HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-09-27 Planning & transportation commission Agenda PacketREVISED
_______________________
1.Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2.The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3.The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Planning & Transportation Commission
Special Meeting Agenda: September 27, 2017
Council Chambers
250 Hamilton Avenue
5:00 PM
Call to Order / Roll Call
Oral Communications
The public may speak to any item not on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,2
Agenda Changes, Additions, and Deletions
The Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management.
City Official Reports
1.Assistant Directors Report, Meeting Schedule and Assignments
Study Session
Public Comment is Permitted. Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3
Action Items
Public Comment is Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Fifteen (15) minutes, plus three (3) minutes rebuttal.
All others: Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3
2.PUBLIC HEARING. Planning and Transportation Commission Recommendation to the
City Council on the Draft Comprehensive Plan Update, with a focus on the
Transportation and Land Use Element, and Recommendation Regarding the Final
Environmental Impact Report
Approval of Minutes
Public Comment is Permitted. Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3
3.August 30, 2017 Draft Planning & Transportation Commission Meeting MinutesDraft August 30,
2017 Meeting
Minutes
REVISED
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Committee Items
Commissioner Questions, Comments or Announcements
Adjournment
REVISED
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Palo Alto Planning & Transportation Commission
Commissioner Biographies, Present and Archived Agendas and Reports are available online:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/ptc/default.asp. The PTC Commission members are:
Chair Michael Alcheck
Vice Chair Asher Waldfogel
Commissioner Przemek Gardias
Commissioner Ed Lauing
Commissioner Susan Monk
Commissioner Eric Rosenblum
Commissioner Doria Summa
Get Informed and Be Engaged!
View online: http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city-of-palo-alto or on Channel 26.
Show up and speak. Public comment is encouraged. Please complete a speaker request card
located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Commission
Secretary prior to discussion of the item.
Write to us. Email the PTC at: Planning.Commission@CityofPaloAlto.org. Letters can be
delivered to the Planning & Community Environment Department, 5th floor, City Hall, 250
Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301. Comments received by 2:00 PM two Tuesdays preceding
the meeting date will be included in the agenda packet. Comments received afterward through
2:00 PM the day of the meeting will be presented to the Commission at the dais.
Material related to an item on this agenda submitted to the PTC after distribution of the
agenda packet is available for public inspection at the address above.
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@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least
24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service.
Planning & Transportation Commission
Staff Report (ID # 7775)
Report Type: City Official Reports Meeting Date: 9/27/2017
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
(650) 329-2442
Summary Title: City Official Report
Title: Assistant Directors Report, Meeting Schedule and Assignments
From: Hillary Gitelman
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) review and
comment as appropriate.
Background
This document includes the following items:
PTC Meeting Schedule
PTC Representative to City Council (Rotational Assignments)
Tentative Future Agenda
Commissioners are encouraged to contact Yolanda Cervantes
(Yolanda.Cervantes@CityofPaloAlto.org) of any planned absences one month in advance, if
possible, to ensure availability of a PTC quorum.
PTC Representative to City Council is a rotational assignment where the designated
commissioner represents the PTC’s affirmative and dissenting perspectives to Council for quasi-
judicial and legislative matters. Representatives are encouraged to review the City Council
agendas (http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/agendas/council.asp) for the months of their
respective assignments to verify if attendance is needed or contact staff. Prior PTC meetings are
available online at http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city-of-palo-alto/boards-
and-commissions/planning-and-transportation-commission.
The Tentative Future Agenda provides a summary of upcoming projects or discussion items.
Attachments:
Attachment A: September 27, 2017 Tentative Agenda (DOCX)
Planning & Transportation Commission
2017 Meeting Schedule & Assignments
2017 Schedule
Meeting Dates Time Location Status Planned Absences
1/11/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
1/25/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular CANCELLED
2/8/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular Waldfogel
2/22/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
3/8/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular Monk, Waldfogel
3/29/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
4/12/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
4/26/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
5/10/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular Rosenblum, Summa,
5/31/2017 6:00PM Council Chambers Regular Alcheck
6/14/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular Monk,Waldfogel
6/28/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular Alcheck
7/12/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular Rosenblum, Waldfogel
7/26/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular Alcheck, Lauing
8/09/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular Rosenblum
8/30/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
9/13/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
9/27/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
10/11/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
10/25/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
11/08/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
11/29/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
12/13/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular
12/27/2017 6:00 PM Council Chambers CANCELLED
2018 Assignments - Council Representation (primary/backup)
January February March April May June
Michael Alcheck Eric Rosenblum Asher Waldfogel Ed Lauing Przemek Gardias Eric Rosenblum
July August September October November December
Asher Waldfogel Ed Lauing Doria Summa Przemek Gardias Doria Summa Michael Alcheck
Subcommittees
Planning & Transportation Commission
2017 Tentative Future Agenda
September 11, 2017 Draft-All Dates and Topics Subject to Change
The Following Items are Tentative and Subject to Change:
Meeting Dates Topics
October 11 Downtown Parking Management #2
North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Scoping
October 25
Comp Plan Implementation Ordinance
Stanford GUP 2018: DEIR Comment Letter
PF Zone Parking and Development Standards Amendment
November 8 Title 18 Code Clean-up
November 29 PTC Annual Report to Council
December 13 ADU Six Month Report
Eichler Design Guidelines and Potential Zone Changes
Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Implementation Update
Planning & Transportation Commission
Staff Report (ID # 8100)
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 9/27/2017
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
(650) 329-2442
Summary Title: Comp Plan Update: Putting It Together and Final
Recommendation
Title: PUBLIC HEARING. Planning and Transportation Commission
Recommendation to the City Council on the Draft
Comprehensive Plan Update, with a focus on the
Transportation and Land Use Element, and Recommendation
Regarding the Final Environmental Impact Report
From: Hillary Gitelman
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) review and consider
the Comprehensive Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and take the following
action(s):
Review the attached Draft Consolidated PTC Input List on the Transportation and Land
Use Elements of the June 30 Draft Comprehensive Plan Update (CPU) (See Attachment
A) and decide which comments should be incorporated into PTC’s Highest Priority
Changes to the CPU (Table 3 below) and forwarded to Council.
Review the Land Use Section of the Implementation Plan Table and provide comments
and/or recommendations if desired.
Adopt a Motion approving the transmittal of a report to the City Council on the
proposed June 30 Draft Comprehensive Plan Update that:
o Recommends the PTC’s Highest Priority Changes to the Transportation and Land
Use Elements and the CPU (Table 3 as amended by the PTC at the September 27,
2017 meeting) ;
o Transmits the entire consolidated list of PTC comments on the Transportation
and Land Use Elements ( see Attachment B, ), including the consensus comments
shown in Table 2;
o Transmits the minutes from the PTC hearings on the Comprehensive Plan Update
( See Attachment C);
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2
o Transmits the PTC comments/changes to the Land Use Section of the
Implementation Plan Table; and
o Recommends certification of the Comprehensive Plan Update Final
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated August 30, 2017 as completed in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and reflecting
the lead agency’s independent judgment and analysis.
Report Summary
At the September 27 meeting, Commissioners will be asked to complete their recommendation
to the City Council on the Transportation and Land Use Elements of the June 30 Draft
Comprehensive Plan Update and the Final EIR. This is the sixth PTC public hearing on the
Comprehensive Plan Update. The Commission discussed the Transportation and Land Use
Elements at four previous meetings and received the Final EIR on August 30, 2017.
The first action at the September 27 meeting will be to review the attached Draft Consolidated
PTC Comments for Discussion List on the Transportation and Land Use Elements (See
Attachment A) and decide which comments should be incorporated into PTC’s Highest Priority
Changes to the CPU (Table 3) and forwarded to Council. The Commission may also wish to
review the Land Use Section of the Implementation Table. The Commission will then make its
recommendation on its report to the Council on the Land Use and Transportation Elements of
the Comprehensive Plan Update and the Final EIR.
