. Post Office across Hamilton Avenue, which has a similar setback to the proposed project.
Response ARB-3c: Section 2.5.2 Building Design, p.31 and Section 3.4 Cultural, Paleontological, and Tribal
Cultural Resources, p.93, were modified to include an additional description of the benefits of the new,
wider sidewalks, consistent with this comment.
Furthermore, Section 2.5.1 Building Characteristics, p.29, includes a description of the additional space to
accommodate child carriers in the bike parking area.
A description of the landscaping, which is included as part of the proposed project, was also added to
Section 2.5.6 Landscaping, on pp.32-33. The description includes reference to the new landscaping and
other improvements along the frontages and alleyway, including the wider sidewalk, built-in benches, new
raised planters, and new trees. These improvements are designed to create an inviting streetscape and a
convenient pedestrian alleyway between the existing surrounding buildings and the proposed project.
9
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
CHAPTER 4 - REVISIONS TO THE DRAFT EIR
The following section includes all revisions to the Draft EIR made in response to comments received during
the Draft EIR comment period. Furthermore, it also includes revisions to Section 2.5.2 Building Design, that
were not made pursuant to a comment but due to a design modification of the building. Those revisions to
the draft EIR were done to be consistent with the final design of the building. The changes to the building
design are minor and were done to improve the overall architectural design of the proposed project.
Thereby, they do not change any conclusions of the draft EIR.
None of the criteria listed in CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 (Recirculation of an EIR Prior to Certification)
indicating the need for recirculation of the May 2018 Draft EIR has been met because of the revisions, in
particular:
• No new significant environmental impact due to the project or due to a new mitigation measure
has been identified;
• No substantial increase in the severity of a significant environmental impact has been identified;
and;
• No additional feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others
analyzed in the Draft EIR has been identified that would clearly lessen the environmental impacts
of the project.
All text revisions are indicated by strike-through and underlining in red plus a solid vertical line in the left
margin next to the revised line(s). All of the revised pages supersede the corresponding pages in the May
2018 Draft EIR.
CITY OF PALO ALTO
Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
(Downtown Parking Garage)
Draft Final Environmental Impact
Report
State Clearinghouse No. 2017052040
City of Palo Alto
Prepared by
May 2018, Amended August 2018
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
City of Palo Alto
Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue (Downtown Parking Garage)
Draft Final Environmental Impact Report
State Clearinghouse No. 2017052040
Prepared For
CITY OF PALO ALTO
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94301
United States
Contact: Holly Boyd
(650) 329-2612
Prepared By:
WSP USA
425 Market Street, 17th Floor
San Francisco, California 94105
United States
(415) 243-4600
May 2018, Amended August 2018
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
Page 18 of 214
Demand for Parking:
• Additional information is needed to show that there is additional demand for parking in the
commercial core of the City of Palo Alto and the neighboring residential areas. Considerations
should be given to the recommendations of the Downtown Parking Management Study that is
being conducted by the City, and actions taken by the Transportation Management Association
(TMA) to reduce the demand for parking.
Context Sensitive Solutions:
• Compatibility of the parking garage with the existing adjacent buildings regarding architectural
contexts and the number of the proposed stories of the structure.
• Compatibility with adjacent historic buildings, especially the historic two-story U.S. Post Office
across Hamilton Avenue and the church across Waverley Street.
• Loss of natural air and light due to shadows from the new parking structure located south and west
of the building on Lot 85.
• Preserve or replace existing protected California Oak trees. Preserve and/or replace other existing
trees.
Other Design Elements:
• Consideration of new technologies that help reduce the need for large parking structures, delays
and idling time during entering and exiting the structure.
• Maintaining vehicular access to Lot 84 and Lot 85 which faces Waverley Street, this proposes to
consider allowing space and structural accommodations in the basement of the downtown parking
garage and the potential need to expand the building in the future.
• Maintain access by providing a delivery zone on Waverley Street.
• Maintain or improve the existing pedestrian walkways between the parking structure and Lot 85.
Construction Impacts:
• Effect of the loss of the existing parking spaces while the proposed project is being constructed.
1.1.2 Draft EIR
The Draft EIR provides a description of the proposed project, the environmental setting, evaluation of the
project impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts determined to be significant, including direct,
indirect, and cumulative impacts. The Draft EIR addresses environmental resources that were determined
to have potential impacts according to the prepared IS Checklist consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA
Guidelines (see Appendix B for a copy of the Initial Study Checklist). Resources that were determined to
have “No Impacts” from the project will not be further evaluated in this report. The following is a list and
description of the resources with a determination of “No Impact”:
Page 29 of 214
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
2.4 Project Objectives
The following are the project objectives:
1. To increase the number of parking spaces within the downtown to maximize the accessibility and
convenience to downtown visitors and workers
2. To provide a parking structure that includes neighborhood-serving retail and street frontage to
contribute to the economic vitality of the downtown and the City
3. To provide a parking structure that incorporates a pedestrian- and bike-friendly layout
4. To provide a parking structure that is visually appealing and compatible with the downtown
character and nearby historic buildings
2.5 Project Description
2.5.1 Building Characteristics
The proposed project consists of:
• A four-story public parking garage consisting of five above ground parking levels and one basement
level. The uppermost level would provide parking spaces on the roof. The structure would reach a
height of 49 feet-10 inches to the top of the rail of the fifth deck, continuing to a height of 63 feet
at the top of the elevator penthouse.
• The public parking garage footprint would cover 23,490 square feet and the overall square footage
would be 114,048 square feet (of above-grade floor area).
• A 585-square-foot bicycle parking area would provide approximately 50 bicycle parking spaces with
additional space for child carriers and would be located near the entrance to the structure along
Hamilton Avenue.
• A total of 325 parking stalls would be available within the structure. Approximately eight stalls will
be Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible, 82 are planned to be designated for electric
vehicles (with 17 being installed with charging stations), and nine stalls designated specifically for
the retail area use6.
• 25 percent of the parking spaces would be designed with infrastructure to allow the future
installation of charging stations for electric vehicles, per the City of Palo Alto Green Building Code7.
Initially, 5 percent, or approximately 19 stalls, of the parking spaces would be equipped with a
charging station.
• The building would be designed to accommodate the future installation of photovoltaic panels and
their associated structure above the building’s uppermost deck. The top level of the photovoltaic
6 Building Code require 1 space per 250 square feet of non-residential use within the Downtown Assessment District.
7 City of Palo Alto, Ordinance No. 5263, Amendment to the California Green Building Standards Code, August 4, 2014,
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/43818, accessed on November 6, 2017.
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
Page 30 of 214
structure installation, at 56 feet above grade, would be below the top of the elevator penthouse,
at 63 feet above grade.
• The building would be designed with a 3-foot setback from the property line on the south side of
the building along Hamilton Avenue. A continuous 12-foot sidewalk wraps both frontages.
• The building would include an approximately 2,000-square-foot single- or dual-tenant commercial
shell-space building fronting Waverley Street, to be used as commercial retail space for new or
existing businesses.
• The trash enclosure would include area for trash and recycling from two adjacent properties on
Waverley Street (Lots 84 and 85), and for the retail area in the proposed project.
Table 3 below presents a comparison of the proposed project.
Table 3: Summary of the Characteristics of the Proposed Project
Use/Characteristics Amount/Description Proposed Project
Parking 325 stalls 127,612 sf
Commercial 1,955 sf
Circulation Elevator lobbies, ramp, stairs 4,644 sf
Utilities 1,679 sf
Bike Parking 50 spaces, plus child trailer storage 585 sf
Trash 441 sf
Total area 136,595 sf
Height to rail 49’-10”
Height to solar 56‘-0”
Height to penthouse 63’-0”
Note: sf = square feet
Source: Watry Design, May 2018.
Figure 6, p.35 to Figure 8, p.37, show the floor plans of the proposed project. Figure 10, p.39 and
Figure 12, p.41 shows the elevations and sections of the proposed building.
2.5.2 Building Design
The proposed building would extend 4 feet into the existing setback along Hamilton Avenue (providing a 3-
foot setback from the property line) and Waverley Street edge as well as the interior side lot line shared
with the adjacent AT&T building. At the property line shared with the southeastern side of Lot 85 (or 560
Waverley Street), the edge of the garage would be set back ten feet from the property line, allowing
openings for natural ventilation into the parking garage, as well as light to reach the existing windows of
the property at 560 Waverley Street. This necessary setback would also create an opportunity for a
pedestrian walkway, which would be ADA-accessible, leading to the secondary stairway. At the property
line shared with Lot 84 and the southwestern side of Lot 85, the garage would be set back 16 feet to
maintain access for utilities, service, and a secondary means of egress for the existing buildings fronting
Waverley Street. Vehicle access would be restricted in this alley to those needed to service the adjacent
Page 31 of 214
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
properties. Additionally, the alley would be enhanced with architectural paving, new plantings, benches,
and lighting so that it can be a usable space. The sidewalks on Hamilton and Waverley are replaced and
widened to 12 foot to provide more room for circulation.
The project’s façade design is intended to be compatible with the surrounding architectural context, and
to reflect the character of Palo Alto’s Downtown. Potential locations for the integration of public art have
also been identified on the building. These locations are the shear wall element that would face Hamilton
Avenue and the perforation pattern of the stair cladding proposed at the corner of Hamilton Avenue and
Waverley Street.
The primary construction material would be poured in place concrete columns, slabs and walls. Along the
street edges, the two-storybuilding base would be sandblastedcolumns and shear wall would be board-
formed concrete in a natural color, similar to the All Saints Episcopal Church to the north (across Waverley
Street), with subtle details used to define the corners and architrave of the building. Metal flat . Flat metal
bars painted a dark bronze color would be used to infill the first- floor openings to create pedestrian
screening for pedestrians.. The metalwork would continue alongcontinues on the runs and landings of the
stair, celebrating the metalwork found in the Post Office to the east (across Hamilton Street)post office and
other Spanish Revivalrevival buildings. Lighted from the inside, aAn illuminated perforated metal scrim
would wrapwraps on the main corner stair creating a lantern element to servethat serves as a wayfinding
device. This element couldis also be the focus of the public art program for the building. Metal fins would
wrap the upperVertical metal louvers would fill the space between columns at the second, third and fourth
stories in panels outlined by metal channels that would define the cornice of the building as the channels
rise to the upper story.. The fins wouldvertical louvers serve to create a body to the building while allowing
for the required garage ventilation. The finTheir color is intended to be reminiscent of the terracotta colors
found in the Downtowndowntown area. Above the roof parking level, a dark bronze metal ‘cap’ and metal
railing create a cornice for the building. This design is enhanced by, but not dependent on, future columns
and beams supporting photovoltaic panels.
Figure 13, p.42 shows the rendering of the proposed design for the parking structure.
2.5.3 Access Points
The proposed parking garage can be accessed by vehicles via an entrance and exit on Hamilton Avenue and
another one on Lane 21. Lane 21 would continue to be one-way circulation, with the entrance on Waverley
Street and the exit on Bryant Street. A pedestrian pathway through the structure leads from the bike
parking entry near Gilman Street to Lane 21 near the CVS. City Council has not yet decided whether the
facility would be a paid parking lot and thus, there is space reserved to accommodate the provisional gates
at the entrance and exit. Gates and access points are shown on the ground floor plan (Figure 6, p.35).
2.5.4 Utilities
The construction of the parking garage would require the relocation of the existing fiber optic and high
voltage electric lines. Existing utility transformers will be housed below ground in the alleyway adjacent to
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
Page 32 of 214
the trash enclosure. The new parking structure does not include replacing the public restroom due to safety
and maintenance concerns.
2.5.5 Transportation
Improvements for the safety of the pedestrians at the intersection of Waverley Street and Hamilton Avenue
would be part of the proposed project. The project would include the construction of new bulb-outs
adjacent to the parking structure along both Hamilton Avenue and Waverley Street. It would also include
new signal priority for pedestrians.
2.5.6 Landscaping
The landscape of the proposed parking structure is designed to enhance the pedestrian environment of
downtown Palo Alto and to encourage social interaction through providing an inviting streetscape and
creating a unique and convenient pedestrian alleyway between the existing surrounding buildings and the
proposed structure.
Due to the planned footprint of the parking structure, the seven existing trees would need to be removed
from the project site to accommodate the construction of the structure. One of the existing trees, of the
species Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia), is protected under the City of Palo Alto’s Tree Technical Manual.
Although this tree is protected, the arborist’s report indicates that previous, imprecise pruning has resulted
in the poor condition of the tree and a potential for breakage. One street tree will be removed and replaced
with four gingko trees and three oak trees along Hamilton and two gingko trees along Waverley in enlarged,
4-foot by 7-foot tree wells to help ensure healthy growth of these new ginkgo trees, which reflect the
existing species of the street trees to be retained on Waverley Street.
All tree removals on this project require replacement. The replacement standards outlined in the Tree
Technical Manual (as described in the Draft EIR) will be utilized to achieve no net loss of canopy per Policy
1.G of the Urban Forest Master Plan8. Site preparation and soil volume requirements apply so that newly
planted trees have the potential to mature to desired size and thrive.
The corner of the parking structure will feature a small plaza area featuring decorative pavers, which are
also used in the pedestrian access alleyways. In the pedestrian walkway, decorative pervious pavement,
generous benches, landscaped storm water treatment planters, and pedestrian-scaled lighting will be used
to invite pedestrian use. The storm water planters will be at grade level even with the walkway, and will
feature a combination of low-growing, knee-high foliage and flowering plants that provide year-round
interest and function; to cleanse storm water directed from the parking structure deck. As width allows,
columnar gingko trees similar to the surrounding street trees are introduced to further enhance the
pedestrian environment and create a pleasant atmosphere for what may become a well-used passageway.
8 City of Palo Alto, Urban Forest Master Plan Policy 1.G, “Strive for no net loss in canopy cover.”, p.142, May 2015,
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/36187 (accessed on April 16, 2018)
Page 33 of 214
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
The streetscape walkways are replaced and widened to provide more room for circulation along the
proposed retail space on Waverley Street and to enjoy the built-in benches and landscaped raised planters
on Hamilton Avenue. New street trees are proposed along Hamilton in enlarged, 4 feet by 7 feet tree wells
and a suspended pavement system to help ensure healthy growth of the new Ginkgo trees which reflect
the existing species of the preserved street trees on Waverley Street. Three native Oak trees have been
added on Hamilton to compensate for the removal of the one protected oak tree.
2.5.7 Foundation and Excavation
Existing slabs, foundations, fills, and pavement would be removed before the excavation of the basement.
Existing surface pavement consist of generally 2 to 3 inches of asphalt concrete over 3 to 4 inches of an
aggregate base. Most of this existing pavement will be removed, and the underlying sands and clays will be
excavated and removed from the site.
Approximately 13,500 cubic yards of soil would be excavated for the basement and will be transported off-site
by the excavation subcontractor using two 10-yard dump trucks. Minor cuts and fills into the subgrade at a depth
range of 13 to 16 feet are anticipated for setting the foundation. Design of the foundation is expected to be a
one-basement level structure. At the time this report was written, specific structural loads are not yet known,
but are anticipated to be typical of this type of structure.
A site survey determined that the site elevation ranges between 49 and 51 feet below sea level. No ground
improvement or piling is expected. There is a potential for hydrostatic pressures on the basement slab,
even though it does not appear that the one-level below grade basement would extend below the design
ground water depth. There is a potential for short duration perched water events, which could result in
uplift pressures on the basement slab. It is recommended to design the slab for 2 to 4 feet of hydrostatic
uplift pressure over the full width of the below-grade portion of the building9.
2.5.8 Construction
2.5.8.1 Schedule
Construction of the parking structure is expected to last 15 months, excluding possible delays due to
weather, underground issues, etc. Construction is scheduled to begin in Spring 2019 and be complete by
Summer 2020.
Construction would be separated in the following phases:
• Utility relocations are expected to last three to four months, with the collaboration of the utility
service providers such as the City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) for electric and wastewater, AT&T
for data, and others to be determined further in the design
9 Gordon Knowles, Senior Project Manager, Watry Design, email correspondence with Lyne-Marie Bouvet, Environmental Planner,
WSP, April 12, 2018.
Page 57 of 214
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
The parking structure would be 49 feet-10 inches to the top of rail on the fifth deck with an elevator
penthouse continuing to 63 feet. The height of the structure would be lower than the adjacent 75-foot tall
AT&T building to the west. The structure would include infrastructure to support the future installation of
photovoltaic panels, which would be mounted above the top (fifth) level parking deck. The structure would
maximize the amount of parking while allowing for retail storefronts, with the primary intent of consistency
with the context of the downtown area. The parking structure would have a zero setback, extending to the
property line, at the Hamilton Avenue and Waverley Street edges, as well as the interior side lot line shared
with the AT&T building. The ground-floor retail space would open to the Waverley Street frontage. Along
the northern property line, the parking structure would be set back 10 feet from the property line to allow
natural ventilation into the structure and light to the existing windows at 560 Waverley Street. The 10-foot
setback would also provide for a pedestrian walkway leading to a secondary stair, as well as a visual
connection to the All Saints Episcopal Church. The main stair and elevator for the structure would be
located at the corner of Waverley Street and Hamilton Avenue and would include a pedestrian court with
access to the ground floor retail. Construction of the parking structure would require removal of the
existing onsite trees and one street tree which would be replaced with four gingko trees and three oak
trees along Hamilton and two gingko trees along Waverley. There would be no net loss of canopy per Policy
1.G of the Urban Forest Master Plan12.
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Map L-4 of the adopted Comprehensive Plan identifies scenic vistas, including major view corridors, scenic
routes, and gateways within the City of Palo Alto13. There are no scenic vistas within the project area;
therefore, construction and operation of the proposed project would have no impact on scenic vistas.
NO IMPACT
b) Have a substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
There are no state scenic highways within the project area; therefore, construction and operation of the
proposed project would not damage any resources within a state scenic highway. There would be no impact
and no mitigation is required.
NO IMPACT
12 City of Palo Alto, Urban Forest Master Plan Policy 1.G, “Strive for no net loss in canopy cover.”, p.142, May 2015,
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/36187 (accessed on April 16, 2018)
13 City of Palo Alto, Comprehensive Plan, Map L-4, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/62915 accessed on
April 16, 2018.
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
Page 58 of 214
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
Construction
During construction, the site would be fenced primarily for safety purposes. The fence limits visibility of the
site and construction activities. Large-scale equipment used to hoist and/or excavate materials would be
visible to surrounding areas and passersby. Signage for safety and informational purposes would also be
visible. Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as good housekeeping activities (street sweeping, material
organization, etc.), stockpile management, and careful placement of construction staging areas would be
implemented to prevent injuries, minimize vandalism, and reduce visibility of equipment and materials.
Use of BMPs would help minimize the visual clutter associated with construction.
Operations
The proposed structure would be constructed primarily of poured-in-place concrete. The two-storyAlong
the street edges, the building base would be sandblastedcolumns and shear wall are board-formed
concrete in a natural color, similar to the All Saints Episcopal Church, with subtle details used to define the
corners and architecture of the building.. Metal flat bars painted a dark bronze color would beare used to
infill the first- floor openings andto create screening for pedestrians. The metalwork would continueis
continued on the railsruns and landings of the stair to mimiccelebrating the metalwork found in the Post
Officepost office and other Spanish Revivalrevival buildings. The structure would have substantially open
sides to provide natural ventilation andAn illuminated perforated metal scrim wraps the main corner stair
creating a façade scaled tolantern element that serves as a wayfinding device. This element is also the local
streets. Metal fins wrappingfocus of the public art program for the building. Vertical metal louvers, capped
by a horizontal metal channels, wrap the upper stories and define the cornice of the building. The vertical
louvers serve to create a body to the building while allowing for the required garage ventilation. TheTheir
color of the fins would mimicis reminiscent of the terracotta colors found in the downtown area. The
proposed architectural design of the structure is intended to reflect elements and materials of the Post
Office and surrounding buildings and to be consistent with the character of the downtown area. In addition,
two elements of the structure have the potential for integration of public art. The two locations are the
shear wall element facing Hamilton Avenue and the perforation pattern to the stair cladding at the corner
of Hamilton Avenue and Waverley Street. The corner of the parking structure would feature a small plaza
area with decorative pavers similar to what would also be used in the pedestrian access alleyway. The
alleyway would also be visually enhanced with decorative paving, plantings, benches and decorative lighting
to encourage pedestrian use of these spaces. To invite people to explore and use the alley, decorative
pervious pavement, generous benches, landscaped storm water treatment planters, and pedestrian-scaled
lighting would be used. The storm water treatment planters would be at-grade and even with the walkway.
The planters would feature a combination of low growing knee-high foliage and flowering plants to provide
year-round interest, as well as functionality for cleansing storm water directed from the parking structure
roof.
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
Page 68 of 214
3.2.3.1 Criteria of Significance
The following significance criteria are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.)
and are used by the City to determine the significance of impacts. Impacts to would be significant if the
proposed project would:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan (such as the Bay Area
Clean Air Plan)?
b. Violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
3.2.3.2 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
The applicable air quality plan is the Bay Area 2017 CAP. The Plan focuses on two closely-related goals:
protecting public health and protecting the climate. Consistent with the GHG reduction targets adopted by
the State of California, the plan lays the groundwork for a long-term effort to reduce Bay Area GHG
emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. A project that
would not result in significant and unavoidable air quality impacts may be considered consistent with the
Bay Area 2017 CAP. The BAAQMD proposed thresholds are included in Table 8, p.64, for comparison
purposes. As seen in the modeled data in Table 12, p. 70, construction emissions would not exceed the
proposed thresholds for the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or
obstruct implementation of the Bay Area 2017 CAP. Impacts would then considered be less than significant.
No mitigation is required.
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b) Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected
air quality violation?
The proposed project would result in a significant impact if the estimated construction or operational
emissions exceed the BAAQMD thresholds shown in Table 8, p.64. The estimated daily project emissions
generated during construction and operation of the proposed project are summarized in Table 12, p.70,
and Table 13, p.70. As shown in these tables, emission estimates from the proposed project would not
exceed BAAQMD thresholds and impacts will be less than significant. The project would not violate any air
Page 79 of 214
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
3.3.3 Impact Analysis
3.3.3.1 Significance Criteria
The following significance criteria are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.)
and are used by the City to determine the significance of impacts. Impacts to would be significant if the
proposed project would:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved, local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
According to the City’s CEQA thresholds, a significant impact would occur if the project would conflict with
the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance.
3.3.3.2 Impacts and Measures
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies,
or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
The project site is located in an urbanized area of Palo Alto and is currently developed with a surface parking
lot and landscaping. The project site does not include riparian habitat, wetlands or streams or other
sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
A search of the California Natural Diversity Database, maintained by the CDFW, as well as the official species
list from the USFWS yielded a list of threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, and critical
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
Page 92 of 214
3.4.3 Impact Analysis
3.4.3.1 Significance Criteria
The following significance criteria are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.)
and are used by the City to determine the significance of impacts. Impacts to would be significant if the
proposed project would:
a. Adversely affect a historic resource listed or eligible for listing on the National and/or California
Register, or listed on the City’s Historic Inventory.
b. Eliminate important examples of major period of California history or prehistory.
c. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to
15064.5.
d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries.
e. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a local cultural resource that is recognized by City Council resolution.
g. Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is:
i a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size
and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native
American Tribe, that is listed or eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical
Resources, or on a local register or historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code
section 5020.1(k) or
ii a resource determined by a lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant according to the historical register criteria in Public Resources
Code section 5024.1 (c), and considering the significance of the resource to a California
Native American tribe.
3.4.3.2 Impacts
a. Would the project adversely affect a historic resource listed or eligible for listing on the National and/or
California Register, or listed on the City’s Historic Inventory?
b. Directly or indirectly destroy a local cultural resource that is recognized by City Council resolution?
There is no historic building listed or eligible for listing on the National and/or California Register, or listed
on the City’s Historic Inventory on the proposed project site. The City of Palo Alto inventory of the
downtown area shows several historic buildings within proximity to the project area. The most prominent
building is the U.S. Post Office located across the street from the project site, which is listed on the National
Register of Historic Places. The adjacent building located at 526 Waverley Street is listed on the City’s
Historic Inventory as a Category 3 historic resource and is currently used as the Palo Alto Sport Shop. It is
Page 93 of 214
City of Palo Alto Parking Structure at 375 Hamilton Avenue
Downtown Parking Garage
not anticipated that the project would affect the U.S. pPost Ooffice building, the Sport Shop or any other
historic building.
The design of the proposed garage incorporates several architectural elements intended to make it an
appropriate and compatible addition to the Palo Alto downtown area. This includes consideration of the
total building height, the character of the ground floor façades, and building setbacks. The garage will
include a sub-grade level that will allow for additional parking while limiting the overall building height. The
proposed parking structure will be 49 feet 10 inches to the top of rail on the fifth deck, below the city-wide
50-foot height limits. The parking structure would be 49 feet-10 inches to the top of rail on the fifth deck
with future photovoltaic panels at 56 feet and an elevator penthouse continuing to 63 feet. Although this
is taller than the existing zoning height limit for this site, tThe proposed building will also have a lower
height than the existing building to the west, which is 75 feet tall, therefore it is consistent with the
development pattern of adjacent buildings.
While theThe proposed garage design attempts to maximizes parking capacity, it also while also
incorporatinges ground floor storefront facades in keeping with the character of the surrounding retail and
entertainment neighborhood. In addition, the visual impact of the proposed garage will be softened by the
widen 12 foot sidewalks on Waverley Street and Hamilton Avenue, sympathetic to the two-story, 25 foot
tall U.S. Post Office which is setback from the Hamilton Avenue sidewalkby a 10-foot setback along
Waverley Street and a 7-foot setback from Hamilton Avenue. The selection of exterior materials also
reflects an attempt to include design element from surrounding structures, with a neutral sandblasted
concrete and bronze painted metal panels. The exterior treatments employ a color palette that echoes the
natural adobe-colored walls and terracotta roof tiles of the city’s Spanish Revival buildings (including the
adjacent U.S. Post Office). There is also a commitment to preserve or replace existing street trees and to
incorporate additional appropriate landscaping.
The proposed project would not directly demolish, destroy, relocate, touch, or alter any historic resources
listed or eligible for listing on the National and/or California Register, or listed on the City’s Historic
Inventory. Furthermore, given the restrained height and compatible design, the garage design avoids or
minimizes potential adverse impacts on the historic resources in the project area. The proposed project
would not indirectly destroy a local cultural resource that is recognized by City Council resolution.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT E
ZONING COMPARISON TABLE
375 Hamilton Avenue
Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.28 (PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT)
Regulation Required Existing Proposed
Minimum Site Area, width and
depth
None
29,164 sf 29,164 sf
PF Setbacks - Minimum front, side, and rear yards in the PF zone shall be equal to the respective front, side,
and rear yards of the most restrictive abutting district, provided no yard adjoining a street shall be less than
20 feet, and no interior yard shall be less than 10 feet –June 11, 2018 Council modified code for public
parking structures and Essential Services Buildings within the Downtown and Cal Avenue
Front Yard (Waverley) 0’ in CD district (10’) NA Approximately 2 feet to
wall (encroaches 8’) – 0’ to
columns
Rear Yard (next to ATT bldg) 10 feet NA 2 feet (encroaches 8’)
Interior Side Yard (at CVS and
backing Waverley addressed
lots)
10 feet NA 10 feet – CVS and side of
Tai Pan, 16 feet- from rear
lines of Waverley buildings
Street Side Yard (Hamilton,
special setback)
PAMC 20.08 special
setback line: Seven feet
on Hamilton; PF Zone
requires 20 feet
NA Approximately 3 feet to
wall (encroaches 4’ into 7’
special setback)
Min. yard for lot lines abutting
or opposite residential districts
or residential PC districts
10 feet (2) NA (not
abutting 510
Waverley, CDC-
GF-P, may have
residential use
on upper floor)
NA
Max. Site Coverage Equal to site coverage
established by most
restrictive adjacent
district (CD)
NA NA
Max. Building Height 50 feet NA 63’ to top of mechanical
equipment for elevator (no
exception required); 56’ to
top of PV structure and
elevator ceiling (exception)
49’10” elsewhere
Max. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Equal to FAR established
by most restrictive
adjacent district (1:1 for
non-residential use in
CDC zone with increase
allowed with TDR not to
exceed 3:1 in CDC)
NA 114,048 sf - above grade
parking area
Daylight Plane for lot lines
abutting one or more residential
zone districts other than an RM-
40 or PC Zone
None NA NA
Attachment F
Project Plans
Hardcopies of project plans are provided to Board members. These plans are available to the
public online and/or by visiting the Planning and Community Environmental Department on the
4th floor of City Hall at 250 Hamilton Avenue.
Directions to review Project plans online:
1. Go to: http://bit.ly/PaloAltoPlanningProjects
2. Scroll down the center of the page and click “View pending projects”
3. Scroll to find “375 Hamilton Avenue” and click the address link
4. Public Works maintains a project webpage which provides links to the project
plans and other important information
Direct Link to Project Webpage:
https://cityofpaloalto.org/downtowngarage
July 12th, 2018
City of Palo Alto
Department of Planning & Community Environment
250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor
Palo Alto, CA 94303
Re: 375 Hamilton Ave., Downtown Parking Garage, ARB Formal Review Project Description
To Planning Staff and ARB Members:
Attached is the formal ARB submittal package for 375 Hamilton Avenue, the proposed Downtown Parking
Garage. The project applicant is Watry Design Inc., with Hayes Group Architects, on behalf of our client,
the City of Palo Alto.
This package includes 14 sets of half size drawings and two sets of full size drawings, including the
vicinity map, neighborhood context, site plan, landscape plan, proposed floor plans, elevations, sections,
and perspectives.
SCOPE OF WORK
Due to an increased parking demand and a shortage of available parking spaces in the downtown area,
the City of Palo Alto has begun the process for the design of a new parking structure at the corner of
Hamilton Avenue and Waverley Street. The primary goals of this project are to maximize the amount of
structured parking while integrating the structure within the downtown context of retail storefronts.
EXISTING SITE USE
The site is located at the east corner of Hamilton Avenue and Waverley Street. The rear of the site
adjoins Lane 21. The surrounding vicinity is a mix of downtown retail and office uses. Southwest of the
property, at 345 Hamilton is the four-story AT&T central office. Northwest along Waverley are several
one and two-story retail buildings, including historic buildings at 526 Waverley, a category 3 historic
building and 510 Waverley, a category 2 historic building. Across Hamilton, to the Southeast, is the
historic, two-story Post Office, a category 1 historic building. Across Waverley to the Northeast is the All
Saints Episcopal Church. The site is more than 150 feet from any residentially zoned properties so
increased zoning restrictions do not apply.
The zone district is PF: Public Facility. The district has a 50 foot height limit. A PF zone amendment,
allowing an exception to the seven foot special setback at Hamilton Avenue, was approved by Palo Alto
City Council. Easements are not known at this time.
The site area is 29,164 SF, accommodating a surface-level parking lot for 86 vehicles. There is a public
restroom at the corner of Hamilton and Waverley. The Arborist Report identifies eight trees on the
property, including one protected Coast Live Oak. The protected Coastal Oak is in fair condition with good
grow but is not suitable for transplanting.
The occupants of 526, 550 and 560 Waverley utilize a portion of the site to access the backs of their
buildings and pick up trash and recycling.
PROPOSED USE
The proposed parking structure shall be five levels above ground and one basement level with a ground
floor retail area of 1,955 SF. The main entry to the building will be from Hamilton Avenue. Access is also
provided from Lane 21, however this access will generally be for exit only with entry only in the event that
the Hamilton Avenue access may be restricted.
This project shall provide 325 total parking stalls. Of these, there will be provision for accessible spaces
(8); electric vehicle charging (82, 17 to be installed initially) stalls serving the new retail area (6) and a
stall serving 550 Waverley.
A long-term bike storage room shall be provided at Hamilton Avenue near the main vehicle entry/exit.
This room shall be approximately 438 square feet and have space for approximately 50 bicycles with
additional space for child carriers etc. Short-term bicycle storage can be provided at the sidewalk near the
retail space.
A common refuse storage room shall be at Lane 21 near the secondary vehicle entry / exit. This room
shall be approximately 450 square feet. It will serve the Waverley businesses and the proposed new
retail space.
The parking structure will be 50’-0” to the top of rail on the fifth deck with an elevator penthouse
continuing to 63’-0”.
The building will be designed with infrastructure to allow for the future installation of photovoltaic panels
mounted above the top parking deck.
SITE AND BUILDING CONCEPT
The proposed building sits three feet away from the property line at Hamilton Avenue; it extends four feet into the
special setback. The building extends to the property line at Waverley Street. A continuous 12 foot sidewalk
wraps both frontages. The structure is two feet from the interior lot line at the AT&T building.
At the north property line, shared with 560 Waverley, the edge of the garage sets back 10 feet from the property
line. This facilitates construction, provides a path for underground utilities, allows openings for natural ventilation
into the parking garage, and lets light reach the existing windows at 560 Waverley. This necessary setback also
creates an opportunity for a pedestrian walkway, focused on and leading to the secondary stair vertical circulation
element. Additionally, a visual connection to All Saints Episcopal Church is created between the garage and the
church by way of the new alley connection. The alley is visually enhanced with architectural paving, plantings,
benches and decorative lighting features that will provide the infrastructure for a useable space.
The primary stair and elevator circulation features are prominently positioned at the corner of Waverley Street and
Hamilton Avenue since pedestrian way finding is an important aspect of garage navigation. At this street corner,
the building edge erodes, creating a pedestrian court with access to the stair and elevator, as well as an entrance
to the ground floor retail space that extends down Waverley Street.
In order to maintain access for utilities, services and secondary means of egress for the existing buildings fronting
Waverley Street, the garage sets back 16 feet from the shared property line at this location. Vehicle access will
be restricted in this alley to those vehicles needed for service. The alley will be enhanced with architectural
paving, new planting, benches and lighting so that it can be a useable space.
To satisfy the car count goal, the garage is four stories, with parking at the roof level, plus one level of basement
parking. The main vehicle entry / exit shall be on Hamilton Avenue near the south corner of the lot since Hamilton
is a more travelled way. A secondary vehicular exit shall be at Lane 21.
The building will be naturally ventilated and as such must meet California Building Code requirements for
openness. This requirement requires that the design must have a sustainably open façade to achieve the
prescribed open area and open length. The basement will be mechanically ventilated.
The building concept is one of transition and compatibility. The garage is integrated into the context of the
downtown rather than being self-conscious and aggressive. An integrated building defines itself though program,
connections with the site and context as well as streetscape character without replicating architectural styles but
drawing from them.
The general massing of the façade is scaled to the street with a new canopy at Hamilton and Waverley. This
canopy, higher at Waverley Street, relates to the adjacent retail and nearby Post Office arcade. The height of the
AT&T building at seventy-five (75) feet serves as a backdrop to our building that is 50% shorter. The retail
storefront assists in the transition to mercantile buildings along Waverley Street.
MATERIALS, COLORS, AND CONSTRUCTION METHODS
The primary construction material is poured in place concrete columns, slabs and walls. Along the street
edges, the building base columns and shear wall are board-formed concrete in a natural color, similar to
All Saints Church. Flat metal bars painted a dark bronze color infill the first floor openings to create
pedestrian screening. The metalwork continues on the runs and landings of the stair, celebrating the
metalwork found in the post office and other Spanish revival buildings. An illuminated perforated metal
scrim wraps the main corner stair creating a lantern element that serves as a wayfinding device. This
element is also the focus of the public art program for the building. Vertical metal louvers, fill the space
between columns at the second, third and fourth stories. The vertical louvers serve to create a body to
the building while allowing for the required garage ventilation. Their color is reminiscent of the terracotta
colors found in the downtown. Above the roof parking level, a dark bronze metal ‘cap’ and metal railing
create a cornice for the building. This design is enhanced by, but not dependent on, future columns and
beams supporting photovoltaic panels.
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROM THE PREVIOUS SUBMITTAL
In response to board member comments on February 15th and June 21st, we have made several changes
to the design. The building moved three feet back from the Hamilton Avenue property line, better aligning
with the existing AT&T building. A pedestrian pathway through the structure leads from the bike parking
entry near Gilman Street to Lane 21 near CVS as recommended by the Transportation Department.
Responding to comments on proportion and massing, the heavy two-story arcade base is now a narrow
canopy at Hamilton and Waverley. The material of the perforated metal shroud at the corner stair has
been refined into a more open, transparent structure.
The vertical fins were lowered to line up with the upper parking deck, and a new metal cap and open
metal guardrail create a cornice at the top of the building. The bike locker received decorative screening,
an accent paint at the back wall, and a protected walkway. A long planter shifted to add more bench
seating Hamilton. Seating was also added near the corner plaza. The latest renderings of the garage
show the public art incorporated into the perforated metal shroud at the corner stair.
LANDSCAPE CONCEPT
The landscape of the proposed parking structure is designed to enhance the pedestrian environment of
downtown Palo Alto and encourages positive social interaction through providing an inviting streetscape
and creating a unique and convenient pedestrian alleyway between the existing surrounding buildings
and the proposed structure.
The streetscape walkways are replaced and widened to provide more room for circulation along the
proposed retail space on Waverley Street and for enjoying the built-in benches and landscaped raised
planters on Hamilton Avenue. New street trees are proposed along Hamilton in enlarged, 4’x7’ tree wells
and a suspended pavement system to help ensure healthy growth of the new Ginkgo trees which reflect
the existing species of the preserved street trees on Waverley Street. Three native Oak trees have been
added on Hamilton to compensate for the removal of the one protected oak tree.
The corner of the parking structure features a small plaza area that introduces decorative pavers which
are also used in the pedestrian access alleys.
The pedestrian access alleys offer a quiet and human scaled alternative route through the project site. To
invite people to explore and use the alley we use decorative pervious pavement, generous benches,
landscaped storm water treatment planters, and pedestrian scaled lighting. The storm water planters in
the alley and to Lane 21are about three feet high, and will feature a combination of low growing foliage
and flowering plants that provide year round interest and function to cleanse storm water directed from
the parking structure roof. Planting species have been carefully selected to be successful in the alley
environment and to enhance the pedestrian experience creating a pleasant atmosphere for what is
expected to be a well-used passageway.
Maintenance access for surrounding Waverley Street businesses is provided in the pedestrian access
alley. Concrete paving is used at the north end for durable access to the refuse storage room.
Vines trained to grow on the façade visually soften the appearance of the parking structure.
PUBLIC ART
The public art installation will form an integral part of the building’s fabric. Public art shall incorporate into
and onto the perforated metal panel screens around the stair at the corner of Hamilton and Waverley and
above the parking entrance on Hamilton Avenue.
GREEN BUILDING PROGRAM
The building will comply with the mandatory requirements of the 2016 Non Residential California Green
Building Code (CALGREEN + TIER 2).
We look forward to our presentation and discussion with the Architectural Review Board.
Sincerely,
Ken Hayes, AIA
Principal
cc: Watry Design Group
enclosed: Arborist Report, June 2017
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Call to Order/Roll Call
Present: Chair Wynne Furth, Vice Chair Peter Baltay, Board Members Alexander Lew and Robert
Gooyer.
Absent: Osma Thompson.
2. PUBLIC HEARING/QUASI-JUDICIAL. 375 Hamilton Avenue [17PLN-00360]:
Recommendation on a Request for Approval of an Architectural Review Application
for a Five-Level, 50' Tall Parking Structure, With One Below Grade Parking Level,
Providing 325 Public Parking Spaces and Approximately 2,000 Square Feet of Retail
Space Fronting Waverley Street. Environmental Assessment: A Draft Environmental
Impact Report was published May 18, 2018 and circulated for public comments.
Zoning District: Public Facilities (PF). For More Information Contact Chief Planning
Official Amy French at amy.french@cityofpaloalto.org.
Chair Furth: The first one is a public hearing. It's quasi-judicial, so we will disclose any conversations we
may have had since the last hearing relevant to it. It's a request for approval of an architectural review
application for a five-level, 50-foot tall parking structure with one below-grade parking level, providing
325 parking spaces and approximately 2,000 square feet of retail space, fronting on Waverley Street. A
draft Environmental Impact Report was published and circulated for comment. May we have the staff
report? Oh, are there any disclosures? Any conversations? None. And we have all visited the site. Staff?
