Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2025-05-27 Parks & Recreation Commission Agenda Packet
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Special Meeting Tuesday, May 27, 2025 Community Meeting Room & Hybrid 7:00 PM Parks and Recreation Commission meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with the option to attend by teleconference/video conference or in person. To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can choose to participate from home or attend in person. Information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting is located at the end of the agenda. Masks are strongly encouraged if attending in person. The meeting will be broadcast on Cable TV Channel 28, live on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen Media Center https://midpenmedia.org. Commissioner names, biographies, and archived agendas and report are available at https://www.paloalto.gov/Departments/Community-Services/Other- Services/Commissions/Parks-and-Recreation-Commission. VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/99937899745) Meeting ID: 999 3789 9745 Phone: 1(669)900-6833 PUBLIC COMMENTS Public comments will be accepted both in person and via Zoom for up to three minutes or an amount of time determined by the Chair. All requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutes after the staff’s presentation. Written public comments can be submitted in advance to ParkRec.commission@paloalto.gov and will be provided to the Council and available for inspection on the City’s website. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your subject line. PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are accepted only by email to ParkRec.commission@paloalto.gov at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received, the Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strong cybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are not accepted. Signs and symbolic materials less than 2 feet by 3 feet are permitted provided that: (1) sticks, posts, poles or similar/other type of handle objects are strictly prohibited; (2) the items do not create a facility, fire, or safety hazard; and (3) persons with such items remain seated when displaying them and must not raise the items above shoulder level, obstruct the view or passage of other attendees, or otherwise disturb the business of the meeting. CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS The Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.Approval of Minutes from April 11, 2025, and April 22, 2025, Meetings CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) 2.Council Liaison Report – 5 Minutes 3.Department Report – 20 Minutes BUSINESS ITEMS 4.Baylands Golf Links Update 5.South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity: Provide Feedback on Initial Crossing Opportunity Locations and Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria 6.Approval of the Parks and Recreation Commission Workplan COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) ADJOURNMENT OTHER INFORMATION A.Public Comments PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email, teleconference, or by phone. 1.Written public comments may be submitted by email to ParkRec.Commission@paloalto.gov. 2.Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Council, click on the link below to access a Zoom-based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. ◦You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in- browser. If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up-to-date browser: Chrome 30 , Firefox 27 , Microsoft Edge 12 , Safari 7 . Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. ◦You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your turn to speak. ◦When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. ◦When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments. 3.Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Council, download the Zoom application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID below. Please follow the instructions B-E above. 4.Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Council. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. CLICK HERE TO JOIN Meeting ID: 999 3789 9745 Phone:1-669-900-6833 Americans with Disability Act (ADA) It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329-2550 (voice) or by emailing ada@paloalto.gov. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service. Parks and Recreation Commission Staff Report From: Sarah Robustelli Meeting Date: May 27, 2025 Report #: 2505-4706 TITLE Approval of Minutes from April 11, 2025, and April 22, 2025, Meetings BACKGROUND Staff recommend that the Parks and Recreation Commission review and approve the minutes from April 11, 2025, annual retreat special meeting and April 22, 2025, regular meeting. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Attachment B: April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1 Item 1 Staff Report Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 4 of 351 1 MINUTES 2 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 3 SPECIAL MEETING 4 April 11, 2025 5 In-Person and Virtual Conference 6 Palo Alto, California 7 8 Commissioners Present In Person:Chair Nellis Freeman; Vice Chair Jeff Greenfield; Commissioners 9 Anne Cribbs, Shani Kleinhaus, and Bing Wei 10 Commissioners Present Virtually:Commissioner Amanda Brown 11 Commissioners Absent:Commissioner Yudy Deng 12 Others Present:Councilmember Lythcott-Haims 13 Staff Present:Kristen O’Kane, Sarah Robustelli, Adam Howard, and Nicole Bissell 14 CALL TO ORDER 15 Meeting was called to order at 12:08 PM. 16 PUBLIC COMMENT 17 None 18 AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS 19 Commissioner Kleinhaus wanted to have a short discussion on SB 315; however, it could not be 20 added to the agenda because of the Brown Act. It was suggested to Commissioner Kleinhaus 21 that she could mention it at the end of the meeting under Commissioner Comments unless the 22 topic fit under another agenda item. 23 CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS 24 1. Council Liaison Report 25 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims reported that at Monday’s City Council meeting there was a 26 lengthy discussion on the proposed dark sky ordinance. The Council asked staff to come back for 27 further discussion before voting on the ordinance. The Council voted 4-3 vote to support SB 457, 28 which seeks to limit Builder’s Remedy. Supporting this bill would not allow projects such as the 29 one proposed at 80 Willow Road in Menlo Park. One reason mentioned for opposing the bill was 30 feeling it was too broad and limited good projects along with the bad. Next week, the Council 31 will look at a potential new parking structure at 375 Hamilton which might include housing, a 32 proposed housing development of 10 townhomes at 70 Encina in the parking lot between Town 33 & Country and the Opportunity Center at PAMF, and a renters’ protection item related to the 34 relevance of one’s criminal history. On the 21st, Council will look at the draft poll seeking 35 community input for the Cubberley Master Plan Project. The Council was interested in the Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 5 of 351 36 Commission’s feedback on the Cubberley poll, so it will come to the PRC on the 22nd. On the 37 21st, the Council will vote on a comprehensive turf study to compare the pros and cons of 38 synthetic and natural turf. Mayfield’s field was ready for urgent placement, prompting the 39 question of artificial turf. 40 BUSINESS ITEMS 41 2. Review FY25 Parks and Recreation Commission Accomplishments 42 Vice Chair Greenfield pointed out that the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) was the 43 closest the City had to an environmental or sustainability commission. Vice Chair Greenfield 44 read the three FY25 priorities and accomplishments. 45 Priority: Optimize resources to offer diverse recreation opportunities, and promote community 46 health and wellness. FY25 accomplishments: Worked to develop and improve park facilities. Still 47 in development are the Wellness Center, skate park, and improvement of Robles Park facilities. 48 The following park improvements were now open: Boulware Park, Cameron Park, and Mitchell 49 Dog Park; as well as restrooms at Cubberley Fields, Ramos Park, and Rinconada Park. 50 Priority: Advance equity, access, and inclusion for programs, parks, and open space. FY25 51 accomplishments: Reviewed City projects and programs including the Bicycle and Pedestrian 52 Open Space Access Policy, Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan, Traffic Garden project, 53 middle school athletics programming, Eleanor Pardee Park restroom survey, racquet court 54 policy, and Terman Park pickleball court lines. The PRC unanimously supported the renaming of 55 Tower Well Park to Frederick Eyerly Tower Well Park. 56 Priority: Enhance biodiversity, environmental sustainability, and climate change resilience. FY25 57 accomplishments: Reviewed City projects and programs including the Tree and Landscape 58 Technical Manual draft, tree ordinance updates, a recommendation to support Valley Water 59 Tide Gate repair PIO, as well as infrastructure updates at Foothills, Pearson-Arastradero, and 60 Baylands Nature Preserve. The Park Dedication Ad Hoc was looking at potential sites for 61 dedication and expected to present recommendations to the Commission in May. An ad hoc has 62 been working with staff on the Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan. The PRC provided 63 feedback on Utilities-related projects in open spaces including the Arastradero Creek 64 stabilization plan and utility line repair, Byxbee Park sewer pipe rehabilitation and associated 65 trail closures, and the Office of Emergency Services plan for radio equipment at Fire Station 6. 66 The PRC had seven ad hoc committees and work plan items. The Master Plan Ad Hoc reviewed 67 and provided feedback on the FY26 CIP plan. The Recreation Wellness Center Ad Hoc explored 68 potential locations and co-hosted a community meeting with staff. The Baylands Comprehensive 69 Conservation Plan (BCCP) Ad Hoc worked with staff to resume development of the draft BCCP. 70 The Nature Preserve Access Policy Ad Hoc worked with staff to review the Open Space Preserve 71 access policy, identified areas for increased signage and additional bicycle racks, and presented 72 the Pearson-Arastradero Nature Preserve trail realignment concept plan to the PABAC. The Park 73 Dedication Ad Hoc worked with staff on reviewing a prioritized list of seven potential locations 74 for parkland dedication suitability. Benches, signage, walkways, perimeter landscaping, and site 75 amenities were added to Tower Well Park. The Playing Fields and Racquet Sports Ad Hoc was 76 working with staff to review current reservation policies, implemented pickleball lines at 77 Fletcher School/Terman Park, and met with the Pickleball Club to discuss expanding access Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 6 of 351 78 including the possibility of multiuse courts at Mitchell Park. The Middle School Athletics (MSA) 79 Ad Hoc was working with staff on researching MSA programming and met with community 80 members to discuss future visioning for MSA. 81 Commissioner Cribbs asked where this report was going, how the report will be used, and she 82 wanted more information on the Traffic Garden. Vice Chair Greenfield knew the Traffic Garden 83 was proposed by a Gunn High School student and understood the project plan was approved 84 but will not be implemented until June. Vice Chair Greenfield suggested getting an article in the 85 high school paper this year and then reach out to Palo Alto Weekly after the Traffic Garden is 86 completed. Sarah Robustelli, Community Services Department Division Manager, thought the 87 Transportation Department will work with the Community Services Department on the Traffic 88 Garden. Regarding communication of accomplishments to the Council, Director Kristen O’Kane 89 said there were opportunities to share through the City Manager’s weekly email to the Council, 90 in City Manager comments, or the Council liaison can report back to the Council as appropriate. 91 The budget included a list of accomplishments. The Community Services Department used to 92 create a calendar. Each month was devoted to a different part of the Community Services 93 Department, special events were populated on the calendar, and at the end was the list of 94 accomplishments and things the department had worked on. The calendar went away during 95 COVID but it might be brought back. 96 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims invited the Chair and Director O’Kane to suggest three things 97 she might mention from the dais to highlight some of the accomplishments over the past year. 98 Director O’Kane recommended the Chair, Vice Chair, or staff could point out things during the 99 discussion for Council Member Lythcott-Haims to share with the full Council. 100 NO ACTION 101 3. Review and Update Current Priorities 102 Chair Freeman reviewed the PRC’s purpose and duties. 103 Commissioner Brown suggested reevaluating if ad hoc committees were fitting the legal 104 definition of an ad hoc when they addressed multiyear projects because she thought they more 105 fit the definition of a standing committee that was subject to the Brown Act. Commissioner 106 Brown noted a lot of the ad hoc committees did not report back to the full Commission within 107 the last year. Commissioner Brown believed liaisons may feel the need to take action as projects 108 come up but did not have a specified work plan to do so. 109 Vice Chair Greenfield believed they fit the ad hoc definition but it was important to develop the 110 ad hoc with a specific focus and goal targeted for typically a one-year period. Vice Chair 111 Greenfield agreed the ad hoc committees should present to the Commission more often. 112 Commission discussion ensued. Ad hoc reports present information to the Commission but it is 113 not agendized for discussion. One suggestion was to have a regularly agendized item for each ad 114 hoc committee to provide an update, every quarter or at least twice a year, to allow the 115 Commission to have a discussion and for the public to provide comments. 116 Commissioner Brown asked staff to ask the City Attorney’s Office about ad hoc committees 117 because she did not want the PRC’s work to be challenged for not following the proper process. 118 Commissioner Brown used the Recreation Wellness Center as an example of a multiyear project, Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 7 of 351 119 while you can have a specific goal for the year, if the same goal was carrying over from year to 120 year, she thought it was no longer an ad hoc committee and therefore those meetings should be 121 open to the public. 122 Chair Freeman stated the majority of the ad hoc committees should be close to 80 to 90 percent 123 done by Month 10 or 11. Commissioner Kleinhaus pointed out there had been a lot of changes 124 with staff and it delayed some of the ad hoc committee’s work. 125 Commissioner Cribbs recalled a couple years ago the liaison and ad hoc reports were on the 126 agenda. 127 Director Kristen O’Kane noted the Master Plan Review ad hoc reviewed the Master Plan with 128 staff but it did not have an end date or a primary goal, so it probably did not fit the ad hoc 129 definition and it needed an agenda if it was a standing committee. Director O’Kane did not 130 believe it was a good use of commissioner and staff time when ad hoc committees get too much 131 into operations within the Community Services Department without a specific task the ad hoc 132 was trying to accomplish. 133 Chair Freeman wondered if the Playing Fields and Racquet Courts Ad Hoc Committee should be 134 divided. Vice Chair Greenfield stated it was important to have a clearly defined task for the ad 135 hoc specified in the work plan because it should not be open for all things related to playing 136 fields and racquet courts, otherwise it was a standing committee. 137 After establishing the ad hoc duties, Director O’Kane recommended those committees meet 138 separately with staff to determine particular tasks as well as what were the outcomes and when 139 they would be completed. 140 Chair Freeman agreed with Vice Chair Greenfield’s suggestion for ad hoc committees to present 141 a status update to the Commission on an agendized item at least every six months to allow for 142 Commission discussion and community feedback. Vice Chair Greenfield recommended having 143 three agenda items per meeting as he recalled previous PRC meetings with two agenda items, 144 which would have been an opportunity to add an item for ad hoc status updates. Vice Chair 145 Greenfield stated that shuffling the commissioners on ad hoc committees was a best practice. 146 In reply to Commissioner Cribbs inquiring if there was a document about serving all the 147 community and providing a diversity of programs, she was directed to the Parks, Trails, Open 148 Space, and Recreation Master Plan as well as the City Master Plan. Director O’Kane stated the 149 Accessibility and Inclusion Coordinator was tasked with ensuring people had access to our 150 programs and was working with the Magical Bridge Foundation. Director O’Kane did not know 151 the timing but the Accessibility and Inclusion Coordinator could do a presentation to the PRC 152 once she develops the plan, and the plan will be added to the PRC’s roadmap documents. 153 Chair Freeman read the list of 2025 City Council Priorities: (1) Implementing housing strategies 154 for social and economic balance; (2) climate action and adaptation, and natural environment 155 protection; (3) economic development and retail vibrancy; and (4) public safety, wellness and 156 belonging. Vice Chair Greenfield noted Council Priorities 2 and 4 applied to the PRC’s purview. 157 Council Member Lythcott-Haims explained the difference between last year’s wording and this 158 year. Climate change was changed to climate action because the Council wanted to take action 159 and adapt to climate change as well as focus on environmental protection. Safety was changed Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 8 of 351 160 to public safety to include police, fire, and emergency operations; wellness referred to being 161 proactive about mental and physical health. 162 Commissioner Brown believed all four Council priorities were pertinent to the PRC and should 163 be kept in mind as the PRC selected its new priorities. Chair Freeman and Commissioner Wei 164 agreed. Vice Chair Greenfield did not believe the PRC had purview regarding housing strategies 165 and economic development. Director O’Kane stated Council Priorities 2 and 4 were where the 166 PRC was most involved but agreed the CSD’s and PRC’s work supported Council Priorities 1 and 167 3. For Priority 3, the Special Events Work Plan identified places to hold special events to increase 168 economic vitality in certain areas of the city. For Priority 1, as housing strategies were 169 implemented, for example the San Antonio Area Plan, it was important for the PRC to be 170 involved in ensuring there were local parks for people to walk to. 171 Chair Freeman invited discussion on whether the current PRC priorities were in alignment with 172 staff and Council priorities. 173 Last year’s PRC Priority 1: Optimize resources to offer diverse recreation opportunities, and 174 promote community health and wellness. Commissioner Kleinhaus suggested adding 175 “belonging” to PRC Priority 1 to match Council’s Priority, and asked if “optimize resources” was 176 applicable. Vice Chair Greenfield thought “optimize resources” was helpful in recognizing that 177 resources were limited. Chair Freeman felt “optimize resources” implied the PRC was working 178 with staff. Vice Chair Greenfield suggested changing “health and wellness” to “wellness and 179 belonging.” To avoid “optimize resources” from sounding too operational, Commissioner Brown 180 was in favor of changing Priority 1 to: Promote community health, wellness, and belonging 181 through diverse recreation opportunities. Following the Council’s lead, Vice Chair Greenfield 182 suggested omitting “health” since it was part of wellness. Commissioner Cribbs preferred 183 keeping “health”. Commissioner Kleinhaus was okay with keeping “health” because it was not 184 contradictory. 185 Last year’s PRC Priority 2: Advance equity, access, and inclusion for programs, parks, and open 186 space. The Commission was in consensus with keeping PRC Priority 2. 187 Last year’s PRC Priority 3: Enhance biodiversity, environmental sustainability, and climate 188 change resilience. Commissioner Kleinhaus felt the PRC’s work was more related to climate 189 change adaptation instead of resilience, for example the horizontal levee was an adaptation the 190 PRC looked at but it was not resilience. Commissioner Wei suggested “climate action and 191 adaptation” and gave an example of dark skies being an action taken by the PRC to support the 192 Council’s Priority. Chair Freeman, Vice Chair Greenfield, and Commissioner Kleinhaus stated 193 climate action was not within the PRC’s purview. Commissioner Wei suggested “adaptation and 194 resilience.” Commissioner Kleinhaus mentioned adaptation was something you do and resilience 195 provided flexibility, so she was okay with choosing one or both. 196 The PRC took a five-minute break. 197 Sarah Robustelli, Community Services Department Division Manager, stated Staff Priorities: 198 Proposed FY26 CIPs included the turf study (award of the contract was scheduled for the April 199 21 City Council meeting), finalizing the long-term partnership agreement with First Tee, 200 continuing to offer diverse programs to meet and enhance the needs of the community, 201 compliance with mitigation requirements, and executing CIPs. Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 9 of 351 202 Chair Freeman asked for the status of First Tee’s long-term partnership agreement. Manager 203 Robustelli believed that staff planned to provide a golf update in May. An interim agreement 204 was in place while the terms are finalized for the long-term partnership agreement. 205 Commissioner Cribbs asked if “compliance with mitigation requirements” was specific to golf. 206 Commissioner Kleinhaus said it included the floodgate. Manager Robustelli noted another 207 example was additional plantings after the removal of eucalyptus at Esther Clark. 208 Manager Robustelli stated staff recruitments included an Assistant Director for Open Space, 209 Parks, and Golf as well as hiring hourly staff for summer recreation programs. The new 210 Recreation Coordinator will start in early May. Upcoming recruitments include the Public Works 211 Coordinator, a Park Ranger for Baylands, and a Parks Maintenance person. Staffing priorities 212 included staff retention, professional development, and succession planning. 213 In reply to Commissioner Kleinhaus asking if the Public Works Coordinator worked for both 214 departments, Manager Robustelli answered no. It was Jeanette Serna’s role, who worked in the 215 Parks office and assisted with reoccurring CIPs and other projects, was project manager for the 216 Cameron Park playground replacement project and court resurfacing, and assisted with 217 procurement. 218 Commissioner Kleinhaus noted there were not many mitigation requirements and she 219 wondered how we avoid accidents or incidents. Manager Robustelli said staff was building 220 interdepartmental relationships and having ongoing meetings, for example meeting monthly 221 with the Public Works Engineering team. Manager Robustelli stated it was project dependent, 222 such as last month’s update on the Arastradero project with Utilities and the joint intercepting 223 sewer project discussed the month before. Mike Warner and Manager Robustelli are aware of 224 the type of work being conducted, are invited to those meetings, and have been working in 225 coordination with the respective department. 226 Manager Robustelli announced that Jeanette Serna accepted the Field Inspector position. 227 Commissioner Wei inquired if the Public Works Coordinator will work with the Transportation 228 Department on the Traffic Garden. Director O’Kane explained that the Public Works Coordinator 229 position supported capital improvement projects. Vice Chair Greenfield reminded the 230 Commission that the PRC was not involved operationally but staff was presenting this 231 information so the Commission had an understanding of staff’s resources. Manager Robustelli 232 stated Peter Jensen in Public Works Engineering left the City. Director O’Kane noted Public 233 Works Engineering was balancing multiple projects, not just for CSD but also the Public Safety 234 Building, roads, and park restrooms. Manager Robustelli mentioned that staff met with Public 235 Works on the five-year plan and the proposal was in alignment with all departments. 236 Commissioner Cribbs asked about the Foothills Boronda Lake dock replacement. Manager 237 Robustelli replied it was scheduled for this year and rolled over to next year. 238 Vice Chair Greenfield asked what improvements will be made to Ramos Park. Manager 239 Robustelli believed it was site amenities. The playground opened two days ago. 240 Commissioner Cribbs asked about starting blocks for the pool and pool lengthening. Manager 241 Robustelli thought starting blocks were in the five-year proposed plan. Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 10 of 351 242 Vice Chair Greenfield wanted to know if there was opportunity for review and input to the 243 eucalyptus tree removal plan regarding which trees will be removed and replanted. Manager 244 Robustelli knew trees had been identified in Foothills, Arastradero, and Esther Clark but she will 245 check with the Urban Forestry team and respond back to Vice Chair Greenfield. Esther Clark was 246 completed this fiscal year but staff was waiting to hear back about a grant they were seeking. 247 Director O’Kane thought CSD was taking the lead on this effort but it was in alignment with Fire 248 and Urban Forestry. 249 Commissioner Kleinhaus mentioned that trees were identified to be removed in Arastradero 250 and Foothills with some level of mitigation but eucalyptus removal was exempt from CEQA 251 because of fire concerns. Commissioner Kleinhaus heard that neighbors were upset once they 252 realized many large trees were removed from Esther Clark. Grass Roots Ecology was working on 253 planting trees. One of the neighbors offered to provide water for trees if the City chose to plant 254 trees. Manager Robustelli stated an Assistant Ranger was taking care of the trees. Staff worked 255 with Grass Roots Ecology to plant some seedlings. Manager Robustelli will provide updates to 256 the PRC as this effort progresses. 257 In looking at the list of proposed CIPs for FY26, Councilmember Lythcott-Haims noted they were 258 only for parks but she did not see any for recreation, such as for the Cubberley Community 259 Center. Manager Robustelli explained that CIPs for the arts and sciences were not captured on 260 the slide as they were not under the PRC’s purview. Director O’Kane acknowledged the 261 Cubberley Community Center and Lucie Stern Community Center roof replacement should have 262 been included. 263 Commissioner Kleinhaus asked how the PRC could look at non-CIP enhancement projects. The 264 Commission will discuss this further in the ad hoc agenda item. 265 NO ACTION 266 4. Assign Parks and Recreation Commission Ad Hoc Committee and Liaison Roles 267 Vice Chair Greenfield suggested switching to Item 5. 268 5. Review and Update Current Work Plan 269 Project/Goal 1: Master Plan. Chair Freeman asked if there should be a Master Plan Ad Hoc. 270 Director O’Kane said maybe staff could provide a quarterly update to the Commission on 271 projects and efforts including Cubberley, inclusion, and accessibility. Vice Chair Greenfield 272 wondered if it was staff work or if the Commission had a role. Director O’Kane wanted a way for 273 the Commission to stay involved without having an ad hoc. Vice Chair Greenfield pointed out 274 that the Master Plan update was a major task, so he did not know how it would get done 275 without an ad hoc. The ad hoc committee’s goal for the year was to work on a portion of the 276 Master Plan. Commissioner Cribbs recalled the Master Plan was approved in 2017 and the ad 277 hoc was for the Commission and staff to work together regularly to determine adherence to the 278 Master Plan and making additions to it. In reply to Commissioner Wei wondering if there was an 279 expectation for publishing another version of the Master Plan, Commissioner Kleinhaus 280 answered no. Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 11 of 351 281 Commissioner Brown, who has been on the Master Plan Ad Hoc since it started, thought that 282 process for updating the Master Plan was a larger initiative and would not be accomplished 283 within one year. Commissioner Brown stated that the Master Plan Ad Hoc had not provided 284 many reports because staff was doing a lot of things that were in the Master Plan, a lot of them 285 were best practices, and some things were meant for other departments to do. Commissioner 286 Brown suggested a CIP-focused ad hoc and the Master Plan could be embedded in the other ad 287 hoc committees. Vice Chair Greenfield commented the Master Plan Ad Hoc was created because 288 the Parks Master Plan stated the Plan should be reviewed every five years. Commissioner 289 Kleinhaus noted it takes a lot of staff work to look at the Master Plan but realized staff was busy 290 and short-staffed; therefore, the PRC could help staff. The Master Plan needed to be updated to 291 address things the community wanted, for example the skate park and pickleball. Vice Chair 292 Greenfield was comfortable with removing the Master Plan Ad Hoc but wanted to know the 293 process going forward. Director O’Kane proposed staff agendize a review of the Master Plan 294 with the full Commission. 295 Vice Chair Greenfield inquired if the Master Plan Ad Hoc will be converted to a CIP Review Ad 296 Hoc to review the annual CIP with staff before it goes to the Commission for presentation. 297 Director O’Kane thought that would be appropriate because it is on an annual cycle with the 298 budget review. Sarah Robustelli, Community Services Department Division Manager, agreed. 299 The Commission was in consensus on making no changes to Project/Goal 2 Park Dedication 300 FY25. 301 Project/Goal 3 Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan (BCCP) Update: Commissioner 302 Kleinhaus stated the ad hoc could continue. The BCCP was done in 2017. Since then, there have 303 been legislative changes. Vice Chair Greenfield said the ad hoc needed to follow up with staff to 304 define specific tasks and report a status update to the Commission. 305 Project/Goal 4 Nature Preserve Access Policy: Vice Chair Greenfield thought the ad hoc needed 306 to present a discussion item to the Commission on policy change recommendation followed by 307 an action item to allow proper time for community review. Manager Robustelli mentioned that 308 staff will be presenting in less than two weeks. The next meeting will discuss the PABAC work to 309 be done and recall the history of the ad hoc committee’s work over the years. The Commission 310 agreed to keep the Nature Preserve Access Policy Ad Hoc. 311 Project/Goal 5 Recreation Wellness Center: Chair Freeman asked if this ad hoc was needed. The 312 purpose of the ad hoc was the Council’s request to look at the feasibility of having a gym or 313 wellness center. Commissioner Cribbs believed they had raised the level of visibility about the 314 need for a City Health and Wellness Center. For the Cubberley Center to be successful, 315 Commissioner Cribbs opined the bond issue required the whole community to be engaged and 316 understand the need for a community center to promote health and wellness. Chair Freeman 317 wondered if it should change from an ad hoc to a liaison. Before disbanding, Vice Chair 318 Greenfield said the PRC needed a presentation from the ad hoc on the work the ad hoc has 319 done. If the goals of the work plan have been met, then the ad hoc should be closed. Director 320 O’Kane noted the task for Project/Goal 5 was to facilitate progress, which was too vague. Vice 321 Chair Greenfield mentioned the ad hoc assignments could be clarified at the May meeting when 322 discussing the work plan. Director O’Kane stated there was no need for an ad hoc if a specific Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 12 of 351 323 task cannot be identified. Friends of Cubberley could present to the Commission. Manager 324 Robustelli remarked that staff will provide Cubberley updates to the PRC several times this year. 325 The Commission agreed to keep the Cubberley liaison and ad hoc for the time being. The ad hoc 326 committee’s presentation to the Commission will provide an opportunity for discussion and 327 public comment, at which time the PRC will decide keeping or closing the ad hoc. 328 Project/Goal 6 Playing Fields and Racquet Sports: Mr. Howard thought Playing Fields should be a 329 separate ad hoc because it had a specific goal to discuss turf versus grass and had different staff 330 than the ones addressing the racquet policy, and it was appropriate to continue an ad hoc on 331 racquet courts for ongoing conversations about policy change. Vice Chair Greenfield noted a 332 single policy document governed playing fields and racquet sports, which likely why they were 333 part of the same ad hoc. Commissioner Kleinhaus asked about the duration of the turf study, if 334 approved by Council. Manager Robustelli replied the deliverable is in August. Commissioner 335 Cribbs inquired if the scope of the RFP addressed the PRC’s suggested questions about the 336 conversion to grass fields and the amount of additional land needed to satisfy the users, the 337 cost, and the environmental impacts. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims offered to share Exhibit A 338 of her City Council packet where it described the scope of services the turf study would 339 encompass. 340 Discussion ensued on the names for the two ad hoc committees. Manager Robustelli noted 341 there was a lot for a Playing Fields Ad Hoc to address because there was a large Mayfield capital 342 project, the turf study, and El Camino will be based on the findings from the turf study. 343 Commissioner Cribbs pointed out that a Turf Replacement Ad Hoc would not include other 344 things such as soccer ball policies. The Commission reached a consensus to have a Playing Field 345 Study Ad Hoc and Racquet Courts Policy Ad Hoc. 346 The Commission agreed to keep the Middle School Athletics Ad Hoc. 347 Commissioner Kleinhaus wanted park renovation projects to have a component of natural 348 ecosystem restoration such as putting a native flower garden somewhere in the park. 349 Commissioner Kleinhaus wondered if it could be addressed by the CIP Review Ad Hoc or what 350 was the best approach for the PRC to provide input on having more nature in parks and avoid 351 the pushback for turf at Boulware Park. Commissioner Kleinhaus wanted to know the best way 352 to address how maintenance people were engaged because she observed a lot of work being 353 done in parks that maybe was not needed and, as a result, would enhance the ecological value 354 and save money. Manager Robustelli pointed out that all CIP projects had community outreach 355 and engagement. Manager Robustelli thought staff had internal discussions about preventing 356 what happened with Boulware. 357 Commissioner Brown commented that commissioners and the community had opportunity to 358 opine and provide input when the PRC saw the plan for Boulware. For example, the plan said 359 turf, so the question could have been raised as to what kind of turf and query the community on 360 the type of turf they wanted. Commissioner Brown did not know if it rose to a policy level where 361 a specific ad hoc was needed to address the operations or how park maintenance was done 362 because that should be addressed at the operational staff level; however, as interested 363 members of the PRC and users of parks, commissioners can provide input and feedback to staff 364 if staff felt it was helpful. Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 13 of 351 365 Commissioner Kleinhaus thought PRC input was necessary because the public may not know 366 they could ask about the type of turf or that there was a possibility for plastic turf to be in a play 367 area where kids could fall on it. Commissioner Kleinhaus opined one of the largest reasons we 368 had ecologically limited parks was due to maintenance, which could be addressed through a 369 policy change. Commissioner Kleinhaus would like Palo Alto to do something similar as to what 370 had been successfully done on Google Campus. Google’s guidelines for landscaping and park 371 maintenance resulted in plantings that attracted monarch butterflies. Commissioner Kleinhaus 372 thought an ad hoc was needed to work with staff to develop guidelines to implement changes. 373 Commissioner Kleinhaus knew of documents that provided guidance on how to bring nature 374 into a city, and she recommended starting with parks going through a renovation. Commissioner 375 Kleinhaus mentioned the City of Mountain View had a biodiversity strategy plan for their biggest 376 parks but was developing a citywide plan to include parks, City properties, and street trees. Vice 377 Chair Greenfield asked how the PRC could work with staff to further this goal, possibly a liaison 378 to preview park update plans before they were presented to the PRC. Director O’Kane will give it 379 some thought before providing a response. 380 Commissioner Wei wondered if it was possible to have a Youth Accessibility to Nature Ad Hoc to 381 help staff communicate with the Transportation Department about resuming shuttle service to 382 the park or have a multidepartment coordinator. Commissioner Wei thought some of the 383 budget could come from the Transportation Department. This topic was important to 384 Commissioner Brown and she was interested in an ad hoc; however, she cautioned her fellow 385 commissioners that liaisons and ad hoc committees should not direct staff to do or not do 386 something, such as changing the way parks are maintained. Commissioners should look at policy 387 alternatives. For example, if the PRC had an interest in exploring accessibility policy alternatives, 388 the goal of the ad hoc should be to look at the shuttle and other options, and bring the findings 389 back to the PRC for consideration but not starting with the end goal of a shuttle. 390 Director O’Kane agreed with Commissioner Brown’s comments. The Transportation Department 391 had to be included and it would take significant resources to explore and implement but if 392 accessibility to Foothills was an issue the Commission wanted to explore, an ad hoc could review 393 options and ultimately present a proposal to the Council. Director O’Kane noted there were 394 ways for people to access Foothills Park for free or reduced rates. Commissioner Wei wanted to 395 address teen mental health by getting teenagers to nature when they do not have a driver’s 396 license or car and seniors would benefit from a shuttle as well. Director O’Kane pointed out that 397 the Baylands Nature Preserve was more accessible and had a bike path. Commissioner Wei 398 understood the taxi vendor was being renewed. Commissioner Wei has heard that the majority 399 of teens preferred the shuttle over the taxi because of the social aspect. Commissioner Wei 400 suggested the PRC could consider helping the Youth Council visit Foothills Park once a month or 401 once a quarter. 402 Commissioner Kleinhaus thought the shuttle was in the Park Master Plan or General Plan and 403 she recalled other things being mentioned previously such as the Junior Ranger programs but 404 the main problems were resources and difficulty in execution. Commissioner Kleinhaus liked 405 Vice Chair Greenfield’s idea about having a liaison look at park plans before they are presented 406 to the full Commission. Commissioner Kleinhaus believed maintenance of parks was a policy 407 issue. Commissioner Kleinhaus has seen kids playing with sticks and jumping in piles of leaves in 408 our parks because they have the need to touch but parks were cleaned to be almost devoid of 409 nature. Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 14 of 351 410 NO ACTION 411 4. Assign Parks and Recreation Commission Ad Hoc Committee and Liaison Roles 412 Commissioner Wei asked if there was a Park Accessibility Ad Hoc. Vice Chair Greenfield 413 expressed his concern about staff resources and was hesitant to advocate creating a new ad hoc 414 until one or two other ad hoc committees finish. There were eight ad hoc committees but two 415 were wrapping up, the Recreation Wellness Center and Access Policy. Vice Chair Greenfield 416 suggested tabling this discussion until May when the work plan is reviewed to allow time for the 417 two ad hoc committees to finish and for staff to consider resources. Director Kristen O’Kane 418 mentioned there were a lot of ad hoc committees and they take significant staff time. 419 Commissioner Wei suggested the Nature Preserve Access Policy could look into youth access to 420 nature. Vice Chair Greenfield answered no because it was not part of the work plan for that ad 421 hoc. Vice Chair Greenfield suggested removing “Study” from Playing Field Study Ad Hoc. 422 List of PRC Ad Hoc Committees for FY26: 423 Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan Ad Hoc Members: Vice Chair Greenfield, 424 Commissioners Kleinhaus and Wei. 425 Nature Preserve Access Policy Ad Hoc was almost done. Members: Chair Freeman, Vice Chair 426 Greenfield, and Commissioner Kleinhaus. Staff liaison: Manager Sarah Robustelli. 427 CIP Review Ad Hoc Members: Chair Freeman, Commissioners Brown and Kleinhaus. 428 Park Dedication FY26 Ad Hoc Members: Chair Freeman and Vice Chair Greenfield. Staff liaison: 429 Director O’Kane. 430 Playing Field Ad Hoc Members: Vice Chair Greenfield and Commissioner Wei. 431 Racquet Court Policy Ad Hoc Members: Chair Freeman, Commissioners Cribbs and Wei. Staff 432 liaisons: Adam Howard/Mark Ribeiro. 433 Recreation Wellness Center Ad Hoc was wrapping up. Members: Chair Freeman, Commissioners 434 Cribbs and Deng. Staff liaison: Director O’Kane. 435 Middle School Athletics Ad Hoc will wrap up by October or November. Members: 436 Commissioners Brown, Cribbs, and Deng. Staff liaison: Adam Howard. 437 Liaisons: 438 Aquatics liaison: Commissioner Brown. Staff contact: Sharon Eva. 439 Community Gardens liaison: Chair Freeman. 440 Cubberley liaison: Chair Freeman and Commissioner Cribbs. Staff contact: Director O’Kane. The 441 PRC will have a discussion in May to decide if an ad hoc is needed. Commissioner Cribbs was in 442 favor of an ad hoc. Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 12 Packet Pg. 15 of 351 443 Dog Parks liaison: Commissioners Brown and Cribbs. Staff contact: Manager Robustelli. 444 Vice Chair Greenfield suggested asking Commissioner Deng which liaison role she wanted. 445 Funding Partners liaison: Commissioners Brown and Cribbs. Staff contact: Adam Howard. 446 Golf/First Tee liaison: Chair Freeman and Commissioner Cribbs. Staff contact: Lam Do. 447 OpenSpace Preserves liaison: Vice Chair Greenfield and Commissioner Kleinhaus. 448 PAUSD/City liaison: Chair Freeman. Staff contact: Director O’Kane. Director O’Kane noted this 449 group did not meet for a while but was now meeting at 7 PM. Commissioner Cribbs asked how 450 the Commission could highlight the facilities in schools and the City. Director O’Kane said 451 PAUSD/City was created with that intention. Commissioner Kleinhaus commented that most of 452 the school grounds in Mountain View used to serve as parks for the community but the City of 453 Mountain View decided to enclose them with a fence for safety. Sunnyvale had opposition to a 454 similar decision about some of their parks. Therefore, Commissioner Kleinhaus urged being 455 careful to avoid the issues in Mountain View and Sunnyvale, which also made a huge difference 456 in elections. Vice Chair Greenfield explained the liaison role was created for a Commission 457 Member to attend monthly meetings and report back to the Commission. Director O’Kane will 458 notify Chair Freeman if it was necessary for him to attend a PAUSD/City meeting, depending on 459 the agenda. 460 Safe Routes liaison: Vice Chair Greenfield. Staff contact: Rose Mesterhazy. 461 Skate Park liaison: Commissioners Cribbs and Wei. Staff contact: Manager Robustelli. 462 Urban Forestry liaison: Vice Chair Greenfield and Commissioner Kleinhaus. Staff contact: Peter 463 Gollinger. 464 Youth liaison: Commissioners Deng and Wei. Staff contact: Adam Howard. 465 Commissioner Kleinhaus offered to be a Parks Update liaison. Sarah Robustelli, Community 466 Services Department Division Manager, asked how Parks Update was different than CIP Review. 467 Commissioner Kleinhaus answered CIP was only once a year. Vice Chair Greenfield commented 468 that capital projects for the renovation of parks and playgrounds come to the Commission for 469 review. A Parks Update liaison would provide input to staff before a project comes to the full 470 Commission. Commissioner Kleinhaus wanted to enhance native ecosystems when planning 471 new parks. Manager Robustelli stated it would fall under CIP Review and she was concerned 472 about adding another commissioner to the three commissioners on CIP Review. Director O’Kane 473 said CIP Review looked at what was planned for the next budget cycle. 474 Commissioner Brown recalled the Sustainability liaison was eliminated one or two years ago 475 because of difficulty in defining the role. Instead of reviewing every park improvement before it 476 comes to the Commission, Commissioner Brown suggested having a Biodiversity liaison that 477 would make sure biodiversity existed in parks and other facilities. Commissioner Kleinhaus 478 recommended the liaison role address sustainability features and biodiversity. The Commission 479 agreed to have Commissioners Kleinhaus and Wei serve as Sustainability and Biodiversity 480 Liaison. Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 13 Packet Pg. 16 of 351 481 MOTION: Vice Chair Freeman, seconded by Commissioner Cribbs, to adopt the ad hoc 482 committees and assignments, and liaison roles and assignments as listed. 483 MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1 (Deng absent) 484 COMMISSIONER/BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE AGENDA 485 ITEMS 486 None 487 ADJOURNMENT 488 Meeting was adjourned at 4:00 PM. Item 1 Attachment A - April 11, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 14 Packet Pg. 17 of 351 1 MINUTES 2 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION 3 REGULAR MEETING 4 April 22, 2025 5 In-Person & Virtual Conference 6 Palo Alto, California 7 8 Commissioners Present In Person: Freeman, Cribbs, Greenfield, Kleinhaus, Wei, Deng (Arrived at 7:04 9 p.m.) 10 Commissioners Present Virtually: None 11 Commissioners Absent: Brown 12 Others Present: Councilmember Lythcott-Haims 13 Staff Present: Kristen O’Kane, Sarah Robustelli, Amanda Deml, Adam Howard, Mahealani Ah Yun 14 CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL 15 Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. 16 Chair Freeman welcomed all to the meeting. 17 The clerk called roll and declared 5 were present. 18 PUBLIC COMMENT 19 Roger S., a founder of Friends of the Palo Alto Parks, complimented Council for attending the Tall Tree 20 Award. The 10th anniversary of Magical Bridge occurred on April 21. He read what he had discussed with 21 Council last night. An action plan for the old Magical Bridge bathroom has been developed, and he 22 hoped the bathroom will be open by July 4. 23 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 24 1. Approval of Draft Minutes from the March 25, 2025, Parks and Recreation Commission 25 Regular meeting 26 MOTION: Commissioner Cribbs moved, seconded by Vice Chair Greenfield to approve the minutes. 27 MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1, Brown Absent 28 AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS 29 There were no agenda changes or deletions. 30 CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS 31 2. Council Liaison Report (5 min) 32 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims summarized what Council has been dealing with since April 11. On April 33 14, the next stages for a downtown parking garage at Hamilton and Waverly and the next stages for 10 Item 1 Attachment B - April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 15 Packet Pg. 18 of 351 34 townhomes at 70 Encino was approved. They looked at a Fair Chance Housing Ordinance, which she 35 detailed. Council had asked to take an additional look at it, so no decisions have been made. On April 21, 36 a turf study for what should replace the existing field at El Camino Park was approved. There was a lot of 37 debate over artificial turf and natural grass. Staff will engage with a consultant to help understand the 38 latest technology, benefits, and consequences of different types of turf and grass. There had been an 39 update on Cubberley, and she looked forward to hearing from the PRC about Cubberley at this meeting. 40 PUBLIC COMMENT 41 There were no requests to speak. 42 3. Department Report (20 Minutes) 43 Sarah Robustelli, Division Manager, supplied slides. The anniversary of Magical Bridge that took place on 44 April 19. Upcoming events included Earth Day on April 20 and the May Fete Parade and Fair on May 3. 45 Spring swim lessons began about a month ago. There is a projects page for Cubberley, and scanning the 46 QR code will allow folks to receive updates via email. There was a turf study last night, which will focus 47 on El Camino Park. Council is scheduled to address the construction for the Stanford Palo Alto 48 community playing fields in June. Commissioner Kleinhaus’ photos of the spring blooms at Foothills 49 Nature Preserve were shared. The Byxbee Park restrooms have been refreshed. The new dog park at 50 Mitchell Park is substantially complete. However, new updates had taken place on April 21 and 22. 51 Boulware park is partially open, and she discussed the amenities. It is anticipated that the playground 52 will open later this week, and updates will likely be provided next month. Ramos Park opened a few 53 weeks ago. 54 Vice Chair Greenfield asked if ribbon cutting ceremonies are done for park re-openings. He was not 55 implying that they should or should not be done. He suggested that the new parks be on the 56 destinations for Bike Palo Alto. 57 Ms. Robustelli answered that they have been having discussions with the Public Works Engineering team 58 about ribbon cuttings but none are scheduled. A dedication for Fred Eyerly Tower Well Park is being 59 considered, and staff will provide an update. New parks being on the destinations for Bike Palo Alto is a 60 great idea. 61 Chair Freeman stated that a lot of good work has been happening in the background but the public 62 needs to know about the good job with Ramos Park, Mitchell Park Dog Park, and Byxbee Park. 63 Commissioner Cribbs noted that the May Fete parade is known as the oldest and largest children’s 64 parade in Northern California. She asked if there is an update on First Tee. 65 Ms. Robustelli replied that the annual golf update is planned for May and details will be provided as it 66 relates to First Tee. 67 Commissioner Deng questioned when the Cubberley track and field bathroom will open. 68 Ms. Robustelli anticipated that the Cubberley track and field bathrooms will open next month. It had 69 been estimated for mid-May. 70 Commissioner Kleinhaus asked what happened following the loss of trees at Ramos Park, if the trees 71 were replaced. Item 1 Attachment B - April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 16 Packet Pg. 19 of 351 72 Ms. Robustelli responded that she has to consult with Urban Forestry regarding the trees at Ramos Park 73 and information will be returned to the Commission. 74 Commissioner Wei requested information on the turf study. 75 Kristen O’Kane, Community Service Director, responded that the Council approved a contract for a 76 consultant to do the turf study. Staff needs to revise the scope. Council will be presented with a 77 construction contact in June to approve the replacement of the turf at the Mayfield playing fields, which 78 should be replaced late summer or early fall. 79 Chair Freeman queried if the number of participants for swim lessons has grown from previous years. 80 Ms. Robustelli responded that Tim Sheeper believed there has been an increase because spring lessons 81 started earlier. 82 Commissioner Kleinhaus asked if the brighter lights at the Byxbee restrooms are indoor or outdoor. 83 Ms. Robustelli answered that the brighter lights are indoor. 84 BUSINESS ITEMS 85 4. Palo Alto Pickleball Club Informational Update 86 Ron Gentile, Palo Alto Pickleball Club Member, displayed slides related to the role of pickleball in 87 addressing community issues, pickleball demand at Mithcell Park overwhelming the resources, and a 88 proposal to extend the partnership going forward. Pickleball is growing and provides benefits. He 89 discussed the work of PAPC. Pickleball at Mitchell Park is often 2 or 3 times court capacity. At the end of 90 2024, there were 1,400 members, and it is growing 25 percent a year with zero marketing. There are 91 long wait times to play, which is starting to hit a saturation point. The sport provides physical, mental 92 health, and social benefits. There is a wide range of youth programs. There are difficult tradeoffs due to 93 demand. It is not possible to support public open play and community events at Mitchell Park. He 94 proposed expanding capacity at Mitchell Park. He wants to investigate adding 8 new pickleball courts, 95 which PAPC and the benefactor are willing to pay for, and there will be no financial impact to the City. 96 PAPC cleaned and maintained the courts. There will be no environmental impact with resurfacing an 97 area. Expanding pickleball will help Council with their goals of wellbeing and community belonging. 98 PAPB is grateful for the partnership, and they want to work together to investigate expanding pickleball. 99 PUBLIC COMMENT 100 There were no requests to speak. 101 Commissioner Wei was considering joining PAPC. She wondered how the PRC could provide more 102 support. 103 Mr. Gentile wanted to act on adding courts quickly because they are far over capacity. 104 PUBLIC COMMENT 105 Young commented that adding courts had to come at the expense of someone. There is a lack of 106 parking. He suggested building a bigger pickleball center east of 101 or in an industrial area. He did not 107 want tennis courts to be converted to pickleball courts. Item 1 Attachment B - April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 17 Packet Pg. 20 of 351 108 Commissioner Kleinhaus fund pickleball to be a wonderful community and resource. The expansion is 109 not part of the notification. She did not know what was expected of the PRC. 110 Chair Freeman remarked that there is nothing to vote on, that it is primarily an informational item. 111 Commissioner Cribbs recognized PAPC for what has been created in the community. More space is 112 needed, and folks will work together for that to happen in the near future. Pickleball will continue to 113 grow. 114 Chair Freeman inquired if Mr. Gentile has any background on pickleball in other communities, such as 115 Menlo Park, etc. 116 Mr. Gentile stated that other communities are building courts but the demand is overwhelming and 117 they cannot keep up and they cannot be relied on to close the gap. PAPC tries to work with clubs in 118 different cities to educate them. 119 Vice Chair Greenfield stated that PAPC has a fantastic story, which benefits the community in many 120 ways. He asked if it is appropriate to discuss the offer made by PAPC and potential implications. 121 Kristen O’Kane, Community Service Director, stated it is appropriate to discuss that. 122 Vice Chair Greenfield thanked PAPC for the offer to fund the construction of new courts. He questioned 123 where the courts would be located. Parking is a concern. He asked what percentage of players drove, 124 did not drive, or carpooled to Mitchell Park. Pickleball growth will not stop any time soon, which 125 highlights the need for bigger-picture planning and multiyear projections in terms of capacity for the 126 courts, infrastructure, etc. He questioned if an additional Palo Alto pickleball hub should be considered. 127 He asked if there will be maintenance expenses to the City. He was also concerned about staff having 128 the capacity to manage this. 129 Adam Howard, Senior Resources Manager, stated that nothing about the proposal will be simple and 130 that a lot needs to go into every decision made around the topic. There are short- and long-term 131 approaches, which he was not ready to speak to. 132 Commissioner Kleinhaus supported Vice Chair Greenfield’s comments. She is aware of the benefits of 133 pickleball. She is not comfortable with the notification, as the topic is not notified as a discussion of 134 expansion. The proposal mentions expanding in Mitchell Park, and many other uses there need to be 135 considered. It is important to discuss alternatives to manage demand, other than space, such as 136 reservation systems. Noise is a concern, and she wanted consideration to be given to the affordable 137 housing project being built within 300-400 feet of the pickleball courts. She wanted more information 138 before discussing it. 139 PUBLIC COMMENT 140 Elleen B., a member of PAPC, commented that she had attended events at the pickleball courts that she 141 never would have done without knowing people at PAPC. She asked what study or information is 142 needed and if it is something the club can provide, what the timeline and the process will be, and what 143 the next step is. Item 1 Attachment B - April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 18 Packet Pg. 21 of 351 144 Chair Freeman responded that studies or information needed is not a point of discussion, so the 145 question cannot be answered. There is no timeline. This meeting is just for information, not to make a 146 decision about a process. 147 Ms. O’Kane declared that the public comment period is not intended to be dialogue. Staff will take the 148 comments in. 149 Mahealani Ah Yun, City Clerk, explained the process for making comments. She declared that Item 4 is 150 now closed for public comment. 151 5. Informational Update on the Cubberley Community Center Project including, Summary of 152 Community Meeting #1, Themes for Community Poll #1, and Workplan Update 153 Kristen O’Kane, Community Service Director, announced that there will be an update and staff will not 154 ask for direction from the Commission but staff wants to hear the Commission’s input on the progress 155 made. Staff will also share some ways the Commission can be involved in the project, specifically 156 engagement. She introduced Amanda Deml, Assistant Director Community Services. 157 Amanda Deml, Assistant Director Community Services, stated this is her first PRC meeting and she is 158 excited to meet everyone and present some information on Cubberley. 