Background
This is the sixth PTC public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan Update. At the beginning of
July, the PTC was sent a bound copy of the June 30, 2017 draft of the Comp Plan, which is being
used throughout the PTC’s review. The Comprehensive Plan Update is available at
http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/07/PACompPlan_June30_PTC_webreduced.pdf.
The PTC has decided to focus its review on the Transportation and Land Use Elements. At the
July 12 PTC meeting, the PTC received a staff report that included an overview of the
Comprehensive Plan Update legal requirements and an overview of key issues in the Land Use
and Transportation Elements. This is a link to that report:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/58650.
At the July 12th meeting, the schedule shown below was agreed to by the Commission.
Table 1. PTC Comprehensive Plan Review Schedule (Revised 9.14.17)
Month/Date Topic
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3
Month/Date Topic
June
June 30 Start of 90-day PTC review period
July
July 12
7/12 PTC Hearing
Comp Plan Orientation
July 26 7/26 PTC Hearing
Review the Transportation Element
August
Aug. 9
8/ 9 PTC Hearing
Transportation: Receive PTC comments on Transportation Goals T-1
to T-8 and continue discussion to 8.30.17
Land Use: Review Goals L-1 to L-4
Aug. 30
8/30 PTC Hearing
Transportation: Continued review of Transportation Element Land
Use: Review PTC comments on Goals L-1 to L-4 and Review of Land
Use Goals L-5 to L-10
September
Sept. 1 Final EIR Transmitted to the Commission
Sept. 13
9/13 PTC Hearing
Begin the review of the highest priority PTC recommendations to the
City Council for comments/changes to the Comp Plan Update.
Sept. 27
9/27 PTC Hearing
Final Review; Recommendation to Council on the Land Use and
Transportation Elements and the Final EIR
Sept. 30 End of 90-day PTC review period
October
October 23 The City Council is currently scheduled to receive and review the PTC
Report and Recommendations regarding the CPU and the Final EIR
November
November 13 The Council is currently scheduled to take final action on the CPU on
November 13, 2017.
Source: Planning & Community Environment, September 14, 2017
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4
At the July 26, August 9, August 30 meetings, the PTC reviewed and commented on the Land
Use and Transportation Elements. Some additional Commission comments were submitted in
writing on September 5. The staff and consultants took all these comments and created a list
for each Element that combines similar comments, organizes them by Land Use and
Transportation goal numbers and notes where the staff and consultants believe there was
consensus among PTC members (See Attachment B). The comments identified as consensus
are shown below in Table 2 below.
Table 2: PTC consensus comments
PTC COMMENT CONSENSUS?
Land Use Element Overall/General
The Element should place more emphasis on creating neighborhoods, not just building housing units.
Consensus
Land Use Element Overall/General
Goals, policies, and programs throughout should be clear and actionable, and the City should be able to track
progress toward achievement.
Consensus
Transportation Element Overall/General
Don’t build the Plan around specific technologies. The ultimate consequences of new or emerging trends such
as transportation network companies (TNCs – e.g. Lyft, Uber) or autonomous vehicles may be positive or
negative and cannot be predicted.
Consensus
Transportation Element Narrative and Maps
Geng Road improvement is too specific for the Comp Plan. Re-state more broadly as an improvement, or a
policy, to reduce traffic on East Bayshore Road.
Consensus
Transportation Element Narrative and Maps
Support for Caltrain grade separation. Consensus
Transportation Element Goal T-1: Sustainable Transportation
Program T1.2.2: Add reference to stable, sustained funding for the TMA, but don’t be proscriptive or limit the
City’s options for funding.
Consensus
Transportation Element Goal T-4: Neighborhood Impacts
Policy T4.1: Policy should recognize that residential arterials, along with local and collector streets, are also
school commute corridors. Policy should state that safety on residential arterials is also important. Consensus
Transportation Element Goal T-6: Road Safety
Policy T-6.6: Policy and related programs discuss education for bicyclists. Language should be updated to
reflect that pedestrian safety is also included.
Consensus
Transportation Element Goal T-8: Regional Collaboration and Coordination
Consider adding a policy statement about a potential future High Speed Rail station and/or other aspects of
High Speed Rail.
Consensus
Source: Department of Planning & Community Environment Based on Commission input at meetings in July and
August, 2017.
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment Department Page 5
At the August 30 meeting, the Commission determined that its report to the City Council would
have more impact and be more persuasive if the Commission identified its highest priority
comments and recommended changes. Under the process agreed to by the Commission, each
Commissioner identified a total of ten comments/changes from both the Transportation and
Land Use Elements that the Commissioner wanted to discuss and recommend as the highest
priorities to the City Council. Each Commissioner brought their list of priorities to the
September 13 PTC meeting.
At the September 13 meeting, staff collated these priority lists and identified comments that
had received votes from two or more Commissioners. This collating was done quickly at the
beginning of the meeting. Staff identified five items that received 4 votes for discussion, nine
items that received 3 votes, and five items that received 2 votes. During the course of the
meeting, Commissioners noted some tallying errors. Staff went back after the meeting,
rechecked the tally and corrected the errors. Attachment A, the Draft Consolidated PTC
Comments for Discussion List on the Transportation and Land Use Elements, is a corrected
table. One comment, number 10 on Attachment A, that had in fact received two votes but was
inadvertently left off the list, was added to this Table. A few other comments received more
votes than was originally indicated and the correct number of votes is shown on Attachment A.
On September 13, the PTC discussed seven comments as shown on Table 3. Commissioners
approved motions that incorporate the PTC’s recommendation on the action the Council should
take on each of the issues the Commission identified as priorities.
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment Department Page 6
Table 3: PTC Highest Priority Changes to the Comp Plan for Council Consideration
ITEM ORIGINAL PTC COMMENT MOTION VOTE
1 Land Use Element Overall/ General
We need to expand our stock of family-oriented housing.
Where do we have spaces to accommodate this use? How
do we ensure new neighborhoods receive full investment
in schools, parks, adjacent commercial districts and other
services we traditionally offer to neighborhoods. Our
current neighborhoods are built out, and don’t provide
substantial spaces for new family-oriented development.
In light of Palo Alto’s traditional family
orientation, we need housing policies that
encourage building more family-oriented
housing for all demographics. The PTC
recommends that the Council add policies to
Goals L-4 and L-5 to accommodate larger
scale family-oriented housing development
in retail and commercial districts, and
policies to ensure school and other service
impacts are fully mitigated.
5:2
2 Land Use Element Narrative and Maps
The distinction between commercial districts and
employment districts is a fundamental linchpin of the
previous comp plan that largely seems lost in the draft.
We need to test the draft commercial district definition to
ensure it still provides space in the commercial districts
for the sort of walkable services the neighborhoods
expect. These include not just retail, but also services like
doctors, dentists, veterinarians, accountants, lawyers,
therapists, auto repair… Also spaces for not-for-profits,
maker spaces, performance spaces, clubs, dance and
music schools, gymnastics and other uses catering to the
entire age range including families, kids, and seniors. We
need to test that retail includes spaces where lower
margin and more specialized retail businesses can
operate. OR we need to look at some new definitions for
mixed use districts so we don’t undermine commercial
districts. We also need to discuss whether the land use
map contains proper spaces for neighborhood services.
The PTC recommends that the Council
strengthen policies supporting walkable
neighborhoods to ensure that space for
professional and personal services as well as
retail uses is available near neighborhoods,
recognizing that all of these uses are
desirable in thriving commercial centers.
