Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-10-06 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL SUMMARY MINUTES Page 1 of 11 Regular Meeting October 6, 2025 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers and by virtual teleconference at 5:30 PM Present In Person: Burt, Lu, Lythcott-Haims, Reckdahl, Stone, Veenker Present Remotely: None Absent: Lauing Roll Call Vice Mayor Veenker call the meeting to order. The clerk called the roll. Special Orders of the Day 1. Proclamation Recognizing Fire Prevention Week – October 5-11, 2025 NO ACTION Councilmember Lu read the proclamation. Geo Blackshire, Fire Chief, expressed appreciation for the proclamation. Tami Jasso, Fire Marshall, spoke about Fire Prevention Week in Palo Alto. 2. Review Applications and Select Candidates to Interview for the Human Relations Commission (HRC), Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC), and Public Art Commission (PAC) Vacancies; CEQA Status: Not a Project Christine Prior, Assistant City Clerk, provided a slide presentation including 2025 fall recruitment, interview selection process, Human Relations Commission 12 applicants for 3 full- term vacancies and votes received, Parks and Recreation Commission 10 applicants for 3 full- term and votes received, and Public Art Commission 10 applicants for 3 full-term and votes received. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 2 of 11 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 10/06/2025 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims pointed out the different landscape on the HRC compared to the other two. Councilmember Burt opined there are things that need to be shored up by Policy and Services. Comment was made that the upcoming meeting only had four Council members available. Councilmember Burt encouraged respecting the norms when having agendas set and decisions and if there is a question, running it past Council. Consideration of restarting the start time was encouraged in order to have more Council members present for all of the interviews. Vice Mayor Veenker suggested moving the start time to 4:30 and consulting Mayor Lauing. Kiely Nose, Assistant City Manager, agreed to explore changing the time and would consult with the Mayor. Assistant City Clerk Prior reported Bridget Algee received votes from Burt, Lythcott-Haims, Reckdahl, and Veenker, Rodney Leggett received none, and the option none of the above received votes from Lu and Stone. Interviews will move forward with Bridget Algee as well as the other seven candidates. MOTION: Councilmember Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Reckdahl to: 1. Interview all candidates for the Public Art Commission (PAC) that received two or more votes; 2. Council to take a vote to select the 8th candidate to interview for the Human Relations Commission (HRC). MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1, Lauing absent MOTION: Vice Mayor Veenker moved, seconded by Councilmember Burt to add to the Council- approved Interview Selection Process that Boards, Commissions, & Committee candidates must receive a threshold of 2 votes to receive an interview. MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1, Lauing absent Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions Assistant City Manager reported no changes. Public Comment 1. Jack S. requested something be done about the vehicle dwellers on Park Boulevard. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 3 of 11 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 10/06/2025 2. Brad A. declared Palo Alto needs to amend local regulations to prohibit RVs and trailers from being parked overnight on the city streets. 3. Nancy E. agreed with the comments made regarding RV dwellers on the Palo Alto streets suggesting creating RV parks with sanitation, showers, and counseling to help get into low-income housing. 4. Mitch M. spoke about concerns around RV street parking echoing the previous speakers comments. 5. Meg T. urged Council to take action on the unsafe situation with RVs. 6. Don N. echoed all the previous comments regarding issues with RVs in Palo Alto. 7. Michel E. asked for action regarding dry trees and plants at the Oak Creek Apartments posing a fire hazard. Vice Mayor Veenker noted that Council will be hearing the issue of oversized vehicles on October 20. Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Councilmember Burt asked for a follow-up to the concern on fire hazard at Oak Creek Apartments and called out the success of the Bike Palo Alto Day the day before. Councilmember Reckdahl described attending the Moonlight Run at the Baylands, Bike Palo Alto, and JMZ. Vice Mayor Veenker described having attended the installation of Castilleja's head of school, Dr. Betty Noel-Pierre and ribbon cutting for Square Pie Guys and repaving of El Camino Real. There was discussion of the success of the Moon Festival Mixer and Bike Palo Alto. The vice mayor noted two new wood smoke rules passed by the Air District the past week. AB 1273 passed both houses of legislature unanimously but was vetoed by the governor. In the veto letter, the governor signaled support for clarifying language about hydroelectricity for publicly owned utilities. On Saturday October 18 at San Jose State, there will be the Santa Clara County Women's Policy and Leadership Summit. Study Session 3. San Antonio Road Area Plan: Provide Feedback on Existing Conditions Analysis and Land Use and Mobility Priorities. CEQA Status: Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15262. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 4 of 11 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 10/06/2025 NO ACTION Chris Sensenig, Matt Ramey & Associates, provided a slide presentation including an overview, description of San Antonio Area Plan, the goals, project area, project timeline, existing conditions analysis, aerial view of the plan area for location and context, built character + open space, zoning + development activity, impact of SB 79: Tier 1 overview, existing housing, existing jobs and businesses, future potential, multimodal connectivity, identified safety issues to be addressed, potential impacts from climate change and natural hazards of the plan area, development opportunities, summary of opportunities and challenges identified in the existing condition analysis, September and October meetings and engagement events, next phase, feedback from commissions/boards/CAG/TAG/partner jurisdictions, and requested feedback summary. Public Comment: 1. Herb B. mentioned worsening hazards that need to be taken into consideration when designing the area plan. 2. Penny E. (Zoom) requested Staff to provide clarity regarding the exact locations of special setbacks and their legal status throughout the planning area, why Council and the community was not given information that the setback is not legally required, and if there a way to legally require developers to abide by the setback requirement. 3. Chris B. (Zoom) expressed disappointment that nothing was included in the analysis about groundwater in the area and expressed the need to have another park, more shade, and plants along the side of the road in the area. The commenter also suggested having one dedicated left and one dedicated right turning lane on San Antonio at Middlefield. 4. John P. (Zoom) was disappointed that Canopy and Urban Forest within Palo Alto had not been contacted regarding the project, suggested adding to the plan bringing in the Palo Alto Fiber Optic Internet Service, and suggested allowing access to the reclaimed water. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims asked how applicants will be managed between now and expected completion. Director Lait replied the goal is to have a set of options presented to this body in June of next year. At that time, work will begin on details of the plan. It is anticipated there will be more confidence and understanding of the expectations and interests at that point. Conversations have been had with property owners who are aware of the timing and are waiting for that milestone. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims had questions about equity regarding the school district. Director Lait responded Staff was aware of the school district boundaries before starting the project. That is a factor of the boundaries being drawn before the City annexed this portion of the community to Palo Alto. Staff is committed to having conversations both in Palo Alto and in Mountain View to see how realignment can be achieved to serve the new neighborhood. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 5 of 11 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 10/06/2025 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims asked about equity and access regarding grocery shopping for the residents in the southeastern corner of the City. Mr. Sensenig stated there is a small market on San Antonio. There is also Costco and Safeway right outside of the plan area. There is a market at Charleston and Middlefield and the stuff at the San Antonio Center. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims had concern that those dollars would go to Mountain View and asking a set of residents to travel further than others to get some basic needs met. Director Lait agreed to look at that and opportunities to create incentives for markets. Councilmember Burt had inquiries about the raised bicycle easement on the south side of San Antonio. Director Lait stated this was not seen as problematic for the initial assessment of the right-of-way. The special setbacks are shown in the City's publicly available zoning map. Council had asked Staff to look at whether there are concerns about future expansions of roadway improvements. An information report was transmitted to City Council that showed the conclusion about where those setbacks were. Staff did not feel that effort to be warranted unless the City was interested in engaging actively in a process to create easements along those properties or somehow acquire that property. It is believed there is sufficient right-of-way combined with the special setbacks to achieve the goals. Councilmember Burt thought it would be more accurate to say that FEMA is a detriment to development but can be mitigated adequately on the list of challenges on slide 17. Mr. Sensenig agreed. Councilmember Burt stated the sea level and impact on the water table needed to be connected. The safety of school children crossing San Antonio is a big concern on the south side of San Antonio. Retaining them in the Mountain View district has that advantage. Councilmember Lu requested context of what might happen northeast of 101. Director Lait answered part of that will come out of the community meetings and workshops. It is included in the plan. It is not expected that every parcel in the area is going to be redeveloped. The boundary is set up to recognize the transportation connections between Project Home Key and transportation networks along San Antonio but also connecting folks to the San Antonio Caltrain Station to job centers and