159 Ms. O’Kane furnished slides and discussed the background of the Cubberley site. Details of the 160 Memorandum of Understanding were outlined, which includes the City purchasing of 7 acres of land, 161 but it is contingent on a successful bond measure approved by voters in November 2026. There had 162 been reengagement with Concordia to assist in the reinitiation of the master planning process. The 163 Previous Master plan is being built upon, and input received from 2019 is being reaffirmed. Because 164 there will possibly be pursuit of a ballot measure, the City contracted with 2 organizations that are 165 experts in polling, ballot strategy, and ballot measure development. The master planning effort and the 166 polling and development of the ballot measure language will occur in parallel due to time constraints. 167 The Cubberley Ad Hoc Committee consisted of Councilmembers Lythcott-Haims (Chair), Burt, and 168 Reckdahl. Council had a visioning session in February, and a vision statement had been drafted. The first 169 Cubberley master planning community meeting occurred on March 19. On April 21, Council discussed 170 the themes to be used to develop a community poll. The poll will be released on April 28 through phone 171 calls, emails, and texts. Staff will return to Council in June and to the PRC later in June to review the poll 172 results. The second community meeting will be on June 12, and Concordia will present 3 concepts for a 173 new center at Cubberley, which will be based on input received from 2019, the first community 174 meeting, and the polling results. Folks may participate in an online survey on the project website. The 175 first community meeting was on March 19, and folks wanted a flexible, inclusive, and sustainable space, 176 places to gather to connect with others, wellness opportunities, affordability, and long-term community 177 engagement throughout the process. A slide was presented showing desired indoor programming, and 178 there is opportunity for shared space. Outdoor programming had also been addressed, and people 179 valued open green space with flexibility and adaptability, so not preprogramming the space. It was 180 learned that there are fewer opportunities to share space for outdoor programming. The poll that will 181 be released on April 28 will seek voter input on goals, the future of the Cubberley Community Center, 182 and voter willingness to support a tax or bond measure to fund the purchase and development of the 183 site. The Council Ad Hoc will review poll results on May 16. Council will receive a full review on June 9. 184 Staff will return to the PRC in late June and present the results of the community meeting and the poll. Item 1 Attachment B - April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 19 Packet Pg. 22 of 351 185 She outlined what the PRC could do as far as support. How folks could receive regular project updates 186 was discussed. She requested participating in the poll if an invitation is received. 187 Chair Freeman asked what vehicle the PRC should use to stay informed. 188 Ms. O’Kane answered that staff could share updated information in an email. If a conversation should be 189 desired, the best way would be through the Commission’s Cubberly Ad Hoc. 190 Discussion ensued regarding the PRC having Cubberley liaisons, not an ad hoc. 191 Vice Chair Greenfield thought at the May meeting there had been discussion about creating an ad hoc, 192 which was contingent on getting feedback from staff on the specific project the ad hoc would be tasked 193 with. 194 Ms. O’Kane replied if something needs to be quickly reviewed or feedback is needed between PRC 195 meetings that it would be appropriate to create an ad hoc. 196 Chair Freeman thought the appropriate way to create an ad hoc would be to have an action item on 197 next month’s agenda. 198 Commissioner Wei agreed. She hoped to help both commissioners look into findings as well. 199 Commissioner Cribbs inquired how folks could be part of the poll. 200 Ms. O’Kane answered that the poll intends to engage voter interest and support for a future ballot 201 measure. There will be a random selection of Palo Alto registered voters. Industry standards will be 202 followed. 203 Chair Freeman inquired if the poll will be framed around the bond issue itself. 204 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims replied Poll 1 will be an extensive set of questions gauging what folks 205 hope to see in Cubberley. She thought Poll 2 would list options for what Cubberley might look like and 206 cost. Poll 3 will be the go/no-go point of the community supporting a bond measure. 207 PUBLIC COMMENT 208 There were no requests to speak. 209 Commissioner Kleinhaus inquired what will be the product of this effort. 210 Ms. O’Kane responded there will be a concept design, not detailed construction drawings. An architect 211 will need to be hired to design the depicted concept. 212 Commissioner Deng queried if the PRC will vote on the best concept design. 213 Ms. O’Kane envisioned the 3 concepts being brought to the PRC for feedback and a recommendation for 214 advancement. There will be a community meeting in September and various touch points with Council 215 between then and the final concept being presented, which will be based on community, PRC, and 216 Council input. A slide was shared outlining the themes of polling questions that will be asked. The 217 themes were built from the community meeting and what had been learned in the 2019 process. Item 1 Attachment B - April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 20 Packet Pg. 23 of 351 218 Commissioner Kleinhaus asked if the PRC should provide feedback related to the survey questions and if 219 such might change the survey. Green space is being presented generically, and presenting it as a 220 butterfly garden, etc., may make a difference. 221 Ms. O’Kane answered that the questions will not be presented at this meeting and that the Council Ad 222 Hoc had not seen the questions. Council looked at the themes and did not direct going forward, but staff 223 is moving forward with the themes staff heard at that meeting. Regarding green space being presented 224 generically, opportunities to share preferences for the space will be shared in the community 225 engagement process, which can be designed into the concept. 226 Commissioner Cribbs discussed the language not being exciting. 227 Commissioner Wei agreed and stated there are ways to make the narrative of sharing the story 228 attractive. 229 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims voiced that the PRC’s feedback is essential and that it will be helpful to 230 hear the PRC’s concerns about the poll. The poll will not try to sell the public on the benefits of 231 Cubberley, but it will ascertain what folks want out of it. It will ask questions about green space, 232 performing arts, age groups, etc. 233 Ms. Deml expressed that the poll is meant to be neutral. It is not the right place to build excitement 234 because it could skew the data and provide a false positive. There will be other opportunities to build 235 excitement. 236 Vice Chair Greenfield asked what type of feedback staff is seeking from the PRC and if there is a number 237 targeted for survey participation. 238 Ms. Deml replied that the goal of the master plan is to stay high level with concepts and themes. Staff 239 welcomes more granular examples, and the data is being tracked. They are tasked with creating concept 240 plans and then information on facility design and individual elements will come in. Feedback on the first 241 community meeting is being requested so it can be incorporated into the 3 concept plans for the second 242 meeting. 243 Ms. O’Kane did not remember the number of participants the survey would target. 244 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims did not remember the number, but it is meant to be statistically 245 significant. The poll will be provided via email, phone call, and text and will start with voters who are 246 likely to vote in the November 2026 election. The data will be demographically balanced. 247 Ms. Deml thought about 1,000 people will be polled. 248 Chair Freeman assumed there will be almost an equal number of people participating from different 249 demographics. 250 Ms. Deml affirmed that that is the goal. 251 Vice Chair Greenfield asked what will happen if a call should go unanswered, how long it will take to 252 complete the survey, and if there will be discussion of room design related to outdoor space. 253 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims did not know what would happen with unanswered calls, but the 254 pollsters know it is essential to reach people. Item 1 Attachment B - April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 21 Packet Pg. 24 of 351 255 Ms. Deml believed the survey will take an average of 10-15 minutes to complete, although it depends on 256 the method. 257 Ms. O’Kane responded that flexible space had been discussed with Concordia, which staff hopes to 258 incorporate. 259 Commissioner Kleinhaus stated that folks not responding to the poll can be data in itself, and she 260 inquired how that will be addressed. 261 Ms. O’Kane did not know the answer. Staff could speak with the consultant about it if desired. 262 Chair Freeman expressed that there will be lessons learned with each poll, so the polls will evolve. He 263 questioned when the polls will be done. 264 Ms. Deml replied that the first poll be on April 28 and run for 2 weeks. The second poll will be around 265 November and the third poll closer to August 2026. 266 Commissioner Cribbs queried if the poll will be extended if the numbers are not met. 267 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims thought the poll will be extended if the numbers are not met. It may be 268 helpful for the consultant to outline the number of people reached, the most successful methodology 269 used, etc. 270 Chair Freeman discussed defining spaces, such as a basketball court also being used for dancing, etc. 271 Ms. Deml stated that the goal is to have flexible spaces. The poll will not be just yes or no questions, but 272 preferences will be ranked. 273 Commissioner Cribbs questioned how those taking the second poll will be chosen. 274 Ms. O’Kane believed those taking the second poll will be chosen in the same way. 275 Vice Chair Greenfield asked if the poll was included in Council’s agenda. The adopted City meeting 276 report format was awkward, and it does not feel transparent. He encouraged the City to reconsider that 277 methodology. 278 Ms. O’Kane replied that the PRC Staff Report has a link to the poll themes. The poll themes are reflected 279 in an attachment to Council’s packet. 280 Ms. Deml added that after the meeting she will supply a link to the Attachment from last night’s Council 281 meeting. 282 Commissioner Kleinhaus struggled with keeping the project size scaled to the community but yet doing 283 what the community desired. 284 Ms. Deml replied that Council had provided such feedback. Staff and the consultant are aware of the 285 desire to do that. There are plans to offer phased approaches if necessary. 286 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims asked the commissioners to attend the June 12 community meeting. 287 The poll uses the term gym and wellness in different places. It is not intended for the poll to use a term 288 that might narrow the sense of what is possible. Item 1 Attachment B - April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 22 Packet Pg. 25 of 351 289 Chair Freeman understood that staff will provide the PRC with any needed information prior to the next 290 meeting. 291 [The Commission took a 5-minute break] 292 6. Update on the Ad Hoc Nature Access Policy and Proposed Trail Closure at Pearson-Arastradero 293 Preserve – 45 minutes 294 Sarah Robustelli, Division Manager, shared slides and detailed what will be addressed in this meeting. In 295 2023, the State of California regulated E-bikes and coasting devices in parks and open spaces, and local 296 agencies need to take formal action to regulate or restrict access. The Staff Report detailed the nuances 297 and details of what Council and the PRC had done previously. In February, in an internal meeting with 298 the Ad Hoc, there were discussions of Arastradero potentially needing access limitations. In February, a 299 field visit further assessed the conditions. The Ad Hoc wanted staff to consider seasonal trail closures of 300 the portion of the Upper Bowl to support habitat protection during the wet season. Staff proposed the 301 trail closure of an unmarked trail, and staff requested the PRC’s feedback related to that. PABAC had 302 provided feedback at the April 1 meeting. It was determined that the connectivity is adequate and that 303 the closure will unlikely impact public access. There was support to increase community outreach. A 304 map of the preserve was displayed. The proposal is to close a 390-foot trail segment to support 305 habitation restoration efforts and to reduce redundant parallel trail routes within the preserve. She 306 believed signs are posted in the area. Public comment is being sought through July 1. In terms of next 307 steps, staff will continue to conduct community outreach related to the proposed trail closure, public 308 feedback will be gathered, and the needs for additional educational materials will be evaluated. Staff 309 plans to return to the PRC to report findings and recommendations following the outreach and 310 evaluation phase. 311 Vice Chair Greenfield, the Ad Hoc Chair, had concerns about some of the environmental stewardship 312 issues at the Upper Bowl area. A slide was furnished from the April 2024 meeting in which the Ad Hoc 313 discussed Pearson-Arastradero Nature Preserve, which included looking into the social branches of the 314 Bowl Loop Trail and managing access at the Upper Bowl and specifically looking at the ponds. Photos of 315 the Upper Arastradero Bowl and the Lower Bowl/Quarry were provided. The Ad Hoc recommended that 316 staff look into the feasibility of a permanent closure of roughly 50 percent of the Upper Bowl. Bike usage 317 in the Nature Preserve should be limited to the trails. It will be difficult to close the Bowl areas to bike 318 traffic altogether, but if that should occur, the problem will move to another location, and finding a 319 place to manage it will be ideal. The goal is to balance environmental stewardship with recreation 320 opportunities. A slide was provided showing the benefits of a partial closure of the Upper Bowl. The Ad 321 Hoc suggested closing half of one of the bowls to protect some unique habitat. It was explained that it 322 would also be a potential educational opportunity. 323 Chair Freeman, and Ad Hoc Member, remarked that there are pros and cons to both. The environmental 324 impact supports closure of the Upper Bowl, which he supported. 325 Commissioner Kleinhaus voiced that there are not many visitors to the Upper or the Lower Bowl aside 326 from youth biking activities. The Ad Hoc agreed to closing the trail as staff had suggested. 327 Vice Chair Greenfield did not think staff is proposing moving forward with this now except under the 328 consideration of the feedback of the PRC. Item 1 Attachment B - April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 23 Packet Pg. 26 of 351 329 Ms. Robustelli commented that staff is seeking feedback and that they will be happy to discuss it with 330 the rangers again. 331 Commissioner Kleinhaus mentioned that if there are discrepancies she would put the blame on that. 332 Chair Freeman thanked all for the work that had been done. 333 PUBLIC COMMENT 334 There were no requests to speak. 335 Commissioner Cribbs did not feel that bikes should be allowed in nature preserves. Closure is probably a 336 good idea, although she did not know if it should be all or half of it. She requested the definition of a 337 reasonable recreational activity. She asked what the process will be to do the closure and how much 338 fencing would cost. 339 Vice Chair Greenfield replied that the definition of a reasonable recreational activity is subjective. 340 Ms. Robustelli responded that the process and the cost of fencing will need to be assessed, which will 341 potentially result in another Ad Hoc meeting for a site visit. The information is not available. 342 Commissioner Deng liked the educational opportunity. 343 Commissioner Wei inquired how the public should be educated on where to ride bikes. 344 Vice Chair Greenfield thought education would include enhanced signage and fencing and then 345 enforcement. The number of folks using the Upper Bowl for recreational activities will not be known 346 until community feedback is received. If it should be closed, other options should be considered. 347 Vice Chair Greenfield noted that the current activity is not illegal. Youth had been observed riding bikes 348 in the water. It did not seem that such should be encouraged at a nature preserve. Real-world 349 considerations should be balanced. Preserving wildlife is important. 350 Commissioner Wei mentioned that educational materials may include fliers and park rangers conducting 351 classes, etc. The naturalists classes from the Santa Clara County park rangers are informative, and their 352 resources may be leveraged. 353 Commissioner Kleinhaus expressed that the Ad Hoc had addressed safety. If the City did not sanction an 354 activity, she did not think the City would be liable if something should happen, but if the City says an 355 activity can be done in a certain area, the City could potentially be liable. The Ad Hoc is trying to 356 accommodate the youth and the wildlife. 357 Vice Chair Greenfield mentioned that the definition of reasonable is to accommodate the youth and the 358 wildlife. 359 Ms. Robustelli requested feedback on the proposed trail closure. 360 Commissioner Wei questioned when the closure will happen and if a particular seasonal closure is being 361 considered. Item 1 Attachment B - April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 24 Packet Pg. 27 of 351 362 Ms. Robustelli answered that after the comment period staff would plan to return to the PRC with an 363 update on the evaluation and the community input. The potential trail closure will restore it back to its 364 natural, which is typically done in the wet season. 365 Commissioner Wei noted that there are park closures to allow grass to grow, which the public easily 366 accepts. 367 Commissioner Deng supported closing the trail if the cost will be reasonable and if the community 368 receives advanced notice. 369 Commissioner Cribbs asked what the rangers suggested. 370 Vice Chair Greenfield clarified that the closure is a staff suggestion, which the Ad Hoc supported. It is 371 intended that staff will return to the PRC after doing any needed analysis and compiling public feedback. 372 Chair Freeman did not know how staff would determine whether there is daily bike riding activity in the 373 Upper Bowl. If such occurred once or twice a month, signage and fencing may be sufficient. 374 Commissioner Wei felt that signage and fencing would work well for a closure from November to the 375 spring of 2025. She asked if there had been recruitment of a staff naturalist, which had been discussed 376 previously. 377 Ms. Robustelli remarked that there has not been a position added for a staff naturalist. The rangers are 378 knowledgeable of the natural environment. 379 Commissioner Kleinhaus supported adding a naturalist/biologist. The trail closure will be permanent and 380 it will not reopen. The rangers recommended closing the trail because it is redundant and there is 381 erosion that is hard to control. Some restoration is already happening in the area, so it seems to be a 382 natural place to return to nature. 383 Vice Chair Greenfield supported closing the trail. 384 COMMISSIONER/BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE AGENDA 385 ITEMS 386 Sarah Robustelli, Division Manager, shared that the May agenda includes the South Palo Alto Bike and 387 Pedestrian Connectivity Project, which will be presented by the Transportation Department, and an 388 annual golf update. Adding a Cubberley Ad Hoc will be a potential action item. She did not know if park 389 dedication will be ready. 390 Chair Freeman requested putting an asterisk by park dedication to see if it will be ready. 391 Vice Chair Greenfield thought it would be helpful to include it in the May agenda, as June is a larger 392 agenda. The Ad Hoc needs to report to the full Commission. 393 Commissioner Cribbs asked what will be included in the golf update. 394 Ms. Robustelli answered that the golf update will include vendors, programs, First Tee, mitigation, and 395 finances. Item 1 Attachment B - April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 25 Packet Pg. 28 of 351 396 Chair Freeman stated that, in addition to adding the Cubberley Ad Hoc, work needs to be done on 397 developing the Work Plan. 398 Ms. Robustelli stated that the Work Plan could be folded into Cubberley, although that will be too many 399 items for May. 400 Vice Chair Greenfield thought the assumption at the retreat was that a major portion of the May agenda 401 would focus on updating/reviewing the Work Plan. 402 Chair Freeman stated the item needs to be completed. Each Ad Hoc should work on completing the 403 Work Plan item to support each Ad Hoc. 404 Vice Chair Greenfield added that new ad hocs will need new Work Plan items and that existing Work 405 Plan items may need to be edited to accommodate the longer timeline. 406 Chair Freeman noted that the existing ad hocs had been reviewed, which will be posted on the PRC 407 website this week. He requested reports from ad hocs. 408 Commissioner Cribbs commented that there had been a community meeting concerning the tennis 409 court situation, which went well. She thought Adam Howard and the ad hoc are working together to put 410 together ideas for the future. There are 2 areas of concern – the ability of the leagues to reserve courts 411 and the unauthorized teaching on the tennis courts all over the city. 412 Chair Freeman added that there have been weekly meetings with Adam Howard and Chase, which 413 included working on developing a team to incorporate comments from the community meeting. A 414 rackets policy will be presented at some point, although there is a lot of work to be done. The most 415 immediate issue is trying to get a handle on the USTA as it seems that they are monopolizing the courts. 416 Private lessons are also monopolizing the courts. 417 Commissioner Cribbs added that an important consideration is how to best extend the use of the tennis 418 courts. 419 Chair Freeman wanted to ensure that ad hocs will meet once to twice a month, so there will be 420 meaningful content presented at the PRC meetings. 421 Commissioner Cribbs mentioned that the skate park continued to have meetings every 2 weeks and they 422 are extending their outreach. There is a group helping with some things. She asked if there will be a 423 replacement for Peter at Public Works. There had been a couple meetings about middle school athletics, 424 and Adam Howard is working with Purchasing on an RFP for a third-party vendor, and consideration is 425 being given to working with/creating a nonprofit to help with the cost of middle school athletics. The 426 goal is for there to be access to all who want to play and that there be coaches. 427 Ms. Robustelli stated there is not a replacement for Peter at Public Works at this time. There will be 428 updates related to recruitment. 429 Vice Chair Greenfield mentioned that the public comment period regarding the tree and landscape 430 technical manual review has closed and staff is reviewing the feedback and finalizing the documents. 431 ADJOURNMENT 432 Meeting was adjourned at 9:59 p.m. Item 1 Attachment B - April 22, 2025 Draft Summary Minutes Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 26 Packet Pg. 29 of 351 Parks and Recreation Commission Staff Report Lead Department: Community Services Meeting Date: May 27, 2025 Report #: 2505-4703 TITLE Baylands Golf Links Update RECOMMENDATION This is an informational report on the City’s owned Baylands Golf Links currently operated by OB Sports BACKGROUND In May 2018, the Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course re-opened as the Baylands Golf Links after a course renovation. The new course included a full reconfiguration of the 18-hole course layout to conform with a Baylands setting and some modification of practice facilities. Since re- opening, the course has been operated by a single golf management company providing course maintenance, golf practice and course play, and food and beverage service. Along with the course renovation, this is a change from prior operations of having three different service providers. With full service provided by a single golf management company, the course has experienced improvements in operations and customer service. When the golf course re-opened, green fees were established with a range to accommodate dynamic pricing, where green fees fluctuate based on time of day, day of week, and demand. Green fees are also tiered with Palo Alto residency, Bay Area residency, visitor, and Links Card (loyalty program) rates. The combination of dynamic pricing, tiered pricing, and high demand since the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in strong green fee revenue to support operating costs. The golf course offers general public course play, tournament play, club play, and youth play. Course play is supplemented with practice facilities consisting of a driving range, putting green, chipping green, and a teaching lesson program. The course draws players regionally across several counties, with most players from Santa Clara, San Mateo, and San Francisco counties. Item 4 item 4 Staff Report Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 30 of 351 ANALYSIS Course Performance Baylands Golf Links continues to serve as a valued community and regional asset, offering a variety of programs and high-quality public golf experiences. Youth programming remains a key component, including participation by Palo Alto public high school golf teams, First Tee Silicon Valley, Youth on Course, and seasonal youth golf camps. These programs support boys and girls at all skill levels and are offered either by the city or in partnership with outside organizations, with reduced or subsidized fees available. The table below summarizes financial performance at Baylands Golf Links from Fiscal Year 2019 through Fiscal Year 2024: Table # 1 Fiscal Year Revenue in Millions Expenses in Millions Profit/(Loss) in Millions Rounds of Golf 2019 $3.4 $3.7 ($0.3)54,619 2020 $2.8 $3.5 ($0.7)42,429 2021 $5.1 $4.0 $1.1 63,352 2022 $5.3 $4.2 $1.1 64,157 2023 $5.0 $3.8 $1.2 56,314 2024 $5.0 $4.5 $0.5 59,526 In Fiscal Year 2019, the operating loss is associated with incurring two debt service payments which consisted of a final payment on prior debt and payment for new debt issued for course renovations. For Fiscal Year 2020 the operating loss is due to course closure upon the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and then restricted course play once the course reopened with single play only. The golf course has demonstrated resilient performance since the initial impact of the COVID- 19 pandemic, with strong rebounds in Fiscal Year 2021 and Fiscal Year 2022. Although performance dipped in Fiscal Year 2023 due to inclement weather and reduced demand, Fiscal Year 2024 saw an increase in total rounds of golf played. The course generated nearly $5.0 million in revenue in Fiscal Year 2024, with over 59,500 rounds played and continued strength Item 4 item 4 Staff Report Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 31 of 351 in green fees and ancillary revenue. In Fiscal Year 2024, player residency consisted of 39 percent from Palo Alto and 29 percent elsewhere within Santa Clara County. Additionally, 16 percent were from San Mateo County and 8 percent from the City and County of San Francisco. The remaining 8 percent of players were from outside our region. Looking ahead, Fiscal Year 2025 is projected to see continued growth, with revenues expected to reach $5.3 million and over 59,000 rounds of golf played. The average revenue per round has steadily increased since the course reopened, reflecting improved yield management, program offerings, and customer demand. OB Sports continues to operate Baylands Golf Links under contract with the City through the end of Fiscal Year 2027. OB Sports is responsible for course maintenance, tee time management, instruction, golf shop sales, and practice facilities. They also operate the Bay Café under a separate lease agreement; therefore, food and beverage revenues are not included in the golf course’s operating budget. First Tee Partnership and Second Deck Study On August 27, 20241 staff updated the Parks and Recreation Commission on discussions with the First Tee – Silicon Valley towards furthering a partnership. Since that time, the City has entered into a short-term facility use agreement with the First Tee - Silicon Valley, executed in October 2024 and provides the First Tee with facility access through February 2026. Earlier this month, City staff met with First Tee and shared a draft term sheet outlining a proposal for a long-term partnership agreement. Once the terms are finalized and an agreement is developed, the Long-Term agreement will go to the City Council for approval to formalize the partnership and staff will amend the existing Management Agreement to incorporate impacts on the golf course operator. In parallel, staff is re-engaging with the National Golf Foundation (NGF) to complete a second deck feasibility study. This study will evaluate the potential for a double-deck driving range at Baylands Golf Links and provide an updated pro forma based on current market conditions. The completed study will be presented at a future Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. Mitigation The City constructed the Municipal Golf Course Reconfiguration Project in 2016 and 2017 at the 1 Parks and Recreation Commission, August 27, 2024; Agenda Item #4 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/parks-and- recreation-commission/agendas-minutes/2024-agendas-and-minutes/08/first-tee-update-to-prc-8-27-24.pdf Item 4 item 4 Staff Report Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 32 of 351 Baylands Golf Links. The reconfiguration of the golf course resulted in both permanent and temporary impacts to wetlands and other waters of the United States and State. To address these impacts, the project received regulatory permits from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was consulted regarding potential effects on federally listed species. The approved Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP), prepared by ICF International in 2016, outlined a total of 8.03 acres of wetland expansion (creation) and 0.42 acres of enhancement to existing wetlands. Of this total, the permits require at least 4.00 acres of wetland creation and 0.20 acres of enhancement as compensatory mitigation. Since the project’s completion, City staff has continued to coordinate with the State Water Board to ensure compliance with mitigation requirements and to advance the next steps toward long-term success of the mitigation areas. In August 2024, the City submitted an Existing Conditions Report prepared by ecological consultants H.T. Harvey & Associates. The report assessed the status of the mitigation wetlands, evaluated them against the Year 5 Performance Criteria, and provided recommendations to bring each wetland group into compliance. As stated in the report, the five-year monitoring period will formally begin once the recommended corrective actions are implemented. In December 2024, the City notified the State Water Board of its intent to conduct a jurisdictional wetland delineation. The City established a contract with H.T. Harvey & Associates to perform the wetland delineation which began in February 2025, consistent with the Existing Conditions Report’s recommendation. The purpose of the delineation is to verify the extent of jurisdictional wetland acreage present and determine whether additional mitigation acreage is needed to meet permit conditions. The delineation is anticipated to be completed in July 2025 and will also inform whether any hydrological modifications are necessary to ensure the wetlands meet jurisdictional standards. In parallel with these efforts, staff has coordinated with the golf course operator and maintenance staff to implement additional protective measures in and around the mitigation areas. These include the installation of more split rail fencing, improved signage, and educational materials aimed at golf course patrons. Additionally, a “local rule” has been adopted to allow stroke relief in cases where a golf ball lands in wetland habitat, discouraging entry into sensitive areas and supporting habitat protection. Item 4 item 4 Staff Report Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 33 of 351 FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT Funding for golf operations is budgeted in the Community Services Department’s General Fund budget which is annually reviewed and approved by the City Council. The golf budget2 is contained within the department budget and published annually in the City’s Adopted Operating Budget, inclusive of financial performance of prior years. 2 Golf Fiscal Year 2025 Adopted Operating Budget; https://www.paloalto.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/administrative-services/city-budgets/fy-2025-city- budget/adopted/palo-alto-adopted-operating-budget-book_final2.pdf#page=263 Item 4 item 4 Staff Report Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 34 of 351 Parks and Recreation Commission Staff Report Lead Department: Transportation Meeting Date: May 27, 2025 Report #: 2503-4419 TITLE South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity: Provide Feedback on Initial Crossing Opportunity Locations and Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) review the Existing Conditions Report (Attachment A) and Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum (Attachment B) for the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project and provide feedback on the initial crossing opportunity locations and draft design priorities and evaluation criteria. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project (Project) is to assess ways to improve bicycle and pedestrian access across the rail corridor in the southern portion of the City. This Project will develop locally preferred locations and design concepts for two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor in south Palo Alto (south of Oregon Expressway) and identify bicycle and pedestrian enhancements that link the proposed crossings sites to the existing/future networks. The goal is to complete 15 percent of designs for two locally preferred alternatives, develop an implementation plan and funding strategy, and secure funding for the next phases of work, including preliminary engineering, environmental documentation, final design and construction. Staff recommends the PRC review the Existing Conditions Report (Attachment A) and Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum (Attachment B) and provide feedback on the initial crossing opportunity locations and draft design priorities and evaluation criteria. BACKGROUND The Caltrain corridor runs north-south, parallel to Alma Street through the City of Palo Alto, resulting in a barrier for east-west travel by all modes. The City of Palo Alto 2030 Comprehensive Plan (2022), Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) (2012), Rail Corridor Study (2013), and Midtown Connector Feasibility Study (2016) have identified a critical Item 5 Item 5 Staff Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 35 of 351 need for additional grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian rail crossings, particularly in the southern portion of the City. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan Program T1.19.3 aims to "increase the number of east-west pedestrian and bicycle crossings across Alma Street and the Caltrain corridor, particularly south of Oregon Expressway." The 2012 BPTP identifies the 1.3-mile distance between the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and Meadow Drive as the longest stretch of track barrier in Palo Alto and recommends a grade-separated pedestrian and bicycle crossing of the Caltrain corridor and Alma Street in the vicinity of Matadero Creek/Park Boulevard or between Margarita Avenue and Loma Verde Avenue. The 2013 Rail Corridor Study and 2016 Midtown Connector Feasibility Study identify rail crossing opportunities and potential alignments to provide grade-separated crossings for bicyclists and pedestrians. On September 9, 2024, Council approved a professional services contract (C25191297) with Kittelson & Associates, a transportation planning, engineering, and research services firm, to assist with the Project.1 The purpose of the Project is to assess ways to improve bicycle and pedestrian access across the rail corridor in the southern portion of the City. This Project scope includes development of locally preferred locations and design concepts for two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor in south Palo Alto (i.e., south of Oregon Expressway). The Project also includes identification of bicycle and pedestrian enhancements that link the proposed grade-separated crossing sites to the existing/future bicycle and pedestrian networks within the neighborhoods adjacent to the railroad tracks. The goal is to complete 15 percent of designs for two locally preferred alternatives, develop an implementation plan and funding strategy, and secure funding for the next phases of work, including final design and construction. In September 2024, City staff and Kittelson & Associates began this Project and subsequently completed initial tasks, including data collection and analysis, review of background documents, development of a community outreach and engagement plan, preparation of an Existing Conditions Report (Attachment A), and development of a Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum (Attachment B). The City is in the process of updating the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP Update), which began in 2023 and will be finalized by the end of 2025. The BPTP Update addresses the citywide bicycle and pedestrian network, including in the southern portions of Palo Alto. This Project will implement recommendations of the current BPTP and will advance designs and provide connections to the citywide bike and pedestrian network to be identified in the BPTP Update. As a result, this Project is being completed in close collaboration with the ongoing BPTP Update. 1 September 9, 2024 City Council Meeting for Contract Authorization (Consent Calendar Item 7) Item 5 Item 5 Staff Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 36 of 351 ANALYSIS Existing Conditions Report The Existing Conditions Report (Attachment A) establishes a detailed baseline condition for the Project using a combination of quantitative and qualitative data from various sources. The technical information presented in the Existing Conditions Report is being used to identify opportunities, inform design options, and evaluate alternatives for potential grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the rail corridor in south Palo Alto. Key findings from the Existing Conditions Report include: •Local Destinations: Many local destinations such as parks, community centers, libraries, bus lines, residential areas, shopping centers, after-school destinations, and schools may be served by additional bike and pedestrian rail crossings. Key destinations within the Study Area include, but are not limited to, Mitchell Park, Robles Park, Hoover Park, Cubberley Community Center, El Carmelo Elementary School, Jane L. Stanford Middle School, and Herbert Hoover Elementary School. Other major destinations outside the Study Area include Stanford University, Stanford Research Park, downtown and commercial corridors, and Caltrain stations. •Literature Review: A review of 35 relevant planning documents, programs, and policies was conducted to understand the current planning context for walking and biking in south Palo Alto as well as prior efforts completed in the Study Area. •Demographics: According to American Community Survey 2022 Five-Year Estimates, approximately 19,700 residents live in the Study Area, representing roughly 29 percent of the City of Palo Alto’s total population. 46 percent of the Study Area population is White, around eight (8) percent of the population identify as Hispanic or Latino, 41 percent Asian, and three (3) percent other race. •Land Use and Population Growth: Key growth areas within and near the Study Area include the Midtown and Ventura neighborhoods, San Antonio Road corridor, and along El Camino Real. •Transportation Network: Distances between existing bike and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor in south Palo Alto are as follows: •1.3 mile between the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and Meadow Drive; and •0.3 mile between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road; and •0.8 mile between Charleston Road and the San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass. Several notable on-going and upcoming transportation improvement projects in the Study Area include the rail grade separation projects for vehicles, bicyclists, and Item 5 Item 5 Staff Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 37 of 351 pedestrians at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road, and the El Camino Real bikeway2 currently being installed by Caltrans in Palo Alto, Mountain View and Los Altos. •Commuting Behavior: Around 59 percent of workers living in the Study Area commute by car (drive-alone and carpool combined), which is more than 56 percent of total residents citywide that commute by car. •Bike/Ped Counts at At-Grade Crossings: On weekdays, pedestrian activity is generally highest in the afternoon hours between 3 PM and 6 PM. On weekends, pedestrian activity is more variable, with the highest activity levels in the morning and early afternoon. On weekdays, bicycle activity peaks during commute hours in the morning and afternoon peak periods (7-9 AM and 4-6 PM), with a jump in activity around 8 AM on Meadow Drive westbound. On weekends, bicycle activity remains relatively steady throughout the day. Similar to pedestrian activity, there is higher bicycle activity on Meadow Drive than Charleston Road. •Bike/Ped Accessibility: Pedestrians using the existing rail crossings in and near the Study Area must travel further to access destinations near Park Boulevard, Margarita Avenue and Loma Verde Avenue. Bicyclists using existing rail crossings in and near the Study Area are generally able to travel anywhere throughout the Study Area in less than 30 minutes (round trip). •Big Data Analysis: Approximately 30 percent of all trips using the existing rail crossing in and near the Study Area are less than five miles in length. Origins and destinations of shorter distance trips (under five miles) for all travel modes currently using the existing rail crossings in and near the Study Area are more concentrated near the California Avenue Caltrain Station, California Avenue, Ventura Neighborhood, and San Antonio Center in Mountain View. •Safety: Oregon Expressway, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, Middlefield Road, and El Camino Real are designated as High-Injury Corridors due to their disproportionately high number of crashes. •Environment: Several creeks flow through the Study Area, classified as a Moderate Risk zone for flooding. The Existing Conditions Report identifies the following crossing opportunity locations for further exploration based on the review of previous plans and studies, right-of-way constraints, and on-site field visits conducted by the Project team. A. Near Colorado Avenue and Page Mill Road B. Around Matadero Creek (El Dorado Avenue to Loma Verde Avenue) C. Near Barron Creek 2Caltrans El Camino Real Pavement Rehabilitation and ADA Improvements Item 5 Item 5 Staff Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 38 of 351 D. Between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road E. Near Adobe Creek F. Near San Antonio Road Figure 1: Potential Crossing Locations Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum The Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum (Attachment B) presents the initial design priorities and evaluation criteria that will be used to guide the development and selection of rail crossing designs and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure options (“alternatives”) for the Project. It also outlines the engagement and evaluation processes that will be utilized to inform the assessment of designs and subsequent selection of two locally preferred alternatives. The following draft design priorities were identified based on the Project needs, goals, benefits, and themes documented in several plans and studies previously prepared by the City, which are summarized in the Literature Review Section (starting on page 11) of the Existing Conditions Report (Attachment A). •Improve Mobility: Prioritize locations and designs that integrate with surrounding networks, provide access to critical destinations, serve the most users, and accommodate current and future transportation needs. Item 5 Item 5 Staff Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 39 of 351 •Enhance User Experience: Design facilities guided by the prioritization of the most vulnerable populations, and create safe, well-lit spaces that are comfortable to access and utilize. •Maximize Ease of Construction: Minimize potential for disruption during construction and complexity of design, while ensuring that construction costs and maintenance costs are feasible to implement given reasonably expected project funding. •Enhance Visual Appeal: Ensure that newly constructed facilities enhance the sense of community by incorporating public art, public spaces, and attractive structures. •Minimize Community Impacts: Limit potential impacts on existing neighborhoods, including the amount of space needed (parking spaces, roads, and buildings are minimally affected) and impacts on the environment. Draft evaluation criteria presented in the following table are grounded in key community priorities and linked to specific evaluation criteria, with measurable outcomes, that are proposed to be used for the analysis of alternatives. The proposed design priorities and draft evaluation criteria are presented in the following table. Table 1. Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Draft Design Priority Draft Evaluation Criteria** Description Accessibility Walk and bike access within 5- 10- and 15-minutes Demand#Projected number of users during the weekday peak hourImprove Mobility Capacity#Width of facility and ability of rail crossing to accommodate people walking and biking Crossing length#Total length of the crossing facility Crossing elevation#Total change in elevation of the crossing facility Pedestrian and bicyclist comfort Extent to which existing bicycle and pedestrian network would provide low-stress access to the rail crossing(s) Enhance User Experience Personal security Alignment of rail crossing facility and approaches with Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) best practices Utility and right- of-way impacts Level of disruption to existing and planned utilities, extent of relocations required, extent of right-of-way impactsMaximize Ease of Construction Construction cost#Rough order of magnitude of project construction cost Item 5 Item 5 Staff Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 40 of 351 Draft Design Priority Draft Evaluation Criteria** Description Operations and maintenance cost Magnitude of projected annual cost of operations and maintenance Enhance Visual Appeal Public space and green infrastructure Potential to create new public spaces and implement green infrastructure Environmental impacts Extent to which crossing impacts the environment - impervious areas, creeks/drainage, sea level rise, wetlands, and sensitive habitats Parcel impacts#Number of parcels needed, all or in part, to construct crossing and approach facilities Minimize Community Impacts Parking and driveway impacts Extent to which rail crossings affect existing vehicle parking and access to existing driveways Notes: **Criteria marked with an “#” are quantitative and a specific value will be presented. Criteria without a “#” are qualitative and will be scored using a scale of high, medium, and low, for its performance. These initial design priorities and evaluation criteria are presented for feedback as part of Phase 1 engagement activities. Based on the feedback received, the Project team will refine the design priorities and corresponding evaluation criteria that will guide subsequent efforts. Next Steps With input from community and the PRC, City/School Transportation Safety Committee (CSTSC), Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC), Rail Committee, Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC), and City Council, the Project team will develop and present concept designs and corresponding network modifications for up to eight alternatives at various locations along the rail corridor. The Project team will evaluate each alternative using the selected design priorities and evaluation criteria established in Phase 1. The final evaluation criteria will be selected based on how well they facilitate evaluation against the overarching set of established priorities and how effectively they differentiate alternatives. Each of the eight crossing alternatives will be evaluated against the same subset of criteria and scored quantitatively with a specific value reported or qualitatively using a scale of high, medium, and low, for its performance. The results of this evaluation will be presented in Phase 2 engagement activities, and community input will be sought to inform refinement and selection of the two preferred alternatives for the rail crossing and associated bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements in south Palo Alto. Item 5 Item 5 Staff Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 41 of 351 FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT On September 9, 2024, Council approved the professional services contract (C25191297) with Kittelson & Associates for a not-to-exceed amount of $499,491 for the Project for a term of two-years. Sufficient funding for anticipated expenses is available in the FY 2025 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Implementation project (PL- 04010) in the Capital Improvement Fund. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The City is organizing and facilitating community outreach and engagement efforts with the intent to engage residents and key stakeholders and solicit input at various phases of the project. Community engagement will include a series of workshops, pop-ups, surveys, and other strategies that will be structured to include property owners, residents, businesses, local business employees, representatives of private and public schools, agencies providing services in the area, and visitors. Community outreach and engagement will occur over four phases: •Phase 1 Community Engagement: Establish Design Priorities (Spring 2025) •Phase 2 Community Engagement: Feedback on Alternatives (Fall 2025) •Phase 3 Community Engagement: Review Public Draft Report (Spring 2026) •Phase 4 Community Engagement: Council Adopt Final Report (Summer 2026) Phase 1 Community Engagement will establish community priorities and an evaluation framework to compare crossing location and design alternatives through the following activities: •Informational materials (project webpage, fact sheet, mailers, etc.) •Online survey •Community workshop •Pop-up events •Small group discussions •Engagement with target audiences •Standing committee meetings During the first phase of engagement, the Project team is seeking input from the community to confirm crossing opportunity locations and establish design priorities and evaluation criteria to be applied in the evaluation of alternatives. The outcome of Phase 1 will be prioritization of crossing opportunity locations and a final set of design priorities and evaluation criteria to be applied in Phase 2. During the next phase of engagement, Phase 2 Feedback on Alternatives, the Project team will present concept designs and corresponding network modifications for up to eight alternatives and evaluate each alternative using the selected design priorities and evaluation criteria Item 5 Item 5 Staff Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 42 of 351 established in Phase 1. The initial eight alternatives and completed evaluation will be shared with the community for review and feedback during Phase 2 via small group discussions, pop- up events, a second online survey, a second community workshop, and discussions at standing meetings in Fall 2025. The feedback received during this phase will result in the refinement and selection of two preferred alternatives that will be carried forward for 15 percent concept design. The Public Draft Report will include a funding and implementation plan and will be shared for feedback as part of a third phase of engagement, Phase 3 Review Public Draft Report, in Spring 2026. The Final Report will be shared in Summer 2026 in Phase 4 for community review and Council adoption. Community Engagement Phase 1 Establish Design Priorities (Spring 2025) Phase 1 is currently in progress. The purpose of Phase 1 is to introduce the project to the community and establish design priorities and evaluation criteria for grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings. A summary of Phase 1 activities and engagement themes heard so far is provided in this section. •Project Website: A dedicated project webpage (paloalto.gov/bikepedcrossings) was created in September 2024 where City staff will continue to post the latest information and provide regular updates on upcoming meetings/events and ways to engage on the Project. •Project Fact Sheet: A project fact sheet was made available on the project webpage in March 2025. •Small Group Discussions: Eight small group discussions were held virtually from November through December 2024 at the start of this Project. These one-hour virtual meetings included members of the CSTSC and PABAC, and representatives of Caltrain, Palo Alto Unified School District, Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design (CARRD), Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition (SVBC), and Stanford University. The discussions covered a range of topics including: background and vision, alignments and design, evaluation criteria, community engagement, challenges and opportunities. There was unified support for easy, well-lit, accessible, safe crossing of the railroad tracks and Alma Street that is suitable for all ages (8-80), reducing the long distances between crossings that exist today. Participants encouraged the team to think about crossing locations from a network perspective to consider not only the crossing location but how to get to/from that point. Participants also shared a list of criteria and priorities for consideration in the evaluation of alternatives. •Community Workshop: A Transportation Planning Workshop was held at Palo Alto’s Mitchell Park Community Center (El Palo Alto Room) on April 2, 2025, from 6-7:30 p.m, where participants were able to provide feedback on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update and South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project. Nearly Item 5 Item 5 Staff Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 43 of 351 50 community members were in attendance. The majority of community members prioritized crossings that improved mobility, with additional comments emphasizing their general support for the project and interest in its fast completion. A crossing around Matadero Creek (El Dorado Avenue to Loma Verde Avenue) was the most popular location amongst attendees, followed by a crossing between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road. •Online Survey: An online survey is currently available to share input that will help select preferred crossing locations, designs, and improvements. The survey will be open from April 1, 2025 through May 22, 2025 and is available on the project webpage at paloalto.gov/bikepedcrossings. As of May 20, 2025, almost 700 responses have been submitted. •Pop-Up Events: Pop-up events have included and will continue to include tabling participation at community-wide events, such as California Ave Third Thursdays, Earth Day Festival, and Bike to Work Day. •Presentations at Standing Meetings (tentative): Staff will engage with standing committees, including the PABAC, CSTSC, Rail Committee, PTC, and PRC in April and May 2025, with a City Council meeting planned to occur later this Summer. Feedback from Phase 1 will be used to establish design priorities and evaluation criteria for crossing alternatives presented in Phase 2 (Fall 2025). Sketch-level concept designs for eight alternatives will be presented for feedback in Phase 2 along with the results of the evaluation. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This study session is not a project as defined by California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment. CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4). ATTACHMENTS Attachment A Existing Conditions Report Attachment B Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum Item 5 Item 5 Staff Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 44 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) SOUTH PALO ALTO BIKE/PED CONNECTIVITY EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 45 of 351 Inside front cover Page Intentionally blank Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 12 Packet Pg. 46 of 351 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Existing Conditions Report Prepared for: City of Palo Alto Prepared by: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Project Number 30555 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 13 Packet Pg. 47 of 351 Page Intentionally blank Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 14 Packet Pg. 48 of 351 Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................ 2 Significance of the Project ....................................................................................... 2 Study Area ................................................................................................................ 3 Local Destinations .................................................................................................... 5 Key Findings ............................................................................................................. 8 Literature Review .................................................................................................. 11 Demographics ....................................................................................................... 14 Land Use and Population Growth ........................................................................... 19 Transportation Network......................................................................................... 23 Roadway Network .................................................................................................. 23 Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................................... 28 Bicycle Facilities ..................................................................................................... 31 Major Barriers ........................................................................................................ 33 Transit Facilities ..................................................................................................... 