Amy French, Chief Planning Official: Thank you. We have today the third hearing for the downtown
garage and retail project. On the screen I have a couple circles around some areas to look at, chiefly on
these images, because there have been quite a few changes there. There's some additional changes that
the architect will go over. A few more images here. The architect today is actually here, which is great,
and presented last time. We have a response to the ARB and are requesting to get a recommendation
from the ARB to City Council. We have already scheduled a hearing for Council in September, I believe,
so we are looking forward to that. In the process, we've had the CEQA, which was last year scoping. We
went through pre-screening. We had preliminary reviews for this project in 2017, and then, we had our
formal reviews by the ARB -- there're a few images -- starting with February 15th here, moving to June
21st, where we had three members, and then, today's hearing, July 19th. Back in early June, the Council
adopted the Public Facilities' own changes that allow us to move this forward to the Council for their
action to approve the setback modifications. That's September 17th. They would be taking action on the
final EIR, which is being prepared. The final EIR has not been published, but will soon be. It does contain
responses to the ARB comments on the draft EIR, and several of the sections on building, landscaping,
cultural sections. There have been some responses regarding the historic post office, noting that we do
have these 12-foot sidewalks that are sympathetic to the post office, providing that public realm. We
have notes about the metal work, and a nod to metal work on Spanish revival buildings. We have notes
about the heights, and we have the emphasis on the cyclist circulation and provisions, as well as the
deletion of the trees in the alley. These were comments from the last meeting that three of you attended,
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
EXCERPT DRAFT MINUTES: July 19, 2018
City Hall/City Council Chambers
250 Hamilton Avenue
8:30 AM
City of Palo Alto Page 2
and their comments on the EIR that were folded into the final. Key issues. This was pretty much
presented at the last hearing, but we're just going to quickly go through this. Looking at the pedestrian
path with the higher ceiling through the garage, so there's better pathways from Hamilton through to
CVS, and where we have increased bike and stroller parking, and now, a protective walkway down the
lower right image for that bicycle storage area. Again, the three-foot setback, the four-foot
encroachment, that was increased in the last rendition and maintained here. We have a better alignment
with the AT&T building. It does reduce the parking count in the garage. We have corner enhancements.
The architect will show you today some of the seating ideas there on the corner. We have a few
modifications in the architecture with this new cap at the top. We also have a concept for a modified
concrete treatment that the artist has put forward, so that is considered at this time. And, that is in
addition to the tapestry that was proposed. In the last rendition, you had seen enclosure of the stair at
the corner, as well as over the vehicle entrance on Hamilton. That has been approved by the Public Art
Commission. The content of the art is not in the ARB's purview, but certainly placement on the building is
within the purview. There was some discussion last time about where the plantings were, and there was
a letter that talks about the viability of the landscaping. And I believe we have our landscape architect
today to provide answers if you have questions. As far as the adjacent property owner and the
operations, we've been corresponding with the adjacent property owners. There are some items there
that were brought up and discussed in letters. We do have a formal parking space in the garage for 550
Waverley, which is per the downtown parking assessment. It cites one space. And, we are going to have
a Waverley Street loading zone, and that's likely to be put in prior to completion of this project, to get the
ball rolling on that pattern of delivery. That's the conclusion of my presentation. The architect is here to
present, and Holly Boyd is the project manager, and may have additional comments.
Holly Boyd, Senior Engineer, Public Works: Good morning. My name is Holly Boyd, I'm a senior engineer
in Public Works, and I'm the project manager for this garage. We have a consultant design team here,
including the landscape architect, designer and their architect. I don't have any additional comments, but
I’m going to introduce Ken Hayes, who is the architect for the project. He has our presentation.
Chair Furth: Thank you. Mr. Hayes? Good morning. You have 10 minutes. Once we get everything
organized.
Ken Hayes, Hayes Group Architects: Good morning, Chairwoman Furth, members of the Board. My name
is Ken Hayes with Hayes Group Architects. I'm joined today by the design team, Watry Design, with
Michelle Wendler and Gordon Knowles; the landscape architect with Merrill Morris, John Potis, is also here
in case you have questions for him. And then, Terry Murphy from my office is also here, who has worked
on the majority of the documents in front of us. I know that Member Lew was not present at the last
hearing, so I have a little bit of a review, and then we'll get into the changes. The program, the
downtown garage is Lot D. We're familiar with that. Five levels above grade, one level below. We have
reduced it to 325 spaces from the 338 formerly, but we were able to add 50 bike spaces as a result of
that. The retail space has decreased a little bit per some modifications that we've made, down to 1955
from the 2188. And then, we are showing the future...Did I do that? I did. Back up. Solar photovoltaic
system. I get another five seconds. Project site is at...
Chair Furth: It's an important project. Don’t rush.
Mr. Hayes: Okay, thank you. The project site is a 29,000 square foot surface parking lot currently, on the
corner of Waverley and Hamilton. The site is zoned PF. The AT&T building next door is also zoned PF,
and so is the historic post office across the street. The other sites that are adjacent on Waverley are
zoned CDC Ground Floor, P. The project is responding to the ground floor component, as well as the
pedestrian overlay component. We have lane 21 at the rear, which is a one-way alley headed to Bryant
Street. That serves as an exit for the project. You can also enter there. I want to point out that the
sidewalks, both frontages are being expanded. The sidewalk on Waverley is going from about 10 feet to
16 feet, and the sidewalk on Hamilton is going from about 10 to 12, depending on how you count the
benches that we have located on that side of the building. And, of course, the historic Category 1 post
office is across Hamilton. At the February hearing, we heard some comments about some of the concerns
City of Palo Alto Page 3
on the site planning, the building edge at Hamilton Avenue, and how the building responded to the
seven-foot special setback. We all know now that special setback has been eradicated for PF buildings, so
that's not a requirement any longer. However, we are responding to it. Board members were questioning
why we needed to have this pedestrian alleyway, so I have some comments on that. This was an
awkward way through the garage, so you asked us to look at that a little more closely. And then, if there
was a way to increase the bicycle parking, that would be something that would be very positive. We have
responded to all of these at the June hearing, and I believe our response was well received. The setback
along Hamilton, we've moved the building in three feet to better align with the AT&T building. That is
about as tight as we can go because of the requirements for the parking stalls. We're at minimum on
some of these parking stalls, but allows for the pedestrian alley. The pedestrian alley, Board Member
Lew, is needed because of constructability issues, to avoid underpinning of the Thai Pan building, to allow
our joint trench utilities to come in that way, and we need it for light, air, ventilation, in order to propose
this naturally-ventilated parking garage, so we don't have to have mechanical ventilation for the floors
above grade. And I contend that it's also a great way to give people choice on moving through the
community when they come down the stair, which is at the intersection. You know where the intersection
is. The pedestrian pathway through the building. The whole second floor has been raised a foot, so a
little bit more light when you come in. This left-hand side is essentially all committed to bikes and bike
signage and stroller parking. And then, a more deliberate pathway across the garage that is aligned with
the pedestrian alley. That then also is coupled with the stair that comes down from the floors above, is
also in that corner, and you can either decide to go in the alley behind Thai Pan and Congdon & Chrome
and Prolific Oven, or you can decide to walk straight out to Waverley Street through the pedestrian
pathway. And then, this is the expansion of the bike area. It's increased by about 50 percent. Those
changes were all well received in June. However, there were some comments on the elevations that I
just wanted to go through and show the changes that we've made. On the Hamilton Elevation, we have
this pattern of vertical fins that provide a varying view into the building as you walk past it because it will
change. There was some thought that maybe they're a little too dominate, so we were asked to
investigate ways to lessen the impact, maybe, of those fins. Make the pedestrian entrance, which is down
in this area here, a little more prominent or inviting, and add amenities at this corner sidewalk and plaza
there along Hamilton. I'm going to go to the large scale because I can't see it this far away. I apologize.
The changes are, on the ground floor, we have added an additional bench, so we have shifted the entire
built-in planter toward the stairwell, so now the planter goes to here, and that allowed us to pick up a
bench right here. Now there are four benches along the frontage. We've reduced the fins at the upper
floor in this center part here -- this cursor is not working real well. Anyway, you know where. And we've
introduced metalwork railings that would be reminiscent of the metal work railings we have on the
ground floor behind all the benches and the built-in planters. At the bike entrance, we've taken the
board-formed concrete around to the bike entrance, and we've introduced open rails -- this is on the far
left-hand side of the drawing -- open rails on the levels above to make it a little bit more transparent. And
then, we've introduced a graphic and perforated metal, basically, that symbolizes bikes. So, there's an
image of a bike there, and that image continues as you move through the building. At the plaza area,
we've incorporated another bench into the stair as it comes down to the plaza. And then, we think any
other seating opportunities there -- and this is in conference with the landscape architect -- would really
need to be something that's promoted by the tenant that's in that space, and if they have tables and
chairs they want to pull out there, perhaps that's a way to animate that space. Waverley façade, same
thing. Look at the fins and add some amenities in the plaza. Again, I'm going to go to the large-scale
elevation. I've already discussed the amenity in the plaza, which is the bench that we've added. In a
similar way, we've reduced the fins down and created this railing that starts to form a cap to the building.
We also no longer are wrapping the two corners with fins. If you'll recall before, we were wrapping the
two corners with the fins. Now, we're not. The fins are merely infill and reduced in height? Lastly, this
wasn't something that the Board commented on, but we've added a horizontal mullion at the retail
transom, just to give it a little bit different scale and to increase the horizontality of that façade, with the
canopy above. On the pedestrian alley side in the back of the building, really, it was a matter of, what's
the selection on the plant material? I think we looked at a lilac vine, and we looked at the California
grape, which I'm told is not going to attract winemakers, right? But, it might attract birds. The fruit is
very small on the California vines, so I thought I would just preempt that question. There's really no
change to that, although the planters are all now consistently drawn at the same height. The planters in
City of Palo Alto Page 4
the pedestrian way at the back of the building and the alleyway behind Tai Pan and Prolific Oven are all
now at 36 inches, approximately. Those are all seed-free, drain-free type planters, as well. We have
some new images right off the press from yesterday morning that are not in your set. This is a view from
the, in front of the building, basically, on Waverley. We have the board-formed concrete at the lower
levels. We have the terracotta-colored fins, the bronze metalwork, and the clear glass at the retail. You
can look down the alley. This is from, obviously, across the street. It shows the corner stair element
where, again, we have the bronze perforated metal that has tapestry on it, which is the public art.
Tapestry has already been approved by the Public Art Commission and is an abstract representation of,
not the flatlands, but the foothills that surround Palo Alto. It creates an interesting graphic on that
screen. We have it at this location, and we have it at the far end, which you will see in a minute. This is a
close-up of the stair. We incorporated a bench here, and then extended the planter over on this side, in
front of the elevator. And then, the railings for the stair descend down and provide a backdrop to that
bench so that no one falls into the stair that then descends down to the garage level. Showing some idea
of furniture that could possibly be out there. And then, a photographic representation of the building
from down Waverley Street, giving an idea of what it would like in the context. You don't really see the
post office because of the trees. And then, on Hamilton Avenue looking the other direction. It's broken up
quite nicely I think. It's a big building, but it integrates well. And then, this is the other location of the
perforated panel and the, you know, this horizontal line here is picked up in that horizontal canopy that
we have on Hamilton. This is just our rendering, showing you how that additional bench would look and
how those benches occur there, with the metalwork behind. That metalwork then would match the
railings above. If you have a bicycle, you would enter here. Here's the perforated graphic of the bike and
the entrance. As you come in, you'd be entering on the left-hand side, and this is sort of the drive-aisle
side. You'd see this pattern of images of bikes, basically, that would be in this perforated screen to
provide a secure bike area, but communicate what's going on there. We're thinking of a bright color in
there, so that when you're in the alley coming from Waverly looking down, you can, actually, in the
distance, can see the color in the garage. And then, the screen of the perf'd metal in front of the bike
storage area. And then, this is looking the other way. You see the festoon lighting in the alleyway, the
plant material, the special paving. The paving won't be contrasting like that. I think that's a shadow thing
going on here, so the paving is more consistent. I apologize for that. More like that. This is the back
alleyway, again, with an opportunity for a bench. There was a discussion, should this bench be
moveable? Right now, we're showing it more fixed in this rendering. And then, the very rear. And I
believe that's...This is just an explanation of tapestry. I think we covered that probably last time. That's
my presentation. Thank you for the extra time.
Chair Furth: You're welcome.
Mr. Hayes: It's much better when you don't have to rush.
Chair Furth: We'll extend the same courtesy to the public. Any questions?
Board Member Gooyer: I have one question. Ken, on the Hamilton Avenue side, the concrete portion,
depending on which one you look at, the square openings are either there, or not there. Which one is it?
Mr. Hayes: It's...
Board Member Gooyer: On this one, it doesn't really appear to be there, other than just...
Mr. Hayes: They are depressions, so they're not see-through.
Board Member Gooyer: Well, at one point, they looked like they were completely all the way through.
They're openings.
Mr. Hayes: They're not openings. There was an issue with the sheer wall, so they are recesses in the
concrete.
City of Palo Alto Page 5
Board Member Gooyer: Oh, okay.
Mr. Hayes: They're recesses.
Board Member Gooyer: Okay.
Mr. Hayes: But they are there.
Chair Furth: Anything else before we hear from the public?
Vice Chair Baltay: Yes. Architect Hayes, in the same thing Robert's talking about, I've noticed the Art
Commission seems to present images of irregular, rounded shapes on that same wall, rather than the
recta-linear squares. Do you have an opinion, as the architect, what's appropriate for the architecture of
the building?
Mr. Hayes: It's a very good question. We've gone back and forth on this. I like the interest in the
proposal by the artist. I think that that is a concept that your public art coordinator, Elise DeMarzo, is also
supportive of. I could see it working. I'm not sure what the, you know, how we're going to accomplish it,
if that's something that we want to go. But, I also don't mind just the simplicity of what we have here,
with the vines growing on it. I don't know if we have the vines with the other concept, whether or not
you're going to read through that, this undulating façade that picks up on that tapestry kind of pattern.
I'd be interested to hear your opinion. I'm a bit on the fence, I think, in terms of which way to go. I don't
mind the simple version if we're going to have the vines.
Vice Chair Baltay: Thank you.
Chair Furth: I have one speaker card, Elizabeth Wong.
Elizabeth Wong: I represent Waverley Post, which is the owner of 550 Waverley, the building adjacent to
this parking lot. If there are not enough people in the audience, it's probably because they never received
notification of this ARB meeting. The only reason I'm here is because I received an email, and I checked
my mailbox yesterday, and there was no notification. I have several buildings in town and I did not
receive a single card. I wanted to talk about a few things concerning this building and the (inaudible).
One of the reasons why I spoke so adamantly against the fins is because this is a view of my property,
and you will see from these windows, I can see the post office, which is amazing, an amazing view, and
that the fence totally blocks the view. I thought it was, you know, for the people in the parking lot, it
would be a lost opportunity to see the beautiful building that the post office is. Amy, would you show
them the next one? I also wanted to voice some of my other opinions. I have a neighbor that is building
a 50-foot underground, three stories. There's going to be a basketball court there, and (inaudible) walls,
and I don't see why this building could not have 40 feet underground and include three levels of
underground parking. I think that we don't have space in the city for parking spaces, and it's an
opportunity to build a garage that will stay there forever. I would like to see...It would have been my
preference to see the art going horizontal instead of vertical because it's really hard to see vertical in a
very small area of downtown. I wanted to also add that I had no conversations or correspondence with
anybody since the last ARB meeting. I don't know who they talked to, but they did not include me. I also
wanted to ask you if the panel, on the top of the fourth floor, are they solar panels? And, what is the
height of that solar panel? I'm interested in knowing that. Basically, those are the things, I think. There is
another view that you can see the post office really, really well. Can you see the next slide? This is the
kind of view that you will lose, and if you had an open parking space, parking, you know, four or five
levels of parking was open, it would be a less-massive building with a splendid view of the (inaudible)
area. Thank you. Oh, one more thing, and that is the access to the back of my building. That is a big, big
issue, and it will not go away. Thank you.
Chair Furth: Thank you. Are there any questions of Mrs. Wong? Okay. Anybody else wish to speak on this
project? All right. Any comments from staff?
City of Palo Alto Page 6
Ms. French: You know, when we continue a meeting, just generally, to a date certain, we do not send
out additional notice cards. It's a City expense that we don't go to the trouble to do, because it is a date
certain and...
Chair Furth: At our last meeting, we announced that this would be heard on this day.
Ms. French: Correct.
Chair Furth: Thank you. Okay. Any questions of staff or the applicant?
Board Member Gooyer: Want me to start?
Chair Furth: Sure.
Board Member Gooyer: Okay. I think this is an improvement over what we've seen, and I think the third
time definitely helped. It's interesting. There are a couple of things. The various changes that you made,
I think, are all in the right direction, and I think, as far as I'm concerned, this is approvable at this point.
There are some items that, I guess, are still somewhat in flux, but it's all just sort of, throw out my
opinion. The tapestry as it's shown on here, I happen to like that. I mean, I know it seems like it didn't
really work at Stanford, but I think because, first of all, this is also, you could see through it, and I think
it just makes a unique...If nothing else, it's almost, you look at it, you go, "What the heck is that?" It
draws you to it a little more. But, I do find it strange that, if this is done, I mean, it doesn't make any
sense to me to put the original design skin on there, and then, take that down and put up the tapestry,
so we just do one in lieu of the other completely. Secondly, I happen to like the framing for the solar
panels. I think it helps the building rather than hinders. I'd like to see, even if they don't put the solar
panels on, I'd like to see the frame up there to counterbalance what's going on at the base of the
building. I think it actually is a help to it, especially with the new design of the railing on top. It just gives
it a nice, finished top floor to it. Like I said, I could approve the project, or forward it on at this point the
way it is now.
Chair Furth: Alex?
Board Member Lew: Thank you, Ken, and thank you, staff, for all the hard work on this project. I can
also recommend approval of the project today. Previously, I had three major reservations. One was the
four dead-end aisles, dead-end aisles inside the garage; the narrow alley between the Tai Pan restaurant
and the project; and, also, before, I think you were encroaching as much as six or seven feet into the
special setback, and I felt that was sort of short-sighted. I understood the logic of it, but it really seemed
short-sighted to me given how hard it is to regain right-of-way space in the future when we actually...If
we ever need it. Anyway, I think the building is handsome. It is big. I understand Ken's design strategy,
and I think that you've done a really great job with giving that approach. I do want to throw out there
that there is a different way of designing a big garage like this. In Beverly Hills, there are two garages,
public garages. One's at, like, 345 North Beverly Drive. It has a Williams Sonoma on the ground floor and
it's three stories. And then, they have another one, which is 9510 Brighton Way, which is five levels. That
has ground-floor retail and it's on Rodeo Drive. They look like buildings. You would never think that they
are parking garages. They would be more expensive than what you're showing today. They may be out
of the budget of this particular project. But, if you just walk down the street, you wouldn't think that they
are a garage, and they blend in. And I think as a good of a job as you've done on this project, it's still
going to look like a big garage, especially the Hamilton façade. I think you've done everything that you
can do on the Waverley façade. I think the retail helps. It's going to be big, and I think we should expect
some criticism of the bulk from it. If you think all the criticism we've gone over, like, the 636 Waverley
project, this is going to be a pretty big shock to the system in Palo Alto. I think we should be, we're going
to have to be prepared for it, and it's responding to a need for parking. I mean, that's the way I'm
looking at it. There were a lot of good changes in the last revisions, the photovoltaics structure, the
columns, the changes to the fins. I think those are all really important, and I think that they do help.
Okay. The only things that I have on my list now that I think are completely addressed is the concrete
City of Palo Alto Page 7
color, which I think you're calling out as natural. My understanding is there isn't really such a thing as
"natural" concrete. Even sidewalks are colored with lamp black. I think we need to see something, and I
would prefer to see something warmer, a warmer color than cooler color. I can understand the logic of
trying to match the concrete to, having the gray-colored concrete to match the All Saints Church. But
then, at the same time, I'm thinking churches should be separate and distinct from the rest of the fabric.
I did look at the 636 Waverley building and the color of that in context with all the warm colors on the
block and it seems off to me. It seems like it stands out too much from the neighbors. I think that the
Board should discuss some provision for placement of signs for the retail storefront. That's mostly
because your awning is really high. You don't have a lot of space above the doors, the transoms. Yeah,
you can hang a sign, or a provision for blade signs on the columns. Something. I think we have to do
something. I'm also concerned about graffiti on the board-formed concrete and I want to know if you're
proposing to put the coating, like a graffiti coating on the concrete. Or if the City is going to paint it
afterwards, or if you're going to use chemical cleaners, which never completely remove all of the paint.
And then, I did want to address Elizabeth Wong's comment about the fins. If I look at the site plan, I
think that, even if the fins were removed, I don't think it's going to help the view through the garage
because there's that stair, and the elevator, and the sheer wall. I think the other thing is that I think the
way Ken has designed the fins now, I think looks good. We have another garage over at the Hoover
Building at Stanford, where the fins are four feet apart, and it doesn't work at all. It doesn't look good. I
think they do need to be fairly closely spaced. I would say that there is an alternate. Like, we have the
Bryant Street garage. It just has a grid. It looks more like a window frame and not fins. I think that
works, actually, pretty well. But, at the moment, I think I'm recommending no change with regard to
that. I did visit the site this morning. I do think there is an issue with service vehicles unloading in the
mornings for the CVS store and the restaurant, and then, later in the day, for the Apple store. I think that
is an issue. I think loading it from the street side is feasible in the early morning because there's
generally not a lot of cars parked in the morning. And I do see restaurants (inaudible) Emerson Street
that have restaurant loading in the morning, in the street. They just block the street, so I think that can
work. But, I think we do have to resolve all that, and I don't see a lot of details in here. Anyway, that's all
that I have. I can recommend approval of the project today.
Chair Furth: Peter.
Vice Chair Baltay: Through the Chair, could I ask a question of the architect, please?
Chair Furth: Yes.
Vice Chair Baltay: Architect Hayes, I have a question for you about the concrete sheer wall and what you
explained were decorative penetrations. I originally understood those to be windows through the sheer
wall, so you'd have a glancing view, a frame of the post office. Is that a possibility, to do that, still?
Mr. Hayes: We can certainly investigate that more. That was the original concept, but in working with the
structural in Watry's office, it presented some problems for them to be able to get the lateral forces to
transfer down the sheer wall.
Vice Chair Baltay: Okay. The openings are very small. It seems that the sheer strength would not be
dramatically affected. Thank you. I find myself able to recommend approval of this project. I think the
changes have been for the good, and I'm very pleased with the way it looks now. I'm very appreciative of
the architect and staff for modifying the façade a little bit with the top corniche line. I am concerned that
the building is much better with the photovoltaic canopy on the top. The reality is that the canopy is
something like 56 feet up, so it's higher than the current sacred 50-foot height limit, and this is going
before City Council for a vote. I'd like to give them some ammunition, that the Architecture Board thinks
the building is significantly better with the photovoltaic canopy, fully understanding that it's higher than
the current 50-foot limit. We still think it's an improvement on the building and should be retained. At
least put it really loud and clear to everybody what's going on. My second and only other issue is
regarding that concrete sheer wall. I think it's much better if you have rectilinear openings through it that
people can see out of. Perhaps also modify the color, or just take into account what Alex was saying
City of Palo Alto Page 8
about toning down the coldness of the gray concrete. I think the metal covering on the stairs will be a
nice feature, having the public art there, and I'm all in favor of keeping it there, but I don't think it needs
to be extended to the concrete sheer wall. I find the rectilinear grade somehow sinks in with the building
as an architectural element. I think it's a loss not to have those peekaboo windows out to the post office
that we were originally discussing. I'd like to recommend that, I guess that that concrete sheer wall come
back on consent, or just a recommendation to staff to check the color of the concrete and see if we can't
get openings through it. Aside from that, I'm grateful to the staff for all the work that's gone through,
and the architects for getting this building to where it is now. Thank you.
Board Member Gooyer: Can I just interject one item? I agree completely, and that's why I asked the
question about the openings in the concrete wall. I think it would be much better if the openings were
there. And I also know, having dealt with enough structural engineers, that they're going to scream and
moan and everything else, and then, if you put your foot down, it's amazing how it gets done. I don't buy
it, that it has to be that way. I mean, I accepted your answer because I know you probably asked the
structural engineer and they said, no, no, I need that wall solid. But they don't. It's amazing how...I've
always gotten my way if you really push a little bit.
Chair Furth: I'm trying to judge by facial expressions how many architects are out there and how many
engineers are out there [Laughter.] Getting a lot of audience reaction.
[crosstalk]
Vice Chair Baltay: It's a few more rebars, Wynne. That's all.
Chair Furth: That's what I figured (inaudible). Sorry about the terrace.
Board Member Lew: Wynne, I'd like to interrupt for one second. There's the internal joke, like, if you're
having a meeting with architects and engineers, the engineers show up 10 minutes early and the
architects show up 10 minutes late. That's reflective of, I think, structural design, as well.
Chair Furth: I see. And the extroverted engineers are the ones who look at your shoes, right. Okay. I
think it looks like a handsome building. I'm really pleased. I share Elizabeth Wong's sorrow at the loss of
that view of the post office, but it's going to happen with this building program. I'm grateful that you did
carve out the corner on Waverley so that as people come down that street, to have a bit more of a
glimpse of that beautiful building across the street. That beautiful civic building across the street, but as a
Depression project, with a feeling that civic buildings should look good, they should look like we care
about our common purposes in our public buildings. That they shouldn't be as cheap as possible, but
they should be the most satisfying we can do. And in this last set of drawings, I have the sense that this
is a huge structure, it's a parking structure, but it's also a handsome structure, and we can be proud of it.
I think a really important thing with a building of this size is what the experience is walking by it, or even
driving by it, close up. I think it's going to be good. I think it's going to be a big improvement over our
current experience. We do sit up here and carp a lot, but we also do appreciate what you're doing.
There's going to be a much better bicycle and pedestrian experience. I am not going to be locking my
bike in the midst of the ivy. I'm not going to be dodging cars backing up into me because there is no
pedestrian path at this point that doesn't involve cars backing up into you. I really like your new, walking
through the lower level. I'm really glad that we discussed and you were able to raise that floor level
underground. I think that this is really, for all the fact it is housing for many, many cars, a pretty
multimodal project. I agree that we need to think about where the signage is going to go. I'm delighted
that we have a public art element here, and it looks like a beautiful one. On the concrete color, I do not
like that cold gray. I don't think -- and I don't know if it really is cold -- I don’t think that it's the concrete
across the street in the church that we should be picking up on. I think it's the other civic building, which
is the post office. I want to know that it's going to enhance that. Which one am I looking at?
Ms. Boyd: Yes, they have.
City of Palo Alto Page 9
Chair Furth: (inaudible)
[Laughter]
Chair Furth: I saw it, I looked at it, I looked at it in a bigger context; I still don't like it. I think the context
is the post office. I do think that this is wonderful for us in terms of a City building and solar panels
because we have been not happy with retrofitted solar panels on parking garages. We have thought that
they looked horrible, to use a technical term. These finish the building. They make it lighter, they make it
soar, they make it float, they make it ecologically more optimistic. They're great. I really like the altered
railings up on the top. Again, I think those are great design elements. I have the sense that this building,
when it's built in full, can make us proud in the same way that our post office does, while we reflect on
the changes in the way the world is organized between the point when the post office was the most
important thing we had, and when the parking garage still was. Fifty-six feet -- or whatever -- is a lot of
height, but the building next to it is 75, so this is one of the very few places in the city where I think,
downtown where I think you could do this and it wouldn't be a bad thing. I was very concerned about
pulling it back as far as possible. I think you've done that. And I also realize that by having the wider
sidewalk, you give a sense of bigger pull-back, even though the building façade is not further back. I very
much appreciate the wider sidewalks. What else did I want to say? I agree that the windows would be
much better. I am concerned about loading and how that's going to work. While I know that this building
is much more deferential to the 550 Waverley building than a standard, you know, if we continue
development pattern along that street, all the way to the corner, which has zero setback. This is a
different situation. It's a deep building, and it's a tall building, and I am persuaded that moving it back
isn't going to work. And I'm almost ready to be persuaded that that will be an attractive place to walk
through. I am persuaded that it will be a much better place for people working there. Our code says
we're supposed to have seating areas and what-not, not just for customers, but for employees, and we're
all used to the sight of workers on their breaks, sitting on stand pipes, or curbs, or boxes overturned, and
I'm glad that we're going to have seating. In one of the drawings of the seating proposals, it shows what
I think of as architecturally lovely, but not comfortable seating. The Timber form Colossus, I can't tell
how tall that is, but it looks a little short. I hope it's at least 30 inches, or thereabouts. I'm looking at
sheet...
Male: (inaudible)
Chair Furth: Yeah.
Male: (inaudible)
Board Member Lew: Microphone.
Chair Furth: Please.
Mr. Hayes: That is John Potis with Merrill Morris, landscape architect.
Mr. Potis: Thank you. Benches are 18 inches high and are similar to a chair.
Chair Furth: I'm sorry, could you introduce yourself for the record?
Mr. Potis: My name is John Potis, landscape architect with Merrill Morris Partners.
Chair Furth: Thank you.
Mr. Potis: The benches are generally 18 inches high, and that's about the same height as a chair.
Chair Furth: I thought was a chair was, a chair seat...Isn't a chair seat 30?
City of Palo Alto Page 10
Mr. Potis: Thirty would be the table height.
Chair Furth: Fine, good, lovely.
Mr. Potis: [crosstalk] is generally about 30 inches.
Chair Furth: You're right. I just measured my seat this morning. It's 12 foot six. You're right. Great.
People can sit down in them. And they're both the same height? Timber form is just photographed to
look lower? You have bench options for the alley passageway.
Mr. Hayes: There are benches in the alleyway, which would be these Timber form.
Chair Furth: (inaudible) way?
Mr. Hayes: And then there are benches on the Hamilton frontage, and those are integrated, cantilevered
off the architecture.
Chair Furth: Right, and as photographed... You present these to us as options in Sheet ARB 4.2, and as
photographed, the Timber form Colossus looked really low. Is that an illusion? They're both the same
height?
Mr. Potis: We're getting the image up, but it might be that the Colossus looks lower because it's a longer
bench in that image.
Chair Furth: Could be.
Mr. Hayes: Yeah, it will be seat height, they will both be seat height, whether they're...
Chair Furth: My point is...
Mr. Hayes: ...integrated.
Chair Furth: ...of course, that I want a bench that I can sit down on and stand up from, even if I am not
in peak health. Which means, occasionally, you need something to lean on.
Mr. Potis: Yeah, with sitting up, generally, having an arm on the bench, or a...
Chair Furth: Exactly.
Mr. Potis: [crosstalk]...And with the other...
Mr. Hayes: Can you (inaudible)?
Mr. Potis: The Colossus would not normally come with an arm. The Colossus, it's a big hunk of wood, so I
think of Palo Alto trees. Even though it's a dead tree, it's a nice hunk of wood. But with the other bench,
you can get arms, and also, the other bench, I thought would be more complementary to the built-in
benches. But, again, I wanted...
Chair Furth: I mean, I love great big hunks of wood and all that. And we have lots of people to whom
they will not need any assistance. But, take a look at the CVS clientele. You've got a lot of people who
need help getting up and down.
Mr. Hayes: The benches in front of the building on Hamilton do have arms.
City of Palo Alto Page 11
Chair Furth: I understand that they do, but I’m in favor of universal design. Okay. I think that's all. But
my overall feeling is pleasure that we have, I think, gotten to a building which will be pleasant to
experience, that will enhance alternative forms of moving about, and that will meet the City Council's
project, which requires, says we need a lot more parking in this area. I also hear commentary which
leads me to think that we should consider a subcommittee. I am prepared to vote for this. I think there
are some items that need further work, and I would suggest that a subcommittee is the appropriate way
to do that. I'm happy to delegate it to two of you. I don’t think my participation is needed. Any issues, I
think, would be -- unless you want to talk about it now -- signage placement, concrete color, and the
piercing or not of the sheer wall on Hamilton. Was there something else? Oh, and loading. How loading is
going to be handled. Or do you think that's not necessary? Colleagues? I'm actually asking if you're
supportive of that approach.
Board Member Lew: I have a question for staff. Wynne was asking about loading. Is that actually part of
ARB purview? Because that's something in the street right-of-way. I think in discussion in the past, I
think that's been excluded from our scope.
Ms. French: Correct. Yes.
Board Member Lew: We can make a statement to the Council, right? We can make a recommendation,
but it's not our...
Ms. French: The Office of Transportation would be reviewing where exactly that would be placed...
Chair Furth: So, what I'm thinking...
Ms. French: ...in relationship to the parking.
Chair Furth: ...about is that we're required to find that it's functional. If there's something about the
parking garage itself in relationship to these public alleyways that is making it dysfunctional for loading,
then it would be something we should be thinking about. If we don't think there's anything to be done
with respect to the building itself, that we're satisfied it can be done elsewhere, then I agree with you.
Ms. French: Could I interject? With the architectural review findings on circulation, if you would like to
wordsmith that to note the loading space, with the provision of a loading space on Waverley, something
to that effect, the details of where that loading space along the block is something that would be worked
out. But having a loading space, period...
Chair Furth: Allows the building and the adjacent buildings to function...
Ms. French: Yeah, we'd like to think of it...
Chair Furth: That's helpful. Thank you. Not actually an issue I raised. Further discussion, or does
somebody want to make a motion, which we can then discuss?
MOTION
Vice Chair Baltay: I'm happy to make a motion. I move that we recommend approval of this project with
the following conditions. Or, actually, before I even go into conditions, in the findings we need to make,
I'd like to insert a sentence regarding the importance of the photovoltaic panels. Staff, could you help me
locate where the best place to put that would be, please?
Board Member Gooyer: I think it should be more than just a sentence. I think they really do help the
overall design of the building.
Vice Chair Baltay: Yeah. I agree. Do we have draft findings in here, Amy?
City of Palo Alto Page 12
Chair Furth: Yes, we do. They're on pages...They're not highlighted the way they usually are, so they're a
little harder to find. They start on page 17. Oh, wait a minute. Yeah. Actually, they start earlier, it's just
that they're laid out in a very different way.
Ms. French: There is, on packet page 20, is the...
Chair Furth: On page what?
Ms. French: Packet page 20.
Chair Furth: Right.
Ms. French: There is the ARB Finding #6.
Chair Furth: Right, but they start earlier, right? They start...
Ms. French: Correct.
Chair Furth: It's very odd because we've got...I have a hard time finding #1.
Ms. French: We do have a fair number of comp plan policies for this project, so #1 actually starts on the
top of page 14.
Chair Furth: Oh, at the top [crosstalk], right.
Ms. French: Packet page 14.
Chair Furth: Right. I think it's Finding #2, that the project has unified and coherent design.
Vice Chair Baltay: Yeah. I would like to see us add...
Chair Furth: A bullet [crosstalk]...
Vice Chair Baltay: ...in that, in Finding #2, that the photovoltaic panels on the top of the building
significantly aid in making the building a harmonious transition in scale, mass and character with the
community.
Chair Furth: And say, "and supporting structures?" Photovoltaic panels and supporting structures?
Vice Chair Baltay: That's great. You're good with words, Wynne. Help me figure that one out.
Chair Furth: I think it (inaudible) 2-a, or third bullet? I'm sorry. Never mind. Wrong place. Yeah, you're
right. It goes in 2-d. So, the photovoltaic panels and supporting structures...
Ms. French: Is the focus the supporting structure for the...?
Chair Furth: It's the whole thing. Yes.
Vice Chair Baltay: Well...
Chair Furth: The building looks unfinished without them, is my problem.
Vice Chair Baltay: Alex...?
City of Palo Alto Page 13
Board Member Lew: I think my inclination would be to just say, just have it include the structure and not
the panels themselves. Because we got all sorts of state acc...Like, we have two solar shading accents,
and I'm thinking it may be better if we just...
Vice Chair Baltay: I agree with you, Alex.
Chair Furth: Because the structure (inaudible).
Vice Chair Baltay: It's the structure that we're after. We just need to use those words.
Chair Furth: Okay, the photovoltaic support structures?
Vice Chair Baltay: That's the...
Chair Furth: I'm thinking of them as finishing the building, but you said something else.
??: (inaudible)
Chair Furth: Provide an elegant top to the building? Top, bottom and middle. Did the architect want to
comment why they're good?
Mr. Hayes: It terminates the top of the building. It gives it a cornice.
Chair Furth: Okay, provides an elegant cornice. Effective?
Vice Chair Baltay: What I wanted to do, Wynne, was use language in the findings...
Chair Furth: All right.
Vice Chair Baltay: ...and (inaudible) this super structure is important in helping the building achieve a
harmonious transition in scale, mass and character with the adjacent...
Board Member Gooyer: There you go. That sounds good.
Vice Chair Baltay: ...building.
Chair Furth: All right. Let's say it provides a cornice, and. Then we've got the facts and the [crosstalk].
Vice Chair Baltay: I'm trying to give Council what they need to hear, that this is the language they wrote.
This building does...[crosstalk].
Chair Furth: And then, can we add a sentence? Yeah, because it has a lot to do with the height. And can
we add another sentence, that the 75-foot height of the adjacent building...?
Vice Chair Baltay: I think that's already here.
Chair Furth: All right.
Vice Chair Baltay: It's bullet point number 3.
Chair Furth: Perfect. Some of these things, I have read them, (inaudible) my marks, but I don't
remember them all, obviously. Okay. Do you have something, staff, that will work? Are you clear on what
we're saying?
City of Palo Alto Page 14
Ms. French: Yeah, I think you noted under 2-a, the third bullet, the photovoltaic supporting structure on
the top of the building.
Chair Furth: It should be 2-d. I'm sorry.
Ms. French: Oh, 2-d, okay. The photovoltaic supporting structure on the top of the building provides an
elegant top, and there's something about significant, and some other verbiage.
Vice Chair Baltay: And it's important in helping the building achieve, then use the language from the
findings. Helping the building achieve...
Chair Furth: Harmonious transitions.
Vice Chair Baltay: ...harmonious transition and mass-scale character with the adjacent building.
Chair Furth: Perfect.
Vice Chair Baltay: Then, I'd like to make a condition that the openings in the concrete sheer wall remain
as openings, as we've been originally shown. It's not a, come back to us on consent. Just make them
openings. I believe that can be done. And I'd like to have a second condition, that the color of the
concrete come back on a consent calendar after the architect has given a little more thought to how to
tone down the harshness of the colored concrete. And then...
Ms. Gerhardt: Board Member Baltay, are you asking that to be on consent or on subcommittee?
Vice Chair Baltay: Subcommittee, I think. I'm sorry, I misspoke.
Ms. Gerhardt: Thank you.
Vice Chair Baltay: Assuming the rest of the board is up for that. And then, the signage. Is that something
we can expect to have come back at the same subcommittee?
Ms. French: Once we receive an application for staff architectural review, we can bring that to the
subcommittee.
Chair Furth: I think our problem is different. The question is: What is a location on the building that any
signs could go. I think that's the way we want to think about it now. Not the content of the sign.
[crosstalk]
Board Member Lew: The other choice we would have is we could, could we not recommend that a
master sign program be included as part of the project? That doesn't mean it would happen. I think we
were saying...
Chair Furth: [crosstalk].
Board Member Lew: There's usually a sign for the garage itself. I mean, we name the garages.
Mr. Hayes: There is a master sign program in the drawing set for the parking-related elements that the
City has adopted. For the garages.
Vice Chair Baltay: Could that just be expanded to include the commercial...?
Chair Furth: It's retail...[crosstalk]
City of Palo Alto Page 15
Mr. Hayes: We're just talking the retail store.
Vice Chair Baltay: Just expand it to include the retail signage, too. It can't be that hard just to say you're
going to have... [crosstalk].
Mr. Hayes: We can locate, yeah, yeah, we can locate, you know, options for where the signage could be
incorporated.
Chair Furth: Perfect.
Vice Chair Baltay: It will help everybody if you do that. At least that's the base [crosstalk].
Mr. Hayes: And the tenant will want to see that, too.
Vice Chair Baltay: Those are the only conditions I'd like to add. I do not think we should put anything
about loading...
Chair Furth: All right.
Vice Chair Baltay: ...on the architecture board. So, that's my motion.
Ms. French: Could I ask a clarification? The openings in the concrete, you said that would not go to
subcommittee, that's just a ...?
Vice Chair Baltay: It would not go to subcommittee.
Ms. French: ...would be a condition.
Vice Chair Baltay: We're just saying that should be one of the conditions of approval, is that the openings
be retained as openings.
Ms. French: Okay, thank you.
Board Member Gooyer: I'll second that.
Chair Furth: Any discussion?
Vice Chair Baltay: No, there's no "if possible" on that condition. It just says it.
Chair Furth: Keep in mind we are a recommending body. Any other comments before we vote?
Ms. Gerhardt: Do we have a second?
Chair Furth: Yes. Robert. I always forget to summarize that. Okay, on a motion by Board Member Baltay,
second by Board Member Gooyer, to recommend approval as previously stated. All those in favor say
aye. All those opposed. Hearing none, it passes unanimously.
MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 4-0.
1 Revision July 20, 2016
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. C17166279
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND
WATRY DESIGN INC.
This Amendment No. 1 (this “Amendment”) to Contract No. C17166279 (“Contract,”
as defined below) is entered into on February 11, 2019, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a
California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and WATRY DESIGN INC., a California
corporation, located at 2099 Gateway Place, Suite 550, San Jose, CA 95110 (“CONSULTANT”).