Similar attention is needed to provide space
to accommodate non-profits and small
medical offices in our community. (Note:
After an extensive discussion of this item,
the Commission approved a motion to have
staff prepare a statement that summarized
the Commission’s recommendation. At the
Commission’s request, this language was
developed by staff to reflect the
Commission’s discussion.)
7:0
3 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management
Some PTC members felt that the Citywide growth cap on
office/R&D development and annual limit on office/R&D
development (enacted as a separate ordinance) were
appropriate growth management tools. Others expressed
that the consensus at the 2015 Our Palo Alto Summit was
that a Citywide growth cap is not the right tool, and
policies should manage the impacts of office/R&D growth
(such as traffic) rather than setting a cap on square
footage.
The PTC recommends that the Council keep
the growth cap, focus on offsets and quality
of life and other indication metrics that are
based on the impact of development,
including traffic, noise, pollution, etc. Set
specific goals for a couple of key quality of
life measures and other indication metrics.
4:3
4 Land Use Element Goal L-1: Growth Management
We need a strong commitment to creating BMR housing
inventory for purchase and rental. It is too tentative
appearing at a program level. Suggest we make Program
L1.3.1 into a separate policy – perhaps having a
quantifiable goal for ten years in the future.
The PTC supports a strong commitment to
creating BMR housing inventory for
purchase and rental. It is too tentative
appearing at a program level. The PTC
recommends that the Council make Program
L1.3.1 into a separate policy consistent with
and in support of the quantified goals for
housing production in the adopted Housing
Element.
7:0
5 Land Use Element Goal L-4:Commercial Centers & Hotels
Support for Program L4.6.1 to prepare a Coordinated
Area Plan for Downtown, which is a huge undertaking.
Revise the Program to add that the Coordinated Area Plan
should consider converting parts of University Avenue to
a pedestrian-only zone.
The PTC supports Program L4.6.1 to prepare
a Coordinated Area Plan for Downtown,
which is a huge undertaking. The PTC
recommends that the Council revise the
Program to add that the Coordinated Area
Plan should study converting parts of
University Avenue to a pedestrian-only
5:2
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment Department Page 7
ITEM ORIGINAL PTC COMMENT MOTION VOTE
zone.
6 Transportation Element Goal T-1: Sustainable
Transportation
Require companies located in Palo Alto to create a joint
TMA for all companies or open buses to other companies
Motion was to forego this item. 6:1
7 Transportation Element Goal T-1: Sustainable
Transportation
PTC members had different views on the offering
incentives for TDM achievements. Some suggested
lowering parking requirements for projects with
successful TDM programs; other felt that permanent
parking reductions are not appropriate for uncertain
future trip reductions.
The PTC recommends that the Council add
language to ensure full participation among
Palo Alto employers in TMA.
5:2
Source: Department of Planning & Community Environment Based on Commission actions at their meeting of
September 13, 2017.
What to Expect at the September 27 PTC Meeting
The September 27 meeting will begin at 5 pm. At the meeting, the Commission will continue its
discussion of the Draft Consolidated PTC Comments for Discussion list, Attachment A. There are
14 more PTC comments for the Commission to review and decide if and how these comments
should be transmitted as a recommendation to the Council. Staff will bring paper copies of
Attachment A to the September 27 meeting. It would facilitate this process if the Commission
would begin the discussion of each item with a motion from one of those Commissioners who
identified it as a priority. To get through all 14 items, the Commission will need to be efficient
and Commissioners should come prepared with suggested motions.
When reviewing Attachment A, the Draft Consolidated PTC Comments for Discussion List and
deciding what to transmit to the Council, the Commission will be making motions and taking
votes. Some Commission ideas and comments may not get approved for inclusion as a priority
change. To make sure that the Council has the benefit of all the Commission comments, staff
anticipates that the Commission’s report to Council will contain the complete list of
Commission comments from the earlier discussions (see Attachment B) and the minutes of the
six PTC hearings on the CPU. At the meeting, the Commission will also be asked to decide
whether the list of consensus comments on Table 2 should also be part of that transmittal.
After the Commission completes its review of the Draft Consolidated PTC Comments for
Discussion List (Attachment A), the Commission may review the Land Use Section of the
Implementation Plan Table. This Implementation Plan Table repeats programs from the
elements of the Comprehensive Plan and suggests relative priorities and level of effort
associated with each. In the future, the PTC will be reviewing this list annually and
recommending additions or deletions as resources and priorities change. Given that annual
reviews will be scheduled for ,for, the Commission may wish to defer a close review of the table
until then.
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment Department Page 8
The review and recommendation on the Final EIR is the final item. The Commission is being
asked to recommend certification of the Final EIR to the City Council as discussed further below.
A possible motion for the Commission’s consideration is included in the Recommendation
section at the beginning of this staff report.
Environmental Review
The Comp Plan Update cannot be adopted until the City complies with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a State law requiring California agencies to identify the
significant environmental impacts of their actions and describe feasible measures that can be
taken to avoid or mitigate those impacts. Concurrent with the preparation of the Comp Plan
Update, the City has prepared what is referred to as a “program-level” EIR (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15168), which assesses the potential cumulative impacts of development that may
occur during the life of the plan, considers potential alternatives, and identifies mitigation
measures that should be adopted to reduce or avoid significant impacts. This is the same level
of environmental analysis that was prepared for the existing 1998-2010 Palo Alto Comp Plan.
The August 30, 2017 Final EIR was transmitted to the Commission on August 30th and -- along
with the Draft EIR and Supplement to the Draft EIR -- is available at:
http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/eir/.
The Final EIR responds to comments on the February 2016 Draft EIR and the Supplement to the
Draft EIR, describes the “preferred scenario” based on the Council’s input on March 27, 2017
and May 1, 2017 and presents revisions to the February 2016 Draft EIR and the Supplement to
the Draft EIR. The Commission is asked to review this document and recommend certification
of the Final EIR to the City Council.
A key document is Table 1-3, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures of the Final EIR, on
page 1-8 of the Final EIR. This table is reprinted from the Supplement to the Draft EIR with
revisions resulting from the public review process. Where changes have been made, they are
shown in strikethrough and underline. As shown in Table 1-3, several adjustments have been
made to the mitigation measures in the EIR. Most of these revisions are to ensure that
implementation of mitigation measures is consistent with the policy approach arrived at
through the Comp Plan Update process. None of these revisions weaken the effectiveness of
mitigation measures.
The City received 29 comment letters on the February 2016 Draft EIR and 18 letters on the
Supplement to the Draft EIR, as well as oral comments made during public meetings. Chapter 5
of the Final EIR provides responses to every comment received on the EIR.
In addition to the individual responses provided to each comment on the EIR, Chapter 5 of the
Final EIR contains three “master responses” that provide comprehensive responses to common
topics that arose in the comments received. Master Response 1 addresses comments related to
the merits of the Comp Plan Update, as opposed the EIR analysis. Because CEQA does not
require the Final EIR to respond to comments on the merits of the proposed project, Master
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Community Environment Department Page 9
Response 1 (Final EIR page 5-2) explains how the City considers these non-CEQA comments.
Master Response 2 (Final EIR page 5-3) addresses comments that requested that the EIR
analysis include recent cumulative projects and plans in nearby jurisdictions that have been
proposed or approved since the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Comprehensive Plan EIR
was issued. Master Response 3 (Final EIR page 5-7) addresses comments regarding the EIR’s
analysis of impacts to schools.
To ensure that the EIR is responsive to concerns regarding potential impacts to schools, the City
has coordinated with the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) at various junctures in the
EIR process. Master Response 3 summarizes the information received from the public and
PAUSD during the EIR’s public review period. Since preparing the Final EIR, the City has also
received additional data from the PAUSD regarding school capacity (see Attachment C) The
updated capacity data is intended to capture factors that lower the effective capacity of
schools, and varies from the capacity data presented in the EIR as follows: elementary school
capacity is lower than presented in the EIR by approximately 1,000 students, middle school
capacity is the same as presented in the EIR, and high school capacity is lower by 100 students.