37 Safe Routes to School ............................................................................................ 41 Future Transportation Network Improvements ..................................................... 43 Commuting Behavior ............................................................................................. 46 Traffic Counts ........................................................................................................ 48 Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility ........................................................................ 53 Big Data Analysis .................................................................................................... 57 Data Source ............................................................................................................ 57 Trips Distances by Crossing Location ..................................................................... 57 Origin/Destination Patterns ................................................................................... 59 Travel Mode ........................................................................................................... 62 Trip Purpose ........................................................................................................... 62 Safety .................................................................................................................... 65 Environment .......................................................................................................... 68 Water Bodies and Flood Risk ................................................................................. 68 Geotechnical Hazards ............................................................................................ 68 Wildfire .................................................................................................................. 68 Overhead Utilities .................................................................................................. 69 Potential Crossing Locations .................................................................................. 72 Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 15 Packet Pg. 49 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page ii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Study Area ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2: Study Area Key Demographic Data ............................................................................................... 14 Figure 3: Existing Zoning and Future Housing Sites ..................................................................................... 20 Figure 4: Population Growth ....................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 5. Existing Roadway Network Speed Limits ...................................................................................... 25 Figure 6. Existing Roadway Network Number of Lanes (Both Directions) ................................................... 26 Figure 7. Existing Pavement Conditions ...................................................................................................... 27 Figure 8. Existing Pedestrian Facilities ......................................................................................................... 29 Figure 9. Existing Intersection Control......................................................................................................... 30 Figure 10. Existing Bicycle Facilities ............................................................................................................. 34 Figure 11: Bicyclist Level of Traffic Stress – Roadway Segments ................................................................. 35 Figure 12: Bicyclist Level of Traffic Stress - Intersections ............................................................................ 36 Figure 13. Existing Transit Facilities ............................................................................................................. 39 Figure 14. Existing Bus Ridership Activity .................................................................................................... 40 Figure 15. Suggested Routes to Schools ...................................................................................................... 42 Figure 16: Pedestrian Activity at Existing At-Grade Crossing Locations ....................................................... 49 Figure 17: Bicycle Activity at Existing At-Grade Crossing Locations ............................................................. 50 Figure 18: Vehicle Activity at Existing At-Grade Crossing Locations ............................................................ 51 Figure 19: 5-, 10-, and 15-Minute Walking Access to Closest Rail Crossing ................................................ 54 Figure 20: 5-, 10-, and 15-Minute Bike Access to Closest Rail Crossing....................................................... 55 Figure 21: Length of Person Trips (All Travel Modes) Crossing Caltrain Tracks in/near Study Area ............ 58 Figure 22: Daily Person Trips (All Travel Modes) under Five Miles by Crossing Location ............................ 58 Figure 23: Concentration of Person Trips (All Travel Modes) Under Five Miles - Weekday ........................ 60 Figure 24: Concentration of Person Trips (All Travel Modes) Under Five Miles - Weekend ........................ 61 Figure 25: Person Trips under Five Miles by Travel Mode (Trip Percent) .................................................... 62 Figure 26: Person Trips under Five Miles by Trip Purpose (Trip Percent) .................................................... 63 Figure 27: Pedestrian and Bicyclist Collisions (2018 – 2022) ....................................................................... 66 Figure 28: Flood Risk ................................................................................................................................... 70 Figure 29: Potential Crossing Locations ....................................................................................................... 74 Figure 30: Caltrain, Public and Private Right of Way ................................................................................... 75 Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 16 Packet Pg. 50 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Race and Ethnicity ......................................................................................................................... 15 Table 2: Language Spoken at Home ............................................................................................................ 15 Table 3: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile Ranking per Census Tract ............................................................. 17 Table 4. VTA Bus Routes Summary .............................................................................................................. 38 Table 5: Commuting Characteristics in the Study Area ............................................................................... 46 Table 6: Bicycle and Pedestrian 12- Hour Counts (7 AM to 7 PM) .............................................................. 48 APPENDICES Appendix A: Literature Review Memorandum Appendix B: Traffic Counts Appendix C: Replica Data Details Appendix D: Field Visit Summary Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 17 Packet Pg. 51 of 351 Introduction Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 18 Packet Pg. 52 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 2 Introduction The City of Palo Alto is conducting the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project (“Project”) to assess ways to improve bicycle and pedestrian access across the rail corridor in the southern portion of the City. The purpose of this Project is to develop community-supported locations and design concepts for two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor and Alma Street in south Palo Alto (i.e., south of Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road). The Project will also identify context- sensitive bicycle and pedestrian enhancements that link the proposed grade-separated crossing sites to the existing/future bicycle and pedestrian networks within the neighborhoods adjacent to the railroad tracks. The Project will engage the community to select preferred crossing locations, designs, and network improvements, and develop an implementation plan and funding strategy for future construction. This Project is initiating the Project Identification, Project Initiation and Conceptual Planning phases of the Caltrain Corridor Crossings Delivery Guide (2024)1, during which alternatives will be developed and refined based on feedback from the community. The goal is to complete 15 percent of designs for two locally preferred alternatives, develop an implementation plan and funding strategy, and secure funding for Preliminary Design, Final Design and Construction phases. This Existing Conditions Report establishes a detailed baseline condition for the Project using a combination of quantitative and qualitative data from various sources. The technical information presented in this Report will be used to identify opportunities, inform design options, and evaluate alternatives for potential grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the rail corridor in south Palo Alto. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROJECT Located along the San Francisco Peninsula within Santa Clara County, south Palo Alto is generally defined as the area within the City of Palo Alto limits south of Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road. It is adjacent to the cities of Mountain View and Los Altos and is well-connected to the greater Bay Area through US Route 101, El Camino Real, and Caltrain’s Peninsula Corridor. This location places south Palo Alto at the heart of a major innovation and technology hub, with easy access to Stanford University, downtown Palo Alto, and major employment centers in Silicon Valley. As of the 2020 Census, the south Palo Alto area has a population of approximately 36,600 residents, which represents around 54% of the City of Palo Alto’s total residential population of approximately 69,000.2 The Caltrain corridor runs north-south parallel to Alma Street through the City of Palo Alto and serves as a vital transportation mode for the Bay Area. However, the rail line also creates a physical divide and barrier for east-west travel by all modes within the community. Currently, there are two at-grade crossings for pedestrians and cyclists in the southern portion of the City at Charleston Road and Meadow Drive. There is also the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel located to the north of Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road and San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass (near Mayfield Avenue) located to the south in the 1 Caltrain Corridor Crossings Delivery Guide (2024): https://www.caltrain.com/media/34937 2 This represents the southern Palo Alto area which is bigger than the Study Area discussed in the later sections. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 19 Packet Pg. 53 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 3 City of Mountain View. The Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road undercrossing and San Antonio Road overcrossing do not contain dedicated bike or pedestrian facilities. Distances between existing bike and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor in south Palo Alto are as follows: ◼ 1.3 mile between the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and Meadow Drive; ◼ 0.3 mile between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road; and ◼ 0.8 mile between Charleston Road and the San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass. The City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2030 (2022), City of Palo Alto 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (“BPTP”) (2012), and Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study (2013) have identified a critical need for additional grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings, particularly in the southern portion of the City. This Project seeks to advance previously identified needs of the community and will identify locations and design concepts where two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian pathways across the Caltrain railroad tracks may be constructed in south Palo Alto. Creating a path above or below the tracks will improve bicycle and pedestrian connectivity in support of the mobility and sustainability goals of the City. The City is in the process of updating the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (“BPTP Update”), which began in 2023 and will be finalized by the end of 2025. The BPTP Update addresses the citywide bicycle and pedestrian network, including in the southern portions of Palo Alto. This Project will implement recommendations of the current BPTP and will advance designs and provide connections to the citywide bike and pedestrian network to be identified in the BPTP Update. As a result, this Project is being completed in close collaboration with the ongoing BPTP Update. The City of Palo Alto has also been actively pursuing rail grade separation projects to separate the Caltrain railroad tracks from vehicles, bikes, and pedestrians at three major crossings: Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road. 3 It’s important to note that the Project will focus on locations and design concepts for two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings, which are in addition to the rail grade separation projects at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road. STUDY AREA Figure 1 shows the Study Area limits as well as the surrounding area, roadway network, and points of interest. The Study Area extends between Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road to the north, San Antonio Road to the south, Middlefield Road to the east, and El Camino Real to the west. While the Project focuses primarily on selecting preferred rail crossing locations and developing design concepts, the Study Area extends beyond the Caltrain corridor to assess the bike and pedestrian connections to/from the future railroad crossings. Data from outside the Study Area has been incorporated into the existing conditions review in recognition that future railroad crossings have the potential to impact travel citywide. 3 Connecting Palo Alto. For more information, visit: https://connectingpaloalto.com/ Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 20 Packet Pg. 54 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 4 Figure 1: Study Area Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 21 Packet Pg. 55 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 5 LOCAL DESTINATIONS The Study Area includes a variety of destinations such as parks, community centers, libraries, bus lines, residential areas, shopping centers, after-school destinations, and schools that may be served by additional rail crossings. Key destinations within the Study Area include, but are not limited to, Mitchell Park, Robles Park, Hoover Park, Cubberley Community Center, El Carmelo Elementary School, Jane L. Stanford Middle School, and Herbert Hoover Elementary School. Other major destinations outside the Study Area include Stanford University, Stanford Research Park, downtown and commercial corridors, and Caltrain stations. These destinations are described in the following sections. PARKS, COMMUNITY CENTERS, AND LIBRARIES The Study Area includes several parks, community centers, and libraries that provide recreational spaces, cultural programs, and public services for residents. These facilities serve as key destinations for families, students, and community members, many of whom rely on walking or biking. Mitchell Park Library and Community Center Located along Middlefield Road, Mitchell Park is one of the largest community parks in south Palo Alto. It offers multiple recreational facilities, including sports fields, playgrounds, picnic areas, and a dog park. It serves as a central gathering space with public library services, meeting rooms, and community programs. Mitchell Park Library and Community Center are located approximately 2,000 feet east of the Caltrain corridor, and many community members walk or bike to access it. Robles Park Robles Park is located approximately 200 feet west of the Caltrain corridor. It is a neighborhood park that offers open green space, a playground, and picnic areas. The park serves as a popular destination for families and is used for outdoor activities and community gatherings. Hoover Park Adjacent to residential neighborhoods, Hoover Park is a recreational facility that features sports fields, tennis courts, and a playground. The park is a key destination for organized sports, casual recreation, and social gatherings, supporting an active lifestyle for the surrounding community. It is located approximately 2,500 feet east of the Caltrain corridor. Cubberley Community Center Located near Middlefield Road, Cubberley Community Center serves as a key public facility offering a wide range of recreational, educational, and cultural programs. The center houses community meeting spaces, art studios, and athletic facilities, making it a vital resource for residents. It is a frequent destination for pedestrians and cyclists in the Study Area. It is located approximately 1,700 feet east of the Caltrain corridor. Ventura Community Center Located at 3990 Ventura Court, Ventura Community Center Park is a key recreational space in Palo Alto’s Ventura neighborhood. The park was renovated with new play structures, accessible swings, improved irrigation, and a fenced community garden. The community center serves as the Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 22 Packet Pg. 56 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 6 headquarters for the Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) and the Sojourner Truth Infant- Toddler Program. The centrality of the community center attracts many neighborhood locals, who take advantage of the park’s amenities throughout the day. SCHOOLS There are many schools surrounding the Study Area that generate significant bicycle and pedestrian activity. Many students, faculty and staff rely on active transportation and transit options to access these schools: Henry M. Gunn High School Henry M. Gunn High School is located along Arastradero Road. It is approximately 1.3 miles from the Caltrain corridor. For the period between 2019 and 2024, approximately 68% of the students used green transportation (walk, bike scooter, bus, or carpool) to commute to school, while the remaining students used family cars. Jane L. Stanford Middle School Jane L. Stanford (JLS) Middle School is one of the largest middle schools in Palo Alto. It is located along East Meadow Drive, approximately 1,700 feet from the Caltrain corridor. For the period between 2019 and 2024, approximately 75% of the students used green transportation to commute to school, while the remaining students used family cars. El Carmelo Elementary School Located along Bryant Street near Loma Verde Avenue, El Carmelo Elementary School serves as a key educational institution within the Study Area. The school is approximately 900 feet from the Caltrain corridor and is surrounded by residential neighborhoods. For the period between 2019 and 2024, approximately 60% of the students used green transportation to commute to school, while the remaining students used family cars. Herbert Hoover Elementary School Located along East Charleston Road, Herbert Hoover Elementary School is a neighborhood school serving families in south Palo Alto. The school is surrounded by residential areas, with many students walking or biking daily. It is located approximately 1,700 feet from the Caltrain corridor. For the period between 2019 and 2024, approximately 34% of the students used green transportation to commute to school, while the remaining students used family cars.4 Other Nearby Schools There are other schools surrounding the Study Area that generate significant bicycle and pedestrian activity. Many students, faculty and staff rely on active transportation and transit options to access these schools as well. The Study Area is surrounded by multiple elementary and middle schools, including Keys School – Elementary Campus, Keys School – Middle Campus, Challenger School, Imagination Lab School, and Athena Academy. Additionally, several preschools in the vicinity 4 Office of Transportation, Safe Routes to School. For more information, visit: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Transportation/Safe-Routes-to-School Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 23 Packet Pg. 57 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 7 provide early childhood education and contribute to local pedestrian activity, including Edgewood House Preschool, Learning Links Preschool, Children's Preschool Center, Acme Children's Center, Mi Casita de Espanol Preschool, Ellen Thacher Children's Center, Heffalump School, and Sojourner Truth Child Development Center. STANFORD UNIVERSITY Stanford University, located northwest of the Study Area, is a private research university and a major educational and employment hub. The university attracts students, faculty, staff, and visitors from across the region, influencing transportation patterns and economic activity within the Study Area. Its presence contributes to the high level of pedestrian and bicycle traffic in nearby communities. STANFORD RESEARCH PARK Located west of the Study Area, Stanford Research Park is a major employment center that hosts numerous technology and research firms. The park spans 700 acres and is home to over 150 companies, including those in biotechnology, clean energy, and information technology. It influences travel patterns within the Study Area, as many employees rely on bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure to access transit and surrounding neighborhoods. COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS SURROUNDING THE STUDY AREA Several major arterials in south Palo Alto serve as commercial corridors that provide essential services, retail, and dining options for residents, employees, and visitors. El Camino Real is a key corridor with a mix of shopping centers, restaurants, and office spaces, attracting both local and regional traffic. As a high-volume roadway, it presents challenges for bicycle and pedestrian accessibility. San Antonio Road, another significant corridor, connects Palo Alto with Mountain View and features a range of commercial establishments, including grocery stores, retail centers, and business offices. Middlefield Road functions as a neighborhood-serving corridor with small businesses, cafés, and essential services that cater to nearby residents. These commercial areas are important destinations that generate pedestrian and bicycle activity in the Study Area. DOWNTOWN PALO ALTO AND CALIFORNIA AVENUE BUSINESS DISTRICT While located outside of south Palo Alto, Downtown Palo Alto and the California Avenue Business District serve as major commercial and employment centers within the City. They provide a mix of retail, restaurants, office spaces, shopping, and professional services. CALTRAIN STATIONS South Palo Alto is served by two Caltrain stations that provide regional transit connections: California Avenue Station Located north of the Study Area, this station serves the California Avenue Business District and provides connections to downtown Palo Alto. It is a frequent destination for pedestrians and bicyclists. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 24 Packet Pg. 58 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 8 San Antonio Station Located near the southern boundary of the Study Area, this station provides access to major commercial and residential developments in Palo Alto and Mountain View. It is a key transit hub for local and regional commuters. BUS TRANSIT LINES The Study Area is served by several bus routes that provide connectivity to key destinations. Key routes operating in or near the Study Area include VTA Routes 21, 22, 89, 101, 102, 103, 104, and 522, as well as school shuttle services. Routes 22 and 522 provide frequent all-day service along El Camino Real. Route 89 connects California Avenue Caltrain Station to the Palo Alto VA Hospital. Additionally, a school shuttle service operates within the Study Area, VTA Route 288. Additional details are provided in the Transit Facilities section of this report. KEY FINDINGS Key findings from the remainder of this Existing Conditions Report are summarized below: ◼ City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (2022), Program T1.19.3 aims to "increase the number of east-west pedestrian and bicycle crossings across Alma Street and the Caltrain corridor, particularly south of Oregon Expressway." ◼ City of Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) (2012) identifies the 1.3-mile distance between the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and Meadow Drive as the longest stretch of track barrier in Palo Alto. The Plan recommends a grade-separated pedestrian and bicycle crossing of the Caltrain corridor and Alma Street in the vicinity of Matadero Creek/Park Boulevard or between Margarita Avenue and Loma Verde Avenue. ◼ City of Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study (2013) and Midtown Connector Feasibility Study (2016) identify bicycle and pedestrian rail crossing opportunities and potential crossing alignments. ◼ Approximately 19,700 residents live in the Study Area, representing roughly 29 percent of the City of Palo Alto’s total population. ◼ Key growth areas within the City of Palo Alto include the Midtown and Ventura neighborhoods, San Antonio Road corridor, and along El Camino Real within and near the Study Area. ◼ Dedicated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the railroad in and near the Study Area include: o California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel o Meadow Drive o Charleston Road o San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass ◼ Existing pedestrian facilities are largely continuous in the Study Area and include sidewalks, crosswalks, Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons, and bridges. However, several notable gaps exist in the pedestrian network at certain locations, such as along Alma Street where a sidewalk is only present on the east side. Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road and the San Antonio Road interchange features a high-speed vehicle environment and limited pedestrian facilities for crossing the tracks. ◼ Existing bicycle facilities support active travel in the Study Area with key routes providing access across the railroad tracks, including along Meadow Drive and Charleston Avenue. However, there are currently no continuous bike facilities across the railroad tracks on Oregon Expressway and Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 25 Packet Pg. 59 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 9 San Antonio Road. The Study Area includes several low-to-moderate traffic stress level bikeways. However, several notable roadways in the Study Area are considered to have high traffic stress for cyclists, including along Alma Street, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, San Antonio Road, and El Camino Real. ◼ Several VTA bus routes and two Caltrain stations (California Avenue and San Antonio) provide public transit access to the Study Area. ◼ The City’s Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program offers suggested routes to and from schools within and near the Study Area through Walk and Roll Maps. ◼ Several notable on-going and upcoming transportation improvement projects in the Study Area include the rail grade separation projects for vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road, and the El Camino Real bikeway currently being installed by Caltrans in Palo Alto, Mountain View and Los Altos. ◼ Around 59% of workers living in the Study Area commute by car (drive-alone and carpool combined), which is more than 56% of total residents citywide that commute by car. ◼ On weekdays, pedestrian activity is highest in the afternoon hours between 3 PM and 6 PM. On weekends, pedestrian activity is more variable, with the highest activity levels in the morning and early afternoon. On weekdays, bicycle activity peaks during the morning and afternoon peak periods (7-9 AM and 4-6 PM), with a jump in activity around 8 AM on Meadow Drive westbound. On weekends, bicycle activity remains relatively steady throughout the day. Similar to pedestrian activity, there is higher bicycle activity on Meadow Drive than Charleston Road. ◼ Pedestrians using the existing rail crossings in and near the Study Area must travel further to access destinations near Park Boulevard, Margarita Avenue and Loma Verde Avenue. ◼ Bicyclists using existing rail crossings in and near the Study Area are generally able to travel anywhere throughout the Study Area in less than 30 minutes (round trip). ◼ Approximately 30% of all trips using the existing rail crossing in and near the Study Area are less than five miles in length. ◼ Origins and destinations of shorter distance trips (under five miles) for all travel modes currently using the existing rail crossings in and near the Study Area are more concentrated near the California Avenue Caltrain Station, California Avenue, Ventura Neighborhood, and San Antonio Center in Mountain View. ◼ The Draft Safety Action Plan designates Oregon Expressway, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, Middlefield Road, and El Camino Real as High-Injury Corridors due to their disproportionately high number of crashes. ◼ Several creeks flow through the Study Area, classified as a Moderate Risk zone for flooding. Based on the information presented in this Existing Conditions Report, the following crossing opportunity locations have been identified for further exploration: A. Near Colorado Avenue and Page Mill Road B. Around Matadero Creek (El Dorado Avenue to Loma Verde Avenue) C. Near Barron Creek D. Between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road E. Near Adobe Creek F. Near San Antonio Road The City plans to gather feedback on these locations to help determine the preferred crossing sites. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 26 Packet Pg. 60 of 351 Literature Review Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 27 Packet Pg. 61 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 11 Literature Review A review of 35 relevant planning documents, programs, and policies was conducted to understand the current planning context for walking and biking in south Palo Alto as well as prior efforts completed in the Study Area. The detailed literature review is presented in Appendix A, which includes policies and programs, common themes related to needs and challenges, relevant projects and planning studies recommended in prior and ongoing plans, and community feedback and public input. There is strong alignment in the visions and goals across the documents reviewed, particularly surrounding sustainability, climate action, and enhancing active transportation (people walking and biking) in Palo Alto. This Project aims to build comfortable and convenient connections for people walking and biking across the rail corridor in south Palo Alto. For instance, the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (2022) establishes long-term policies to enhance mobility, safety, and connectivity while addressing the impacts of rail operations. Key transportation policies focus on pursuing grade separation at rail crossings (Policy T-3.15), maintaining pedestrian and bicycle access at-grade crossings with safety studies (Policy T-3.16), and improving existing crossings for safety and accessibility (Policy T-3.17). The plan also prioritizes Safe Routes to School programs (Policy T- 6.4) and supports regional bicycle and pedestrian connectivity projects, such as the Bay Trail and Santa Clara Countywide Bicycle System (Policy T-8.8). This project advances Program T1.19.3 from the Comprehensive Plan, Program T1.19.3 aims to "increase the number of east-west pedestrian and bicycle crossings across Alma Street and the Caltrain corridor, particularly south of Oregon Expressway." The Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) (2012) proposes a network of bikeways, pedestrian paths, and crossings to close system gaps and promote active transportation. Key recommendations included maintaining and expanding Class I trails, improving substandard Class II bike lanes for safety and visibility, and adding sharrows and signage on Class III shared roadways. The Plan also focuses on enhancing bicycle connections with neighboring jurisdictions, removing unnecessary stop signs on bicycle boulevards, and implementing intersection improvements such as curb extensions, markings, and signalization changes to improve safety for bicyclists and pedestrians. Additionally, it prioritizes across- barrier connections to enhance access to key destinations while addressing implementation challenges. The Plan recommends the City study potential pedestrian and bicycle undercrossing or overcrossing alternatives of the Caltrain corridor and Alma Street in the vicinity of Matadero Creek/Park Boulevard or between Margarita Avenue and Loma Verde Avenue to close a 1.3 mile gap between existing crossings at California Avenue and Meadow Drive, greatly improving east-west connectivity in conjunction with other improvements. The Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) (2022) aligns with these efforts by integrating transportation safety and sustainability goals. Goal T-6 aims to provide a safe environment for all road users, including motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists, and supports measures such as adult crossing guards at warranted school crossings. While Goal T-8 focuses on influencing regional transportation policies to reduce congestion and greenhouse gas emissions, improve bicycle connections between Palo Alto and neighboring communities in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties, and reduce barriers to bicycling and walking at freeway interchanges, expressway intersections, and railroad grade crossings. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 28 Packet Pg. 62 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 12 The City of Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study (2013) envisions a vibrant, safe, and transit-rich corridor that enhances connectivity between the east and west portions of the City while promoting walkable, bicycle- friendly environments. The study goals include constructing rail improvements in a below-grade trench; ensuring the highest possible safety at all rail crossings and mitigate rail impacts on neighborhoods, public facilities, schools and mixed-use centers; connecting the east and west portions of the City through an improved circulation network that binds the City together in all directions; providing improved access to parks, recreation facilities and schools and assess future needs for these facilities; and ensuring that infrastructure development keeps pace with the City’s growth. The Midtown Connector Feasibility Study (2016) evaluates three viable alignments to enhance bicycle and pedestrian connectivity in Palo Alto including the Matadero Creek Shared-Use, the Matadero Creek Pedestrian-Only Path, and the Loma Verde Avenue Class IV Protected Bikeway. The study further explores how a trail facility along Matadero Creek could connect to existing bicycle and pedestrian networks, despite significant barriers such as US 101 and the Caltrain corridor. Potential solutions include utilizing existing and proposed crossings, building a new undercrossing or overcrossing of Alma Street and the Caltrain tracks, or enhancing the current US 101 undercrossing. The Caltrain Business Plan (2022) outlines a strategic vision for the railroad's evolution over the next two decades. Central to this plan is the 2040 Long Range Service Vision, which aims to transform Caltrain into a modern, electrified transit system offering frequent, all-day service. This vision includes infrastructure enhancements, expanded service schedules, and improved access to accommodate a broader range of travelers. The plan also emphasizes organizational growth to effectively deliver major capital projects and expanded operations throughout the corridor. Additionally, major needs and challenges identified in the literature review are summarized below: ◼ Improving Safety and Connectivity: Addressing east-west bicycle connections, pedestrian and bicycle crossings at major barriers, and optimizing at-grade railroad crossings for safety and accessibility, particularly for students and commuters. ◼ Mitigating Congestion and Train Noise Impacts: Reducing traffic stress and congestion caused by increased train frequencies from Caltrain electrification and future High-Speed Rail integration. ◼ Design and Maintenance Challenges: Balancing 24-hour path access with safety and maintenance, enhancing surface conditions for bicyclists, and addressing operational and state-of-repair needs. ◼ Community and Funding Barriers: Finding community-supported solutions for grade separation while overcoming funding, regulatory, and design hurdles. ◼ Behavioral and Security Concerns: Tackling issues like failure to yield to pedestrians, bicycle theft, and trail safety at night. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 29 Packet Pg. 63 of 351 Demographics Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 30 Packet Pg. 64 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Demographics Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 14 Demographics The Study Area has a population of about 19,700 according to the American Community Survey (ACS) Year 2022 estimates, representing roughly 29 percent of the City of Palo Alto’s total population.5 The working age population cohort (ages 20 to 64) represents the largest population segment at 62 percent of the total population. Almost all (97 percent) of the Study Area residents aged 25 years or older have at least a high school diploma. Figure 2 shows key demographic data. Figure 2: Study Area Key Demographic Data Source: American Community Survey (ACS) 2022-year estimates Note: Values are rounded to the nearest 10 or 100. Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number. Table 1 presents the racial and ethnic composition of the Study Area. Forty-six percent of the Study Area population is White, around eight percent of the population identify as Hispanic or Latino, forty-one percent Asian, and three percent some other race. Chinese, Asian Indian and Korean constitute the major Asian groups in the City. Table 2 shows the language spoken at home for the population five years of age and older. Approximately 50 percent of the population exclusively speaks English at home. Asian and Pacific Island languages are spoken by about 28 percent of the population, with around 35 percent of this group not speaking English proficiently. Other Indo-European languages account for 13 percent, of which roughly 12 percent do not speak English very well. 5 A portion of the Study Area includes Mountain View, and the demographics data includes the portion of Mountain View east of El Camino Real and north of San Antonio Road. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 31 Packet Pg. 65 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Demographics Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 15 Table 1: Race and Ethnicity Race and Hispanic Origin Study Area Population Percentage of Study Area White 9,100 46% Black or African American 240 2% American Indian and Alaska Native 80 1% Asian 8,000 41% Asian Indian 1,400 7% Chinese 5,200 27% Filipino 190 1% Japanese 230 1% Korean 630 3% Vietnamese 150 1% Other Asian 250 1% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0% Two or more races 1,620 8% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 1,500 8% Not Hispanic or Latino 18,200 92% Total Population 19,700 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05 Note: Values are rounded to the nearest 10 or 100. Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number. Table 2: Language Spoken at Home Language Study Area Population Percentage Percentage who speak English less than "very well" Speak only English 9,800 52% Not Applicable Speak a language other than English 9,130 48% 29% Spanish 1,050 5% 32% Other Indo-European languages 2,500 13% 12% Asian and Pacific Island languages 5,320 28% 35% Other languages 280 2% 9% Total Study Area Population 5 years and over 18,900 14% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table S1601 Note: Values are rounded to the nearest 10 or 100. Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) measures equity including income, race, English proficiency, age, disability, and car-ownership to develop Equity Priority Communities (EPC), or designated Census tracts with a significant concentration of underserved populations. While Palo Alto Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 32 Packet Pg. 66 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Demographics Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 16 does not have designated EPCs, adjacent communities that include Stanford University and Census blocks in Mountain View bounded by Rengstorff Avenue, Crisanto Avenue, Escuela Avenue, and El Camino Real, located 0.7 mile from south of San Antonio Road, are designated as EPCs per Plan Bay Area 2050+.6 The Study Area includes some Census blocks where between 10%-20% of the population lives below the poverty line. These are located near the Alma Street, East Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road areas.7 Disadvantaged Communities (DAC) represent Census tracts that experience high levels of pollution and/or Census tracts that are federally recognized as tribal areas. Similar to EPCs, there are no DACs in the City of Palo Alto. The California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen 4.0)8 developed by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to help identify California communities disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution. The tool utilizes existing environmental, health, and socioeconomic data to rank Census tracts based on 20 distinct indicators. It provides an assessment of environmental burdens such as air quality, toxic releases, hazardous waste, and drinking water, as well as health-related burdens including asthma, low birth weight, and cardiovascular disease across Census tracts statewide. In general, the higher the score, the more impacted a community is by pollution burdens and population vulnerabilities. Designated disadvantaged communities are those communities that scored within the highest 25 percent of Census tracts across California. Census tracts at the 75th percentile and above are considered to experience high burdens. For the Study Area, Census tracts located east of Alma Street are below the 10th percentile overall, which indicates relatively low cumulative environmental and health impacts. Census tracts west of Alma Street are at the 14th percentile overall. For asthma burdens, the Census tracts in the Study Area are at the 5th percentile. Table 3 depicts the percentile rankings for the Census tracts within the Study Area. Midtown (Census Tract 5109) percentiles indicate low cumulative environmental and health burdens. It has a pollution burden percentile of 30 and an asthma burden percentile of 3. Similarly, Fairmeadow (Census Tract 5108.02) and South of Midtown (Census Tract 5108.03) also have low CalEnviroScreen percentiles, with pollution burden percentiles of 28 and 7, respectively, and asthma burden percentiles of 5. In contrast, Ventura (Census Tract 5107) and Charleston Meadows (Census Tract 5094.01) rank in the 14th percentile overall, which indicates slightly higher environmental burdens compared to other areas within the Study Area. Ventura has a pollution burden percentile of 50, the highest among the listed Census tracts, while Charleston Meadows has a pollution burden percentile of 33. However, both Census tracts maintain relatively low asthma burdens at 3 and 2 percentiles, respectively. 6 Plan Bay Area 2050 Plus: 7aiii_24_1232_Attachment_B_2024_Equity_Priority_Communities_Map.pdf 7 Palo Alto Safety Action Plan: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Transportation/Transportation-Projects/Safety- Action-Plan 8 CalEnviroScreen 4.0: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/11d2f52282a54ceebcac7428e6184203/page/CalEnviroScreen- 4_0/ Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 33 Packet Pg. 67 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Demographics Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 17 Table 3: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile Ranking per Census Tract Census Tract Neighborhood CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile1 Pollution Burden Percentile2 Asthma3 Traffic Impacts4 5109 Midtown 1 30 3 38 5108.03 South of Midtown 6 7 5 24 5108.02 Fairmeadow 4 28 5 55 5107 Ventura 14 50 3 71 5094.01 Charleston Meadows 14 33 2 72 Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 is the latest iteration of the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool. 2. Pollution Burden Percentile represents the average of exposure indicators such as pm2.5 and ozone and environmental indicators such as cleanup sites and groundwater threats. 3. Exposure to traffic and outdoor air pollutants, including particulate matter, ozone, and diesel exhaust, can trigger asthma attacks. 4. Traffic impacts represent the vehicles in a specified area, resulting in human exposures to chemicals that are released into the air by vehicle exhaust. Note: Values represent the percentile ranking of Census tract Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 34 Packet Pg. 68 of 351 Land Use and Population Growth Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 35 Packet Pg. 69 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Land Use and Population Growth Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 19 Land Use and Population Growth The Study Area includes several diverse neighborhoods including Ventura, Midtown, St. Claire Gardens, South of Midtown, Greendell, San Alma, Greenmeadow, Walnut Grove, Fairmeadow, Charleston Meadows, and Monroe Park. Land use varies across these areas, with a mix of single-family and multi- family residential, commercial, office, and service uses. Midtown contains the Midtown Shopping Center, Hoover Park, and El Carmelo Elementary School, while Fairmeadow and Greenmeadow near Alma Street are primarily low-density residential with some multi-family units. North Ventura, west of the railroad tracks, features a combination of residential, office, and retail uses, with commercial activity concentrated along El Camino Real, Lambert Avenue, Park Boulevard and Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road. Office uses are mainly located along Page Mill Road and Park Boulevard, while the area south of Lambert Avenue transitions back to low-density residential and includes Robles Park. The City of Palo Alto 2023-2031 Housing Element (2024)9 identified several sites within the Study Area for future housing development. Most of these sites are located in the Ventura Neighborhood, San Antonio Road and along the El Camino Real as shown in Figure 3. Figure 4 illustrates the projected population growth approved by the City of Palo Alto 2023-2031 Housing Element. Key growth areas include the areas surrounding San Antonio Road, Ventura Neighborhood, and Midtown. City Council adopted the North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (NVCAP) in 2024 which aims to add to the City’s supply of multi-family housing, including market rate, affordable, “missing middle” and senior housing in a walkable, mixed-use, transit-accessible neighborhood, with retail and commercial services.10 Furthermore, the City will be conducting the San Antonio Road Area Plan over the next three years, which will establish the goals, policies, and implementation programs for land use, transportation, critical infrastructure, and other improvements to support the increase the capacity for development along San Antonio Road. 9 City of Palo Alto 2023-2031 Housing Element (2024). Retrieved from https://paloaltohousingelement.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Palo- Alto-Housing-Element.pdf 10 City of Palo Alto North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (NVCAP) (2024). Retrieved from https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning- Development-Services/Housing-Policies-Projects/NVCAP Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 36 Packet Pg. 70 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Land Use and Population Growth Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 20 Figure 3: Existing Zoning and Future Housing Sites Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 37 Packet Pg. 71 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Land Use and Population Growth Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 21 Figure 4: Population Growth Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 38 Packet Pg. 72 of 351 Transportation Network Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 39 Packet Pg. 73 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 23 Transportation Network The transportation network within the Study Area consists of roadways, pedestrian facilities, bicycle facilities, and transit facilities, as well as the suggested walk and roll routes from the City’s Safe Routes to School Program. Future transportation network improvements relevant to the Study Area are also summarized in this section. ROADWAY NETWORK The Study Area roadway network consists of various street types, each with specific posted speed limits ranging from less than 25 mph to 45 mph. The Study Area includes a mix of signal-controlled intersections, stop-controlled intersections, and Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons11 for traffic control. Figure 5 and Figure 6 depict the existing roadway network, including speed limits and the number of lanes for both directions, while Figure 7 illustrates the pavement conditions within the Study Area. The pavement conditions within the Study Area are generally good to excellent. However, some segments along local and collector roads show fair to poor conditions, particularly, Loma Verde Avenue east of Alma Street and the local and collector roads surrounding Park Boulevard west of Alma Street. As documented in the City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map12, the Study Area includes a network of designated truck routes that facilitate freight movement while managing impacts on local streets. Alma Street, San Antonio Road, and El Camino Real are designated as through truck routes, which allow continuous truck travel across the City. Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road is considered a local truck route, which operates between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM. It has limited-access routes for deliveries and commercial vehicle traffic within the City. El Camino Real (State Route 82) is the western border of the Study Area and runs parallel to the Caltrain rail corridor. The roadway is classified by the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2030 (2022)13 (or Comp Plan) as a north-south arterial extending from Interstate 880 (I-880) in San Jose to Interstate 280 (I-280) in San Francisco. Within the Study Area, it runs from Embarcadero Road to Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road and features a six-lane cross-section. The posted speed limit along El Camino Real ranges from 25 to 40 mph, with a 35-mph speed limit within the Study Area. Middlefield Road runs parallel to the Caltrain rail corridor. The roadway is classified by the City’s Comp Plan as a north-south residential arterial. It extends from San Antonio Road in Palo Alto to Veterans Boulevard in Redwood City. It is primarily a four-lane undivided roadway with a posted speed limit of 25 mph. Alma Street is classified by the City’s Comp Plan as a north-south arterial which extends from the San Antonio Road at the border of Mountain View (where it changes name to Central Expressway in Mountain View) to Palo Alto Avenue at the border of Menlo Park. Alma Street is primarily a four-lane undivided 11Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) is a traffic control device designed to help pedestrians safely cross higher-speed roadways 12 City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/2/transportation/wide-load- permits/truck-route-map-city-of-palo-alto.pdf 13 City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2030 (2022): https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/4/planning-amp- development-services/3.-comprehensive-plan/comprehensive-plan/full-comp-plan-2030_with-dec19_22-amendments.pdf Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 40 Packet Pg. 74 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 24 roadway with the speed limit within the Study Area ranging from 25-35 mph. Alma Street also runs adjacent and parallel to Caltrain’s right-of-way. San Antonio Road serves as a key connection between Mountain View and Los Altos. It forms the southern border of the Study Area. The roadway is classified by the City’s Comp Plan as an east-west arterial which extends from US 101 in Palo Alto to Foothill Expressway in Los Altos. It features a four-lane cross-section throughout the Study Area. Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road is classified by the City’s Comp Plan as an east-west expressway that runs from Middlefield Road and El Camino Real within the Study Area. This expressway also connects residents to US 101 in the east and I-280 in the west. Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road is a four-lane divided roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 mph. Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road is currently a grade-separated crossing primarily for vehicles. Meadow Drive is classified by the City’s Comp Plan as an east-west local/collector which runs from Fabian Way to El Camino Way and features a two-lane cross-section throughout the Study Area. Charleston Road is classified by the City’s Comp Plan as a residential arterial from El Camino Real to Fabian Way and as an arterial from Fabian Way to U.S. 101. Charleston Road features a four-lane cross- section from El Camino Real to Wright Place, transitioning to a two-lane cross-section from Wright Place to U.S. 101. The posted speed limit along Charleston Road within the Study Area is 25 miles per hour. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 41 Packet Pg. 75 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 25 Figure 5. Existing Roadway Network Speed Limits Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 42 Packet Pg. 76 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 26 Figure 6. Existing Roadway Network Number of Lanes (Both Directions) Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 43 Packet Pg. 77 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 27 Figure 7. Existing Pavement Conditions Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 44 Packet Pg. 78 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 28 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Figure 8 depicts the existing pedestrian facilities including sidewalks, crosswalks, Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons, and bridges in the Study Area. Sidewalks within the Study Area are largely continuous, and most streets feature at least four- to five-foot wide sidewalks on both sides of the roadway. However, notable gaps exist in certain locations. On Alma Street, sidewalks are present only on the east side of the road. Additionally, gaps are also observed along Miller Avenue and its adjacent residential streets. Several local/collector roads, particularly near Miller Avenue in the southwest part of the Study Area have no sidewalks on both sides of the road. In limited locations, sidewalks have landscape strips separating the sidewalk from the roadway; however, in most locations there is no landscaping or trees in the public right-of-way. Marked crosswalks exist at signalized intersections along major roads including Middlefield Road, Alma Street, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, San Antonio Road, and El Camino Real. These signalized intersections are marked with standard crosswalks and have pedestrian- activated countdown signal heads. Each intersection provides at least one crosswalk and pedestrian signal head. Unsignalized intersections throughout the Study Area are primarily side-street two-way or all-way stop-controlled and most do not have marked crosswalks. Figure 9 shows the existing intersection control in the Study Area. Within the Study Area, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road features a high-speed vehicle environment and limited pedestrian facilities, which makes it challenging for pedestrians to cross the tracks. Meadow Drive and Charleston Road are signalized intersections with marked crosswalks and pedestrian crossing phases, which provide controlled crossings at the intersections. However, they feature at-grade railroad crossings with pedestrian gates and warning signals. Outside the Study Area, the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel is a dedicated grade separated crossing beneath the rail tracks located adjacent to the California Avenue Caltrain Station. San Antonio Road does not provide direct pedestrian or bicycle crossings over the Caltrain tracks and Central Expressway, despite its proximity to the San Antonio Caltrain Station, shopping areas, and higher-density housing. As a result, pedestrians and cyclists rely on alternative routes to navigate across the tracks and the expressway. Pedestrians and cyclists familiar with the area typically use one of three options: ◼ San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass (located 0.1 mile south of San Antonio Road) and either the signalized crossing of the expressway at Mayfield Avenue in Mountain View or at San Antonio Avenue in Palo Alto. ◼ Dirt track and pedestrian pathway from the west side of San Antonio Road (west of the Caltrain tracks) and the flight of stairs north of the Caltrain station to get to the signalized intersection across Central Expressway at San Antonio Road. ◼ Some cyclists choose to use the San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass in combination with the underpass across San Antonio Road near the entrance of the Waymo campus. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 45 Packet Pg. 79 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 29 Figure 8. Existing Pedestrian Facilities Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 46 Packet Pg. 80 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 30 Figure 9. Existing Intersection Control Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 47 Packet Pg. 81 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 31 BICYCLE FACILITIES The City of Palo Alto has made significant progress in developing a robust bicycle network. Figure 10 shows existing bicycle facilities. The existing bicycle network includes a variety of facility types including: ◼ Class I Bikeways (Shared Use Paths): A path physically separated from motor vehicle traffic by an open space or barrier, used by bicyclists, pedestrians, joggers, skaters, and other non-motorized travelers. ◼ Class II Bikeways (Bike Lanes): A travel lane on a roadway that has been set aside by striping and pavement markings for the preferential or exclusive use of bicyclists. o Class IIa (Standard Bike Lane): A conventional one-way striped bicycle lane. o Class IIb (Buffered Bike Lane): An enhanced bike lane that includes a painted buffer zone, providing additional space between bicyclists and adjacent vehicle lanes or parked cars. ◼ Class III Bikeways (Bike Routes): are designated by signage where bicyclists share travel lanes with motor vehicle traffic. o Class IIIa (Bike Routes): A shared roadway where bicyclists and motor vehicles coexist, identified solely by signage without additional pavement markings. o Class IIIb (Bike Boulevard): A shared roadway optimized for bicycle travel through traffic calming measures and signage, creating a safer and more comfortable environment for cyclists. ◼ Class IV Bikeways (Separated Bikeway) is for the exclusive use of bicycles and includes a separation between the bikeways and adjacent vehicle traffic. The physical separation may include flexible posts, grade separation, inflexible physical barriers, or on-street parking. The Study Area includes a bicycle network that supports active transportation, with key routes providing access across major corridors. Meadow Drive and Charleston Road have Class II bike lanes on both sides of the roadway and serve as the primary east-west bicycle connections across the Caltrain corridor in the Study Area. There are currently no continuous bike facilities on Oregon Expressway and San Antonio Road. San Antonio Road has a partial Class III shared roadway (sharrows) in certain segments; however, it does not provide a strong east-west bicycle connection due to its limited dedicated bike facilities and high vehicle speeds, which create a challenging environment for cyclists. Loma Verde Avenue, Colorado Avenue, and Margarita Avenue are additional east-west bicycle routes in the Study Area. Loma Verde Avenue has Class II bike lanes and Colorado Avenue has a combination of Class II bike lanes and Class III bike routes. Margarita Avenue is a Class III bike route. There are currently no continuous bike facilities on Alma Street and El Camino Real. However, several north-south bikeways are provided within the Study Area. Middlefield Road has a Class II bike lane from Montrose Avenue to Loma Verde Avenue. Bryant Street consists of a combination of Class IIIa bike routes and Class III bike boulevards, while Cowper Street features a Class III bike route. Park Boulevard has a combination of Class II bike lane and Class III bike routes north of Matadero Avenue. Additionally, the Caltrans El Camino Real Bikeway Project is currently under construction and is expected to include a combination of Class II and Class IV bike facilities along El Camino Real throughout Mountain View, Los Altos, and Palo Alto. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 48 Packet Pg. 82 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 32 Within the Study Area, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road presents a significant challenge for cyclists due to high-speed vehicle traffic and the lack of dedicated bicycle infrastructure. Additionally, at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road, cyclists must navigate at-grade railroad crossings equipped with pedestrian gates and warning signals. However, without dedicated bicycle treatments, they are required to cross alongside vehicular traffic. Bicyclist Comfort Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) is an evaluation that quantifies the amount of discomfort that people feel when bicycling near motor vehicle traffic. It assigns a numeric stress level to roadway segments, trails, and intersections based on attributes such as motor vehicle speed, volume, number of lanes, lane blockage, on-street parking, and ease of intersection crossing. The higher the LTS, the higher the expected discomfort for the rider traveling along the facility. The four LTS ratings are as follows: ◼ LTS 1 - Very Low Traffic Stress: Most children feel comfortable bicycling. ◼ LTS 2 - Low Traffic Stress: The mainstream adult population feels comfortable bicycling. ◼ LTS 3 - Moderate Traffic Stress: Bicyclists who are considered "enthused and confident" but still prefer having their own dedicated space feel comfortable while bicycling. ◼ LTS 4 - High Traffic Stress: Only "strong and fearless" bicyclists feel comfortable while bicycling. These routes have high-speed limits, multiple travel lanes, limited or non-existent bicycle lanes and signage, and large distances to cross at intersections. Figure 11 illustrates the results of the Segment Bicycle LTS analysis from the BPTP Update. Based on this analysis, the most stressful segments in the Study Area are located along Alma Street, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, San Antonio Road, Middlefield Road, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, El Camino Real, Lambert Avenue, and parts of Park Boulevard. Bicycle LTS at intersections results are depicted in Figure 12. Among the 975 intersections in the Study Area, 129 are signalized and are assigned LTS 1 as traffic signals help manage traffic flow and provide safer crossings for cyclists. The remaining low stress intersections are generally located on residential streets characterized by low speeds and minimal vehicular activity. Many high-stress intersections are associated with El Camino Real, Alma Street, San Antonio Road, Middlefield Road, Charleston Road, Loma Verde Avenue, Lambert Avenue, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, and parts of Park Boulevard, which are also high-stress corridors as stated above. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 49 Packet Pg. 83 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 33 MAJOR BARRIERS The BPTP Update examined the effects of five linear barriers in the Study Area (Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, Adobe Creek, Barron Creek, Matadero Canal, and Caltrain rail lines). ◼ Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road: The Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road does not result in significantly longer pedestrian crossing paths due to the presence of crossing facilities. Crossings are generally located every quarter mile, with facilities such as curb ramps, crosswalks, and traffic signals. ◼ Adobe Creek: Pedestrians may need to walk longer paths (often more than twice the straight-line crossing distance) to pass around Adobe Creek, especially to the south. Opportunities to cross Adobe Creek in the Study Area include Middlefield Road, Charleston Road, Alma Street, and El Camino Real. There is also a walking- and bicycling-only connection: a walkway connecting the Miller Avenue cul-de-sac to Wilkie Way. ◼ Barron Creek: While some paths across Barron Creek are longer than the straight-line crossing distance, they are usually less than double that distance due to the availability of closely spaced crossing facilities. Crossing opportunities are generally located every 1,100 feet north of Waverly Street and every 300 feet to the south; sidewalks are provided on streets crossing the creek. ◼ Matadero Creek: People may need to take detours of up to 1.75 times the straight-line crossing distance to cross Matadero Creek. However, the presence of the rail line along the southern tip of the creek’s above-ground alignment further increases the crossing distance in that area. ◼ Rail Line: Crossing distances varies along the length of the rail line in Palo Alto. Distances between existing bike and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor in south Palo Alto are as follows: o 1.3 mile between the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and Meadow Drive; o 0.3 mile between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road; and o 0.8 mile between Charleston Road and the San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass. The 1.3 mile distance between the existing California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and the at-grade crossing at Meadow Drive represents the longest stretch of track barrier in Palo Alto. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 50 Packet Pg. 84 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 34 Figure 10. Existing Bicycle Facilities Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 51 Packet Pg. 85 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 35 Figure 11: Bicyclist Level of Traffic Stress – Roadway Segments Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 52 Packet Pg. 86 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 36 Figure 12: Bicyclist Level of Traffic Stress - Intersections Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 53 Packet Pg. 87 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 37 TRANSIT FACILITIES The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) operates bus services in Palo Alto. Within the Study Area, there are currently 18 bus stops along El Camino Real, 10 bus stops along Meadow Drive, 18 bus stops along Middlefield Road, three bus stops along Loma Verde Avenue, and three bus stops along San Antonio Road. School routes operate on Charleston Road, Meadow Drive, Loma Verde Avenue, Middlefield Road, and Waverly Street, while no shuttle routes operate in the Study Area. Additionally, Palo Alto Link is an on-demand rideshare service that allows users to book rides within most areas of the City. Table 4 describes the services and frequency during the week and weekend for buses that operate within the Study Area. Figure 13 illustrates the existing VTA transit routes and bus stop locations and Figure 14 shows the VTA’s 2024 average weekday ridership activity (boardings and alightings) by stop/station in the Study Area14. Bus stops along El Camino Real and Middlefield Road have the highest ridership activity in the Study Area. The highest average weekday ridership activity in the Study Area occurs along El Camino Real at the Arastradero Road and Charleston Road bus stops. These bus stops have ridership activity exceeding 100 passengers per day and are served by both Route 22 and Route 522. Caltrain, a regional commuter rail system, provides service from San Francisco to Gilroy by the Peninsula Joint Powers Board. Two Caltrain stations are located near the Study Area: (1) California Avenue Station located approximately 650 feet north of Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road and (2) San Antonio Caltrain Station located approximately 450 feet south of San Antonio Road. Caltrain recently electrified its right- of-way between San Francisco and San Jose, installing an overhead wire (catenary) system on the tracks. Additionally, future California High-Speed Rail trains require a new four-track section in Palo Alto15, which will extend between Churchill Avenue and Meadow Drive to bypass Caltrain trains. 14 VTA's 2024 Ridership by Stop & Station: https://data.vta.org/pages/ridership-by-stop 15 Caltrain Business Plan Summary Report: https://www.caltrain.com/media/24042/download?inline Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 54 Packet Pg. 88 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 38 Table 4. VTA Bus Routes Summary Route Number From To Weekdays Weekends Operating Hours Headway (minutes) Operating Hours Headway (minutes) 21 Stanford Shopping Center Santa Clara Transit Center 5:30 am – 10:00 pm varies 7:40 am - 9:20 pm varies 22 Palo Alto Transit Center Eastridge All Day 15 All Day 15 89 California Ave Caltrain Palo Alto VA Hospital 6:30 am - 6:10 pm varies No Service No Service 522 Palo Alto Transit Center Eastridge 5:00 am – 11:30 pm 10-20 (varies) 6:00 am – 11:50 pm 10-20 (varies) School Shuttle 288 Veterans Hospital Middlefield and Colorado 3:40 pm – 4:50 pm 20 No Service No Service School Shuttle 288 Middlefield and Colorado Gunn High School 8:10 am – 8:50 am -- No Service No Service School Shuttle 288L Veterans Hospital Louis and Fielding 3:40 pm – 4:50 pm 20 No Service No Service School Shuttle 288 Louis and Elbridge Gunn High School 8:10 am – 8:50 am -- No Service No Service Source: VTA Schedule, 2024; VTA School Trippers 2024 Notes: 1. Operating hours are rounded to the nearest ten minutes. 2. Route 288M is scheduled to be discontinued, but Route 288 will be extended from Middlefield & Colorado to Loma Verde & Waverley to cover some of the former 288M route. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 55 Packet Pg. 89 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 39 Figure 13. Existing Transit Facilities Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 56 Packet Pg. 90 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 40 Figure 14. Existing Bus Ridership Activity Note: Activity includes boardings and alightings. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 57 Packet Pg. 91 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 41 SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL The local Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Partnership between the City, the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD), and the Palo Alto Council of PTAs (PTAC) works to reduce risk to students in route to and from school and encourages more families to choose alternatives to driving solo more often.16 Within the Study Area, several schools benefit from the SRTS program including JLS Middle School, El Carmelo Elementary School, and Herbert Hoover Elementary School. The SRTS program offers Walk and Roll Maps for each school to highlight the suggested routes that prioritize safety and convenience. These maps are designed to assist parents and students in exploring healthy, active commute options. Figure 15 shows the suggested routes to school in the Study Area. 16 Office of Transportation, Safe Routes to School. For more information, visit: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Transportation/Safe-Routes-to-School Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 58 Packet Pg. 92 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 42 Figure 15. Suggested Routes to Schools Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 59 Packet Pg. 93 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 43 FUTURE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS This section summarizes on-going/upcoming transportation improvement projects within the Study Area. ◼ Rail Grade Separation Projects: The City of Palo Alto has been actively working on rail grade separation projects along the Caltrain corridor at the existing at-grade crossings. Over the past several years, conceptual plans have been developed to evaluate various alternatives for grade separations at three key crossings: Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road. Considering input and feedback from the community, the project alternatives were reviewed by the Community Advisory Panel and the City’s Rail Committee to identify a preferred solution for each crossing. In June 2024, following community feedback and recommendations from the rail committee, the City Council advanced the Partial Underpass Alternative with a bicycle-pedestrian crossing at Seale Avenue as the preferred alternative for Churchill Avenue, with the Closure Alternative as a backup. For the Meadow Drive and Charleston Road crossings, the Hybrid Alternative (a mixed wall-column design approach) and the Underpass Alternative were selected. These alternatives are designed to accommodate all modes of traffic, including bicycles and pedestrians. The project is now progressing to the Preliminary Engineering and Environmental phase, during which selected alternatives will be further evaluated to confirm the preferred alternatives. The goal is to complete 35% of the design for the preferred alternative at each crossing during this phase of the project. ◼ Caltrans El Camino Real Pavement Rehabilitation and ADA Improvements: State Route 82 (SR 82) Pavement Rehabilitation and ADA Improvements17 project along El Camino Real spanning several communities including Palo Alto, will improve the state highway and support safety, access, and mobility of pedestrians and bicyclists. The project will repair pavement, upgrade existing non- standard ADA curb ramps, add complete street elements such as enhanced crosswalks, and replace on-street parking with bike lanes. Construction is on-going and expected to complete fall 2025. ◼ County of Santa Clara Page Mill Road and El Camino Real Intersection Improvements: The County of Santa Clara plans to install intersection improvements18 at Page Mill Road and El Camino Real to improve efficiency and provide bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements. Construction is expected to begin mid-2025. ◼ City of Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) Update: Palo Alto has been at the forefront of bicycle and pedestrian transportation planning since the early 1980’s, when the City developed the nation’s first bicycle boulevard on Bryant Street. The City’s existing BPTP, adopted in 2012, built upon those extensive planning and design efforts, and the 2025 update will continue the legacy of innovative active transportation planning. The BPTP Update effort will reflect community needs and desires, consider recent trends in cycling and bicycle technology, and address changes in bicycle and pedestrian planning and design. The BPTP Update is expected 17 SR-82 – Pavement Rehabilitation and ADA Improvements: https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-4/d4-projects/d4-santa- clara-sr82-pavement-rehabilitation-and-ada-improvements 18 Page Mill Road intersection improvements at El Camino Real: https://roads.santaclaracounty.gov/projects-and-studies/capital- projects/page-mill-road-intersection-improvements-el-camino-real Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 60 Packet Pg. 94 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Transportation Network Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 44 to recommend enhanced bicycle infrastructure within the Study Area including along, but not limited to, Loma Verde Avenue, Colorado Avenue, Meadow Drive, and San Antonio Road. ◼ Caltrain Business Plan: The Caltrain Business Plan identified that the California Avenue 4-track segment overlaps with planned crossing projects and will necessitate alignment with local and regional planning efforts to preserve this corridor for future infrastructure needs. Additionally, the plan includes future California High-Speed Rail (CA HSR) which will operate on the same tracks as Caltrain along the Peninsula Corridor (San Francisco to San Jose). The Northern California segment of HSR will share tracks with Caltrain, which will drive the need for additional passing track and signal system infrastructure. According to the latest construction timeline, initial HSR operations from Merced to San Francisco are expected to begin in 2029, with the Downtown Extension (DTX) opening and expanded HSR operations by 2033. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 61 Packet Pg. 95 of 351 Commuting Behavior Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 62 Packet Pg. 96 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Commuting Behavior Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 46 Commuting Behavior The Study Area has approximately 10,800 workers aged 16 and over, according to the American Community Survey (ACS) 2022 5-Year Estimates. The majority (59%) commute by car, truck, or van, with 54 percent driving alone and five percent carpooling. Public transportation is utilized by four percent of workers, while active transportation modes such as walking and bicycling contribute three and six percent of commuting trips, respectively. Alternative transportation modes, including taxis, motorcycles, and other means, account for two percent of commutes, while 26% work from home. Table 5 presents the commuting characteristics in the Study Area. Table 5: Commuting Characteristics in the Study Area Commute Mode Percentage of Total Workers – Study Area1 Percentage of Total Workers – City of Palo Alto Car, truck, or van 59% 56% - Drove alone 54% 52% - Carpooled 5% 4% Public Transportation 4% 2% Walked 3% 5% Bicycle 6% 7% Taxicab, motorcycle or other means 2% 2% Worked from home 26% 28% Total workers 16 years and over 100% 100% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table S0801. 1Based on 2022 ACS estimates, there are approximately 10,800 workers in the Study Area. Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 63 Packet Pg. 97 of 351 Traffic Counts Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 64 Packet Pg. 98 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Traffic Counts Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 48 Traffic Counts Bicyclist and pedestrian counts were collected by the City at 12 intersections during a typical weekday and weekend day over a 12-hour period (7 AM to 7 PM). These counts are summarized in Table 6; detailed summaries of counts by approach and turn movement are included in Appendix B. Table 6: Bicycle and Pedestrian 12- Hour Counts (7 AM to 7 PM) Intersection Pedestrian Bicycle Weekday Weekend Weekday Weekend Alma Street & E. Meadow Drive 497 440 516 243 Alma Street & Charleston Road 345 216 416 228 Bryant Street & El Carmelo Avenue 466 246 510 327 Middlefield Road & Colorado Avenue 841 968 261 111 Middlefield Road & Loma Verde Avenue 350 74 213 64 Middlefield Road & E. Meadow Drive 403 309 629 193 Middlefield Road & Charleston Road 773 559 376 222 Middlefield Road & San Antonio Road 328 379 138 79 El Camino Real & California Avenue 1,520 1,736 322 233 El Camino Real & Los Robles Avenue 268 343 130 36 El Camino Real & Margarita Avenue 379 272 113 31 El Camino Real & Arastradero Road 596 467 319 175 Source: City of Palo Alto, 2024 Note: Weekday counts were collected on Thursday, May 16, 2024. Weekend counts were collected on Saturday, May 18, 2024. Figure 16 summarizes pedestrian activity at existing at-grade crossing locations (Meadow Drive and Charleston Road) on a typical weekday and weekend day from 7 AM to 7 PM. On weekdays, pedestrian activity is generally highest in the afternoon hours between 3 PM and 6 PM. On weekends, pedestrian activity is more variable, with the highest activity levels in the morning and early afternoon. Overall pedestrian crossing activity is higher on weekends compared to weekdays; for both weekdays and weekends, Meadow Drive experiences higher pedestrian activity than Charleston Road. Figure 17 summarizes bicycle activity at existing at-grade crossing locations. On weekdays, bicycle activity peaks during the morning and afternoon peak periods (7-9 AM and 4-6 PM), with a jump in activity around 8 AM on Meadow Drive. On weekends, bicycle activity remains relatively steady throughout the day. Similar to pedestrian activity, there is higher bicycle activity on Meadow Drive than Charleston Road. Figure 18 illustrates vehicle activity at the existing crossing locations. On weekdays, peak commute periods typically occur around 8 AM and 5 PM. On weekends, a distinct peak is observed only on Charleston Road in the westbound direction during commute hours, while Meadow Drive experiences a peak in the afternoon. Overall, westbound traffic exceeds eastbound traffic, with Charleston Road carrying the highest vehicle volume. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 65 Packet Pg. 99 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Traffic Counts Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 49 Figure 16: Pedestrian Activity at Existing At-Grade Crossing Locations Source: City of Palo Alto, 2024; Compiled by Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2025 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 7:0 0 A M 8:0 0 A M 9:0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1:0 0 P M 2:0 0 P M 3:0 0 P M 4:0 0 P M 5:0 0 P M 6:0 0 P M Pe d e s t r i a n C o u n t Pedestrian Crossing -Weekday Meadow Dr - Eastbound Meadow Dr - Westbound Charleston Rd - Eastbound Charleston Rd - Westbound 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 7:0 0 A M 8:0 0 A M 9:0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1:0 0 P M 2:0 0 P M 3:0 0 P M 4:0 0 P M 5:0 0 P M 6:0 0 P M Pe d e s t r i a n C o u n t Axis Title Pedestrian Crosing -Weekend Meadow Dr - Eastbound Meadow Dr - Westbound Charleston Rd - Eastbound Charleston Rd - Westbound Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 66 Packet Pg. 100 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Traffic Counts Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 50 Figure 17: Bicycle Activity at Existing At-Grade Crossing Locations Source: City of Palo Alto, 2024; Compiled by Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2025 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 7:0 0 A M 8:0 0 A M 9:0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1:0 0 P M 2:0 0 P M 3:0 0 P M 4:0 0 P M 5:0 0 P M 6:0 0 P M Bic y c l e C o u n t Bicycle Crossing -Weekday Meadow Dr - Eastbound Meadow Dr - Westbound Charleston Rd - Eastbound Charleston Rd - Westbound 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 7:0 0 A M 8:0 0 A M 9:0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1:0 0 P M 2:0 0 P M 3:0 0 P M 4:0 0 P M 5:0 0 P M 6:0 0 P M Bic y c l e C o u n t Axis Title Bicycle Crossing -Weekend Meadow Dr - Eastbound Meadow Dr - Westbound Charleston Rd - Eastbound Charleston Rd - Westbound Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 67 Packet Pg. 101 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Traffic Counts Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 51 Figure 18: Vehicle Activity at Existing At-Grade Crossing Locations Source: City of Palo Alto, 2024; Compiled by Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2025 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 7:0 0 A M 8:0 0 A M 9:0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1:0 0 P M 2:0 0 P M 3:0 0 P M 4:0 0 P M 5:0 0 P M 6:0 0 P M Nu m b e r o f V e h i c l e s Vehicle Crossing -Weekday Meadow Dr - Eastbound Meadow Dr - Westbound Charleston Rd - Eastbound Charleston Rd - Westbound 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 7:0 0 A M 8:0 0 A M 9:0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1:0 0 P M 2:0 0 P M 3:0 0 P M 4:0 0 P M 5:0 0 P M 6:0 0 P M Nu m b e r o f V e h i c l e s Vehicle Crossing -Weekend Meadow Dr - Eastbound Meadow Dr - Westbound Charleston Rd - Eastbound Charleston Rd - Westbound Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 68 Packet Pg. 102 of 351 Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 69 Packet Pg. 103 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 53 Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility A network accessibility analysis was completed to evaluate existing levels of access for bicyclists and pedestrians at existing rail crossings. This analysis focuses on the rail crossing locations with paths and sidewalks in and near the Study Area: California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, and San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass. This analysis shows locations in the Study Area that are either not able to access a crossing or relatively further from an existing bicycle or pedestrian crossing. These findings will be used in later phases of the Project to identify how different alternatives would reduce how far people must travel to/from destinations. Two evaluations were conducted, one for walking and one for biking. For each evaluation, network buffer distances were calculated for 5-, 10-, and 15-minute travel times from each rail crossing mentioned above. The network buffers were then overlapped to identify the nearest crossing from a given location. For walking, a travel speed of 3 miles per hour is assumed and for biking a travel speed of 10 miles per hour is assumed. The bicycle evaluation includes existing bicycle facilities and excludes sidewalks. The network evaluation for biking limits access along the roadways and intersections identified as high traffic stress (LTS 4) earlier in the report. Note that the analysis does not consider the relative comfort of routes except to prevent access along LTS 4 roadways and at intersections that are LTS 4 (i.e., the shortest route may require biking on a street without designated bike facilities). The analysis highlights locations that require longer travel times for bicyclists and pedestrians in the Study Area. Figure 19 shows the network accessibility analysis for walking and Figure 20 shows the network accessibility analysis for biking. The analysis shows that pedestrian access to existing rail crossings are greatest in the western part of the Study Area between California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel and Meadow Drive. The impact of the gap is clearest in looking at El Carmelo Elementary School and Hoover Park, which are a quarter mile and half-a-mile from the rail line but are each more than 15-minute walk from a crossing. For bike accessibility, access is limited by El Camino Real and Alma Street on either side of the Caltrain tracks. In contrast, the figure shows how the separated tunnel at the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel which crosses under the Caltrain tracks and Alma Street allows for a larger access area to the east and west. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 70 Packet Pg. 104 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 54 Figure 19: 5-, 10-, and 15-Minute Walking Access to Closest Rail Crossing Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 71 Packet Pg. 105 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 55 Figure 20: 5-, 10-, and 15-Minute Bike Access to Closest Rail Crossing Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 72 Packet Pg. 106 of 351 Big Data Analysis Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 73 Packet Pg. 107 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 57 Big Data Analysis This section describes person trips that cross the Caltrain corridor at the existing roadway crossings in and near the Study Area as well as the walking and biking trips crossing at the bike and pedestrian tunnels located at the California Avenue and San Antonio Caltrain Stations. The analysis provides a basic understanding of where person trip origins and destinations are concentrated, as well as trip length, travel mode, and trip purpose. The goal of the analysis is to understand the potential to encourage new walking and biking trips or better serve existing walking biking trips with a shorter route. For example, some trip purposes such as school and recreational trips are common for children who are unable to drive and therefore are more likely to occur by walking and biking. Additionally, distance is one of the primary factors influencing individual decisions to walk or bike for a given person trip. In particular, trips less than five miles have the greatest potential for being completed by walking or biking. For this reason, the Big Data analysis presented in this section focuses on person trips that are five miles or less. Big Data provides the opportunity to study detailed travel characteristics for people crossing the railroad tracks in the Study Area. Historically, data collection and analysis related to trip origins and destinations, trip length, travel mode, and trip purpose has been very difficult and expensive, but the recent increase in available Big Data has made these analyses easier. As a result, Big Data is becoming more widely used throughout the transportation planning industry. As with any data source, Big Data has its limitations, but it is useful as one of multiple sources of information that can be used to inform the Project. DATA SOURCE The analysis was conducted using person trip models created by Replica to represent average weekday and weekend conditions in Spring 2024. Replica is a transportation data company that models travel patterns based on multiple data sources, including data collected by vehicles, land use and Census data, and public transportation data sets. Replica presents data by person trips versus vehicle trips in order to analyze existing mode share conditions and potential changes. Details regarding Replica are provided in Appendix C. TRIPS DISTANCES BY CROSSING LOCATION Figure 21 presents total person trips for all travel modes combined for the existing Caltrain crossings. The distribution shows that around 30% of crossings are trips that are less than five miles. Then, Figure 22 provides more detail about the location and relative length of person trips under five miles. As noted above, these are the trips on which that the analysis will focus. For average weekday conditions, approximately 57,000 person trips are under five miles; for average weekend conditions, approximately 51,000 person trips are under five miles. Of the existing crossing locations, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road and San Antonio Road serve the greatest numbers of existing person trips under five miles. Meadow Drive has the largest number of person trips under one mile in length. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 74 Packet Pg. 108 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 58 Figure 21: Length of Person Trips (All Travel Modes) Crossing Caltrain Tracks in/near Study Area Source: Replica, Spring 2024. Thursday and Saturday represent weekday and weekend conditions, respectively. Figure 22: Daily Person Trips (All Travel Modes) under Five Miles by Crossing Location Source: Replica, Spring 2024. Thursday and Saturday represent weekday and weekend conditions, respectively. 1% 7% 9% 7% 6% 70% Weekday 1% 7% 9% 8% 6% 69% Weekend 0 - 1 mile 1 - 2 mile 2 - 3 mile 3 - 4 mile 4 - 5 mile 5+ miles - 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000 0 - 1 mile 1 - 2 mile 2 - 3 mile 3 - 4 mile 4 - 5 mile Weekday Weekend Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 75 Packet Pg. 109 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 59 ORIGIN/DESTINATION PATTERNS Figure 23 and Figure 24 show origin and destination areas with high concentrations of person trips for all travel modes under five miles that use the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, and San Antonio Caltrain Station Bike/Ped Underpass. This analysis highlights the potential for walking and biking trips by showing locations where shorter trips start and end. For both weekdays and weekends, the highest concentrations of person trips under five miles are observed around the California Avenue Caltrain Station, along California Avenue, and at the San Antonio Center in Mountain View. Similarly, these areas also have the highest concentrations of shorter person trips for weekends. Within the Study Area limits, the Ventura Neighborhood show the highest concentration of shorter person trips. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 76 Packet Pg. 110 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 60 Figure 23: Concentration of Person Trips (All Travel Modes) Under Five Miles - Weekday Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 77 Packet Pg. 111 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 61 Figure 24: Concentration of Person Trips (All Travel Modes) Under Five Miles - Weekend Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 78 Packet Pg. 112 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 62 TRAVEL MODE Figure 25 summarizes the person trips by primary travel mode for the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, San Antonio Road, or San Antonio Ped/Bike Tunnel focusing on person trips that are less than five miles. This analysis includes all person trips crossing the railroad, including trips that do not begin or end within the Study Area. This analysis differs from Census analyses in that it includes all trip purposes, not just commute trips. The goal of this summary is to understand the relative share of person trips that are currently being completed by personal vehicle and the potential to increase walking and biking with a new rail crossing. For person trips under five miles that cross the Caltrain corridor, over 80 percent are made by personal vehicle or on-demand services like Palo Alto Link, Uber, and Lyft. Walking and biking make up 17 percent and 15 percent of weekday and weekend person trips, respectively. This suggests there may be an opportunity to increase walking and biking activity if the City built an additional railroad crossing. Figure 25: Person Trips under Five Miles by Travel Mode (Trip Percent) Source: Replica, Spring 2024. Thursday and Saturday represent weekday and weekend conditions, respectively. Note: Commercial trips are those where delivery vehicles are used to carry freight goods. TRIP PURPOSE Figure 26 summarizes the trip purpose for person trips for all travel modes under five miles that cross at the California Avenue Bike/Ped Tunnel, Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, San Antonio Road, or San Antonio Ped/Bike Tunnel. The trip purpose is based on the activity completed at the end of the trip (e.g., a trip from home to school is classified as a “School” trip purpose). Person trips to eating/shopping/errand locations and person trips to home/lodging locations each account for over a third of person trips for weekdays and weekend periods. As expected, work and school person trips are lower on weekends versus weekdays. This analysis suggests that a new rail crossing may benefit a wide variety of person trip types beyond recreation and school trips. 80% 11% 6% 0% 2% Weekday 84% 9%6% 0%1% Weekend Personal Vehicle / On- Demand Biking Walking Public Transportation Commercial Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 79 Packet Pg. 113 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Big Data Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 63 Figure 26: Person Trips under Five Miles by Trip Purpose (Trip Percent) Source: Replica Data, Spring 2024. Weekday representative of Thursday and Weekend representative of Saturday. Note: Commercial trips are trips where vehicles deliver freight goods. Includes large and small delivery vehicles. 36% 34% 12% 10% 4%2%2% Weekday 40% 37% 6% 13% 0%1%2% Weekend Eat / Shop / Errands Home / Lodging Work Recreation / Social School Commercial Other Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 80 Packet Pg. 114 of 351 Safety Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 81 Packet Pg. 115 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Safety Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 65 Safety Collision data for the Study Area was evaluated to identify collision trends or locations with multiple collisions. Data was obtained through the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS). TIMS reports injury collisions from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) but excludes collisions that cause property damage only (PDO) and no injuries. It is important to note the limitations of the collision data. Not every collision is reported, and collision records are only as reliable as the person filling them out. Data like party race, party at fault, or the primary collision factor (PCF) are determined by the reporting officer. The collisions analyzed occurred between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2022. Injuries suffered by involved parties are categorized into four types: ◼ Fatal: This category refers to collisions where individuals involved in the incident sustained injuries that resulted in death. ◼ Severe Injury: This category includes collisions where individuals suffered significant injuries such as broken bones, severe lacerations, or injuries beyond what are classified as "visible injuries" according to the reporting officer's assessment. ◼ Moderate Injury (Visible Injury): This category encompasses collisions where individuals sustained injuries that are evident to observers at the collision scene, such as bruises or minor lacerations. These injuries are considered less severe than those in the severe injury category. ◼ Minor Injury (Complaint of Pain): This category pertains to collisions where individuals report experiencing pain or discomfort, even though there may not be any visible injuries. These injuries are categorized as complaints of pain and do not involve severe physical trauma or visible injuries. The Draft Safety Action Plan designates Oregon Expressway, Meadow Drive, Charleston Road, Middlefield Road, and El Camino Real as High-Injury Corridors due to their disproportionately high number of crashes.19 Figure 27 presents a five-year (2018 - 2022) overview of the pedestrian and bicyclist collision data. Over the five-year period, a total of 25 pedestrian and 61 bicyclist collisions were reported in the Study Area. These collisions represent 24% of pedestrian and bicyclist collisions for the City during the same period. Two fatal collisions and four serious injury collisions were reported. The fatal collisions occurred on Charleston Road near Herbert Hoover Elementary School and on El Dorado Avenue at South Court. For the severe injury collisions, two occurred on El Camino Real at Barron Avenue/Wilton Avenue, one occurred at San Antonio Road and Middlefield, and one occurred at Meadow Drive and Alma Street. 19 City of Palo Alto. Safety Action Plan DRAFT. December 2024. Retrieved from https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Transportation/Transportation-Projects/Safety-Action-Plan Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 82 Packet Pg. 116 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Safety Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 66 Figure 27: Pedestrian and Bicyclist Collisions (2018 – 2022) Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 83 Packet Pg. 117 of 351 Environment Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 84 Packet Pg. 118 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Environment Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 68 Environment Environmental and physical factors affecting the Study Area may also affect potential crossing opportunity locations. The following are some of the primary factors that will be considered throughout the Project. Additional evaluation will be completed in later phases of the Project as individual crossing locations are analyzed. WATER BODIES AND FLOOD RISK A series of creeks and streams pass through the Study Area as they drain the local foothills into the San Francisco Bay. • Matadero Creek runs east-west through the Study Area between Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road and Loma Verde Avenue, passing Hoover Park. • Barron Creek runs east-west through the Study Area between Loma Verde Avenue and Meadow Drive. • Adobe Creek runs east-west though the Study Area between Charleston Road and San Antonio Road before turning north to cross under Charleston Road and continue past Mitchell Park. The creeks have been heavily engineered over the past decades and now primarily serve a very important role as flood control channels. Partnerships with the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) and other organizations will be required to consider any potential improvements to the creeks. Figure 28 shows flood risk areas using the latest maps available from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) portal. These maps categorize areas based on their associated flood risk levels. The Study Area falls within the Moderate Risk zone. GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS The Safety Element in the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (2022)20 identifies areas that have a high risk for geotechnical hazards such as earthquake-induced landslides, soil liquefaction, and surface rupture along fault traces. The Study Area does not fall within any of these zones. WILDFIRE Cal Fire maps Fire Hazard Severity Zones21 for the state of California and has recently updated its maps for the Bay Area. The maps define very high, high, and moderate severity zones. The Study Area does not fall within any of these zones. 20 City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2030: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/4/planning-amp-development- services/3.-comprehensive-plan/comprehensive-plan/full-comp-plan-2030_with-dec19_22-amendments.pdf 21 https://calfire.app.box.com/s/wahuw9ny7cgn89xpxh7092ur50r1pwvj/folder/308443211682 Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 85 Packet Pg. 119 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Environment Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 69 OVERHEAD UTILITIES Based on the field visit conducted by the Project team, overhead utility lines are found along the Caltrain corridor but are not present along most streets in the Study Area. As mentioned earlier, the rail grade separation projects along the Caltrain corridor will further affect the location of utility lines. Any potential overcrossings will require coordination with utility providers to avoid potential conflicts. A more detailed review of utilities data (both above ground and underground) will be completed as part of the evaluation of potential crossing locations. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 86 Packet Pg. 120 of 351 April 2, 2025 (Updated April 22, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Environment Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 70 Figure 28: Flood Risk Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 87 Packet Pg. 121 of 351 Potential Crossing Locations Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 88 Packet Pg. 122 of 351 April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 72 Potential Crossing Locations Based on the information presented in this Existing Conditions Report, the crossing opportunity locations, as shown in Figure 29 and described further below have been identified for further exploration. The crossing opportunity locations were identified based on the review of the following items: ◼ Previous plans and studies: Based on the literature review, the four locations (Matadero Creek, Loma Verde, El Carmelo Avenue, Adobe Creek and San Antonio Road) are areas where community have expressed interest in additional bike and pedestrian crossings. The Midtown Connector Feasibility Study evaluated Matadero Creek, Loma Verde and El Carmelo Avenue. Community feedback on the 2012 BPTP and Rail Corridor Study included Adobe Creek and San Antonio Road. ◼ Preliminary review of right-of-way (ROW) constraints: Figure 30 shows GIS data for the Caltrain ROW and easements, along with parcel boundaries used for an initial review. Since the GIS data may not precisely reflect actual property lines, a field survey will be conducted before the design phase to confirm property boundaries. ◼ Field review: An on-site assessment to evaluate ROW constraints along the railroad corridor and identify preliminary crossing opportunities was conducted. A summary of observations and key findings from each site visit stop is provided in Appendix D. Below are several crossing opportunity locations that have been identified for further exploration in this Project. A. Near Colorado Avenue and Page Mill Road: This location is near California Avenue Caltrain Station, making it a strategic point for improving multimodal connectivity. It is also near NVCAP, the planned transit-oriented, mixed-use neighborhood within the North Ventura neighborhood, which is expected to generate increased pedestrian and bicycle activity. Alma Street at Oregon Expressway B. Around Matadero Creek (El Dorado Avenue to Loma Verde Avenue): Situated equidistant between two existing railroad crossings at California Avenue and Meadow Drive, this location presents an opportunity to significantly reduce travel distances for pedestrians and bicyclists. The presence of Matadero Creek offers potential for integrating a dedicated bicycle and pedestrian path along the creek, creating a seamless connection between residential neighborhoods and key destinations along Park Boulevard. Matadero Creek Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 89 Packet Pg. 123 of 351 April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 73 C. Near Barron Creek: This location could leverage Barron Creek as a natural corridor for a new bicycle and pedestrian crossing. Exploring options for a pathway along the creek could provide a safe, off- street alternative for non-motorized users. Additionally, on-street parking along El Verano Avenue could be repurposed to accommodate crossing infrastructure, ensuring minimal disruption while maximizing connectivity. El Verano Avenue at Alma Street D. Between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road: A crossing at this location would provide direct access to Robles Park, benefiting local residents and enhancing recreational connectivity. This area also serves as a gateway to nearby community destinations, such as JLS Middle School and Alma Village. Lindero Drive at Alma Street E. Near Adobe Creek: A bicycle and pedestrian path could be developed along Adobe Creek, utilizing existing open space to create a scenic and functional crossing. This would connect residential neighborhoods with Park Boulevard and nearby schools, parks, and retail areas. Adobe Creek F. Near San Antonio Road: This location would utilize the existing San Antonio Road overpass to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian movements. By upgrading the overpass with dedicated bike lanes, widened sidewalks, or improved signage, this crossing could provide a safe and efficient route across the railroad corridor. Given its location near the San Antonio Caltrain Station, this improvement would enhance first- and last-mile connectivity for transit users. San Antonio Road Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 90 Packet Pg. 124 of 351 April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 74 Figure 29: Potential Crossing Locations Source: Circlepoint 2025, Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2025, City of Palo Alto Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 91 Packet Pg. 125 of 351 April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 75 Figure 30: Caltrain, Public and Private Right of Way Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 92 Packet Pg. 126 of 351 Appendices Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 93 Packet Pg. 127 of 351 April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Appendix A: Literature Review Memorandum Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 94 Packet Pg. 128 of 351 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM April 1, 2025 Project# 30555 To: Charlie Coles, City of Palo Alto From: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. RE: South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson reviewed the documents identified to develop an understanding of the planning context and prior efforts completed within the study area. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a synthesis and summary of existing plans, programs, and policies from recent documents. This will help develop an understanding of the policy and planning environment for walking and biking in Palo Alto. Document List The following Table 1 lists the relevant documents and programs that were reviewed, summarized, and synthesized for this task. Table 1. List of Documents Reviewed No. Document Name Year of Adoption 1. City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2017 2. City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update 2022 3. City of Palo Alto Sustainability and Climate Action Plan 2022 4. City of Palo Alto Housing Element Update 2024 5. City of Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan 2012 6. City of Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update In progress 7. City of Palo Alto Safe Streets for All Plan In progress 8. City of Palo Alto San Antonio Road Corridor Area Plan In progress 9. City of Palo Alto North Venture Coordinated Area Plan 2024 10. City of Palo Alto Midtown Connector Feasibility Study 2016 11. City of Palo Alto Parks, Trails, Natural Open Space and Recreation Master Plan 2017 12. City of Palo Alto El Camino Real Master Planning Study Public Review Draft 2007 13. City of Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study 2013 14. Connecting Palo Alto Website -- 155 Grand Avenue, Suite 505 Oakland, CA 94612 P 510.839.1742 Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 95 Packet Pg. 129 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 2 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 15. Expanded Community Advisory Panel (XCAP) on Grade Separations Report for Palo Alto 2021 16. Palo Alto's Local Road Safety Plan by VTA 2022 17. Santa Clara Countywide Bicycle Plan 2018 18. 2050 Plan Bay Area 2021 19. VTA Bicycle Technical Guidelines 2022 20. VTA Bicycle Superhighway Implementation Plan 2021 21. VTA 2025 Transit Service Plan 2024 22. Caltrans District 4 Bike Plan 2018 23. Caltrans District 4 Pedestrian Plan 2021 24. Grand Boulevard Initiative 2006 25. California High Speed Rail Website -- 26. Caltrain Corridor Crossing Delivery Guide 2024 27. Caltrain Electrification Project Website -- 28. Californians Advocating for Responsible Rail Design (CARRD) -- 29. Peninsula Rail Program -- 30. Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center -- 31. Mountain View 2015 Bicycle Transportation Plan 2015 32. Mountain View 2014 Pedestrian Master Plan 2014 33. Mountain View 2019 El Camino Real Streetscape Plan 2019 34. Los Altos Complete Streets Master Plan: Active Transportation Framework 2022 35. Los Altos Hills Countywide Trails Master Plan Map Update Project 2023 Topics and Key Themes The following relevant topics were reviewed and summarized for each document and overall themes within each topic and across all reviewed documents are synthesized in this section. ◼ Vision and goal statements ◼ Existing policies and programs related to active transportation ◼ Established needs, issues, and concerns raised in the study ◼ Current/planned projects coming from the study ◼ Community feedback captured in the document Key themes from this review are presented in this section. Vision and Goals There is strong alignment among the vision and goals established in the documents reviewed, particularly surrounding sustainability and climate action. For example, the 2012 Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan supports the goals identified in the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and reflects specific targets mentioned in the 2007 Palo Alto Climate Protection Plan. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 96 Packet Pg. 130 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 3 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Common themes around vision and goals from the review of these plans include: ◼ Increasing biking and walking trips for all purposes ◼ Connecting multi-modal networks for walking, biking, and transit ◼ Developing a network of bikeways, pathways, and traffic-calmed streets that connect various business districts, residentials areas, open spaces, parks, and schools ◼ Constructing and maintaining safe and accessible streets for walking and biking to all modes and people of all ages and abilities ◼ Reducing the number, rate, and severity of bicycle and pedestrian collisions citywide ◼ Reducing bicycle and vehicular conflicts at transit stops ◼ Maintaining a high-quality active transportation system and reducing gaps in pedestrian and bicycle networks ◼ Improving the aesthetics and quality of walkways, bike paths, and corridors to attract more walking and biking trips ◼ Increasing active transportation options and reducing the overall vehicle miles traveled ◼ Reducing barriers to bicycling and walking at freeway interchanges, expressway intersections, and railroad grad crossings ◼ Enhancing pedestrian and bicycle crossings at key locations across physical barriers ◼ Ensuring the highest possible safety at rail crossings while mitigating impacts on neighborhoods, schools, and public facilities ◼ Ensuring access for all ages, abilities, and underserved communities while prioritizing equity areas ◼ Improving Caltrain system performance to reduce noise, improve air quality, and lower greenhouse gas emissions ◼ Increasing opportunities for community feedback and implementing a formal feedback process Policies and Programs Most of the policies and programs mentioned in each plan aim to promote the goals and vision of that specific plan. They are also in line with the vision of similar plans that promote non- motorized transportation. For instance, the 2030 City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan introduced policies that focus on pursuing grade separation of rail crossings along the rail corridor (Policy T-3.15); keeping existing at-grade rail crossings open for pedestrians and bicyclists with safety studies (Policy T-3.16); improving existing at-grade rail crossings for safety and accessibility (Policy T-3.17); improving safety and minimize adverse noise, vibrations and visual impacts of operations in the Caltrain rail corridor on adjoining districts, public facilities, schools and neighborhoods with or without the addition of High Speed Rail (Policy T-3.18); coordinating proactively with the California High Speed Rail Authority and Caltrain to minimize negative impacts and maximize benefits to Palo Alto from any future high speed rail service through Palo Alto (Policy T-3.19); working with Caltrain Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 97 Packet Pg. 131 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 4 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. to increase safety at train crossings, including improving gate technology and signal coordination (Policy T-6.3); continuing the Safe Routes to School partnership with PAUSD and the Palo Alto Council of PTAs (Policy T-6.4); supporting regional bicycle and pedestrian plans including development of the Bay Trail, Bay-to-Ridge Trail and the Santa Clara County Countywide Bicycle System (Policy T-8.8); minimizing noise spillover from rail related activities into adjacent residential or noise-sensitive areas (Policy N-6.13). Some programs directly support these policies, including evaluating the implications of grade separation on bicycle and pedestrian circulation (Program T3.15.2); identifying near-term safety and accessibility improvements at crossings through studies like the Palo Alto Avenue crossing study (Program T3.17.1); working with Caltrain to ensure that the rail tracks are safe and secure with adequate fencing and barriers (Program 13.17.2); providing adult crossing guards at school crossings that meet established warrants (Program T6.4.3); improving pedestrian crossings by creating protected areas, enhancing visibility, and incorporating design tools such as bulb-outs, small curb radii, and high-visibility crosswalks (Program T6.6.6); and reducing barriers to walking and bicycling at railroad grade crossings, freeway interchanges, and expressway intersections (Program T8.8.1); encouraging the Peninsula Corridors Joint Powers Board to pursue technologies and grade separations that would reduce or eliminate the need for train horns/whistles in communities served by rail service (Program N6.13.1); evaluating changing at-grade rail crossings so that they qualify as Quiet Zones based on Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) rules and guidelines in order to mitigate the effects of train horn noise without adversely affecting safety at railroad crossings (Program N6.13.2); participating in future environmental review of the California High-Speed Rail (HSR) Project, planned to utilize existing Caltrain track through Palo Alto, to ensure that it adheres to noise and vibration mitigation measures (Program N6.13.3). These policies and programs are in line with the goals and visions of the Comprehensive Plan. The 2024 City of Palo Alto North Venture Coordinated Area Plan adopts the Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC’s) regional TOC policy update aims to support the region’s transit investments by fostering communities around transit stations and along transit corridors. These communities are designed to not only increase transit ridership but also serve as places where Bay Area residents of all abilities, income levels, and racial and ethnic backgrounds can live, work, and access essential services, such as education, childcare, and healthcare. The TOC policies apply to Priority Development Areas (PDAs) served by fixed-guideway transit, such as the California Avenue Station (Caltrain). PDAs that comply with Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 98 Packet Pg. 132 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 5 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. TOC policies are eligible for grant funding administered by the MTC. Figure 1 shows the NVCAP area, Palo Alto’s priority development areas, and San Antonio Road Area Plan boundary. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 99 Packet Pg. 133 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 6 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 1. NVCAP area, Palo Alto’s priority development areas, and San Antonio Road Area Plan boundary. The rezoning changes adopted as part of the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element update substantially increase the capacity for development along San Antonio Road with an objective to create cohesive mixed-use neighborhoods with safe access to transportation, employment, Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 100 Packet Pg. 134 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 7 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. services, and third places (public spaces such as parks, libraries and community centers, and privately owned spaces like churches, cafés, fitness centers and entertainment venues). The San Antonio Road Area Plan (in progress) will establish goals, policies, and implementation programs for land use, transportation, critical infrastructure and other improvements that will support the redevelopment of the PDA surrounding San Antonio Road. The 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (2012 BPTP) identified a proposed network of bikeways, pedestrian paths, and crossings to address gaps in the existing system and promote active transportation. The recommendations included the following: ◼ Maintaining Class I trails from the 2003 Plan and adding new projects, including sidepaths along key corridors, supports recent efforts by the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority to design and build a trail along the Palo Alto side of the creek from Alma Street to Chaucer Road, and modify or replace unnecessary trailhead and barrier crossing obstacles to improve Class I path convenience for larger bicycles and families ◼ Improving substandard Class II bike lanes by addressing potential “dooring” issues adjacent to parked cars or where gutter pans affect the functionality of curbside bike lanes, adding innovative green colorization and markings for visibility, and proposing new bike lanes on key arterials like Middlefield Road and El Camino Real ◼ Implementing sharrows and signage for Class III shared roadways for major arterial routes such as Alma Street, El Camino Real, Embarcadero Road, and San Antonio Road, and improve bicycling comfort along San Antonio Road by providing wider shoulders and parking restrictions as part of an upcoming paving and median replacement project ◼ Removing unnecessary stop signs on bicycle boulevard corridors and upgrading pavement conditions, focusing implementation on specific bicycle boulevard corridors, and interim Bike Route signage on future bicycle boulevards citywide ◼ Enhancing bicycle connections with neighboring jurisdictions and creating enhanced bikeways and crossings ◼ Implementing across-barrier connections to improve pedestrian and bicycle access to key destinations while addressing potential implementation challenges and prioritizing alternatives. ◼ Implementing intersection improvements including a variety of markings, curb extensions, and signalization changes to improve bicyclist and pedestrian visibility in key locations. Figure 2 and Figure 3 show the proposed bicycle network and the proposed bicycle boulevard in the 2012 BPTP, respectively. The BPTP Update will recommend implementation of the alignments identified in this study. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 101 Packet Pg. 135 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 8 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 2. Palo Alto 2012 BPTP Bikeway Network Figure 3. Palo Alto 2012 BPTP Bicycle Boulevard Network The Midtown Connector Feasibility Study evaluates three viable alignments to enhance bicycle and pedestrian connectivity in Palo Alto including the Matadero Creek Shared-Use, the Matadero Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 102 Packet Pg. 136 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 9 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Creek Pedestrian-Only Path, and the Loma Verde Avenue Class IV Protected Bikeway. The study further explores how a trail facility along Matadero Creek could connect to existing bicycle and pedestrian networks, despite significant barriers such as US 101 and the Caltrain corridor. Potential solutions include utilizing existing and proposed crossings (e.g., Oregon Avenue and Adobe Creek), building a new undercrossing or overcrossing of Alma Street and the Caltrain tracks, or enhancing the current US 101 undercrossing. Three alignments for undercrossing were proposed (Figure 4): 1. Alignment 1: An at-grade crossing of Alma Street at Matadero Creek, followed by an undercrossing of just the Caltrain right-of-way. The ramps for this undercrossing would run parallel to the train tracks and the west side could exit through an existing City-owned power transmission property. This alignment is unlikely because of the constraints for developing a trail along Segment A of Matadero Creek. At Alma Street, maintenance access ramps make a creek trail infeasible. 2. Alignment 2: A ramp down from El Carmelo Avenue to a tunnel under the Caltrain tracks, similar to the ramp on N. California Avenue. Similar to Alignment 1, the tunnel would exit at the power plant where an at-grade pedestrian and bicycle connection would be provided. Alternatively, a ramp could be located along Alma Street on the north side between Matadero Creek and El Carmelo Avenue shown as Alignment 2b. 3. Alignment 3: At-grade crossing of Alma Street followed by an undercrossing of the Caltrain right-of-way. It is likely that this alignment would require right-of-way purchase where the tunnel daylights The conceptual under crossing configuration for the three alignments is shown in Figure 5. The feasibility analysis for three alignments in Midtown Palo Alto identifies varying degrees of feasibility for each option. A shared-use path will accommodate the most user diversity and provide a recreational path that is largely protected from motor vehicle travel, but faces high costs, right-of-way challenges, and public safety and privacy concerns. A pedestrian-only path would be easier to implement at lower cost but shares similar public concerns. A Class IV bikeway on Loma Verde Avenue provides a cost-effective bicycling connection through Midtown Palo Alto without additional right-of-way needs but poses challenges with numerous driveway that must be crossed and limited pedestrian infrastructure improvements. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 103 Packet Pg. 137 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 10 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 4. Midtown Connector Feasibility Study Potential Alignments Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 104 Packet Pg. 138 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 11 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 5. Conceptual Undercrossing Configuration Under Caltrain Corridor In The Vicinity Of Matadero Creek The 2018 Santa Clara Countywide Bike Plan proposed policies that focus on leveraging development to build bicycle infrastructure by ensuring existing and new development supports bicycling (Policy 1B); supporting bicyclist safety and traffic laws through equitable enforcement and improved driver education (Policy 2C); improving bicycle access to transit by funding and constructing transit-connected bikeways (Policy 4A); and supporting safe and convenient interactions between bicyclists and transit vehicles, including providing adequate bicycle storage on-board transit vehicles (Policy 4C). The 2014 Mountain View Pedestrian Master Plan introduced programs and policies such as accommodating all transportation modes in the design and construction of transportation projects to safely meet the needs of all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, motorists, and persons of all abilities (Policy 1.2); promoting pedestrian improvements that increase connectivity, provide placemaking opportunities, and foster a greater sense of community (Policy 1.3); improving universal access within private developments, public transit facilities, programs, and services (Policy 2.1); providing a safe and comfortable pedestrian network (Policy 3.1); increasing connectivity through safe pedestrian connections to public amenities, neighborhoods, and other destinations (Policy 3.2); and enhancing pedestrian crossings at key locations across physical barriers (Policy 3.3). These existing programs and policies mentioned in the relevant plans are consistent with and will be reflected in the alternatives developed for this study. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 105 Packet Pg. 139 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 12 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Needs and Challenges Common themes surrounding needs and challenges per review of the plans include: ◼ Providing safe and accessible east-west bicycle connections at Charleston Road and Meadow Drive, which are critical for school commuters and community access ◼ Addressing congestion and safety at at-grade railroad crossings due to increased train frequency from Caltrain electrification and future High-Speed Rail (HSR) integration ◼ Ensuring railroad crossings are optimized for bicyclists by improving track angles, surface smoothness, gap between the flangeway and roadway, and closing bike paths at night ◼ Removing railroad tracks at intersections from abandoned rights-of-way, with priority given to streets with higher bicycle volumes ◼ Balancing 24-hour access on bike paths with safety, enforcement, and maintenance considerations, including inconsistent hours and trail safety at night ◼ Mitigating traffic congestion and safety impacts caused by frequent train gate closures during peak hours at at-grade crossings ◼ Enhancing pedestrian and bicycle crossings at major barriers, including railroad tracks, Alma Street, and El Camino Real, to improve safety and connectivity ◼ Improving safety for students and residents who must cross heavily trafficked streets or the rail corridor to access schools, parks, and other amenities ◼ Finding community-supported solutions for grade separation while securing funding, regulatory approvals, and addressing design challenges ◼ Reducing traffic stress for “interested but concerned” bicyclists by providing separated and lower-stress facilities at crossings and throughout the network ◼ Managing safety risks at rail crossings while balancing increased train frequencies and ensuring the community’s transportation needs are met ◼ Maintaining transit systems in good condition by addressing operational needs and ensuring state of good repair through fleet and facility upgrades ◼ Uncertainty of funding opportunities ◼ Failure to yield to pedestrians on the roadway ◼ Bicycle theft Plans and Projects Relevant projects and planning studies recommended in the prior and in progress plans reviewed for this study are presented in this section. ◼ Roadway and intersection improvements, including full grade separations for automobiles, pedestrians, and bicyclists at Caltrain crossings; retrofitting and improving existing grade- separated crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists at California Avenue and University Avenue; and constructing new pedestrian and bicycle grade-separated crossings in South Palo Alto and North Palo Alto including: Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 106 Packet Pg. 140 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 13 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. o Churchill Avenue, alternatives included a Viaduct (Figure 6), a closure with traffic mitigations, and two bike/pedestrian tunnel options. A community-generated "Partial Underpass" alternative would depress Churchill on the west side of the tracks, allowing north/south turns onto Alma but restricting crossing. From the east side of Alma, traffic traveling westbound towards Alma could only turn right to head north on Alma Figure 6. Churchill Avenue Viaduct on Viaduct Structure (Churchill Avenue and Alma Street Intersection) o Churchill Avenue Partial Underpass, it would separate Churchill Avenue from the current Caltrain tracks via an underpass. However, there would no longer through traffic on Churchill Avenue east of Alma; instead, it would form a T-intersection (Figure 7) Figure 7. Churchill Avenue Partial Underpass o Meadow Drive and Charleston Road, alternatives including a viaduct, a trench, and a hybrid (raised berm) solution (Figure 8) Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 107 Packet Pg. 141 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 14 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 8. Meadow Drive Proposed Solutions o Palo Alto Grade Separation Planning Study: Meadow Drive and Charleston Road underpass plan (Figure 9) Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 108 Packet Pg. 142 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 15 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 9. Palo Alto Grade Separation Planning Study o Alma Street and Oregon Expressway Improvements in traffic signals (Figure 10) Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 109 Packet Pg. 143 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 16 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Figure 10. Alma Street and Oregon Expressway Improvements o Caltrain/Highway 101 Crossing, providing connections through a new undercrossing or overcrossing of Alma Street and the Caltrain tracks o Caltrain/Alma Barrier Crossing at Matadero Creek o Caltrain Railroad Planned Bike and Pedestrian Crossing at Loma Verde Ave. Crossing and Everett Ave. Crossing o Caltrain Crossing at Stanford Ave/Seale Avenue (Potential Bike Ped Bridge) o The Caltrain Business Plan identified that the California Avenue 4-track segment overlaps with planned crossing projects and will necessitate alignment with local and regional planning efforts to preserve this corridor for future infrastructure needs o The California Avenue 4-track segment overlaps with the City of Palo Alto’s “Connecting Palo Alto” project. The crossings at Churchill Avenue and Meadow Drive are adjacent to the California Avenue 4-track segment and will likely require minor modifications to planning concepts to accommodate the transition between 2-tracks and 4-tracks. Caltrain is actively coordinating this effort ◼ Safety improvements such as sidewalk extensions, crosswalk improvements, expanded pedestrian refuges and waiting plazas, improved lighting and wayfinding, advance warning signage and signalization for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists, and landscape enhancements o Alma Street/Meadow Drive and Alma Street/Charleston Road intersections and roadways approaches that can be undertaken in the near term by the City of Palo Alto Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 110 Packet Pg. 144 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 17 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. prior to rail improvements. Include improvements such as sidewalk extensions, crosswalk improvements, expanded pedestrian refuges and waiting plazas, improved lighting and wayfinding, advance warning signage and signalization for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists, and landscape enhancements. The City of Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study identified potential locations for additional railroad crossing study areas to evaluate opportunities for improving connectivity across the rail lines in southern Palo Alto (Figure 11). Figure 11. City of Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study – Priority Rail Crossing Locations ◼ Expansion and modernization of the regional rail network to better connect communities, increase frequencies, and advance projects. This expansion will address the increased demand for multimodal connections, enhance safety through grade separations, and support accessibility improvements for last-mile connectivity. Additionally, it will necessitate improved connectivity and upgraded bicycle and pedestrian crossings to ensure safe and efficient multimodal integration in areas impacted by increased rail activity. o Link21 new transbay rail crossing o BART to Silicon Valley Phase 2 o Valley Link o Caltrain Downtown Rail Extension o Caltrain/High-Speed Rail grade separations Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 111 Packet Pg. 145 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 18 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. ◼ Design, Feasibility, and Planning o Middlefield Road "Complete Street" Plan Line Study, located 0.65 miles north of the Caltrain railroad, it includes implementing sidewalk and traffic calming improvements on Middlefield Road to further promote pedestrian safety and reduce vehicle speeds o El Camino Real Complete Streets project, located 0.25-0.5 miles south of Caltrain railroad, it integrates bicycle and transit use on the corridor and upgrades crossing treatments at intersections. o Bicycle facilities upgrade on East Meadow Drive Community Feedback Community feedback and public input is a crucial factor throughout long-term planning process. It helps to inform and shape the final recommendations of plans. Most plans are significantly invested in conducting public workshops, public surveys, open houses and community engagement events to hear from the public throughout the development of the plan. Common themes and takeaways per the review of the relevant prior and in progress plans are presented in this section. ◼ Providing accessible and safe active transportation (walking, biking, etc.) routes to natural open space, community centers and parks is a high priority ◼ Addressing dangerous and difficult crossings due to high vehicle speeds, high vehicle volumes, or lack of bicycle facilities ◼ Roadways highlighted include El Camino Real, Middlefield Avenue, University Avenue, Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, Alma Street, San Antonio Road, California Avenue, and Stanford Avenue ◼ Requests for improved traffic control, wayfinding signage, and infrastructure for cyclists and pedestrians, with proposals for traffic calming measures ◼ Improving connections to trails, transit hubs, employment centers, schools, public buildings, and parks ◼ Enhancing physical and mental well-being is a critical function of parks for people who live, work and play in Palo Alto. Loop trails, bicycle and pedestrian paths to parks and places to relax are top priorities, along with exercise equipment or additional classes ◼ Low-stress bicycle facilities are desired ◼ Frequently requested bicycle infrastructure improvements include more trail lighting, better accommodation at signalized intersections, better access and signage to bicycle paths, more frequent maintenance, more space to store bicycles on transit vehicles, secure bicycle parking ◼ Design safer and more intuitive highway crossings and interchanges ◼ Streamline and communicate the process for local agencies to engage with Caltrans and for Caltrans to engage with local communities ◼ Increase investment in bicycle facilities on state highways Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 112 Packet Pg. 146 of 351 April 1, 2025 Page 19 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity – Literature Review Literature Review Kittelson & Associates, Inc. ◼ Preference for fully dedicated bike facilities that is separate from traffic and has space for multiple modes ◼ Bike highways should prioritize access and connection for low-income and disadvantaged communities and people without personal access to vehicles ◼ Residents prefer current policies that prioritize services and facilities for local residents over regional attractions Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 113 Packet Pg. 147 of 351 April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Appendix B: Traffic Counts Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 114 Packet Pg. 148 of 351 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Table 1: Pedestrian Crosswalk Counts at Major Intersections – 12-Hour Total (7:00 am – 7:00 pm) Intersection Weekday Weekend North South East West Total North South East West Total Alma Street & E. Meadow Drive 364 100 33 0 497 295 108 35 2 440 Alma Street & Charleston Road 144 123 74 4 345 89 98 29 0 216 Bryant Street & El Carmelo Avenue 67 141 61 197 466 51 39 35 121 246 Middlefield Road & Colorado Avenue 172 302 262 105 841 198 294 303 173 968 Middlefield Road & Loma Verde Avenue 110 68 73 99 350 34 18 12 10 74 Middlefield Road & E. Meadow Drive 63 192 63 85 403 53 115 56 85 309 Middlefield Road & Charleston Road 222 151 104 296 773 96 144 73 246 559 Middlefield Road & San Antonio Road 90 126 64 48 328 100 119 87 73 379 El Camino Real & California Avenue 509 573 243 195 1,520 513 635 347 241 1,736 El Camino Real & Los Robles Avenue 96 61 63 48 268 72 44 78 149 343 El Camino Real & Margarita Avenue 89 63 99 128 379 55 42 103 72 272 El Camino Real & Arastradero Road 101 226 129 140 596 94 92 93 188 467 Source: City of Palo Alto, 2024 Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 115 Packet Pg. 149 of 351 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Table 2: Bicyclist Turning Movement Counts at Major Intersections – Total 12- Hour Counts Weekday Intersection northbound southbound eastbound westbound Total right thru left right thru left right thru left right thru left Alma Street & E. Meadow Drive 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 335 4 4 170 0 516 Alma Street & Charleston Road 1 2 5 0 3 0 0 213 1 0 191 0 416 Bryant Street & El Carmelo Avenue 7 211 2 15 239 8 1 2 17 5 1 2 510 Middlefield Road & Colorado Avenue 1 18 5 2 18 2 2 109 4 8 86 6 261 Middlefield Road & Loma Verde Avenue 3 26 1 4 24 1 7 78 1 2 64 2 213 Middlefield Road & E. Meadow Drive 2 20 8 7 29 0 33 218 9 5 290 8 629 Middlefield Road & Charleston Road 2 17 10 12 50 5 36 106 3 1 129 5 376 Middlefield Road & San Antonio Road 0 1 0 0 10 2 1 63 1 0 60 0 138 El Camino Real & California Avenue 1 2 1 4 8 1 4 160 3 3 134 1 322 El Camino Real & Los Robles Avenue 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 51 1 1 72 0 130 El Camino Real & Margarita Avenue 0 4 0 6 8 0 0 50 0 2 43 0 113 El Camino Real & Arastradero Road 0 6 0 0 4 0 0 146 0 1 162 0 319 Weekend Intersection northbound southbound eastbound westbound Total right thru left right thru left right thru left right thru left Alma Street & E. Meadow Drive 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 139 1 5 95 0 243 Alma Street & Charleston Road 1 1 2 0 1 0 1 102 0 0 120 0 228 Bryant Street & El Carmelo Avenue 8 124 3 9 146 4 3 3 8 11 5 3 327 Middlefield Road & Colorado Avenue 0 16 4 2 11 2 4 36 4 1 30 1 111 Middlefield Road & Loma Verde Avenue 7 6 0 2 6 4 2 14 2 3 16 2 64 Middlefield Road & E. Meadow Drive 3 15 2 0 10 0 15 64 0 0 84 0 193 Middlefield Road & Charleston Road 9 11 18 16 26 3 19 45 8 7 51 9 222 Middlefield Road & San Antonio Road 2 1 2 3 2 1 1 25 1 1 40 0 79 El Camino Real & California Avenue 2 5 1 2 8 5 2 115 8 9 75 1 233 El Camino Real & Los Robles Avenue 0 1 0 0 4 1 1 10 1 1 16 1 36 El Camino Real & Margarita Avenue 1 3 0 1 3 0 0 16 0 0 7 0 31 El Camino Real & Arastradero Road 0 4 0 2 3 0 2 75 2 0 84 3 175 Source: City of Palo Alto, 2024 Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 116 Packet Pg. 150 of 351 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project Kittelson & Associates, Inc. VEHICLE COUNTS Turning movement count data was collected as part of the connecting Palo Alto’s Churchill, Meadow and Charleston Grade Separation Traffic Analysis1. The data was collected at two intersections: Alma Street at Meadow Drive and at Charlston Road. Counts were collected during a typical weekday (Tuesday, January 28, 2020) for the AM peak hours (7:00 – 9:00 AM) and PM peak hours (4:00 PM – 6:00 PM). Table 3 illustrates the existing vehicle turning movement counts, respectively: Table 3: Vehicle Turning Movement Counts – AM and PM Peak Hours AM Peak Intersection northbound southbound eastbound westbound Total right thru left right thru left right thru left right thru left Alma Street & Meadow Drive 46 1,174 82 142 511 92 69 145 120 73 207 62 2,723 Alma Street & Charleston Road 33 1131 346 43 517 63 130 376 95 71 245 44 3,094 PM Peak Intersection northbound southbound eastbound westbound Total right thru left right thru left right thru left right thru left Alma Street & Meadow Drive 61 848 95 182 1,102 109 74 169 88 99 245 55 3,127 Alma Street & Charleston Road 49 806 245 50 1,094 57 216 237 83 83 313 42 3,275 Source: Churchill, Meadow and Charleston Grade Separation Traffic Analysis, January 2024 1 Churchill, Meadow and Charleston Grade Separation Traffic Analysis: Traffic-Analysis-Report_Churchill-Meadow-and-Charleston-Grade-Separation_revised.pdf Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 117 Packet Pg. 151 of 351 April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Appendix C: Replica Data Details Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 118 Packet Pg. 152 of 351 APPENDIX – REPLICA BACKGROUND AND VALIDATION This appendix provides additional technical background on the use of Replica for origin/destination analyses. Replica builds on the traditional approaches for traffic models used by transportation agencies in the Bay Area and the United States. Replica differs from traditional transportation models in that it incorporates vehicle probe data (GPS records generated by on-board sensors on vehicles) to produce more granular representations of trip patterns and routes. Additionally, Replica has a greater focus on estimating walking and biking activity compared to traditional transportation models. Since Replica’s processes include multiple data sources, it has the potential to capture trip patterns more accurately; however, the blending of multiple datasets results in a more complex dataset to understand. The Replica data used in the analysis represents Spring 2024 conditions. Thursday data was used to represent weekday conditions and Saturday data was used to represent weekends. Prior to finalizing the use of Replica, a reasonableness check was completed by comparing Replica’s peak hour trip estimates against traffic counts collected in the Study Area. Specifically, the AM and PM peak hour volumes for Meadow Drive and Charleston Street from Replica were compared against peak hour turn counts for those same locations collected as part of the Palo Alto Grade Separation Project.1 Table 1 summarizes the comparison; as shown in the table, the Replica estimates were found to be 15% higher than observed counts for Meadow Drive and 19% higher than observed counts for Charleston Street. Table 1: Comparison of Volume Data between Counts and Replica Data Location Turn Movement Count1 Replica Count2 % Difference Meadow Drive 1,918 2,270 +15% Charleston Street 2,560 3,140 +19% 1. Peak AM and PM count collected January 28, 2020. Total includes people walking and biking, and motor vehicles. 2. Peak AM and PM count from Replica Data, modeled Spring 2024 Thursday. Total includes person trips for people driving, walking, biking, taking on-demand services, and completing commercial freight deliveries. It excludes driving passenger trips. A difference of less than 20% is viewed as reasonable given that traffic counts can also exhibit this level of variability on a given day. Based on this comparison, Replica is considered a reasonable data source for analyzing multimodal trip patterns for the Study Area. 1 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2020). Churchill, Meadow, and Charleston Grade Separation Traffic Analysis from https://connectingpaloalto.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Traffic-Analysis-Report_Churchill-Meadow-and- Charleston-Grade-Separation_revised.pdf Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 119 Packet Pg. 153 of 351 April 22, 2025 (Updated April 17, 2025) Existing Conditions Report Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Appendix D: Field Visit Summary Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 120 Packet Pg. 154 of 351 The field visit took place on Tuesday, November 19, from 9:00 AM to 12:00 PM in sunny weather conditions, with temperatures in the mid-to-high 50s. Table 1 shows the corresponding field visit locations. The route began by traveling south along the Alma Street sidewalk and on-street through the Circles neighborhood. The team then crossed Alma Street, and the railroad tracks at Charleston and continued north along Park Boulevard. The field visit team included a representative from Kittelson, Circlepoint, BKF, City Staff and Safe Routes to School Coordinator. Table 1. Field Visit Locations Map ID Stop Location Start California Avenue Caltrain Undercrossing 1 Colorado Avenue 2 El Dorado Avenue 3 Matadero Creek & El Carmelo Avenue 4 Loma Verde Avenue & Margarita Avenue 5 El Verano Avenue 6 Lindero Avenue & Robles Park 7 Adobe Creek & Ely Pl Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2024 Start ◼ Field observations started at the California Avenue Tunnel at Alma Street ◼ The existing undercrossing serves pedestrians and bicyclists crossing the railroad tracks and Alma Street ◼ The tunnel width is narrow and inadequate to accommodate current volumes of two-way pedestrian and bicyclist traffic during peak hours, particularly morning and afternoon school peaks ◼ The tunnel grades are steep and not ADA-compliant, which requires bicyclists to either dismount and walk or wait for pedestrians to clear the tunnel before biking through ◼ There are gates at both ends of the tunnel that enforce slower movement through the tunnel and restrict two-way travel ◼ The tunnel is inadequately lit, which causes visibility and safety concerns 1: Colorado Avenue ◼ Colorado Avenue intersects Alma Street adjacent near the ramps to/from Oregon Expressway ◼ The sloping exit ramp access creates challenges for tunnel structure, which would need to extend deeper to clear the ramp up to Alma Street ◼ Alma Street is wider at this location, requiring longer structure to accommodate the roadway and railroad ◼ This alignment provides access to California Avenue Caltrain Station ◼ If this alignment is selected, supporting improvements, such as widening or formalizing access from Park Boulevard to the California Avenue Caltrain Station parking lot, should be considered. Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 121 Packet Pg. 155 of 351 Oregon Expressway on ramp from Alma Street Alma Street and Colorado Avenue 2: El Dorado Avenue ◼ El Dorado Ave intersects Alma Street at a wider, three-track railroad segment ◼ Access to Park Boulevard could be achieved through surface parking lots with property acquisition, easement, or a connection to City-owned switching station ◼ The Caltrain right-of-way (ROW) is wider at this location, requiring a longer structure to clear the roadway and railroad. A lease agreement or easement may be possible if the third track is not in use. Alma Street and El Dorado Alma Street and El Dorado 3: Matadero Creek & El Carmelo Avenue ◼ The area includes a service road and a narrow-banked channel along Matadero Creek ◼ The potential for widening Matadero Creek is limited by existing constraints ◼ Vertical clearance within Matadero Creek tunnel is insufficient ◼ Opportunities at this location involving the nearby City-owned power transmission property could be explored Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 122 Packet Pg. 156 of 351 ◼ Alma Street and El Carmelo Ave Matadero Creek 4: Loma Verde Avenue & Margarita Avenue ◼ Consider implementing a center-running bicycle/pedestrian ramp on Loma Verde Avenue Consider implementing one-way traffic on Loma Verde Avenue may mitigate impacts but could affect residential driveways ◼ Property(ies) acquisition may be required on Park Boulevard near Margarita Avenue and Loma Verde Avenue near Emerson Street Park Blvd at Margarita Loma Verde at Alma Street 5: El Verano Avenue ◼ El Verano Avenue has on-street parking on both sides of the road with rolled curbs ◼ On-street parking was observed to be over 90% occupied ◼ The sidewalks on El Verano Avenue are narrow (approximately 5 feet wide) on Alma Street and frequently interrupted by driveway access ◼ There are potential opportunities to utilize an auxiliary merge lane (a short, additional traffic lane designed to facilitate smooth merging or diverging movements) on Alma Street, this may be challenging due to frequent driveway spacing ◼ This would require property acquisition or easement to access Park Boulevard Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 123 Packet Pg. 157 of 351 ◼ There are two existing driveways to Boardwalk Apartments that could provide potential future access for a new crossing El Verano at Alma Street Boardwalk Apartments on Park Blvd 6. Lindero Ave & Robles Park ◼ The connectivity to existing bicycle and pedestrian network is limited and requires crossing major arterials at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road or out-of-direction travel via indirect streets within the Circles neighborhood ◼ Lindero Avenue at Alma Street is wide, and the landscaped strip along Alma Street provides a potential location for a ramp structure ◼ Lindero Avenue is located between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road, where future grade separation projects are planned (including future improved pedestrian/bicycle crossings) ◼ Consider the implications of nearby grade separation project on desirability of this as a pedestrian/bicycle crossing location ◼ Connecting to Park Boulevard would require property acquisition ◼ A connection to Robles Park would provide access for multiple school routes ◼ If this alignment is selected, supporting improvements such as paving and widening paths through Robles Park, should be considered Lindero Drive at Alma Street Lindero Drive at Alma Street Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 124 Packet Pg. 158 of 351 7: Adobe Creek & Ely Pl ◼ The creek channel is narrow, with limited potential for widening ◼ Access to the creek is constrains, as it abuts private property. It is challenging for pedestrians and bicyclists to navigate from both sides of the railroad tracks ◼ Installing a crossing at Ely Place may require property acquisition ◼ The available ROW in this area is constrained/limited ◼ Adobe Creek Alma Street at Adobe Creek Item 5 Attachment A - Existing Conditions Report Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 125 Packet Pg. 159 of 351 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity DRAFT Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memo Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 1 SOUTH PALO ALTO BIKE/PED CONNECTIVITY DRAFT DESIGN PRIORITIES AND EVALUATION CRITERIA MEMORANDUM Introduction This memorandum presents the draft design priorities and evaluation criteria that will be used to guide the development and selection of rail crossing designs and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure options (alternatives) in southern Palo Alto as part of the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project (Project). It also outlines the engagement and evaluation processes that will be utilized to inform the assessment of designs and subsequent selection of two locally preferred alternatives. Project Background The City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2030 (2022), City of Palo Alto 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) (2012), and Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study (2013) identified a critical need for additional grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings, particularly in the southern portion of the City. In response, the City of Palo Alto is conducting this Project to assess ways to improve bicycle and pedestrian access across the rail corridor in south Palo Alto. The purpose of this Project is to develop community-supported locations and design concepts (15 percent designs) for two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor and Alma Street in south Palo Alto (i.e., south of Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road). The Project will also identify context-sensitive bicycle and pedestrian enhancements that link the proposed grade-separated crossing sites to the existing/future bicycle and pedestrian networks within the neighborhoods adjacent to the railroad tracks. The Project will engage the community to select preferred crossing locations, designs, and network improvements and develop an implementation plan and funding strategy for future construction. Engagement Process During the first engagement phase of this Project, Phase 1 Establish Design Priorities (Spring 2025), the Project team is seeking community input to confirm crossing opportunity locations and establish design priorities and evaluation criteria to be applied in the evaluation of alternatives. Engagement is occurring via small group discussions, an online survey, several pop-up events, a community workshop, and discussions at standing committee meetings. The outcome of Phase 1 will be prioritization of crossing opportunity locations and a final set of design priorities and evaluation criteria that will be further developed and evaluated in Phase 2. During the next engagement phase of this Project, Phase 2 Feedback on Alternatives (Fall 2025), the Project team will present concept designs and corresponding network modifications for up to eight Item 5 Attachment B - Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 126 Packet Pg. 160 of 351 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity DRAFT Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memo Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 2 alternatives and evaluate each alternative using the selected design priorities and evaluation criteria established in Phase 1. The initial eight alternatives and completed evaluation will be shared with the community for review and feedback during Phase 2 via small group discussions, pop-up events, a second online survey, a second community workshop, and discussions at standing committee meetings. The feedback received during this phase will result in the refinement and selection of two preferred alternatives that will be carried forward for 15 percent concept design. The Public Draft Report will be shared for feedback as part of Phase 3 Review Public Draft Report (Spring 2026). The Final Report will be shared in Summer 2026 in Phase 4 Final Report for community review and Council adoption. Draft Design Priorities The following draft design priorities were identified based on the Project needs, goals, benefits, and themes documented in several plans and studies previously prepared by the City, which are summarized in the literature review in the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Existing Conditions Report (April 2, 2025). •Improve Mobility: Prioritize locations and designs that integrate with surrounding networks, provide access to critical destinations, serve the most users, and accommodate current and future transportation needs. •Enhance User Experience: Design facilities guided by the prioritization of the most vulnerable populations, and create safe, well-lit spaces that are comfortable to access and utilize. •Maximize Ease of Construction: Minimize potential for disruption during construction and complexity of design, while ensuring that construction costs and maintenance costs are feasible to implement given reasonably expected project funding. •Enhance Visual Appeal: Ensure that newly constructed facilities enhance the sense of community by incorporating public art, public spaces, and attractive structures. •Minimize Community Impacts: Limit potential impacts on existing neighborhoods, including the amount of space needed (parking spaces, roads, and buildings are minimally affected) and impacts on the environment. These initial design priorities are presented for review and feedback as part of Phase 1 engagement activities. Based on the feedback received, the Project team will refine the design priorities and corresponding evaluation criteria that will guide subsequent efforts. The key areas of community feedback will also be considered from other on-going City plans and projects, such as the BPTP Update. Draft Evaluation Criteria Draft design priorities established in this memorandum are grounded in key community priorities and linked to specific evaluation criteria, with measurable outcomes, that are proposed to be used for the analysis of alternatives. The proposed design priorities and draft evaluation criteria are presented in the following table. Item 5 Attachment B - Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 127 Packet Pg. 161 of 351 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity DRAFT Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memo Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 3 Table 1. Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Draft Design Priority Draft Evaluation Criteria1 Description Improve Mobility Accessibility Walk and bike access within 5- 10- and 15-minutes Demand# Projected number of users during the weekday peak hour Capacity# Width of facility and ability of rail crossing to accommodate people walking and biking Enhance User Experience Crossing length# Total length of the crossing facility Crossing elevation# Total change in elevation of the crossing facility Pedestrian and bicyclist comfort Extent to which existing bicycle and pedestrian network would provide low-stress access to the rail crossing(s) Personal security Alignment of rail crossing facility and approaches with Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) best practices Maximize Ease of Construction Utility and right-of- way impacts Level of disruption to existing and planned utilities, extent of relocations required, extent of right-of-way impacts Construction cost# Rough order of magnitude of project construction cost Operations and maintenance cost Magnitude of projected annual cost of operations and maintenance Enhance Visual Appeal Public space and green infrastructure Potential to create new public spaces and implement green infrastructure Minimize Community Impacts Environmental impacts Extent to which crossing impacts the environment - impervious areas, creeks/drainage, sea level rise, wetlands, sensitive habitats Parcel impacts# Number of parcels needed, all or in part, to construct crossing and approach facilities Parking and driveway impacts Extent to which rail crossings affect existing vehicle parking and access to existing driveways Notes: 1 Criteria marked with an “#” are quantitative and a specific value will be presented. Criteria without a “#” are qualitative and will be scored using a scale of high, medium, and low, for its performance. Item 5 Attachment B - Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 128 Packet Pg. 162 of 351 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity DRAFT Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memo Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 4 Next Steps With input from community and committee members, the final evaluation criteria will be selected based on how well they facilitate evaluation against the overarching set of established priorities and how effectively they differentiate alternatives. Each of the eight crossing alternatives will be evaluated against the same subset of criteria and scored quantitatively with a specific value reported or qualitatively using a scale of high, medium, and low, for its performance. The results of this evaluation will be presented in Phase 2 Feedback on Alternatives and community input will be sought to inform selection of the two preferred alternatives for the rail crossing and associated bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements in south Palo Alto. Item 5 Attachment B - Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria Memorandum Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 129 Packet Pg. 163 of 351 Parks and Recreation Commission Staff Report Lead Department: Community Services Meeting Date: May 27, 2025 Report #: 2505-4705 TITLE Approval of the Parks and Recreation Commission Workplan RECOMMENDATION Discussion and approval of the Parks and Recreation Commission for the 2025 Calendar Year Workplan BACKGROUND The Parks and Recreation Commission held their annual retreat on April 11, 20251, at Foothills Nature Preserve Interpretive Center. There were four business items discussed, which included: •Review of the FY25 Parks and Recreation Commission Accomplishments •Review and update current priorities •Assign Parks and Recreation Commission Ad Hoc Committee and Liaison Roles; and •Review and update the current workplan. ANALYSIS The draft workplan can be found in Attachment A. This reflects the Commission's key priorities and areas of focus for the calendar year, aligned with City Council priorities and department goals. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Draft Calendar Year 2025 Parks and Recreation Commission Workplan 1 Parks and Recreation Commission, April 11, 2025; Items 2-4 https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=17417 Item 6 Item 6 Staff Report Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 164 of 351 Parks and Recreation Commission 2025 Draft Workplan Staff Liaison: Sarah Robustelli, Division Manager Lead Department: Community Services About the Commission The purpose of the Parks and Recreation Commission is to advise the City Council on matters pertaining to the activities of the Open Space & Parks, Golf, and Recreation divisions of the Community Services Department, excluding daily administrative operations. Timeframe covered by Work Plan is calendar 2025. The Commission is composed of seven members. See Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) 2.25 Sections 2.25.010, 2.25.030, 2.25.040, 2.25.050, and 2.25.060. Residency is required. Further requirements are that members shall not be Council Members, officers, or employees of the City of Palo Alto. Each member of the Commission shall have a demonstrated interest in parks, open space, and recreation matters. For more information about the Parks and Recreation Commission please visit our webpage. Current Commissioners •Nellis Freeman (Chair) •Jeff Greenfield (Vice Chair) •Amanda Brown •Anne Warner Cribbs •Yudy Deng •Shani Kleinhaus •Bing Wei Mission Statement The purpose of the Parks and Recreation Commission is to advise the City Council on policy matters pertaining to the activities of the Open Space, Parks and Golf Division, and the Recreation Division of the Community Services Department. Item 6 Attachment A - Draft Calendar Year 2025 Parks and Recreation Commission Workplan Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 165 of 351 Prior Year Accomplishments Master Plan •The ad hoc met with staff on December 3, 2024 to review the FY 2025 - 2029 CSD Capital Plan for Parks, Open Space, and Golf projects. • The ad hoc recommended updates to the CIP project list and provided input. • The PRC reviewed and provided feedback on the CIP plan on December 18. 2024. Based on direction, the CIP plan was brought back for review and discussion again on January 28, 2025. Park Dedication FY25 •Worked with staff reviewing a prioritized list of 7 potential locations for parkland dedication suitability. •(Will) present and discuss 2 sites to (potentially) recommend for partial parkland dedication. •Updates for Tower Well Site, dedicated as parkland in March 2024: o As directed by City Council, reviewed and then supported recommended name change of Tower Well Park to Frederick Eyerly Park in May 2024. o Ribbon-cutting ceremony in April/May 2025. Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan (BCCP) Update •Working to revive the BCCP effort that began in October 2017 and stalled on several occasions •Met on multiple occasions with staff to determine a path forward including an estimated timeline •Review of multiple chapters in progress, including: o Work to update the draft to reflect current conditions o Work to define scope of modifications to the existing draft plan along with recommendations for future amendments and/or plans o Work to highlight environmental stewardship and sustainability o Considerations of workflow and best practices for managing facilities and human impact Nature Preserve Access Policy •Met on multiple occasions with staff, including supervising rangers, to review current policy and visit open space preserves (OSPs). This included evaluating the current Access Policy implementation and acceptance, and potential trail access changes at the Baylands and Pearson-Arastradero Preserves: •Baylands Nature Preserve: analysis and recommendations to be shared with the PRC in April 2025. •Pearson Arastradero Preserve: analysis and recommendations to be shared with the PRC in April 2025. •Recommendations shared with PABAC for feedback in April 2025, prior to discussion at PRC. •Collaborated with staff to identify areas in need of increased signage. •Worked with staff to pinpoint locations that would benefit from the installation of additional bicycle racks. Recreation Wellness Center •Collaborated with City staff on stakeholder and community outreach initiatives. •Held weekly ad hoc meetings (with occasional staff participation) to conduct outreach and research on the Recreation Wellness Center's needs, potential locations, facilities, programs, and activities. •Raised public awareness about the need for a city-operated Recreation Wellness Center. •Partnered with the City of Palo Alto and the Friends of the Recreation Wellness Center to draft and sign a Letter of Intent (LOI) on December 3, 2024, outlining the relationship between the City and the Friends group. Item 6 Attachment A - Draft Calendar Year 2025 Parks and Recreation Commission Workplan Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 166 of 351 •Provided regular status updates to the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) during monthly meetings. •Co-hosted a community meeting with City staff in January 2025 to discuss the proposed center and explore potential locations. •Continued collaboration with the Friends of Palo Alto Recreation Wellness Center Board of Directors, providing updates to the PRC based on relevant input received. Bicycle / E-Bike Policy and Access •Implementation of Council Direction from 2/27/2023 for all bikes in the Baylands and Arastradero Preserve to consider and recommend policy to address: o Reduction of speed limit. o Whether and where to restrict bicycle and horse access. o Adding bike racks at trailheads in open space, where lacking. •PRC ad hoc met throughout the year, working with staff to review policy and regulations regarding the use of e- bikes and electric conveyances in parks and open space areas. This included Palo Alto, neighboring cities, and regional, state, and national jurisdictions. We also met with park users to solicit feedback. •Discussed policy considerations, including parks vs. open spaces, types of e-bikes, and state policy implications with CSD, Transportation and Safe Routes staff, and PABAC, including their E-Bike subcommittee. •PRC ad hoc discussed balancing competing interests and priorities, including wildlife and ecosystem protection, recreation, bicycle transportation corridors, public access, equity, safety, enforceability, ADA requirements, and clarity and communication of rules on October 25, 2022. •After considerable public comment and discussion, PRC unanimously recommended e-bike and electric conveyances policy and regulations for parks and open space on November 22, 2022. Playing Fields and Raquet Sports ●Policy and Best Practices Review: ○Supporting staff by reviewing the best regional practices and making general policy cleanup recommendations. ○Completed an initial review of the field use policy, identifying areas for further stakeholder engagement and review. ●Field and Turf Initiatives: ○Recommending a synthetic turf replacement strategy for upcoming work at El Camino Park and the Stanford/Mayfield Soccer Complex. ○Planning a community meeting to update field users on tournament clean-up responsibilities, goal storage, and stakeholder communications. ●Tennis Court Management: ○Reviewed CPA reservation policies and proposed reserving a specific percentage of court usage for Palo Alto residents. ○Organized community outreach with a tennis meeting scheduled for April 8, 2025, and explored ways to extend the use of existing courts (e.g., lights, additional porta potties). ○Gathered and reviewed best practices for court reservation systems from neighboring cities to support local access. ●Pickleball Initiatives: ○Supported and implemented pickleball lines at Fletcher School/Terman Park to increase access for students. ○Met with Pickleball Club leadership to discuss expanding access, including the possibility of multi-use courts at Item 6 Attachment A - Draft Calendar Year 2025 Parks and Recreation Commission Workplan Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 167 of 351 Mitchell Park. ●Coordination Efforts: ○Coordinating with staff on the timeline for the racquet sports joint task force. Middle School Athletics •Ad Hoc met January 29 to create a workplan. •Reviewed of history of MSA, reviewed research and background gathered by staff. Options included 1) city remains the provider, with financial support to offset costs 2) MSA contracts with outside organizations to operate the program or contracts out individual sports to specific non-profits. •Staff’s goal was to reach agreement/decision by school start August 15, 2025 •Staff researched information regarding possible vendors •Staff working with purchasing about required process for MSA third party vendors. •Ad Hoc scheduled a meeting March 28 with Mr. Tom Haxton and colleagues to listen to his vision for MSA •Ad hoc and staff to continue to collect information on options including a timeline for presentation to Commission and report to City Council PROJECT/GOAL 1:CIP Review Review the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) planning and prioritization process to ensure consistency with the Parks, Trails, Natural Open Space, and Recreation Master Plan. Collaborate with staff to evaluate current project alignment, enhance transparency in project selection, and implement best practices for long-term capital planning and inter-departmental coordination. BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED Optimize implementation of the Parks Master Plan Better Resource Allocation Increased Public Trust Fiscal Year 25 – Q3 & Q4 Moderate staff time Alignment with Master Plan Goals Stakeholder Engagement/Transparency Yes: Parks Master Plan (Policy 2.G, 6.A) HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY COUNCIL-DIRECTED POLICY UPDATE Review CIP and to ensure alignment with the Master Plan Establish annual and periodic review best practices Yes: Parks Master Plan (Chapter 5: Progress Reporting) PROJECT/GOAL 2: Park Dedication FY26 Pursue and evaluate top priority potential sites and identify potential new sites to recommend dedicating as parkland within our community Item 6 Attachment A - Draft Calendar Year 2025 Parks and Recreation Commission Workplan Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 168 of 351 BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED Increase dedicated parkland to provide recreational opportunities, promote the health and well-being of the community, and support biodiversity Advance goals of 4 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, and within 1/2 mile of homes Q1-FY25 through Q2-FY26 Moderate staff time (CSD, CAO, Planning, PWE, Real Estate) Recommendation of one or more sites for dedication as parkland Yes: Parks Master Plan (Goals and Policies 1.B, 1.C, 4.D, 5.C) and Comprehensive Plan (Policy L-8.1) HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY COUNCIL-DIRECTED POLICY UPDATE Work with staff to assess the suitability of potential sites for parkland dedication, including Rinconada Gardens, San Antonio Avenue at Ponce Drive, Los Altos Treatment Plant Site (wetland area), and Baylands Measure E Site (landfill slope portion) Pursue dedication of Greer Park sewer easement associated with the 2850 W. Bayshore Road development project Review previously identified locations and consider new potential sites for park dedication Yes PROJECT/GOAL 3:Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan (BCCP) Update BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED Work towards releasing the Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan which was previously developed but not completed Establish updated standards, guidelines, and processes for environmental stewardship and infrastructure development and maintenance in the Palo Alto Baylands Nature Preserve Q1-FY25 through Q2-FY26 Moderate to high staff time Funding for a consultant will likely be required eventually Generate an update on the current status of the BCCP, including estimated timeline for completion and recommended next steps Yes (Parks Master Plan Program 4.A.1) HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY COUNCIL-DIRECTED POLICY UPDATE Review current draft BCCP and work with staff to assess the status of document sections: •Up to date, complete•Up to date, further updates required •Outdated, update required •Outdated, appropriate to omit •Identify gaps that should be addressed Work with staff to review the status of CEQA and other required environmental reviews Work with staff to recommend a path forward for completing and releasing the BCCP, including: •Identify work that can be completed with current resources during FY25 •Identify any additional required resources and an estimated timeline for Move forward with BCCP updates as possible and appropriate Yes Item 6 Attachment A - Draft Calendar Year 2025 Parks and Recreation Commission Workplan Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 169 of 351 completion •Identify work, which is out of scope for the BCCP, to be considered at a later date. PROJECT/GOAL 4: Nature Preserve Access Policy Access Policy Recommendation for Pearson-Arastradero and Baylands Nature Preserves - work with staff and stakeholders to review all access, including bicycles, e-bikes and other electric conveyances, equestrians, and pedestrians BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED Balance recreational access with stewardship of natural resources in the Baylands and Arastradero Nature Preserves Considerations include habitat and wildlife protection, trail safety, community interests, and staff and infrastructure resources Q1-FY25 through Q1-FY26 Moderate Staff Time Forward updated access recommendations for Pearson- Arastradero and Baylands Nature Preserves to staff and/or City Council as appropriate. Yes (Parks Master Plan Policy 6.D; Program 2.A.7) HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY COUNCIL-DIRECTED POLICY UPDATE Follow up on FY24 Bicycle and Equestrian Ad Hoc recommendations re: unauthorized trail usage and stewardship of natural resources along trails. Review Adobe Creek Loop Trail and Byxbee Park trail access. Provide input to staff regarding an appropriate response to the 02/27/2023 City Council referral. Follow up / review access and activity at Pearson-Arastradero Bowl Loop Trail area and Baylands Adobe Creek Loop Trail Bowl. o Work with staff to implement a recommended trail closure in the bowl loop area at Pearson-Arastradero Nature Preserve o Work with staff to evaluate partial closure of the upper bowl at Pearson- Arastradero Nature Preserve General trail network access review Yes PROJECT/GOAL 5: Cubberley/Recreation Wellness Center Work with staff to facilitate progress on the Palo Alto Recreation Wellness Center. BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED Item 6 Attachment A - Draft Calendar Year 2025 Parks and Recreation Commission Workplan Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 170 of 351 Recreation and Park facilities for the health and welfare of current and future generations Community engagement 2025 – 2026 Goal – vision of a complete facility CSD staff time, Public Works staff time Completing the facility for the community via the partnership with the City of Palo Alto, Friends of Recreation Wellness Center and community stakeholders Council Approved (Parks Master Plan Goal 1; Policy 4.A) Identified priority major project HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY COUNCIL-DIRECTED POLICY UPDATE Community engagement with stakeholders and others, including existing facilities Discussion of site alternatives – Greer Park, Cubberley, 10.5 acres, and others Confirmed location of site with Council Approval of site Commission support of LOI with Friends and City of Palo Alto Regular updates for PRC to ensure other Commissioners, City staff and stakeholders are kept abreast of updates Define relationship between Ad Hoc/PRC, Friends group, and the City of Palo Alto Yes PROJECT/GOAL 6: Playing Fields Review the playing fields synthetic turf replacement process and strategy with staff, and recommend updates, with a long-term focus BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED Efficient and successful replacement of end-of-life synthetic turf fields Optimized access to City playing fields Proactive field management FY25-Q1 through FY26-Q2 Moderate staff time Successful replacement of end-of life synthetic turf field, contingent upon CIP funding (turf study/analysis) Engage with stakeholders for feedback Yes: Parks Master Plan (Programs 2.A.3; 2.C.3) HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY COUNCIL-DIRECTED POLICY UPDATE Work with staff to review and recommend optimum synthetic turf replacement strategy, including materials, process, and definite timeline for Mayfield. Collaborate on the ongoing Turf Study by providing historical context and relevant past research and engaging with stakeholders to gather input. Work with staff to recommend an optimum synthetic turf replacement strategy for El Camino Park, based on the Turf Study findings. Meet with stakeholders periodically for feedback Yes PROJECT/GOAL 7: Racquet Courts Policy Review and recommend updates to Racquet Sports policies, including tennis and pickleball Item 6 Attachment A - Draft Calendar Year 2025 Parks and Recreation Commission Workplan Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 171 of 351 BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED Proactive Pickleball and Tennis court management Work with staff to develop fair and equity tennis court reservation system that promotes wellness for residents. Understand current utilization, demand patterns, and user feedback for Pickleball and tennis courts. FY25-26 Q3, Q4, and Q1: Complete review of court reservation policy Moderate staff time Court reservation policy update, recommendation if warranted by Q1 2026 Yes: Parks Master Plan (Programs 1.F.1; 2.A.3; 2.C.3) HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY COUNCIL-DIRECTED POLICY UPDATE Meet with stakeholders periodically/monthly if necessary for feedback Work with staff to review current USTA resident requirements as it relates to reserving court space in Palo Alto for non-residents Investigate the feasibility of expanding Pickleball courts Completion of a 30-day utilization report with hourly breakdowns (tennis and pickleball) Survey response rate of at least 60% from current users Identification of at least 3 top pain points (e.g., peak congestion, reservation hoarding, low off-peak use) Work with staff to convene and support the joint taskforce for racquet sports Meet with stakeholders for feedback and review court reservation systems and use policy and recommend an update as appropriate Yes PROJECT/GOAL 8: Middle School Athletics BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED Look into the Middle School Athletics Program and investigate alternative operational models and determine if alternative models would create better programing for the community. Commission to discuss options by August 2025 and forward recommendations to City Council for discussion. Moderate staff time Community/Commission/Council feel confident in MSA program moving forward. Council Directed HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY COUNCIL-DIRECTED POLICY UPDATE Item 6 Attachment A - Draft Calendar Year 2025 Parks and Recreation Commission Workplan Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 172 of 351 Gather information regarding contracting MSA program out to a different provider. Investigate non-profit funding sources to help offset registration fee Looking at hiring methods to increase available coaches Yes Item 6 Attachment A - Draft Calendar Year 2025 Parks and Recreation Commission Workplan Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 173 of 351 From:Canopy To:ParkRec Commission Subject:More Trees Please Webinar on June 12, 2025 Date:Tuesday, May 20, 2025 12:08:37 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. i This message needs your attention This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 174 of 351 Schools: The Lungs of Our Community Thursday, June 12, 2025 | 10:00-11:30 a.m. Webinar featuring: Elektra Fike-Data, Executive Director, Tree San Diego Julia Gowin, Urban Forestry Supervisor for Northern California, CAL FIRE Kira Maritano, Senior Program Manager, Bay Area Park Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 175 of 351 Development for Trust for Public Land Milan Ninkovic, Facility & Construction Executive, Bridge Way Facilitated by: Jean-Paul Renaud, Executive Director, Canopy Schools and greenspaces are the heart of our communities and cities. Greening schoolyards can benefit students, their families, and the rest of the community. A well-forested campus improves the mental health of those who engage with those spaces and fights climate change, pollution, and heat islands. Transforming schools from asphalt to greenspace is a critical strategy for increasing our urban forest, cooling our neighborhoods, and improving access to open spaces — especially in dense urban communities like those in the Bay Area. But schools face complex challenges and competing priorities that can create barriers to this transformation. Hear from a panel of 4 speakers about how we can overcome challenges and work together to transform our schools into community greenspaces. Register Now! After registering, you will receive a confirmation email from no- reply@zoom.us containing information about joining the webinar. Certified Arborists will earn 1.5 ISA CEUs upon attending the live webinar. This program is made possible by a generous grant from the Santa Clara County Office of Sustainability. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 176 of 351 We hope to see you online for the 2025 More Trees Please webinar! Tree Library Find an Arborist Canopy Blog Give to Canopy Our mission is to collaborate with communities to grow and sustain equitable urban forests for all. We envision connected communities thriving within a vibrant urban forest. Canopy | 3921 East Bayshore Road | Palo Alto, CA 94303 US Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Constant Contact Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 177 of 351 From:Friends of the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo To:ParkRec Commission Subject:ICYMI: Friends" Spring Breakfast Ignites a Passion for Science Date:Tuesday, May 20, 2025 11:34:25 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i Logo_Full_Color_CMYK.jpg Friends' Spring Breakfast May 20, 2025 Hello Friends, On May 9, we hosted our second annual Friends' Spring Breakfast. We were glad to see many new faces and returning supporters join us for a morning focused on the importance of early access to science education and the impact that JMZ science programs have throughout our community. Over the past year, both JMZ Science Outreach in underserved schools and Science with a Twist at the Boys & Girls Clubs of the Peninsula have expanded in response to student and site demand. Thanks to the generosity of our donors, we raised more than $80,000 at this year’s event to help bring hands-on, engaging science lessons to even more elementary school students in underserved communities. We’re especially grateful to the speakers, educators, and ambassadors who helped bring This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 178 of 351 the JMZ’s work to life during the event. If you missed it, we’ve included a few highlights and photos below. This Saturday, May 24, from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m., join the Friends and the Joy Culture Foundation for a Dragon Boat Festival storytime and craft. This event is free with admission; advanced ticket purchase to the JMZ is required. Thank you for being part of our community, helping us ignite a passion for science for over 3,000 students across East Palo Alto, Eastern Menlo Park, and Redwood City. With gratitude, Lauren Angelo President, Friends of the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo Thank you to our Spring Breakfast guests and donors for supporting science programs across our community! Friends’ Ambassadors, Lee Harper, Kat Burton, and Anoek Grosmann, welcomed guests alongside a few animals that visit JMZ Science Outreach classes in schools and Science with a Twist lessons at the Boys & Girls Clubs of the Peninsula (BGCP). As panelist Jenny Obiaya shared, animal visits are powerful and encourage children to open up, engage, and connect to the natural world. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 179 of 351 JMZ Educators, Alex Hamilton and Heather Schultz, brought hands-on science activities to the event, offering guests a glimpse at the interactive lessons students experience at schools and at BGCP. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 180 of 351 Sally Loverro, Friends' Board Member, opened the event by sharing more about why she joined the Friends. As she became more involved with her own children's school district foundation, Sally was inspired to expand her impact beyond her community and support students who might not have access to the same resources. Initially thinking the Friends focused solely on capital projects, she quickly discovered the depth of the Friends' outreach work and found the meaningful connection she had been seeking. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 181 of 351 We were fortunate to be joined by a panel of three science and education experts featuring Jenny Obiaya, CEO of the Boys & Girls Clubs of the Peninsula; Dr. Hyowon Gweon, Associate Professor in the Stanford's Department of Psychology; and Dr. Nicole Ardoin, Associate Professor of Environmental Behavioral Sciences in the Environmental Social Sciences Department of the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability. Panelists highlighted the importance of early, hands-on science education and how it fuels curiosity, confidence, and critical thinking in young learners. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 182 of 351 Development Committee Co-chairs, Meredith Tan and Jill Hartnett, closed the morning with a thank you to our guests. We’re so grateful to our incredible community of donors, educators, and partners who attended. Thanks to the support of our community, we raised over $80,000 to fund science education across East Palo Alto, Eastern Menlo Park, and Redwood City. Your commitment to our programs helps lay the foundation for future success, ensuring every child has access to engaging, high-quality science education. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 183 of 351 All photos courtesy of BQ Creative. Donate Now Thank you to our generous event sponsors! Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 184 of 351 Interested in becoming a corporate sponsor? Please contact Stephanie Kerry, Advancement Manager, at stephanie@friendsjmz.org. Friends of the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo info@friendsjmz.org | www.friendsjmz.org Donate Now Connect with us Friends of the JMZ | 1451 Middlefield Road | Palo Alto, CA 94301 US Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 12 Packet Pg. 185 of 351 From:Light As Air Boats To:ParkRec Commission Subject:Upgrade Your Watersports This Season! Date:Tuesday, May 20, 2025 6:33:36 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. i SHOP NOW Hi there! Set Your Water Sports Offerings Apart From the Crowd! Perfect for guests! This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 13 Packet Pg. 186 of 351 SIPABOARDS See Parks & Camps Catalog Here See Resorts Catalog Here Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 14 Packet Pg. 187 of 351 For Quantity Discounts or Questions, Call Andi! Tel:706.619.6670 andi@lightasairboats.com Ride, Surf, Float – Offer the Ultimate Summer Experience! See Parks & Camps Catalog Here See Resorts Catalog Here Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 15 Packet Pg. 188 of 351 SIPABOARDS Yours in Wind, Water, and Waves, - The Light As Air Boats Team We don’t want to spam you.If you're no longer interested in enjoying adventures out on the water Unsubscribe here.Light As Air Boats 13801 Walsingham Rd. Suite A-116 Largo, Florida 33774 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 16 Packet Pg. 189 of 351 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki Cc:Jay Boyarsky; Jeff Rosen; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader forCalifornia Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; Reckdahl, Keith; Lauing, Ed; Mickie Winkler; Gerry Gras;Roberta Ahlquist; Gardener, Liz; planning.commision@cityofpaloalto.org; ParkRec Commission; Lythcott-Haims,Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Burt, Patrick; Patricia.Guerrero@jud.ca.gov; Jessica Speiser; board@pausd.org; SupervisorSusan Ellenberg; Sean Allen; Pat M; sharon jackson; Josh Becker; josh@joshsalcman.com; Cait James; TimJames; Marina Lopez; Henry Etzkowitz; Lotus Fong; Drekmeier, Peter; Friends of Cubberley; DuJuan Green;dennis burns; Human Relations Commission; Kaloma Smith; Holman, Karen (external); Nash, Betsy;dcombs@menlopark.gov; city.council@menlopark.gov; GRP-City Council; Bill Newell; Roberta Ahlquist; RobertaRoth; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Baker, Rob; Barberini, Christopher; Rowena Chiu; YolandaConaway; Don Austin; gstone22@gmail.com; Greg Tanaka; Ruth Silver Taube; Donna Wallach; Salem Ajluni;Stump, Molly; Tom DuBois; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Steve Wagstaffe; Sheree Roth; Lori Meyers; Linda Jolley;Raymond Goins; Doug Minkler; Diana Diamond; Emily Mibach; Dave Price; Figueroa, Eric; chuck jagoda; Zelkha,Mila; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; District10@sanjoseca.gov; The Office of Mayor Matt Mahan; Enberg,Nicholas; Gennady Sheyner; EPA Today; James Quadra; Bryan Gobin; Foley, Michael;<michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Lee, Craig; Cribbs, Anne; Templeton, Cari; Bains, Paul; Perron, Zachary;Zahra Billoo; Robert. Jonsen; Rose Lynn; Rodriguez, Miguel; Jeff Conrad; Jeff Hayden; Vara Ramakrishnan;Sheriff Transparency; Patrice Ventresca; editor@paweekly.com; Afanasiev, Alex; Lu, George Subject:A months-long investigation found even the smallest hints of dissent are often met with unemployment. Date:Sunday, May 18, 2025 1:56:09 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i An important piece for anti-Zionist Jews and their supporters to read! U.S. Jewish Institutions Are Purging Their Staffs of Anti-Zionists A months-long investigation found even the smallest hints of dissent are often met with unemployment. Source: In These Times https://share.google/UZxQsvGbeAk3TLghf Shared via the Google app This message needs your attention Some Recipients have never replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 17 Packet Pg. 190 of 351 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki Cc:Josh Becker; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Lori Meyers; Sheree Roth; Emily Mibach; Zelkha, Mila;Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; planning.commision@cityofpaloalto.org; ParkRec Commission; Cribbs, Anne; JayBoyarsky; Jeff Rosen; Steve Wagstaffe; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations; board@valleywater.org;boardfeedback@smcgov.org; Dave Price; Gennady Sheyner; Braden Cartwright; Brian Good; Roberta Ahlquist;WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Henry Etzkowitz; Mickie Winkler; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Perron,Zachary; Human Relations Commission; frances.Rothschild@jud.ca.gov; Pat M; Sean Allen; sharon jackson;Yolanda Conaway; Don Austin; Donna Wallach; Friends of Cubberley; Figueroa, Eric;<michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Foley, Michael; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Reckdahl, Keith; GerryGras; Lu, George; Daniel Kottke; Jeff Hayden; Bill Newell; editor@almanacnews.com; editor@paweekly.com; EPAToday; Council, City; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov; Angel, David; Dan Okonkwo; Dana St. George;Bryan Gobin; Stump, Molly; Shikada, Ed; GRP-City Council; city.council@menlopark.gov;citycouncil@mountainview.gov; GRP-City Clerk; Bains, Paul; dennis burns; Dennis Upton; DuJuan Green; RowenaChiu Subject:Eurovision crew members were also hit with paint during the incident at the grand final in Basel Date:Saturday, May 17, 2025 5:14:23 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i ELIMINATE THE STATE OF ISRAEL NO MORE NAZI GENOCIDE Israeli singer Yuval Raphael was left “shaken and upset” after pro-Palestinian protesters tried to storm the stage during the Eurovision Song Contest final. Eurovision crew members were also hit with paint during the incident at the grand final in Basel Source: The Independent https://share.google/dtQm5lOFdwAlX1PA2 Shared via the Google app This message needs your attention Some Recipients have never replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 18 Packet Pg. 191 of 351 From:নਊ To:ParkRec Commission Subject:Dangerous Behavior and Field Monopolization by Youth Soccer Team at El Camino Park Date:Saturday, May 17, 2025 2:28:12 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Palo Alto Community Services Department, I am writing to formally report an incident that occurred on May 17th at approximately 1:30 PM at the artificial turf soccer field in El Camino Park. While I was exercising and organizing my belongings, a youth soccer team wearing blue uniforms arrived and forcibly took over the area where I was working out. During this time, a player from the team kicked a soccer ball directly at me, posing a serious safety risk. I request a formal apology from the coach or responsible adult supervising the team regarding this dangerous behavior. Furthermore, I strongly urge the City of Palo Alto to consider restricting this youth team’s access to El Camino Park until proper behavior and respect for other park users can be ensured. If prompt and appropriate action is not taken, I will have no choice but to escalate this complaint to higher city authorities and the city council. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your swift response and appropriate action. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. This person's name has non-English characters. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 19 Packet Pg. 192 of 351 From:Robustelli, Sarah To:Evan Reade Cc:City Mgr; ParkRec Commission; Council, City Subject:RE: Budget realities vs. Eleanor Pardee Park restroom proposal Date:Friday, May 16, 2025 3:41:45 PM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image004.png image005.png image006.png image007.png Hi Evan, Thank you for your continued engagement regarding the proposed restroom at Eleanor Pardee Park, and for sharing your concerns with the City Council, the Parks and Recreation Commission, and City staff. We appreciate your participation in this process and the time you have taken to voice your perspective. As you referenced, the City’s FY 2026 Proposed Capital Improvement Program includes funding for a new restroom at Eleanor Pardee Park. This recommendation is based in part on the results of a community survey, which received 1,171 responses. Of these, 82% supported the project, including 75% of respondents who live within walking distance of the park. Among supporters in the neighborhood, nearly half (48%) strongly agreed that the restroom is necessary. We also acknowledge that 18% of total respondents expressed opposition, and we understand that some nearby residents remain concerned. No final decisions have been made. A Park Improvement Ordinance will be required to move the project forward. This ordinance will be reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission at a future public meeting, offering an opportunity for additional input and discussion before the project is considered by the City Council. Should the project proceed, further community engagement will occur during the design phase. In regard to your question about environmental review, the City will follow all applicable requirements under CEQA as part of the standard approval process. We understand your view that Pardee Park has served the neighborhood well without a restroom and appreciate your comments regarding budget priorities, potential neighborhood impacts, and community outreach. We also recognize the strong interest expressed by many residents in adding a restroom to better support park users, especially families with young children and older adults. City Council will carefully weigh all input and competing priorities before making any decisions regarding funding allocations in the FY 2026 budget and Parks Improvement Ordinance. Thank you again for your continued engagement on this matter. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 20 Packet Pg. 193 of 351 Sarah SARAH ROBUSTELLI Division Manager Open Space, Parks, and Golf Community Services Department (650) 617-3518 |sarah.robustelli@paloalto.gov www.paloalto.gov From: Evan Reade <evanreade@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2025 4:56 PM To: Council, City <city.council@PaloAlto.gov>; Lauing, Ed <Ed.Lauing@paloalto.gov>; Burt, Patrick <Pat.Burt@PaloAlto.gov>; Stone, Greer <Greer.Stone@paloalto.gov>; Reckdahl, Keith <Keith.Reckdahl@paloalto.gov>; Veenker, Vicki <Vicki.Veenker@paloalto.gov>; Lu, George <George.Lu@paloalto.gov>; Lythcott-Haims, Julie <Julie.LythcottHaims@PaloAlto.gov>; Shikada, Ed <Ed.Shikada@paloalto.gov>; Robustelli, Sarah <Sarah.Robustelli@paloalto.gov>; ParkRec Commission <parkrec.commission@PaloAlto.gov> Subject: Budget realities vs. Eleanor Pardee Park restroom proposal CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council: First, thank you to those of you who have taken the time to speak with me personally since my appearance before the Parks and Recreation Commission on March 25 and the Council on April 7 concerning my opposition to the installation i This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report CGBANNERINDICATOR Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council: First, thank you to those of you who have taken the time to speak with me personally since my appearance before the Parks and Recreation Commission on March 25 and the Council on April 7 concerning my opposition to the installation of restrooms at Eleanor Pardee Park. I would like to make several additional points further to those outlined in my letter to the Parks and Rec Commission, copied to you, dated March Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 21 Packet Pg. 194 of 351 31, 2025. On Monday, May 12, I observed your discussion of the city's proposed budget for FY2026. The Proposed Capital Budget mentions at pages 250-252 an intent to continue to install one new park restroom per year and notes that Eleanor Pardee Park is next on the list for FY2026. However, in your discussions it became clear that given current economic conditions and uncertainties it may well be necessary to cut $6 million (out of a proposed $12 million) from the Capital Improvements Plan in order to protect a needed reserve fund, particularly if the city wishes to continue to adequately fund the critically important work being done by a number of non-profit organizations which receive city dollars to implement programs with direct positive impacts upon various segments of our community. The slides presented at last Monday's meeting indicated that to realize CIP reductions of 5,10 and 15 percent it would be necessary to evaluate proposed project timing with a priority to delay or defer projects to manage funding availability and project prioritization. The slide also listed factors to be considered in making such determinations. Might I suggest that the city can save $1 million right off the bat by foregoing construction of a restroom at Eleanor Pardee Park? Even if one concedes that this project is in the "nice to do" category (which I do not) rather than in the "must do" category, it is clear that those funds can be better spent on other more pressing and necessary priorities, some of which are ongoing and would be severely impacted if continued funding were to cease. Spend the money where it is needed the most. Consider "luxury" or "nice to have" projects later. I would also like to know whether the city has complied with or is planning to comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") before proceeding with the Eleanor Pardee Park restroom project. It is my understanding that CEQA applies to projects requiring discretionary government approval, and this includes construction of new facilities like park restrooms. The city's decision to approve the construction of new park restrooms is clearly a discretionary action, as the city has control over the project's location, design, and construction methods. As I have asserted in my earlier letters, the construction and operation of a new restroom in Eleanor Pardee Park could have potential impacts on the environment in our neighborhood, such as increased traffic, increased waste generation, or changes to the park's and the neighborhood's aesthetics. If I am correct in assuming that CEQA applies, then the city must conduct an environmental review process, potentially including an Initial Study, an Environmental Impact Report, or a Negative Declaration. Has the city conducted or initiated such a process with regard to the proposed restroom at Eleanor Pardee Park? And if not, when is the city planning on doing so? Finally, let me reiterate the points I've made in my earlier letters: Eleanor Pardee Park has served our community well for 100 years without a restroom. For those parents who want to take their kids to a park with a restroom, Rinconada Park - with two restrooms and with numerous other city maintained Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 22 Packet Pg. 195 of 351 restrooms within close walking distance - is less than half a mile away. A restroom will change the park from one designed to serve the neighborhood into a regional park. A restroom will be expensive - perhaps $1 million to design and construct (according to a press report I have read), never mind the ongoing costs required for daily maintenance (estimated in the proposed budget at $9,000 per year). A restroom could present public safety issues - vandalism, loitering, narcotics transactions - and attract the unhoused. The process of community outreach to date has been totally inadequate; the "survey" the city did was hopelessly flawed and, to my knowledge (and I live right next to the park) the city has not made any attempt to engage with those of us in the neighborhood who stand to be most directly impacted by the addition of restroom in the park. Thank you again for your time and willingness to engage with me and to listen to my concerns, which I know are shared by a number of other residents. Sincerely, Evan G. Reade Sharon Ct. cc: City Manager Parks and Recreation Commission Community Services Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 23 Packet Pg. 196 of 351 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki Cc:Reckdahl, Keith; Lauing, Ed; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Jessica Speiser; Zelkha,Mila; Emily Mibach; Lori Meyers; Sheree Roth; Henry Etzkowitz; Lu, George; Burt, Patrick; gstone22@gmail.com;MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; Michelle; O"Neal, Molly; Diana Diamond; Dave Price; Gennady Sheyner; Friends ofCubberley; frances.Rothschild@jud.ca.gov; Patricia.Guerrero@jud.ca.gov; Pat M; Sean Allen; Jeff Conrad;Council, City; GRP-City Council; city.council@menlopark.gov; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Binder, Andrew;chuck jagoda; Tim James; Lee, Craig; Barberini, Christopher; Enberg, Nicholas; Rowena Chiu; WILPF PeninsulaPalo Alto; Doug Minkler; Human Relations Commission; Salem Ajluni; DuJuan Green; Gerry Gras; Mickie Winkler;Nious, Kevin (NBCUniversal); Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; cromero@cityofepa.org; Cribbs, Anne; BradenCartwright; Templeton, Cari; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Raymond Goins; Gardener, Liz; SteveWagstaffe; Freddie.Quintana@sen.ca.gov; Bains, Paul; Perron, Zachary; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>;Foley, Michael; Shikada, Ed; Ruth Silver Taube; Yolanda Conaway; Don Austin; Patrice Ventresca;board@pausd.org; BoardOperations; Tom DuBois; Holman, Karen (external); Dennis Upton; Dennis Upton;editor@paweekly.com; Donna Wallach Subject:Google Worried It Couldn’t Control How Israel Uses Project Nimbus, Files Reveal Date:Thursday, May 15, 2025 6:12:10 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i https://theintercept.com/2025/05/12/google-nimbus-israel-military-ai-human-rights/ This message needs your attention Some Recipients have never replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 24 Packet Pg. 197 of 351 From:Evan Reade To:Council, City; Lauing, Ed; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Reckdahl, Keith; Veenker, Vicki; Lu, George; Lythcott- Haims, Julie; Shikada, Ed; Robustelli, Sarah; ParkRec Commission Subject:Budget realities vs. Eleanor Pardee Park restroom proposal Date:Thursday, May 15, 2025 4:57:05 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council: First, thank you to those of you who have taken the time to speak with me personally since my appearance before the Parks and Recreation Commission on March 25 and the Council on April 7 concerning my opposition to the installation of restrooms at Eleanor Pardee Park. I would like to make several additional points further to those outlined in my letter to the Parks and Rec Commission, copied to you, dated March 31, 2025. On Monday, May 12, I observed your discussion of the city's proposed budget for FY2026. The Proposed Capital Budget mentions at pages 250-252 an intent to continue to install one new park restroom per year and notes that Eleanor Pardee Park is next on the list for FY2026. However, in your discussions it became clear that given current economic conditions and uncertainties it may well be necessary to cut $6 million (out of a proposed $12 million) from the Capital Improvements Plan in order to protect a needed reserve fund, particularly if the city wishes to continue to adequately fund the critically important work being done by a number of non-profit organizations which receive city dollars to implement programs with direct positive impacts upon various segments of our community. The slides presented at last Monday's meeting indicated that to realize CIP reductions of 5,10 and 15 percent it would be necessary to evaluate proposed project timing with a priority to delay or defer projects to manage funding availability and project prioritization. The slide also listed factors to be considered in making such determinations. Might I suggest that the city can save $1 million right off the bat by foregoing construction of a restroom at Eleanor Pardee Park? Even if one concedes that this project is in the "nice to do" category (which I do not) rather than in the "must do" category, it is clear that those funds can be better spent on other more pressing and necessary priorities, some of which are ongoing and would be severely impacted if continued funding were to cease. Spend the money where it is needed the most. Consider "luxury" or "nice to have" projects later. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 25 Packet Pg. 198 of 351 I would also like to know whether the city has complied with or is planning to comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") before proceeding with the Eleanor Pardee Park restroom project. It is my understanding that CEQA applies to projects requiring discretionary government approval, and this includes construction of new facilities like park restrooms. The city's decision to approve the construction of new park restrooms is clearly a discretionary action, as the city has control over the project's location, design, and construction methods. As I have asserted in my earlier letters, the construction and operation of a new restroom in Eleanor Pardee Park could have potential impacts on the environment in our neighborhood, such as increased traffic, increased waste generation, or changes to the park's and the neighborhood's aesthetics. If I am correct in assuming that CEQA applies, then the city must conduct an environmental review process, potentially including an Initial Study, an Environmental Impact Report, or a Negative Declaration. Has the city conducted or initiated such a process with regard to the proposed restroom at Eleanor Pardee Park? And if not, when is the city planning on doing so? Finally, let me reiterate the points I've made in my earlier letters: Eleanor Pardee Park has served our community well for 100 years without a restroom. For those parents who want to take their kids to a park with a restroom, Rinconada Park - with two restrooms and with numerous other city maintained restrooms within close walking distance - is less than half a mile away. A restroom will change the park from one designed to serve the neighborhood into a regional park. A restroom will be expensive - perhaps $1 million to design and construct (according to a press report I have read), never mind the ongoing costs required for daily maintenance (estimated in the proposed budget at $9,000 per year). A restroom could present public safety issues - vandalism, loitering, narcotics transactions - and attract the unhoused. The process of community outreach to date has been totally inadequate; the "survey" the city did was hopelessly flawed and, to my knowledge (and I live right next to the park) the city has not made any attempt to engage with those of us in the neighborhood who stand to be most directly impacted by the addition of restroom in the park. Thank you again for your time and willingness to engage with me and to listen to my concerns, which I know are shared by a number of other residents. Sincerely, Evan G. Reade Sharon Ct. cc: City Manager Parks and Recreation Commission Community Services Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 26 Packet Pg. 199 of 351 From:Light As Air Boats To:ParkRec Commission Subject:Beach & Ground Mat Solutions! Date:Thursday, May 15, 2025 7:30:41 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. i SHOP NOW Hi ! Check out great options for walkways and accessibility for your guests! This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. The subject has non-English characters. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 27 Packet Pg. 200 of 351 See Resorts Catalog See Parks Catalog Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 28 Packet Pg. 201 of 351 For Quantity Discounts or Questions, Call Andi Tel:706.619.6670 andi@lightasairboats.com Explore Beach & Ground Access Mats See Resorts Catalog See Parks Catalog Yours in Wind, Water, and Waves, Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 29 Packet Pg. 202 of 351 - The Light As Air Boats Team We don’t want to spam you. If you're no longer interested in enjoying adventures out on the water Unsubscribe here. Light As Air Boats 13801 Walsingham Rd. Suite A-116 Largo, Florida 33774 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 30 Packet Pg. 203 of 351 From:Postmaster To:ParkRec Commission Subject:You have new held messages Date:Thursday, May 15, 2025 7:15:15 AM Logo You have new held messages You can release all of your held messages and permit or block future emails from the senders, or manage messages individually. Release all Permit all Block all You can also manage held messages in your Personal Portal. Spam Policy aaafactory4@vip.163.com Fw:Belt ,Bag, shoe, and clothing ,leather hardware,Custom metal components and more!,hooks, grommets, 2025-05-15 06:24 Release Permit Block Release all Permit all Block all © 2019 Mimecast Services Limited. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 31 Packet Pg. 204 of 351 From:Office of Supervisor Otto LeeTo:ParkRec CommissionSubject:One County One FutureDate:Tuesday, May 13, 2025 5:29:38 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. i Hello, As an immigrant myself, I understand the emotions and uncertainty many members of our community may be feeling right now. Yesterday, I stood alongside the Board of Supervisors, County Executive Williams, Chief Operating Officer Hansen, District Attorney Rosen, and leadership from across the County of Santa Clara to launch the One County One Future media campaign. This campaign aims to reaffirm our County's unwavering support for our entire community, including all of our immigrants, and connect anyone under threat by the current federal administration to information and resources. Launched yesterday, the This message needs your attention You've never replied to this person. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 32 Packet Pg. 205 of 351 campaign features print, digital, TV, radio, and transit (VTA) advertising, and website SCC.INFO/more in five languages: ENGLISH - ESPAÑOL - ᾂ㛜 - TiӃng ViӋt - TAGALOG. Santa Clara County is an incredibly diverse region in our state, let alone our nation, with a population that speaks over 100 languages and dialects. Further, immigrants comprise 2 out of 5 residents in our community, and own more than half (50.3%) of our businesses. UPDATE: On Friday, May 9th, Judge Susan Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, temporarily blocked the White House's sweeping overhaul of the federal government. Judge Illston shared that a restraining order -- pausing further implementation of the Feb. 11 executive order for major reorganizations within federal and directing government agencies - - was necessary "to protect the power of the legislative branch." Read the full report from NPR here We at Santa Clara County agree. Your government works for you, and we must ensure that any plans for restructuring within government agencies is done so lawfully and justly. We thank Judge Illston for her work, and continue on our mission: to support you, and everything that Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 33 Packet Pg. 206 of 351 makes this a great place to live. I reassure you, Santa Clara County: We have your back, your rights will never be compromised, and you will still be supported by your County. Read the full One County One Future press release here AVAILABLE IN: ENGLISH - ESPAÑOL - TiӃng ViӋt - ᾂ㛜 - TAGALOG Learn at SCC.INFO/more Sincerely, Otto Lee Board President Santa Clara County Supervisor, District 3 SupervisorLee.org 70 West Hedding 10th Floor San José, CA 95110 (408) 299-5030 Email Supervisor Lee Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 34 Packet Pg. 207 of 351 District 3 Website Unsubscribe from future messages. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 35 Packet Pg. 208 of 351 From:Postmaster To:ParkRec Commission Subject:You have new held messages Date:Tuesday, May 13, 2025 12:27:06 PM Logo You have new held messages You can release all of your held messages and permit or block future emails from the senders, or manage messages individually. Release all Permit all Block all You can also manage held messages in your Personal Portal. Spam Policy joselyn@vasdirect.com Providing VA Services 2025-05-13 09:00 Release Permit Block Release all Permit all Block all © 2019 Mimecast Services Limited. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 36 Packet Pg. 209 of 351 From:Aram James To:Veenker, Vicki; Vicki Veenker Cc:Reckdahl, Keith; Lu, George; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker;josh@joshsalcman.com; Gennady Sheyner; Emily Mibach; Council, City; Binder, Andrew; Yolanda Conaway; DonAustin; Salem Ajluni; Donna Wallach; Dave Price; editor@almanacnews.com; Diana Diamond; Cribbs, Anne;Perron, Zachary; chuck jagoda; Barberini, Christopher; Enberg, Nicholas; Rowena Chiu; board@valleywater.org;BoardOperations; Sean Allen; sharon jackson; Pat M; Rose Lynn; Roberta Ahlquist; Doug Minkler; Stump, Molly;Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Baker, Rob; Sheree Roth; Lori Meyers; Rosen, Jeff; Jeff Conrad; Jeff Hayden; SteveWagstaffe; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; Patrice Ventresca; Burt, Patrick; Patricia.Guerrero@jud.ca.gov;Rodriguez, Miguel; Angel, David; Damon Silver; walter wilson; Holman, Karen (external); Tom DuBois; Figueroa,Eric; Friends of Cubberley; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Gardener, Liz; Bill Newell; dennis burns; DuJuan Green;Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov; GRP-City Council; city.council@menlopark.gov;citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Bains, Paul; Afanasiev, Alex; Henry Etzkowitz;<michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Mickie Winkler; Brian Good; Sheriff Transparency; Paul George @ PPJC;Lotus Fong; Zelkha, Mila; Human Relations Commission; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission Subject:Stanford students launch hunger strike, demand divestment over Gaza war Date:Tuesday, May 13, 2025 10:18:57 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Stanford students launch hunger strike, demand divestment over Gaza war Activists will maintain a daily presence at White Plaza to advocate for demands https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/05/13/stanford-students-hunger-strike-divestment-gaza- protest/ Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 37 Packet Pg. 210 of 351 From:Light As Air Boats To:ParkRec Commission Subject:Big Water Toys for Big Time Fun! Date:Tuesday, May 13, 2025 7:31:05 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. i SHOP NOW Hi there, The must-haves for parks, camps and rentals! Make Your Lake the Coolest Place this Season! This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 38 Packet Pg. 211 of 351 See Parks & Camps Catalog Here See Resorts Catalog Here Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 39 Packet Pg. 212 of 351 Bouncy springs give the ultimate jump experience! Offered in different sizes to fit every size and budget. Explore Island Hopper Bouncers & Tramps Here! See Parks & Camps Catalog Here See Resorts Catalog Here For Quantity Discounts or Questions, Call Andi Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 40 Packet Pg. 213 of 351 Tel:706.619.6670 andi@lightasairboats.com Yours in Wind, Water, and Waves, - The Light As Air Boats Team We don’t want to spam you.If you're no longer interested in enjoying adventures out on the water Unsubscribe here.Light As Air Boats 13801 Walsingham Rd. Suite A-116 Largo, Florida 33774 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 41 Packet Pg. 214 of 351 From:sales=openyard.com@smartr.openyard.com on behalf of OpenYard To:ParkRec Commission Subject:Score Big on Field Equipment—Limited-Time Savings! Date:Tuesday, May 13, 2025 7:09:11 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. ! View in Browser openyard GOALS SOCCER NETS SHELTERS TRAINING COACHING LOWEST PRICES OF THE SEASON Get game-ready with OpenYard.com - your reliable source for top-tier soccer goals, nets, and field equipment since 2003. OpenYard.com Huge Selection Best Price Guarantee Fast, Reliable Shipping Don't miss out! Shop now or request a free quote to lock in unbeatable dealsbefore they're gone on May 31st. Head to OpenYard.com and save big today! This message could be suspicious Similar name as someone in your company. No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 42 Packet Pg. 215 of 351 Shop Now Sent from OpenYard.com 888-575-2178 sales@openyard.com Unsubscribe Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 43 Packet Pg. 216 of 351 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki Cc:Reckdahl, Keith; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; EdLauing; Lauing, Ed; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Lori Meyers; board@pausd.org;Emily Mibach; Templeton, Cari; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Gardener, Liz;Gerry Gras; Dana St. George; Rosen, Jeff; jay.boyarsky@da.sccgov.org; Yolanda Conaway; Donna Wallach; DonAustin; Steve Wagstaffe; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Roberta Ahlquist; Lotus Fong; Palo Alto Free Press; KarenHolman; Tom DuBois; Human Relations Commission; Sheree Roth; frances.Rothschild@jud.ca.gov; Pat M; SeanAllen; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; EPA Today; Dave Price; Lee, Craig;cromero@cityofepa.org; rabrica@cityofepa.org; Vara Ramakrishnan; Rose Lynn; Freddie.Quintana@sen.ca.gov;Barberini, Christopher; chuck jagoda; Enberg, Nicholas Subject:Two dozen fasting students also press university system to divest from weapon manufacturers in list of demands Date:Monday, May 12, 2025 5:51:53 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i Two dozen fasting students also press university system to divest from weapon manufacturers in list of demands Source: the Guardian https://search.app/KeU4YXiH1nxEag8TA Shared via the Google app This message needs your attention Some Recipients have never replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 44 Packet Pg. 217 of 351 From:Aram James To:Josh Becker; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; Veenker, Vicki; Vicki Veenker; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Reckdahl, Keith; Rosen, Jeff; jay.boyarsky@da.sccgov.org; board@pausd.org; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; BoardOperations; board@valleywater.org; boardfeedback@smcgov.org; Sean Allen; Pat M; Emily Mibach; Dave Price; EPA Today; Gerry Gras; Bains, Paul; Paul George @ PPJC; Bill Newell; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Council, City; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov; Steve Wagstaffe; city.council@menlopark.gov; GRP-City Council; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; chuck jagoda; Barberini, Christopher; Gardener, Liz; Liz Kniss; Don Austin; Yolanda Conaway; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Sheree Roth; Lori Meyers; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; Stump, Molly; editor@almanacnews.com; Gennady Sheyner; Lee, Craig; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Lotus Fong; Palo Alto Free Press; Drekmeier, Peter; Tom DuBois; Holman, Karen (external); Donna Wallach; frances.Rothschild@jud.ca.gov; Patricia.Guerrero@jud.ca.gov; Salem Ajluni Subject:Re: Hamas and U.S. reach deal. “I think we"ll have to detox from US security assistance,” says Netanyahu Date:Sunday, May 11, 2025 5:19:40 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. On Sun, May 11, 2025 at 7:54ௗPM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Dingell. “I heard it was from the Jewish Regents,”—that is, the Jewish members of the University of Michigan Board of Regents—“they forced me to take these cases,” Nessel said at an event this week called a “Town Hall on Hate Crimes & Extremism” in West Bloomfield Township. “I heard it was from the [Michigan Legislative] Jewish Caucus because of the money I get from them. I heard it was from Jewish donors. You know how those cases came to my office? Debbie Dingell. Debbie Dingell, I don’t know if you know this: Not Jewish. But it had to be some sort of Jewish influence.” Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more Become a paid subscriber to gain access to our private Discord server, subscriber- only AMAs, chats, and invites to events. Hamas and U.S. reach deal. “I thinkwe'll have to detox from US security Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 45 Packet Pg. 218 of 351 assistance,” says Netanyahu RYAN GRIM MAY 11 READ IN APP Hamas and the United States announced an agreement today that will lead to the freeing of Israeli soldier Edan Alexander, a dual American citizen, ahead of President Donald Trump’s trip to the region. Israel was reportedly not involved in the discussions, but informed about the deal afterward. Israeli airstrikes have intensified throughout the day. “I think we'll have to detox from US security assistance,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu concluded today. This is a developing story, follow our Twitter account for up-to-the-minute details. Jeremy Scahill will appear on Breaking Points tomorrow morning to discuss the latest developments. (BP subscribers get an email early when the show goes live; or watch for free when it’s posted to YouTube or Spotify.) Our colleague Abubaker Abed, who is now in Ireland, will appear tomorrow morning on Democracy Now! In case you missed our email earlier today, Hamza M. Salha reports for us from north Gaza on the recent airstrike an an UNRWA building in the middle of Jabaliya refugee camp, severely damaging a food distribution center, warehouse, and health center run by the UN refugee agency. His story with Sharif Abdel Kouddous is here. Below is a story I reported out with journalist Tom Perkins, digging into a claim made by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, namely that the impetus for her failed investigations into University of Michigan student protesters came from Rep. Debbie Dingell. Dingell says that is false. (This video is worth a watch.) Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 46 Packet Pg. 219 of 351 We have a commitment to ensuring that our journalism is not locked behind a paywall. But the only way we can sustain this is through the voluntary support of our community of readers. If you are a free subscriber and you support our work, please consider upgrading to a paid subscription or gifting one to a friend or family member. Upgrade to paid You can also make a 501(c)(3) tax-deductible donation to support our work. If you do not have the means to support our work financially, you can do your part by sharing our work on social media and by forwarding this email to your network of contacts. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel in 2022. Photo by Bill Pugliano/Getty Images By Ryan Grim and Tom Perkins Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel continues to do damage control in the wake of her failed prosecution of student protesters at the University of Michigan. Nessel was forced to drop charges against students who had been arrested at a pro-Palestinian encampment last year after the judge overseeing the case indicated he was sympathetic to the defense’s argument that Nessel had been improperly biased against the defendants. This week, in public remarks on the prosecution, she claimed without evidence that Democratic Rep. Debbie Dingell of Michigan had been the one who urged her to charge students involved in protests over Gaza. Pinning the pressure for the prosecutions on Dingell was Nessel’s way of arguing that the bias claims made against her were inaccurate—that she was not in fact pushed to take the cases by donors to her campaign who serve as senior officials at the university, but rather by the local congresswoman, Dingell. “I heard it was from the Jewish Regents,”—that is, the Jewish members of the Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 47 Packet Pg. 220 of 351 University of Michigan Board of Regents—“they forced me to take these cases,” Nessel said at an event this week called a “Town Hall on Hate Crimes & Extremism” in West Bloomfield Township. “I heard it was from the [Michigan Legislative] Jewish Caucus because of the money I get from them. I heard it was from Jewish donors. You know how those cases came to my office? Debbie Dingell. Debbie Dingell, I don’t know if you know this: Not Jewish. But it had to be some sort of Jewish influence.” In a statement to Drop Site, Dingell spokesperson Michaela Johnson suggested the congresswoman was not behind the investigations, pointing to a May 2024 letter from Nessel’s office to the university in which Nessel offered to take over any investigations. The letter, which has not previously been reported, makes no reference to Dingell, but instead suggests that protests outside the homes of Board of Regents members triggered Nessel to launch an effort targeting student protesters. “Nessel did not write the letter at our request, and Rep. Dingell had not seen that letter until today,” Johnson said. Dingell represents Ann Arbor, but previously represented Dearborn until redistricting in 2014, and she still has strong ties to the Arab-American community there. But she has remained largely silent with regard to the protests. Amir Makled, an attorney for some of the students, said he called Dingell’s office on Friday to ask about Nessel’s allegations. He said a Dingell staffer denied the congresswoman had pushed for the investigation. Makled said he didn’t think it was done at Dingell’s behest, but he said Dingell has been involved with the discussions because the incident occurred in her district, and she “has been giving lip service to all sides.” But, he added, “Nessel is trying to do anything to deflect blame for her office’s misdeeds – that much seems clear to me.” Nessel’s office didn’t respond to a request for comment over the weekend. The university, its regents and Nessel have denied that the school recruited the Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 48 Packet Pg. 221 of 351 attorney general.. This was not the first time Nessel had pointed the finger at Dingell. She told a local reporter several weeks ago that “the congresswoman from the 6th Congressional District” – Dingell – had put her up to it. “I stand behind the evidence and I stand behind the charges, and I appreciate the fact that this matter was referred by the congresswoman from the 6th Congressional District, who asked the state to intervene because they were concerned about what was happening on campus,” she said. “I believe what we did was the right thing, and that will be borne out in court.” Following that report, supporters of the students who’d been charged approached Dingell at an event on March 3 to ask if Nessel’s allegation was true. According to an audio recording provided to Drop Site, it was not. “She’s told a lot of people a lot of stuff,” Dingell told the students. She was then asked directly by Jared Eno, a grad student at Michigan, if that was true: “No!” Dingell said. “She called the university and offered.” The letter supports that claim. Nessel, in her remarks at the town hall, again claimed Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan had accused her of bias linked to her Jewish background, but Tlaib’s public statements have never referenced this. “I think people at the University of Michigan put pressure on her to do this, and she fell for it,” Tlaib had said. “I think President Ono and Board of Regent members were very much heavy-handed in this.” UMich President Santa Ono, the only person Tlaib named as having applied pressure to Nessel, is not Jewish. The AG letter was sent to Timothy G. Lynch, vice president and general counsel at the University of Michigan, and signed by Danielle Hagaman-Clark, a prosecutor in Nessel’s office. “I write today to offer the DAG’s assistance with investigating and prosecuting any cases that arise from the recent demonstrations on UM’s campus,” she wrote. “It has been widely reported that the demonstrators have not limited their protests to the campus but have also appeared at the homes of the Board of Regents. My understanding is that the Regents are not required to live in Washtenaw County, the location of UM, but that they reside in several different counties. Because the DAG has state-wide criminal authority to bring charges, we are ideally situated to review any potential cases.” Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 49 Packet Pg. 222 of 351 The reference to the protests outside the homes of Regents matches reporting that suggested those demonstrations, even more than the encampments, enraged the board members, who urged Nessel to prosecute. Nessel’s prosecutor added her office was well suited to determine whether any of the speech from the protesters was illegal. “I would also note that our Department has specialized expertise in the intersection of First Amendment free speech rights in the context of a criminal prosecution. We are fluent in the law around what speech is protected and what speech is not protected,” said Hagaman-Clark, making the pitch to Michigan. The letter was sent shortly after local prosecutor Eli Savit (who is also Jewish) declined to prosecute 36 of 40 protesters arrested in connection with the occupation of an administration building, and recommended four others for diversion. “General Nessel has discussed the potential jurisdictional issues that might arise with Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit. Prosecutor Savit recognizes that his authority is confined to Washtenaw County. He is comfortable with the DAG overseeing these cases based on his jurisdiction being limited to only Washtenaw County.” In her effort at damage control this week, Nessel claimed Dingell’s supposed request was common. “Now it’s not unusual for a congressional representative to call up the department of the attorney general and to call the attorney general herself and say ‘I’m really worried about what I see to be criminal activity occurring and either the local prosecutor is not doing anything about it,’ or ‘they’re not equipped to do anything about it. But I am scared about what I am seeing. And I think the AG’s office has to take action.’” Nessel also told the town hall audience that she dropped the charges because the judge had ordered an evidentiary hearing into the defense’s charge that Nessel was biased against the defendants. Defense attorneys, in their recent motion to disqualify Nessel’s office over bias, pointed to a previous analysis that found she had prosecuted protesters at a much higher rate than other prosecutors in the state. They also pointed to Nessel recusing herself from an investigation into alleged election fraud by Muslim-American city council members in nearby Hamtramck. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 50 Packet Pg. 223 of 351 Nessel said she wanted to avoid the appearance of bias because she was Jewish and the suspects were of Arab descent. She also noted that she had previously been critical of the Hamtramck City Council. In their motion to disqualify Nessel’s office, defense attorneys questioned how she could consider herself biased in Hamtramck but unbiased in Ann Arbor under similar circumstances. A letter sent by the Jewish Federation of Ann Arbor to the judge urging him to allow her to remain on the case, she said, put improper pressure on the judge and should not have been sent. And the cases against the students were becoming a distraction to staff, she added, who couldn’t even attend a job fair without being “shut down by protesters.” “We elected that rather than me being put on trial for being a Jewish prosecutor, and rather than having the federation be put on trial for an email they should not have sent—but the kind that gets sent all the time—that we would dismiss the charges against those particular defendants,” she said. An evidentiary hearing would have opened her office to discovery and made public communications about how the cases came together. Defense attorneys say she wanted to avoid that. Liz Jacob, an attorney from the Sugar Law Center who represented the defendants, said the claim from Nessel was another effort to deflect responsibility. “It’s alarming to see the ways that Nessel is trying to avoid accountability for her repression of free speech and brutal targeting of protesters at all costs,” Jacob said. “Both in that video and over the last several months AG Nessel has tried to blame anyone—from Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib to Debbie Dingell to the Jewish Federation of Greater Ann Arbor—to deflect criticism regarding her own deplorable treatment of pro-Palestine protesters.” Nessel’s decision was a serious one, and Nessel should treat it seriously, Jacob said. “As the Attorney General who is directing the FBI to raid protesters homes and bringing baseless and retaliatory criminal charges against protesters, it is Nessel who must bear responsibility for targeting young people who bravely speak out against war and genocide. Nessel’s actions speak for themselves — she has aligned herself with the Trump administration’s criminalization and repression of pro-Palestine speech,” she said. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 51 Packet Pg. 224 of 351 Share Leave a comment Become a Drop Site News Paid Subscriber Drop Site News is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber today. Upgrade to paid A paid subscription gets you: Access to our Discord, subscriber-only AMAs, chats, and invites to events, both virtual and IRL Post comments and join the community The knowledge you are supporting independent media making the lives of the powerful miserable You can also now find us on podcast platforms and on Facebook, Twitter, Bluesky, Telegram, and YouTube. LIKE COMMENT RESTACK © 2025 Drop Site News, Inc. Drop Site News Inc., 4315 50th St. NW Ste 100 Unit #2560, Washington, DC 20016 Unsubscribe Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 52 Packet Pg. 225 of 351 From:Aram James To:Josh Becker; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; Veenker, Vicki; Vicki Veenker; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Reckdahl, Keith; Rosen, Jeff; jay.boyarsky@da.sccgov.org; board@pausd.org; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; BoardOperations; board@valleywater.org; boardfeedback@smcgov.org; Sean Allen; Pat M; Emily Mibach; Dave Price; EPA Today; Gerry Gras; Bains, Paul; Paul George @ PPJC; Bill Newell; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Council, City; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov; Steve Wagstaffe; city.council@menlopark.gov; GRP-City Council; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; chuck jagoda; Barberini, Christopher; Gardener, Liz; Liz Kniss; Don Austin; Yolanda Conaway; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Sheree Roth; Lori Meyers; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; Stump, Molly; editor@almanacnews.com; Gennady Sheyner; Lee, Craig; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Lotus Fong; Palo Alto Free Press; Drekmeier, Peter; Tom DuBois; Holman, Karen (external); Donna Wallach; frances.Rothschild@jud.ca.gov; Patricia.Guerrero@jud.ca.gov Subject:Hamas and U.S. reach deal. “I think we"ll have to detox from US security assistance,” says Netanyahu Date:Sunday, May 11, 2025 4:54:24 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dingell. “I heard it was from the Jewish Regents,”—that is, the Jewish members of the University of Michigan Board of Regents—“they forced me to take these cases,” Nessel said at an event this week called a “Town Hall on Hate Crimes & Extremism” in West Bloomfield Township. “I heard it was from the [Michigan Legislative] Jewish Caucus because of the money I get from them. I heard it was from Jewish donors. You know how those cases came to my office? Debbie Dingell. Debbie Dingell, I don’t know if you know this: Not Jewish. But it had to be some sort of Jewish influence.” Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more Become a paid subscriber to gain access to our private Discord server, subscriber- only AMAs, chats, and invites to events. Hamas and U.S. reach deal. “I thinkwe'll have to detox from US securityassistance,” says Netanyahu Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 53 Packet Pg. 226 of 351 RYAN GRIM MAY 11 READ IN APP Hamas and the United States announced an agreement today that will lead to the freeing of Israeli soldier Edan Alexander, a dual American citizen, ahead of President Donald Trump’s trip to the region. Israel was reportedly not involved in the discussions, but informed about the deal afterward. Israeli airstrikes have intensified throughout the day. “I think we'll have to detox from US security assistance,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu concluded today. This is a developing story, follow our Twitter account for up-to-the-minute details. Jeremy Scahill will appear on Breaking Points tomorrow morning to discuss the latest developments. (BP subscribers get an email early when the show goes live; or watch for free when it’s posted to YouTube or Spotify.) Our colleague Abubaker Abed, who is now in Ireland, will appear tomorrow morning on Democracy Now! In case you missed our email earlier today, Hamza M. Salha reports for us from north Gaza on the recent airstrike an an UNRWA building in the middle of Jabaliya refugee camp, severely damaging a food distribution center, warehouse, and health center run by the UN refugee agency. His story with Sharif Abdel Kouddous is here. Below is a story I reported out with journalist Tom Perkins, digging into a claim made by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, namely that the impetus for her failed investigations into University of Michigan student protesters came from Rep. Debbie Dingell. Dingell says that is false. (This video is worth a watch.) We have a commitment to ensuring that our journalism is not locked behind a Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 54 Packet Pg. 227 of 351 paywall. But the only way we can sustain this is through the voluntary support of our community of readers. If you are a free subscriber and you support our work, please consider upgrading to a paid subscription or gifting one to a friend or family member. Upgrade to paid You can also make a 501(c)(3) tax-deductible donation to support our work. If you do not have the means to support our work financially, you can do your part by sharing our work on social media and by forwarding this email to your network of contacts. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel in 2022. Photo by Bill Pugliano/Getty Images By Ryan Grim and Tom Perkins Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel continues to do damage control in the wake of her failed prosecution of student protesters at the University of Michigan. Nessel was forced to drop charges against students who had been arrested at a pro-Palestinian encampment last year after the judge overseeing the case indicated he was sympathetic to the defense’s argument that Nessel had been improperly biased against the defendants. This week, in public remarks on the prosecution, she claimed without evidence that Democratic Rep. Debbie Dingell of Michigan had been the one who urged her to charge students involved in protests over Gaza. Pinning the pressure for the prosecutions on Dingell was Nessel’s way of arguing that the bias claims made against her were inaccurate—that she was not in fact pushed to take the cases by donors to her campaign who serve as senior officials at the university, but rather by the local congresswoman, Dingell. “I heard it was from the Jewish Regents,”—that is, the Jewish members of the University of Michigan Board of Regents—“they forced me to take these cases,” Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 55 Packet Pg. 228 of 351 Nessel said at an event this week called a “Town Hall on Hate Crimes & Extremism” in West Bloomfield Township. “I heard it was from the [Michigan Legislative] Jewish Caucus because of the money I get from them. I heard it was from Jewish donors. You know how those cases came to my office? Debbie Dingell. Debbie Dingell, I don’t know if you know this: Not Jewish. But it had to be some sort of Jewish influence.” In a statement to Drop Site, Dingell spokesperson Michaela Johnson suggested the congresswoman was not behind the investigations, pointing to a May 2024 letter from Nessel’s office to the university in which Nessel offered to take over any investigations. The letter, which has not previously been reported, makes no reference to Dingell, but instead suggests that protests outside the homes of Board of Regents members triggered Nessel to launch an effort targeting student protesters. “Nessel did not write the letter at our request, and Rep. Dingell had not seen that letter until today,” Johnson said. Dingell represents Ann Arbor, but previously represented Dearborn until redistricting in 2014, and she still has strong ties to the Arab-American community there. But she has remained largely silent with regard to the protests. Amir Makled, an attorney for some of the students, said he called Dingell’s office on Friday to ask about Nessel’s allegations. He said a Dingell staffer denied the congresswoman had pushed for the investigation. Makled said he didn’t think it was done at Dingell’s behest, but he said Dingell has been involved with the discussions because the incident occurred in her district, and she “has been giving lip service to all sides.” But, he added, “Nessel is trying to do anything to deflect blame for her office’s misdeeds – that much seems clear to me.” Nessel’s office didn’t respond to a request for comment over the weekend. The university, its regents and Nessel have denied that the school recruited the attorney general.. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 56 Packet Pg. 229 of 351 This was not the first time Nessel had pointed the finger at Dingell. She told a local reporter several weeks ago that “the congresswoman from the 6th Congressional District” – Dingell – had put her up to it. “I stand behind the evidence and I stand behind the charges, and I appreciate the fact that this matter was referred by the congresswoman from the 6th Congressional District, who asked the state to intervene because they were concerned about what was happening on campus,” she said. “I believe what we did was the right thing, and that will be borne out in court.” Following that report, supporters of the students who’d been charged approached Dingell at an event on March 3 to ask if Nessel’s allegation was true. According to an audio recording provided to Drop Site, it was not. “She’s told a lot of people a lot of stuff,” Dingell told the students. She was then asked directly by Jared Eno, a grad student at Michigan, if that was true: “No!” Dingell said. “She called the university and offered.” The letter supports that claim. Nessel, in her remarks at the town hall, again claimed Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan had accused her of bias linked to her Jewish background, but Tlaib’s public statements have never referenced this. “I think people at the University of Michigan put pressure on her to do this, and she fell for it,” Tlaib had said. “I think President Ono and Board of Regent members were very much heavy-handed in this.” UMich President Santa Ono, the only person Tlaib named as having applied pressure to Nessel, is not Jewish. The AG letter was sent to Timothy G. Lynch, vice president and general counsel at the University of Michigan, and signed by Danielle Hagaman-Clark, a prosecutor in Nessel’s office. “I write today to offer the DAG’s assistance with investigating and prosecuting any cases that arise from the recent demonstrations on UM’s campus,” she wrote. “It has been widely reported that the demonstrators have not limited their protests to the campus but have also appeared at the homes of the Board of Regents. My understanding is that the Regents are not required to live in Washtenaw County, the location of UM, but that they reside in several different counties. Because the DAG has state-wide criminal authority to bring charges, we are ideally situated to review any potential cases.” The reference to the protests outside the homes of Regents matches reporting Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 57 Packet Pg. 230 of 351 that suggested those demonstrations, even more than the encampments, enraged the board members, who urged Nessel to prosecute. Nessel’s prosecutor added her office was well suited to determine whether any of the speech from the protesters was illegal. “I would also note that our Department has specialized expertise in the intersection of First Amendment free speech rights in the context of a criminal prosecution. We are fluent in the law around what speech is protected and what speech is not protected,” said Hagaman-Clark, making the pitch to Michigan. The letter was sent shortly after local prosecutor Eli Savit (who is also Jewish) declined to prosecute 36 of 40 protesters arrested in connection with the occupation of an administration building, and recommended four others for diversion. “General Nessel has discussed the potential jurisdictional issues that might arise with Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit. Prosecutor Savit recognizes that his authority is confined to Washtenaw County. He is comfortable with the DAG overseeing these cases based on his jurisdiction being limited to only Washtenaw County.” In her effort at damage control this week, Nessel claimed Dingell’s supposed request was common. “Now it’s not unusual for a congressional representative to call up the department of the attorney general and to call the attorney general herself and say ‘I’m really worried about what I see to be criminal activity occurring and either the local prosecutor is not doing anything about it,’ or ‘they’re not equipped to do anything about it. But I am scared about what I am seeing. And I think the AG’s office has to take action.’” Nessel also told the town hall audience that she dropped the charges because the judge had ordered an evidentiary hearing into the defense’s charge that Nessel was biased against the defendants. Defense attorneys, in their recent motion to disqualify Nessel’s office over bias, pointed to a previous analysis that found she had prosecuted protesters at a much higher rate than other prosecutors in the state. They also pointed to Nessel recusing herself from an investigation into alleged election fraud by Muslim-American city council members in nearby Hamtramck. Nessel said she wanted to avoid the appearance of bias because she was Jewish and the suspects were of Arab descent. She also noted that she had previously Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 58 Packet Pg. 231 of 351 been critical of the Hamtramck City Council. In their motion to disqualify Nessel’s office, defense attorneys questioned how she could consider herself biased in Hamtramck but unbiased in Ann Arbor under similar circumstances. A letter sent by the Jewish Federation of Ann Arbor to the judge urging him to allow her to remain on the case, she said, put improper pressure on the judge and should not have been sent. And the cases against the students were becoming a distraction to staff, she added, who couldn’t even attend a job fair without being “shut down by protesters.” “We elected that rather than me being put on trial for being a Jewish prosecutor, and rather than having the federation be put on trial for an email they should not have sent—but the kind that gets sent all the time—that we would dismiss the charges against those particular defendants,” she said. An evidentiary hearing would have opened her office to discovery and made public communications about how the cases came together. Defense attorneys say she wanted to avoid that. Liz Jacob, an attorney from the Sugar Law Center who represented the defendants, said the claim from Nessel was another effort to deflect responsibility. “It’s alarming to see the ways that Nessel is trying to avoid accountability for her repression of free speech and brutal targeting of protesters at all costs,” Jacob said. “Both in that video and over the last several months AG Nessel has tried to blame anyone—from Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib to Debbie Dingell to the Jewish Federation of Greater Ann Arbor—to deflect criticism regarding her own deplorable treatment of pro-Palestine protesters.” Nessel’s decision was a serious one, and Nessel should treat it seriously, Jacob said. “As the Attorney General who is directing the FBI to raid protesters homes and bringing baseless and retaliatory criminal charges against protesters, it is Nessel who must bear responsibility for targeting young people who bravely speak out against war and genocide. Nessel’s actions speak for themselves — she has aligned herself with the Trump administration’s criminalization and repression of pro-Palestine speech,” she said. Share Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 59 Packet Pg. 232 of 351 Leave a comment Become a Drop Site News Paid Subscriber Drop Site News is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber today. Upgrade to paid A paid subscription gets you: Access to our Discord, subscriber-only AMAs, chats, and invites to events, both virtual and IRL Post comments and join the community The knowledge you are supporting independent media making the lives of the powerful miserable You can also now find us on podcast platforms and on Facebook, Twitter, Bluesky, Telegram, and YouTube. LIKE COMMENT RESTACK © 2025 Drop Site News, Inc. Drop Site News Inc., 4315 50th St. NW Ste 100 Unit #2560, Washington, DC 20016 Unsubscribe Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 60 Packet Pg. 233 of 351 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki Cc:assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California DemocraticDelegate, Assembly District 23; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Reckdahl, Keith; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Emily Mibach;planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Dana St. George; Gerry Gras; Zelkha, Mila; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Mickie Winkler; Salem Ajluni; SeanAllen; Pat M; Patricia.Guerrero@jud.ca.gov; Sheree Roth; Lori Meyers; Lotus Fong; Human RelationsCommission; Tom DuBois; jgreen@dailynewsgroup.com; Diana Diamond; EPA Today; h.etzko@gmail.com; DavePrice; Doug Minkler; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Rowena Chiu; Robert.Jonson@shf.sccgov.org;Barberini, Christopher; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Foley, Michael; Enberg, Nicholas; Figueroa, Eric;Gardener, Liz; Marina Lopez; Steve Wagstaffe; Wagner, April; Roberta Ahlquist; Karen Holman; Bains, Paul;Raymond Goins; DuJuan Green; dennis burns; Council, City; city.council@menlopark.gov; GRP-City Council;citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov Subject:Sunnyvale under fire over festival booth controversy Date:Friday, May 9, 2025 6:04:46 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Sunnyvale under fire over festival booth controversy https://sanjosespotlight.com/sunnyvale-under-fire-over-festival-booth-controversy/ Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 61 Packet Pg. 234 of 351 From:Office of Transportation To:ParkRec Commission Subject:Transportation Connect -May 2025 Date:Friday, May 9, 2025 2:05:26 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. View this newsletter as a web page A digital newsletter connecting the community to transportation news, updates, ways to share input & more. What's New: Celebrate Bike Month This May: Park to Park Saturday & Bike to Work and Wherever Days May 15-17 Safe Routes to School Celebrates 20th Year Anniversary Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 62 Packet Pg. 235 of 351 South Palo Alto Bike and Pedestrian Rail Crossing Survey Closes May 15 Bike and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Status Update Transportation Quick Links Park to Park Ride: Tomorrow, Saturday May 10 Celebrate Bike Month with a Bike to Work/Wherever Days: May 15-May 17 Bike to your destination and stop by one of Palo Alto’s Energizer Stations for free snacks, coffee, and community cheer. Stop by Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 63 Packet Pg. 236 of 351 community bike ride tomorrow, Saturday, May 10 from 1 p.m. - 3 p.m.! Take a 1-mile Park to Park Ride from Mitchell Park to Juana Briones Park and celebrate the Charleston / Arastradero Corridor Project completion. End with free ice cream and booths. Please bring your bike, helmet, and hydration. any of the five energizer stations in Palo Alto on Thursday, May 15 in the morning. Pedal with a purpose anywhere in the community on Bike to Wherever Days, which runs May 15–17. Transportation Updates Safe Routes to School Celebrates 20 Years of Safer Streets for Students This year marks the 20th year anniversary of Palo Alto’s Safe Routes to School program. Thanks to strong partnerships between the City, schools, and community, program efforts continue to support safe streets for students and to advance community priorities from crosswalk upgrades to bike education and more! Read the program's latest Annual Report and find resources and walk and role route maps. South Palo Alto Bike/Pedestrian Rail Crossings Survey Closes May 15 South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity project will identify community-supported locations and design concepts where two new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian pathways across the Caltrain railroad tracks may be constructed. Help shape the development of this project and identify and compare different options for bicycle and pedestrian railroad crossings and other improvements in south Palo Alto. A community survey closes May 15. Rail Grade Separation Update Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 64 Packet Pg. 237 of 351 The Rail Committee will meet Tuesday, May 20 at 6 p.m. and discuss proposed plans to conduct outreach and engagement throughout the preliminary engineering and environmental phase for the City of Palo Alto Project for Grade Separation at Churchill Ave., Meadow Dr., and Charleston Rd. A Draft Public Outreach and Engagement Plan was developed with the ultimate goal of fostering involvement from the community, Rail Committee, City Council, and interested parties at key project milestones, and help inform decision-making. The anticipated Project timeline to complete a 35% conceptual design and environmental clearance is anticipated to culminate in late 2027. Upcoming Meetings & Events Park to Park Saturday, May 10| 1 p.m. Mitchell Park to Juana Biones Park Planning & Transportation Commission Wednesday, May 14 | 6 p.m. Council Chambers & Hybrid Bike to Work Day/Wherever Days Thursday, May 15-May 17 Rail Committee Meeting Tuesday, May 20 | 6 p.m. Community Meeting Room & Hybrid Joint Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee and City/School Transportation Safety Committee Meeting Thursday, May 22 | 6:30 p.m. Mitchell Park Community Center Transportation Quick Links Main Page Palo Alto Link Parking Projects Biking & Walking Office of Transportation | 250 Hamilton Ave | Palo Alto, CA 94301 US Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 65 Packet Pg. 238 of 351 Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Constant Contact Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 66 Packet Pg. 239 of 351 From:Postmaster To:ParkRec Commission Subject:You have new held messages Date:Thursday, May 8, 2025 4:15:05 PM Logo You have new held messages You can release all of your held messages and permit or block future emails from the senders, or manage messages individually. Release all Permit all Block all You can also manage held messages in your Personal Portal. Spam Policy h.etzko@gmail.com Re: Tell Congress to Stop the Humanitarian Blockade on Gaza 2025-05-08 14:12 Release Permit Block Release all Permit all Block all © 2019 Mimecast Services Limited. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 67 Packet Pg. 240 of 351 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 68 Packet Pg. 241 of 351 From:Martin Wasserman To:Aram James Cc:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki; Reckdahl, Keith; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California DemocraticDelegate, Assembly District 23; Ed Lauing; Shikada, Ed; Lauing, Ed; Emily Mibach;assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Zelkha, Mila; h.etzko@gmail.com; Council, City;Cribbs, Anne; ParkRec Commission; Mickie Winkler; Doug Minkler; Foley, Michael; Marina Lopez; Cait James;Freddie.Quintana@sen.ca.gov; Tim James; Gardener, Liz; Raymond Goins; Don Austin; Yolanda Conaway; DianaDiamond; Dave Price; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; Perron, Zachary; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov;Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Barberini, Christopher; Gerry Gras; Dana St. George; Lotus Fong; Bains,Paul; paul@peaceandjustice.org; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Jeff Rosen; Rowena Chiu; Roberta Ahlquist; Rosen,Jeff; Jay Boyarsky; Figueroa, Eric; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations;board@valleywater.org; boardfeedback@smcgov.org Subject:Re: Tell Congress to Stop the Humanitarian Blockade on Gaza Date:Thursday, May 8, 2025 12:51:51 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i Israel is fighting for its existence against ruthless enemies who respect NO laws of war, and who are firmly committed to the annihilation of both the Jewish state and the Jewish people. Israel does what it does because it's enemies leave it no other choice. Martin Wasserman On May 8, 2025, at 10:59AM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Israel must immediately end its devastating siege on the occupied Gaza Strip which constitutes a genocidal act, a blatant form of unlawful collective punishment… Source: Amnesty International https://search.app/QJUAWxFWduiqXASd9 On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 1:54PM Martin Wasserman <deeperlook@aol.com> wrote: Yes, but the war must be won and not be allowed to drag on indefinitely. This message needs your attention Some Recipients have never replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 69 Packet Pg. 242 of 351 On May 8, 2025, at 9:36ௗAM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Expanding Israeli attack on Gaza would certainly lead to more deaths, destruction, says Volker Turk - Anadolu AjansÕ https://search.app/LgdhXoprtPKfB2Hz7 Shared via the Google app On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 12:24ௗPM Martin Wasserman <deeperlook@aol.com> wrote: The quickest way to lift the blockade is for Hamas to lay down its arms and release the hostages. Lifting the blockade prematurely will just strengthen Hamas and prolong the war. Martin Wasserman On May 7, 2025, at 10:50ௗPM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 1:22ௗAM Salem Ajluni <sajluni@yahoo.com> wrote: Dear Friends: If you have not done so already, please take a minute and use the link below to demand an end to Israel's humanitarian blockade on the people of Gaza. While this is a small gesture, other gestures are also encouraged. With regards and in solidarity, Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 70 Packet Pg. 243 of 351 Salem Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Action Network After breaking the ceasefire in late March, Israel enacted a complete blockade on all humanitarian aid, includin... Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 71 Packet Pg. 244 of 351 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki Cc:Reckdahl, Keith; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; EdLauing; Shikada, Ed; Lauing, Ed; Emily Mibach; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker;Zelkha, Mila; h.etzko@gmail.com; Council, City; Cribbs, Anne; ParkRec Commission; Mickie Winkler; DougMinkler; Foley, Michael; Marina Lopez; Cait James; Freddie.Quintana@sen.ca.gov; Tim James; Gardener, Liz;Raymond Goins; Don Austin; Yolanda Conaway; Diana Diamond; Dave Price; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz;Perron, Zachary; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov; Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Barberini,Christopher; Gerry Gras; Dana St. George; Lotus Fong; Bains, Paul; paul@peaceandjustice.org; WILPF PeninsulaPalo Alto; Jeff Rosen; Rowena Chiu; Roberta Ahlquist; Rosen, Jeff; Jay Boyarsky; Figueroa, Eric;<michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations; board@valleywater.org;boardfeedback@smcgov.org; Marty Wasserman Subject:Re: Tell Congress to Stop the Humanitarian Blockade on Gaza Date:Thursday, May 8, 2025 11:02:00 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Israel must immediately end its devastating siege on the occupied Gaza Strip which constitutes a genocidal act, a blatant form of unlawful collective punishment… Source: Amnesty International https://search.app/QJUAWxFWduiqXASd9 On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 1:54ௗPM Martin Wasserman <deeperlook@aol.com> wrote: Yes, but the war must be won and not be allowed to drag on indefinitely. On May 8, 2025, at 9:36ௗAM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Expanding Israeli attack on Gaza would certainly lead to more deaths, destruction, says Volker Turk - Anadolu AjansÕ https://search.app/LgdhXoprtPKfB2Hz7 Shared via the Google app On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 12:24ௗPM Martin Wasserman <deeperlook@aol.com> wrote: The quickest way to lift the blockade is for Hamas to lay down its arms and release the hostages. Lifting the blockade prematurely will just strengthen Hamas and prolong the war. Martin Wasserman Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 72 Packet Pg. 245 of 351 On May 7, 2025, at 10:50ௗPM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 1:22ௗAM Salem Ajluni <sajluni@yahoo.com> wrote: Dear Friends: If you have not done so already, please take a minute and use the link below to demand an end to Israel's humanitarian blockade on the people of Gaza. While this is a small gesture, other gestures are also encouraged. With regards and in solidarity, Salem Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Action Network After breaking the ceasefire in late March, Israel enacted a complete blockade on all humanitarian aid, includin... Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 73 Packet Pg. 246 of 351 From:Martin Wasserman To:Aram James Cc:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki; Reckdahl, Keith; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California DemocraticDelegate, Assembly District 23; Ed Lauing; Shikada, Ed; Lauing, Ed; Emily Mibach;assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Zelkha, Mila; h.etzko@gmail.com; Council, City;Cribbs, Anne; ParkRec Commission; Mickie Winkler; Doug Minkler; Foley, Michael; Marina Lopez; Cait James;Freddie.Quintana@sen.ca.gov; Tim James; Gardener, Liz; Raymond Goins; Don Austin; Yolanda Conaway; DianaDiamond; Dave Price; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; Perron, Zachary; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov;Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Barberini, Christopher; Gerry Gras; Dana St. George; Lotus Fong; Bains,Paul; paul@peaceandjustice.org; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Jeff Rosen; Rowena Chiu; Roberta Ahlquist; Rosen,Jeff; Jay Boyarsky; Figueroa, Eric; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations;board@valleywater.org; boardfeedback@smcgov.org Subject:Re: Tell Congress to Stop the Humanitarian Blockade on Gaza Date:Thursday, May 8, 2025 10:55:03 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i Yes, but the war must be won and not be allowed to drag on indefinitely. On May 8, 2025, at 9:36 AM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Expanding Israeli attack on Gaza would certainly lead to more deaths, destruction, says Volker Turk - Anadolu AjansÕ https://search.app/LgdhXoprtPKfB2Hz7 Shared via the Google app On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 12:24PM Martin Wasserman <deeperlook@aol.com> wrote: The quickest way to lift the blockade is for Hamas to lay down its arms and release the hostages. Lifting the blockade prematurely will just strengthen Hamas and prolong the war. Martin Wasserman This message needs your attention Some Recipients have never replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 74 Packet Pg. 247 of 351 On May 7, 2025, at 10:50ௗPM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 1:22ௗAM Salem Ajluni <sajluni@yahoo.com> wrote: Dear Friends: If you have not done so already, please take a minute and use the link below to demand an end to Israel's humanitarian blockade on the people of Gaza. While this is a small gesture, other gestures are also encouraged. With regards and in solidarity, Salem Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Action Network After breaking the ceasefire in late March, Israel enacted a complete blockade on all humanitarian aid, includin... Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 75 Packet Pg. 248 of 351 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki Cc:Reckdahl, Keith; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; EdLauing; Shikada, Ed; Lauing, Ed; Emily Mibach; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker;Zelkha, Mila; h.etzko@gmail.com; Council, City; Cribbs, Anne; ParkRec Commission; Mickie Winkler; DougMinkler; Foley, Michael; Marina Lopez; Cait James; Freddie.Quintana@sen.ca.gov; Tim James; Gardener, Liz;Raymond Goins; Don Austin; Yolanda Conaway; Diana Diamond; Dave Price; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz;Perron, Zachary; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov; Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Barberini,Christopher; Gerry Gras; Dana St. George; Lotus Fong; Bains, Paul; paul@peaceandjustice.org; WILPF PeninsulaPalo Alto; Jeff Rosen; Rowena Chiu; Roberta Ahlquist; Rosen, Jeff; Jay Boyarsky; Figueroa, Eric;<michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations; board@valleywater.org;boardfeedback@smcgov.org Subject:Re: Tell Congress to Stop the Humanitarian Blockade on Gaza Date:Thursday, May 8, 2025 9:44:59 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. 'War-Crime Starvation Strategy': Israel Blocks All Humanitarian Aid into Gaza Source: Common Dreams https://search.app/WBWdNPF3175XMzTp9 Shared via the Google app On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 12:36ௗPM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Expanding Israeli attack on Gaza would certainly lead to more deaths, destruction, says Volker Turk - Anadolu AjansÕ https://search.app/LgdhXoprtPKfB2Hz7 Shared via the Google app On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 12:24ௗPM Martin Wasserman <deeperlook@aol.com> wrote: The quickest way to lift the blockade is for Hamas to lay down its arms and release the hostages. Lifting the blockade prematurely will just strengthen Hamas and prolong the war. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 76 Packet Pg. 249 of 351 Martin Wasserman On May 7, 2025, at 10:50ௗPM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 1:22ௗAM Salem Ajluni <sajluni@yahoo.com> wrote: Dear Friends: If you have not done so already, please take a minute and use the link below to demand an end to Israel's humanitarian blockade on the people of Gaza. While this is a small gesture, other gestures are also encouraged. With regards and in solidarity, Salem Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Action Network After breaking the ceasefire in late March, Israel enacted a complete blockade on all humanitarian aid, includin... Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 77 Packet Pg. 250 of 351 From:Aram James To:Martin Wasserman Cc:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki; Reckdahl, Keith; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California DemocraticDelegate, Assembly District 23; Ed Lauing; Shikada, Ed; Lauing, Ed; Emily Mibach;assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Zelkha, Mila; h.etzko@gmail.com; Council, City;Cribbs, Anne; ParkRec Commission; Mickie Winkler; Doug Minkler; Foley, Michael; Marina Lopez; Cait James;Freddie.Quintana@sen.ca.gov; Tim James; Gardener, Liz; Raymond Goins; Don Austin; Yolanda Conaway; DianaDiamond; Dave Price; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; Perron, Zachary; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov;Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Barberini, Christopher; Gerry Gras; Dana St. George; Lotus Fong; Bains,Paul; paul@peaceandjustice.org; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Jeff Rosen; Rowena Chiu; Roberta Ahlquist; Rosen,Jeff; Jay Boyarsky; Figueroa, Eric; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations;board@valleywater.org; boardfeedback@smcgov.org Subject:Re: Tell Congress to Stop the Humanitarian Blockade on Gaza Date:Thursday, May 8, 2025 9:36:56 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Expanding Israeli attack on Gaza would certainly lead to more deaths, destruction, says Volker Turk - Anadolu AjansÕ https://search.app/LgdhXoprtPKfB2Hz7 Shared via the Google app On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 12:24ௗPM Martin Wasserman <deeperlook@aol.com> wrote: The quickest way to lift the blockade is for Hamas to lay down its arms and release the hostages. Lifting the blockade prematurely will just strengthen Hamas and prolong the war. Martin Wasserman On May 7, 2025, at 10:50ௗPM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 1:22ௗAM Salem Ajluni <sajluni@yahoo.com> wrote: Dear Friends: If you have not done so already, please take a minute and use the link below to demand an end to Israel's humanitarian blockade on the people of Gaza. While this is a small gesture, other gestures are also encouraged. With regards and in solidarity, Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 78 Packet Pg. 251 of 351 Salem Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Action Network After breaking the ceasefire in late March, Israel enacted a complete blockade on all humanitarian aid, includin... Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 79 Packet Pg. 252 of 351 From:Martin Wasserman To:Aram James Cc:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki; Reckdahl, Keith; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California DemocraticDelegate, Assembly District 23; Ed Lauing; Shikada, Ed; Lauing, Ed; Emily Mibach;assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Zelkha, Mila; h.etzko@gmail.com; Council, City;Cribbs, Anne; ParkRec Commission; Mickie Winkler; Doug Minkler; Foley, Michael; Marina Lopez; Cait James;Freddie.Quintana@sen.ca.gov; Tim James; Gardener, Liz; Raymond Goins; Don Austin; Yolanda Conaway; DianaDiamond; Dave Price; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; Perron, Zachary; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov;Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Barberini, Christopher; Gerry Gras; Dana St. George; Lotus Fong; Bains,Paul; paul@peaceandjustice.org; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Jeff Rosen; Rowena Chiu; Roberta Ahlquist; Rosen,Jeff; Jay Boyarsky; Figueroa, Eric; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations;board@valleywater.org; boardfeedback@smcgov.org Subject:Re: Tell Congress to Stop the Humanitarian Blockade on Gaza Date:Thursday, May 8, 2025 9:24:53 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i The quickest way to lift the blockade is for Hamas to lay down its arms and release the hostages. Lifting the blockade prematurely will just strengthen Hamas and prolong the war. Martin Wasserman On May 7, 2025, at 10:50PM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 1:22AM Salem Ajluni <sajluni@yahoo.com> wrote: Dear Friends: If you have not done so already, please take a minute and use the link below to demand an end to Israel's humanitarian blockade on the people of Gaza. While this is a small gesture, other gestures are also encouraged. With regards and in solidarity, Salem This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 80 Packet Pg. 253 of 351 Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Action Network After breaking the ceasefire in late March, Israel enacted a complete blockade on all humanitarian aid, includin... Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 81 Packet Pg. 254 of 351 From:Light As Air BoatsTo:ParkRec CommissionSubject:Top Rated Inflatable Kayaks & Canoes Date:Thursday, May 8, 2025 7:35:53 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. SHOP NOW Hi there! Loved by people world over! Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 82 Packet Pg. 255 of 351 See Camps & Parks Catalog See Resorts Catalog Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 83 Packet Pg. 256 of 351 SEE GUMOTEX INFLATABLES KAYAKS SEE SPINERA INFLATABLES KAYAKS SEE KOLIBRI INFLATABLES CANOES SEE SCOUT INFLATABLES & KAYAKS For Quantity Discounts or Questions, Call Andi Tel:706.619.6670 andi@lightasairboats.com Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 84 Packet Pg. 257 of 351 Explore Inflatable Kayaks Check Out Our Inflatable Canoes See Camps & Parks Catalog See Resorts Catalog Yours in Wind, Water, and Waves, - The Light As Air Boats Team We don’t want to spam you. If you're no longer interested in enjoying adventures out on the water Unsubscribe here. Light As Air Boats 13801 Walsingham Rd. Suite A-116 Largo, Florida 33774 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 85 Packet Pg. 258 of 351 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki Cc:Reckdahl, Keith; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; EdLauing; Shikada, Ed; Lauing, Ed; Emily Mibach; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker;Zelkha, Mila; h.etzko@gmail.com; Council, City; Cribbs, Anne; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRecCommission; Mickie Winkler; Doug Minkler; Foley, Michael; Marina Lopez; Marty Wasserman; Cait James;Freddie.Quintana@sen.ca.gov; Tim James; Gardener, Liz; Raymond Goins; Don Austin; Yolanda Conaway; DianaDiamond; Dave Price; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; Perron, Zachary; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov;Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Barberini, Christopher; Gerry Gras; Dana St. George; Lotus Fong; Bains,Paul; Paul George @ PPJC; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Jeff Rosen; Rowena Chiu; Roberta Ahlquist; Rosen, Jeff;Jay Boyarsky; Figueroa, Eric; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations;board@valleywater.org; boardfeedback@smcgov.org Subject:Re: Tell Congress to Stop the Humanitarian Blockade on Gaza Date:Wednesday, May 7, 2025 10:50:37 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 1:22ௗAM Salem Ajluni <sajluni@yahoo.com> wrote: Dear Friends: If you have not done so already, please take a minute and use the link below to demand an end to Israel's humanitarian blockade on the people of Gaza. While this is a small gesture, other gestures are also encouraged. With regards and in solidarity, Salem Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Tell Congress: Stop the humanitarian blockade on Gaza Action Network Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 86 Packet Pg. 259 of 351 After breaking the ceasefire in late March, Israel enacted a complete blockade on all humanitarian aid, includin... Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 87 Packet Pg. 260 of 351 From:TRACE DEVAI To:parksandreccommission@chinohills.org Subject:Fwd: MJ ROXTAR Live 2 hour concert Band/Dancers... Date:Wednesday, May 7, 2025 7:13:10 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. mjrox.com. SEE ATTACHMENT BELOW MONDAY JUNE 16th. 2025 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 88 Packet Pg. 261 of 351 From:TRACE DEVAI To:Juwono, Jessie (CNS) Subject:Fwd: MJ ROXTAR Live 2 hour concert Band/Dancers... Date:Wednesday, May 7, 2025 6:37:18 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. mjrox.com. SEE ATTACHMENT BELOW MONDAY JUNE 16th. 2025 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 89 Packet Pg. 262 of 351 From:Francisco Valenzuela To:Francisco Valenzuela Subject:San Andreas Regional Center"s Superhero Summer Festivals Date:Tuesday, May 6, 2025 11:04:11 AM Attachments:Salinas Festival June 28th.pdfHollister Festival July 12th.pdfSanta Cruz Festival July 19th.pdfSan Jose Sestival July 26th.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Friends, Once again, San Andreas Regional Center will be hosting our 9th Annual Superhero Summer Festival in Salinas, Santa Cruz, and San Jose. This year for the first time, we are hosting a Superhero Summer Festival at Santana Ranch Park in Hollister. At each festival kids and young adults with intellectual developmental disabilities, service provider staff, and others will dress up in their favorite superhero costume to enjoy our event. Service providers / Organizations who would like to “Table” to share information about your office / organization during the Resource Fair Register Here: Organizations_Register_Here Families, service providers, city & county programs, organizations, neighbors, stake holders, elected official, and the community at large are all welcomed to join us this summer. The San Jose Superhero Summer Festival will also host a 5K/10K Walk~Run~Roll. Service Providers / Organizations who would like to have they're Agency Logo on the 5K/10K Walk~Run~Roll Shirt being handed out at the San Jose Superhero Summer Festival Register Here: Organization_Logo Thank you for your continued friendship and looking forward to having our community partners join us once again at one of our up-coming Superhero Summer Festivals. Francisco Valenzuela Government Affairs / Community Relations San Andreas Regional Center Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 90 Packet Pg. 263 of 351 Mobile: 408-210-5663 Office: 408-341-3809 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 91 Packet Pg. 264 of 351 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki; Council, City; Human Relations Commission; jgreen@dailynewsgroup.com; Lotus Fong; Roberta Ahlquist; Rodriguez, Miguel; Dana St. George; Gerry Gras; Mickie Winkler; Binder, Andrew; Jay Boyarsky; Jeff Rosen; Jeff Conrad; Jeff Hayden Cc:Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; board@pausd.org;assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; josh@joshsalcman.com; Josh Becker; Ed Lauing; Lauing, Ed;Reckdahl, Keith; Gardener, Liz; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Emily Mibach;Dave Price; EPA Today; Gennady Sheyner; Diana Diamond; GRP-City Council Subject:Why Palestinian Films Need To Be Widely Distributed Date:Tuesday, May 6, 2025 9:10:31 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more Farah Nabulsi.mp4 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 92 Packet Pg. 265 of 351 Watch now Why Palestinian Films Need To Be Widely Distributed Award-winning director joins Mehdi to talk about the release of ‘The Teacher’ in the US and self-distributing it in the UK. MEHDI HASAN AND TEAM ZETEO MAY 6 Ă PREVIEW READ IN APP When the ugliness of Israel’s crimes in occupied Gaza overshadows the ugliness of its crimes in the occupied West Bank, films like Farah Nabulsi’s latest release, ‘The Teacher,’ become all the more important. The BAFTA-winning, Oscar-nominated Palestinian Director joins Mehdi to discuss her latest film, which centers around the struggle of Palestinians living in the occupied West Bank through the lens of a school teacher there. “The film is set in this sort of brutal, oppressive reality of militarily occupied Palestine, a place of apartheid that has been suffered by Palestinians for decades,” says Nabulsi, adding that highlighting that reality is not an easy task. “You really do have this reality unfolding around you that you're trying to do justice to in your film. So a lot of pressure.” The movie, which was entirely shot in the occupied West Bank prior to October 7, 2023, was a complicated one to film, according to Nabulsi, “One evening we finished at two in the morning shooting a scene in the heart of Nablus only to wake up four hours later and receive messages that the Israeli military entered Nablus and blown up a house about two kilometers from where we were shooting.” Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 93 Packet Pg. 266 of 351 Upgrade to paid After crossing the hurdles of filming under heavy militarization in the occupied territories, Nabulsi still faced the hurdles of distributing a film that centers around the Palestinian struggle for liberation. “What's crazy is this is a British-Palestinian film, and I am a British-Palestinian filmmaker, and you would think that we would have got distribution in the UK, considering this film has won now 20 international awards… it ticked all the boxes, and yet we didn't have distribution.” Nabulsi went on to self-distribute the film, which was released in the US just last month. Head to theteacher.film to find a screening near you. Paid subscribers can watch the full interview above to hear some of Farah’s horrifying stories while filming in the occupied West Bank, and to see what she has in store for her next film. Free subscribers can watch a 5-minute preview. Do consider becoming a paid subscriber to Zeteo and skip the paywall every time!... Subscribe to Zeteo to unlock the rest. Become a paying subscriber of Zeteo to get access to this post and other subscriber-only content. Upgrade to paid A subscription gets you: Support Mehdi’s brand of accountability journalism Unlimited access to all exclusive content (shows, podcasts, newsletters) Live Q&As with Mehdi + more! LIKE COMMENT RESTACK Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 94 Packet Pg. 267 of 351 © 2025 Zeteo 1640 Boro Place 4th floor, McLean, VA 22102 Unsubscribe Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 95 Packet Pg. 268 of 351 From:Light As Air BoatsTo:ParkRec CommissionSubject:Thril Them With The Tube That Spins! Date:Tuesday, May 6, 2025 7:33:16 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. SHOP NOW Hi there! Let your guests experience the Endless Ride! And NEW for 2025... Inflatable Gangways! Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 96 Packet Pg. 269 of 351 Absolute eye-catcher on the water -- a tube that also spins on its own axis during the ride. As the speed of the boat increases, the tube rotates faster and faster around its own axis! SEE ALL SPINERA SPINNING TUBES HERE Durable, heavy-duty rotating tube designed for commercial use. With its high-quality materials, numerous handholds, and eye-catching design, it's the best in water fun! Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 97 Packet Pg. 270 of 351 Perfect embarking and disembarking. 3 Sizes, railings for safety, and stowable! SEE ALL YACHTBEACH INFLATABLE GANGWAY HERE Parks & Camps Catalog Resorts Catalog Yachts Catalog Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 98 Packet Pg. 271 of 351 For Quantity Discounts or Questions, Call Andi Tel:706.619.6670 andi@lightasairboats.com Yours in Wind, Water, and Waves, - The Light As Air Boats Team Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 99 Packet Pg. 272 of 351 We don’t want to spam you.If you're no longer interested in enjoying adventures out on the water Unsubscribe here. Light As Air Boats 13801 Walsingham Rd. Suite A-116 Largo, Florida 33774 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 100 Packet Pg. 273 of 351 From:Lauren Weston, Acterra To:ParkRec Commission Subject:Your Gift is Key to Local Climate Action Date:Friday, May 2, 2025 2:05:07 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. Dear Daren, When you think about the future of climate impact under this administration, do you feel worried? If so, I understand. It is difficult to ignore that seven years ago, we sat in a similar place with President Trump and the government failing to lead on local climate action. Now, unfortunately, the failure to lead has escalated into an active campaign against climate impact solutions, specifically the work of Acterra and many of our partners. Staff Wendy Chou with board member Peggy Brannigan and members of our HGBA team at an Earth Month event All of us doing the hard work of climate action know it can be difficult to be optimistic about the current challenges and what new generations will face. However, I am a true believer in the power of collective action, and if there was ever a time for our community to come together to continue this fight, it is now. Even though Acterra has been a major player in this space for the last 55 years, there is still room for us to grow. Spring is a season of renewal, and the perfect opportunity to review our commitment to protecting the planet. Please renew your support of Acterra, matched dollar for dollar up to $10,000 to continue expansion of this vital work. DONATE NOW! Double Your Impact Now! Environmental action and education are more critical now than ever. Here at Acterra, our four programmatic pillars focus on ways to create positive change for the planet that fit into your life and help your community. A snapshot of work across our pillars: Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 101 Packet Pg. 274 of 351 Electrification: Find your best EV: Schedule a no-cost consultation with Acterra to find the right EV for your needs and budget. We'll also help you find any qualifying incentive programs and show you how to apply! Food: By partnering with public school districts across San Mateo County, our Farm Fresh Futures Program aims to transform school meals into a showcase of culturally relevant, healthy, farm-fresh food while supporting small, climate-smart local farmers and ranchers across Northern California. Education: Join the student summer cohort: Are you a student interested in sustainability? Join Acterra’s Student Ambassador Program (ASAP). You'll design and implement sustainability projects that address environmental challenges in your community. Advocacy: Take Action with Acterra: Want to know more about environmental legislation? In our EcoHappenings newsletter, we break down the latest climate-related state and federal bills, and show you how to contact your lawmakers to fight for change. DONATE NOW! When you give today you will see your dollars at work in the community tomorrow! Your gift will support a lasting legacy for our community, and will have double the impact with this year’s $10,000 Board match until the end of this fiscal year, June 30, 2025! These efforts benefit the planet and have a ripple effect that empowers communities (our neighbors, friends, and loved ones) when we need them most. With heartfelt gratitude, Signature Lauren Weston Executive Director P.S. I would also like to invite you to celebrate this work, our community and all that has been accomplished over the last 55 years at this year’s Promise to Our Planet, on May 17, 2025 at Hidden Villa from 5 - 9 p.m. The evening will reflect on Acterra’s past while also highlighting what is yet to come. More details can be found here. I do hope you will join us. Join Us! Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 102 Packet Pg. 275 of 351 Staff Wendy Chou with board member Nancy Grove at an Earth Month event Our Contact Information Acterra 3921 E Bayshore Rd Suite 210 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650.962.9876 https://www.acterra.org Unsubscribe | Manage email preferences Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 103 Packet Pg. 276 of 351 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki; Josh Becker; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Ed Lauing; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith Cc:planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Dana St. George; Gerry Gras; Jeff Conrad; JeffRosen; jay.boyarsky@da.sccgov.org; Cribbs, Anne; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Templeton, Cari; Emily Mibach;Zelkha, Mila; Dave Price; Braden Cartwright; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; Diana Diamond; EPA Today;jgreen@dailynewsgroup.com; Council, City; Perron, Zachary; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; GRP-City Council;Nash, Betsy; Binder, Andrew; dcombs@menlopark.gov; Reifschneider, James; Human Relations Commission;h.etzko@gmail.com; Bill Newell; Mickie Winkler; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Gardener, Liz; Lotus Fong; RobertaAhlquist; Burt, Patrick; Sean Allen; Patricia.Guerrero@jud.ca.gov; Patrice Ventresca; Palo Alto Free Press;Wagner, April; Afanasiev, Alex; editor@paweekly.com; editor@almanacnews.com; Shikada, Ed; Ruth SilverTaube; Tom DuBois; Holman, Karen (external); Kaloma Smith; Senator Becker; Steve Wagstaffe; Donna Wallach;Don Austin; Yolanda Conaway; yolanda; Tim James; Vara Ramakrishnan Subject:Meanwhile, Spain, Belgium and Latin American states highlight the illegality of Israel"s ban on humanitarian aid as World Court hearings enter second day Date:Wednesday, April 30, 2025 8:49:07 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Saudi Arabian envoy asks ICJ to condemn Israel's 'hideous conduct' in Gaza Meanwhile, Spain, Belgium and Latin American states highlight the illegality of Israel's ban on humanitarian aid as World Court hearings enter second day Source: Middle East Eye https://search.app/2qNnyCuawhuQBjCs9 Shared via the Google app Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 104 Packet Pg. 277 of 351 From:Marie Wolbach To:ParkRec Commission Subject:biking decisions Date:Wednesday, April 30, 2025 4:36:37 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Greetings members of Palo Alto Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee; Park and Rec Commissioners: Width of bike lanes: As discussions about bike routes have proceeded, I have not seen discussion about making the width of lanes large enough to accommodate 3-wheel cycles. As we encourage elderly drivers to abandon their cars, we must provide alternatives. Also, as kids on e-bikes or e-scooters go past our house, they often weave toward the middle of the street at a fast speed. Personal experience: For medical reasons, my doctors advised me to stop riding my bicycle, an activity I love. So at age 86 I bought a 3-wheel cycle with an electric option and a large basket. I live on south Greer Rd. which does not have marked bike lanes and lanes on near-by streets are all too narrow for my cycle. Large streets vs small streets: Please avoid using large streets for bike routes. I agree with those of you who take that position. Thank you for your service and careful consideration. Marie Wolbach3427 Greer Rd., Palo Alto mariewolbach@gmail.com Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 105 Packet Pg. 278 of 351 From:Office of Supervisor Otto LeeTo:ParkRec CommissionSubject:Sustainability Month, Black April, and Wildfire Preparedness DayDate:Wednesday, April 30, 2025 4:30:14 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. In This Newsletter: Zoe Lofgren Town Hall Recap - Sustainability Month Recap - Black April Remembrance - Wildfire Preparedness Day - Highlights Around the Community - Upcoming Events and Helpful Resources - Before We Go... Dear Friends and Neighbors, April 2025 was FILLED with lots in bloom – and that’s not just because of Sustainability Month and Earth Day! On the first day of April, we celebrated the grand re-opening of Regional Medical Center, which officially joined Santa Clara Valley Healthcare’s family of public hospitals and high-quality care countywide. It was a great way to start a new month and helped us get rolling on a ton of other great events! Take a look below at some other incredible events, Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 106 Packet Pg. 279 of 351 both in community and with the County itself, and join us in looking toward the next month of events that demonstrate just how diverse and joyful this community is. As we face challenges from the federal government’s policies affecting us here locally, it is imperative for us to stand in community together, and work for everyone in our County. We at the County of Santa Clara will continue to work together to support our community near and far, and protect one another for our collective growth and prosperity. Now, let’s connect on how great District 3 is, and all that our County has to offer! Some friendly reminders and events coming up: Remember to dump out standing water on or near your properties, due to recent finding of aedes aegypti mosquitoes in the area. We hope to see you at the Berryessa Annual Art Festival! Check out more information here. Budget workshops are May 12, 13 and 14. Your feedback is important to help the County guide the tough decisions we have ahead. As always, please feel free contact our office anytime via email at Supervisor.Lee@bos.sccgov.org or visit us online at SupervisorLee.org. Supervisor Otto Lee Santa Clara County, District 3 SupervisorLee.org Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 107 Packet Pg. 280 of 351 Supervisor.Lee@bos.sccgov.org ICYMI: Town Hall with Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren On Friday, April 4, the District 3 team welcomed Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (CA D-18) to County chambers for a Town Hall, dedicated to her District 18 constituents regarding all of the challenges coming down from Washington D.C. Congresswoman Lofgren -- no stranger to the County, as a previous Supervisor from 1981 to 1994 – spoke to over 400 attendees from the Chamber floor, addressing their questions and concerns on topics ranging from DOGE cuts, a ceasefire in Gaza, and threats against social security. The Congresswoman spoke to the crowd for nearly 90 minutes, and took additional questions back to her staff to address personally. As she reminded the audience, it’s time to “stand up, fight back, and I’ll do it with you.” Many thanks to Congresswoman Lofgren for joining us at the County to address your constituents, and for encouraging further action both locally and federally. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 108 Packet Pg. 281 of 351 Reach out to Congresswoman Lofgren here The D3 team was able to celebrate Sustainability Month and Earth Day in lots of amazing ways. Take a look below at just some of our favorite moments out in the community! Fremont Union High School District 2nd Annual Earth Day 10th Anniversary of Stanford Energy System Innovations Milpitas Community Education Foundation's STEAM Showcase City of Sunnyvale Earth Day San Jose Water-led tour of the Watershed + AI wildfire detection sensors Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 109 Packet Pg. 282 of 351 Photos by Grace Stetson, Emily Pachoud, and Wendy Ho Many thanks to all of these organizations, community members, and advocates in creating a more sustainable and greener future for us all! Black April: Remembering 50 Years Since the Fall of Saigon On April 30, we are commemorating a historic moment for Vietnamese and Vietnamese American Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 110 Packet Pg. 283 of 351 individuals -- the 50th anniversary of Black April. This marks both a solemn and pivotal point in the history of Vietnam and its peoples. On April 30, 1975, the fall of Saigon marked the end of the Vietnam War. While it was the end of the war, for millions of Vietnamese peoples, it was just the beginning of greater conflict – lives torn apart, peoples uprooted, and a great exodus from the country. This day symbolizes loss and grief for many, but further demonstrates the pure resilience, courage, and spirit of the Vietnamese people Here in Santa Clara County, we are proudly the home of over 140,000 Vietnamese Americans, the second-largest Vietnamese community in the United States. Vietnamese Americans are powerful advocates for freedom, democracy, and human rights, and we are so grateful to have so many amazing community members here to remind us of the importance of unity and strength. On April 7th, the D3 office joined Supervisor Duong and the District 2 team in raising the Vietnamese flag, symbolizing our community’s Vietnamese Americans and the importance of this history. Take a look at that event, and other memorable moments in which we commemorated this historic anniversary. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 111 Packet Pg. 284 of 351 Photos by Daniel Cao, The-vu Nguyen & Ly Vo Wildfire Preparedness Day As wildfire season becomes more prolonged here in California, it is imperative that we prepare ourselves, our families and our properties appropriately On Saturday, May 3, we’re taking part in Wildfire Community Preparedness Day, reminding people and organizations everywhere to take action in both raising awareness and reducing wildfire risks. How can you prepare? Here are some action items that you can do at home: Regularly clear debris from roofs, gutters, vents, and under decks. Store combustible items – such as firewood, propane tanks, and vehicles – at least 30 feet away from structures. Create a custom wildfire readiness plan, with the help of CAL Fire. Check out more recommendations Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 112 Packet Pg. 285 of 351 from CAL Fire Upcoming Events and Helpful Resources Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 113 Packet Pg. 286 of 351 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 114 Packet Pg. 287 of 351 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 115 Packet Pg. 288 of 351 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 116 Packet Pg. 289 of 351 70 West Hedding 10th Floor San José, CA 95110 (408) 299-5030 Email Supervisor Lee District 3 Website Unsubscribe from future messages. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 117 Packet Pg. 290 of 351 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki; Josh Becker; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Reckdahl, Keith Cc:Gardener, Liz; Liz Kniss; board@pausd.org; Jay Boyarsky; Jeff Conrad; Jeff Rosen; Jeff Hayden; Gerry Gras;Dana St. George; Angel, David; Dave Price; Gennady Sheyner; Kaloma Smith; Council, City; Cribbs, Anne;Templeton, Cari; Anna Griffin; board@valleywater.org; BoardOperations; boardfeedback@smcgov.org; BillNewell; Zelkha, Mila; Burt, Patrick; Patrice Ventresca; Patricia.Guerrero@jud.ca.gov; Lotus Fong; RobertaAhlquist; Friends of Cubberley; Pat M; Sean Allen; Damon Silver; Rodriguez, Miguel; Mickie Winkler; Binder,Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Perron, Zachary; Wagner, April; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Figueroa, Eric;Human Relations Commission; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; dennis burns;DuJuan Green; Palo Alto Free Press; Foley, Michael; Vara Ramakrishnan; Ruth Silver Taube; Tom DuBois;Holman, Karen (external); Freddie.Quintana@sen.ca.gov; Donna Wallach Subject:Deprivation by Design”: Israel Intensifies Mass Killing Campaign in Gaza With Starvation and Daily Strikes Date:Wednesday, April 30, 2025 1:19:42 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more Become a paid subscriber to gain access to our private Discord server, subscriber- only AMAs, chats, and invites to events. “Deprivation by Design”: IsraelIntensifies Mass Killing Campaign inGaza With Starvation and DailyStrikes The scale of killing in Gaza is almost impossible to track as the Israeli military bombs and starves Palestinian civilians with impunity. RASHA ABOU JALAL AND SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS APR 30 READ IN APP Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 118 Packet Pg. 291 of 351 Palestinians carrying the bodies of their family members killed in Israeli airstrikes for burial. April 28, 2025. (Photo by Ali Jadallah/Anadolu via Getty Images) GAZA CITY—Three generations of the al-Khour family were wiped out when Israel bombed their family home in the al-Sabra neighborhood in central Gaza at dawn on April 26. The elderly patriarch of the family, Talal al-Khour, his wives, daughters, sons, and grandchildren were all killed in the attack. A total of twenty- two people—including twelve children—perished, their bodies blown apart and buried under the rubble. "The airstrike occurred at dawn while we were asleep. Suddenly, we woke up to a blast that felt like an earthquake. We rushed into the street and found that the five-story home of the Al-Khour family had turned into a pile of rubble,” Mohammad Al-Ajla, a 37-year-old neighbor who helped retrieve the bodies, told Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 119 Packet Pg. 292 of 351 Drop Site News. "As soon as the dust from the strike cleared, neighbors began trying to rescue members of the family. The recovery operation continued for eight straight hours. We saw bodies everywhere. There were children without heads." With the help of residents in the area, Civil Defense teams were able to retrieve fifteen of the bodies, which were later buried together in a mass grave. The remaining bodies remain trapped under the debris. Emergency rescue crews were forced to dig through the wreckage with their bare hands as a result of Israel denying the entry of equipment into Gaza and deliberately targeting the little machinery available, according to the Civil Defense spokesperson, Mahmoud Bassal. "We could hear the cries of the wounded trapped under the rubble, but we were helpless to reach them. Over time, the screaming faded, and we no longer knew whether they were still alive or had been killed,” Bassal told Drop Site. "Many lives could have been saved, but the ongoing blockade and the denial of essential tools eliminated every possible chance for rescue.” Since Israel resumed its scorched earth bombing campaign on March 18, Gaza has been transformed into a desert of death, in which rubble and ruin form the backdrop for an unceasing campaign of mass killing. The Israeli military has carried out multiple airstrikes and shelling across the enclave on a daily basis, pounding homes, displacement camps, cafes, hospitals, charity kitchens, so-called “humanitarian zones,” and other civilian sites. The scale of the attacks is almost impossible to track. On Wednesday alone, three residential buildings in the Nuseirat refugee camp were bombed; one of the strikes killed six members of one family, including three siblings, all children. In a nearby building, eight people in a single home were killed. In Jabaliya, at least three people from the same family, including two young girls, were killed in Israeli artillery fire. On the coast, west of Gaza City, a fisherman was killed while pulling his boat ashore. In western Khan Younis, an overnight drone strike on a tent killed six people, including children. This is not a comprehensive list and does not even cover a 24-hour period. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 120 Packet Pg. 293 of 351 Over two days last week, the Israeli military also targeted and bombed over 30 bulldozers and other pieces of heavy machinery. Some of them had been donated during the “ceasefire” to clear rubble, repair critical infrastructure, and rescue people after airstrikes, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Drop Site News is reader-supported. Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Upgrade to paid The scenes emerging from across Gaza, from Rafah in the south to Beit Hanoun in the north, are staggering in their horror. Children blown apart across rooftops or while riding their bikes; dead bodies strewn across a cafe, some still seated, slumped in their chairs; corpses wrapped in white body bags lined up alongside one another; suicide drones crashing into tents housing sleeping families; screaming parents and wounded children scattered in the streets. “The massacres do not stop. We are being slaughtered from vein to vein,” Al Jazeera correspondent Anas al-Sharif said in a social media post. At least 2,300 Palestinians have been killed over the past six weeks alone—the equivalent of over fifty people killed every day. Over 740 of the dead are children, the Director of the Information Unit at the Ministry of Health in Gaza, Zaher Al- Wahidi, told Drop Site. Since the start of the war, more than 2,180 families have been entirely annihilated—with all members killed—while more than 5,070 families have lost all members except for one surviving individual, according to the Government Media Office. The relentless assault comes as Israel has imposed a policy of forced starvation on Gaza’s two million residents, sealing off Gaza completely and denying the entry of all food, fuel, medicine and other humanitarian goods since March 2—by far the longest blockade since the beginning of the war. More than 65,000 children in Gaza have been hospitalized with severe malnutrition, according to a statement this week by the Government Media Office. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 121 Packet Pg. 294 of 351 Israel has made it clear that the intensifying military assault and the ongoing blockade are explicitly aimed at bringing Hamas to its knees. Negotiations for a ceasefire appear deadlocked with Israel scrapping crucial elements of the original three-phase deal signed by Hamas and Israel in January, and now pushing for Hamas to formally surrender, disarm, and exile its leadership as a condition to end the genocide. Israel’s defense minister has reiterated that the denial of food, medicine, and other aid is being used to collectively punish the Palestinians of Gaza. "No humanitarian aid is about to enter Gaza,” Israel Katz said, announcing that “preventing humanitarian aid from entering Gaza is one of the main pressure levers." Using starvation as a weapon of war has had a devastating effect. Last week, the UN warned that Gaza “is now likely facing the worst humanitarian crisis in the 18 months since the escalation of hostilities in October 2023.” The World Food Program recently announced that it had run out of food. “The situation is at a breaking point,” the organization said in a statement. Food prices have risen by 1,400 percent. With no remaining supplies of flour or fuel, Gaza’s bakeries have stopped functioning and remaining stocks of food are being rapidly depleted. The flour that is available is often insect-infested. Families are increasingly resorting to mixing crushed macaroni with flour to make bread and allocating just one piece of bread per family member per day. With shortages of cooking gas and firewood, families are forced to burn plastic and other waste to cook the little food they have. People are foraging for wild plants and eating sea turtles that have washed ashore in order to survive. The UN last week said it identified 3,700 children suffering from acute malnutrition in March—now up to 80% from the month before. A total of fifty-three children have died of malnutrition since the war began. The heads of twelve major aid organizations issued a joint statement last week warning that “Famine is not just a risk, but likely rapidly unfolding in almost all parts of Gaza,” and characterizing the situation in Gaza “one of the worst humanitarian failures of our generation.” Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 122 Packet Pg. 295 of 351 Over the past few weeks, the Israeli military has bombed the al-Ahli Hospital and the Al Durrah Paediatric Hospital, both in Gaza City; the Nasser hospital in Khan Younis and the Kuwaiti Field Hospital in Mawasi; and massacred fifteen emergency workers and first responders. The hospitals that are still standing are barely functioning, with severe shortages of medicine, equipment and doctors. Meanwhile, the Israeli military continues to squeeze Palestinians onto smaller tracts of land within Gaza. About 70 percent of Gaza has been designated as “no- go” zones or placed under displacement orders. Over the past six weeks, roughly 420,000 Palestinians have been displaced yet again, with no safe place to go. “This is deprivation by design,” the acting head of office for OCHA, Jonathan Whittall, said in a statement. “Land is being annexed from the north, from the east, from the south of the strip as forces advance…Gaza is being starved, it’s being bombed, it’s being strangled. This looks like the deliberate dismantling of Palestinian life.” Leave a comment Upgrade to paid A guest post by Rasha Abou jalal I am Rasha Abu Jalal, a journalist from the Gaza Strip. I work in several media outlets covering Palestinian political, humanitarian and social issues. I am a permanent member of the judging committee for the annual Press House Award. Subscribe to Rasha Become a Drop Site News Paid Subscriber Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 123 Packet Pg. 296 of 351 Drop Site News is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber today. Upgrade to paid A paid subscription gets you: Access to our Discord, subscriber-only AMAs, chats, and invites to events, both virtual and IRL Post comments and join the community The knowledge you are supporting independent media making the lives of the powerful miserable You can also now find us on podcast platforms and on Facebook, Twitter, Bluesky, Telegram, and YouTube. LIKE COMMENT RESTACK © 2025 Drop Site News, Inc. Drop Site News Inc., 4315 50th St. NW Ste 100 Unit #2560, Washington, DC 20016 Unsubscribe Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 124 Packet Pg. 297 of 351 From:Postmaster To:ParkRec Commission Subject:You have new held messages Date:Wednesday, April 30, 2025 12:24:09 PM Logo You have new held messages You can release all of your held messages and permit or block future emails from the senders, or manage messages individually. Release all Permit all Block all You can also manage held messages in your Personal Portal. Spam Policy mobileappdevelopment8@outlook.com Re: Mistake Proof 2025-04-30 08:40 Release Permit Block Release all Permit all Block all © 2019 Mimecast Services Limited. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 125 Packet Pg. 298 of 351 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 126 Packet Pg. 299 of 351 From:Francisco Valenzuela To:Francisco Valenzuela Subject:Vietnamese Conference Date:Tuesday, April 29, 2025 4:06:13 PM Attachments:Vietnamese Conference English.pdfVietnamese Conference Flyer.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Friends, San Andreas Regional Center will be hosting our 8th Annual Vietnamese / English Speaking conference on Saturday, May 17th. The conference will take place at the San Andreas Regional Center office in San Jose with the resource portion being held indoors. One Table & Two Chairs will be provided • 10:00am - Set Up • 11:00am - Resource Begins • 2:00pm - Conference Ends The Service provider / Community Based Organizations are invited to attend and be part of the Resource Fair. If you're organization is interested in sharing information about your organization to parents who will be attending the conference, use the following link to register. San_Andreas_Regional_Center_Vietneamese_Conference If you should have any questions, feel free to reach out to me at: 408-341-3809. Francisco Valenzuela Government Affairs / Community Relations San Andreas Regional Center Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 127 Packet Pg. 300 of 351 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 128 Packet Pg. 301 of 351 From:Postmaster To:ParkRec Commission Subject:You have new held messages Date:Tuesday, April 29, 2025 12:14:01 PM Logo You have new held messages You can release all of your held messages and permit or block future emails from the senders, or manage messages individually. Release all Permit all Block all You can also manage held messages in your Personal Portal. Spam Policy hello@lightasairboats.com Where to Dock Water Toys For Your Guests? 2025-04-29 07:30 Release Permit Block Release all Permit all Block all © 2019 Mimecast Services Limited. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 129 Packet Pg. 302 of 351 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 130 Packet Pg. 303 of 351 From:Aram James To:Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Veenker, Vicki; Palo Alto Free Press; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23 Cc:Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Council, City; Reckdahl, Keith; KalomaSmith; Reckdahl, Keith; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Gennady Sheyner; Donna Wallach; Don Austin;Yolanda Conaway; Rowena Chiu; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Ed Lauing;Shikada, Ed; Lauing, Ed; Ruth Silver Taube; board@pausd.org; board@valleywater.org;jay.boyarsky@da.sccgov.org; BoardOperations; Dana St. George; Gerry Gras; Zelkha, Mila; Templeton, Cari;Emily Mibach; Bill Newell; Dave Price; Pat M; Sean Allen; Damon Silver; Rodriguez, Miguel; Raymond Goins;Human Relations Commission; dennis burns; DuJuan Green; Figueroa, Eric; Foley, Michael; Enberg, Nicholas;Barberini, Christopher; yolanda; EPA Today; Diana Diamond; Vara Ramakrishnan; Mickie Winkler; Wagner, April;Jeff Conrad; Lee, Craig; cromero@cityofepa.org; Lotus Fong; Marina Lopez; Cait James; Tim James; SalemAjluni; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Gardener, Liz Subject:Mob of Orthodox Jewish men chased Brooklyn woman after mistaking her for protester against Israeli security minister Date:Monday, April 28, 2025 10:22:12 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Mob of Orthodox Jewish men chased Brooklyn woman after mistaking her for protester against Israeli security minister Source: PBS NewsHour https://share.newsbreak.com/cu8w23lp?s=i0 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 131 Packet Pg. 304 of 351 From:Aram James To:Veenker, Vicki; Vicki Veenker Cc:assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Reckdahl, Keith; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leaderfor California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; Reckdahl, Keith; Lauing, Ed; josh@joshsalcman.com;Zelkha, Mila; Emily Mibach; Dave Price; Braden Cartwright; EPA Today; Gardener, Liz; Cait James; Tim James;Lewis james; Angel, David; Cribbs, Anne; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission;Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; board@pausd.org; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Mickie Winkler;Henry Etzkowitz; Bill Newell; Figueroa, Eric; Anna Griffin; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Jensen, Eric;<michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Foley, Michael; Dana St. George; Gerry Gras; Jeff Conrad; Jeff Rosen; JeffHayden; jay.boyarsky@da.sccgov.org Subject:Gaza Genocide on the Ballot as Canadians Head to the Polls Date:Sunday, April 27, 2025 10:14:11 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Gaza Genocide on the Ballot as Canadians Head to the Polls https://zeteo.com/p/gaza-genocide-on-ballot-canada-election? r=fjmzt&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 132 Packet Pg. 305 of 351 From:Light As Air BoatsTo:ParkRec CommissionSubject:Inflatable Canoes & Kayaks Best In Class! Date:Sunday, April 27, 2025 7:34:13 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. SHOP NOW Hi there! Loved by people world over! Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 133 Packet Pg. 306 of 351 See Camps & Parks Catalog See Resorts Catalog Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 134 Packet Pg. 307 of 351 SEE GUMOTEX INFLATABLES KAYAKS SEE SPINERA INFLATABLES KAYAKS SEE KOLIBRI INFLATABLES CANOES SEE SCOUT INFLATABLES & KAYAKS For Quantity Discounts or Questions, Call Andi Tel:706.619.6670 andi@lightasairboats.com Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 135 Packet Pg. 308 of 351 Explore Inflatable Kayaks Check Out Our Inflatable Canoes See Camps & Parks Catalog See Resorts Catalog Yours in Wind, Water, and Waves, - The Light As Air Boats Team We don’t want to spam you. If you're no longer interested in enjoying adventures out on the water Unsubscribe here. Light As Air Boats 13801 Walsingham Rd. Suite A-116 Largo, Florida 33774 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 136 Packet Pg. 309 of 351 From:Lythcott-Haims, Julie To:ParkRec Commission Cc:O"Kane, Kristen; Hartmann, Chase; LeDrew, Lance; Lythcott-Haims, Julie Subject:Re: May Fete Parade Invite Date:Saturday, April 26, 2025 6:38:10 PM Sadly I have an unmoveable conflict - giving a talk long scheduled. Julie Julie Lythcott-Haims Palo Alto City Council Member Click to make an Office Hours appointment On Apr 24, 2025, at 5:10ௗPM, ParkRec Commission <parkrec.commission@paloalto.gov> wrote: The below was included in your Public Comment packet this month, but also passing along this information directly. If you plan to participate in the parade, please RSVP to me by Friday, April 25th at lance.ledrew@paloalto.gov copied here. Good morning Palo Alto Dignitaries, We are excited to announce that the May Fete Children’s Parade will return on Saturday, May 3rd for its 101st year! This year’s theme, “Celebrate Growth” celebrates individual growth, community spirit and nurturing of relationships! Once again, this year’s event will have some of the many things the community has come to love about the May Fete: floats, pets, bands, classic cars, and the return of a horse team! And do not forget the wonderful May Fete Fair, sponsored by Kiwanis of Palo Alto and hosted in Heritage Park. As a Palo Alto Dignitary, we would like to welcome you to walk in the parade to help celebrate our youth and to celebrate your great work in the community! The Parade will start at 10AM at the corner of University Avenue and Emerson St. If you would like to join us, we ask that you check in at that location by 9:30AM. If you plan to participate in the parade, please RSVP to me by Friday, April 25th at lance.ledrew@paloalto.gov We are excited to see you at this year’s parade and please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you! Lance <image001.png>Lance LeDrew Recreation Coordinator – Special Events Community Services (650) 329-2478 | lance.ledrew@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org <image002.png><image003.jpg><image004.png><image005.png><image006.png> <image007.png> <image008.jpg> Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 137 Packet Pg. 310 of 351 From:Postmaster To:ParkRec Commission Subject:You have new held messages Date:Friday, April 25, 2025 4:02:08 PM Logo You have new held messages You can release all of your held messages and permit or block future emails from the senders, or manage messages individually. Release all Permit all Block all You can also manage held messages in your Personal Portal. Spam Policy imsurbhi40@gmail.com Are you looking for mobile building app 2025-04-25 12:22 Release Permit Block Release all Permit all Block all © 2019 Mimecast Services Limited. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 138 Packet Pg. 311 of 351 From:Jeanette To:ParkRec Commission Subject:Delayed Response - Out of Office Re: FW: May Fete Parade Invite Date:Thursday, April 24, 2025 5:10:39 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi. Thanks for being in touch with us. We are grateful for you. I'm out of the office this afternoon and on Fridays. I will respond to your email on Monday. Please hold tight, as you are important to Julie and me. Thank you for your patience. -- Jeanette Miller (she/her) Executive Coordinator | Julie Lythcott-Haims, Author/Speaker Cell | 408-431-9375 This message needs your attention This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 139 Packet Pg. 312 of 351 From:O"Kane, Kristen To:ParkRec Commission Subject:Automatic reply: May Fete Parade Invite Date:Thursday, April 24, 2025 5:10:24 PM Hello, I am currently out of the office and will return on Tuesday, April 29th. If you need assistance please contact Assistant Director Amanda Deml. Thanks, Kristen Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 140 Packet Pg. 313 of 351 From:Light As Air Boats To:ParkRec Commission Subject:We Are Pool Ready! Date:Thursday, April 24, 2025 9:38:44 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. SHOP NOW Hi there, Explore top-rated pool slides, climbing walls, chairs and starting platforms – fun & safety for all guests! Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 141 Packet Pg. 314 of 351 See Parks & Camps Catalogs See Resorts Catalog Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 142 Packet Pg. 315 of 351 See Parks & Camps Catalogs See Resorts Catalog For Questions, Customizations & Quotes Call Dave - Tel: 864.367.6161 dave@lightasairboats.com EXPLORE OUR SUMMER DEALS TODAY! Yours in Wind, Water, and Waves, - The Light As Air Boats Team Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 143 Packet Pg. 316 of 351 We don’t want to spam you. If you're no longer interested in enjoying adventures out on the water Unsubscribe here. Light As Air Boats 13801 Walsingham Rd. Suite A-116 Largo, Florida 33774 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 144 Packet Pg. 317 of 351 From:Postmaster To:ParkRec Commission Subject:You have new held messages Date:Wednesday, April 23, 2025 7:13:50 AM Logo You have new held messages You can release all of your held messages and permit or block future emails from the senders, or manage messages individually. Release all Permit all Block all You can also manage held messages in your Personal Portal. Spam Policy janeqpublic@myself.com Fw: UREGENT - CALL FOR ACTION - STOP FURTHER ELIMINATION OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC TENNIS COURTS - PALO ALTO CITY HALL 7PM 2025-04-22 16:20 Release Permit Block Release all Permit all Block all © 2019 Mimecast Services Limited. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 145 Packet Pg. 318 of 351 From:Hurjane Vongsachang To:ParkRec Commission Subject:Veto pickleball in Palo Alto Date:Wednesday, April 23, 2025 12:17:47 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City of PA, I am a PA resident and recently moved due to the quiet neighborhoods and abundance of tennis courts. The prestige that PA has is unmatched by other cities. It has come to my attention that more tennis courts at Mitchell park and potentially other park centers, are in danger of being converted to pickleball courts. This should be completely vetoed. Those playing on the courts are majority, if not all, not even PA residents. PA residents taxes are paying these courts to be maintained, yet we are not receiving the service we need. Which is more tennis courts. I am sending this message to cast my vote against pickleball, and to retain all tennis courts. There are plenty of other cities with facilities in neighboring towns that have plenty of pickleball courts and shops not be disrupting the quality and prestige of the tennis courts and neighborhoods in Palo Alto. Best, Hurjane Vongsachang Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 146 Packet Pg. 319 of 351 From:George Maxe To:Do, Lam Cc:ParkRec Commission; O"Kane, Kristen Subject:Re: FTSV - BAY - Timeline for Youth Area PPP? Date:Tuesday, April 22, 2025 5:27:20 PM Attachments:image018.png image019.png image021.png image016.png image017.png image020.png image015.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Thanks, Lam. I believe that Sarah and I met when we provided an in-person update to the Parks & Recreation Commission on 8/27. Our FTSV and Baylands tour on 9/17 included me, you, Steve and Kristen. I look forward to hearing back from you meeting with you two sometime soon. Best, George George Maxe President & CEO First Tee — Silicon Valley george@ftsv.org 408-288-2937 M/Tu/W/F — 10am-5pm Locations — Web Site On Apr 22, 2025, at 4:13 PM, Do, Lam <Lam.Do@paloalto.gov> wrote: Hello George, Thank you for reaching out. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 147 Packet Pg. 320 of 351 As Steve Castile is no longer working with the City, Division Manager Sarah Robustelli will be working with me on the public-private partnership. I think you briefly meet Sarah previously on a tour of the First Tee’s program and students on course. I’ll be in touch with you to set up another discussion meeting. Thank you, Lam Do (Please note and update your records of the City’s change in website URL and staff e-mail below.) LAM DO Superintendent Open Space, Parks, and Golf Community Services Department (650) 496-6997 | Lam.Do@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov From: George Maxe <george@ftsv.org> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2025 4:13 PM To: O'Kane, Kristen <Kristen.O'Kane@paloalto.gov> Cc: Do, Lam <Lam.Do@paloalto.gov>; ParkRec Commission <parkrec.commission@PaloAlto.gov> Subject: FTSV - BAY - Timeline for Youth Area PPP? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Becautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Kristen, I was so sorry to learn of Steve Castile’s resignation from Community Services. He catalyzed the City of Palo Alto and First Tee – Silicon Valley (FTSV) reaching an interim use agreement for Baylands Golf Links. The agreement specifies FTSV’s current use for our youth development program – after-school hours; Tuesdays to Fridays; 32 weeks/year (8-week seasons) – and expires on 28 February 2026. FTSV has endeavored for nearly 15 years to form a private-public partnership with the City to raise private funds to build out a “Youth Area” in the rarely-used open area between the driving range and Embarcadero Road. One of the reasons for the use agreement was to maintain momentum for reaching a partnership agreement. Community Services contracted the National Golf Foundation circa July 2023 to explore the ROI of adding a second deck to the driving range bays. Adding a second deck would Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 148 Packet Pg. 321 of 351 require the City to raise the driving range nets to ensure safety. Given the adjacency of the driving range and Youth Area clearly connects the two projects. To my knowledge, there has not been a recommendation made about such a project. FTSV is proud of our 16-year history at Baylands Golf Links and positive impact on local kids and teens. At present, we serve nearly 500 youth every year at Baylands with waiting lists every season. We could more than double that impact if the City would seriously engage with us about the Youth Area project. FTSV respectfully requests a timeline for earnestly exploring a private-public partnership with FTSV for the youth area. Thank you, in advance, for your response. Best, George Enclosure (Letter Attached) George Maxe President & CEO First Tee —Silicon Valley george@ftsv.org 408-288-2937 M/Tu/W/F — 10am-5pm Locations —Web Site Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 149 Packet Pg. 322 of 351 From:Do, Lam To:George Maxe Cc:ParkRec Commission; O"Kane, Kristen Subject:RE: FTSV - BAY - Timeline for Youth Area PPP? Date:Tuesday, April 22, 2025 4:13:09 PM Attachments:image001.png image015.png image016.png image017.png image018.png image019.png image020.png image021.png Hello George, Thank you for reaching out. As Steve Castile is no longer working with the City, Division Manager Sarah Robustelli will be working with me on the public-private partnership. I think you briefly meet Sarah previously on a tour of the First Tee’s program and students on course. I’ll be in touch with you to set up another discussion meeting. Thank you, Lam Do (Please note and update your records of the City’s change in website URL and staff e-mail below.) LAM DO Superintendent Open Space, Parks, and Golf Community Services Department (650) 496-6997 | Lam.Do@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov From: George Maxe <george@ftsv.org> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2025 4:13 PM To: O'Kane, Kristen <Kristen.O'Kane@paloalto.gov> Cc: Do, Lam <Lam.Do@paloalto.gov>; ParkRec Commission <parkrec.commission@PaloAlto.gov> Subject: FTSV - BAY - Timeline for Youth Area PPP? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Kristen, I was so sorry to learn of Steve Castile’s resignation from Community Services. He catalyzed the City of Palo Alto and First Tee – Silicon Valley (FTSV) reaching an interim use agreement for Baylands Golf Links. The agreement specifies FTSV’s current use for our you Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 150 Packet Pg. 323 of 351 i This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. Mark Safe Report CGBANNERINDICATOR Dear Kristen, I was so sorry to learn of Steve Castile’s resignation from Community Services. He catalyzed the City of Palo Alto and First Tee – Silicon Valley (FTSV) reaching an interim use agreement for Baylands Golf Links. The agreement specifies FTSV’s current use for our youth development program – after-school hours; Tuesdays to Fridays; 32 weeks/year (8-week seasons) – and expires on 28 February 2026. FTSV has endeavored for nearly 15 years to form a private-public partnership with the City to raise private funds to build out a “Youth Area” in the rarely-used open area between the driving range and Embarcadero Road. One of the reasons for the use agreement was to maintain momentum for reaching a partnership agreement. Community Services contracted the National Golf Foundation circa July 2023 to explore the ROI of adding a second deck to the driving range bays. Adding a second deck would require the City to raise the driving range nets to ensure safety. Given the adjacency of the driving range and Youth Area clearly connects the two projects. To my knowledge, there has not been a recommendation made about such a project. FTSV is proud of our 16-year history at Baylands Golf Links and positive impact on local kids and teens. At present, we serve nearly 500 youth every year at Baylands with waiting lists every season. We could more than double that impact if the City would seriously engage with us about the Youth Area project. FTSV respectfully requests a timeline for earnestly exploring a private-public partnership with FTSV for the youth area. Thank you, in advance, for your response. Best, George Enclosure (Letter Attached) George Maxe President & CEO First Tee —Silicon Valley george@ftsv.org 408-288-2937 Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 151 Packet Pg. 324 of 351 M/Tu/W/F — 10am-5pm Locations — Web Site Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 152 Packet Pg. 325 of 351 From:Postmaster To:ParkRec Commission Subject:You have new held messages Date:Tuesday, April 22, 2025 12:14:50 PM Logo You have new held messages You can release all of your held messages and permit or block future emails from the senders, or manage messages individually. Release all Permit all Block all You can also manage held messages in your Personal Portal. Spam Policy socialmedia@kaboom.org Get outside and play- It's Earth Day! 2025-04-22 09:17 Release Permit Block Release all Permit all Block all © 2019 Mimecast Services Limited. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 153 Packet Pg. 326 of 351 From:Light As Air BoatsTo:ParkRec CommissionSubject:Give Them An Endless Ride! Date:Tuesday, April 22, 2025 9:32:57 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. SHOP NOW Designed specifically for commercial use! Parks & Camps Catalog Resorts Catalog Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 154 Packet Pg. 327 of 351 Check out the tough, heavy-duty rotating tube designed for commercial use. The ENDLESS RIDE is always a top attraction for watersports rentals! Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 155 Packet Pg. 328 of 351 5-layers of fabric makes the Spinera Profession Banana Boats the Choice for Rentals! Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 156 Packet Pg. 329 of 351 Rental towable designed specifically for operators, water ski schools, and rental stations. Built with durable materials to ensure safety and a fun experience for all users. SEE ALL SPINERA INFLATABLES HERE Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 157 Packet Pg. 330 of 351 Parks & Camps Catalog Resorts Catalog For Quantity Discounts or Questions, Call Andi Tel:706.619.6670 andi@lightasairboats.com Yours in Wind, Water, and Waves, The Light As Air Boats Team Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 158 Packet Pg. 331 of 351 We don’t want to spam you.If you're no longer interested in enjoying adventures out on the water Unsubscribe here. Light As Air Boats 13801 Walsingham Rd. Suite A-116 Largo, Florida 33774 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 159 Packet Pg. 332 of 351 From:sales=openyard.com@smartr.openyard.com on behalf of OpenYard To:ParkRec Commission Subject:Sitewide Savings on Field Equipment! Date:Tuesday, April 22, 2025 8:33:21 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. View in Browser openyard SOCCER GOALS SOCCER NETS LACROSSE TRAINING DISCOVER OPENYARD The trusted source for top-quality soccer goals, nets, & field equipment since 2003! Lowest Prices Guaranteed Massive Selection Fast Shipping Now until April 30th Fill your cart, request a free quote, and score unbeatable savings! OpenYard.com Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 160 Packet Pg. 333 of 351 Shop Now Reach us at: 888-575-2178 Sales@Openyard.com Unsubscribe Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 161 Packet Pg. 334 of 351 From:Aram James To:Doug Minkler; Raymond Goins; Bill Newell; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; josh@joshsalcman.com; Josh Becker; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Henry Etzkowitz; Zelkha, Mila; Foley, Michael; Andrew Bigelow; Reifschneider, James; Perron, Zachary; Kaloma Smith; Ed Lauing; Reckdahl, Keith; Reckdahl, Keith; Lotus Fong; Friends of Cubberley; Liz Kniss; Roberta Ahlquist; Freddie.Quintana@sen.ca.gov; Bains, Paul; Patricia.Guerrero@jud.ca.gov; cromero@cityofepa.org; rabrica@cityofepa.org; Vara Ramakrishnan; Dana St. George; Gerry Gras; Jeff Conrad; Jeff Hayden; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Council, City; Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki; Dave Price; Emily Mibach; Braden Cartwright; board@pausd.org; board@valleywater.org; Dennis Upton; Daniel Kottke; Angel, David; Human Relations Commission; Gardener, Liz; Mickie Winkler; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Rodriguez, Miguel; Damon Silver; Sheree Roth; Lauing, Ed; ladoris cordell; Palo Alto Free Press; Donna Wallach; EPA Today; Holman, Karen (external); Tom DuBois; DuJuan Green; dennis burns; Jensen, Eric; Figueroa, Eric; Afanasiev, Alex; Gennady Sheyner; Blackshire, Geoffrey; Diana Diamond; Wagner, April; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Nat Fisher; boardfeedback@smcgov.org; BoardOperations; Yolanda Conaway; Don Austin; editor@paweekly.com; Patrice Ventresca; Rowena Chiu; Templeton, Cari; Cribbs, Anne Subject:Protect Ethnic Studies in California Schools Date:Monday, April 21, 2025 10:44:59 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Protect Ethnic Studies in California Schools https://actionnetwork.org/letters/protect-ethnic-studies-in-california-schools Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 162 Packet Pg. 335 of 351 From:George Maxe To:O"Kane, Kristen Cc:Do, Lam; ParkRec Commission Subject:FTSV - BAY - Timeline for Youth Area PPP? Date:Monday, April 21, 2025 4:15:36 PM Attachments:FTSV 2025 BAY PACS Status Letter 04-21.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Kristen, I was so sorry to learn of Steve Castile’s resignation from Community Services. He catalyzed the City of Palo Alto and First Tee – Silicon Valley (FTSV) reaching an interim use agreement for Baylands Golf Links. The agreement specifies FTSV’s current use for our youth development program – after-school hours; Tuesdays to Fridays; 32 weeks/year (8-week seasons) – and expires on 28 February 2026. FTSV has endeavored for nearly 15 years to form a private-public partnership with the City to raise private funds to build out a “Youth Area” in the rarely-used open area between the driving range and Embarcadero Road. One of the reasons for the use agreement was to maintain momentum for reaching a partnership agreement. Community Services contracted the National Golf Foundation circa July 2023 to explore the ROI of adding a second deck to the driving range bays. Adding a second deck would require the City to raise the driving range nets to ensure safety. Given the adjacency of the driving range and Youth Area clearly connects the two projects. To my knowledge, there has not been a recommendation made about such a project. FTSV is proud of our 16-year history at Baylands Golf Links and positive impact on local kids and teens. At present, we serve nearly 500 youth every year at Baylands with waiting lists every season. We could more than double that impact if the City would seriously engage with us about the Youth Area project. FTSV respectfully requests a timeline for earnestly exploring a private-public partnership with FTSV for the youth area. Thank you, in advance, for your response. Best, George Enclosure (Letter Attached) George Maxe President & CEO First Tee — Silicon Valley george@ftsv.org Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 163 Packet Pg. 336 of 351 408-288-2937 M/Tu/W/F — 10am-5pm Locations — Web Site Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 164 Packet Pg. 337 of 351 From:Aram James To:Perron, Zachary; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Binder, Andrew; Council, City; Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Shikada, Ed; Roberta Ahlquist; Foley, Michael; Dana St. George; Gerry Gras; Pat M; Sean Allen; Afanasiev, Alex; Gennady Sheyner; Henry Etzkowitz; Dave Price; Braden Cartwright; Bill Newell; Diana Diamond; Damon Silver; Emily Mibach; EPA Today; Lee, Craig; Cribbs, Anne; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Figueroa, Eric; Jensen, Eric; Sheriff Transparency Subject:Video: Black Oakland Chef Tased, Detained In Dallas, Says He Was Wrongfully Accused Of Drug Possession Date:Saturday, April 19, 2025 10:01:40 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Video: Black Oakland Dallas, Says He WasWrongfully Accused Of Drug Possessi Video: Black Oakland Chef Tased, Detained In Dallas, Says He Was Wrongfully Accused Of Drug Possession Source: SFist https://share.newsbreak.com/cp70vscw?s=i0 Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 165 Packet Pg. 338 of 351 From:Jose Carrasco To:ParkRec Commission Subject:Mitchell park Date:Friday, April 18, 2025 5:42:32 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. To whom it may concern, My name is Jose and I’m a resident of Palo Alto. I wanted to inquire about providing and servicing a vending machine in Mitchell Park. Thank you! Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 166 Packet Pg. 339 of 351 From:Isabella Lee To:ParkRec Commission Subject:FREE In-Person + Virtual: Wild & Scenic Film Festival 2025 May 17 hosted by POST Date:Friday, April 18, 2025 2:14:47 PM Attachments:WSFF 1.pdfWSFF 2.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Friends and Families of the Palo Alto Department of Parks and Recreation, My name is Isabella Lee, and I’m the Community Engagement Intern for Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST). I’m reaching out today to invite you and your community to attend our free in-person event and online broadcast of the 2025 Wild & Scenic Film Festival on Saturday, May 17th, from 5:30 PM - 9 PM at the Smithwick Theatre in Los Altos. Premiering live both in-person and online on Saturday, May 17th at 5:30 PM. Join POST for an unforgettable evening at the 2025 Wild & Scenic Film Festival, where inspiring environmental films, live music, and a lively Community Fair come together for a night of fun and connection! The Wild & Scenic Film Festival is the largest film festival of its kind, showcasing the best and brightest in environmental and adventure films. Festival viewers can expect to see award-winning, environmentally inspired short films and learn more about POST and our partners’ work here on the Peninsula and in the South Bay. In-person activities will include: This message needs your attention This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 167 Packet Pg. 340 of 351 Live showing of 9 short films in the Smithwick Theatre at Foothill College, Los Altos Explore 20+ community booths Connect with local organizations and learn about environmental initiatives in your area Enjoy live music, free pizza, and the chance to win raffle prizes Chance to get up close with birds of prey thanks to our special guests—falconers! Register now to reserve your spot, and don’t miss your chance to win fantastic raffle prizes just by attending in person! Thanks! I included a printable flyer. Please print it out and post it to your local bulletin board or forward it to any other listservs that might be interested in this event. Hope to see you there, and please don’t hesitate to reach out with any questions. Isabella Lee POST Community Engagement Intern Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 168 Packet Pg. 341 of 351 From:Giovanni Nunez To:ParkRec Commission Cc:Lucas Riphagen Subject:TriActive USA Outdoor Fitness Equipment - Palo Alto Date:Thursday, April 17, 2025 3:08:20 PM Attachments:TriActive USA Park Catalog 2025.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello, I hope you are doing well! My name is Giovanni and I'm with TriActive USA, a leading manufacturer of outdoor fitness equipment made 100% in the USA. I wanted to reach out to inquire if the city of Palo Alto is interested in enhancing its parks with durable, low-maintenance outdoor fitness equipment? Our products are designed to withstand all weather conditions and have been installed in hundreds of locations nationwide. You can explore our offerings on our website: TriActiveUSA.com, and I've attached our catalog for your convenience. To simplify our purchasing process, we have a contract with NPPGov cooperative, making procurement easier and eliminating the need for competitive bidding. Feel free to reach out if you have any questions or need assistance with any park projects. Sincerely, Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 169 Packet Pg. 342 of 351 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Veenker, Vicki Cc:Josh Becker; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; Jay Boyarsky; Jeff Rosen; Jeff Conrad; h.etzko@gmail.com; Foley, Michael; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Perron, Zachary; board@pausd.org; board@valleywater.org; BoardOperations; Damon Silver; Rodriguez, Miguel; Sean Allen; Pat M;Sheree Roth; Lotus Fong; Lori Meyers; Diana Diamond; Dave Price; Palo Alto Free Press; Figueroa, Eric;cromero@cityofepa.org; rabrica@cityofepa.org; Vara Ramakrishnan; Gennady Sheyner; Emily Mibach;editor@almanacnews.com; Ed Lauing; Reckdahl, Keith; Daniel Kottke; Angel, David; ParkRec Commission;planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; city.council@menlopark.gov; Nash, Betsy; Wagner, April; Zelkha, Mila; Mickie Winkler Subject:Re: Another Columbia activist arrested — tell Schumer and Gillibrand to speak up Date:Wednesday, April 16, 2025 12:34:29 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 11:48ௗAM Gerry Gras <> wrote: you probably know about this, buy just in case. gerry -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject:Another Columbia activist arrested — tell Schumer and Gillibrand to speak up Date:Tue, 15 Apr 2025 22:47:11 +0000 From:Stop AIPAC <team@citizensagainstaipac.com> Reply-To:team@citizensagainstaipac.com To: Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 170 Packet Pg. 343 of 351 Gerald, Yesterday, Palestinian Columbia University student and legal permanent resident Mohsen Mahdawi was handcuffed and detained by immigration authorities. He was attending his final citizenship interview after doing everything he was supposed to do and living in the United States for 10 years. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 171 Packet Pg. 344 of 351 Mahdawi arrived at a Vermont immigration office on Monday morning, expecting to complete the last step toward becoming an American citizen. Instead, he was met by officers who arrested him without explanation, refused to disclose where they were taking him, and carted him away in handcuffs. Mahdawi's arrest follows Mahmoud Khalil's, also a Palestinian activist who attended Columbia and is now being held at a detention center in Louisiana. Both students co-founded the Palestinian Student Union at Columbia in the fall of 2023. These arrests are a pattern. Mahdawi's attorney, Luna Droubi, was unequivocal: "Mohsen Mahdawi was detained by the Trump administration as a direct Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 172 Packet Pg. 345 of 351 response to his advocacy for Palestinian rights and his identity as a Palestinian. This detention is an effort to silence those who voice opposition to the atrocities occurring in Gaza. It also violates constitutional rights." The Trump administration is trying to silence immigrants who dare to speak out against the complicity of the United States in genocide. And they will NOT stop there. Every one of us is at risk. Citizens Against AIPAC Corruption is calling on Senators Schumer and Gillibrand to IMMEDIATELY denounce this pattern of targeting Columbia anti-genocide students and activists. As representatives of New York, they have a responsibility to protect the constitutional rights of all students. The shameful truth is that Schumer and Gillibrand have been among the top recipients of AIPAC and pro-Israel lobby money, taking millions of dollars combined. That means they face intense pressure from AIPAC to remain silent. And they haven’t just remained "silent." Both have publicly condemned aspects of the protests, focusing on supposed lawlessness, antisemitism, and campus safety. Neither has addressed concerns about the rights of pro-Palestinian students. That's why we are building to become STRONGER than AIPAC. This is no time for cowardice. Please stand with us to demand immediate action. Your donation of $25, $50, $100, or any amount powers CAAC's work to mobilize public response and defend free speech and due process in the face of this dangerous assault. This is about more than one student. It's about the right to speak freely without fear of persecution, the promise of due process, and the principle that America welcomes those seeking a better life, regardless of where they were born. While Mahdawi sits in detention for the "crime" of advocating for his people, we cannot and will not remain silent. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 173 Packet Pg. 346 of 351 FREE PALESTINE. For peace and justice, The entire team at Citizens Against AIPAC Corruption DONATE TO CAAC Citizens Against AIPAC Corruption is the only national political organization established to explicitly challenge and dismantle the political power of AIPAC. CAAC works to elect candidates who reject AIPAC money, to defeat lawmakers who take their money, and expose AIPAC’s corruption for all the world to see. Visit citizensagainstaipac.com to learn more. And please contribute to help us expand our reach DONATE >> Paid for by Citizens Against AIPAC Corruption Citizens Against AIPAC Corruption 600 1st Ave Ste 102 PMB92159 Seattle, , WA 98104 United States If you believe you received this message in error or wish to no longer receive email from us, please unsubscribe. Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 174 Packet Pg. 347 of 351 From:Aram James To:Josh Becker; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; Reckdahl, Keith; Ed Lauing; Foley, Michael; Friends of Cubberley; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Templeton, Cari; Angel, David; Cribbs, Anne; Jay Boyarsky; Jeff Conrad; Jeff Hayden; Jeff Rosen; Baker, Rob; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Dana St. George; Gerry Gras; Gennady Sheyner; Dave Price; EPA Today; MGR-Melissa Stevenson Diaz; Diana Diamond; Bill Newell; Damon Silver; Rodriguez, Miguel Cc:Veenker, Vicki; Council, City; Binder, Andrew; Perron, Zachary; Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Shikada,Ed; Liz Kniss; Gardener, Liz; Lotus Fong; Roberta Ahlquist; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations;boardfeedback@smcgov.org; Sean Allen; Pat M Subject:A pro-Israel group says it gave US list of protesters to deport, drawing alarm from students’ supporters Date:Wednesday, April 16, 2025 9:55:56 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i Source: CNN A pro-Israel group says it gave US list of protesters to deport, drawing alarm from students’ supporters A pro-Israel group says it gave US list of protesters to deport, drawing alarm from students’ supporters | CNN https://search.app/MazPCjuVmooAYbmC7 Shared via the Google app This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 175 Packet Pg. 348 of 351 From:Jenny LewisTo:ParkRec CommissionSubject:An inclusive and scalable community fitness experience Date:Wednesday, April 16, 2025 6:11:00 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. i Outdoor-Fit banner This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. Mark Safe Report Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 176 Packet Pg. 349 of 351 Sweet Bay Park Fitness Park Discover the Apollo Multigym Versatility, adjustability, and over 56 exercises - outdoors The Apollo Multigym is a unique outdoor fitness solution designed to deliver full-body workouts for users of all fitness levels. With the ability to perform over 56 different exercises, the Apollo targets every major muscle group, providing real, scalable exercise options in a durable multigym system. Why It Stands Out Unlike most outdoor fitness products, the Apollo incorporates Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 177 Packet Pg. 350 of 351 adjustability - a core feature typically found only in indoor gym equipment. This allows both beginners and advanced users to train effectively on the same equipment by modifying resistance, reps, or intensity to suit their individual fitness levels. The Apollo brings the inclusivity and customization of an indoor gym to outdoor environments, making high-quality workouts accessible in parks for the community to benefit from and enjoy. Exclusive Features of the Apollo Multigym - 100 lb. adjustable weight stack (in 10 lb. increments) - Adjustable assist system on chin-up and dip station - Adjustable back extension station - Access to 56+ different exercises in one compact unit If you want to offer an ASTM-compliant, versatile, inclusive, and effective outdoor gym, let the Apollo Multigym be your choice. Request a quote for your project Apollo-Front Apollo-Left Item A 4.16.25 5.20.25 Public Comment Item A: Staff Report Pg. 178 Packet Pg. 351 of 351