housing, etc. That is why the boundary follows the corridor. There are no preset ideas about what would happen. Most of the area west of the freeway will likely remain largely as it is but that is subject to change through the process. Councilmember Lu observed if there is any area in this plan that office can be built, it is there. There was a question if anything notable has been hear from other developers or corporations. Director Lait responded the developer is going to submit an application in the next week or two probably to Mountain View for the Gatekeeper Project. There is some property accumulation taking place in that area. Conversations have been had with representatives of that entity and they are familiar with the process being proceeded on and discussions are being had. Councilmember Lu said there could be hundreds of thousands of square feet of office in that area on the border. The focus should be on housing. Councilmember Burt's concerns about getting a solid right-of- way along Middlefield, San Antonio, and Charleston were echoed. Councilmember Stone inquired if Staff has a realistic path forward on the possibility of focusing on creating new open spaces. Director Lait replied there are property owners in the area who have land that could be an opportunity to yield some public benefit to the City in exchange for SUMMARY MINUTES Page 6 of 11 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 10/06/2025 development potential in some areas. Mr. Sensenig added different alternatives of ways to get park and open space will be looked into. There is community benefit from allowing potential office space in the area. Councilmember Stone wanted to look at more urban environments for some inspiration. There might be opportunities that might not require such a large land expansion. That would mean having adequate setbacks and trees on private and public right-of- ways. Clarification was requested if the 750 units of housing bites in to the 1559 potential units. Mr. Sensenig responded it is not a one-to-one. Councilmember Stone was not excited about the idea of office but was open to it if it was used to get additional affordability or parkland with a strong area focused office cap. As far as building height goes, context is key. A conversation was held around the area near 101. There were talks on the Council then of experimenting with going higher than typical. Councilmember Stone is open to additional height in that area and more contextualized height along San Antonio and 85 feet is a good stopping point. Councilmember Stone agreed with everything discussed on transportation and bike and pedestrian facilities. It does not make sense to have isolated retail along the corridor so other retail strategies used in the past might not work for San Antonio and was open to being creative. Councilmember Reckdahl wanted to discourage office preferring to insist on housing, wanted to investigate options to pay for parkland, and had questions about the special setbacks. Mr. Sensenig stated due to existing projects, there are a lot of utilities from the curb to the building face on the south side of San Antonio Road. Because of the existing utilities there, it is a huge expense to try to create a new bike or pedestrian facility along the south side. Director Lait added the Builder's Remedy is the one area of concern. State law changes frequently and is tilted toward the developer. There are some areas along San Antonio that are special setbacks. It is possible that those areas could be subject to concessions or waivers as a part of the state density bonus project. It is not a high level of concern for City Staff in terms of how the 24 foot special setback can be managed throughout this corridor while working on this planning initiative. The only way to combat that is for the City to take proactive steps to get an easement or spend a considerable amount of time, expense, and energy to implement that lease right-of- way for each property along the corridor. If Council directs that, Staff will come back with a proposal on how that would be done and the cost and estimate but it will exceed the time it will take to get the concept plan developed by June. The hotel projects do not encroach into the 24-foot setback. There is one area where there is an accessibility ramp that encroaches five feet into the special setback. There is a condition of approval on that entitlement that says if that land is ever needed for a City purpose, the applicant needs to relocate it at their expense. A solution has already been worked out where the ramp can be put in another location. Vice Mayor Veenker asked for clarification on how the bicycle through way through the special setback interplayed with the utilities on the south side and reconciling having one on the north side. Director Lait noted Staff is on the cusp of wanting to engage the community and understand what is important to them. The goal is to make sure there are safe, convenient transport multimodal transportation solutions so people can access the area. As the existing conditions report data was collected, the utility locations were discovered. No solutions are being proposed but they are flagged as things to think about. As alternatives are developed, SUMMARY MINUTES Page 7 of 11 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 10/06/2025 Staff will want to consider ways that are cost effective, reasonable alternatives, and the ultimate wish. Mr. Sensenig was optimistic on achieving a good facility along the length of San Antonio Road. The north