This reduced capacity data is important for planning purposes but does not affect the impact
finding in the EIR, which is required by State statute to conclude that the payment of school
fees would offset potential impacts.
Next Steps
The City Council is currently scheduled to receive and review the PTC Report and
Recommendations regarding the Comprehensive Plan Update and the Final EIR at its October
23, 2017 meeting. The Council is currently scheduled to take final action on the Comprehensive
Plan Update on November 13, 2017.
Report Author & Contact Information PTC1 Liaison & Contact Information
Hillary Gitelman, Director Jonathan Lait, AICP, Assistant Director
(650) 329-2321 (650) 329-2679
Hillary.gitelman@cityofpaloalto.org jonathan.lait@cityofpaloalto.org
Attachments:
Attachment A: PTC Comments List for Discussion (PDF)
Attachment B: Consolidated PTC Comments List (PDF)
Attachment C: Revised PAUSD School Capacities (PDF)
Attachment D: Draft Excerpt Minutes PTC 09.13.17 Meeting (PDF)
1 Emails may be sent directly to the PTC using the following address: planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.org
Comment
#Goal Title PTC Comment
Total
Number
of Votes
1 Transportation Element
Goal T‐5: Motor Vehicle and
Bicycle Parking
PTC members expressed different viewpoints on parking requirements: Some
suggested that the City require projects to be fully self‐parked, while others
were concerned that this creates underutilized parking.
Although each project should be self‐parked on‐site, shared parking is
acceptable. Parking construction could potentially be funded by public or
private investment, not borne only by the owner, and/or funds could be
recouped by renting parking spaces for revenue.
4
2 Transportation Element Goal T‐
2:Traffic Delay and Congestion
Policy T‐2.3 and Program T2.3.1: PTC members expressed differences of opinion
on using both LOS and VMT metrics.
Some said that both are important because they measure different aspects of
traffic conditions. LOS measures quality of life and local user experience. VMT
measures regional impacts.
The CAC and Council expressed support for retaining both LOS and VMT.
Others said the Plan should not contradict CEQA changes that eliminate LOS
and should include a sunset provision for LOS as a metric.
If LOS is continued, consider referencing only seconds of delay or increases in
delay, not letter grades.
If LOS is continued, be more explicit about possible unintended consequences
on pedestrians and cyclists.
3
3 Land Use Element
Overall/General
Include stronger emphasis on taking on responsibility for dramatically
increasing housing supply in Palo Alto. Both BMR housing and “housing that is
affordable,” including housing for the middle class.
3
4 Land Use Element Narrative and
Maps
Strike “software development” from the Regional/Community Commercial
definition. The addition of “software development” as an allowed use does not
make sense because this designation is applied to diverse areas including
Downtown, Stanford Shopping Center, and Town & Country Village. Allowing
software and other office uses in retail areas like Town & Country displaces the
“diverse range of services that cater to daily needs” referenced in Policy L‐2.2
and is inconsistent with Policies L‐4.10 through L‐4.12 regarding preserving
Town & Country Village as a vibrant retail center.
3
5 Land Use Element
Goal L‐1: Growth Management
Strengthen Policy L‐1.3 about infill development to indicate not just that infill
should be compatible but that “infill development should be preferred or
promoted.”
3
6 Land Use Element
Goal L‐2: A Sustainable
Community
Some PTC members would support identifying specific locations where heights
above the 50‐foot height limit (which is a separate ordinance, not in the Comp
Plan) could be exceeded, particularly to enable construction of housing that is
affordable and/or BMR units. However, others were not comfortable exceeding
the 50‐foot height limit, even for affordable or subsidized housing.
3
7 Land Use Element
Goal L‐2: A Sustainable
Community
Several PTC members had comments on Program L2.4.4 regarding conversion
of non‐residential development potential FAR to residential FAR:
Revise Program L2.4.4 so it does not prohibit housing as a potential future use
at Town & Country Village. This may become a feasible or desired use over the
life of the Plan.
3
Consolidated PTC Comments for Discussion (9/27/2017)1
Page 1 of 2
Comment
#Goal Title PTC Comment
Total
Number
of Votes
8 Land Use Element
Goal L‐2: A Sustainable
Community
Preserving retail – lip service only – L‐2.9: Not a single program to support
policy. Wants a program to be flexible to respond to trends away from brick
and mortar. Restaurant imbalance will continue to grow. Look at what other
cities are doing to actually have retail. Otherwise market will dictate and we will
lose retail space.
3
9 Transportation Element Goal T‐
1: Sustainable Transportation
Have policy to open routes along creeks to pedestrians and bikers, if routes are
safe, in addition to other possible routes
3
10 Land Use Element
Goal L‐1: Growth Management2
Comments on Goal L‐1:
Concerns
1. Why not put vision statement this section by the goal (instead of on page 1)
so we know what we are committed to accomplish?
2. Goal does not call for diversity in demographic groups.
3. Neighborhoods are not prioritized as the most important.
4. Passive wording and relegation to project level does not suggest
COMMITMENT to future action.
Suggestions for change:
1. Goal L‐1 should read “A compact and resilient city prioritizing diverse and
vibrant neighborhoods – and existing compatibly with shopping and services,
workplaces, public facilities, parks and open space.”
2. Policies:
Swap L1.1 and L1.2 for emphasis on neighborhoods – substituting “prioritize”
for “strengthen” in current 1.2
2
11 Transportation Element
Goal T‐5: Motor Vehicle and
Bicycle Parking
Instead of paying to construct parking spots, allow applicants to:
o Put money instead in in‐lieu fees that could build central shared parking
by zone, with some parking on site; and/or
o Provide transit passes, free bikes, etc for residents/tenants.
2
12 Land Use Element
Overall/General
The Introduction to the Comp Plan describes a different city than the land use
element. The introduction describes a walkable suburb oriented around
residential neighborhoods. Land Use describes a mini‐city‐office‐park and is
largely silent on neighborhoods and neighborhood services. Either the
introduction is wrong or the land use element is wrong. How do we reconcile
the different views?
2
13 Comments on Other
Components
Starting with the very first words in this draft Comp Plan (I‐1)I find it incredible
in a unifying “Vision Statement” for the next couple of decades that it states in
the first two sentences that we all disagree! Of course we do on specific
policies, but hopefully not on our vision.
On I‐5 it then says, speaking about each element’s vision, “. . . the idea of a
vision for PA – a shared dream of PA in the future.” I suggest we drop the first
two sentences of this verbiage on I‐1 and start with “ We aspire to create a safe
and beautiful City for ourselves . . . . ”
2
14 Comments on Other
Components
In other realms a plan like this would discuss revenue models to pay for our
vision. We know that companies are willing to pay higher rents to locate in Palo
Alto (which benefits landlords), but we haven’t worked out how to monetize
this for the community. Can the comp plan recommend the development of
new revenue such as a payroll tax, a business license tax, or a 3rd party asset
management tax?
2
1. This list does not include the 7 comments that were discussed by PTC on 9/13/2017 meeting. They are shown on Table 3 of the 9/27/17 staff report
2. Comment 10 was mistakenly not included in the Draft Consolidated PTC Input List distributed on 9/13/2017 PTC meeting
Page 2 of 2
1
Consolidated PTC input – Meetings on July 26, August 9, and August 30, 2017 +
written comments received by September 5, 2017.
PTC Comment Consensus
Transportation Element Overall/General
There is some redundancy in the draft Element. For example, first/last mile policies
are good but are located in too many places.