R E C I T A L S
A. The Contract was entered into on December 12, 2016 between the parties
for the provision of design and environmental consulting services in connection with a new parking
structure in the Downtown University Avenue business district, as detailed therein.
B. The parties now desire to amend the Contract to increase the scope of
services to include the basement design and, in consideration of such increase to the scope of
services, to increase the compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT by Three Hundred Eighty Eight
Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Five Dollars ($388,275), from One Million Eight Hundred Ninety
Nine Thousand Five Hundred Ninety One Dollars ($1,899,591) to Two Million Two Hundred Eight
Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Six Dollars ($2,287,866).
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and
provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree as follows:
SECTION 1. Definitions. The following definitions shall apply to this Amendment:
a. Contract. The term “Contract” shall mean contract no. C17166279
between CONSULTANT and CITY, dated December 12, 2016.
b. Other Terms. Terms used and not defined in this Amendment shall
have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Contract.
SECTION 2. The first sentence of the Recitals section of the Contract is hereby
amended to read as follows:
“The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement and are hereby
incorporated into this Agreement as though fully set forth herein, as follows:”
SECTION 3. Subsection C of the recitals section of the Contract is hereby amended
to read as follows:
“In reliance on these representations, City desires to engage Consultant to provide
professional services as more fully described in the Scope of Services set forth in Exhibit “A”,
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A9377EC-19C4-47FC-B032-9975773D23B4
2 Revision July 20, 2016
entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES” and Exhibit “A-1”, entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES” (together, the
“Basic Services”), and any authorized additional services (collectively, the “Services”), in
accordance with Schedule of Performance (“Schedule”) set forth in Exhibit “B”, entitled
“SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE”. Each of the exhibits enumerated in this recitals subsection C is
hereby attached and incorporated into this Agreement by reference as though fully set forth
herein.”
SECTION 4. Section 1, “SCOPE OF SERVICES”, of the Contract is hereby amended to
read as follows:
“CONSULTANT will perform the Services described in Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “A-1” in
accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement to the reasonable
satisfaction of City.”
SECTION 5. Section 4, “COMPENSATION”, of the Contract is hereby amended to read
as follows:
“4.1 Basic Services. The compensation to be paid by City to Consultant for
performance of the Basic Services and reimbursable expenses may not exceed Two Million
Seventy Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Eight Dollars ($2,079,878) in accordance with and
subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C,” entitled “COMPENSATION”, which is hereby attached and
incorporated into this Agreement by reference as though fully set forth herein. Consultant agrees
to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount.
4.2 Additional Services. Services in addition to the Basic Services (“Additional
Services”), if any, must be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit
“C,” entitled “COMPENSATION.” In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total
compensation for Basic Services, Additional Services and reimbursable expenses may not exceed
Two Million Two Hundred Eight Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Six Dollars ($2,287,866).
Consultant will not be entitled to any compensation for Additional Services performed without the
prior written authorization of City. Additional Services includes any Services that are determined
by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which are not already
encompassed within the Basic Services described in Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “A-1.”
4.3 Rate Schedule. The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set forth in
Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “Schedule of Rates” (“Rate Schedule”). Consultant is not entitled to
compensation for any Services performed or reimbursement for expenses incurred to the extent
that payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth
herein.”
SECTION 6. The following exhibit is hereby added to the Contract to read as set
forth in the attachment to this Amendment, which is hereby attached to and incorporated into this
Amendment and the Contract in full by this reference:
a. Exhibit “A-1”, entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A9377EC-19C4-47FC-B032-9975773D23B4
3 Revision July 20, 2016
SECTION 7. The following exhibit to the Contract is hereby amended in its entirety
to read as set forth in the attachment to this Amendment, which is hereby attached to and
incorporated into this Amendment and the Contract in full by this reference:
a. Exhibit “C”, entitled “COMPENSATION”.
SECTION 8. Legal Effect. Except as expressly modified by this Amendment, all of the
terms and conditions of the Contract, including any exhibits thereto, shall remain unchanged and
in full force and effect.
SECTION 9. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals set forth above are terms of this
Amendment and are hereby fully incorporated herein by this reference.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A9377EC-19C4-47FC-B032-9975773D23B4
4 Revision July 20, 2016
SIGNATURES OF THE PARTIES
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized
representatives executed this Amendment on the date first above written.
CITY OF PALO ALTO
City Manager (Contract over $85k)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney or designee
(Contract over $25k)
WATRY DESIGN INC.
Officer 1
By:
Name:
Title:
Officer 2 (Required for Corp. or LLC)
By:
Name:
Title:
Attachments :
EXHIBIT "A-1”, entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”
EXHIBIT “C’’, entitled “COMPENSATION”
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A9377EC-19C4-47FC-B032-9975773D23B4
Principal
John Purinton
Michelle Wendler
Secretary
5 Revision July 20, 2016
EXHIBIT “A-1”
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Under Exhibit “A”, CONSULTANT is providing services including without limitation preliminary
engineering, environmental review, schematic design, design development, construction
documents, construction administration and project closeout services to the City of Palo Alto for
the Downtown Parking Garage Project. In April 2017, the City Council directed City staff to
proceed with design of a new parking garage with five levels of above ground parking, one level of
basement parking with a retail space on the Waverley Street frontage. Therefore, in addition to
the services detailed under Exhibit “A”, , CONSULTANT will also complete the additional tasks as
detailed in this Exhibit “A-1” in order to proceed with the direction from the City Council regarding
the design of the parking garage in performance of this Agreement.
The additional design tasks include the following:
1. The addition of one basement level to the project including additional below-grade shoring
and emergency response radio coverage
2. Geotechnical environmental services to characterize soil for offsite disposal
3. Addition of security cameras
4. Street improvements related to the bulb outs at the Hamilton Avenue/ Waverley Street
sidewalks and removal of the existing post office drop box in the median island at Hamilton
Avenue
5. Traffic signal modifications at the Hamilton Avenue/ Waverley Street and Hamilton
Avenue/ Gilman Street intersections
CONSULTANT will include the additional design tasks under this Exhibit “A-1” throughout all of the
performance phases detailed in Exhibit “A” of this Agreement for the Downtown Parking Garage
project, including but not limited to the phases outlined below:
1. Schematic Design
2. Design Development
3. Construction Documents
4. Construction Administration
5. Project Closeout
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A9377EC-19C4-47FC-B032-9975773D23B4
6 Revision July 20, 2016
EXHIBIT “C”
COMPENSATON
The City agrees to compensate the Consultant for the Services performed in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below, and as
further specified in each Task Order issued by the City. Compensation will be calculated based on
the hourly rate schedule attached as Exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each
task set forth below.
Consultant must perform the tasks and categories of Services as outlined and budgeted below. The
City’s Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the
tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including
reimbursable expenses, and the total compensation for Additional Services do not exceed the
amounts set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement. City will authorize Phase 2 and 3, at its
discretion, contingent upon approval of environmental review and of the budget for construction
of the Project, and upon satisfactory completion of the Phase 1 Services.
Phase 1
Environmental Assessment $274,228
Preliminary Design $126,559
Schematic Design $264,862
Design Development $404,735
Phase 2
Construction Documents $457,700
Permitting $75,819
Project Bidding and Award $30,074
Phase 3
Construction Administration $340,249
Project Closeout $53,938
Subtotal Basic Services $2,028,164
Reimbursable Expenses $51,714
Total Basic Services and
Reimbursable Expenses $2,079,878
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A9377EC-19C4-47FC-B032-9975773D23B4
7 Revision July 20, 2016
Additional Services (Not to Exceed) $207,988
Maximum Total Compensation $2,287,866
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-
house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of
payment for Services and are not reimbursable expenses. City will reimburse Consultant for the
following expenses at cost, provided that the expenses were reasonably and necessarily incurred
solely for providing the Services:
A. Travel outside the San Francisco Bay Area, including transportation and meals, will be
reimbursed at actual cost subject to limits of the City’s policy for reimbursement of travel
and meal expenses for City employees.
B. Long distance telephone service charges, cellular phone service charges, overnight
delivery, facsimile transmission and postage charges are reimbursable at actual cost.
All requests for payment of expenses must be accompanied by appropriate documentation of the
claimed expenditure, such as written receipts. Any expense anticipated to be more than $5,000
must be approved in writing in advance by the City’s Project Manager.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Consultant will provide Additional Services related to a duly authorized Task Order only pursuant
to advanced, written authorization from the City as specified in Section 4 of the Agreement. At the
City’s Project Manager’s request, Consultant must submit a detailed written proposal including a
description of the scope of Additional Services, schedule, level of effort, and Consultant’s proposed
maximum compensation, including reimbursable expenses, for such Additional Services based on
the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The Additional Services, including scope, schedule and maximum
compensation will be negotiated and memorialized in writing by the City’s Project Manager and
Consultant prior to commencement of the Additional Services. Such written agreements for
Additional Services are deemed to be incorporated into the Task Order payment.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A9377EC-19C4-47FC-B032-9975773D23B4
City of Palo Alto (ID # 9920)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 2/11/2019
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Downtown Cap: Repeal of PAMC Chapter 18.18.040
Title: PUBLIC HEARING. Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 18.18
(Downtown Commercial District) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code (PAMC) to Repeal Section 18.18.040 Regarding a
Nonresidential Square Footage Cap in the CD Downtown Commercial Zoning
District to Implement and Conform to the Updated Comprehensive Plan;
Section 18.18.040 Implemented Policy L-8 of the Prior 1998 Comprehensive
Plan, Which was Removed as Part of the Adoption of the Comprehensive Plan
Update. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), This Ordinance is
Within the Scope of the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) Certified and Adopted on November 13, 2017 by Council Resolution No.
9720 (Continued from December 3, 2018)
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions:
1. Find the Ordinance within the scope of the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) certified and adopted on November 13, 2017 by Council Resolution No.
9720; and,
2. Adopt an ordinance implementing City Council direction from January 30, 2017 to repeal
Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) section 18.18.040 regarding a nonresidential floor
area restriction in the CD Downtown Commercial Zoning District.
Background
Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) section 18.18.040 implements Land Use Program L-8 from the
1998 Comprehensive Plan. This program and code section establish a development ceiling that
prevents more than 350,000 square feet of non-residential floor area from being developed in
City of Palo Alto Page 2
the City’s downtown commercial district. The program directed that the City re-evaluate the
limit once new non-residential development approvals reached 235,000 square feet of floor
area. City staff and consultants commenced this re-evaluation after that intermediate
threshold was reached, during the City’s Comprehensive Plan update process.
On January 30, 2017, as part of its consideration of the Comprehensive Plan update, the City
Council directed the removal of the downtown-specific non-residential floor area limit in Land
Use Program L-8 in favor of a new policy objective1. The new policy would limit office and
research and development (“office/R&D”) floor area on a citywide basis, capping new
development at 1.7 million square feet. In November 2017, the Council adopted that new policy
with the Council’s final approval of the updated Comprehensive Plan. In summer 2018, Council
amended the Comprehensive Plan to reduce the citywide office/R&D cap by half to 850,000
square feet following the certification of a citizen’s initiative to affect this change.
In addition to the citywide office/R&D limit, the City Council in May 2018 adopted a zoning code
amendment replacing interim regulations and establishing a 50,000 square foot annual limit on
new office space that applies to downtown, California Avenue Area and El Camino Real on an
ongoing basis.
Following prior Council direction, staff initiated a text amendment to repeal PAMC section
18.18.040 last summer. The Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) considered this
ordinance and recommended (4-0-1) that the Council reject it. The PTC expressed concerns
about the then-pending citizen’s initiative and the perceived inconsistency of removing the
downtown non-residential floor area restriction with the City’s expressed interest in
encouraging more housing development. The contemplated conversion of residential units at
the President Hotel was cited as an example of how allowing commercial development could be
contrary to other City efforts to encourage the retention and production of housing units. Over
20 speakers expressed concern about the ordinance at the PTC meeting. More on the
Commission meeting and verbatim minutes are provided in Attachment C.
Discussion
The subject ordinance seeks to implement what staff understood to be the Council’s direction
on January 30, 2017 to eliminate a downtown-specific cap on non-residential development and
instead rely upon the citywide office/R&D floor area limit and the 50,000 square foot annual
limit in three areas (downtown, along El Camino Real and near California Avenue). The
preferred scenario as described in the Comprehensive Plan Final EIR also included the same
provisions – the citywide cumulative office/R&D cap of 1.7 million square feet, an assumed
annual office/R&D limit to control the pace of growth, and the elimination of the separate cap
1 Action minutes from the City Council meeting are available online:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/56153
City of Palo Alto Page 3
that applies to Downtown. In reviewing the administrative record of the Comprehensive Plan
update, staff was unable to find any contrary discussion that would support the view that the
Council expected or contemplated that non-residential development downtown would be
limited to the remaining floor area that exists under the downtown cap, which today is
approximately 18,000 square feet.
If the Council intends to retain the downtown cap, staff would need to conduct additional
environmental analysis to evaluate how this change in policy direction impacts the land use
assumptions and conclusions in the final environmental impact report prepared for the
Comprehensive Plan update.
Additionally, it is recommended that, if Council does not adopt the proposed ordinance
repealing PAMC section 18.18.040 in its entirety, that the Council approve amending Section
18.18.040 to ensure the retention of the downtown development standards in PAMC Chapter
18.18 (Downtown Commercial (CD) District). Section 18.18.040 currently states that Chapter
18.18 as whole, including all of the downtown land use and development regulations, would be
City of Palo Alto Page 4
repealed once the City reaches 350,000 square feet of non-residential floor area from the 1986
base year.
Attachment A provides a copy of the proposed ordinance that would repeal PAMC section
18.18.040. Attachment B includes the prior and current Comprehensive Plan programs and
additional background information.
Timeline
If the Council approves the proposed ordinance, a second reading of the ordinance would be
scheduled as a consent calendar item for final adoption. Thirty days after the second reading,
PAMC section 18.18.040 would be removed from the Municipal Code.
Environmental Review
The proposed Ordinance is within the scope of and in furtherance of the Comprehensive Plan
2030 which was evaluated in the Comprehensive Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (Final
EIR) certified and for which findings were adopted by Council Resolution Nos. 9720 and 9721 on
November 13, 2017, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Pursuant to Section 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has determined that no new
effects would occur from and no new mitigation measures would be required for the adoption
of this Ordinance.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Draft Ordinance Chapter 18.18 (Downtown CD) to Repeal Downtown
Development Cap (PDF)
Attachment B: Comp Plan Policies (PDF)
Attachment C: PTC Minutes (PDF)
jb SL/Amending ORD 18.18 (DC) District 1 July 2018
** NOT YET ADOPTED **
DRAFT
Ordinance No. ____
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 18.18
(Downtown Commercial District) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal
Code (PAMC) to Repeal Section 18.18.040 Relating to a Nonresidential Square
Footage Cap in the CD Downtown Commercial Zoning District to Implement and
Conform to the Updated Comprehensive Plan 2030
The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. The 1998 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Palo Alto included a program, Land
Use Program L-8, to limit new nonresidential development in the Downtown area to 350,000
square feet or 10 percent above the amount of development existing or approved as of May
1986 (the “Downtown cap”), and to re-evaluate this limit when nonresidential development
reached 235,000 square feet. This program perpetuated the already existing Downtown cap
adopted in 1986 by Ordinance No. 3696 which had amended the Zoning Code to add a new
chapter codifying the Downtown cap.
B. Beginning in 2013, when Downtown nonresidential development was
approaching 235,000 square feet, the City re-evaluated the Downtown cap, studying land use
and traffic conditions and impacts, at the same time that the Comprehensive Plan update
process was underway.
C. As part of Council’s process for adoption of the updated Comprehensive Plan in
2017, the Council determined to maintain a cumulative citywide cap on nonresidential
development of 1.7 million square feet and apply it to office/R&D development only with
certain exemptions, to continue on an ongoing basis the annual limit on office/R&D
development by a separate ordinance, and to eliminate the 350,000 square foot cap on
nonresidential development in the Downtown in then-existing Program L-8 and focus on
monitoring development and parking demand. Accordingly, former Program L-8 is not included
in the Comprehensive Plan 2030 as adopted by the Council on November 13, 2017.
D. This Ordinance, which would remove the Downtown cap from the Zoning Code,
implements and is in furtherance of the updated Comprehensive Plan 2030.
SECTION 2. Section 18.18.040 (Repeal of Regulations) of Chapter 18.18 (Downtown
Commercial (CD) District) of Title 18 (Zoning) is repealed in its entirety.
18.18.040 Repeal of Regulations
jb SL/Amending ORD 18.18 (DC) District 2 July 2018
The department of planning and community environment shall monitor the number of
square feet approved for nonresidential development in the CD district and the number of
square feet approved for nonresidential development pursuant to a planned community (PC)
zone if the site of the PC zone was within the CD district on the effective date of this
chapter. When 350,000 square feet of nonresidential development have received final design
review approval pursuant to Chapter 18.76 or have received building permits, if no design
approval is required, this chapter shall be repealed and a moratorium shall be imposed. This
moratorium shall prohibit the city's acceptance or processing of any application for planning
approval or a building permit for new nonresidential square footage in the CD district. This
moratorium shall remain in effect for one year while the city undertakes a study of what
regulations would be appropriate in the CD district. The moratorium may be extended by the
council until such study is completed and appropriate regulations are implemented.
SECTION 3. Any provision of the Palo Alto Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent
with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is
hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each
and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or
unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the Ordinance would be
subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. The Council finds that the Ordinance is within the scope of and in furtherance of
the Comprehensive Plan 2030 which was evaluated in that certain Final Environmental Impact
Report (“Final EIR”) certified and for which findings were adopted by Council Resolution Nos.
9720 and 9721 on November 13, 2017, all in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (“CEQA”). Pursuant to Section 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has
determined that no new effects would occur from and no new mitigation measures would be
required for the adoption of this Ordinance.
SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its
adoption.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
jb SL/Amending ORD 18.18 (DC) District 3 July 2018
ABSTENTIONS:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ATTEST:
____________________________ ____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
____________________________ ____________________________
Assistant City Attorney City Manager
____________________________
Director of Planning & Community
Environment
Attachment B
Comprehensive Plan Policies and Additional Background Information
1998 Comprehensive Plan Program L-8:
Limit new non-residential development in the Downtown area to 350,000 square feet, or
10% above the amount of development existing or approved as of May 1986. Reevaluate
this limit when non-residential development approvals reach 235,000 square feet of floor
area.
Current Comprehensive Plan Policy L1.10:
Cap new square feet of office/R&D development citywide at 850,000 square feet,
exempting medical office uses in the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) vicinity.
Use January 1, 2015 as the baseline and monitor development towards the cap on an
annual basis. Continue to exempt medical, governmental and institutional uses from the
cap on office/R&D development.
Note:
PAMC Chapter 18.18.040 codified a maximum growth of 350,000 square feet and stipulated that
the CD development cap was to be re-evaluated when net new non-residential development
reached 235,000 square feet. A moratorium would come into effect as soon as 350,000 square
feet of new non-residential development receives either planning entitlements or building
permits. As required by the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code, City staff has monitored and
prepared annual reports to the City Council regarding development activity, vacancy rates and
commercial lease rates in order to evaluate the effectiveness of these regulations. As of October
30, 2018, the new non-residential development downtown, including approved and pipeline
projects, has not been exceeded. Approximately 330,792 square feet has been entitled or is in
the pipeline and approximately 19,208 square feet remains.
Consistent with PAMC section 18.18.040, the City initiated a study in 2013 to re-evaluate the
downtown cap for land use and traffic conditions and other impacts, when the total amount of
new nonresidential square footage approached 235,000. The City Council awarded a contract In
October 2013 for Downtown Development Cap Study to Dyett and Bhatia Urban and Regional
Planners. This analysis was proposed to be completed in two phases. Phase I focused on data
collection and projection analysis, while Phase II was to be the policy analysis phase. Phase I was
completed and the associated studies were submitted to both the PTC and City Council for
review. The studies included existing trends and conditions, downtown development cap
evaluations and a downtown business survey. Phase II was stayed given Council direction on
January 30, 2017 to end the Downtown non-residential floor area limitation.
Attachment C
PTC Summary and Transcript
Planning & Transportation Commission Meeting
The PTC held a public hearing on this item on July 25, 20181. There were 21 members of the
public who spoke on this proposed zoning code amendment. The majority of speakers voted in
favor of retaining the existing downtown commercial cap. While many of the speakers supported
retention of the downtown cap due to concerns about traffic and potential conversion of
residential square footage to nonresidential uses, some were directly the result of the proposed
conversion of the President Hotel residences to a hotel use. Some speakers also asked that this
issue be studied further in light of recent policy direction, the pending citizen initiative on the
citywide office/R&D growth cap, and so that the impact, including the environmental impact,
could be clearly understood. There were also a number of speakers who requested that the focus
be placed on providing more renter protection instead.
Following the public speakers, the PTC held a detailed discussion which also echoed much of what
was raised by the public. While a commissioner noted that there was some concern that the
retention of PAMC Chapter 18.18.040 would conflict with the January 30, 2017 Council motion
to remove the downtown cap from the Comp Plan, it was also acknowledged that the downtown
cap and the overall citywide cap are different because one restricts all commercial downtown
only, while the citywide cap restricts only office and R&D uses.
The PTC stated that action on the subject ordinance appeared to be premature for several
reasons. One of the biggest reasons was the upcoming (at the time) citizen initiative to reduce
the overall City wide cap. The perception was that the removal of the downtown commercial
square footage cap would be inconsistent with the citizen initiative to reduce in the allowable
office and R&D square footage city wide. The reduction was approved by Council five days after
this PTC hearing, preempting the placement of the measure on the November ballot.
Another reason was that the removal of the restriction on commercial square footage was seen
to contradict the more recent policy support for housing, including the zoning code amendments
being considered to implement the Comp Plan policies to increase housing production (Housing
Work Plan). The PTC expressed that the removal of the restriction on commercial square footage
would encourage more commercial development instead of housing. There was specific concern
that the removal of the downtown commercial cap would encourage conversion of residential
units to commercial uses. The proposed conversion of the President Hotel from residential units
to a hotel was held as one significant example. The PTC was concerned that the motion to
remove the downtown cap, made in January 2017, did not reflect more current policy direction
and Council positions and that more time should be spent to evaluate the more recent
discussions before taking any action on the subject code section. At the conclusion of the public
hearing, the PTC adopted a motion that recommended that City Council reject staff’s proposal to
repeal PAMC Chapter 18.18.040.
1 PTC Hearing July 25, 2018 Staff Report and Minutes
_______________________
1.Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2.The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3.The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Action Items 2
Public Comment is Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Fifteen (15) minutes, plus three (3) minutes rebuttal. 3
All others: Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 4
5
2. Public Hearing: Recommend that the City Council Adopt an Ordinance Amending6
Chapter 18.18 (Downtown Commercial District) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto7
Municipal Code to Repeal Section 18.18.040 Regarding a Nonresidential Square8
Footage Cap in the CD Downtown Commercial Zoning District to Implement and9
Conform to the Updated Comprehensive Plan. CEQA: Comprehensive Plan10
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Council Resolution No. 972011
12
Commission Action: Motion made by Commissioner Waldfogel to Recommend Council reject 13
staff's proposed ordinance, motion seconded by Chair Lauing (friendly amendment by Summa). 14
Motion passed 4‐0‐1 (Waldfogel, Monk, Lauing, Summa. Alcheck abstained, Gardias and Riggs 15
absent) 16
17
18
Chair Lauing: So as stated the next item on the agenda is Item Number 2 as printed here and 19
that’s a recommendation on an ordinance amending Chapter 18. And I believe we’re going to 20
have a Staff presentation on that as well from (interrupted) 21
22
Ms. French, Chief Planning Official: Yes, hello again. I’ll introduce Elena Lee who is going to be 23
presenting the PowerPoint she prepared. 24
25
Ms. Elena Lee: Thank you Chair and Members of the Commission. So tonight, the proposed 26
repeal of Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 18.18.40 is a direct outcome of the Comp. Plan 27
update and per specific Council motion at the January 30th, 2017 Council hearing on the Land 28
Use Element. 29
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
So PAMC 18.18.40 provides the following should certain thresholds be met. First of all, this 2
code chapter involves all non‐residential floor area. That would be office, retail‐like, not just 3
office and R&D. So, at 350,000‐square feet of non‐residential development and as of now we 4
have about 25,000‐square feet left. Chapter 18. 18 would be repealed and a 1‐year moratorium 5
accepting and processing applications in the CD District and the City would study new CD 6
District regulations. 7
8
So, at the January 30th, 2017 City Council hearing on the Land Use… the draft Land Use Element 9
the Council directed that the final Comp. Plan policy be focused on office and R&D uses, that it 10
be applied (interrupted) 11
12
Chair Lauing: Yeah, just go a little bit slower for us. 13
14
Ms. Lee: Sure, sorry about that. 15
16
Chair Lauing: Thanks. 17
18
Ms. Lee: Ok so at the January 30th, 2017 hearing the final draft… the City Council actually 19
directed that the final draft Comp. Plan includes a revised policy that focused the cap on all 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
office and R&D uses only. It would apply City‐wide rather than the 9 monitor subareas and it 1
would also require annual monitoring to assess the effectiveness of the development 2
requirements and to determine whether the cap and development requirement should be 3
adjusted. In addition, the Council also directed Staff to make permanent an Annual Office Limit 4
Ordinance of up to 50,000‐square feet per year for office and R&D uses only separate from the 5
Comp. Plan update in the downtown, Cal. Ave, and El Camino Real area. Thirdly the Council 6
directed Staff to eliminate the Downtown Cap found in existing Program L‐8 and to focus it on 7
monitoring and development and parking demands. 8
9
So, the previous policy and program are shown here on this slide and in this… under Policy L‐8, 10
that second item, it shows that the Comp. Plan stipulated that we have them limit of 3.2 11
million‐square‐feet of new non‐residential development in the 9 planning areas as evaluated in 12
the 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study. And so that would be focused on 9 13
planning areas that include downtown, Cal. Ave, Research Park, amongst other areas. The 14
associated program specific to downtown said that new non‐residential development, again 15
this includes retail as well, in downtown would be limited to 350,000‐square feet or 10 percent 16
above the amount of development existing or approved as of a May 1986 study. And then this 17
limit would be reevaluated when the non‐residential development approvals reached 235,000‐18
square feet which happened around 2012. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
So after… through the Comp. Plan update consistent with the January 30th direction the City 1
adopted… City Council adopted new Policy L1.10 which states… said that we should have a City‐2
wide cap of 1.7 million‐square‐feet. That would be the remaining from the 3.2 million that was 3
identified earlier and that would be for office and R&D development only. Exempting medical 4
uses such as SUMC and then that we would use a January 1st, 2015 as a baseline. In addition, 5
we would monitor development towards a cap on an annual basis and require the monitoring 6
to determine the effectiveness as well as looking at specific measurements to make sure that 7
we are complaining with the policies. And note again that this cap applies only to office R&D so 8
the cap would apply for example if someone converted an office use or sorry, convert a retail 9
use into an office use. Previously under the old Comp. Plan as well as 18.18… Chapter 18 10
currently, if somebody converted retail to office space that wouldn’t count against the cap. So 11
that is a difference between the two so that would definitely capture any potential retail uses 12
that would want to convert to office space. So, the associated Program L10.1 stated that we 13
should reevaluate the cumulative cap when the amount of a new development reaches 67 14
percent or 1.139 [note‐ 1,139,000 slide]. And then concurrently we would consider removing or 15
other potential changes to the cap. 16
17
So, concerns have been raised by the members of the public that this repeal… proposed repeal 18
is inconsistent with the recent direction. This ordinance would bring the Zoning Code into 19
consistency with the recently adopted Comp. Plan. The Comp. Plan also includes provisions for 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
regular evaluation of the cap and a program for the coordinated area plan for downtown. Other 1
policies and programs were also adopted with the Comp. Plan that provides the City with great 2
tools to address development. Including new TDM requirements with required reductions in 3
ranging from 45 percent reduction downtown as well as up to 20 percent else ware in addition 4
to the update to the Transportation Impact Fee. 5
6
So, in summary, Staff recommends a repeal of Chapter 18.18.40 because its consistent with the 7
Comp. Plan update as well as the January 30th motion from City Council. So, the PTC may 8
recommend for or against this ordinance or may continue the hearing to a date certain or 9
uncertain. If the PTC recommends Council adoption or recommends against or against the 10
ordinance, Staff will forward a draft ordinance to the City Council for their review and action. 11
However, if the PT [note‐PTC] continues… chooses to continue this item to a date certain or 12
uncertain we would return with this item later that… at that time. This concludes Staff’s report. 13
14
Chair Lauing: Amy did you have anything to add? No? 15
16
Ms. French: Not at this time. 17
18
Chair Lauing: Ok. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Ms. French: I’m here for questions. 1
2
Chair Lauing: I think if we want to… if there are any prudent preliminary question from the 3
Commission to Staff we could do that and then we want to go to public comment. Any 4
questions? No? Ok. Commissioner Summa. 5
6
Commissioner Summa: Thank you. Thank you for the report and thank you for everyone in the 7
public for coming out tonight. I have a couple questions and I know that as of January 2017 the 8
cap I believe… the square footage, the commercial count was at 317,000. And I have a question 9
because there’s some confusion in the Municipal Code. It says that it's supposed to capture… 10
count square feet and I think that… and so I’m wondering if you have been calculating that 11
number counting square feet or FAR because in not all cases are they the same? 12
13
Ms. French: So square footage is known as Gross Floor Area. The Floor Area Ratio is when that 14
Gross Floor Area is divided by the lot area so when we talk about square footage that’s kind of 15
interchangeable with Gross Floor Area or/and square footage. 16
17
Commissioner Summa: But we wouldn’t be counting footage that is exempted from being 18
counted. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Ms. French: So yeah in the Stanford University Hospital area, that medical office is not counted 1
into the cap. 2
3
Commissioner Summa: Oh, sorry I wasn’t clear. I mean square feet that exists in a given 4
building but don’t count against the FAR and I’m wondering if there was any idea how much of 5
that there might be that maybe should be included in the number? I have a couple questions 6
about the count. 7
8
Ms. French: I don’t really have an answer for that. I’m not prepared for that question. 9
10
Commissioner Summa: Ok. 11
12
Ms. Lee: So actually, if I may? So, I think there are multiple items that we are evaluating for that 13
we monitor on an early basis. So, for… so I think the… for Program L‐8 there was a specific way 14
we count versus for example the Annual Office Limit. So, in this case, we are compliant with the 15
limitation within Program L‐8 and we are counting all the square footage that would be 16
applicable for this particular but we can certainly come back with more detail if you need it. 17
18
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Summa: Ok I was just curious and then do you know where we are now because 1
I’m sure there’s been some commercial development downtown since January of 2017 and we 2
didn’t have that number in our report? 3
4
Ms. Lee: Actually, I do have that number. I’ve been having some technical problems. 5
6
Commissioner Summa: You can let me know later… you can let us know later when you find it. 7
And then this is a small thing but I notice that a lot of buildings downtown have converted 8
basement which was typically used as storage or warehouse to office and I’m… I have no idea 9
how many. I know it’s come up before at Council and maybe even from me actually. Do we 10
have any idea if that’s included in the square footage? The downtown non‐commercial… non‐11
residential? 12
13
Ms. French: So, I believe this is the case if it had been counted towards the parking assessment 14
roles. In other words, some basement area has… have been used for offices etc. and if that area 15
was counted towards the parking assessment district as existing then it would have been 16
included in the existing floor area in town. 17
18
Commissioner Summa: Ok. Ok, thank you that’s if for now. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Lauing: Commissioner [note‐ Vice‐Chair] Monk. 1
2
Vice‐Chair Monk: To follow up on Commissioner Summa’s question regarding count, if 3
hypothetically Staff… I guess my first question… preliminary question is given the fact that 4
we’ve heard from a lot of concerned residents over the President Hotel. Has that space already 5
been accounted for in the Square Footage Cap? 6
7
Ms. Lee: It… no, it counts as… it… except for the ground floor. The ground floor is retail and the 8
above floors are residential so the residential units would not count against the cap. 9
10
Vice‐Chair Monk: I see so if hypothetically there was a conversion, that then would trigger 11
application towards… with the cap? With the rules for governing cap, correct? 12
13
Ms. French: If we received an application for modification to that building that you’re bringing 14
up, that hotel building, the President Hotel, then it would be looked at as far as that goes. You 15
know we have a maximum of 25,000 left I believe in the Downtown Cap so if they were to come 16
forward, grandfathers’ facility aside, then there would be an issue with the amount of 17
remaining cap area. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Vice‐Chair Monk: Ok and then on that same hypothetical, if we were to remove the cap then 1
we’re looking at the City‐wide cap and the 50,000‐square foot cap. Where would that building 2
fit? Would it still be precluded from a conversion based on the square footage or is it… 3
wouldn’t it exceed the 50,000‐square foot limitation that we currently have in any event? 4
5
Ms. French: Yeah that’s a… the 50,000 Annual Cap is related to office, not all commercial. The 6
Downtown Cap that is in this code that we’re talking about tonight is related to call commercial, 7
not just office and R&D. Whereas the 50,000 Annual Cap Citywide or in those areas is related to 8
office R&D. 9
10
Ms. Lee: And also, the 1.7 million that is in the new Comp. Plan would also be office and R&D. 11
So, if the hotel was converted to an office R&D use that would be counted towards the annual 12
limit. Of course, if the previous Comp. Plan was still adopted… is still… was still effective then a 13
conversion from if say for example the hotel existed and it was already hotel. It could convert to 14
any non‐residential use and it would not count against any cap. 15
16
Vice‐Chair Monk: I’m sorry could you just repeat that? 17
18
Ms. Lee: So basically, under the old Comp. Plan the cap was for all non‐residential uses. So, you 19
could go from commercial… you could go from retail to office and there’s no cap. And there’s 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
no problem with a cap versus the new policy which states that there’s a cap on office R&D uses 1
only. So, if you have an existing retail use and you converted it to office then the Office Cap 2
would apply. 3
4
Vice‐Chair Monk: Ok and in regards to that removal of the Policy L‐8, was that recommended 5
by the Citizens Advisory Committee? 6
7
Ms. French: I believe it was. 8
9
Ms. Lee: Actually, so the way the Comp. Plan CAC process worked was that there were multiple 10
policy recommendations made by the CAC so that was one of the options. They didn’t have a 11
strict recommendation by the whole CAC for Land Use policies… for… specifically for the 12
Growth Management Policies. 13
14
Vice‐Chair Monk: Ok and then does our vote tonight on updating the code with this new 15
ordinance whether we vote year or no on it, how will that impact this… Hotel President? 16
17
Ms. French: The Hotel President is related to the existing code, not this code per say. The 18
Grandfathered Facilities Code that says if there’s a grandfather’s facility that is non‐complying 19
in the downtown CD then that it can continue with its existing conforming use. Which it is a 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
conforming use, mixed‐use, you know housing and retail but yeah so that’s what that code is 1
about. That’s the code that the City has alerted the new owners that this is in effect and 2
applicable to that property. 3
4
Vice‐Chair Monk: So, you’re referring to the code I think it’s 18.18.120 which handles the 5
grandfathers which is not before us tonight. 6
7
Ms. French: Correct. 8
9
Vice‐Chair Monk: And what is before us tonight whether we vote yes or no or modify it in any 10
way will have absolutely no barring or impact on existing residential use in the downtown? 11
12
Ms. French: It has an impact on if their conversion where allowable to one of the commercial 13
uses and we were going past 25,000 which is what’s left then it would have an impact. There 14
may be other properties that are interested in adding square footage beyond 25,000 and so this 15
code section doesn’t allow those projects to go beyond 25,000. You know office, retail, any 16
commercial. 17
18
Vice‐Chair Monk: So, the new owner technically if this date on the books could bifurcate and 19
convert up to 25,000 K or whatever we have left on under this cap? 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Ms. French: If somebody wanted to come forward and it wasn’t a grandfather’s facility and they 2
wanted to convert then yes, they would be subject to a cap. 3
4
Vice‐Chair Monk: This current cap that we’re looking at tonight? 5
6
Ms. French: This current cap, yes. If the cap was removed then an existing facility that was not a 7
grandfathered facility could… you know as long as it’s allowed by zoning could convert but then 8
that would go towards the 25,000. 9
10
Vice‐Chair Monk: But this current property that we have the community out and discussing 11
tonight, although it’s not related to this specifically, that property does not fall within that 12
zoning that you’re referring too? 13
14
Mr. Albert Yang, Senior Deputy Attorney: So that property is a non‐conforming facility and so 15
there is an entirely separate section of the code that applies and restricts its uses. 16
17
Vice‐Chair Monk: Ok and I just want to confirm that any action we take tonight, I would like to 18
know what our actions tonight will impact or not impact to and to what extent with existing 19
properties downtown so that’s where my questions are coming from. Thank you. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Lauing: Do you… yeah, I want to get some comments from the public. I’ve got quite a few 2
cards. I’m sorry, Commissioner Alcheck. 3
4
Commissioner Alcheck: Ok I just want to ask you a quick question sort of following up on what 5
Commissioner [note‐ Vice‐Chair] Monk (interrupted) 6
7
[note‐female:] [off mic‐speaking from the audience] We can’t hear you. 8
9
[note‐ several audience members started talking at once] 10
11
Commissioner Alcheck: Don’t worry, I’m getting there. Warming up. Let me follow up on what 12
you just said to Commissioner [note‐ Vice‐Chair] Monk. You have a recently enacted 13
Comprehensive Plan which replaces the Comprehensive Plan that supports Chapter 18.18.040. 14
And you have recent Council direction in the form of a directive that suggests enact a 50,000‐15
annual limit, that’s changed a little bit over the course of the year and delete this downtown 16
specific cap. Are you suggesting that a parcel owner that came forward with a project that 17
exceeded 25,000 which is what we presumably have left would somehow be denied? And I ask 18
that question because when I put my land use attorney cap on it suggests that you’d have two 19
conflicting code directions and I would assume based on my experience that a court of law, if it 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
got litigated, would rely on the more recent code language and the even more recent Council 1
direction to eliminate the conflict. So, I’m asking if for example we recommended not changing 2
this code section or deleting it and Council agreed with that decision would this not be 3
indefensible? Wouldn’t you be stuck because we’ve just essentially created an annual limit of 4
50,000 that contemplates double what a much older 30‐year old law allows? I see a problem 5
here and I need to understand how you think it at least from a legal perspective. 6
7
Ms. Yang: So that’s something that we would look at if and when that situation arose but Staff’s 8
recommendation tonight is that PTC recommends adoption of this ordinance which would 9
remove the cap and that potential conflict that you described. 10
11
Commissioner Alcheck: So, it’s… ok. I guess what I’m… I can fully appreciate the legal 12
department’s desire not to openly discuss a legal vulnerability. That’s fine, I won’t push you to 13
do that but I’m going to assume that your recommendation that we delete this is an effort to 14
eliminate a conflict that might be indefensible unless you tell me that it’s not. I’m not… again I 15