side is a great opportunity. Vice Mayor Veenker said it would be nice to see those options and articulated strong support for a contiguous facility end-to-end. Hope was expressed that solutions could be worked out for those residing in RVs. A question was raised about how RSAP would interplay with this area. Mr. Sensenig responded it is at the existing conditions phase. The edge needs to be addressed. There are ways to design and mitigate development in these areas. Vice Mayor Veenker was not excited about adding office there but was open for the benefits. Vice Mayor Veenker concurred with Councilmember Reckdahl's comments about open space. Councilmember Burt talked about the reference under challenges for inadequate Caltrain access and the issues touched on about school service and having family housing on the south side. The ARB is looking at going big on height but not at the transportation challenges. Vehicular congestion needs to be addressed through better transit and active transportation. Office would compound the problem. Councilmember Burt encouraged addressing the jobs/housing imbalance in discussions with Mountain View. Coordination with Mountain View is needed on the retail needs. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims agreed with Councilmember Burt's concerns about family housing on the south side and the Vice Mayor's comments about being a great opportunity to find solutions for the RV dwellers in the commercial transit area. This is an opportunity to show how a modern city adapts to the housing, climate, sustainability, and loneliness challenge along with other health and wellness issues the community faces. Consent Calendar 4. Approval of FY 2025 Reappropriation Requests to FY 2026 Operating and Capital Improvement Budgets and Additional Technical Clean-Up Actions and Corresponding Amendments to the FY 2026 Budget Appropriation for Various Funds. CEQA Status: Not a Project 5. Approval of Construction Contract No. C25195264 with Precision Engineering, Inc. in the Amount Not-to-Exceed $6,842,121 and Authorization for the City Manager or Their Designee to Negotiate and Execute Change Orders for Related Additional but Unforeseen Work that May Develop During the Project Up to a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $684,212 for the Hamilton Avenue Capacity Upgrades Project (SD-25000), and Approval of a Budget Amendment in the Stormwater Management Fund; CEQA Status – Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c) 6. Approval of Professional Service Contract No. C26194618 with SCS Field Services in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $1,513,890, to Provide Landfill Gas Monitoring, Reporting, and Well Installation Services for the City’s Closed Landfill for a Period of Five Years, and SUMMARY MINUTES Page 8 of 11 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 10/06/2025 Approval of a Budget Amendment in the Refuse Fund; CEQA Status – Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 7. Approval of Construction Contract No. C26193446 with MP Nexlevel of California, Inc., in the Amount Not-to-Exceed $13,600,187 and Authorization for the City Manager or Their Designee to Negotiate and Execute Changes Orders Up to a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $1,060,018 for a Total Not to Exceed Amount of $14,660,205 Over Three Years to Provide Utility Trench and Substructure Installations; CEQA status: Exempt, CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, 15302, and/or 15303; for Fiber-to-the-Premises work, Council Action on This Item is Within the Scope of the Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Fiber-to-the-Premises Project, adopted on June 17, 2024. 8. Approval of Construction Contract C25194006 with SCC Electric, Inc. in the Not-to- Exceed Amount of $997,500, and Authorization for the City Manager or Their Designee to Negotiate and Execute Change Orders Up to a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $99,750 for the Utilities Control Center Generator Replacement Project as part of the Building Systems Improvements Project (PF-01003); and Approve Amendment to the FY 2026 Budget in the Capital Improvement and Electric Funds; CEQA Status - Exempt under CEQA Guideline Sections 15301 and 15302 9. Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Contract Number S23185432 with Koffler Electrical Mechanical Apparatus Repair, Inc. in the Amount of $230,000 for a New Not-to Exceed Amount of $460,000, and Extending the Term through September 29, 2027, for Electric Motors and Submersible Pump Service at the Regional Water Quality Control Plant; CEQA Status – Exempt under Section 15301(b) AA1. Approve the selection of Teri Black & Company as the executive recruitment firm for the recruitment of the City Attorney and Approve the Recruitment General Timeline as Recommended by the Council Appointed Officers (CAO) Committee. CEQA status – not a project. Public Comment: 1. Herb B. (Items 7 and AA1) indicated the cost breakdown on the construction contract did not show how it was calculated and that anything the City does related to property related expenses should involve votes of the public to approve them. MOTION: Councilmember Reckdahl moved, seconded by Councilmember Lythcott-Haims to approve Agenda Item Numbers 4-9, AA1. MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1, Lauing absent SUMMARY MINUTES Page 9 of 11 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 10/06/2025 City Manager Comments Assistant City Manager Nose provided a slide presentation on behalf of Ed