The draft Element places too much emphasis on the future and not enough weight to
solving neighborhood congestion and parking problems of today, including
construction issues.
Some policies seem like they would work better at the regional scale, not being
implemented unilaterally at a local scale.
Palo Alto relies on effective regional transportation. Align projects with regional
transportation investments and track what we can do as connectivity improves.
Differing viewpoints on the role of technology: Some PTC members expressed that
Palo Alto is the technology center of the world and we can come up with solutions to
these problems. Other members felt the draft Element relies too much on aspirational
future technology that may never exist.
The Element should not assume that future Caltrain capacity after electrification will
solve our problems.
Don’t build the Plan around specific technologies. The ultimate consequences of new
or emerging trends such as transportation network companies (TNCs – e.g. Lyft, Uber)
or autonomous vehicles may be positive or negative and cannot be predicted.
Consensus
The transit element needs to align its SOV goals with regional transit capabilities. It
also needs real tracking data on road capacity and vehicle ownership so we get
parking and traffic requirements right. (If a road is currently filled to capacity should
our response to additional growth be “No mitigation is possible?” or “No growth is
possible?”)
Transportation Element Narrative and Maps
Geng Road improvement is too specific for the Comp Plan. Re‐state more broadly as
an improvement, or a policy, to reduce traffic on East Bayshore.
Consensus
Support for Caltrain grade separation. Consensus
Add a policy to support BART under El Camino.
List a possible bike route along Sterling Canal as a potential infrastructure
improvements.
Consider relocating Downtown transit center. Existing location could be better
location for housing and retail.
Transportation Element Goal T‐1: Sustainable Transportation
The PTC had a number of comments on new policies and programs requiring
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and supporting the Transportation
Management Association (TMA).
Program T1.2.2: Add language to further protect and expand the TMA. To the second
bullet, add “…such as TMA”
2
Program T1.2.2: Add reference to stable, sustained funding for the TMA, but don’t be
proscriptive or limit the City’s options for funding. Consensus
PTC members had different views on the offering incentives for TDM achievements.
Some suggested lowering parking requirements for projects with successful TDM
programs; other felt that permanent parking reductions are not appropriate for
uncertain future trip reductions.
Program T1.2.2: One PTC member expressed discomfort with the specific percent
reductions in single‐occupant vehicle trips as infeasible.
Program T1.2.3: Revise to state that the PTC should evaluate the TMA annually.
Programs under Policy T‐1.4 regarding electric vehicles: Add “e‐bikes or related
electrical modes of transport.”
Policy T‐1.13: PTC members expressed different views on how aggressively the draft
Element should encourage transportation network companies (TNCs – e.g. Lyft, Uber),
also called ridesharing companies in the Comp Plan, as part of first/last mile solutions.
o Some PTC members suggested that the City should collaborate with these private
companies, including exploring ways to offer discounted rates for pick‐ups and drop‐
offs in Downtown.
o Others expressed concern that ridesharing companies increase congestion and
reduce transit use.
Structure the Palo Alto shuttle service so it does not compete with VTA service, e.g.
along El Camino or Middlefield.
Add specific goals for ridership and frequency for the Palo Alto shuttle program, similar
to the specific quantitative goals for SOV trip reduction.
Require companies located in Palo Alto to create a joint TMA for all companies or open
buses to other companies.
Have a policy to open routes along creeks to pedestrians and bikers, if routes are safe,
in addition to other possible routes.
Explore opening bus stops for private operators to use for a fee.
Add a policy to require all bike routes to be aligned with sidewalks. (Not in the middle
of the street.)
Transportation Element Goal T‐2:
Traffic Delay and Congestion
Goal T‐2: Unclear. What is the message? Consider clarifying.
Policy T‐2.3 and Program T2.3.1: PTC members expressed differences of opinion on
using both LOS and VMT metrics.
o Some said that both are important because they measure different aspects of traffic
conditions. LOS measures quality of life and local user experience. VMT measures
regional impacts.
o The CAC and Council expressed support for retaining both LOS and VMT.
o Others said the Plan should not contradict CEQA changes that eliminate LOS and
should include a sunset provision for LOS as a metric.
o If LOS is continued, consider referencing only seconds of delay or increases in delay,
not letter grades.
o If LOS is continued, be more explicit about possible unintended consequences on
pedestrians and cyclists.
Transportation Element
3
Goal T‐3: Streets
No comments
Transportation Element
Goal T‐4: Neighborhood Impacts
Different viewpoints on Policy T‐4.2:
o Some PTC members felt that the language about prioritizing traffic
calming over congestion could be problematic because it gives more
weight to safety over congestion management, and these needs should
be balanced.
o Others felt that the idea of safe neighborhood streets should be retained.
Policy T4.1: Policy should recognize that residential arterials, along with local and
collector streets, are also school commute corridors. Policy should state that safety on
residential arterials is also important.
Consensus
Transportation Element
Goal T‐5: Motor Vehicle and Bicycle Parking
PTC members expressed different viewpoints on parking requirements: Some
suggested that the City require projects to be fully self‐parked, while others were
concerned that this creates underutilized parking.
Although each project should be self‐parked on‐site, shared parking is acceptable.
Parking construction could potentially be funded by public or private investment, not
borne only by the owner, and/or funds could be recouped by renting parking spaces for
revenue.
Add a statement of principles about parking (may be separate from policies and
programs).
o Recognize the costs to parking.
o Eliminate incentives for providing more parking than is necessary.
o Where possible, have shared parking resources to minimize unused parking
inventory.
Encourage technology that helps people find and/or share parking. Add a Program to
put together a community group to examine innovations in parking technology.
Allow non‐traditional concrete parking structures to enable future flexibility in
repurposing the land.
Allow mechanical parking.
Unbundled parking should be allowed; allow or require project owners/tenants to pay
separately for parking.
Instead of paying to construct parking spots, allow applicants to
o Put money instead in in‐lieu fees that could build central shared parking
by zone, with some parking on site; and/or
o Provide transit passes, free bikes, etc for residents/tenants.
Transportation Element
Goal T‐6: Road Safety
Policy T‐6.6: Policy and related programs discuss education for bicyclists. Language
should be updated to reflect that pedestrian safety is also included.
Consensus
Transportation Element
4
Goal T‐7: Transit‐Dependent Community
No comments
Transportation Element
Goal T‐8: Regional Collaboration and Coordination
Goals T‐1 and T‐8 seem redundant.
Tighten up policies under Goal T‐8 to reduce redundancy.
Under Goal T‐8 – consider policies supporting exploration of re‐starting rail service
across Dumbarton Bridge.
Recognize 280 and 101 as transit links. Have a stop at 280 and Page Mill Road where
passengers can move from bus to shuttle. Embarcadero/Oregon should be reviewed.
Work together with adjacent cities.
Support for reinstating or investigating future Dumbarton Rail service.
Consider adding a policy statement about a potential future High Speed Rail station
and/or other aspects of High Speed Rail. Consensus
Transportation Element Implementation Plan table
There are a lot of Programs. Staff should review for redundancy and remove any
already covered elsewhere. Fewer programs are more likely to be accomplished.
Land Use Element
Overall/General
Goals L‐1 through L‐4 are unclear and are not easy for a layperson to interpret.
Look at anything that is prohibitive and consider if it is too restrictive.
Consider hiring an area plan specialist for the Fry’s site or other area plans.
Include stronger emphasis on taking on responsibility for dramatically increasing
housing supply in Palo Alto. Both BMR housing and “housing that is affordable,”
including housing for the middle class.
As the number of electric vehicles increases, GHG emissions from long commutes will
be less of a concern.
The Element should place more emphasis on creating neighborhoods, not just building
housing units.