can fully appreciate you’re desire not to get into it because people are listening but I… it sounds 16
to me like the legal department's hands would be tied with this 25,000 remainder with all of the 17
action Council has taken and the new Comprehensive Plan. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Ms. Yang: Again, I think that’s something that we would look at if and when it came up. I would 1
note that the 50,000‐square foot cap that you mention does apply not only to the downtown 2
but also to a few other areas in the City. So, in that sense, there is not a head‐on conflict 3
(interrupted) 4
5
Commissioner Alcheck: Right. 6
7
Mr. Yang: Between the two policies. 8
9
Commissioner Alcheck: Right, ok, that’s sort of the extent of my questions for Staff. 10
11
Chair Lauing: Commissioner Summa 12
13
Commissioner Summa: Thank you. Just one more and I thought maybe what Commissioner 14
[note‐Vice‐Chair] Monk was trying to get at and forgive me if this wasn’t what you were trying 15
to get at. Are there other residential buildings existing in the CD district that if we eliminate the 16
cap will be vulnerable to be converting to commercial uses? I’m not… I can think of one maybe 17
but do we have any idea of how many of those there are? 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Ms. French: I mean there’s a number of mixed‐use buildings, larger buildings downtown that 1
contains residential that are in the CD Zone. So, I mean I can’t think of any that use to be a hotel 2
I mean if that’s what you’re (interrupted) 3
4
Commissioner Summa: No, I’m not… that’s not relevant to my question actually. It’s just do we 5
have an idea… if we eliminate… take the… recommend eliminating the Downtown Cap L‐8, I 6
mean not… 18.18.0… whatever it is but if we do that are there… do we have any idea how many 7
other residential units or residential buildings there are in the CD Zone that could be converted 8
to a more lucrative purpose which is office commercial? 9
10
Ms. French: I mean for one thing the existing Zoning Code for CD has a limitation on the square 11
footage so for instance if you had a mixed‐use building that had 1 to 1 FAR for… Floor Area 12
Ratio for commercial and somehow 2 to 1 for… existing for residential. Could they convert and 13
have it all be 3 to 1‐floor area for office? I mean I don’t… that would be a tough one too 14
because that would be kind of non‐conforming. A non‐complying facility that you're changing 15
the use in so we might be in that same similar situation about conversion of use inside a 16
grandfathered building. I’m just trying to kind of throw out a hypothetical. This (interrupted) 17
18
Commissioner Summa: Ok so it sounds like… I mean that’s not exactly what I was asking. I was 19
really trying to get some idea of potentially how much… I mean I think we’ll all agree that office 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
is more lucrative for property owners than rental even though rental prices are getting so 1
expensive. So, I was just wondering if we had any idea of how many units we have downtown 2
that could potentially convert to office but if we don’t have that number… ok, thank you. 3
4
Chair Lauing: Ok let’s move to public comment. We have quite a lot of speakers, welcome you 5
all for participating in the process and I’d like to do 3‐minutes per speaker given the size of the 6
group. So, the first one up and this is speaking to the hearing on adoption of the ordinance 7
omitting Chapter 18.18 is Joe Hirsch and next is Suzanne I believe it’s Kek. 8
9
Mr. Joe Hirsch: Thank you. I am Joseph Hirsch, a member of the Palo Altans for Sensible Zoning 10
Steering Committee which has authorized me to make the following statement on its behalf. 11
Now withstanding Council’s prior actions, it may be the time given what is known now to give 12
Council a different recommendation on this item than what they might expect. City Staff and 13
some of you, maybe all of you, have spoken out about encouraging below moderate rate 14
housing throughout the City, particularly in the downtown area. It is our suggestion that 15
whatever action you take tonight you should be extremely clear about the effect your 16
recommendation will have on Hotel President Apartments and other similar properties in the 17
downtown area. You should be very clear if the action you recommend tonight will make it 18
easier to convert current rental apartments to either hotel rooms or luxury apartments. If you 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
do that the Palo Alto community will be fully advised as to what is happening. They deserve 1
that and you do deserve to be fully clear with the people you serve. 2
3
From our perspective, we urge you not to be apart of a process that will, in essence, evict the 4
tenants of the Hotel President Apartments. Some of whom have been living in downtown Palo 5
Alto for long periods of time. Accordingly, we suggest that you recommend retaining Section 6
18.18.040 and its non‐residential development cap which is different than an office R&D cap. 7
Given the adverse consequences, we now know will result if the non‐residential development is 8
unfortunately repealed. That is if repealed one barrier to the tenant’s eviction will have been 9
removed. Is that what you want to recommend? We urge you to take a stand that will help 10
preserve below moderate rate housing in the downtown area by recommending retaining the 11
non‐residential development cap. We need your leadership in view of changed circumstances. 12
Thank you for considering this request which as I noted before is being made on behalf of Palo 13
Altans for Sensible Zoning. Thank you. 14
15
Chair Lauing: Thanks very much. Suzanne Kek? Keek? I’m not getting it correct, you’ll help me 16
out. 17
18
Ms. Suzanne Keen: Suzanne Keen. Good evening. I have never… I never knew about Hotel 19
President and the wonderful community that live there until all this came up. I am actually so 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
thrilled that we have a group like that and that we can continue the ordinance as it is and 1
support this kind of diversity with such vulnerable people that we need in our community. So, I 2
hope that you will keep the ordinance as is and protect vibrant communities as is. Especially 3
since we seem in Palo Alto think we need to build more below market rate housing and as 4
somebody who else spoke said, this is… if you build new it’s nowhere going to be so much more 5
expensive than keeping something old that is working. Thank you. 6
7
Chair Lauing: Ok thank you. Robert Moss. 8
9
Mr. Robert Moss: Thank you, Commissioners. I agree with Joe Hirsch and I think it’s essential 10
that we retain Section 18.18.040. As you know we have a jobs/housing imbalance in Palo Alto. 11
We should be doing everything that we can to preserve housing, especially lower‐income 12
housing, and everything we can to prevent housing or housing type uses from being converted 13
to offices. We should [unintelligible] a proposal for downtown right now would do. Now I have 14
happen to be very familiar with the President Hotel. When I first started working in Palo Alto in 15
1971 we couldn’t sell our house in Rancho Costa Verde so for 2‐years I lived at the President 16
Hotel during the week and on Friday I’d fly home to LA and on Monday I’m back up to San 17
Francisco. Fortunately, we’ve been able to live in Palo Alto since 1973. Only 45‐years, I’m a 18
newbie here so I think if you retain 18.18.040 you are saying that you are retaining the kind of 19
low capacity development that we need downtown. We're supposed to be encouraging 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
downtown residential and discouraging increasing office use. If we allow the existing 1
elimination of 18.18.040 all that goes away. So, I think it’s important for a number of that we 2
preserve that and we do everything we can to preserve housing. Especially small lower cost 3
housing downtown so I would urge you to act effectively tonight and don’t allow the conversion 4
and don’t allow removal of 18.18.040. 5
6
Chair Lauing: Thank you. Arthur Keller. 7
8
Mr. Arthur Keller: Thank you, Commissioners. So, there was an interesting blub in the Weekly, 9
which I’m going to paraphrase, of Mayor Kniss’s quote. And she said it’s hard to get City 10
employees because it doesn’t have the same cache as it uses too. Well, it actually doesn’t have 11
the same cache as it uses too and part of the reason for that is because prices are… of living in 12
Palo Alto are going up and up and up. And why is that? Because we keep on building more 13
office space and there’s a push for office space and not enough push for housing. And as a 14
result of that, we are now… you are being asked to remove one of the caps which has been in 15
effect since 1989 and that cap is on an amount of non‐commercial downtown. So, I’m 16
wondering if this the right time? Why is… why are we rushing to do this? The Council did 17
recommend removal from the Comp Plan of this policy but that’s not the same as 18
recommending removal from… actually having a policy or program to remove it from the 19
Comp… from the ordinance. And so, we don’t actually have a recommendation removing the 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
ordinance from the actual motion that was made by Council. And in fact, the motion talked 1
about monitoring development and parking demand. Where are we… wherein the Staff report 2
does it talk about monitoring development? Where in the Staff [note‐report] does it talk about 3
parking demand? Nowhere and there for doing this instead of… it does not make sense when 4
we’re not doing the things that even the motion talked about doing in concert. In addition, we 5
should be talking about traffic because we increasing are seeing going through downtown, 6
going on University Avenue, going on Willow Road, going on Middlefield Carmageddon. So, we 7
need to think about traffic impacts. People talk about traffic being bad. We should… I don’t 8
recall the CAC specifically making this an option for the Council to consider. I think it was on the 9
Council’s own motion. 10
11
And also, why are we rushing through this? Is this because we’re removing one barrier for the 12
President Hotel Apartments? It seems to be suspicious that that might be a cause. We should 13
wait until new TDM evaluation is done and see how that’s [unintelligible]. We should wait until 14
the Stanford GUP happens and we see how much growth is going to happen in there in terms of 15
traffic that’s flows through downtown. And until the Stanford Medical Center construction is 16
complete and a November election in which there is a growth ordinance initiative on the 17
election. So why are we rushing to do this? You should say no, don’t implement this change and 18
let it come back. Instead, implement changes of things we need like renter protection. Use your 19
time for that. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Lauing: Thank you. Next up is Elaine Meyer. 2
3
Ms. Elaine Meyer: Good evening Chairman and members of the Commission. There’s so much 4
confusion. Hardly anyone knows what’s going on. Sure, this ordinance is supposed to clarify the 5
confusion? Yeah, right. Who benefits from the confusion? As specified in the January 2017 6
Wolbach motion focus should be on monitoring, development, and parking demand before 7
making any other changes. 8
9
When I first learned of the Council’s intention to pre‐empt the Citizens Intuitive, I was 10
disheartened. How could our City leadership be so deeply in the pocket of developers as to try 11
and silence us? Then I realized that this move… their move could backfire. It will make people 12
feel betrayed. I think the result could turn out to be that the Citizen’s Intuitive will win by an 13
even larger margin than we anticipate. 14
15
Just a reminder on another subject, you probably know that the 2017 Citizen Survey reported 16
the percentages voting good or excellent on many issues. In fact, only 40 percent of the 17
population approved of the City’s “Land Use Planning and Zoning”. Only 51 percent believe Palo 18
Alto is generally acting in the best interest of the community and only 45 percent approved the 19
overall direction that Palo Alto is taking. I have a suggestion for the Planning Staff. The code is 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
barely readable. It needs to be clarified, simplified, removing redundancy, and made readable 1
by intelligent people. I think that is where the Staff’s energy should go because who benefits 2
from the confusion? Maybe the developers of the President Hotel. Thank you. 3
4
Chair Lauing: Thanks very much. Ms. Roberta Ahlquist. Next up is Terry Holzmer. 5
6
Ms. Roberta Ahlquist: My name is Roberta Ahlquist and I’m speaking on behalf of the Women’s 7
International Leagues for Peace and Freedom, low‐income housing subcommittee. And half of 8
my speech was already said by Mr. Keller so thank you very much for putting that on the table. 9
There are two caps, one cap is a cap on Annual Office Cap Applicants to the downtown El 10
Camino and California Avenue. The other cap is an Absolute Cap on downtown commercial 11
development. I think those have been conflated in the discussion and they need to be 12
separated. We don’t need… we need the caps on office development. It’s clear if you would 13
want to do something for the Council it would be recommend renter protections, recommend 14
that no low‐income housing, no rental housing be destroyed until there’s replacement housing. 15
So, the people who are living here who are now getting increased… rent increases, therefore, 16
having to leave. There’s a whole building with 11 different units on the corner of Webster and 17
Hamilton that is vacant. All those people had to leave town because there’s a proposal for a 18
commercial office and condominium development. That’s what’s going to happen unless you 19
find a way to stop it. We don’t need high‐income condos. We need housing for the people who 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
work here. Those who travel the farthest who have kids who they have to put in some kind of 1
daycare in order to get to work. Those are the people who have the least amount of money for 2
the gas or the other kinds of transportation costs. So, find a way to not remove the caps on 3
office development but to provide low‐income housing for our workers which makes the 4
community more or a community. 5
6
Chair Lauing: Mr. Holzmer. Yeah, we like… Council has advised me that it’s not policy to 7
support with that kind of demonstration but we do thank you for your participation. Mr. 8
Holzmer followed by Rita Vrhel. 9
10
Mr. Terry Holzmer: Good evening Commissioners. I wish to highly recommend that you support 11
ordinance 18.18.040. I recommend that the PTC take no action tonight that would endanger or 12
change the current downtown cap. Changing or modifying this cap would seriously impact not 13
only the residents of the President Hotel but potential residents that live also in the downtown 14
area. I’m against anything that would severely impact the residents of this community that 15
would impact them in a bad way. The residents of the President Hotel disserve the same 16
treatment that any neighborhood in Palo Alto receives. We need to keep our existing housing 17
stock and prevent any attempt that would either eliminate that or change it. We need to do 18
more to protect the citizens and the residents of this City. Thank you. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Lauing: Thank you. Rita… is it Vrhel? 1
2
Ms. Rita Vrhel: Vrhel 3
4
Chair Lauing: Ok thanks. 5
6
Ms. Vrhel: I don’t envy you tonight. I have to say that I’m completely confused and I am just 7
going to speak my mind. I think everyone has already spoken very well to the topic. I am really 8
concerned about the timing of this issue. Why now? Is that because of the votes initiative to roll 9
back office growth and development? Is it because of the sale of the President Hotel? Is it 10
because our City Manager and some City Council Members met with the new owner before 11
they bought the hotel? Is it because Jeff Levinsky dug through all the data and found that it was 12
a non‐conforming use and therefore probably can’t be converted without a legal fight? I wrote 13
a letter to the editor a while back that basically stated politics in this town stink. People are fed 14
up. You know you talk about the Comp Plan being changed. I was by a 5 to 4 vote and I would 15
remind you that 3 of the people that voted in the 5 to 4 majority were investigated for 16
campaign issues. One of the investigations is still going on a year and a half later. I wonder why? 17
I also would remind you that the CAC met for, oh god what was it, 18 months? Doria, you were 18
on it and there was actually no majority view. It seemed like it was Palo Alto forward and the 19
residents. It was very, very divided and if you remember the January 2016 Comp Plan meeting it 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
was a disaster with our then‐Mayor Greg Scharff making motions and hogging the floor and 1
saying I won’t accept that. So, when you talk about a 5‐4 majority and directing you to do 2
something you really need to look at that majority and the way that majority came to the City 3
Council. And honestly, there are a lot of things that are not in the Comp Plan which remain in 4
the Municipal Code. I would urge you not to get involved in the tardy display of politics that the 5
City Council has shown us lately. People are fed up. I would table this and say go it on your own 6
and let the voters decide. Thank you. 7
8
Chair Lauing: Ok thank you. Next speaker is Herb Borock followed by Becky Sanders. 9
10
Mr. Herb Borock: Chair Lauing, Vice‐Chair Monk and Commissioners I urge you to continue this 11
agenda item until the first meeting in January to give the Staff the time required to prepare a 12
project. Let allow an environmental document as required by the environmental impact… 13
California Environmental Quality Act. And also, as other speakers have said for the practical 14
reason that there’s intuitive measure pending and you might as well see what the results of 15
that are to inform any decision that you make. You can’t make a recommendation in the 16
absence of the required environmental document. A motion to continue takes precedence over 17
a motion to take action on the Staff recommendation and therefore it would replace such a 18
motion if it… ones before you but a motion on the recommendation could not replace the 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
motion to continue. Which must be disposed of before there’s an opportunity to discuss the 1
substance. 2
3
An Environmental Impact Report is a consistent set of policies… internally consistent set of 4
policies and programs and in this case is EIR for a Comprehensive Plan that replaces another 5
Comprehensive Plan of internally consistent policies and programs. Within a specific 6
Comprehensive Plan, you can replace programs and policies but individual programs and 7
policies from one EIR one Comp Plan did not replace those as another as stated in the Staff 8
report. 9
10
The existing cap that’s being discussed before you is consistent with the cap that was adopted 11
Citywide; they both occur. There’s nothing in the Comprehensive Plan that has a policy or 12
program to eliminate this downtown cap. Accordingly, since the EIR did not… does not contain 13
sufficient information to assess this proposal and all the effects of the specific action Staff is 14
required to do the Environmental Review conveyed in an initial study leading to a Negative 15
Declaration… a Mitigating Negative Declaration or another EIR. I’m surprised that this is coming 16
before you now because unlike a number of speakers who are speculating what development 17
will occur. I see nothing in the next 6‐months that’s going to be impacted by this and certainly, 18
that wouldn’t impact the continuation until January. Thank you. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Lauing: Thank you. Becky Sanders followed by Tucker Berckmann. 1
2
Ms. Becky Sanders: Good evening Commission Members. Thank you for your service. I was 3
triggered by a previous comment mentioning Casa Olga so I threw out my prepared statement 4
because it took me an entirely different direction. If we don’t keep 18.80.040 [note‐ 18.18.040] 5
it will not only exacerbate an already direr housing situation. I think it will accelerate. We really 6
need to do everything in our power to prevent the erosion of any kind of housing and of course 7
to promote the building of more housing. In my neighborhood Ventura I walk all the time and in 8
the past 5‐years, I’ve seen a real change with more people living on the streets. The Olga… Casa 9
Olga a good friend of mine’s mom lived there and she was evicted and she died within about 3‐10
weeks of relocating. I’m not saying that was the fault but eviction is very stressful, particularly 11
on elders, people living in a fixed income, I think it’s cruel and I was really saddened to be 12
reminded of Carol’s passing. 13
14
So ok in Ventura my daughter and I were hanging around and we drove… we found someone 15
dumpster diving and we drove them to the Opportunity Center. And his story was like many 16
other people’s story. Had an apartment, lost it, lost his job, that was 2‐week ago. A woman… I 17
thought I recognized her was living behind the Shell station near my house and I talked to my 18
neighbor and they went and kind of looked at her and it turned out she use to rent in Ventura. 19
And nobody had seen her for a while and all of sudden she’s living behind the Shell station and 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
she moves between three places. And then there’s this family that lives in a car that I see on a 1
regular basis and they’re doing a great job; of a father, a daughter and a mother living in the 2
sedan. I’m not quite sure what this has to do with this ordinance but somehow the drive for 3
money over people is turning our City into a very ugly place. And so, I want to encourage you all 4
from a moral standpoint and you have a legal standing to do so because it’s not like we’re 5
asking you to do anything illegal. Just go ahead and uphold this ordinance a little bit longer so 6
that we can continue toward to address this crisis in humanity in our City. Thank you. 7
8
Chair Lauing: Thank you. Tucker Berckmann followed by Annette Ross. 9
10
Mr. Tucker Berckmann: I wanted to respond briefly to the question from the Commission to the 11
Staff of whether this would actually affect the President Hotel and I believe the response from 12
Staff was no because this is a non‐conforming building. What if in the meantime the building 13
classification changes and then it would be protected by the cap? That was not clear from the 14
earlier comments tonight and I think clarity should be gained on this point before we dismantle 15
18.18.040. And I think we need to find the exact count of the building, I think we need to find 16
out who the suitors are for the remaining space and also if there is pressure to remove this cap 17
it should be clearly stated what that reason is and who it is that needs a space. Otherwise, 18
there is no immediate need for removing the cap. Can’t we live with 25,000‐square feet for 19
another 6‐months? Does this item need to be retained, perhaps changed, or merged into 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
something else? If… even… if so then there should be a period of consistency where the cap 1
remains in place until those changes are made. Thank you. 2
3
Ms. Annette Ross: (off mic) I’d like to give my time to Taylor [note ‐spelling] Brady. Is that ok? 4
5
Chair Lauing: Sure. It’s just one of you. 6
7
Mr. Taylor [note ‐spelling] Brady: Good evening everyone. My name is Taylor [note ‐spelling] 8
Brady and I am a resident of College Terrace as I have been since 2014. And I would like to 9
speak in favor of maintaining the 18.18.040. One thing I’d like to point out as I begin is this 10
particularly rich but a double speaks in the Planning and Transportation Commission’s 11
summary. The proposed repeal of… in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.18.040 would bring 12
the Municipal Code into conformance with the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan and then, 13
this is the important bit, reflecting the policy change to focus on limiting office/R&D growth 14
Citywide. Of course, limiting office and R&D growth Citywide also involves focusing on critical 15
areas which it seems like the City is blindly assuming is not an important thing. The downtown 16
area where we’re talking about development caps is one through which three major transit and 17
thoroughfares run. We’re talking about University Avenue, we’re talking about in an ancillary 18
capacity the Embarcadero and we’re also talking about El Camino. So, we’re talking about 19
major routes through which people come into the City which exacerbated the traffic problems 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
in the morning that exist because of the massive imbalance between office workers and people 1
who can afford to live here. And we’re talking about removing those caps in order to allow the 2
development of more space that not only specifically evicts low income or low or moderate‐3
income residents who have a low impact lifestyle but also provides the precedent for allowing 4
future developments, non‐residential developments, to go bananas all over the City. The 5
50,000‐square foot Annual Cap is a somewhat annual cap on office space in the three targeted 6
zones is somewhat misleading because it also goes along with the 1.7 million additional square 7
feet that are being allowed to go on in the rest of the City. I’d also like to focus on a couple of 8
key elisions by the members of the Staff representatives French and Lee enlighting the type of 9
square footage that has not been counted in the cap for 18.18.040. Talking about common 10
areas and parking and other such parts of all of these commercial developments that are of 11
course key to their operation as commercial or non‐residential developments but are not being 12
included. Thus, giving us this magical 25,000‐square foot that are still left. What we need in this 13
City are beds, not desks as Annette encouraged me to say and I say that from a very personal 14
standpoint as a young person who’s having a hell of a hard time staying here. 15
16
Chair Lauing: Thanks very much. The next speaker is Iqbal Serang. 17
18
Mr. Iqbal Serang: Evening… good evening Commissioners. I’m one of those newbies living at the 19
President for decades, close to 3. I remember when he had dark hair, I’m kind of losing it too. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
I’d like to support Arthur Keller’s statement and others who have suggested you tabling this for 1
a future date. Perhaps give the opportunity for City Council to take the lead and provide unique 2
protections for the existing residential rental units at the President. Since all new developments 3
of larger sizes of residential or housing developments are practically modeled after the 4
President Hotel Apartments being dense, being small sizes, being hardly any parking, being in 5
the CD Zone and close to mass transit. It is time to consider that building a treasure for Palo 6
Alto. I understand you may not be able to make that type of statement for it to apply to an 7
existing structure but what a statement it would be. It may provide some teeth to City Council 8
to take the lead and create that possibility. Thank you very much. 9
10
Chair Lauing: Thank you. Margaret Heath. 11
12
Ms. Margaret Heath: [unintelligible] ok, can you hear me? Yes. Good evening Commissioners. 13
I’m here to support keeping the cap downtown. Others have spoken very eloquently this 14
evening about why you should do that and I agree and support all of their reasons for doing so. 15
In fact, this suddenly… we find this week this suddenly is on the agenda and it has all the 16
appearance of being a bit sneaky actually. As if it’s possible for the benefit of one particular 17
business without having the chance to really explore why we should eliminate the cap? What 18
are all the unintended consequences might be or the intended ones? The President Hotel is a 19
perfect example of exactly the kind of housing that we need downtown. Council has been 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
advocating for this. I think many people have and I don’t see any reason to remove it from our 1
rental units… our residential rental units and most especially because of its location. And 2
indeed, there may be other housing unit’s downtown that would also be eliminated if the cap is 3
reduced. Thank you. 4
5
Chair Lauing: Thank you. Mr. Jeff Levinsky. 6
7
Mr. Jeff Levinsky: Good evening Commissioners. Look around at downtown and see what it’s 8
become. We’ve piled in more buildings and more workers and more cars. We’ve created a 9
mess. Downtown residents here tonight are being evicted because we have no effective renter 10
protection and residential preservation laws. Others here can’t park in front of their own 11
homes or get out of their own driveways at rush hour because so many commuters have taken 12
over our neighborhood streets. Those of us who live yet farther away won’t even come to 13
downtown anymore because it is… it’s traffic and parking are unbearable. Downtown is 14
supposed to be the heart of our community, it has become a disaster. And then we find in all 15
this darkness a small but gleaming ray of hope. A 3rd of a century ago a wise City Council 16
anticipated what would happen. They foresaw that excessive development might go awry and 17
they crafted a solution. A cap on downtown commercial growth that lets us step back and 18
address the traffic, parking, and other problems. That cap kicks in once 350,000‐square feet of 19
non‐residential development are added downtown. The law says the City should count all new 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
non‐residential square footage, the City hasn’t. According to its own records, it has not counted 1
common areas, parking, storage spaces converted to offices and more. You don’t have to look 2
far to find an example. For most of the 20th century, there was a 1‐story, 5,000‐square foot 3
building right across the street from us at 240 Hamilton. Radio Shack was there. A few years 4
ago, it was replaced by a new 4‐story building. You would think the new non‐residential space 5
at that site would all count towards the 350,000‐square foot cap but the plans for that building 6
show it actually added 50 percent more new commercial space than the City shows on the 7
records for the cap. That’s just one small building. Once you start correcting for others it 8
appears that we’re already over the 350,000‐square foot cap. That means there should be a 1‐9
year moratorium, that moratorium will apply to buildings like the Hotel President and others 10
and prevent them from converting to hotel or offices. And let me say that the grandfathering 11
law, I am familiar with it is not enough because our City loses cases. They lost the case on 12
Edgewood Plaza. We hoped that they went back on appeal but we need all the protections that 13
we have in the law. We cannot give any up and keeping the cap also provides a unique 14
opportunity for you as Commissioners, the Council, and most importantly the public to 15
reimagine downtown so it can best serve its residents and our entire community. We can fix 16
Palo Alto. Please help by voting tonight to keep the cap in place and to protect our City. Thank 17
you. 18
19
Chair Lauing: Thank you. Ms. Karen Porter, I think. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Ms. Karen Porter: Good evening. I’ll acknowledge I’m actually fairly new to this issue. I’ve been 2
focused on the jet noise fiasco over the last couple of years. I see some similarities. I don’t see 3
our City leaders taking enough action to protect the residents and community members 4
interests. And I have to say I’ve been very impressed by all the speakers I’ve heard tonight who 5
are unanimous in their ask that the City either delay or reject this proposal. And I have to ask 6
myself where are the people, the community members, who are in favor of this proposal? Why 7
aren’t they here? Why are they not showing their faces? And so, to me, it suggests that it’s 8
really just the lobbyists for the developers who are behind this proposal. I really think we need 9
more transparency and more effective and considered decision making before a change like 10
this is implemented. Thank you. 11
12
Chair Lauing: Thank you. Lenore Cymes and then Mary Sylvester. 13
14
Ms. Lenore Cymes: Thank you very much for hearing me out and for you service of what you’ve 15
got to do up there. I hadn’t planned on talking. I just want to share my experience. On Tuesday I 16
had to go from my house which is on Wildwood Lane, I turn on Channing and I turn to St. 17
Francis and I get in Embarcadero. It took me 25‐minutes to get to Home Depot. Think about 18
that. It usually takes me 2‐minutes, 3‐minutes, 5 if I get a couple of red lights. Coming back, I 19
had to do an errand on University Avenue so went over 101 and I couldn’t figure what was 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
going on. From 101 to Middlefield Road heading east it was bumper to bumper the entire way. 1
It didn’t stop. I heard horns for the first time in Palo Alto. Is the new ruling going to be what is a 2
second in New York for time for the car in front of you to honk the horn for the car behind to 3
hear it? It just didn’t make sense and tonight I noticed coming down here, I come down on 4
Hamilton to come downtown. When I got past Greer there was hardly a parking spot. Maybe 5
somebody was having a big party, I don’t know but I’ve never seen that many cars on Hamilton 6
to get all the way downtown. Thank you and I hope you think about the real‐life experiences as 7
you make your decisions. 8
9
Chair Lauing: Thank you. Mary Sylvester and then Katja Priess. 10
11
Ms. Mary Sylvester: Good evening Commissioner and City Staff. I’m here to echo much of 12
what’s been said this evening. I urge the maintenance of 18.18.040, the cap, not it’s repeal as 13
has been recommended by City Staff. We need more time for review before this is even 14
seriously considered. As has been said tonight why now? This Council chambers and the media 15
we’ve heard for over a week is confused. Why is this going on? Can we please have some 16
transparency why this discussion is happening at this point in the middle of summer when 17
many residents are out of town? 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
On a personal level, I am particularly concerned about the President Hotel residences. This is a 1
warm, vibrant community as we’ve seen not only tonight but before the Council before it took 2
its break. I’ve had friends and still do in the President Apartments. One of whom is a teacher in 3
our local school district. These are people assisting our community. 4
5
Just to walk down memory lane, I remember Cosa Olga and the single room occupancy hotel 6
that use to be next to it on Hamilton and Emerson Streets. These two facilities had over 100 7
residents; low income, seniors and the disabled. Where is the replacement? There is none. And 8
as to more commercial growth you’ve heard from all the speakers tonight. We don’t need that 9
at this time. We need to rectify the job/housing imbalance. Arthur Keller well illustrated this 10
year the number of major issues this community has to grapple with. This should not be one 11
we’re considering at this time. Thank you. 12
, 13
Chair Lauing: Thank you very much and Katja Priess. 14
15
Ms. Katja Priess: Yeah, my name is Katja Priess and I spoke earlier so I lived in the Hotel 16
President again 20‐years. And I didn’t really prepare much to say at this point but I wanted to 17
thank really everybody who spoke right now in favor of keeping the cap. A lot of our community 18
right now said that there is hope and what really touched my heart is that I don’t know a lot of 19
the people who spoke tonight but this is the reason why we would like to stay in Palo Alto. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Because there is still this spirit of community that people do speak up for each other and 1
support each other. If we cannot stay in the President, we have to get out of Palo Alto. We 2
would lose this spirit of community and it would break the heart of a lot of us who live in the 3
President. That’s all I wanted to say, thank you. 4
5
Chair Lauing: Thanks very much. So that concludes the public speakers and the… 6
7
Mr. Bill Ross: [unintelligible – spoke from the audience off mic] 8
9
Chair Lauing: Right, we only got one card. 10
11
Mr. Ross: [unintelligible – spoke from the audience off mic] 12
13
Chair Lauing: Ok that’s fine. Why don’t you just… why don’t you just fill that out again? We’re 14
not trying to keep you away. 15
16
[note‐ many people from the audience started speaking at once] 17
18
Commissioner Alcheck: [off mic] Do you want me to fill that out for you? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Mr. Ross: [unintelligible – spoke from the audience off mic] Commission, Chair, Commissioners 2
respectfully, I have comments in two areas barring on this agenda item. One is General Plan 3
consistency and the other is CEQA compliance. Pages 3 to 4… first of all what’s before you is a 4
change to the Zoning Ordinance. It’s not just a code change. This is clearly a project under 5
CEQA. It’s also subject to General Plan consistency analysis. The analysis that you have before 6
you is on Pages 3 to 4 and focuses principally and exclusively on the Land Use Element. That’s 7
not the standard. The standard is that articulated in the 2003 and 2016 General Plan guidelines 8
that confirmed judiciously. What is that? That you look at the action and you say does the 9
action further without hindering all elements of a General Plan? That analysis isn’t here. 10
Respectfully if you look at the Housing Element of the new Comp Plan there are several policies 11
that bare on the preservation of existing housing. Among others, there’s an inventory of sites 12
that should be in that analyzed in such an analysis that would bear on the CD district. That’s 13
absent. On the CEQA issue, I would incorporate the testimony of all the tenants that were 14
present here tonight. Why does that bare on not just relying on the Comprehensive 15
Plan/General Plan? Much like Herb Borock, I would say there’s a need for another assessment, 16
an initial study. Why? There are changed circumstances under CEQA guideline Section 15.626 if 17
I remember correctly, under which this project would be carried out. What is it? Among other 18
things, tenants are going to be displaced. There’s an economic impact. The normal rule under 19
CEQA is that economic impacts are not assessed but that’s qualified if there’s going to be an 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
effect on the environment. We know there are going to be displaced. There’s already an 1
agreement for relocation assistance by AJ Capital. Let’s look at AJ Capital and on this, I have 2
personal knowledge. What are they doing? They have 11 existing facilities in university towns, 9 3
planned, all of them convert to exclusive Airbnbs. Is that what we want? We want to have that 4
displacing of diverse housing opportunities that exist right now contrary to the new General 5
Plan policies? I would respectfully suggest and this would be the part that’s based on personal 6
knowledge, let’s go look at another one of those existing facilities. One exists in Iowa City, Iowa. 7
It’s 9‐stories, it’s 237 units, the prices… and the cost of living in Iowa City is about 1/3rd of what 8
it is here, is for units for $160 to $360 a night. It’s for people like Gene Wilder. Allow me to 9
finish if you will please? My point is that’s what we’re putting in in the President Hotel and 10
we’re displacing tenants? Much like Mr. Borock, I think there’s an incomplete CEQA analysis 11
and incomplete General Plan analysis. On those bases alone, you should differ until you get that 12
type of analysis supported by substantial evidence before you. Thank you. 13
14
Chair Lauing: Thank you. Alex Smaliy. 15
16
Ms. Alex Smaliy: [unintelligible ‐off mic] 17
18
Chair Lauing: Ok. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Mr. Smaliy: Hi, I spoke early and I wanted to follow on from what the previous speaker said. I 1
just wanted to speak plainly about what is actually happening at the President right now. Which 2
is that yes, there was a comment earlier that AJ Capital have not applied to change the use of 3
the building. But we have to look at what they are which is they’re a hotel developer. They 4
develop hotels. They are not… it is difficult to imagine a scenario in which they maintain the use 5
of the building as residential. They will apply for an exemption. They may have to struggle with 6
the City to get it but if we limit the protections on the building to just it’s grandfather statues it 7
again may not be enough. Because they will try to get like…this is what they bought the building 8
for, they paid untold millions of dollars to convert the building to a hotel, they’re even quite 9
clear about the recent New York Times article with a wonderful title of the Education of a 10
Brotelia [note – couldn’t find the spelling]. So, its… just because they haven’t applied to change 11
the buildings use far and away doesn’t imply that they will… that they will not do it. They’re 12
already… they’re forcing the tenants to empty the building so the [unintelligible] is already 13
being destroyed. And as a landlord, they are within their own rights to do that. We are tenants, 14
we are not owners. Sure, we may be gone but maybe the building will remain and others will 15
have the opportunity to live downtown in this walkable, transit‐accessible, dense, wonderful 16
downtown community. Great but it is extremely dubious that this is what they are planning to 17
do. 18
19
Chair Lauing: Ok the last speaker and we’re going to close comments here is Michelle Kraus. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Ms. Michelle Kraus: Thank you so much, Commissioners. I just wanted to thank the community 2
as my colleague and friend Katja did. They’ve stood up for us and not only the Planning Staff 3
have raised their voices but here we are and we’re asking you to join us. Again, what I 4
[unintelligible] in my professional hat is there’s confusion over the metrics. Doria, you raised it. 5
Is it FAR? Is it square footage? What’s counted? What isn’t counted? Let’s go back, take a step 6
back, and let’s take time to figure this out and I urge you to uphold the cap of 18.18.040. We 7
need you. Thank you. 8
9
Chair Lauing: Ok thank you. That concludes the testimony part of the hearing and now we’ll 10
bring it back to the Commission of Item Number 2. So, we just opened the floor to comments 11
and questions from Commissioners. Just light up your lights. Commissioner Alcheck. 12
13
Commissioner Alcheck: Ok, I have a question but I’m not sure you’ll be able to speak to maybe 14
but just so I make sure not to misspeak later. Would it be your understanding that (interrupted) 15
16
[note – many people speaking from the audience at once] 17
18
Commissioner Alcheck: Do you think it’s correct to suggest that the ballot measure coming 19
before the City in November, I think that’s qualified, regarding amending the cap that was 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
adopted in the Comprehensive Plan is not impacted by this adjustment? What I’m trying to say 1
is there’s been a suggestion that this would somehow preempt the citizens ability to speak but 2
it’s my understanding that the ballot measure isn’t amending the Comp Plans 1.7 million City‐3
wide cap, not another or I should say the more current 1.7 million cap not this sort of pre‐4
existing cap. Is that accurate? 5
6
Mr. Yang: I think what you’re asking is, is there a relationship between this cap and the ballot 7
measure or the City‐wide cap of 1.7 or half of that amount whatever it may be. And from our 8
perspective no, there’s… those are unrelated caps. 9
10
Commissioner Alcheck: Ok that’s sort of what I understood the ballot measure to say. Ok, so 11
I’m going to… are you setting time limits or are we… ok, so I’m going to… I’m just going to 12
address one thing about process real quick. I’m glad Elaine Miller that you joined us tonight. I 13
was hoping I’d have an opportunity to meet you. I want you to know that when I saw your 14
Next‐Door post on Monday at 4 because I get the roundup, I was a little disappointed. Because 15
you wrote and I’ll quote it because I think it’s worth… that we all work setting the tone here, 16
which is you said that the development cabal on the PTC is concerned about the Citizens 17
Initiative to restrain office growth will pass. And so, the Planning Commission has scheduled a 18
discussion to raise the Downtown Cap to preempt the election and the expression of the 19
citizen’s voice. I think it’s safe to assume that when you say development cabal you are 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
referring to some nefarious group of which you believe I am a member. And if that’s the case I 1
just… I want you to know that none of the Commissioners before, all of which are volunteers, 2
have any oversight or influence on agendizing an item like the one before you… before us 3
tonight. In fact, I had only begun and had not yet finished reviewing this item when I saw your 4
post and so I just hope that everybody knows that there’s no effort… the cabal members are… 5
did not ask Staff to bring this forward. And you know you may not realize it but on our 6
Commission’s website my contact information is provided and I really wish you’d called me 7
before suggesting that somehow there was nefarious intent. 8
9
[note ‐female:] [unintelligible ‐speaking from the audience] a conversation [unintelligible]. 10
11
Commissioner Alcheck: No because I want you to know we received almost (interrupted) 12
13
[note‐female:] [unintelligible – speaking from the audience] 14
15
Commissioner Alcheck: Excuse me. 16
17
Chair Lauing: Right. 18
19
Commissioner Alcheck: I just… I want to address the fact that we (interrupted) 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
[note‐many people speaking from the audience at once off mic] 2
3
Chair Lauing: Let’s just make it brief Mike [note‐Commissioner Alcheck]. 4
5
Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, I just wanted you to realize we received hundreds and hundreds 6
of email (interrupted) 7
8
[note ‐female:] [unintelligible – speaking from the audience off mic] 9
10
Chair Lauing: Ok so (interrupted) 11
12
Commissioner Alcheck: I just want you to realize we received hundreds and hundreds of emails 13
and there was a general fear (interrupted) 14
15
[note‐female:] [off mic] Just don’t point out one person. 16
17
Commissioner Alcheck: It’s… I’m not I (interrupted) 18
19
Chair Lauing: Ok Michael [note‐Commissioner Alcheck], Commissioner (interrupted) 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
[note‐ many people from the audience speaking at once off mic]. 2
3
Chair Lauing: Commissioner (interrupted) 4
5
[note‐many people speaking from the audience at once off mic] 6
7
Chair Lauing: Ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner Alcheck currently has the chair. 8
9
[note ‐male:] (off mic) How does this move the (interrupted) 10
11
Chair Lauing: Ok, ladies and gentlemen (interrupted) 12
13
Commissioner Alcheck: Please let me finish. 14
15
Chair Lauing: We’ll move to recess if we can’t get order. So, Commissioner Alcheck currently 16
has the floor and I would urge brevity because I think you’ve made a point. 17
18
Commissioner Alcheck: Let me… if I sound like I took it personally, I’m not. It’s just that I’m… 19
we… I’m here to engage with you and I make my self‐available. I think we all do and what we 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
saw in the last 48‐hours is a tremendous sense of distrust in us. The suggestion that we have 1
somehow attempted to further the President Hotel’s process. 2
3
[note‐unknown speaker:] (off mic) Yeah but this is not (interrupted) 4
5
Chair Lauing: Please. 6
7
[note‐unknown speaker:] (off mic) relating to the issue [unintelligible]. 8
9
Chair Lauing: Yeah, could (interrupted) 10
11
Commissioner Alcheck: We have (interrupted) 12
13
[note‐many people speaking from the audience at once off mic] 14
15
Chair Lauing: Mike, I think you’ve made that point and I don’t really want to carry on with it too 16
much longer. Did you have any other comments on the merits here? 17
18
Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, I’ll (interrupted) 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
[note‐many people speaking from the audience at once off mic] 1
2
Commissioner Alcheck: Ok. 3
4
[note‐male:] (off mic) it’s not on the issue. 5
6
Commissioner Alcheck: Alright, I think we’ve heard (interrupted) 7
8
Chair Lauing: Are we going to (interrupted) 9
10
Commissioner Alcheck: I will continue with my comments. 11
12
Chair Lauing: Let’s say… let’s stay on the agenda and let’s urge brevity. 13
14
Commissioner Alcheck: I’ll say… I’ll try to conclude with this. The… this issue has been litigated 15
sort of at nauseum this specific issue in our community. I did not agree with everything that 16
came to pass with the adoption of our Comprehensive Plan but I did and I continue to respect 17
the process by which it came about. This… tonight this concept it is a policy discussion and 18
we’ve already participated in it and Council acted upon it. And with that said though, there 19
remains a legal ambiguity here. I attempted to also understand how this came to us and it 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