Shikada, City Manager, including fire prevention week: October 5-11, October festivals and events, and notable tentative upcoming Council items. Action Items 10. Adoption of Eight Ordinances Amending Various Sections of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Related to the 2025 California Building Standards Code (CA Code of Regulations Title 24) Update, including: (1) Chapter 16.04 Incorporating the 2025 CA Building Code With Local Amendments; (2) Chapter 16.05 Incorporating the 2025 CA Mechanical Code With Local Amendments; (3) Chapter 16.06 Incorporating the 2025 CA Residential Code With Local Amendments; (4) Chapter 16.08 Incorporating the 2025 CA Plumbing Code With Local Amendments; (5) Chapter 16.14 Incorporating the 2025 CA Green Building Standards Code with Local Amendments; (6) Chapter 16.16 Incorporating the 2022 CA Electrical Code With Local Amendments; (7) Chapter 16.18 Incorporating the 2024 International Swimming Pool and Spa Code With Local Amendments; (8) Chapter 16.17 Incorporating the 2025 CA Energy Code With Local Amendments; Direction to Staff to Return to Council on the Consent Calendar with Ordinances Adopting the 2025 Editions of the California Wildlands-Urban Interface Code and California Fire Code with Local Amendments; Approve a Budget Amendment in the General Fund . CEQA Status: Exempt Under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15308. George Hoyt, Chief Building Official, provided a slide presentation including building standards code update process, legislative updates, code adoption timeline, and summary of local code amendments. Tim Scott, Resource Planner, joined the presentation including Green Building and Energy Amendment timeline, source energy compliance requirements, LEED certification compliance pathway, embodied carbon, and nonresidential EV readiness. Mr. Hoyt resumed the presentation including limited new local amendments, California building and plumbing codes, California fire code, and the Staff recommendation. Councilmember Reckdahl wanted to know the pros and cons of spending the money now or putting the work on the shelf to do next year. Mr. Hoyt responded the additional funds are to complete the code adoption process especially for the energy reach code as it relates to the one margin code currently in existence. Adopting this energy code will effectively revert back to the state code on January 1, 2026. The amendments were not brought forward before because the statewide cost effectiveness studies have not been concluded yet. There are still time constraints. MOTION: Councilmember Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Reckdahl to: SUMMARY MINUTES Page 10 of 11 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 10/06/2025 1. Adopt the ordinances in Attachments A through H that amend chapters of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) related to the 2025 California Building Standards Codes (Cal. Code of Regulations Title 24) and proposed local amendments; and 2. Direct staff to return to Council on the Consent Calendar with ordinances adopting the 2025 editions of the California Wildlands-Urban Interface Code and California Fire Code and local amendments thereto; and 3. Approve an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2026 Budget appropriation in the General Fund (requires a 2/3 majority vote) by: a. Increasing the Planning and Development Services expenditure appropriation by $96,000; and b. Decreasing the Budget Stabilization Reserve by $96,000. MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1, Lauing absent 11. Review of State and Local Ballot Measures Appearing on the November 4, 2025 Ballot and Consideration of Possible City Council Positions Assistant City Clerk Prior provided a slide presentation including purpose and background, upcoming election on November 4, 2025, Proposition 50 – state constitutional amendment, Measure A – Santa Clara County, and the recommendation. Public Comment: 1. Raymond G. talked about impacts of the cuts on marginalized patients and the residents of the Opportunity Center. 2. Jennifer D. (Zoom) spoke in support of Measure A and echoed the comments of Raymond G. Councilmember Stone discussed reasons to support both positions. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims echoed Councilmember Stone's comments and explained that Texas is trying to redraw lines and create more power for one part in Congress. This is a way to fight back for democracy. Councilmember Burt spoke about how support for these measures serves the community. There is no reference in the legislative guidelines to administration of health care services. That consideration should be referred when reviewing the guidelines for health care services and other critical county provided services. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 11 of 11 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 10/06/2025 Councilmember Lu supported Measure A but explained reservations with Proposition 50. Councilmember Reckdahl encouraged supporting Measure A. Prop 50 is gerrymandering but if it does not pass there will be more Medi-Cal type cuts and impacts to the community so supported it reluctantly. Vice Mayor Veenker discussed the position of supporting Proposition 50 and Measure A. MOTION: Vice Mayor Veenker moved, seconded by Councilmember Stone to issue support positions for Santa Clara County Measure A and Proposition 50. MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1, Lauing absent Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:58 PM