Consensus
We need to expand our stock of family‐oriented housing. Where do we have spaces to
accommodate this use? How do we ensure new neighborhoods receive full investment
in schools, parks, adjacent commercial districts and other services we traditionally offer
to neighborhoods. Our current neighborhoods are built out, and don’t provide
substantial spaces for new family‐oriented development.
Need commercial centers within walking distance of neighborhoods for local‐serving
goods and services that can’t pay the same rents as office uses, e.g. vacuum cleaner
repair, music lessons.
Goals L‐3 and L‐4 are important. In order to achieve these goals, may have ripple
effects into Goals L‐1 and L‐2. The goals sound reasonable, but it’s hard to tell if the
policies and programs will result in a desirable urban form and adequate space for
smaller retail and service uses that residents need.
5
Goals, policies, and programs throughout should be clear and actionable, and the City
should be able to track progress toward achievement.
Consensus
Need consistent goals that don’t conflict among elements.
We want diversification of housing and need to take action to get it.
The City should do more to ensure that affordable housing goes to people from lower
income brackets.
During the CAC process, many participants felt that first priorities for housing should
be for most needy – subsidized housing and those with disabilities. Broadening the
definition to “housing that is affordable” to the middle class would not help the most
needy households.
Element should do more to balance need for infill with protection of community
character.
There should be a policy about street design. Define the street as the space between
building facades. This creates public space. Buildings on opposite sides of the street
should relate to each other.
Review the document and identify those policies that mean nothing or would trigger
unnecessary expenditure.
The themes on pages I‐2 to I‐4 are great but are not consistent with the Land Use
Element.
The Introduction to the Comp Plan describes a different city than the land use element.
The introduction describes a walkable suburb oriented around residential
neighborhoods. Land Use describes a mini‐city‐office‐park and is largely silent on
neighborhoods and neighborhood services. Either the introduction is wrong or the land
use element is wrong. How do we reconcile the different views?
Land Use Element
Narrative and Maps
Strike “software development” from the Regional/Community Commercial definition.
The addition of “software development” as an allowed use does not make sense
because this designation is applied to diverse areas including Downtown, Stanford
Shopping Center, and Town & Country Village. Allowing software and other office uses
in retail areas like Town & Country displaces the “diverse range of services that cater to
daily needs” referenced in Policy L‐2.2 and is inconsistent with Policies L‐4.10 through
L‐4.12 regarding preserving Town & Country Village as a vibrant retail center.
Add a policy to address concerns that housing ownership is shifting to absentee owners
and real estate investment corporations.
Map changes:
Recapture Employment District designations on Map L‐6 from previous maps.
Designate University Avenue and parts of California Avenue as Research/Office Park to
reflect existing uses and provide a distinction from small local retail uses.
Consider a Service Commercial designation on University Avenue north of Alma, and
Park Blvd.
6
The distinction between commercial districts and employment districts is a fundamental
linchpin of the previous comp plan that largely seems lost in the draft. We need to test
the draft commercial district definition to ensure it still provides space in the
commercial districts for the sort of walkable services the neighborhoods expect. These
include not just retail, but also services like doctors, dentists, veterinarians,
accountants, lawyers, therapists, auto repair… Also spaces for not‐for‐profits, maker
spaces, performance spaces, clubs, dance and music schools, gymnastics and other uses
catering to the entire age range including families, kids, and seniors. We need to test
that retail includes spaces where lower margin and more specialized retail businesses
can operate. OR we need to look at some new definitions for mixed use districts so we
don’t undermine commercial districts. We also need to discuss whether the land use
map contains proper spaces for neighborhood services.
Land Use Element
Goal L‐1: Growth Management
Revise Goal L‐1 to mention demographic diversity, prioritizing neighborhoods, and BMR
housing. Add policies and program with stronger commitments to specific action.
Comments on Goal L‐1:
Concerns
Why not put vision statement this section by the goal (instead of on page 1) so we
know what we are committed to accomplish?
Goal does not call for diversity in demographic groups.
Neighborhoods are not prioritized as the most important.
Passive wording and relegation to project level does not suggest COMMITMENT to
future action.
Suggestions for change:
1. Goal L‐1 should read “A compact and resilient city prioritizing diverse and vibrant
neighborhoods – and existing compatibly with shopping and services, workplaces, public
facilities, parks and open space.”
2. Policies:
Swap L1.1 and L1.2 for emphasis on neighborhoods – substituting “prioritize” for
“strengthen” in current 1.2
Some PTC members felt that the Citywide growth cap on office/R&D development and
annual limit on office/R&D development (enacted as a separate ordinance) were
appropriate growth management tools. Others expressed that the consensus at the
2015 Our Palo Alto Summit was that a Citywide growth cap is not the right tool, and
policies should manage the impacts of office/R&D growth (such as traffic) rather than
setting a cap on square footage.
Several PTC members requested clarification or rewording of Policy L‐1.10 and
objected to “high quality” development as too ambiguous to provide clear direction.
Stanford Research Park is a major contributor to SOV trips and congestion and should
not be exempt from growth caps.
7
Growth management must include not only capping jobs but also building more
housing.
The office/R&D annual limit should be below 50,000 sf, possibly as low as zero.
Some PTC members expressed a desire to maintain the Downtown office cap rather
than eliminating it; others felt the best way to manage development Downtown is
through an area plan.
Add more language about “quality of life” and neighborhood preservation.
Some PTC members expressed support for Coordinated Area Plans for Downtown,
California Avenue, and the Fry’s site.
Strengthen Policy L‐1.3 about infill development to indicate not just that infill should
be compatible but that “infill development should be preferred or promoted.”
Recommendations for strengthening Program L1.3.1 regarding removing barriers to
infill development of affordable housing:
o 1) delete “remove barriers as appropriate” so that the program is more strongly
worded.
o 2) “work with neighbors” is too passive; split the two sentences into two
programs, one about removing barriers and the second about identifying sites.
o Revise to not just identify but to eliminate barriers to affordable housing.
o We need a strong commitment to creating BMR housing inventory for purchase
and rental. It is too tentative appearing at a program level. Suggest we make
Program L1.3.1 into a separate policy – perhaps having a quantifiable goal for ten
years in the future.
Turn Policy L‐1.4 regarding the land use definitions into a more affirmative statement
of the City’s objective to “use land use definitions in this plan to guide land use
decision‐making.”
Add something to Policy L‐1.8 regarding participation in regional strategies about
protecting Palo Alto interests.
In Policy L‐1.9 and Program L1.9.1 regarding the Citywide office/R&D cap, clarify the
criteria and intent of re‐evaluating the cap amount as square footage approaches the
cap.
Put the Community Indicators that were developed by the CAC back into the Land Use
Element. They help maintain quality of life.
Put the Development Requirements that were developed by the CAC back into the
Land Use Element.
Land Use Element
Goal L‐2: A Sustainable Community
In general, language regarding hosing should be stronger. Important to go beyond
BMR. Do what we can to make cost and rent affordable.
8
Some PTC members would support identifying specific locations where heights above
the 50‐foot height limit (which is a separate ordinance, not in the Comp Plan) could be
exceeded, particularly to enable construction of housing that is affordable and/or BMR
units. However, others were not comfortable exceeding the 50‐foot height limit, even
for affordable or subsidized housing.
Policy L‐2.3, Policy L‐2.6, and Program L2.4.5 are all similar – review and revise if
needed to make them independent and clear.
Strengthen Policy L‐2.4 from “use” a variety of strategies to “Proactively stimulate
housing with a variety of strategies…” or similar wording.
In Program L2.4.1 – eliminate housing sites along San Antonio Road – wants to learn
more about intention. Recent approval of 5‐story hotel on ECR next to International
Market store. Eliminating housing doesn’t help us scale up across the street from the
hotel. Either ARB should stop approval or we should allow San Antonio Road other side
to be tall housing.