seems to me that there’s an effort maybe during the summer when our Legal Department or 1
our Planning Department tries to understand what potential issues may come that they are 2
trying to address that issue which is, I think, admirable. That said there’s remains a legal 3
ambiguity and we need political clarity. Clarity that really only our Council can provide which is 4
why I would suggest that tonight we come together. We show the community that we’re 5
equally unsure of what the Council’s direction was and support a motion that recommends that 6
the City Council make the determination on this code section without direction from the 7
Commission. We’ve reviewed the growth strategies, in summary, we’ve reviewed the growth 8
strategies and opined on them. And there’s a conflict in our code between this section and the 9
Comp Plan’s newer City‐wide cap and whatever compromise our Council came to, to enact that 10
cap along with the 50,000‐annual limit. And the City Council could immediately resolve this 11
confusion and add clarity and help us understand exactly what was the strategy that they had 12
intended. So again, I want to reiterate that I’m here, I’m available and I would support that we 13
come together as a group to demonstrate that we want to resist sort of the pollicization of this 14
Commission and allow our Council to just provide the clarity that they may be unfortunately 15
didn’t provide. 16
17
Chair Lauing: Ok. Other speakers? Commissioner Waldfogel. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Waldfogel: Right. I want to thank all the public speakers for coming out tonight. I 1
know that it’s not… can you hear me? 2
3
Commissioner Summa: No, I can’t even hear you. 4
5
[note‐male:] Get close. 6
7
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Waldfogel: Let me see if I can pull this microphone a little bit closer. Sorry about 1
that, can you hear me now? Ok great. Yeah so, I want to thank you all for coming out tonight. 2
I’m sure it’s not exactly what you wanted to be doing on whatever tonight is, July 29th [note‐3
July 25th]. 4
5
MOTION #1 6
7
I’m… in the interest of moving this forward I’d actually like to propose a motion and if I get a 8
second on the motion then I would like to speak to the motion. So, the motion that I want to 9
propose is to move the Staff recommendation. 10
11
Chair Lauing: Move the Staff recommendation as published in the Staff report basically. Is there 12
a second to that? No second. 13
14
Commissioner Alcheck: Can I ask a question real quick before it (interrupted) 15
16
Chair Lauing: Well we really need a second before we can discuss it. 17
18
SECOND 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Alcheck: If I need to… I’ll second it just to simply ask him a question. 1
2
Chair Lauing: Well yeah, I think we… ok because then we can have a… then we can begin 3
discussion. So, Commissioner Waldfogel moved and it’s seconded by Commissioner Alcheck. 4
5
Commissioner Alcheck: I would like to understand the rationale. 6
7
Chair Lauing: Which is why he’s going to speak now. 8
9
Commissioner Alcheck: That would be great. 10
11
Chair Lauing: Commissioner? 12
13
Commissioner Waldfogel: Great, we have the motion and a second so it’s on the floor. So, I’d 14
like to say I will vote against this motion and my reasons are the following. The City Council and 15
the Comp Plan have set multiple contradictory goals in place that just don’t coordinate. I mean 16
right now housing is Priority One, reducing commercial intrusions into the neighbors is I think 17
Priority Two through RPP and other tools, retail protection is Priority Three. I mean I may not be 18
getting the exact priorities right but these are stated priorities and more office is not even a 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
stated priority. So, we’re solving a non‐problem today and it’s something that’s just wildly 1
contradicted in the Comp Plan. 2
3
We also see from tonight’s speakers on various issues that it’s really hard to make any progress 4
on housing. Developers will continue to develop commercial office uses as long as commercial 5
and office uses are possible and they are more profitable than housing. I mean that’s what’s 6
been happening for the last 15‐years and it will continue to happen. And so, until we 7
understand that we really shouldn’t change anything. And we’re in the middle of a Housing 8
Work Plan and we should really look at this in the context of that Housing Work Plan. Finally, 9
there is a Growth Ordinance on the ballot in November and taking this on right now just looks 10
like it’s undermining a democratic process. We just shouldn’t do that so if we retain the cap 11
tonight and if we hit the limit in the next year or two, which were likely to do, we have time to 12
develop an alternative. After that Growth Ordinance is voted up and down and after the 13
Housing Work Plan is completed so we have plenty of time to do this. We don’t have to do this 14
tonight but my ask is whichever way we vote on this, whether we vote this up or down, let’s get 15
it to the Council quickly. I mean here I agree with my colleague Commissioner Alcheck. I think 16
we should make a recommendation, I think we should get at Council, and Council should say 17
whether they like this or not and resolve the ambiguity. I don’t think we should let this hang out 18
until next year. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
I also have a question for our esteemed counsel which is this… and if this is off topic just stop 1
me but just what tools do we have from PTC to make a quick recommendation to Council on 2
renter protection? I mean are there… is there anything we can do around renter protection, 3
evictions, rent increases? I mean we’ve heard loud and clear that these are issues and just what 4
can we do? I mean do we set up an Ad Hoc? Do we… what’s our process? 5
6
Ms. Yang: You know you and your fellow Commissioners are free to communicate with the 7
Council anyway you want too. I mean (interrupted) 8
9
Commissioner Waldfogel: But as a body how do we communicate an intent if we had an 10
intent? 11
12
Mr. Yang: I… that’s something that I can think about but (interrupted) 13
14
Chair Lauing: I think we just have to agendize it as an issue and work with Staff to get it on the 15
agenda. 16
17
Mr. Yang: This is something that we can talk about at another time in the meeting. 18
19
Chair Lauing: Right. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
SECOND WITHDRAWN FROM THE MOTION #1 2
3
Commissioner Alcheck: I’ll just withdraw my second since I don’t really support the motion. 4
5
Chair Lauing: I’m sorry where you done Commissioner Alcheck [note‐ Commissioner 6
Waldfogel]? So that’s on the… it’s on the floor for discussion. 7
8
Commissioner Alcheck: I wanted to understand his rationale so I withdraw the second because 9
I don’t wish to support that motion but I do wish to (interrupted) 10
11
Chair Lauing: Is that an option? 12
13
Mr. Yang: Yes, of course. 14
15
SECOND 16
17
Chair Lauing: Ok. I’m happy to second it to continue the discussion if we want because there’s 18
a motion on the table, right? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Mr. Yang: Only if it’s seconded. 1
2
Chair Lauing: Right but I think it’s a worthwhile discussion so I’m happy to second it. 3
4
Vice‐Chair Monk: I don’t think it’s a good practice to second motions for the… we can still have 5
a discussion without [unintelligible]. 6
7
Chair Lauing: Ok, sorry, did you want to go ahead? 8
9
Vice‐Chair Monk: I just think it’s odd to make a motion that you have no intention of advancing 10
on and having it pass so why would we discuss it further? 11
12
Commissioner Waldfogel: [unintelligible ‐off mic] take a vote. 13
14
Vice‐Chair Monk: You… oh so you might change your vote on your motion because you stated 15
earlier that you would not be supporting your own motion which I thought was (interrupted) 16
17
[note‐female:] (off mic) We can’t hear you. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Lauing: The motion on the… the motion that was made was to accept the Staff 1
recommendation which generates the discussion. So that’s basically where we are and he 2
stated why he wouldn’t vote for it. I’m interested in getting more conversation so I don’t care 3
procedurally how it is. Did you have a comment Commissioner [note‐Vice‐Chair] Monk? Your 4
light went on. 5
6
Vice‐Chair Monk: Yeah, I do have a few comments. First, I’d like to acknowledge some of the 7
members of Council that are here tonight. Our Vice‐Mayor is here, Council Wolbach is here if 8
there are others I’m missing thank you for coming tonight, and showing your interest. And also 9
thank you to everyone who sent in letters and everyone who’s come tonight. We definitely 10
appreciate all of the input. 11
12
There was an overwhelming support to address the housing crisis and push to preserve housing 13
at all income levels and I heard that unanimously stated by everyone present tonight. When we 14
return on August 29th we will be discussing a framework for Housing Ordinance specific to the 15
downtown area. And I’d like to extend an invitation to everyone here and everyone listening at 16
home to please come, please speak, send letters, walk the walk. We definitely want to hear 17
from you on that issue. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
As far as the timing of this particular ordinance I find it unusual in that Staff typically goes over 1
agendize items with the Commission. And also, with… specifically with the Chair and myself and 2
this was on that had not been previously brought up to our attention. So, if there was some 3
reason that this came forward other than the code cleanup, which is what we’re telling… being 4
told is the reason, I would like to know it. And until then in the absence of that my 5
understanding of our objective tonight is to look at the Staff report because Staff has identified 6
a need to update the code so that it complies with the new adopted Comp Plan and Council 7
direction from January 30th, 2017. So, in that regard, it’s quite clear to me what our objective is 8
tonight and why this is being brought to us. And if there is any further confusion on what it is 9
that is before the PTC I would refer to Packet Page 12 which is the actual ordinance and gives 10
background on the prior Comp Plan where the Downtown Cap was put in place. It also 11
explained what was to happen when we got used… got close to approaching the maximum 12
under that and about 4‐years ago we were getting close and would have triggered the 13
moratorium. And so that’s why it went back to Council and the Phase One of the Downtown 14
Cap Study was put in motion. And based on the findings of that study based on the new Comp 15
Plan Council made the recommendation that we go with a City‐wide cap which incorporated 16
the Downtown Cap. And they also enacted the 50,00‐square foot cap so we have two other 17
caps that were to replace and update the direction that we needed to go in. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
We’ve heard from residents that retaining this cap will somehow have a bearing on preserving 1
residential buildings in the downtown area. However, when we asked Staff about that and look 2
at the code there was anything that I’m seeing that supports that. So, I don’t know if there’s 3
something indeed that I’m missing but my understanding is that whether or not we take a yes 4
decision on the Staff proposal or we take a no‐decision. Either outcome from my understanding 5
has no barring on any residential buildings or conversions in the downtown area. And if I’m 6
mistaken in that conclusion I would like any of my colleagues to correct me or anyone in the 7
audience I invite you to correct me. I did reach out to certain members of the community 8
because there were posts online and on social platforms that gave rise to my questioning as to 9
what was before us tonight. And when I attempted my follow‐up I did not get any additional 10
clarification from anyone actually linking what was before us tonight with any potential action 11
that can or cannot occur in regards to the residential units in downtown. That this is an 12
ordinance that relates to the commercial development and it has no barring on residential. 13
14
So, I haven’t taken a position on this particular motion just yet but I would say that based on 15
what I’m currently understanding, the motion is to advance this to Council so that it will be 16
back in Council’s court for them to reevaluate and decide what to do in terms of this new 17
ordinance. So, I guess I’m leaning towards having it go back to Council in some format or 18
another because we’re an advisory Board in any event. And they’re going to end up making 19
their decision irrespective of what we decided tonight and it may or may not comport. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Arthur Keller, I’d like to acknowledge that you are here at the podium and if you wanted to 1
address us if the Chair would be ok with that? 2
3
Chair Lauing: The hearings closed but did you have a question for him? 4
5
Vice‐Chair Monk: Well, I’m curious Chair, I’m wondering if he wanted to answer my question 6
because I did put a question out to the community where I generally would like to know what 7
exactly is the nexus between what’s before us tonight and the Hotel President. And if someone 8
can clarify the nexus for me and… then I would like an answer to it. So, if the Chair is… if that’s 9
(interrupted) 10
11
Chair Lauing: Counsel? 12
13
Mr. Yang: It's in the Chair’s discretion. 14
15
Chair Lauing: Commission, allow the speaker? 16
17
Commissioner Summa: (off mic) That’s fine with me. 18
19
Chair Lauing: Just say yes or no. We’re just taking a Commission vote. One, two, three. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Commissioner Alcheck: [unintelligible – off mic] 2
3
Chair Lauing: Yeah, I mean we can’t do this to 25 speakers so if this is specifically answering one 4
of your questions then we’ll allow it but it has to be constrained. Go ahead, Mr. Keller. 5
6
Mr. Keller: My understanding is that Commissioners can ask specific members of… questions of 7
members of the public and I'm offering an answer to her question. 8
9
Chair Lauing: Right so go ahead. 10
11
Mr. Keller: So, it’s my understanding that multiple ordinances may apply to [unintelligible] 12
situations. So, with respect to the President Hotel Apartments, in the situation that there… the 13
square footage of that would be converted from residential to a non‐residential use, mainly 14
hotel exceeds 25,000 or that incorporated with other developments. Such as the one on 15
Cowper and University where to that cap then this conversion could not happen as an 16
additional reason. Now it does turn out that the City Manager before the sale went through did 17
say that he thought it could happen by right but it’s not clear exactly at this public… it’s 18
probably going to be litigation that happens. And if there’s litigation on this particular sale 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
because of representations made by the City Manager then having additional ordinances that 1
apply will [unintelligible] the City’s case. 2
3
Chair Lauing: Ok did you have any other questions Commissioner [note‐Vice‐Chair] Monk? 4
5
Ms. Vrhel: I would also like to speak because Commissioner [note‐Vice‐Chair] Monk 6
(interrupted) 7
8
Chair Lauing: Wait, this is what I don’t want to get into. 9
10
Ms. Vrhel: I think there’s only one… it's just me. She asked the residents (interrupted) 11
12
Chair Lauing: I think… did you have your question answered, Commissioner [note ‐Vice‐Chair] 13
Monk? 14
15
Vice‐Chair Monk: No. I’d be happy to hear what Ms. Vrhel has to say but if you need to put that 16
to a vote to the Commission. 17
18
Chair Lauing: Ok. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Ms. Vrhel: I think what I heard today was that the two City Staff representatives from the 1
Building Department really didn’t have a clear answer as to many of your Commissioner 2
questions. And I think you have an attorney here and I think actually what would be very good 3
would be for Ms. Monk’s questions to be given over to the legal counsel… the City’s legal 4
counsel and for them to provide you a rock solid, honest question or answer to her questions. I 5
think the rest are conjecture. And having worked with the City Staff before on planning and 6
particularly Ms. French, I have personal experience that all… that leading information out of an 7
answer creates confusion. Thank you. 8
9
Chair Lauing: Alright, let’s move on. Did you have any other questions or comments at this 10
point? 11
12
Vice‐Chair Monk: Thank you for the input. What I do believe is that additional changes to the 13
code would need to take effect in order for there to be any sort of action on that particular… on 14
the President Hotel. So, this singular action I don’t think would have any barring at all and that 15
in order for something to happen additional changes would need to occur. There would need to 16
be another change in the code or zoning or something in order for there to be something to 17
change… to really impact that unit. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
I do have one question for Staff and that has to do with the… and I know this isn’t… Staff has 1
represented that the item that the public is speaking to is not… that there is not a nexus and 2
there’s not a relationship to what’s before tonight. So, I hope that I’m not out of turn and still 3
referencing it but I also just wanted to confirm that… I just lost my train of thought. I apologize 4
but I guess my main concern is that some of the confusion that I believe that the residents are 5
expressing tonight has to do with what we’re tasked to do and what might be available to the 6
residents of this other property. And I don’t know that there’s been sufficient nexus between… 7
connecting the… what’s before us tonight with the Hotel President hasn’t been shown in my 8
viewpoint so far. Thanks. 9
10
Chair Lauing: Ok, Commissioner Summa. 11
12
Commissioner Summa: Well, thank you, everyone, for your patience this evening. So, I would 13
like to start out by saying that one of the things that has been emphasized the Council vote on 14
this about 18‐months ago. In the last year, the Mayor and the Council have been unanimous in 15
one thing and that is that we need more housing and we need housing downtown. Removing 16
the commercial cap from the downtown will disincentive housing and will create more offices 17
that will contribute to the existing problems that the… our former Council Member’s in 1986 18
were smart enough to see so that’s the first thing. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
I think the Council would like to have us give them the recommendation to reconsider this 1
because I don’t think since in the last year that is what they have expressed. And I think they 2
rely on us to give them good information. Furthermore, we have had a superabundance of 3
concern from every point of view; the moral; the legal; the sensible. We know we have an 4
existing problem with traffic and parking downtown. We have made a commitment to the 5
residents of Downtown North and South to annually reduce the number of commuter parkers 6
in their streets every year and we cannot do that if we continue to add office. We can add office 7
in other parts of downtown where… and other parts of the City but downtown is full up. I think 8
we should assume given the difficulties that we seem to encounter counting the square footage 9
I think we should assume we’ve hit the cap. I didn’t hear a direct answer but Staff referred to 10
25K left. That… you know… so let’s assume we’ve hit the cap. This cap is not a hard cap, it is a 11
cap that says huh, we’re here. This is where we thought the trouble would really start to get 12
really bad so we want to take a year off, we’ll take a moratorium and I think that is a really good 13
thing for us to discuss how this affects the other housing issues that are coming before us. I 14
think we should approach this from a holistic policy issue. That is how we will wind up with a 15
solution and a conclusion that serves all the residents in this City as best it can and no longer 16
continues to burdened the downtown with too much office space that it cannot support. So, I 17
would… if I thought there was support from my colleagues I would make a motion that we 18
recommend that we believe we have reached the cap and the moratorium should immediately 19
be put into place. In the absence of that kind of support from my colleagues, I would simply like 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
to make the recommendation that we do not recommend at this time that the Council abandon 1
18.18.040. Do I have a second? 2
3
Vice‐Chair Monk: I’ll second it. 4
5
Chair Lauing: Wait so procedurally do we not have the motion already on the table from 6
Commissioner (interrupted) 7
8
Vice‐Chair Monk: That’s a substitute motion, correct? 9
10
Mr. Yang: Yeah so that would be a substitute motion that Commissioner Summa has made. 11
12
Chair Lauing: That’s what I wanted to clarify. 13
14
Vice‐Chair Monk: And I would second that. 15
16
Chair Lauing: So please restate the substitute motion. 17
18
Commissioner Alcheck: (off mic) Which one are you seconding? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Lauing: She’s seconding Commissioner Summa’s. 1
2
Commissioner Summa: (off mic) I can’t restate it. [unintelligible] 3
4
Commissioner Alcheck: She said two motions. She suggested (interrupted) 5
6
Chair Lauing: It was your ladder motion I believe Commissioner Summa? 7
8
SUBSTITUTE MOTION 9
10
Commissioner Summa: I don’t… if I have support for enacting the law that exists right now on 11
the books of the City that would result in a very sensible 1‐year moratorium on office space. So, 12
we can all take a step back and look how we can achieve the goals we want together. I would 13
make that motion. 14
15
Chair Lauing: Then you need to make it as opposed to ask the question but if you’d like to 16
(interrupted) 17
18
Commissioner Summa: Ok I’ll make that motion. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Lauing: do that one, that’s ok otherwise we’ll go to the second. 1
2
Commissioner Summa: That’s a law that is in place and we have every reason I believe to follow 3
it. 4
5
Chair Lauing: Ok so now (interrupted) 6
7
Commissioner Summa: Do I have a second? 8
9
Chair Lauing: Is there a second to that? 10
11
Commissioner Waldfogel: [unintelligible – off mic] 12
13
Chair Lauing: Well first let’s see if there’s a second. It doesn’t sound like there’s a second so that 14
motion is not going to forward. 15
16
SUBSTITUTE MOTION DIES DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND 17
18
FRIENDLY AMENDMENT 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Summa: Ok and I’m sorry I made the double motion. I’m not very good at making 1
motions and I make it extemporaneously so whatever I said in the second motion and that is 2
basically that we recommend that the Council not pursue abandoning the Downtown Cap at 3
this time for all the reasons I stated before. 4
5
Chair Lauing: Ok is there a second to that? Was that Commissioner [note‐ Vice‐Chair] Monk’s 6
second? I’m not trying to put you on the spot just (interrupted) 7
8
Vice‐Chair Monk: I just want to clarify from the maker. Are you just recommending that we 9
don’t advice this to Council or are you actually also making some affirmative direction? 10
11
Commissioner Summa: No, I’m… Staff’s recommendation was that we recommend that Council 12
go ahead and pursue abandoning 18.18.040. I am saying for all the reason that I stated and the 13
many people in this room who spoke so well that we do the opposite. And we tell them that we 14
think that they should keep 18.18.040 in place and not remove it from the Municipal Code. 15
16
Chair Lauing: Ok so the motion is to retain 18.18.040 so is there a second to that? That’s fine if 17
you don’t I just didn’t want to preempt you from seconding it. We just need a second so we can 18
discuss it so. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Waldfogel: [unintelligible – off mic] 1
2
Chair Lauing: So procedurally… what I was going to say is there’s no second but procedurally I 3
don’t see that that’s much different. It’s just one of those substitute motions that get to the 4
same place depending on which way you vote on it because the first one says we should go 5
ahead and do it and then it’s going to be either approved or not. And you’re saying we should 6
tell them not to do, it’s going to be approved or not so I think we’re in the same place. 7
8
Vice‐Chair Monk: I guess I have a question for counsel then. Is it the same effect to make a 9
recommendation to keep an ordinance on the books that we know is in conflict with other 10
existing ordinances versus just saying let’s not advance this to Council? 11
12
Mr. Yang: So, this… let me try to help maybe structure this. Right now, there’s a motion on the 13
table which was the Staff recommendation that the Council adopts the ordinance. One way to 14
distinguish Commissioner Summa’s substitute motion is to frame it as a recommendation that 15
the Council rejects the proposed ordinance. And those would be two separate affirmative 16
actions which the Commission could vote on. 17
18
Chair Lauing: Which I think is essentially the same thing as what you’re saying, right 19
Commissioner Summa? 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Vice‐Chair Monk: No, she’s (interrupted) 2
3
Chair Lauing: Because I don’t want him to put words in your mouth so I want you to itemize 4
your own motion. 5
6
Commissioner Summa: No, he’s correct. To… they are in my mind diametrically opposed. One 7
says please do this and get rid of 18.18.040 from our Municipal Code and the other says please 8
do this, keep 18.18.040 in our Municipal Code. 9
10
Chair Lauing: So are… I just want… are you going to accept his language that you want to reject 11
the proposal of Staff? 12
13
Commissioner Summa: Sure, I appreciate that Staff will probably word it better than I so that’s 14
fine as long as it’s clear what the difference is. 15
16
Chair Lauing: Ok so we need a second for that which again to my mind sort of going the same 17
place which the same kind of motion. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Vice‐Chair Monk: I’d prefer to vote on the first motion and then just start fresh with a new 1
motion then go through the substitute motion so I will be seconding it. 2
3
Chair Lauing: So, there’s no second to that motion at this point. 4
5
Commissioner Waldfogel: (off mic) I’ll accept that as a friendly amendment. I mean we’re just 6
trying to get to the same place. The question is just what’s the most expeditious process to get 7
to the same place? 8
9
Chair Lauing: Ok, that’s very accommodating. That’s very accommodating. So, let him just 10
rephrase the motion then as a friendly amendment. Right, did you want to try that one Alex… 11
Albert or are we ok? 12
13
Mr. Yang: So, I guess the question is does the seconder of the main motion accept that friendly 14
as well? 15
16
Chair Lauing: Yeah, no I was just trying to get… we’re onto… we’re basically onto Commissioner 17
Summa’s language now. 18
19
Mr. Yang: Ok so the motion as amended (interrupted) 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Lauing: And my second still stands. 1
2
Mr. Yang: The motion as amended is a motion to recommend that the City Council reject Staff’s 3
proposed ordinance. 4
5
Chair Lauing: Right. Ok and now Commissioner Alcheck has a comment? 6
7
Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah just… so just for clarity, I think even though they’re opposites and 8
the failure of one is the same as the success of the other. You need an affirmative motion to 9
have… we cannot conclude this item without an affirmative… without a motion passing. 10
Whether that’s a motion to continue, a motion to recommend not approving (interrupted) 11
12
Chair Lauing: Right so that’s in place now. 13
14
Commissioner Alcheck: That’s why the failure of Asher’s [note‐Commissioner Waldfogel] 15
original motion wouldn’t be the same as the success of her substitute. Now (interrupted) 16
17
Chair Lauing: Ok so we got that. 18
19
Commissioner Alcheck: Ok I just wanted clarity there. Ok now (interrupted) 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Lauing: So, let (interrupted) 2
3
Commissioner Alcheck: Now I’d like to make the comment that I’m waiting to make. 4
5
Chair Lauing: Sorry because I haven’t spoken yet to the motion so. 6
7
Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah so, I’m going to respond to something. I… there’s a little more 8
nuance here regarding housing growth that I’d like to acknowledge. Our code… and please 9
correct me if I’m wrong. It’s my impression that our current Municipal Code disallows 10
development of solely residential in our downtown. That without a mixed component of 11
commercial you actually can’t add any residential to our downtown. So, this is a little 12
problematic because I am firmly in support of the strategy to add additional housing. I don’t 13
share the belief that commercial office space is more lucrative simply because it’s commercial. I 14
think our code has created incentives that allow commercial projects to be of great intensity 15
and thus reap greater rewards. If our residential projects could have that same advantages I 16
think we would see a lot of more residential projects. One of those disadvantages is that our 17
residential projects have to incorporate some mixed‐use or they can’t come forward. Am I right 18
about that? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Ms. French: In the CD Zone that’s correct. Some of the downtowns like RT, the SOFA area is 1
different. 2
3
Commissioner Alcheck: Some of that is inclusive but most of it. So, I mention that only because 4
if for example, we had considered a moratorium on any of those uses then we would also be 5
considered as our law is currently written a moratorium on residential because our residential 6
is handicapped by this requirement. I am satisfied if this Commission decides to further the 7
recommendation that’s currently on the dais simply because again, I think this is a decision… a 8
discussion that we’ve had and we’ve expressed points of view on it. We really need the Council 9
to tell us what is it exactly you intended or what is it that you now intend? I think regardless of 10
what the Council decides on this when the citizens vote in November if the citizens of this great 11
community decide to half the City‐wide cap then that is the purgative of our citizenry. And that 12
effort shouldn’t be preempted. I don’t think telling us providing clarity here would do that but I 13
will say this if the… and I’ll just… I’ll direct these comments to Council. If you elect not to make 14
the change and retain the cap we really need Staff to address the issue of the requirement that 15
our residential include a component of commercial because without addressing that we are 16
allowing the code to essentially restrict residential development. And that is a huge concern of 17
mine. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
I want to just say one additional thing. I don’t feel that we have really enough information to 1
address the impact of this element on the President Hotel situation. We haven’t been informed 2
about it and it’s not… it’s… I know probably far less about it than most of you who are living 3
there. 4
5
Chair Lauing: Yeah, it’s not even a project, that’s correct. 6
7
Commissioner Alcheck: Right and so I think it’s important to acknowledge that even if… it 8
wouldn’t… it probably would not be appropriate for us at this juncture to suggest some specific 9
legal policy with respect to that site. Because there is a process by which we have to be 10
informed and hear community input before making such a recommendation. So, I just want you 11
to know that I believe we share some of that concern and we feel a little unprepared to provide 12
some feedback in that regard simply because of a lack of insight and prep. 13
14
Chair Lauing: Ok. 15
16
Commissioner Alcheck: But I… again I welcome… I would welcome our Chair inviting that 17
discussion so that’s what I have to say about the motion on the floor. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Lauing: So, I’d like to speak to the motion and actually my own second. First of all, as been 1
stated by a couple of my colleagues we just got this agenda item without any prior discussion 2
ever. Either up here or independently so we’re reacting from the time that we got our Packets 3
delivered on Friday night to try to prep for this. Highly respect and appreciate all the input from 4
the public. 5
6
The whole point to me as I began studying this issue from the get go up to this second is timing 7
of any sort of discussion or action on the accruing cap one way or the other. A number of 8
speakers have asked what… why now? What’s the rush? There isn’t any. We have a common 9
pre‐meeting with Assistant Director Lait and the Commissioner [note‐ Chair?] and Vice‐10
Commissioner [Note‐Vice‐Chair] and others we discussed it at length yesterday. And my 11
questions were around why are we discussing this now? Why is it even in front of us? Why 12
don’t we continue this until there are some other things that are more important that we’ve 13
studied and taken action on called the Housing Work Plan? Which is substantial stuff that is 14
likely going to result in the need for code changes to give incentives to development of housing 15
and relaxation of standards which I think there is close to universal support on this dais for. 16
17
So, we talked about continuances and how urgent was it and unfortunately the Assistant 18
Director isn’t here but I mean we agree that a continuance would be acceptable. And also, that 19
it is not particularly time‐sensitive relative to existing projects or frankly anything else. So, one 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
way or the other I come in tonight saying that I think we do not want to take official action on 1
the exact ordinance language that was put in front of us. A lot has changed in 18‐months since 2
January 30th, 2017 when Council had these discussions. Not the least of which is again the acute 3
situation around housing and the commitment of Council to more housing of all types and 4
particularly the commitment of Council and the community to BRM and affordable housing. We 5
have got to take action on that, that takes the highest priority, that’s what we need to work on 6
the rest of the year, [and] that needs to be done before we look at this thing in front of us 7
tonight in a vacuum because we don’t know what the impacts are. And we don’t even have 8
things in the Staff report on transportation impacts, TDMs, etc. etc. etc. There’s just nothing 9
there to look at so for those two reasons the whole issue here is the sequence on addressing 10
this as is, is just wrong. We have to calculate the impacts and we have to sort out what we 11
really want to do to change the housing build rate in the City and all areas. So that has to be 12
done first and therefore this thing should not be approved, particularly since there’s no time 13
sensitivity. 14
15
So, I think that we’re just looking at the right technique to send that message back to the 16
Council and in support of the community. I think that the motion that’s on the floor does that 17
fine because we can say we don’t want to approve that now and these are the reasons why so 18
I’d be happy to support that motion. I think that we’re getting, regardless of the technique, 19
close to the consensus that we’re not ready to move on that now. We all want to prioritize 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
housing and Council ought to take a second look at that in the context of what we get done 1
through the end of this year before taking a look at that cap issue in a vacuum. So, I’d be happy 2
to support the motion as it is. Other comments on that? Commissioner Summa. 3
4
Commissioner Summa: Just a specific comment but I… Staff can maybe verify that this is true. I 5
believe by using TDRs… we can use TDRs for residential so you could get buildings that have 6
quite a bit residential. Is that accurate? I think it’s in the code. 7
8
Ms. French: We can get back to you further on that but we don’t think there’s a prohibition in 9
the code to use TDRs for residential but it just hasn’t been done. It’s always been (interrupted) 10
11
Commissioner Summa: Because off… yeah because most property owners are going to go for 12
commercial space but we can. 13
14
Ms. French: As too Commissioner Alcheck’s point, you wouldn’t be able to use it and create a 15
holey residential project in the CD Zone downtown. 16
17
Commissioner Summa: No but you have to put… in lots of CD you have to have ground floor 18
retail anyway which is protected Citywide. So, I think there’s more potential than maybe my 19
colleague was thinking about at the moment. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Lauing: Ok if there are no other comments let’s take a vote on the motion and to restate 2
it. 3
4
Commissioner Summa: (off mic) Are we voting on mine? 5
6
Chair Lauing: We’re voting on the friendly amendment that you gave to Commissioner 7
Waldfogel which is to… if you want to give us the exact wording. 8
9
Mr. Yang: The recommendation that the Council rejects Staff’s proposed ordinance. 10
11
Chair Lauing: Yeah at this time or something like that. 12
13
Commissioner Summa: Can you say that again? I can’t hear you. 14
15
Mr. Yang: Sorry, it’s a Planning Commission recommendation that the Council rejects Staff’s 16
proposed ordinance. 17
18
Commissioner Summa: Thank you. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
VOTE 1
2
Chair Lauing: Ok all in favor of that motion signify by raising your hand; four. Opposed? Zero. Is 3
there an abstention? One. 4‐0‐1. Do you want to speak to your abstention? 4
5
MOTION PASSED 4(Lauing, Summa, Monk, Waldfogel)‐0‐1(Alcheck)‐2(Gardias and Riggs absent) 6
7
Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, I’ll just quickly restate that I think this is… I don’t know that the 8
Commissioner needs to provide input here outside of the tremendous amount of input we gave 9
during the Comp Plan process. And I think Council can provide us the clarity without our 10
direction so as to give us our greatest chance to avoid the politicization of our work during this 11
very tentious election year. 12
13
Chair Lauing: Ok, thank you. That concludes Item Number 2 and I’d like to call a recess here at 14
8:35 for about 10‐minutes. 15
16
[The Commission took a short break] 17
18
3. The Planning and Transportation Commission Will Review and may Amend the PTC 19
By‐Laws and Procedural Rules. (Continued from June 27, 2018) 20
21
22
City of Palo Alto (ID # 10009)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 2/11/2019
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Investment Activity Report
Title: City of Palo Alto Investment Activity Report for the Second Quarter,
Fiscal Year 2019
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Administrative Services
Background
The City’s investment policy requires that staff report to Council quarterly on the City’s
portfolio composition and performance compared to the Council-adopted policy; discuss
overall compliance with the City’s Investment Policy; and provide recommendations, if any, for
policy changes. In addition, staff will also provide a detailed list of all securities and report on
the City’s ability to meet expenditure requirements over the next six months. This report is to
inform Council of the City’s investment portfolio performance as of the second quarter ending
December 31, 2018 and to disclose staff’s cash flow projections for the next six months.
Discussion
The City’s investment portfolio is summarized in Graph 1 and detailed in the Investments by
Fund report (Attachment B). The Investments by Fund report groups the portfolio’s securities
by investment type and includes details of the investment issuer, date of maturity, current
market value, the book and face (par) value, and the weighted average maturity of each type of
investment and of the entire portfolio.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
The par value of the City’s portfolio is $527.1 million; in comparison, last quarter it was $511.2
million. The $15.9 million portfolio growth since the last quarter primarily results from timing
of cash flows. Compared to the first quarter of the fiscal year, there was an increase in property
tax receipts totaling $15.4 million; debt service payments decreased by $3.9 million (majority
paid in Q1). In addition, $10 million in securities matured in the second quarter and (discussed
later in this report) $37.6 million of securities were purchased.
The portfolio consists of $25.6 million in liquid accounts and $501.5 million in various
investment types as detailed in the below Table 1. The investment policy requires that at least
$50 million be maintained in securities maturing in less than two years. The portfolio includes
$157.8 million in investments maturing in less than two years, comprising 29.9 percent of the
City’s investment portfolio. In addition, the Investment Policy allows up to 30 percent of the
portfolio can be invested in securities with maturities beyond five years; actual at the end of
the second quarter is 28.6 percent of the portfolio.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Table 1:
Up to 1
Year
1 to 2
Years
2 to 3
Years
3 to 5
Years
Over
5 Years
Portfolio
Total *
% of
Portfolio
U.S. Treasury 9.50$ -$ -$ 10.50$ -$ 20.00$ 3.8%
U.S. Agency Bonds 45.5 37.2 34.4 76.9 112.4 306.4 58.1%
U.S. Municipal/ State Bonds 5.6 5.3 24.0 26.2 36.7 97.8 18.5%
Negotiable Certificates of Deposits (NCD)12.3 4.2 8.8 23.3 1.5 50.1 9.5%
U.S. Corporate Bonds 5.5 7.2 7.0 0.1 - 19.7 3.7%
Supranational Organizations Bonds - - 1.0 6.5 - 7.5 1.4%
Liquid Accounts (LAIF & Fidelity)25.6 - - - - 25.6 4.9%
Grand Total 104.0$ 53.8$ 75.2$ 143.6$ 150.6$ 527.1$ 100%
% of Portfolio 19.7%10.2%14.3%27.2%28.6%100.0%
* $18.9 million or 3.6 percent are in investments that directly support Environmental, Social, and Governace (ESG) activities
(aka "Green" Bonds)
Maturities - Par Value (millions)
Investment Type
The current market value of the portfolio is 98.4 percent of the book value. The market value
of securities fluctuates, depending on how interest rates perform. When interest rates
decrease, the market value of the securities in the City’s portfolio will likely increase; likewise,
when interest rates increase, the market value of the securities will likely decrease.
Understanding and showing market values is not only a reporting requirement, but essential to
knowing the principal risks in actively buying and selling securities. It is important to note,
however, that the City’s practice is to buy and hold investments until they mature so changes in
market price do not affect the City’s investment principal. The market valuation is provided by
Union Bank of California, which is the City’s safekeeping agent. The average life to maturity of
the investment portfolio is 3.71 years compared to 3.60 years last quarter.
Investments Made During the Second Quarter
During the second quarter, $12.0 million of securities with an average yield of 1.3 percent
matured. During the same period, per Table 2 below, government securities totaling $37.6
million with an average yield of 3.5 percent were purchased. The expectation is interest rates
and City’s portfolio’s average yield will continue to rise. The City’s short-term money market
and pool account decreased by $9.7 million compared to the first quarter. Investment staff
continually monitors the City’s short-term cash flow needs and adjusts liquid funds to meet
them.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Table 2:
Up to 1
Year
1 to 2
Years
2 to 3
Years
3 to 5
Years
Over
5 Years
Portfolio
Total *
% of
Purchase
U.S. Agency Bonds 1.5$ 1.5$ 9.4$ 12.4$ 33.1%
U.S. Municipal/ State Bonds 0.5 2.4 1.9 10.7 15.5 41.1%
Negotiable Certificates of Deposits (NCD)2.2 2.2 5.9%
Supranational Organizations Bonds 1.0 6.5 7.5 19.9%
Grand Total 2.0$ -$ 3.4$ 12.1$ 20.2$ 37.6$ 100%
% of Purchase 5.3%0.0%9.0%32.1%53.6%100.0%
* $0.9 million or 2.3 percent are in investments that directly support Environmental, Social, and Governace (ESG) activities
(aka "Green" Bonds)
Investment Type
2019 Q2 Security Purchases - Par Value (millions)
Availability of Funds for the Next Six Months
Normally, the flow of revenues from the City’s utility billings and General Fund sources is
sufficient to provide funds for ongoing expenditures in those respective funds. Projections
indicate receipts will be $276.8 million and expenditures will be $267.7 million over the next six
months, indicating an overall growth in the portfolio of $9.1 million.
As of December 31, 2018, the City had $25.6 million deposited in the Local Agency Investment
Fund (LAIF) and a money market account that could be withdrawn on a daily basis. In addition,
investments totaling $41.4 million will mature between January 1, 2019 and March 31, 2019.
Based on the above and staff’s revenue and expenditure forecast for the next six months, staff
is confident that the City will have more than sufficient funds or liquidity to meet expenditure
requirements for the next six months.
Compliance with City Investment Policy
During the second quarter, staff complied with all aspects of the investment policy. Attachment
C lists the major restrictions in the City’s investment policy compared with the portfolio’s actual
performance.
Investment Yields
Interest income on an accrual basis for the second quarter was $2.9 million which is $0.36
million or 14.3 percent higher over the same period last year. As of December 31, 2018, the
yield to maturity of the City’s portfolio was 2.29 percent. In the second quarter, LAIF’s average
yield was 2.2 percent while the average yield on the two-year and five-year Treasury bonds was
approximately 2.80 percent and 2.88 percent, respectively. The rising interest rate is expected
to increase the portfolio’s yields. Historically, the City’s portfolio yield has outperformed the
two-year and five-year Treasury bond rates, however with the recent rapid interest rate rise
that is no longer the case; this is an expected occurrence. As the City’s laddered portfolio
investments mature in the next year or two, funds are expected to be reinvested in higher
yielding securities. Graph 2 shows the City’s yields and interest earnings for the past 17 years.
City of Palo Alto Page 5
5.9%
4.3%Palo Alto's Yield
4.5%
2.9%
1.8%
2 Yr. Treasury
5 Yr. Treasury
LAIF
2.2%
$0.0
$0.5
$1.0
$1.5
$2.0
$2.5
$3.0
$3.5
$4.0
$4.5
$5.0
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
Int. Earnings
(Millions)Yields
Fiscal Year Quarters
Graph 2: Yields and Interest Earnings
City’s portfolio duration is 3.71 years.
Yield Trends
The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) raised the federal funds and discount rates to
2.25 and 3.0 percent in December 2018, respectively. In the past year, both rates have risen by
0.75 percent. The FOMC restated its view of a robust economy and maintained a similar
outlook when they met in November 2018; this includes strengthening labor market with
inflation and unemployment remaining low. Business fixed investment spending has moderated
while household spending has grown. The FOMC expects future rate increase to be gradual and
dependent on the economic outlook. Though the continued expectation is rates will rise,
factors that could keep a lid on rate increases include: low inflation, weak wage growth, and
domestic and global economic uncertainties.
Funds Held by the City or Managed Under Contract
Attachment A is a consolidated report of all City investment funds, including those not held
directly in the investment portfolio. These include cash in the City’s regular bank account with
US Bank and Wells Fargo. A description of the City’s banking relationships can be found in City
Council Staff Report ID # 7858. The bond proceeds, reserves, and debt service payments being
held by the City’s fiscal agents are subject to the requirements of the underlying debt
indenture. The trustees for the bond funds are U.S. Bank and California Asset Management
Program (CAMP). Bond funds with U.S. Bank are invested in federal agency and money market
mutual funds that consist exclusively of U.S. Treasury securities. Bond funds in CAMP are
invested in banker’s acceptance notes, certificates of deposit, commercial paper, federal
City of Palo Alto Page 6
agency securities, and repurchase agreements. The most recent data on funds held by the fiscal
agent is as of December 31, 2018.
In January 2017, the City established a Section 115 Irrevocable Trust (Public Agencies Post-
Employment Benefits Trust) administered by Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS). This
fund it not governed by the City’s Investment Policy, however, is discussed in this report for
administrative ease. It is the City’s intent to prefund pension costs and began to address the
Net Pension Liabilities (NPL) as calculated by Governmental Accounting Standards Board
Pronouncement No. 68 (GASB 68). The Section 115 Trust offered by PARS has five portfolios
from which to choose in making investments of City funds. The City has selected the
“Moderately Conservative” portfolio which is the second most conservative. Additional
information on this trust can be found in City Council Staff Report ID #7553. Through
November 30, 2018, principal investment contributions of $5.48 million have grown to $5.52
million. As of November 30, 2018, the net return since inception (May 2017) has been 0.69
percent.
Fiscal Impact
This is an information report.
Environmental Review
This information report is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act;
therefore, an environmental review is not required.
Attachments:
• Attachment A: Consolidated Report of Cash Management
• Attachment B: Investment Portfolio
• Attachment C: Investment Policy Compliance
Book Value Market Value
City Investment Portfolio (see Attachment B)531,885,575$ 523,481,059$
Other Funds Held by the City
Cash with Wells Fargo Bank 2,276,759 2,276,759
(includes general and imprest accounts)
Cash with US Bank 6,181,527 6,181,527
(includes general and imprest accounts)
Petty/Working Cash 12,578 12,578
Total - Other Funds Held By City 8,470,865 8,470,865
Funds Under Management of Third Party Trustees *
Debt Service Proceeds
US Bank Trust Services **
2009 Water Revenue Bonds (Build America Bonds)
Debt Service and Reserve Funds 2,573,767 2,573,767
2010 General Obligation (Library) Bond
Debt Service and Escrow Fund 2,488,868 2,488,868
2011 Utility Revenue Refunding Bonds
Debt Service and Reserve Funds 1,455,077 1,455,077
2012 University Ave. Parking Refunding Bonds
Reserve and Escrow Funds 1,866,147 1,866,147
2013 General Obligation (Library) Bond
Escrow Funds 3,160,170 3,160,170
2018 Capital Improvement (Golf Course & 2002B COP Refinance)
(Taxable- Green Bond) Certificates of Participation
Cost of Issuance Fund 17,757 17,757
California Asset Management Program (CAMP) ***
2012 University Ave. Parking Refunding Bonds
Reserve Fund 2,623,152 2,623,152
2013 General Obligation (Library) Bond
Reserve Fund 580,554 580,554
Public Agencies Post-Employment Benefits Trust ****
Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS) 5,430,810 5,430,810
Total Under Trustee Management 20,196,302 20,196,302
GRAND TOTAL 560,552,742$ 552,148,225$
* These funds are subject to the requirements of the underlying debt indenture.
** U.S. Bank investments are in money market mutual funds that exclusively invest in U.S. Treasury securities.
*** CAMP investments are in money market mutual fund which invest in bankers acceptance, certificate of deposit,
commercial paper, federal agency securities, and repurchase agreements.
**** PARS investments are in moderately conservative index plus funds
Second Quarter, Fiscal Year 2018-19
(Unaudited)
Attachment A
Consolidated Report of Cash Management
City of Palo Alto Cash and Investments
City of Palo Alto City of Palo Alto
Administration Svcs. Dept.
250 Hamilton Ave., 4th Floor
Palo Alto, CA 94301
(650)329-2362
December 31, 2018
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund
Par Value Days ToMaturityMaturityDateCurrentRateMarket ValueCUSIPInvestment #Issuer
PurchaseDate Book Value YTM
360
YTM
365
LAIF & Fidelity Cash Accounts
Fidelity Investments158 3,035,039.60SYS158 12.13007/01/2018 3,035,039.60 2.100 2.1303,035,039.60
Local Agency Investment Fund159 22,588,881.13SYS159 12.31007/01/2018 22,539,917.56 2.278 2.31022,588,881.13
Subtotal and Average 25,623,920.73 25,623,920.73 25,574,957.16 2.257 2.289 1
Negotiable Certificates of Deposits
Comenity Capital Bank1959 NCD 245,000.0020033AM86 10/30/2023 1,7633.45010/30/2018 243,799.50 3.404 3.451245,000.00
American Federal Bank1476 NCD 245,000.0002600ADE4 09/30/2022 1,3682.45009/30/2015 236,905.20 2.418 2.451245,000.00
Allegiance Bank - Texas1844 NCD 245,000.0001748DAW6 09/29/2022 1,3672.05009/29/2017 233,472.75 2.022 2.051245,000.00
Alpine Bank1525 NCD 245,000.0002082CBG4 08/16/2023 1,6882.40002/16/2016 233,164.05 2.367 2.400245,000.00
American City Bank1692 NCD 245,000.00025140BC7 03/30/2021 8191.45009/30/2016 235,981.55 1.429 1.449245,000.00
American Eagle Bank1371 NCD 245,000.0002554BCE9 05/28/2019 1471.85008/26/2014 244,358.10 1.825 1.850245,000.00
American National Bank1766 NCD 245,000.0002772JAC4 08/04/2021 9462.05004/04/2017 238,301.70 2.023 2.051245,000.00
American State Bank OSCE1805 NCD 245,000.00029733BX9 05/30/2024 1,9762.30005/30/2017 229,327.35 2.270 2.301245,000.00
American Express Centurion Bk1333 NCD 245,000.0002587CAC4 07/10/2019 1901.95007/10/2014 244,269.90 1.923 1.950245,000.00
American Express Centurion Bk1986 NCD 245,000.0002589AA28 12/04/2023 1,7983.55012/04/2018 244,740.30 3.501 3.550245,000.00
Bankers Bank1776 NCD 245,000.0006610RAM1 04/19/2021 8391.90004/19/2017 238,448.70 1.875 1.901245,000.00
Bank of Wisconsin Dells1696 NCD 245,000.00065847DH5 10/12/2021 1,0151.50010/12/2016 234,070.55 1.480 1.500245,000.00
Bank of Grove1821 NCD 245,000.0006246PBP9 12/29/2021 1,0932.00006/29/2017 236,545.05 1.974 2.001245,000.00
Bankers Bank of the West1421 NCD 245,000.0006610TDB8 12/30/2019 3631.85012/29/2014 243,466.30 1.824 1.850245,000.00
Bar Harbor Bank & Trust1377 NCD 245,000.00066851SG2 08/27/2019 2381.75008/27/2014 243,652.50 1.726 1.750245,000.00
Bank Champaign1477 NCD 245,000.0006607ABD2 09/30/2022 1,3682.50009/30/2015 237,343.75 2.467 2.501245,000.00
Texas Exchange Bank1796 NCD 245,000.0088241TBM1 05/20/2022 1,2352.25005/22/2017 236,760.65 2.220 2.251245,000.00
Bank of Deerfield1396 NCD 245,000.00061785CM1 09/30/2020 6382.20009/30/2014 241,761.10 2.171 2.201245,000.00
Bank of Holland Michigan1302 NCD 245,000.00062649ZV3 05/21/2019 1401.70005/21/2014 244,497.75 1.677 1.701245,000.00
Frontier Bank Madison NE1498 NCD 245,000.0035907XCL9 11/22/2021 1,0562.00011/20/2015 236,932.15 1.974 2.001245,000.00
Bank West1472 NCD 245,000.00063615AX6 09/16/2022 1,3542.25009/16/2015 235,354.35 2.220 2.251245,000.00
Apex Bank1693 NCD 245,000.0003753XAN0 09/30/2022 1,3681.70009/30/2016 230,442.10 1.676 1.700245,000.00
BMO Harris Bank1783 NCD 245,000.0005581WNY7 10/28/2022 1,3962.25004/28/2017 234,876.60 2.220 2.251245,000.00
BMW Bank of North America1807 NCD 245,000.0005580AJK1 06/16/2020 5321.85006/16/2017 241,408.30 1.824 1.850245,000.00
Beneficial Bank1680 NCD 245,000.0008173QBR6 09/13/2021 9861.50009/12/2016 234,335.15 1.479 1.500245,000.00
BankFirst1767 NCD 245,000.0006644QAA9 04/13/2022 1,1982.00004/13/2017 235,261.25 1.973 2.001245,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 2
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Negotiable Certificates of Deposits
BankWest, Inc.1380 NCD 150,000.0006652CEY3 09/16/2019 2581.90009/15/2014 149,254.50 1.873 1.900150,000.00
Bofi Federal Bank1381 NCD 50,000.0009710LAF2 08/30/2022 1,3372.25008/25/2014 47,904.00 2.493 2.52749,543.22
Bofi Federal Bank1382 NCD 100,000.0009710LAE5 08/08/2022 1,3152.35008/25/2014 96,268.00 2.592 2.62899,094.66
Bofi Federal Bank1402 NCD 100,000.0009710LAF2 08/30/2022 1,3372.25010/21/2014 95,808.00 2.462 2.49699,184.76
Banco Poplar North America1478 NCD 245,000.0005965GVP8 10/07/2020 6452.25010/07/2015 241,925.25 2.219 2.250245,000.00
Bridgewater Bank Bloom MN1393 NCD 245,000.00108622EA5 09/24/2019 2661.85009/24/2014 243,647.60 1.825 1.850245,000.00
Balboa Thrift & Loan1984 NCD 245,000.0005765LAW7 11/30/2022 1,4293.25011/30/2018 243,390.35 3.207 3.252245,000.00
Business Bank1531 NCD 245,000.0012325EHA3 02/10/2021 7711.55002/10/2016 237,363.35 1.530 1.551245,000.00
Citigroup1950 NCD 245,000.0017312QJ67 04/22/2023 1,5723.00004/24/2018 240,205.35245,000.00
Worlds Foremost Bank1387 NCD 200,000.00981571AT9 09/04/2019 2462.10009/04/2014 199,198.00 2.072 2.101200,000.00
Campbell County Bank1307 NCD 245,000.00134204BZ8 05/30/2019 1491.65005/30/2014 244,463.45 1.628 1.650245,000.00
Commercial Bank - Alma1772 NCD 245,000.00201282HM5 04/21/2022 1,2062.05004/21/2017 235,543.00 2.023 2.051245,000.00
CBC National Bank1571 NCD 245,000.0012480LDV6 04/15/2021 8351.50004/15/2016 236,373.55 1.479 1.500245,000.00
Celtic Bank1362 NCD 245,000.0015118RJW8 08/20/2019 2311.90008/20/2014 244,071.45 1.875 1.901245,000.00
Central State Bank1538 NCD 245,000.0015524EAA2 02/16/2022 1,1421.70002/16/2016 233,783.90 1.678 1.701245,000.00
First Iowa State Bank1840 NCD 245,000.00320636AC7 01/31/2022 1,1261.90007/31/2017 235,437.65 1.876 1.902245,000.00
Choice Bank - Oshkosh WI1884 NCD 245,000.0017037VBT8 12/29/2022 1,4582.35012/29/2017 234,962.35 2.317 2.350245,000.00
Charter Bank Eau Claire1811 NCD 245,000.0016116PHU8 06/13/2022 1,2592.10006/13/2017 235,344.55 2.071 2.100245,000.00
CIBM Bank1809 NCD 245,000.0012545JAM7 06/16/2022 1,2622.10006/16/2017 235,288.20 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Citizens Deposit Bank1677 NCD 245,000.0017453FBP6 08/24/2021 9661.40008/24/2016 234,425.80 1.380 1.400245,000.00
Citizens State Bank1541 NCD 250,000.0017670BAQ1 02/17/2023 1,5081.75002/19/2016 233,487.50 1.727 1.751250,000.00
Cumberland Federal Bank FSB1813 NCD 245,000.0023062KBH4 07/07/2022 1,2832.10007/07/2017 234,991.75 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Commercial Savings Bank1868 NCD 245,000.00202291AD2 10/18/2022 1,3862.10010/18/2017 233,720.20 2.071 2.100245,000.00
Enerbank USA1246 NCD 245,000.0029266NYZ4 01/30/2020 3942.05001/30/2014 243,169.85 2.021 2.050245,000.00
City National Bk of Metropolis1791 NCD 245,000.0017801GBQ1 05/16/2022 1,2312.00005/15/2017 234,837.40 1.972 2.000245,000.00
Community State Bank1536 NCD 245,000.0020404YBQ7 02/24/2022 1,1501.95002/24/2016 235,513.60 1.924 1.951245,000.00
Country Bank of New York1799 NCD 245,000.0022230PBN9 05/26/2022 1,2412.10005/26/2017 235,508.70 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Capital One Bank USA NA1384 NCD 250,000.00140420NR7 09/04/2019 2461.80009/04/2014 248,985.00 1.775 1.800250,000.00
Capital One Bank USA NA1457 NCD 245,000.0014042E5M8 08/12/2020 5892.30008/12/2015 242,567.15 2.268 2.300245,000.00
Community Bank Pasadena1627 NCD 245,000.00203507BA5 06/15/2021 8961.55006/16/2016 236,145.70 1.529 1.550245,000.00
Commuincity Finl Svcs Bank1530 NCD 245,000.0020364ABA2 02/17/2021 7781.60002/17/2016 237,532.40 1.579 1.601245,000.00
Commerce Bank - Geneva1816 NCD 245,000.0020056QQK2 06/21/2021 9022.00006/21/2017 238,411.95 1.973 2.001245,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 3
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Negotiable Certificates of Deposits
Commercial Bank1369 NCD 245,000.0020143PDB3 05/20/2019 1391.85008/19/2014 244,399.75 1.824 1.850245,000.00
Commerce State Bank1797 NCD 245,000.0020070PJA6 05/23/2022 1,2382.00005/22/2017 234,746.75 1.972 2.000245,000.00
Community State Bank, IA1471 NCD 245,000.0020404MAN1 09/12/2022 1,3502.25009/11/2015 235,403.35 2.224 2.255245,000.00
Cornerstone Bank1757 NCD 245,000.00219232CN3 03/10/2022 1,1642.10003/10/2017 236,427.45 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Discover Bank / Delaware1956 NCD 245,000.00254673VJ2 10/24/2023 1,7573.35010/24/2018 242,750.90 3.304 3.350245,000.00
Dollar Bank FSB1756 NCD 245,000.0025665QAV7 03/08/2022 1,1622.05003/08/2017 236,135.90 2.021 2.050245,000.00
East Boston Savings Bank1463 NCD 245,000.0027113PAL5 08/24/2020 6011.90008/24/2015 240,891.35 1.876 1.902245,000.00
TBK Bank SSB1812 NCD 245,000.0087219RBK9 06/23/2022 1,2692.10006/23/2017 235,158.35 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Ever Bank1454 NCD 245,000.0029976DZK9 07/30/2020 5762.00007/30/2015 241,535.70 1.972 2.000245,000.00
Farmer's and Merchants Bank1360 NCD 250,000.00308702BQ1 02/16/2021 7772.20008/15/2014 245,477.50 2.169 2.200250,000.00
First Bank of Highland1330 NCD 245,000.00319141BV8 07/03/2019 1831.85007/03/2014 244,020.00 1.824 1.850245,000.00
First Business Bank1250 NCD 245,000.0031938QF25 02/19/2020 4142.00002/19/2014 242,890.55 1.972 2.000245,000.00
FirstBank Puerto Rico1768 NCD 245,000.0033767A2C4 04/07/2022 1,1922.10004/07/2017 236,094.25 2.072 2.101245,000.00
First Choice Bank / NJ1297 NCD 245,000.00319464AR4 05/28/2019 1471.70005/28/2014 244,475.70 1.677 1.701245,000.00
State Bank of Fenton (MI)1283 NCD 245,000.00856188AU1 02/15/2019 451.65005/15/2014 244,811.35 1.630 1.653245,000.00
First Federal S&L Bank1626 NCD 245,000.0032018YAW8 06/22/2023 1,6331.80006/22/2016 228,611.95 1.776 1.800245,000.00
1st Financial Bank1485 NCD 245,000.0032022RFD4 03/16/2022 1,1702.10010/19/2015 236,351.50 2.120 2.150244,632.50
First Internet Bank1834 NCD 245,000.0032056GCQ1 07/14/2022 1,2902.05007/14/2017 234,479.70 2.023 2.051245,000.00
First Eagle National Bank1400 NCD 245,000.0032008JAG8 10/15/2021 1,0182.45010/17/2014 241,810.10 2.416 2.449245,000.00
First Oklahoma Bank1838 NCD 245,000.00335857BF4 07/26/2022 1,3022.10007/26/2017 234,749.20 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Farmers & Merchant Bank1735 NCD 245,000.0030781TBD9 01/18/2022 1,1132.05001/18/2017 236,721.45 2.021 2.050245,000.00
First National Bank of America1391 NCD 240,000.0032110YEF8 08/03/2022 1,3102.35009/09/2014 231,938.40 2.665 2.703237,275.56
FNB Bank Inc.1863 NCD 245,000.00330459CB2 10/13/2023 1,7462.25010/13/2017 230,956.60 2.220 2.251245,000.00
First Nationnal Bank / KS1537 NCD 245,000.00334342BU5 02/26/2021 7871.55002/26/2016 237,179.60 1.530 1.551245,000.00
The FNB of Mcgregor1480 NCD 245,000.0032112UBW0 09/30/2021 1,0032.00010/01/2015 237,446.65 1.972 1.999245,000.00
First Nat. Bank of Park Falls1473 NCD 245,000.0032114RAQ9 09/17/2021 9902.20009/17/2015 238,857.85 2.171 2.201245,000.00
First Premier Bank1255 NCD 245,000.0033610RNX7 03/08/2021 7972.50003/07/2014 241,974.25 2.465 2.500245,000.00
Franklin Synergy Bank1771 NCD 103,000.0035471TCV2 01/31/2022 1,1262.00004/04/2017 99,282.73 1.972 1.999103,000.00
First Merchants Bank1351 NCD 245,000.0032082BDH9 08/06/2019 2171.90008/06/2014 244,152.30 1.873 1.900245,000.00
Community First Bank1555 NCD 250,000.0020369JAA9 03/17/2022 1,1711.70003/17/2016 238,125.00 1.677 1.700250,000.00
Farmer's & Merchant's SVG Bank1551 NCD 245,000.00308863AH2 02/26/2021 7871.55002/29/2016 239,149.40 1.528 1.550245,000.00
First Neighbor Bank, NA1469 NCD 245,000.0033581VAF6 09/03/2021 9762.40009/03/2015 240,869.30 2.367 2.400245,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 4
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Negotiable Certificates of Deposits
First Savings Bank Northwest1335 NCD 245,000.0033621JAB4 07/18/2019 1981.80007/18/2014 243,973.45 1.776 1.801245,000.00
First National Bank of Elkhart1801 NCD 245,000.00321130AB2 05/31/2022 1,2462.10005/31/2017 235,447.45 2.072 2.101245,000.00
First Northeast Bank1779 NCD 245,000.0033583FAA0 10/19/2022 1,3872.10004/19/2017 233,666.30 2.072 2.101245,000.00
First State Bank1366 NCD 245,000.0033648RAT6 08/20/2019 2311.85008/20/2014 244,086.15 1.825 1.851245,000.00
First State Bank - Dequeen1824 NCD 245,000.00336460CH1 04/29/2022 1,2142.00006/30/2017 235,048.10 1.973 2.000245,000.00
First State Bank of Purdy1475 NCD 248,000.0033646TAE7 04/13/2022 1,1982.35009/25/2015 240,872.48 2.321 2.353247,987.58
First State Community Bank1819 NCD 245,000.0033708UCF4 06/30/2022 1,2762.10006/30/2017 235,126.50 2.071 2.100245,000.00
First Technology Federal Credi1955 NCD 245,000.0033715LCM0 10/17/2023 1,7503.40010/17/2018 243,319.30 3.355 3.401245,000.00
Firstier Bank1994 NCD 245,000.0033766LAF5 12/11/2023 1,8053.55012/11/2018 244,732.95 3.503 3.551245,000.00
First Kentucky Bank1856 NCD 245,000.0032065TAW1 10/06/2022 1,3742.10010/06/2017 233,810.85 2.072 2.101245,000.00
First Western Bank & Trust1770 NCD 245,000.0033749VAM0 04/07/2022 1,1922.00004/07/2017 235,337.20 1.973 2.001245,000.00
Fox Chase Bank1305 NCD 245,000.0035137QAV6 06/06/2019 1561.70006/06/2014 244,438.95 1.677 1.700245,000.00
Gulf Coast Bank & Trust1920 NCD 245,000.00402194FJ8 07/26/2024 2,0332.65001/26/2018 233,183.65 2.614 2.650245,000.00
Gold Coast Bank1375 NCD 245,000.0038058KDA1 08/05/2019 2161.80009/04/2014 244,100.85 1.775 1.800245,000.00
GE Capital Bank1262 NCD 245,000.0036157PXV6 03/22/2021 8112.65003/21/2014 242,674.95 2.613 2.650245,000.00
Ally Bank1882 NCD 245,000.0002007GAF0 01/04/2021 7342.25001/04/2018 241,148.60 2.219 2.250245,000.00
Great Plains Bank1865 NCD 245,000.0039115UBB8 07/25/2022 1,3012.00010/25/2017 233,923.55 1.972 2.000245,000.00
Grant County Bank1864 NCD 175,000.0038762PCB6 10/18/2023 1,7512.20010/18/2017 164,564.75 2.170 2.201175,000.00
Goldman Sachs Bank USA / NY1951 NCD 245,000.0038148PJ81 05/09/2023 1,5893.15005/09/2018 241,584.70 3.106 3.150245,000.00
Happy State Bank1683 NCD 245,000.00411394AN9 09/16/2021 9891.50009/16/2016 234,288.60 1.500 1.520245,000.00
HSBC Bank1564 NCD 245,000.0040434AR84 10/07/2021 1,0102.00004/07/2016 237,299.65245,000.00
Dubuque Bank & Trust1372 NCD 245,000.00263849BD2 08/21/2019 2321.90008/21/2014 244,064.10 1.873 1.900245,000.00
Investors Community Bank1765 NCD 245,000.0046147USQ4 09/23/2022 1,3612.20003/24/2017 234,832.50 2.172 2.202245,000.00
International Bank1841 NCD 245,000.0045906ABP1 07/29/2022 1,3052.10007/31/2017 234,702.65 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Industrial & Com Bk of China1773 NCD 245,000.0045581EAC5 04/12/2022 1,1972.15004/12/2017 236,415.20 2.121 2.151245,000.00
Interaudi Bank1808 NCD 245,000.0045842PAK7 06/10/2024 1,9872.50006/09/2017 231,711.20 2.465 2.500245,000.00
Iroquois Federal Sav Loan Asso1535 NCD 245,000.0046355PBV9 08/12/2020 5891.60002/12/2016 239,857.45 1.578 1.600245,000.00
Investors Bank1460 NCD 245,000.0046176PEJ0 08/25/2020 6022.00008/25/2015 242,459.35 1.972 2.000245,000.00
Inst. for Sav in Newburyport1455 NCD 245,000.0045780PAN5 07/30/2021 9412.30007/31/2015 240,756.60 2.269 2.301245,000.00
Iowa State Bank1343 NCD 250,000.0046256YAB5 07/23/2019 2031.80007/23/2014 249,190.00 1.775 1.800250,000.00
Kansas State Bank Manhattan1798 NCD 245,000.0050116CAX7 05/31/2024 1,9772.50005/31/2017 231,733.25 2.465 2.500245,000.00
Key Bank1785 NCD 245,000.0049306SYB6 05/18/2020 5031.75005/17/2017 241,356.85 1.726 1.750245,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 5
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Negotiable Certificates of Deposits
Lakeside Bank1686 NCD 245,000.0051210SLR6 09/18/2023 1,7211.80009/16/2016 226,563.75 1.775 1.800245,000.00
LCA Bank Corporation1306 NCD 245,000.00501798FJ6 05/30/2019 1491.65005/30/2014 244,465.90 1.627 1.650245,000.00
Leader Bank1364 NCD 245,000.0052168UCN0 08/22/2019 2332.00008/22/2014 244,078.80 1.973 2.001245,000.00
Legends Bank1533 NCD 245,000.0052465JGM3 02/11/2022 1,1371.70002/12/2016 238,566.30 1.678 1.701245,000.00
Live Oak Banking Company1671 NCD 245,000.00538036CH5 08/19/2021 9611.40008/19/2016 234,501.75 1.381 1.400245,000.00
Luana Savings Bank1367 NCD 245,000.00549103QA0 09/07/2021 9802.25009/05/2014 239,286.60 2.219 2.250245,000.00
Machias Savings Bank1358 NCD 245,000.00554479DN2 08/28/2019 2391.80008/28/2014 244,064.10 1.776 1.801245,000.00
Marathon Savings Bank1818 NCD 245,000.0056585YAA8 06/28/2022 1,2742.05006/28/2017 234,685.50 2.023 2.051245,000.00
Mascoma Savings Bank1319 NCD 248,000.0057461PAG1 01/15/2019 141.80006/20/2014 247,972.72 1.627 1.650248,013.72
MB Financial Bank NA1730 NCD 245,000.0055266CUF1 01/13/2022 1,1082.10001/13/2017 237,084.05 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Mercantile Bank of Michigan1793 NCD 245,000.0058740XZF0 05/12/2022 1,2272.10005/12/2017 235,724.30 2.071 2.100245,000.00
Mechanics Coop Bank1803 NCD 245,000.00583626AC0 05/26/2022 1,2412.05005/26/2017 235,102.00 2.023 2.051245,000.00
Medallion Bank - Salt Lake1238 NCD 245,000.0058403BJ31 01/10/2019 91.85001/10/2014 244,980.40 1.825 1.850245,000.00
Merrick Bank1464 NCD 245,000.0059013JHE2 08/20/2020 5971.90008/20/2015 240,933.00 1.876 1.902245,000.00
Merchants National Bank OH1534 NCD 245,000.00588806AV1 02/17/2022 1,1431.80002/17/2016 238,086.10 1.776 1.801245,000.00
Mid-Country Bank1810 NCD 245,000.0059565QCG8 06/14/2022 1,2602.05006/14/2017 234,881.50 2.023 2.051245,000.00
Mid-Missouri Bank1806 NCD 245,000.0059541KBL0 06/10/2022 1,2562.05006/12/2017 234,910.90 2.023 2.051245,000.00
Mifflinburg Bank & Trust Co.1321 NCD 132,000.00598580AB4 04/30/2019 1191.65006/20/2014 131,779.56 1.627 1.649132,000.00
Marlin Business Bank1483 NCD 245,000.0057116AKU1 10/21/2020 6591.75010/21/2015 241,775.80 1.727 1.751245,000.00
Morgan Stanley Bank NA1890 NCD 245,000.0061747MF63 01/11/2023 1,4712.65001/11/2018 237,645.10 2.613 2.650245,000.00
Morgan Stanley Bank NA1993 NCD 245,000.0061760ASZ3 12/06/2023 1,8003.55012/06/2018 244,732.95 3.501 3.550245,000.00
Municipal Trust and Savings1800 NCD 245,000.00625925AP7 05/02/2024 1,9482.35005/22/2017 230,170.15 2.317 2.349245,000.00
Mutual One Bank1407 NCD 250,000.0062847HAA7 11/21/2019 3241.85011/21/2014 248,705.00 1.825 1.850250,000.00
MY Safra Bank FSB1467 NCD 245,000.0055406JAL6 09/03/2020 6111.90009/03/2015 242,439.75 1.873 1.900245,000.00
NBT Bank1322 NCD 156,000.00628779FJ4 06/06/2019 1561.80006/20/2014 155,633.40 1.775 1.799156,000.00
NBT Bank1373 NCD 94,000.00628779FN5 08/20/2019 2312.10008/20/2014 93,642.80 2.071 2.10094,000.00
Customers Bank1388 NCD 250,000.0023204HCA4 09/10/2019 2522.10009/10/2014 248,955.00 2.071 2.100250,000.00
NCB Savings Bank1344 NCD 245,000.00628825JL6 07/25/2019 2051.80007/25/2014 243,936.70 1.775 1.800245,000.00
National Bank Commerce1607 NCD 245,000.00633368DY8 05/11/2023 1,5911.80005/11/2016 231,282.45 1.776 1.800245,000.00
Nebraska State Bank & Trust1466 NCD 245,000.0063969ABL7 08/26/2022 1,3332.25008/26/2015 239,345.40 2.220 2.251245,000.00
Lake Sunapee Bank FSB1309 NCD 245,000.00510868AG7 06/05/2019 1551.75006/05/2014 244,443.85 1.727 1.750245,000.00
Northern Bank & Trust MA1814 NCD 245,000.0066476QBX5 06/29/2022 1,2752.10006/29/2017 235,077.50 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 6
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Negotiable Certificates of Deposits
Connectone Bank1355 NCD 245,000.0020786AAT2 08/13/2019 2241.85008/13/2014 244,118.00 1.824 1.850245,000.00
Bank of Northern Michigan1298 NCD 245,000.0006414TNW9 05/21/2020 5062.00005/21/2014 243,015.50 1.972 2.000245,000.00
Northfield Bank1365 NCD 245,000.0066612AAA6 08/12/2019 2231.85008/13/2014 244,088.60 1.824 1.850245,000.00
Northstar Bank1326 NCD 245,000.0066704MEG2 07/18/2019 1981.75007/18/2014 244,240.50 1.727 1.751245,000.00
National Bank of NY City1312 NCD 245,000.00634116CB1 06/18/2019 1681.65006/18/2014 244,367.90 1.627 1.650245,000.00
Numerica Credit Union1991 NCD 245,000.0067054NAN3 11/28/2023 1,7923.55011/28/2018 244,769.70 3.503 3.551245,000.00
Oostburg State Bank1532 NCD 245,000.00683430BU5 02/09/2021 7701.55002/09/2016 240,092.65 1.530 1.551245,000.00
Williamette Valley Bank1524 NCD 245,000.00969294BY2 02/06/2023 1,4972.10002/04/2016 236,476.45 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Orrstown Bank1465 NCD 245,000.00687377DR9 08/20/2020 5972.00008/20/2015 241,327.45 1.974 2.002245,000.00
South Ottumwa Savings Bank1851 NCD 245,000.00839145AA7 09/29/2022 1,3672.05009/29/2017 233,472.75 2.022 2.051245,000.00
Ottawa Savings Bank1892 NCD 245,000.0068956HAC7 01/19/2023 1,4792.40001/19/2018 235,219.60 2.368 2.401245,000.00
Peoples United Bank1378 NCD 245,000.0071270QGB6 08/27/2019 2381.95008/27/2014 244,034.70 1.923 1.950245,000.00
Ponce De Leon Federal Bank1795 NCD 245,000.00732333AH2 05/26/2022 1,2412.10005/26/2017 235,496.45 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Parkside Financial Bank1833 NCD 245,000.0070147ACE2 03/15/2023 1,5342.10007/19/2017 231,826.35 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Peapack-Gladstone Bank1275 NCD 245,000.00704692AK8 04/17/2019 1061.80004/17/2014 244,644.75 1.776 1.801245,000.00
Planters Bank1363 NCD 245,000.0072741PCU9 08/20/2021 9622.50008/20/2014 234,705.10 2.467 2.501245,000.00
Prime Alliance Bank1331 NCD 245,000.0074160NED8 07/11/2019 1911.70007/11/2014 244,260.10 1.677 1.701245,000.00
Park National Bank1395 NCD 250,000.00700654AV8 03/26/2019 842.10009/26/2014 249,605.00 2.070 2.099250,000.00
Providence Bank1445 NCD 245,000.00743738BQ8 02/25/2022 1,1512.10002/26/2015 240,653.70 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Providence Bank Columbia, MO1989 NCD 245,000.0074374MAM6 12/19/2023 1,8133.50012/19/2018 244,176.80 3.453 3.501245,000.00
Peoples State Bank, WI1304 NCD 245,000.00712515GY5 05/23/2019 1421.70005/23/2014 244,487.95 1.676 1.700245,000.00
Ohio Valley Bank1338 NCD 250,000.00677721CE0 07/23/2019 2031.80007/23/2014 249,202.50 1.776 1.801250,000.00
RCB Bank1869 NCD 245,000.0074934YAG6 10/27/2022 1,3952.20010/27/2017 234,425.80 2.171 2.201245,000.00
Reliance Savings Bank1636 NCD 245,000.0075950XAD1 06/22/2021 9031.45006/22/2016 236,050.15 1.430 1.450245,000.00
Sallie Mae Bank1350 NCD 245,000.00795450SC0 07/30/2019 2102.05007/30/2014 244,186.60 2.021 2.050245,000.00
State Bank of India1390 NCD 245,000.00856284Z98 09/11/2019 2532.15009/11/2014 243,988.15 2.120 2.150245,000.00
Security National Bank1499 NCD 245,000.00814414AC2 11/19/2021 1,0532.00011/19/2015 236,973.80 1.974 2.001245,000.00
Security State Bank1774 NCD 245,000.0081489TAS5 04/07/2022 1,1922.10004/07/2017 236,099.15 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Stifel Bank & Trust1953 NCD 245,000.0086063QAK1 05/15/2023 1,5952.95005/15/2018 239,548.75 2.911 2.951245,000.00
Summit Community Bank1888 NCD 245,000.0086604XMN3 01/26/2022 1,1212.25001/26/2018 238,007.70 2.220 2.251245,000.00
Somerset Trust Company Bank1616 NCD 245,000.00835104BL3 06/12/2023 1,6231.80006/10/2016 228,741.80 1.776 1.800245,000.00
Bank of New England1704 NCD 245,000.00063847AW7 10/19/2021 1,0221.50010/19/2016 233,656.50 1.480 1.500245,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 7
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Negotiable Certificates of Deposits
Slovak Savings Bank1872 NCD 245,000.0083158TAA0 10/20/2022 1,3882.10010/20/2017 233,622.20 2.072 2.101245,000.00
Security Bank1777 NCD 245,000.00814107AQ1 04/19/2022 1,2042.00004/19/2017 235,182.85 1.973 2.001245,000.00
Stockman Bank1557 NCD 245,000.0086128QBX5 03/30/2023 1,5492.00003/30/2016 233,323.30 1.973 2.000245,000.00
Thomasville Natl Bank1266 NCD 245,000.00884693BJ0 04/12/2021 8322.40004/11/2014 242,554.90 2.367 2.400245,000.00
Crossfirst Bank of Leawood1804 NCD 245,000.0022766ABF1 06/09/2023 1,6202.15006/09/2017 231,331.45 2.121 2.151245,000.00
Toyota Financial Savings Bank1740 NCD 245,000.0089235MHU8 02/12/2024 1,8682.65002/10/2017 234,381.70245,000.00
Traverse City State Bank1820 NCD 245,000.00894333FF5 06/28/2022 1,2742.00006/28/2017 234,344.95 1.972 2.000245,000.00
UBS Bank USA1815 NCD 250,000.0090348JBR0 01/20/2022 1,1152.25006/15/2017 242,930.00 2.219 2.249250,000.00
United Community Bank GA1749 NCD 245,000.0090984P5A9 03/01/2022 1,1552.05003/01/2017 236,219.20 2.021 2.050245,000.00
Uinta Bank1639 NCD 245,000.00903572BC8 12/26/2023 1,8201.70006/24/2016 226,759.75 1.676 1.700245,000.00
United Bankers' Bank1379 NCD 245,000.00909557EA4 04/29/2019 1181.80008/29/2014 244,465.90 1.776 1.800245,000.00
United Community Bank1694 NCD 245,000.0090983WBD2 03/28/2022 1,1821.60009/29/2016 232,955.80 1.577 1.599245,000.00
Unity Bank1529 NCD 245,000.0091330ABF3 02/26/2021 7871.60002/26/2016 240,004.45 1.579 1.601245,000.00
Valley Central Savings Bank1422 NCD 245,000.0091944RAF5 12/30/2019 3631.85012/29/2014 243,466.30 1.824 1.850245,000.00
Washington Trst Westerly1345 NCD 245,000.00940637GJ4 07/31/2019 2111.90007/31/2014 244,181.70 1.873 1.900245,000.00
Webster Bank NA1252 NCD 245,000.0094768NJM7 02/12/2019 421.90002/12/2014 244,889.75 1.873 1.900245,000.00
Northwest Bank1308 NCD 245,000.0066736AAK5 05/29/2019 1481.65005/29/2014 244,473.25 1.628 1.650245,000.00
Western State Bank1392 NCD 245,000.0095960NJA6 03/26/2020 4502.10009/26/2014 242,912.60 2.071 2.100245,000.00
Washington First Bank1745 NCD 245,000.00940727AH3 02/23/2022 1,1492.05002/23/2017 236,292.70 2.021 2.050245,000.00
Wells Fargo Bank1656 NCD 245,000.009497486H5 06/30/2021 9111.60006/30/2016 235,971.75 1.578 1.600245,000.00
Woodford State Bank1459 NCD 245,000.00979424AA6 07/29/2022 1,3052.35008/12/2015 239,200.85 2.317 2.349245,000.00
Washington County Bank1842 NCD 245,000.0093754PAN7 05/11/2022 1,2262.05008/11/2017 235,290.65 2.021 2.050245,000.00
Zions First National Bank1417 NCD 250,000.0098970TU79 12/10/2019 3431.90012/08/2014 248,137.50 1.873 1.899250,000.00
Subtotal and Average 50,065,732.00 50,071,000.00 48,770,896.59 2.002 2.030 947
Corporate Medium Term Bonds
Apple, Inc.1342 MTN 2,000,000.00037833AQ3 05/06/2019 1252.10007/15/2014 1,995,640.00 1.982 2.0102,000,590.70
Apple, Inc.1461 MTN 750,000.00037833AX8 02/07/2020 4021.55008/13/2015 740,917.50 1.980 2.008746,400.67
Apple, Inc.1497 MTN 1,500,000.00037833BD1 05/06/2020 4912.00011/05/2015 1,485,810.00 1.854 1.8791,502,315.79
Apple, Inc.1543 MTN 700,000.00037833BS8 02/23/2021 7842.25002/23/2016 691,796.00 2.140 2.169701,116.83
Alphabet (Google) Inc.1657 MTN 100,000.0002079KAA5 05/19/2021 8693.62507/11/2016 102,010.00 1.271 1.288105,379.68
Alphabet (Google) Inc.1658 MTN 946,000.0038259PAB8 05/19/2021 8693.62507/11/2016 965,014.60 1.271 1.288996,891.77
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 8
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Corporate Medium Term Bonds
Alphabet (Google) Inc.1660 MTN 1,500,000.0002079KAA5 05/19/2021 8693.62507/12/2016 1,530,150.00 1.238 1.2551,581,905.36
Alphabet (Google) Inc.1734 MTN 871,000.0002079KAA5 05/19/2021 8693.62501/11/2017 888,507.10 2.012 2.040902,321.59
Alphabet (Google) Inc.1895 MTN 1,000,000.0002079KAA5 05/19/2021 8693.62501/10/2018 1,020,100.00 2.189 2.2191,032,088.70
Alphabet (Google) Inc.1931 MTN 382,000.0002079KAA5 05/19/2021 8693.62502/14/2018 389,678.20 2.377 2.410392,569.08
Johnson & Johnson1411 MTN 2,000,000.00478160BM5 12/05/2019 3381.87511/24/2014 1,983,960.00 1.874 1.9001,999,557.37
Johnson & Johnson1418 MTN 1,500,000.00478160BM5 12/05/2019 3381.87512/08/2014 1,487,970.00 1.824 1.8501,500,328.70
Johnson & Johnson1624 MTN 1,000,000.00478160BS2 03/01/2021 7901.65006/07/2016 974,480.00 1.530 1.5511,002,004.93
Johnson & Johnson1900 MTN 500,000.00478160BS2 03/01/2021 7901.65001/12/2018 487,240.00 2.179 2.210494,166.74
Microsoft Corporation1448 MTN 2,000,000.00594918AY0 02/12/2020 4071.85002/12/2015 1,982,980.00 1.785 1.8102,000,837.16
Microsoft Corporation1496 MTN 2,000,000.00594918BG8 11/03/2020 6722.00011/05/2015 1,977,720.00 1.913 1.9402,002,061.85
Microsoft Corporation1515 MTN 900,000.00594918BG8 11/03/2020 6722.00001/07/2016 889,974.00 1.887 1.913901,359.08
Microsoft Corporation1878 MTN 100,000.00594918BW3 02/06/2022 1,1322.40012/11/2017 98,848.00 2.292 2.324100,221.51
Subtotal and Average 19,962,117.51 19,749,000.00 19,692,795.40 1.830 1.855 572
Federal Agency Bonds
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1028 3,000,000.0031315PPC7 02/21/2019 511.79002/21/2012 2,998,290.00 1.765 1.7903,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1052 1,500,000.0031315PTW9 04/10/2019 991.87004/10/2012 1,498,095.00 1.844 1.8701,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1123 Call 1,500,000.0031315PQL6 11/29/2021 1,0632.00011/29/2012 1,475,415.00 1.972 2.0001,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1130 1,500,000.0031315PPX1 07/05/2022 1,2812.20012/13/2012 1,482,390.00 1.930 1.9571,511,616.72
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1134 750,000.0031315PB32 11/21/2022 1,4202.00012/19/2012 733,800.00 2.081 2.110747,116.32
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1136 1,500,000.0031315PTY5 12/27/2019 3601.48012/27/2012 1,484,850.00 1.395 1.4151,500,913.31
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1137 1,500,000.0031315PUE7 12/27/2022 1,4562.18001/04/2013 1,476,630.00 2.165 2.1961,499,142.12
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1138 740,000.0031315PEY1 12/30/2019 3634.50001/04/2013 754,437.40 1.514 1.535760,667.84
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1139 500,000.0031315PWN5 06/01/2021 8823.84001/04/2013 515,540.00 1.946 1.973520,689.44
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1141 1,500,000.0031315PUE7 12/27/2022 1,4562.18001/08/2013 1,476,630.00 2.195 2.2251,497,563.32
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1142 1,200,000.0031315PTW9 04/10/2019 991.87001/09/2013 1,198,476.00 1.400 1.4201,201,415.73
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1143 451,000.0031315PPC7 02/21/2019 511.79001/09/2013 450,742.93 1.372 1.392451,238.13
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1144 1,500,000.0031315PUE7 12/27/2022 1,4562.18001/23/2013 1,476,630.00 2.111 2.1411,502,085.29
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1147 2,595,000.0031315PUE7 12/27/2022 1,4562.18001/28/2013 2,554,569.90 2.199 2.2292,590,374.60
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1152 2,000,000.0031315PPF0 01/30/2019 291.32002/11/2013 1,998,680.00 1.220 1.2372,000,128.47
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1155 1,500,000.0031315PPF0 01/30/2019 291.32002/21/2013 1,499,010.00 1.262 1.2801,500,046.20
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1186 1,450,000.0031315PXH7 01/09/2019 82.10005/01/2013 1,450,000.00 1.055 1.0701,450,321.10
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 9
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Federal Agency Bonds
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1243 1,500,000.0031315PQT9 03/06/2020 4301.41001/15/2014 1,482,930.00 2.462 2.4961,482,258.99
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1244 1,500,000.0031315P3G2 09/09/2020 6172.80001/15/2014 1,507,500.00 2.635 2.6721,502,944.76
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1256 1,500,000.0031315PXH7 01/09/2019 82.10003/05/2014 1,500,000.00 1.702 1.7261,500,118.97
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1257 300,000.0031315PTU3 03/09/2021 7984.16003/06/2014 310,815.00 2.574 2.609309,247.52
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1264 1,500,000.0031315PK40 03/26/2021 8152.50003/26/2014 1,501,035.00 2.495 2.5301,499,065.62
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1265 1,800,000.0031315PJ67 02/28/2019 581.70003/28/2014 1,798,416.00 1.784 1.8091,799,703.50
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1279 1,250,000.0031315PPX1 07/05/2022 1,2812.20004/23/2014 1,235,325.00 2.889 2.9301,221,692.02
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1399 500,000.0031315PVF3 04/03/2020 4581.47510/15/2014 494,280.00 1.857 1.882497,576.93
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1406 1,500,000.0031315PA58 11/20/2019 3231.31011/07/2014 1,483,530.00 1.854 1.8801,492,802.71
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1408 2,000,000.0031315PM22 11/20/2019 3231.84011/20/2014 1,987,460.00 1.814 1.8402,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1410 1,500,000.0031315PM22 11/20/2019 3231.84011/20/2014 1,490,595.00 1.848 1.8731,499,574.67
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1423 1,500,000.0031315PZ85 12/23/2019 3561.85012/23/2014 1,489,590.00 1.851 1.8761,499,627.47
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1427 675,000.0031315P2C2 05/05/2021 8552.51001/09/2015 675,276.75 2.110 2.140680,444.19
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1428 404,000.0031315PL23 03/27/2024 1,9123.33001/09/2015 416,277.56 2.540 2.575418,122.83
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1433 1,604,000.0031315PD89 06/12/2023 1,6232.61001/22/2015 1,602,267.68 2.269 2.3011,623,930.09
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1447 1,450,000.0031315PD89 06/12/2023 1,6232.61002/09/2015 1,448,434.00 2.377 2.4101,461,603.38
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1452 1,000,000.003130H0AJ2 03/01/2022 1,1552.15003/05/2015 988,720.00 2.120 2.1501,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1552 Call 1,500,000.003132X0EU1 01/27/2026 2,5832.93002/26/2016 1,497,270.00 2.831 2.8701,505,411.41
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1554 Call 1,500,000.003132X0EU1 01/27/2026 2,5832.93003/02/2016 1,497,270.00 2.878 2.9181,501,071.25
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1576 1,000,000.0031315PZS1 01/24/2023 1,4842.13004/06/2016 981,910.00 1.839 1.8641,010,063.50
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1580 474,000.0031315PEM7 08/04/2025 2,4074.35004/08/2016 515,242.74 2.296 2.328530,484.77
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1595 1,500,000.0031315P2J7 05/01/2024 1,9473.30004/21/2016 1,543,620.00 2.084 2.1121,586,918.20