Revise Program L2.4.2 regarding housing on Stanford lands to specify that “vibrant”
retail should be retained. Retail is changing and preserving retail square footage at the
Stanford Shopping Center may become less of a community priority over the life of this
Plan than is providing additional housing.
Several PTC members had comments on Program L2.4.4 regarding conversion of non‐
residential development potential FAR to residential FAR:
Revise Program L2.4.4 so it does not prohibit housing as a potential future use at Town
& Country Village. This may become a feasible or desired use over the life of the Plan.
Revise Program L2.4.4 to be more proactive. Set a specific goal of convert FAR in order
to allow construction of up to a certain number of units.
Remove Program L2.4.4. Commerce is important to the community.
L2.4.5 – strengthen mix of retail and residential uses. “zoning changes that give priority
to a mix.” Prohibiting office is too restrictive. Eliminate or soften.
L‐2.4.6, TDRs – define the areas within the town where we can spur growth on receiver
sites and identify sending sites where we want density to stay low.
New program – similar to TDRs – allow property owners to trade daylight for cash or
other privileges. System in Great Britain, works well.
Strengthen Policy L‐2.5 and Policy L‐2.7 regarding housing for middle to lower income
by clarifying what “support” means. Delete “as feasible”from Policy L‐2.5.
Revise the wording of Policy L‐2.13 to explicitly connect additional infill housing with
reduction of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and greenhouse gases (GHG), and thereby
part of the City’s response to climate change and sea level rise.
Preserving retail – lip service only – L‐2.9: Not a single program to support policy.
Wants a program to be flexible to respond to trends away from brick and mortar.
Restaurant imbalance will continue to grow. Look at what other cities are doing to
actually have retail. Otherwise market will dictate and we will lose retail space.
Add a policy or program to restrict consolidation of lots under single ownership.
9
Add a new policy regarding development east of 101 to reduce heights in this area to
35 feet. Taller heights are not compatible with recreational/office character.
Land Use Element
Goal L‐3: Distinct Neighborhoods
Program L3.2.1 is redundant with Policy L‐3.2 regarding preserving residential uses
from conversion.
Regarding Policy L‐3.5 about avoiding the negative impacts of basements: consider
counting basements as FAR to deter basements.
Land Use Element
Goal L‐4: Commercial Centers & Hotels
Goal L‐4 is awkwardly phrased. “Pedestrian‐scaled centers” may not make sense to the
lay reader.
L4.1.2 is all about retail. Similar to L‐2.9 – redundant? Or move?
Program L4.4.1 to explore increasing hotel FAR should be deleted, especially in the
absence of any analysis of need.
Policy L‐4.6 re supporting bike use and bike racks – add a program that requires regular
servicing and surveying the need for racks. Some go unused while others are
overflowing. Need consistent evaluation and adjustment.
Remove reference to “the Fry’s site” in Program L4.8.1and elsewhere. The tenant is
likely to change over the life of this Comp Plan.
Support for Program L4.6.1 to prepare a Coordinated Area Plan for Downtown, which is
a huge undertaking. Revise the Program to add that the Coordinated Area Plan should
consider converting parts of University Avenue to a pedestrian‐only zone.
Policy L‐4.7: It is unclear that there is any need to add retail FAR at Stanford Shopping
Center; retail in general is declining, and this policy does not represent a public
interest.
Revise Policy L‐4.7 to add “Promote shuttle, bicycle, and pedestrian use” to access the
Center; realistically, pedestrian access through large parking lots is challenging and
unpleasant.
Policy L‐4.10 is similar to L2.4.4; both may not be necessary.
Policy L‐4.16 should be clear that housing could be an allowed use in Midtown
Shopping Center or other neighborhood centers as part of mixed use development.
Maintain the attractiveness of all shopping centers; Add a policy for Charleston similar
ti Policy L‐4.16 about Midtown.
Differentiate between California Avenue and other districts. Consider a policy or
program that would identify a district in Palo Alto for craftspeople to rent space and
sell their goods and/or to create small kiosks where people can sell goods.
L4.11 and 4.12 are both about urban greening and other physical improvements to
Town & Country and should be combined.
Revise Policy L‐4.13 regarding the El Camino Real to allow heights of up to 50’
consistent with the along with rest of the City, and add “invest in transportation
infrastructure” to the policy.
10
Add policies and programs to allow different types and sizes of vendors, including
allowing small vendors to sell on streets and in alleys, in order to support competition
and innovation.
Add a policy that commercial centers have viable spaces for community services like
music schools or therapists that can’t find space and are getting priced out.
Land Use Element
Goal L‐5: Employment Districts
Several PTC members had comments on Policy L‐5.1:
Add “Provide project TDM policies and mixed uses to reduce trips”
Policy L‐5.1: Separate into two concepts, one about facilitating alternative
transportation/ reducing auto trips and the other about adding a mix of uses.
Policy L‐5.1: Clarify the baseline for the “reduced number of auto trips.”
The language in Policy L‐5.2 to “remove grass turf” in employment districts is overly
detailed and prescriptive for the Comp Plan.
Add language to allow uses besides research and development in Stanford Research
Park, such as housing and schools in future.
Add a policy to allow only small business companies of 500 employees or fewer within
employment districts outside of Stanford Research Park.
Add a policy increase allowable office sizes along El Camino Real, which is suitable for
transportation.
Attach the East Meadow Circle Concept Plan since it is mentioned and make sure that it
has housing possibilities
Land Use Element
Goal L‐6: Design of Buildings and Public Space
Wording in Goal L‐6 about “coherent development patterns” is a little fuzzy.
Support for Policy L‐6.1 to promote development that is compatible with surrounding
development and public spaces.
Policy L‐6.1 about compatibility, and L‐6.2 about the Zoning Ordinance and design
review, seem redundant. Consider combining.
Policy L‐6.3: Bird protection should not be a policy. Too specific/narrowly focused for
the Comp Plan.
Policy L‐6.4: Revise to “In areas of the City having a historic or consistent design
character, encourage the design of new development to maintain and support that is
compatible with the existing character.”
Policy L‐6.5 regarding views of the foothills seems like it would be rarely enforced and
only used to prevent development.
Revise Policy L‐6.5 to “Guide development to respect preserve views of the foothills
and East Bay hills from public streets…”
Revise Policy L‐6.7: “Where possible, avoid abrupt changes in scale and density
between residential and non‐residential areas and between residential areas of
different densities…” to remove the words “ where possible”.
Policy L‐6.10 regarding high‐quality signage should allow for flexibility on signage along
El Camino Real.
Add a policy to establish a build‐to line to define public spaces.
11
Add a policy or program to allow trading of daylight rights.
Land Use Element
Goal L‐7: Historic Resources
Turn Policy L‐7.6 regarding awards programs for historic preservation into a program
under Policy L‐7.1.
Policy L‐7.13 about allowing transfer of development rights from designated buildings
of historic significance should apply not only in Downtown but wherever there are
historic buildings.
Land Use Element
Goal L‐8: Parks and Gathering Places
Goal L‐8 currently does not include any programs. Policies L‐8.2 (about comfortable
seating areas), L‐8.3 (about small retail uses and cafes), and L‐8.6 (about seeking new
sites) could be Programs.
Consider consolidating Policies L‐8.2, L‐8.4, and 8.5 that all deal with places for public
art and cultural/civic events.
Policy L‐8.7 regarding collaboration with religious institutions is overly broad. Expand to
address collaboration “for the benefit of the community.”
Land Use Element
Goal L‐9: Public Streets and Spaces
Add a program to support Policy L‐9.2 about development that creatively integrates
parking.
The statement in Policy L‐9.9 to “involve the urban forester” in development review is
unnecessary. City will definitely do this.