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1604 1,500,000.0031315P2J7 05/01/2024 1,9473.30004/26/2016 1,543,620.00 2.159 2.1891,581,039.31
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1617 500,000.0031315PUE7 12/27/2022 1,4562.18005/26/2016 492,210.00 1.844 1.870505,777.92
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1655 1,500,000.0031315PQT9 03/06/2020 4301.41007/01/2016 1,482,930.00 0.992 1.0051,507,007.69
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1663 510,000.0031315PQT9 03/06/2020 4301.41007/21/2016 504,196.20 1.135 1.150511,522.56
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1665 2,000,000.003132X0BH3 07/15/2022 1,2912.38007/25/2016 1,988,180.00 1.499 1.5202,057,964.04
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1681 1,750,000.003132X0BG5 06/15/2020 5311.75008/24/2016 1,728,842.50 1.136 1.1521,764,857.27
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1698 1,500,000.003132X0EQ0 01/25/2021 7551.55010/03/2016 1,473,465.00 1.256 1.2741,508,290.90
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1710 1,500,000.0031315PRA9 02/03/2026 2,5904.81010/18/2016 1,669,740.00 2.131 2.1601,753,941.17
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1736 Call 1,000,000.003130H0BL6 01/01/2027 2,9223.20001/19/2017 1,000,640.00 3.156 3.2001,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1755 1,000,000.003132X0PX3 02/23/2022 1,1492.10002/23/2017 987,390.00 2.034 2.0631,001,097.41
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 10
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Federal Agency Bonds
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1758 1,500,000.003132X0PX3 02/23/2022 1,1492.10003/02/2017 1,481,085.00 2.085 2.1141,499,336.35
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1769 1,500,000.003132X0RS2 04/06/2022 1,1912.07504/06/2017 1,478,625.00 2.046 2.0751,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1781 1,000,000.003132X0QG9 02/22/2021 7831.90004/12/2017 988,600.00 1.781 1.8051,001,933.60
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1784 Call 1,500,000.003132X0QC8 02/23/2027 2,9753.25004/27/2017 1,500,270.00 3.200 3.2451,500,463.93
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1788 1,000,000.003132X0NZ0 01/03/2022 1,0982.10005/04/2017 988,250.00 1.938 1.9651,003,853.70
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1789 Call 1,000,000.003130H0BN2 05/01/2027 3,0423.20005/11/2017 1,000,230.00 3.156 3.2001,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1792 Call 1,500,000.003132X0QC8 02/23/2027 2,9753.25005/09/2017 1,500,270.00 3.201 3.2451,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1817 1,000,000.0031315PPX1 07/05/2022 1,2812.20006/14/2017 988,260.00 1.908 1.9341,008,829.26
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1830 1,500,000.003132X0UA7 06/29/2022 1,2751.88006/29/2017 1,466,490.00 1.903 1.9301,497,504.97
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1831 1,000,000.003132X0UA7 06/29/2022 1,2751.88006/29/2017 977,660.00 1.923 1.949997,680.39
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1850 Call 1,500,000.003130H0BR3 09/01/2027 3,1653.05009/28/2017 1,487,985.00 3.008 3.0501,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1867 1,000,000.003132X0WL1 08/23/2024 2,0612.25010/06/2017 974,640.00 2.332 2.365994,027.87
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1877 1,500,000.003132X0ZZ7 12/12/2022 1,4412.26012/12/2017 1,481,475.00 2.229 2.2601,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1889 2,000,000.003132X0D57 01/08/2021 7382.12001/08/2018 1,988,160.00 2.090 2.1202,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1891 Call 1,000,000.003132X0E49 01/10/2028 3,2963.28001/10/2018 1,000,000.00 3.235 3.2801,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1893 1,000,000.003130H0AU7 08/01/2024 2,0392.62501/09/2018 994,500.00 2.546 2.5811,002,204.02
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1901 1,500,000.003130H0AU7 08/01/2024 2,0392.62501/11/2018 1,491,750.00 2.623 2.6601,497,315.37
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1911 1,500,000.003132X0G21 02/03/2020 3982.10002/02/2018 1,495,710.00 2.093 2.1231,499,633.01
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1912 2,000,000.003132X0G39 01/30/2023 1,4902.50001/30/2018 1,992,060.00 2.472 2.5071,999,445.04
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1915 1,500,000.003132X0G39 01/30/2023 1,4902.50001/30/2018 1,494,045.00 2.481 2.5151,499,091.67
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1921 2,000,000.003132X0G39 01/30/2023 1,4902.50001/31/2018 1,992,060.00 2.556 2.5921,992,991.24
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1924 1,100,000.0031315PZS1 01/24/2023 1,4842.13002/08/2018 1,080,101.00 2.578 2.6141,079,816.17
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1927 1,000,000.003132X0H79 02/22/2021 7832.35002/22/2018 997,940.00 2.327 2.360999,792.97
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1928 1,500,000.003132X0H87 02/22/2023 1,5132.60002/22/2018 1,499,430.00 2.564 2.6001,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1930 1,000,000.003132X0G21 02/03/2020 3982.10002/09/2018 997,140.00 2.174 2.205998,885.94
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1935 1,000,000.003132X0G21 02/03/2020 3982.10002/15/2018 997,140.00 2.238 2.269998,200.56
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1936 1,500,000.003132X0L33 02/21/2023 1,5122.77002/23/2018 1,509,300.00 2.732 2.7701,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1957 Call 1,000,000.003130H0CB7 10/01/2028 3,5614.00010/25/2018 1,002,590.00 3.945 4.0001,000,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1963 Call 1,500,000.003132X06X4 11/01/2023 1,7653.50011/01/2018 1,505,325.00 3.452 3.5001,500,000.00
Federal Agricultural Mortgage1999 549,000.0031315P4B2 01/30/2024 1,8553.46012/14/2018 563,790.06 3.018 3.060559,239.75
Federal Farm Credit Bank1092 1,500,000.003133EAUF3 06/14/2019 1641.50006/14/2012 1,493,055.00 1.479 1.5001,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank903 1,000,000.0031331JN90 09/29/2020 6372.87509/29/2010 1,004,790.00 2.835 2.8751,000,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 11
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Federal Agency Bonds
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1241 500,000.003133ECRH9 06/06/2023 1,6172.45001/09/2014 494,255.00 3.383 3.430481,572.97
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1526 625,000.003133EAA65 07/26/2023 1,6672.12501/27/2016 608,593.75 2.024 2.052626,919.88
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1563 500,000.0031331XSS2 03/14/2022 1,1685.16003/17/2016 538,470.00 1.876 1.902549,078.94
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1565 Call 1,000,000.003133EFT98 03/28/2025 2,2782.62003/28/2016 970,830.00 2.596 2.632999,306.48
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1582 Call 1,500,000.003133EF3D7 04/21/2025 2,3022.54004/21/2016 1,450,695.00 2.505 2.5401,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1584 Call 1,500,000.003133EF3D7 04/21/2025 2,3022.54004/21/2016 1,450,695.00 2.505 2.5401,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1585 Call 1,500,000.003133EF4A2 04/19/2022 1,2041.92004/19/2016 1,465,710.00 1.893 1.9201,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1591 Call 1,500,000.003133EF2D8 04/13/2026 2,6592.64004/19/2016 1,442,310.00 2.603 2.6391,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1593 250,000.003133EC4L5 11/23/2021 1,0571.61004/21/2016 243,227.50 1.558 1.580250,205.86
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1596 1,000,000.003133ECPF5 05/13/2022 1,2281.87504/21/2016 975,160.00 1.578 1.6001,008,787.28
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1598 Call 1,000,000.003133EFX44 10/05/2022 1,3732.05004/22/2016 976,000.00 2.021 2.0491,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1603 Call 1,930,000.003133EFYV3 02/17/2026 2,6042.82004/26/2016 1,876,847.80 2.722 2.7601,937,152.97
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1606 Call 1,605,000.003133EFYF8 02/10/2025 2,2322.73004/28/2016 1,564,313.25 2.621 2.6571,611,250.67
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1609 Call 1,000,000.003133EF6T9 05/12/2025 2,3232.47005/12/2016 966,230.00 2.436 2.4701,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1615 1,000,000.003133EC7D0 12/13/2024 2,1732.12505/13/2016 961,060.00 1.930 1.9561,009,164.16
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1623 Call 1,500,000.003133EGEB7 06/09/2026 2,7162.57006/09/2016 1,430,445.00 2.534 2.5701,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1630 Call 1,000,000.003133EF2D8 04/13/2026 2,6592.64006/13/2016 961,540.00 2.522 2.5571,005,258.81
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1634 Call 1,000,000.003133EF2D8 04/13/2026 2,6592.64006/16/2016 961,540.00 2.489 2.5241,007,413.06
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1638 Call 2,000,000.003133EGGR0 06/22/2026 2,7292.50006/22/2016 1,904,620.00 2.582 2.6182,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1641 Call 1,500,000.003133EGHN8 06/30/2025 2,3722.42006/30/2016 1,443,360.00 2.386 2.4201,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1647 Call 1,500,000.003133EGJH9 01/06/2025 2,1972.24007/06/2016 1,424,025.00 2.209 2.2401,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1650 1,500,000.003133EGKM6 07/06/2020 5521.00007/06/2016 1,465,110.00 0.986 1.0001,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1659 500,000.0031331XSS2 03/14/2022 1,1685.16007/08/2016 538,470.00 1.215 1.232560,563.49
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1664 Call 1,500,000.003133EGFB6 06/16/2025 2,3582.36007/25/2016 1,434,030.00 2.309 2.3411,501,634.25
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1675 Call 1,500,000.003133EGQA6 11/08/2023 1,7721.85008/09/2016 1,438,305.00 1.859 1.8851,497,639.64
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1679 Call 1,350,000.003133EGQH1 08/10/2026 2,7782.14008/18/2016 1,261,197.00 2.110 2.1391,350,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1701 Call 1,625,000.003133EGXB6 10/05/2026 2,8342.14010/06/2016 1,493,391.25 2.154 2.1841,619,953.88
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1705 Call 1,000,000.003133EGYL3 10/17/2025 2,4812.09010/17/2016 937,670.00 2.061 2.0901,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1782 500,000.0031331XHX3 12/21/2021 1,0855.05004/12/2017 534,560.00 1.884 1.910544,418.94
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1787 900,000.003133EEVD9 03/25/2024 1,9102.30005/04/2017 878,679.00 2.274 2.306899,719.79
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1822 500,000.003133EDWX6 10/07/2024 2,1062.91006/21/2017 502,220.00 2.143 2.172519,546.50
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1826 Call 1,000,000.003133EHGK3 04/24/2025 2,3052.85006/22/2017 986,210.00 2.798 2.8361,000,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 12
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Federal Agency Bonds
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1843 445,000.003133ED6R8 11/07/2022 1,4062.93009/14/2017 448,924.90 1.870 1.896461,782.27
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1845 Call 506,000.003133EFYK7 02/08/2023 1,4992.29009/14/2017 494,807.28 2.260 2.291505,961.56
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1846 Call 1,500,000.003133EHZL0 09/20/2027 3,1842.92009/20/2017 1,459,845.00 2.880 2.9201,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1848 Call 1,000,000.003133EGCR4 06/01/2023 1,6122.07009/18/2017 970,780.00 2.135 2.165996,057.92
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1849 Call 1,000,000.003133EHTZ6 08/09/2027 3,1422.95009/18/2017 976,360.00 2.909 2.9491,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1859 Call 1,000,000.003133EHD59 04/10/2026 2,6562.90010/10/2017 999,500.00 2.860 2.9001,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1870 Call 1,000,000.003133EHG31 04/19/2027 3,0303.00010/19/2017 973,680.00 2.958 3.0001,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1871 Call 1,000,000.003133EHG72 10/18/2027 3,2123.08010/18/2017 975,570.00 3.037 3.0801,000,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1874 Call 1,500,000.003133EHJ20 10/23/2024 2,1222.68010/23/2017 1,481,145.00 2.643 2.6801,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1875 Call 675,000.003133EHZL0 09/20/2027 3,1842.92010/18/2017 656,930.25 2.958 3.000670,945.05
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1885 600,000.003133EC2B9 11/09/2021 1,0431.70012/29/2017 585,462.00 2.161 2.191591,968.29
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1887 Call 1,500,000.003133EH3K7 06/21/2027 3,0933.10001/03/2018 1,460,760.00 3.102 3.1461,494,965.89
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1932 1,500,000.003133EJDE6 02/16/2023 1,5072.57002/16/2018 1,491,885.00 2.605 2.6421,495,852.29
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1954 Call 1,500,000.003133EJNJ4 05/07/2024 1,9533.47005/07/2018 1,501,260.00 3.422 3.4701,500,000.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1977 Call 1,000,000.003133EJMY2 05/01/2028 3,4083.87511/08/2018 1,000,150.00 3.910 3.965993,047.66
Federal Farm Credit Bank .1997 Call 1,500,000.003133EJZ93 12/05/2028 3,6264.07012/10/2018 1,508,235.00 3.946 4.0011,508,394.42
Federal Farm Credit Bank .2004 1,500,000.003133EJ2R9 12/14/2020 7132.75012/20/2018 1,505,070.00 2.663 2.7001,501,403.05
Federal Home Loan Bank1039 1,500,000.003133782M2 03/08/2019 661.50003/08/2012 1,497,360.00 1.574 1.5961,499,746.76
Federal Home Loan Bank1041 1,500,000.00313378LA7 02/25/2022 1,1512.33003/20/2012 1,485,420.00 2.298 2.3301,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1049 1,500,000.00313378VG3 05/22/2019 1411.85004/09/2012 1,495,815.00 1.824 1.8501,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1073 2,000,000.00313379EC9 11/18/2020 6872.00005/18/2012 1,979,840.00 1.972 2.0002,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1125 1,500,000.00313381C94 12/13/2019 3461.25011/30/2012 1,480,680.00 1.196 1.2121,500,506.98
Federal Home Loan Bank1126 Call 750,000.00313381DA0 12/05/2022 1,4342.19012/05/2012 730,387.50 2.165 2.195749,852.71
Federal Home Loan Bank1131 1,500,000.00313381C94 12/13/2019 3461.25012/13/2012 1,480,680.00 1.232 1.2491,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1146 Call 212,500.00313381DA0 12/05/2022 1,4342.19001/25/2013 206,943.13 2.201 2.232212,182.60
Federal Home Loan Bank1156 1,315,000.003133XHRJ3 12/10/2021 1,0745.00002/25/2013 1,406,418.80 1.825 1.8501,426,947.99
Federal Home Loan Bank1240 1,500,000.00313371U79 12/11/2020 7103.12501/09/2014 1,516,335.00 2.615 2.6511,512,522.47
Federal Home Loan Bank1248 1,500,000.003130A0J27 01/07/2020 3712.22001/23/2014 1,494,450.00 2.194 2.2251,499,925.74
Federal Home Loan Bank1253 1,500,000.003130A12B3 03/13/2020 4372.12502/24/2014 1,492,515.00 2.095 2.1241,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1261 1,500,000.00313382K69 03/12/2021 8011.75003/13/2014 1,473,330.00 2.418 2.4511,478,865.32
Federal Home Loan Bank1267 1,500,000.00313370US5 09/11/2020 6192.87504/02/2014 1,507,935.00 2.271 2.3031,513,434.99
Federal Home Loan Bank1270 200,000.00313379EC9 11/18/2020 6872.00004/08/2014 197,984.00 2.263 2.295198,975.40
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 13
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Federal Agency Bonds
Federal Home Loan Bank1272 550,000.00313379EC9 11/18/2020 6872.00004/09/2014 544,456.00 2.263 2.295547,181.16
Federal Home Loan Bank1278 325,000.003133XTYY6 06/14/2019 1644.37504/22/2014 327,570.75 1.889 1.916328,429.59
Federal Home Loan Bank1314 1,500,000.00313379EE5 06/14/2019 1641.62506/04/2014 1,493,505.00 1.700 1.7241,499,355.65
Federal Home Loan Bank1318 1,500,000.00313379EE5 06/14/2019 1641.62506/16/2014 1,493,505.00 1.774 1.7991,498,874.56
Federal Home Loan Bank1324 Call 1,250,000.003133836A4 05/22/2019 1410.80006/24/2014 1,241,462.50 1.766 1.7911,245,364.47
Federal Home Loan Bank1332 1,500,000.003130A2FH4 06/14/2019 1641.75007/02/2014 1,494,075.00 1.686 1.7101,500,257.95
Federal Home Loan Bank1577 1,500,000.003130A7Q73 12/08/2021 1,0721.53004/08/2016 1,457,850.00 1.450 1.4701,502,515.04
Federal Home Loan Bank1583 Call 1,690,000.003130A7RS6 04/27/2026 2,6732.65004/27/2016 1,627,993.90 2.619 2.6551,689,381.27
Federal Home Loan Bank1587 Call 1,500,000.003130A7TA3 04/28/2023 1,5782.07004/28/2016 1,460,970.00 2.041 2.0701,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1605 1,000,000.00313382K69 03/12/2021 8011.75004/27/2016 982,220.00 1.490 1.5111,005,029.95
Federal Home Loan Bank1619 500,000.003133827D9 02/08/2021 7691.75006/02/2016 491,900.00 1.476 1.496502,563.07
Federal Home Loan Bank1620 400,000.003133XDVS7 12/11/2020 7105.25006/02/2016 420,044.00 1.461 1.481428,248.89
Federal Home Loan Bank1628 Call 1,500,000.003130A8F99 06/15/2026 2,7222.58006/15/2016 1,440,900.00 2.544 2.5801,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1632 Call 2,000,000.003130A8J46 06/29/2026 2,7362.52006/29/2016 1,888,960.00 2.485 2.5202,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1633 Call 1,363,636.273130A8J79 12/27/2024 2,1872.35006/27/2016 1,314,531.73 2.317 2.3501,363,636.27
Federal Home Loan Bank1635 Call 1,500,000.003130A8JG9 06/22/2023 1,6332.07006/22/2016 1,459,050.00 2.041 2.0701,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1637 Call 909,091.003130A8J79 12/27/2024 2,1872.35006/27/2016 876,354.63 2.317 2.350909,091.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1640 Call 1,500,000.003130A8JX2 06/29/2026 2,7362.54006/29/2016 1,434,750.00 2.505 2.5401,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1643 Call 1,500,000.003130A8HF3 09/23/2025 2,4572.44006/23/2016 1,436,100.00 2.430 2.4641,497,818.02
Federal Home Loan Bank1644 Call 1,500,000.003130A8HT3 12/29/2025 2,5542.47006/29/2016 1,423,530.00 2.451 2.4851,498,597.43
Federal Home Loan Bank1648 Call 1,500,000.003130A8J46 06/29/2026 2,7362.52006/29/2016 1,416,720.00 2.425 2.4591,500,337.25
Federal Home Loan Bank1649 250,000.003130A0EN6 12/10/2021 1,0742.87506/28/2016 251,887.50 1.232 1.249261,519.05
Federal Home Loan Bank1651 Call 1,500,000.003130A8MQ3 10/12/2022 1,3801.87507/12/2016 1,457,730.00 1.849 1.8751,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1652 Call 980,000.003130A8F99 06/15/2026 2,7222.58006/29/2016 941,388.00 2.524 2.560981,277.75
Federal Home Loan Bank1661 Call 1,000,000.003130A8SJ3 11/01/2024 2,1312.15008/01/2016 959,990.00 2.120 2.1501,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1662 Call 1,500,000.003130A8R54 07/28/2023 1,6691.80007/28/2016 1,434,615.00 1.795 1.8201,498,716.71
Federal Home Loan Bank1667 Call 1,500,000.003130A8VP5 08/23/2024 2,0612.00008/23/2016 1,423,680.00 1.972 2.0001,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1668 Call 1,500,000.003130A8VN0 11/17/2023 1,7811.94008/17/2016 1,438,230.00 1.913 1.9401,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1690 Call 1,000,000.003130A94L2 09/02/2026 2,8012.12509/15/2016 930,140.00 2.129 2.158997,690.83
Federal Home Loan Bank1695 Call 1,500,000.003130A9N64 10/06/2026 2,8352.15010/06/2016 1,399,725.00 2.120 2.1501,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1697 Call 1,000,000.003130A9N64 10/06/2026 2,8352.15010/06/2016 933,150.00 2.131 2.161999,223.61
Federal Home Loan Bank1699 500,000.003133827E7 02/06/2023 1,4972.13010/05/2016 490,090.00 1.578 1.600510,281.67
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 14
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Federal Agency Bonds
Federal Home Loan Bank1700 Call 1,500,000.003130A9P62 10/13/2026 2,8422.20010/13/2016 1,412,700.00 2.169 2.2001,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1702 Call 2,000,000.003130A9PT2 10/26/2026 2,8552.23010/26/2016 1,875,600.00 2.199 2.2302,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1706 Call 310,000.003130A9PT2 10/26/2026 2,8552.23010/26/2016 290,718.00 2.214 2.245309,675.18
Federal Home Loan Bank1707 Call 1,000,000.003130A9RH6 10/20/2026 2,8492.30010/20/2016 942,940.00 2.270 2.302999,843.94
Federal Home Loan Bank1709 Call 1,000,000.003130A9RH6 10/20/2026 2,8492.30010/20/2016 942,940.00 2.271 2.302999,804.93
Federal Home Loan Bank1713 Call 2,000,000.003130A9XC0 11/17/2026 2,8772.36011/17/2016 1,901,040.00 2.327 2.3602,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1716 Call 1,500,000.003130A9XC0 11/17/2026 2,8772.36011/17/2016 1,425,780.00 2.361 2.3931,496,455.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1717 Call 1,500,000.003130AA2Z0 11/23/2026 2,8832.69011/23/2016 1,431,255.00 2.653 2.6901,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1718 Call 205,000.003130AA2Z0 11/23/2026 2,8832.69011/23/2016 195,604.85 2.682 2.720204,575.99
Federal Home Loan Bank1719 Call 1,500,000.003130A7C29 02/24/2026 2,6112.75011/16/2016 1,466,715.00 2.712 2.7491,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1720 Call 1,500,000.003130AAAZ1 12/14/2026 2,9042.90012/14/2016 1,465,485.00 2.860 2.9001,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1724 Call 800,000.003130AAEX2 12/28/2021 1,0922.15012/28/2016 785,984.00 2.120 2.150800,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1727 1,000,000.003130AABG2 11/29/2021 1,0631.87512/16/2016 981,950.00 2.168 2.198991,079.95
Federal Home Loan Bank1741 Call 315,000.003130AAAZ1 12/14/2026 2,9042.90001/27/2017 307,751.85 3.008 3.050311,767.35
Federal Home Loan Bank1751 Call 325,000.003130A8HF3 09/23/2025 2,4572.44002/15/2017 311,155.00 2.836 2.875316,615.25
Federal Home Loan Bank1752 Call 250,000.003130A7C29 02/24/2026 2,6112.75002/15/2017 244,452.50 2.958 3.000246,109.61
Federal Home Loan Bank1763 1,910,000.003133XHRJ3 12/10/2021 1,0745.00003/10/2017 2,042,783.20 2.150 2.1802,059,702.72
Federal Home Loan Bank1780 1,000,000.00313378CR0 03/11/2022 1,1652.25004/12/2017 988,060.00 1.903 1.9301,009,692.76
Federal Home Loan Bank1823 Call 1,500,000.003130ABJW7 06/27/2024 2,0042.55006/27/2017 1,477,170.00 2.515 2.5501,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1847 Call 500,000.003130A7TA3 04/28/2023 1,5782.07009/18/2017 486,990.00 2.131 2.161498,150.10
Federal Home Loan Bank1854 Call 1,500,000.003130ACH64 10/26/2022 1,3942.25010/26/2017 1,479,780.00 2.219 2.2501,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1860 Call 500,000.003130AAWE4 03/08/2022 1,1622.22009/28/2017 494,050.00 2.116 2.146501,114.74
Federal Home Loan Bank1861 Call 800,000.003130ABAF3 05/11/2027 3,0523.00009/29/2017 790,848.00 2.958 2.999800,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1862 Call 1,000,000.003130ACK94 10/10/2024 2,1092.53010/10/2017 979,440.00 2.495 2.5301,000,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1873 Call 1,500,000.003130ACMH4 10/16/2024 2,1152.50010/16/2017 1,471,425.00 2.465 2.5001,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1886 1,000,000.003130A3VC5 12/08/2023 1,8022.25001/03/2018 976,760.00 2.359 2.392993,474.62
Federal Home Loan Bank1896 1,000,000.003130A3DL5 09/08/2023 1,7112.37501/09/2018 988,250.00 2.376 2.409998,504.54
Federal Home Loan Bank1903 500,000.003130ADEV0 01/17/2023 1,4772.38001/18/2018 495,400.00 2.385 2.418499,271.60
Federal Home Loan Bank1918 1,000,000.003130ADJH6 01/29/2020 3932.10001/29/2018 994,900.00 2.083 2.112999,873.90
Federal Home Loan Bank1971 Call 1,000,000.003130AELU2 07/16/2027 3,1183.84011/01/2018 1,000,450.00 3.847 3.900995,586.12
Federal Home Loan Bank1979 Call 1,500,000.003130AFFJ1 11/21/2028 3,6124.08011/21/2018 1,504,920.00 4.024 4.0801,500,000.00
Federal Home Loan Bank1987 Call 1,650,000.003130AFGZ4 09/05/2028 3,5354.08012/05/2018 1,650,825.00 4.024 4.0801,650,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 15
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Federal Agency Bonds
Federal Home Loan Bank1996 Call 1,000,000.003130AFG84 11/29/2028 3,6203.87512/06/2018 1,008,340.00 3.823 3.876999,900.70
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1106 1,500,000.003134G3A91 08/22/2019 2331.40008/22/2012 1,487,910.00 1.380 1.4001,500,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1113 1,500,000.003134G3L73 12/26/2019 3591.50009/26/2012 1,484,595.00 1.479 1.5001,500,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1273 2,000,000.003134G45T1 12/10/2021 1,0742.00004/10/2014 1,971,200.00 2.564 2.6001,968,168.61
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1277 1,000,000.003134G45T1 12/10/2021 1,0742.00004/22/2014 985,600.00 2.643 2.680982,010.87
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1282 300,000.003134G3A91 08/22/2019 2331.40005/01/2014 297,582.00 1.914 1.941299,013.63
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1286 300,000.003134G35V8 03/13/2020 4371.65005/02/2014 296,679.00 2.053 2.082298,541.31
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1287 300,000.003134G3U40 11/21/2019 3241.45005/02/2014 296,793.00 1.938 1.965298,703.35
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1291 1,000,000.003134G3K58 03/19/2020 4431.50005/06/2014 986,540.00 2.041 2.070993,499.44
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1292 1,000,000.003134G44G0 05/22/2020 5071.50005/06/2014 985,750.00 2.091 2.120991,939.33
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1301 1,000,000.003134G3L73 12/26/2019 3591.50005/13/2014 989,730.00 1.945 1.972995,612.95
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1352 1,000,000.003134G43G1 05/07/2019 1261.20007/25/2014 995,610.00 1.765 1.790998,028.89
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1678 Call 1,000,000.003134GAEF7 09/29/2021 1,0021.65009/29/2016 976,070.00 1.627 1.6501,000,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1828 Call 1,500,000.003134GBNX6 05/28/2021 8782.00006/28/2017 1,479,825.00 1.969 1.9961,500,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1835 Call 1,500,000.003134GBXU1 07/27/2022 1,3032.25007/27/2017 1,472,895.00 2.219 2.2501,500,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1836 Call 1,000,000.003134GBXU1 07/27/2022 1,3032.25007/27/2017 981,930.00 2.219 2.2501,000,000.00
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1837 Call 1,000,000.003134GBXU1 07/27/2022 1,3032.25007/27/2017 981,930.00 2.234 2.265999,464.17
Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.1853 Call 660,000.003134GBK92 10/12/2022 1,3802.20010/12/2017 646,357.80 2.169 2.200660,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1048 2,000,000.003136G0AW1 10/16/2020 6542.35004/16/2012 1,991,200.00 2.317 2.3502,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1059 2,000,000.003136G0DU2 04/30/2020 4852.00004/30/2012 1,985,220.00 1.972 2.0002,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1061 1,500,000.003136G0EC1 04/30/2020 4852.05004/30/2012 1,490,760.00 2.021 2.0501,500,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1066 2,000,000.003136G0FJ5 10/30/2020 6682.00004/30/2012 1,975,000.00 1.972 2.0002,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1268 1,500,000.003136FTR43 08/28/2020 6052.00004/08/2014 1,485,885.00 2.172 2.2021,495,323.93
Federal National Mortgage Asso1276 1,000,000.003136G0U58 04/30/2021 8501.75004/16/2014 980,910.00 2.364 2.397986,193.25
Federal National Mortgage Asso1288 250,000.003136G0M57 04/09/2021 8291.75005/02/2014 245,215.00 2.452 2.486246,176.99
Federal National Mortgage Asso1290 1,000,000.003136G0Y70 01/30/2019 291.08005/05/2014 998,940.00 1.633 1.656999,555.39
Federal National Mortgage Asso1315 1,200,000.003136G0YK1 08/28/2019 2391.50006/05/2014 1,191,144.00 1.815 1.8401,197,447.50
Federal National Mortgage Asso1317 1,000,000.003136G02P5 04/29/2019 1181.20006/12/2014 995,760.00 1.765 1.790998,155.74
Federal National Mortgage Asso1546 Call 1,000,000.003136G3AN5 03/16/2021 8051.50003/16/2016 994,450.00 1.978 2.0061,000,000.00
Federal National Mortgage Asso1654 1,000,000.003136G0EG2 04/23/2021 8432.28006/30/2016 993,380.00 1.171 1.1871,024,469.35
Federal National Mortgage Asso1669 Call 1,350,000.003136G3XZ3 07/28/2021 9391.50007/28/2016 1,308,717.00 1.505 1.5261,349,130.94
Federal National Mortgage Asso1687 Call 1,050,000.003136G36A8 09/27/2024 2,0962.00009/27/2016 995,725.50 1.972 2.0001,050,000.00
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 16
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Federal Agency Bonds
Federal National Mortgage Asso1715 500,000.0031364CCC0 04/30/2026 2,6767.12511/10/2016 640,410.00 2.367 2.400654,083.62
Federal National Mortgage Asso1883 500,000.003136G05L1 08/26/2022 1,3332.00012/29/2017 490,040.00 2.238 2.270495,340.65
Federal National Mortgage Asso1894 1,000,000.003135G0T78 10/05/2022 1,3732.00001/09/2018 981,100.00 2.288 2.320988,650.53
Federal National Mortgage Asso1904 1,000,000.003135G0T78 10/05/2022 1,3732.00001/19/2018 981,100.00 2.409 2.443984,339.74
Federal National Mortgage Asso1922 1,000,000.003136G0P62 10/15/2020 6531.50002/05/2018 979,340.00 2.268 2.300986,193.17
Federal National Mortgage Asso1926 1,500,000.003135G0T94 01/19/2023 1,4792.37502/08/2018 1,488,780.00 2.574 2.6101,486,683.04
Federal National Mortgage Asso1960 250,000.003136G33H6 08/24/2026 2,7922.10010/24/2018 231,980.00 3.603 3.653224,373.67
Tennessee Valley Authority1132 500,000.00880591EL2 02/15/2021 7763.87512/14/2012 513,150.00 1.596 1.618522,343.30
Tennessee Valley Authority1133 1,010,000.00880591EN8 08/15/2022 1,3221.87512/14/2012 983,113.80 1.893 1.9201,008,499.83
Tennessee Valley Authority1145 1,500,000.00880591EL2 02/15/2021 7763.87501/23/2013 1,539,450.00 1.647 1.6691,565,415.20
Tennessee Valley Authority1260 1,160,000.00880591EL2 02/15/2021 7763.87503/12/2014 1,190,508.00 2.427 2.4611,191,816.48
Tennessee Valley Authority1508 1,000,000.00880591CJ9 11/01/2025 2,4966.75011/20/2015 1,229,470.00 2.807 2.8461,230,866.29
Tennessee Valley Authority1519 750,000.00880591ER9 09/15/2024 2,0842.87501/15/2016 754,537.50 2.564 2.600760,462.56
Tennessee Valley Authority1589 775,000.00880591CJ9 11/01/2025 2,4966.75004/18/2016 952,839.25 2.337 2.370981,516.21
Tennessee Valley Authority1703 1,490,000.00880591EN8 08/15/2022 1,3221.87510/07/2016 1,450,336.20 1.538 1.5601,506,175.97
Tennessee Valley Authority1714 1,250,000.00880591CJ9 11/01/2025 2,4966.75011/10/2016 1,536,837.50 2.317 2.3501,587,060.35
Subtotal and Average 308,422,498.82 306,418,227.27 302,863,950.09 2.227 2.258 1,525
Treasury Securities (Notes)
U.S. Treasury1237 TB 2,000,000.00912828SD3 01/31/2019 301.25001/07/2014 1,998,280.00 1.682 1.7051,999,285.47
U.S. Treasury1284 TB 1,500,000.00912828TH3 07/31/2019 2110.87505/02/2014 1,485,585.00 1.726 1.7501,492,780.98
U.S. Treasury1285 TB 1,500,000.00912828TN0 08/31/2019 2421.00005/02/2014 1,484,070.00 1.755 1.7801,492,637.08
U.S. Treasury1289 TB 1,500,000.00912828SX9 05/31/2019 1501.12505/05/2014 1,491,570.00 1.692 1.7161,496,526.14
U.S. Treasury1299 TB 1,500,000.00912828SX9 05/31/2019 1501.12505/13/2014 1,491,570.00 1.654 1.6771,496,749.38
U.S. Treasury1316 TB 1,500,000.00912828TC4 06/30/2019 1801.00006/10/2014 1,488,750.00 1.687 1.7111,494,983.66
U.S. Treasury1761 TB 1,500,000.00912828J43 02/28/2022 1,1541.75003/09/2017 1,467,300.00 2.071 2.1001,484,323.06
U.S. Treasury1866 TB 1,500,000.00912828L57 09/30/2022 1,3681.75010/06/2017 1,460,385.00 1.914 1.9411,489,815.54
U.S. Treasury1898 TB 1,500,000.00912828P38 01/31/2023 1,4911.75001/11/2018 1,456,590.00 2.308 2.3401,466,101.15
U.S. Treasury1905 TB 1,500,000.00912828N30 12/31/2022 1,4602.12501/22/2018 1,478,850.00 2.387 2.4201,483,402.77
U.S. Treasury1923 TB 1,500,000.00912828P38 01/31/2023 1,4911.75002/05/2018 1,456,590.00 2.560 2.5961,451,694.79
U.S. Treasury1925 TB 1,000,000.00912828P38 01/31/2023 1,4911.75002/08/2018 971,060.00 2.487 2.521970,558.54
U.S. Treasury1929 TB 1,000,000.00912828P79 02/28/2023 1,5191.50002/09/2018 960,740.00 2.534 2.570958,504.54
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 17
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Treasury Securities (Notes)
U.S. Treasury1934 TB 1,000,000.00912828P79 02/28/2023 1,5191.50002/15/2018 960,740.00 2.601 2.638955,940.74
Subtotal and Average 19,733,303.84 20,000,000.00 19,652,080.00 2.027 2.055 814
Municipal Bonds
Acalanes Union High School Dis1494 MUN 1,000,000.00004284B38 08/01/2021 9432.38110/30/2015 992,670.00 2.120 2.1501,005,577.31
Alameda County Joint Pws Auth.2005 MUN 505,000.00010831DS1 06/01/2025 2,3433.36512/24/2018 509,640.95 3.175 3.220509,204.01
Antelope Valley Community Coll1790 MUN 220,000.0003667PFL1 08/01/2022 1,3082.60805/09/2017 218,374.20 2.266 2.298222,272.51
State of Arkansas1913 MUN 320,000.00041042ZW5 06/01/2022 1,2472.87501/26/2018 321,462.40 2.486 2.520323,648.44
Burlingame School District1548 MUN 730,000.00121457EQ4 08/01/2025 2,4046.23802/24/2016 816,658.30 3.557 3.606836,354.47
Carlsbad Unified School Dist .1547 MUN 300,000.00142665DH8 08/01/2021 9434.58402/24/2016 312,327.00 2.130 2.159317,626.74
Carlsbad Unified School Dist .1556 MUN 1,250,000.00142665DH8 08/01/2021 9434.58403/04/2016 1,301,362.50 2.138 2.1681,323,099.20
Carlsbad Unified School Dist .1753 MUN 350,000.00142665DH8 08/01/2021 9434.58402/17/2017 364,381.50 2.317 2.350369,072.26
Carlsbad Unified School Dist .1857 MUN 305,000.00142665DJ4 08/01/2026 2,7695.23409/27/2017 343,152.45 2.850 2.890352,526.95
Cerritos Community College Dis1523 MUN 500,000.00156792GV9 08/01/2021 9432.78101/27/2016 499,675.00 2.012 2.040509,007.03
Cerritos Community College Dis1876 MUN 55,000.00156792GW7 08/01/2022 1,3082.97111/30/2017 55,194.15 2.416 2.45055,963.59
State of Delaware1952 MUN 1,500,000.002463807H6 07/01/2022 1,2773.50005/03/2018 1,539,015.00 2.927 2.9671,526,066.36
State of Delaware1970 MUN 500,000.002463804C0 10/01/2020 6394.60011/02/2018 506,520.00 3.668 3.719507,360.67
Fremon Union High School Distr1646 MUN 525,000.00357172VA0 02/01/2026 2,5886.08006/28/2016 600,857.25 2.994 3.035623,865.12
Fullerton School District1916 MUN 995,000.00359819DN6 08/01/2026 2,7693.16002/14/2018 999,606.85 3.028 3.0701,000,928.36
Fullerton School District1917 MUN 750,000.00359819DM8 08/01/2025 2,4043.04002/14/2018 750,810.00 2.959 3.000751,746.41
State of Georgia1613 MUN 500,000.00373384RU2 10/01/2022 1,3693.57005/17/2016 514,310.00 1.878 1.904529,353.97
State of Georgia1645 MUN 365,000.00373384W69 02/01/2023 1,4923.25006/27/2016 371,475.10 1.898 1.925383,458.31
State of Georgia1666 MUN 1,825,000.003733844V5 02/01/2025 2,2232.37507/29/2016 1,767,786.25 1.972 1.9991,863,100.96
State of Georgia1691 MUN 385,000.00373384RU2 10/01/2022 1,3693.57009/26/2016 396,018.70 1.630 1.653411,285.19
State of Georgia1775 MUN 250,000.00373384RX6 10/01/2025 2,4654.00004/10/2017 263,460.00 2.739 2.777268,274.78
State of Georgia1919 MUN 1,095,000.00373384RY4 10/01/2026 2,8304.31001/26/2018 1,171,770.45 2.979 3.0201,190,624.45
State of Georgia1945 MUN 200,000.00373384RY4 10/01/2026 2,8304.31003/19/2018 214,022.00 3.204 3.248214,237.13
State of Georgia1962 MUN 390,000.00373384SP2 10/01/2023 1,7343.74010/25/2018 406,095.30 3.093 3.136400,285.13
State of Georgia1967 MUN 350,000.00373385BU6 02/01/2027 2,9532.72010/31/2018 341,057.50 3.412 3.460331,910.48
State of Georgia1980 MUN 1,200,000.00373384PB6 11/01/2027 3,2265.01411/30/2018 1,364,616.00 3.649 3.7001,317,676.84
State of Hawaii1685 MUN 1,045,000.00419792DA1 10/01/2026 2,8303.15010/19/2016 1,040,203.45 2.431 2.4651,093,893.66
State of Hawaii1852 MUN 225,000.00419791YP7 02/01/2022 1,1274.80009/21/2017 239,967.00 2.071 2.100242,805.43
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 18
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Municipal Bonds
State of Hawaii1944 MUN 1,000,000.00419792NH5 10/01/2022 1,3691.92103/20/2018 975,580.00 2.584 2.620975,425.20
State of Hawaii1946 MUN 355,000.00419791YP7 02/01/2022 1,1274.80003/21/2018 378,614.60 2.761 2.800375,604.00
State of Hawaii1947 MUN 1,500,000.00419792NH5 10/01/2022 1,3691.92103/29/2018 1,463,370.00 2.663 2.7001,458,988.13
State of Hawaii1961 MUN 250,000.00419791YS1 02/01/2025 2,2235.23010/25/2018 282,212.50 3.363 3.410274,717.59
State of Hawaii1981 MUN 500,000.00419791YV4 02/01/2028 3,3185.48011/30/2018 578,315.00 3.687 3.739566,390.61
State of Hawaii1995 MUN 800,000.00419791YT9 02/01/2026 2,5885.33012/06/2018 909,224.00 3.304 3.350898,997.44
City of Los Angeles1748 MUN 1,000,000.00544351KS7 09/01/2023 1,7042.64002/14/2017 986,930.00 2.784 2.8231,001,268.73
City of Los Angeles1879 MUN 1,090,000.00544351KR9 09/01/2022 1,3392.44012/11/2017 1,076,505.80 2.355 2.3881,091,938.15
City of Los Angeles1969 MUN 295,000.00544351NP0 09/01/2026 2,8003.30011/02/2018 294,914.45 3.530 3.579289,509.42
Los Angeles Dept. of WTR & PWR1949 MUN 1,500,000.00544495VX9 07/01/2027 3,1035.51603/29/2018 1,742,775.00 3.254 3.3001,741,677.55
Los Angeles Dept. of WTR & PWR1965 MUN 425,000.00544495VX9 07/01/2027 3,1035.51610/29/2018 493,786.25 3.600 3.650482,314.48
Los Angeles Dept. of WTR & PWR1975 MUN 300,000.00544525NW4 07/01/2022 1,2775.18111/07/2018 323,676.00 3.166 3.210319,368.90
State of Maryland1689 MUN 485,000.005741925C0 03/01/2022 1,1554.30009/16/2016 504,312.70 1.534 1.555525,346.22
State of Maryland1762 MUN 1,000,000.00574193NC8 03/15/2022 1,1692.25003/22/2017 979,640.00 2.219 2.2501,000,000.00
State of Maryland1941 MUN 1,500,000.00574193PU6 03/15/2021 8042.48003/21/2018 1,486,230.00 2.406 2.4401,501,264.19
State of Maryland1943 MUN 1,280,000.005741925D8 03/01/2023 1,5204.40003/20/2018 1,349,145.60 2.633 2.6701,365,877.15
State of Maryland1958 MUN 1,690,000.005741926L9 08/01/2024 2,0394.20010/19/2018 1,798,548.70 3.413 3.4611,752,623.26
State of Michigan2002 MUN 825,000.005946108C4 05/15/2026 2,6913.85012/21/2018 847,473.00 3.452 3.500843,583.23
Mtn. View-Whisman School Dist.1348 MUN 500,000.0062451FFK1 08/01/2021 9432.97307/24/2014 500,685.00 2.893 2.933502,601.94
Marin Community College Dist.1858 MUN 500,000.0056781RGU5 08/01/2027 3,1343.27209/28/2017 502,400.00 2.791 2.830516,444.24
Marin Community College Dist.1973 MUN 120,000.0056781RGT8 08/01/2026 2,7693.17211/05/2018 120,330.00 3.452 3.500117,400.13
Mt. San Antonio Community Coll1489 MUN 1,335,000.00623040GX4 08/01/2023 1,6734.10310/26/2015 1,405,741.65 2.490 2.5251,422,156.39
State of Mississippi1968 MUN 1,500,000.00605581LM7 11/01/2026 2,8613.75111/07/2018 1,557,825.00 3.378 3.4251,533,248.33
State of Mississippi1972 MUN 500,000.00605581LM7 11/01/2026 2,8613.75111/07/2018 519,275.00 3.402 3.450510,224.22
State of New Hampshire1948 MUN 1,500,000.00644682M37 06/01/2021 8823.50003/22/2018 1,530,585.00 2.544 2.5801,531,778.85
New York St Envrnmntl Facs1942 MUN 1,000,000.0064985HWN3 07/15/2020 5611.43103/15/2018 981,530.00 2.377 2.410985,424.52
New York State Envrnmntl Corp1933 MUN 2,000,000.0064986DEE1 06/15/2022 1,2612.43802/15/2018 1,982,580.00 2.624 2.6611,985,483.74
State of Ohio1550 MUN 1,500,000.00677522HZ0 05/01/2021 8511.57003/09/2016 1,465,815.00 1.548 1.5691,500,000.00
State of Ohio1688 MUN 800,000.00677522JB1 05/01/2023 1,5812.11009/13/2016 774,696.00 1.764 1.788810,452.26
State of Ohio1742 MUN 2,000,000.00677522JB1 05/01/2023 1,5812.11001/31/2017 1,936,740.00 2.485 2.5201,967,288.53
State of Ohio1832 MUN 900,000.006775207G7 04/01/2024 1,9174.97106/30/2017 987,723.00 2.416 2.4501,009,141.09
State of Ohio1881 MUN 200,000.00677521GP5 11/01/2020 6703.62512/21/2017 202,634.00 2.179 2.210204,998.06
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 19
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Municipal Bonds
Orchard School District1910 MUN 200,000.00685585FD8 08/01/2027 3,1343.18501/25/2018 196,198.00 3.208 3.253198,165.60
State of Oregon1682 MUN 570,000.0068609BGH4 05/01/2022 1,2162.50008/29/2016 566,169.60 1.528 1.550587,210.54
State of Oregon1974 MUN 500,000.0068607LXQ5 06/01/2027 3,0735.89211/06/2018 580,445.00 3.516 3.565571,623.78
State of Oregon2003 MUN 300,000.0068608USE7 08/01/2025 2,4042.87712/21/2018 296,895.00 3.156 3.200294,285.11
Pasadena CA Public Finance Aut1985 MUN 665,000.00702274CP4 12/01/2023 1,7953.43812/06/2018 680,048.95 3.205 3.250670,626.23
Palo Alto Unified School Dist.1192 MUN 2,000,000.00697379UE3 08/01/2021 9432.44105/10/2013 1,990,780.00 2.031 2.0602,018,009.52
Palo Alto Unified School Dist.1193 MUN 1,800,000.00697379UE3 08/01/2021 9432.44105/13/2013 1,791,702.00 2.031 2.0601,816,208.03
Palo Alto Unified School Dist.1195 MUN 1,990,000.00697379UE3 08/01/2021 9432.44105/15/2013 1,980,826.10 2.051 2.0802,006,966.84
Palo Alto Unified School Dist.1437 MUN 200,000.00697379UE3 08/01/2021 9432.44101/27/2015 199,078.00 2.041 2.070201,783.82
Palo Alto Unified School Dist.1610 MUN 1,000,000.00697379UE3 08/01/2021 9432.44105/12/2016 995,390.00 1.528 1.5501,022,020.06
Palo Alto Unified School Dist.1684 MUN 600,000.00697379UD5 08/01/2020 5782.29109/02/2016 596,400.00 1.290 1.308609,073.07
Palo Alto Unified School Dist.1880 MUN 1,025,000.00697379UD5 08/01/2020 5782.29112/20/2017 1,018,850.00 1.923 1.9501,030,358.21
Rancho Water Dist. Fin. Auth.1992 MUN 430,000.00752111KB9 08/01/2026 2,7692.48911/30/2018 407,597.00 3.318 3.365404,995.63
County of Santa Clara1897 MUN 1,340,000.00801546PH9 08/01/2023 1,6732.50001/11/2018 1,321,159.60 2.436 2.4701,341,702.47
County of Santa Clara1899 MUN 1,460,000.00801546PJ5 08/01/2024 2,0392.68001/12/2018 1,447,823.60 2.643 2.6801,460,000.00
Santa Clara Vly Transportation1964 MUN 1,400,000.0080168NEL9 04/01/2021 8214.64910/29/2018 1,458,058.00 3.008 3.0501,448,168.99
Santa Cruz County Capital Fin.1906 MUN 465,000.0080181PCT2 06/01/2024 1,9782.50001/25/2018 453,086.70 2.968 3.010453,378.05
Santa Cruz County Capital Fin.1907 MUN 465,000.0080181PCU9 06/01/2025 2,3432.75001/25/2018 454,937.40 3.008 3.050457,023.04
Santa Cruz County Capital Fin.1908 MUN 470,000.0080181PCV7 06/01/2026 2,7083.00001/25/2018 463,396.50 3.107 3.150465,420.41
Santa Cruz County Capital Fin.1909 MUN 280,000.0080181PCW5 06/01/2027 3,0733.00001/25/2018 273,641.20 3.205 3.250274,946.40
City & County of San Francisco1441 MUN 360,000.00797646NL6 06/15/2022 1,2614.95002/09/2015 383,886.00 2.416 2.450388,297.19
City & County of San Francisco1509 MUN 1,000,000.00797646NC6 06/15/2025 2,3575.45011/27/2015 1,130,390.00 3.067 3.1101,129,814.12
City & County of San Francisco1711 MUN 2,105,000.00797646T48 06/15/2025 2,3572.29011/01/2016 2,025,094.20 2.219 2.2492,109,885.72
City & County of San Francisco1712 MUN 245,000.00797646T55 06/15/2026 2,7222.39011/01/2016 231,858.20 2.376 2.410244,671.59
City & County of San Francisco1839 MUN 230,000.00797646T48 06/15/2025 2,3572.29007/14/2017 221,269.20 2.682 2.720224,287.33
San Francisco Cmnty Facs Dist1937 MUN 680,000.0079772EBC2 09/01/2027 3,1653.25003/02/2018 678,442.80 3.451 3.499667,595.39
SF Bay Area Rapid Transit Dist1938 MUN 2,100,000.00797669XU7 07/01/2021 9122.38703/07/2018 2,085,825.00 2.494 2.5282,092,889.11
SF Bay Area Rapid Transit Dist1939 MUN 1,500,000.00797669XU7 07/01/2021 9122.38703/07/2018 1,489,875.00 2.497 2.5311,494,807.92
San Jose Evergreen Cmnty Colll1966 MUN 315,000.00798189PK6 09/01/2027 3,1653.72810/29/2018 323,829.45 3.676 3.727315,000.00
San Jose Unified School Dist.1435 MUN 580,000.00798186C83 08/01/2023 1,6732.50001/29/2015 565,505.80 2.663 2.700575,277.51
San Mateo Union High School Dt1516 MUN 245,000.00799017KT4 09/01/2019 2432.19301/08/2016 243,792.15 1.775 1.800245,618.00
San Mateo Union High School Dt1518 MUN 180,000.00799017KV9 09/01/2021 9742.72001/19/2016 179,557.20 2.046 2.075182,906.49
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 20
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Municipal Bonds
San Mateo Union High School Dt1902 MUN 1,000,000.00799017UW6 09/01/2025 2,4352.69901/16/2018 974,540.00 2.786 2.825992,472.13
San Mateo Union High School Dt1940 MUN 1,000,000.00799017UW6 09/01/2025 2,4352.69903/09/2018 974,540.00 2.959 3.000982,133.73
South Pasadena Unified School1914 MUN 180,000.00839278JM1 08/01/2027 3,1343.00002/15/2018 178,018.20 3.057 3.100178,667.28
State of Tennessee1673 MUN 1,000,000.00880541XY8 08/01/2026 2,7692.11608/25/2016 933,940.00 1.923 1.9501,011,382.63
State of Tennessee1674 MUN 1,650,000.00880541XX0 08/01/2025 2,4042.06608/25/2016 1,561,312.50 1.893 1.9201,664,490.31
State of Tennessee1676 MUN 700,000.00880541XX0 08/01/2025 2,4042.06608/25/2016 662,375.00 1.893 1.920706,147.40
State of Tennessee2001 MUN 205,000.00880541QU4 08/01/2024 2,0393.72812/20/2018 213,868.30 2.860 2.900213,681.39
State of Texas1482 MUN 920,000.00882723PP8 10/01/2021 1,0042.58910/14/2015 918,123.20 1.864 1.890936,646.39
State of Texas1586 MUN 1,000,000.00882722KA8 10/01/2023 1,7345.64304/19/2016 1,020,830.00 3.339 3.3851,094,050.00
State of Texas1592 MUN 235,000.00882722JZ5 10/01/2022 1,3695.50304/21/2016 239,655.35 3.047 3.090254,144.40
State of Texas1621 MUN 500,000.00882723A41 10/01/2020 6391.77706/07/2016 492,575.00 1.450 1.470502,590.54
State of Texas1625 MUN 485,000.00882722KC4 10/01/2025 2,4655.91306/09/2016 496,062.85 3.831 3.885540,239.26
State of Texas1708 MUN 110,000.00882722VJ7 04/01/2022 1,1863.67310/19/2016 113,020.60 1.825 1.850116,171.30
State of Texas1855 MUN 250,000.00882723EN5 08/01/2025 2,4043.83209/22/2017 258,362.50 2.747 2.785265,362.27
University of California1340 MUN 1,875,000.0091412GSB2 07/01/2019 1811.79607/14/2014 1,866,675.00 2.007 2.0351,872,877.17
University of California1356 MUN 425,000.0091412GGU3 05/15/2020 5003.34807/31/2014 428,140.75 2.281 2.313430,616.46
University of California1368 MUN 250,000.0091412GGT6 05/15/2019 1343.04808/08/2014 250,370.00 1.982 2.010250,916.23
University of California1383 MUN 955,000.0091412GSB2 07/01/2019 1811.79608/27/2014 950,759.80 1.972 2.000954,073.47
University of California1414 MUN 750,000.0091412GSB2 07/01/2019 1811.79611/28/2014 746,670.00 1.923 1.950749,449.55
University of California1420 MUN 1,500,000.0091412GSB2 07/01/2019 1811.79612/12/2014 1,493,340.00 1.943 1.9701,498,756.25
University of California1481 MUN 260,000.0091412GQB4 05/15/2020 5001.99510/08/2015 257,238.80 1.824 1.850260,492.99
State of Utah1622 MUN 750,000.00917542QT2 07/01/2020 5473.28906/07/2016 756,045.00 1.430 1.450770,017.62
State of Utah1731 MUN 770,000.00917542QR6 07/01/2024 2,0084.55401/04/2017 811,464.50 2.904 2.944830,752.23
State of Utah1990 MUN 1,000,000.00917542QU9 07/01/2021 9123.36911/29/2018 1,016,310.00 2.959 3.0001,008,787.55
State of Vermont1456 MUN 2,000,000.00924258TT3 08/15/2023 1,6874.25008/06/2015 2,023,940.00 3.275 3.3202,074,854.08
State of Washington1672 MUN 250,000.0093974DHW1 08/01/2022 1,3082.74008/08/2016 249,437.50 1.504 1.524260,359.49
State of Washington1721 MUN 515,000.0093974CPH7 08/01/2022 1,3084.63612/05/2016 546,857.90 2.465 2.500551,535.99
State of Washington1778 MUN 1,500,000.0093974CPG9 08/01/2021 9434.58604/12/2017 1,569,705.00 2.081 2.1101,591,228.86
State of Washington1802 MUN 485,000.0093974CRC6 08/01/2024 2,0394.66905/23/2017 525,696.35 2.416 2.450539,773.16
State of Wisconsin2000 MUN 500,000.0097705LA49 05/01/2022 1,2163.80012/19/2018 511,720.00 3.076 3.119510,673.27
West Valley-Mission Community1479 MUN 250,000.0095640HBT4 08/01/2024 2,0396.09010/01/2015 254,670.00 4.030 4.086273,261.96
Subtotal and Average 100,432,383.84 97,755,000.00 99,190,374.30 2.560 2.596 1,632
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
December 31, 2018
Par Value
Days To
Maturity
Maturity
Date
Current
RateMarket Value
Fund ALL - Portfolio Listings
Investments by Fund Page 21
CUSIP Investment #Issuer
Purchase
Date Book Value YTM360 YTM365
Supranationals (World Bank) Bonds
Inter-American Dev. Bank1978 IADB 1,500,000.004581X0CZ9 09/14/2022 1,3521.75011/09/2018 1,452,195.00 3.106 3.1501,427,284.61
Intl Bk Recon & Development1976 IBRD 1,500,000.00459056LD7 01/19/2023 1,4797.62511/08/2018 1,779,030.00 3.111 3.1551,752,379.86
Intl Bk Recon & Development1982 IBRD 1,000,000.00459058GL1 09/27/2023 1,7303.00011/27/2018 1,019,340.00 3.018 3.060997,350.73
Intl Bk Recon & Development1983 IBRD 1,000,000.0045905U6K5 11/15/2023 1,7793.00011/27/2018 1,003,930.00 3.357 3.4041,000,000.00
Intl Bk Recon & Development1998 IBRD 1,000,000.0045905UZT4 11/22/2021 1,0561.75012/12/2018 975,570.00 2.850 2.890968,603.05
International Finance Corp.1988 IFC 1,500,000.0045950VMW3 12/15/2023 1,8093.00012/06/2018 1,505,940.00 3.328 3.3741,500,000.00
Subtotal and Average 7,645,618.25 7,500,000.00 7,736,005.00 3.140 3.184 1,538
Total Investments and Average 531,885,574.99 527,117,148.00 523,481,058.54 2.261 2.292 1,355
Portfolio CPA
AP
Run Date: 01/22/2019 - 01:19 FI (PRF_FI) 7.1.1
Report Ver. 7.3.3a
1 General Investment Guidelines:
a) The max. stated final maturity of individual securities in the portfolio should be 10 years.Full Compliance
b) A max. of 30 percent of the par value of the portfolio shall be invested in securities with maturities
beyond 5 years.28.6%
c) The City shall maintain a minimum of one month's cash needs in short term investments.Full Compliance
d) At least $50 million shall be maintained in securities maturing in less than 2 years.
Plus two managed pool accounts which provide instant liquidity:
- Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) - maximum investment limit is $65 million $22.6 million
- Fidelity Investments $3 million
e) Should market value of the portfolio fall below 95 percent of the book value, report this fact within a
reasonable time to the City Council and evaluate if there are risk of holding securities to maturity.98.42%
d) Commitments to purchase securities newly introduced on the market shall be made no more than three (3)
working days before pricing.Full Compliance
f) Whenever possible, the City will obtain three or more quotations on the purchase or sale of
comparable securities (excludes new issues, LAIF, City of Palo Alto bonds, money market
accounts, and mutual funds).Full Compliance
2 U.S. Government Securities:Full Compliance
a) There is no limit on purchase of these securities.
b) Securities will not exceed 10 years maturity.
3 U.S. Government Agency Securities:Full Compliance
a) There is no limit on purchase of these securities except for:
Callable and Multi-step-up securities provided that:
- The potential call dates are known at the time of purchase;
- the interest rates at which they "step-up" are known at the time of purchase; and
- the entire face value of the security is redeemed at the call date.
- No more than 25 percent of the par value of portfolio. 24.02%
b) Securities will not exceed 10 years maturity.
4 Bonds of the State of California Local Government Agencies Full Compliancea)Having at time of investment a minimum Double A (AA/AA2) rating as provided by a nationally
recognized rating service (e.g., Moody’s, Fitch, and/or Standard and Poor’s).b)May not exceed 20 percent of the par value of the portfolio.18.55%
5 Certificates of Deposit:Full Compliance
a) May not exceed 20 percent of the par value of the portfolio;
b) No more than 10 percent of the par value of the portfolio in collateralized CDs in any institution.
c) Purchase collateralized deposits only from federally insured large banks that are rated by
a nationally recognized rating agency (e.g. Moody's, Fitch, and/or Standard & Poor's, etc.).
d) For non-rated banks, deposit should be limited to amounts federally insured (FDIC)
e) Rollovers are not permitted without specific instruction from authorized City staff.
6 Banker's Acceptance Notes:Full Compliance
a) No more than 30 percent of the par value of the portfolio.None Held
b) Not to exceed 180 days maturity.
c) No more than $5 million with any one institution.
Investment Policy Compliance
As of December 31, 2018
Investment Policy Requirements
Compliance
Check / Actual
$157.8 million
3.79%
Attachment C
Attachment C
Investment Policy Compliance
As of December 31, 2018
Investment Policy Requirements
Compliance
Check / Actual
7 Commercial Paper:Full Compliance
a) No more than 15 percent of the par value of the portfolio. None Held
b) Having highest letter or numerical rating from a nationally recognized rating service.
c) Not to exceed 270 days maturity.
d) No more than $3 million or 10 percent of the outstanding commercial paper of any one institution,
whichever is lesser.
8 Short-Term Repurchase Agreement (REPO):Full Compliance
a) Not to exceed 1 year.None Held
b) Market value of securities that underlay a repurchase agreement shall be valued at 102 percent or
greater of the funds borrowed against those securities.
9 Money Market Deposit Accounts Full Compliance
a) Liquid bank accounts which seek to maintain a net asset value of $1.00.
10 Mutual Funds:Full Compliance
a) No more than 20 percent of the par value of the portfolio. None Held
b) No more than 10 percent of the par value with any one institution.
11 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit (NCD):Full Compliance
a) No more than 20 percent of the par value of the portfolio. 9.50%
b) No more than $5 million in any one institution. FDIC Insured
12 Medium-Term Corporate Notes:Full Compliance
a) No more than 10 percent of the par value of the portfolio. 3.74%
b) Not to exceed 5 years maturity.
c) Securities eligible for investment shall have a minimum rating of AA or Aa2 from a nationally
recognized rating service.
d) No more than $5 million of the par value may be invested in securities of any single issuer, other
than the U.S. Government, its agencies and instrumentality.
e) If securities owned by the City are downgraded by either rating agencies to a level below AA it
shall be the City's policy to review the credit situation and make a determination as to whether
to sell or retain such securities.
13 Supranational Organizations Securities Full Compliance
a) No more than 20 percent of the par value of the portfolio. 1.42%
b) No more than 10 percent in any one institution.
c) Securities eligible for investment shall have a minimum rating of AA or Aa2 from a nationally
recognized rating service.
14 Prohibited Investments:
a) Reverse Repurchase Agreements
b) Derivatives as defined in Appendix B of the Investment Policy
15 All securities shall be delivered to the City's safekeeping custodian, and held in the name of the
City, with the exception of :
- Certificates of Deposit, Mutual Funds, and LAIF
Full Compliance
None Held
Full Compliance
City of Palo Alto (ID # 10020)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 2/11/2019
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Property Leases Entered into by City Manager in Fiscal Year
2018
Title: Property Leases Entered Into by the City Manager Under Palo Alto
Municipal Code Section 2.30.310(h), and Reported per Section Code 2.30.710
Fiscal Year 2018
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Administrative Services
This is an informational report and no Council action is required.
DISCUSSION
Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 2.30.710 requires an annual report to the Council of
all leases and rentals of city property with third parties approved by the City Manager. The
attached report transmits the information (Attachment A) for fiscal year (FY) 2018 as required
by the PAMC.
PAMC Section 2.30.210 (h) authorizes the City Manager to award and sign contracts to rent,
lease or license city property to other parties regardless of the price for a term not exceeding
three years. The City Manager may enter into and sign contracts to rent, lease or license
property at the Cubberley site for terms up to five years.
Total Rental revenues for the leases authorized by the City Manager for FY 2018 totaled
$848,254.
MUNICIPAL CODE
2.30.710 City Manager Report
(a) City Manager shall make a biannual report to the Council of all contracts for
professional services or general services awarded by the City Manager, the Procurement Officer
or other designated employees, the costs of which exceed $25,000, and of all contracts
awarded by the City Manager for public works and goods, the costs of which exceed $85,000
City of Palo Alto Page 2
(b) The City Manager shall prepare and deliver an annual report to the Council of all
leases, licenses and rentals of city real property with third parties, approved by the City
Manager. (Ord. 5387 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 4827 § 1 (part), 2004)
2.30.210 City Manager Contract Award Authority
(h) Contracts to Rent, Lease, or License City Real Property to Other Parties. The authority
granted under this Section is distinct from the authority of the director of community services
to grant individuals and groups permits for the exclusive temporary use of buildings and
facilities located in, and the areas of, city parks and open spaces, as described in Chapter 22.04
of this municipal code or in the park and open space regulations. The City Manager may award
and sign contracts to rent, lease or license city real property to other parties regardless of the
price for a term not exceeding three years. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, the City
Manager may enter into and sign contracts for the rental, lease or licensing of real property at
the Cubberley Community Center for terms of up to five years.
Attachments:
• Attachment A: FY 2018 List of Lease Agreements
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF PALO ALTO
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT/REAL ESTATE DIVISION
FY 2018 Annual Report – Lease Agreements Entered Into
By City Manager For PAMC Section Under Section 2.30.210 (h)
Fiscal Year: 2017-2018
Number Property Address Property/Space Type
Size in
Square
Foot**
Tenant Term Monthly Rent Total Term
Rent*
Agreement
Date
1 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 568 Conrad Johnson 12 months $505 $6,060 7/01/2017
2 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 600 Marianne Lettieri 11 months $594 $6,534 7/01/2017
3 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 360 Barbara Boissevain 12 months $ 320 $ 3,840 7/01/2017
4 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 360 Pantea Karimi 12 months $426 $5,112 7/01/2017
5 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 520 Rachelle Doorley 12 months $ 463 $ 5,556 7/01/2017
6 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 480 Ann McMillian 11 months $ 475 $5,225 7/01/2017
7 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 720 Jennifer Gonsalves 12 months $641 $ 7,692 7/01/2017
8 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 960 Lessa Bouchard 12 months $854 $10,248 7/01/2017
9 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 390 Patrick Fenton 12 months $347 $4,164 7/01/2017
10 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 760 Pernilla & Paula
Pereira 12 months $752 $9,024 7/01/2017
ATTACHMENT A
Number Property Address Property/Space Type Size in
Square Foot Tenant Term Monthly Rent Total Term
Rent*
Agreement
Date
11 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 480 Linda Gass 4 months $475 $ 1,900 7/01/2017
12 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 720 Andy Muonio 12 months $ 713 $8,556 7/01/2017
13 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 435 Paloma Lucas 12months $431 $5,172 7/01/2017
14 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 435 Servane Briand 12 months $387 $4,644 7/01/2017
15 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 480 Daniele
Archambault 12months $427 $ 5,124 7/01/2017
16 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 1,200 Sahba Shere 12 months $1,068 $12,816 7/01/2017
17 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 360 Charles Coats 12 months $356 $4,272 7/01/2017
18 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 480 Mel Day 12 months $427 $5,124 7/01/2017
19 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 390 Ernest Regua 12 months $386 $4,632 7/01/2017
20 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 360 Catherine DiNapoli 12 months $320 $3,840 7/01/2017
21 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 360 Melissa Wyman 12 months $320 $3,840 7/01/2017
22 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 360 Amy DiPlacido 12 months $356 $4,272 7/01/2017
23 1305 Middlefield Road Lucie Stern Community
Center 500 Palo Alto Players 3 years $1,271 $15,252 7/01/2015
24 2300 Wellesley Street College Terrace Library 2,000
Palo Alto
Community Child
Care
3 years $- $- 7/01/2016
25 3990 Ventura Court Ventura School Site 21,000
Palo Alto
Community Child
Care
3 years $- $- 7/01/2016
26 1925 Embarcadero Rd
Airport Land 13,250 Audi of Palo Alto M2M $7,950 $95,400 12/15/2014
ATTACHMENT A
Number Property Address Property/Space Type Size in
Square Foot Tenant Term Monthly Rent Total Term
Rent*
Agreement
Date
27 1925 Embarcadero Rd Airport Land 19,700 Anderson Honda M2M $11,820 $141,840 4/01/2016
28 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 99 Airport Land 156 JATO Aviation 2yr - 1yr
extension $361.53 $4,338.36 4/01/2017
29 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 100 Airport Land 3,227 West Valley Flying
Club
2yr - 1yr
extension $8,420 $101,040 4/01/2017
30 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 102 Airport Land 912 Austro Aircraft, LLC 2yr - 1yr
extension $2,113.56 $25,362.72 4/01/2017
31 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 103 Airport Land 368 Abundant Air Cafe 2yr - 1yr
extension $2,090 $25,080 4/01/2017
32 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 107 Airport Land 320 Abundant Air Cafe 2yr - 1yr
extension $640 $7,680 4/01/2017
33 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 105 Airport Land 1,041
Skyworks Aviation,
dba, Trade Winds
Aviation
2yr - 1yr
extension $2,576.52 $58,698 4/01/2017
34 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 106 Airport Land 2,174 Minority Television 2yr - 1yr
extension $4,891.31 $30,000 4/01/2017
35 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 109 Airport Land 2,040 Sundance Flying
Club
2yr - 1yr
extension $2,142.20 $25,708.80 4/01/2017
36 1925 Embarcadero Rd Airport Land 3,960 Advantage Aviation 2yr - 1yr
extension $9,177.30 $110,127.60 4/01/2017
37 1237 San Antonio Rd Los Altos Treatment
Plant (LATP) Land 1,000 Davis Paving 4 mo. $ 350 $ 1,400 7/01/2014
ATTACHMENT A
Number Property Address Property/Space Type
Size in
Square
Foot
Tenant Term Monthly Total Term
Rent*
Agreement
Date
38 1237 San Antonio Rd LATP Land 1,000 Granite M2M $ 350 $4,200 7/01/2014
39 1237 San Antonio Rd LATP Land 5,000 KJ Wood
Construction 1 month $6,500 $6,500 6/01/2018
40 1237 San Antonio Rd LATP Land 1,800 Purple Pipe M2M $990 $11,880 05/01/2016
41 1237 San Antonio Rd LATP Land 1,200 Sequoia M2M $ 720 $8,100 1/01/17
42 1900 Geng Rd Geng Road/Baylands
Athletic Center 10,000 MV Transportation M2M $4,000 $48,000 11/01/2014
SUMMARY – PAMC SECTION 2.30.210 (g) (h) AGREEMENTS
Type Number of Transactions 2018 Total Annual Revenue Resulting from Lease Agreements
$848,254
Total 42 $848,254
*Please, note that tenancy terms ranged from three to twelve months for the tenants.
**Tenant changed their suites or square footage and rent payment changed.
City of Palo Alto (ID # 10020)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 2/11/2019
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Property Leases Entered into by City Manager in Fiscal Year
2018
Title: Property Leases Entered Into by the City Manager Under Palo Alto
Municipal Code Section 2.30.310(h), and Reported per Section Code 2.30.710
Fiscal Year 2018
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Administrative Services
This is an informational report and no Council action is required.
DISCUSSION
Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 2.30.710 requires an annual report to the Council of
all leases and rentals of city property with third parties approved by the City Manager. The
attached report transmits the information (Attachment A) for fiscal year (FY) 2018 as required
by the PAMC.
PAMC Section 2.30.210 (h) authorizes the City Manager to award and sign contracts to rent,
lease or license city property to other parties regardless of the price for a term not exceeding
three years. The City Manager may enter into and sign contracts to rent, lease or license
property at the Cubberley site for terms up to five years.
Total Rental revenues for the leases authorized by the City Manager for FY 2018 totaled
$848,254.
MUNICIPAL CODE
2.30.710 City Manager Report
(a) City Manager shall make a biannual report to the Council of all contracts for
professional services or general services awarded by the City Manager, the Procurement Officer
or other designated employees, the costs of which exceed $25,000, and of all contracts
awarded by the City Manager for public works and goods, the costs of which exceed $85,000
City of Palo Alto Page 2
(b) The City Manager shall prepare and deliver an annual report to the Council of all
leases, licenses and rentals of city real property with third parties, approved by the City
Manager. (Ord. 5387 § 1 (part), 2016: Ord. 4827 § 1 (part), 2004)
2.30.210 City Manager Contract Award Authority
(h) Contracts to Rent, Lease, or License City Real Property to Other Parties. The authority
granted under this Section is distinct from the authority of the director of community services
to grant individuals and groups permits for the exclusive temporary use of buildings and
facilities located in, and the areas of, city parks and open spaces, as described in Chapter 22.04
of this municipal code or in the park and open space regulations. The City Manager may award
and sign contracts to rent, lease or license city real property to other parties regardless of the
price for a term not exceeding three years. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, the City
Manager may enter into and sign contracts for the rental, lease or licensing of real property at
the Cubberley Community Center for terms of up to five years.
Attachments:
• Attachment A: FY 2018 List of Lease Agreements
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF PALO ALTO
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT/REAL ESTATE DIVISION
FY 2018 Annual Report – Lease Agreements Entered Into
By City Manager For PAMC Section Under Section 2.30.210 (h)
Fiscal Year: 2017-2018
Number Property Address Property/Space Type
Size in
Square
Foot**
Tenant Term Monthly Rent Total Term
Rent*
Agreement
Date
1 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 568 Conrad Johnson 12 months $505 $6,060 7/01/2017
2 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 600 Marianne Lettieri 11 months $594 $6,534 7/01/2017
3 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 360 Barbara Boissevain 12 months $ 320 $ 3,840 7/01/2017
4 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 360 Pantea Karimi 12 months $426 $5,112 7/01/2017
5 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 520 Rachelle Doorley 12 months $ 463 $ 5,556 7/01/2017
6 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 480 Ann McMillian 11 months $ 475 $5,225 7/01/2017
7 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 720 Jennifer Gonsalves 12 months $641 $ 7,692 7/01/2017
8 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 960 Lessa Bouchard 12 months $854 $10,248 7/01/2017
9 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 390 Patrick Fenton 12 months $347 $4,164 7/01/2017
10 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 760 Pernilla & Paula
Pereira 12 months $752 $9,024 7/01/2017
ATTACHMENT A
Number Property Address Property/Space Type Size in
Square Foot Tenant Term Monthly Rent Total Term
Rent*
Agreement
Date
11 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 480 Linda Gass 4 months $475 $ 1,900 7/01/2017
12 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 720 Andy Muonio 12 months $ 713 $8,556 7/01/2017
13 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 435 Paloma Lucas 12months $431 $5,172 7/01/2017
14 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 435 Servane Briand 12 months $387 $4,644 7/01/2017
15 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 480 Daniele
Archambault 12months $427 $ 5,124 7/01/2017
16 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 1,200 Sahba Shere 12 months $1,068 $12,816 7/01/2017
17 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 360 Charles Coats 12 months $356 $4,272 7/01/2017
18 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 480 Mel Day 12 months $427 $5,124 7/01/2017
19 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 390 Ernest Regua 12 months $386 $4,632 7/01/2017
20 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 360 Catherine DiNapoli 12 months $320 $3,840 7/01/2017
21 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 360 Melissa Wyman 12 months $320 $3,840 7/01/2017
22 4000 Middlefield Road Cubberley Artist Studio 360 Amy DiPlacido 12 months $356 $4,272 7/01/2017
23 1305 Middlefield Road Lucie Stern Community
Center 500 Palo Alto Players 3 years $1,271 $15,252 7/01/2015
24 2300 Wellesley Street College Terrace Library 2,000
Palo Alto
Community Child
Care
3 years $- $- 7/01/2016
25 3990 Ventura Court Ventura School Site 21,000
Palo Alto
Community Child
Care
3 years $- $- 7/01/2016
26 1925 Embarcadero Rd
Airport Land 13,250 Audi of Palo Alto M2M $7,950 $95,400 12/15/2014
ATTACHMENT A
Number Property Address Property/Space Type Size in
Square Foot Tenant Term Monthly Rent Total Term
Rent*
Agreement
Date
27 1925 Embarcadero Rd Airport Land 19,700 Anderson Honda M2M $11,820 $141,840 4/01/2016
28 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 99 Airport Land 156 JATO Aviation 2yr - 1yr
extension $361.53 $4,338.36 4/01/2017
29 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 100 Airport Land 3,227 West Valley Flying
Club
2yr - 1yr
extension $8,420 $101,040 4/01/2017
30 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 102 Airport Land 912 Austro Aircraft, LLC 2yr - 1yr
extension $2,113.56 $25,362.72 4/01/2017
31 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 103 Airport Land 368 Abundant Air Cafe 2yr - 1yr
extension $2,090 $25,080 4/01/2017
32 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 107 Airport Land 320 Abundant Air Cafe 2yr - 1yr
extension $640 $7,680 4/01/2017
33 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 105 Airport Land 1,041
Skyworks Aviation,
dba, Trade Winds
Aviation
2yr - 1yr
extension $2,576.52 $58,698 4/01/2017
34 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 106 Airport Land 2,174 Minority Television 2yr - 1yr
extension $4,891.31 $30,000 4/01/2017
35 1925 Embarcadero Rd
– Suite 109 Airport Land 2,040 Sundance Flying
Club
2yr - 1yr
extension $2,142.20 $25,708.80 4/01/2017
36 1925 Embarcadero Rd Airport Land 3,960 Advantage Aviation 2yr - 1yr
extension $9,177.30 $110,127.60 4/01/2017
37 1237 San Antonio Rd Los Altos Treatment
Plant (LATP) Land 1,000 Davis Paving 4 mo. $ 350 $ 1,400 7/01/2014
ATTACHMENT A
Number Property Address Property/Space Type
Size in
Square
Foot
Tenant Term Monthly Total Term
Rent*
Agreement
Date
38 1237 San Antonio Rd LATP Land 1,000 Granite M2M $ 350 $4,200 7/01/2014
39 1237 San Antonio Rd LATP Land 5,000 KJ Wood
Construction 1 month $6,500 $6,500 6/01/2018
40 1237 San Antonio Rd LATP Land 1,800 Purple Pipe M2M $990 $11,880 05/01/2016
41 1237 San Antonio Rd LATP Land 1,200 Sequoia M2M $ 720 $8,100 1/01/17
42 1900 Geng Rd Geng Road/Baylands
Athletic Center 10,000 MV Transportation M2M $4,000 $48,000 11/01/2014
SUMMARY – PAMC SECTION 2.30.210 (g) (h) AGREEMENTS
Type Number of Transactions 2018 Total Annual Revenue Resulting from Lease Agreements
$848,254
Total 42 $848,254
*Please, note that tenancy terms ranged from three to twelve months for the tenants.
**Tenant changed their suites or square footage and rent payment changed.