Policy 9.9 to involve the urban forester could be a program.
Policy L‐9.11 regarding public infrastructure could be split into 3 different policies.
Is Program L‐9.12.2 regarding wireless co‐location needed in the Comp Plan?
Add a policy to maintain the City’s inventory of California oaks.
Add policy or program to define the street space.
Land Use Element
Goal L‐10: Palo Alto Airport
Add a policy statement that the Palo Alto Airport should not be a drain on City
resources.
Comments on Other Components
Starting with the very first words in this draft Comp Plan (I‐1)I find it incredible in a
unifying “Vision Statement” for the next couple of decades that it states in the first
two sentences that we all disagree! Of course we do on specific policies, but hopefully
not on our vision. On I‐5 it then says, speaking about each element’s vision, “. . . the
idea of a vision for PA – a shared dream of PA in the future.” I suggest we drop the
first two sentences of this verbiage on I‐1 and start with “ We aspire to create a safe
and beautiful City for ourselves . . . . ”
In other realms a plan like this would discuss revenue models to pay for our vision. We
know that companies are willing to pay higher rents to locate in Palo Alto (which
12
benefits landlords), but we haven’t worked out how to monetize this for the
community. Can the comp plan recommend the development of new revenue such as
a payroll tax, a business license tax, or a 3rd party asset management tax?
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Planning & Transportation Commission 1
Action Meeting Agenda: 2
Excerpt Minutes 3
September 13, 2017 4
Council Chambers 5
250 Hamilton Avenue 6
6:00 PM 7
8
Action Items 9
Public Comment is Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Fifteen (15) minutes, plus three (3) minutes rebuttal. 10
All others: Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 11
3. PUBLIC HEARING Planning and Transportation Commission Review and 12
Recommendation Regarding the June 30, 2017 Draft of the Comprehensive Plan 13
Update, with a Focus on the Draft Transportation and Land Use Elements 14
15
Chair Alcheck: The second half of our meeting tonight. Let’s get ready… no. Alright, staff would 16
you like to begin? 17
18
Hillary Gitelman, Planning Director: Yes, thank you; Chair and Commissioners Hilary Gilman the 19
Planning Director, Elaine and Elena are with me tonight to take you through the next discussion 20
on the Comprehensive Plan update. We have a super brief PowerPoint and I hope you have in 21
front of you the collated ranking of the issues that we asked for your input on. We'll go over 22
that as soon as we run through the slides, right? 23
24
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Elaine Costello, Management Partners: Ok, yeah. We're ready to… my name is Elaine Costello, 1
I've been working on the Comp Plan and the we are here tonight to recommend the highest 2
priority comments and changes and to review the Land Use Implementation Table for the Comp 3
Plan. This is our fifth Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) meeting on the Comp Plan 4
and tonight's focus is something that the Commission decided on at, took a Motion on at your 5
previous meeting that to increase the impact of your report to the Council that you would 6
review the comments and changes and you have. Thank you all. Everybody reviewed the 7
comments and prioritized them. And you would indicate your 10 most important PTC 8
comments and changes. There was a little bit of variation on how many we got, but it was not a 9
problem. So we then took I did want to say that we are also asking you tonight to recommend 10
the entire list of PTC comments for inclusion in the PTC report to the Council so they have the 11
benefit of everybody's comments even the ones that did not get a lot of votes and then to also 12
talk about the Land Use section of the Implementation Plan Table. 13
14
So when we got your comments and tables we went upstairs and collated them and figured out 15
which ones had two or more votes. And 19 of the comments had two or more votes; 5 of them 16
actually had four votes as priority items and another 8 had three votes. So you have sort of 17
some emerged as important issues and now what we're asking the Commission to do tonight is 18
to figure out which of these you want to transmit to the Council and what context you want to 19
put that into. And so that on the September 27th we can make the… that will be the final 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
meeting and the Commission can make your recommendation to the Council on these elements 1
and the final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and that you can decide how you want to set 2
this list of priorities into that report. 3
4
So without any questions… and what we did we just took an Excel spreadsheet to be on it and 5
we just input everybody's and then we totaled them and that's how we came up with this list 6
here. We didn't edit. We didn't change, we didn't we just took what you wrote as your 7
comments and added them up. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you. With that I'd like us all to turn our attention to this consolidated 10
PTC input spreadsheet. We are going to begin with Item 1 and move down the list. And we 11
don't, I don't have a specific indication here of which Commissioners felt strongly about this 12
issue enough to nominate it for our discussion tonight, but what I would like to suggest is that 13
as we approach each of these items those Commissioners that do feel strongly make, turn their 14
light on and participate in this discussion about the item early on as opposed to later in the 15
time that we spent on each of these items. 16
17
The goal as staff mentioned is to determine how if there is a consensus here to communicate a 18
message about this topic to City Council and to what extent what that message should be. I 19
don't think there needs to be a unanimous view here expressed to Council. I think that there 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
could be opposing views expressed to Council on each of these items depending on how the 1
Commission discusses them and the most important thing is that we are clear and we've made 2
our sort of view heard on the item. So again two elements here; Number 1, do we wish to 3
communicate this item to Council and if so what is it exactly that we are communicating to 4
them on this item? Ok, I see one light from Commissioner… 5
6
Commissioner Lauing: I just want to clarify the procedure just a bit. 7
8
Chair Alcheck: Commissioner Lauing. 9
10
Commissioner Lauing: Just wanted to clarify the procedure. So we're not going to try to narrow 11
down this list of 19 right now, we're just going to dive in. Is that correct? 12
13
Chair Alcheck: So thank you Commissioner Lauing. What we're going to do is we're going to 14
begin at the top of the list and I'm using the number of nominations as in essence a narrowing 15
down. So all of us nominated 10 items; I imagine that several items did not receive more than 16
one vote. In and of itself that narrowed down our collective list. I believe there's only 19 items 17
total. What I would suggest we do is that we begin with the top of the list and as we progress 18
through the evening it’s 7:23 right now maybe a little after nine o’clock we'll evaluate where we 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
are in our list and determine whether it's worth continuing to the numbers that got less 1
nominations. 2
3
Commissioner Lauing: Is there any… should we put any limits on the amount of debate per item 4
because if it's an hour per item then we'll be here for 19 hours. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Thank you, Commissioner Lauing. That’s a good question. I'll reiterate that I 7
think the goal for each of these discussions is Number 1 to determine whether there's 8
consensus to communicate to Council that this issue… to determine whether there is consensus 9
that this is an issue we should communicate to Council our position on and second what the 10
Commission how they view that issue. I think that if there is a sense that there is broad 11
consensus among Commissioners when they speak we can make a concise Motion saying here 12
is how we feel on this topic and how it should be communicated to Council. I think if we in our 13
round of discussion determine that if that there is a not a significant consensus, but it is worth 14
communicating the split views of the Commission then we can simply do that. I don't know 15
that any of these items really should receive an hour of time of debate. I don't think we should 16
be using tonight's time to really go head to head on an item to convince our fellow 17
Commissioners. I think the idea really is are there groups of consensus or a larger consensus on 18
the issue? And at the very least what I would suggest we do is that we least try to go through 19
the items that received four nominations and it's a little trial by error. See where we are in a 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
little bit of time and see if that process is effective if that's ok. Alright, I have the first light is 1
Commissioner Summa (interrupted) 2
3
Commissioner Gardias: Can I speak in a formal matter if you don't mind? 4
5
Chair Alcheck: I just want to make sure that we I really want to encourage people to follow this 6
protocol that I'm suggesting which is to light up the board. So I have a light from Commissioner 7
Summa who has waited patiently and I will call on each of you in order of the light that I see 8
and we can continue this discussion. Thank you. Commissioner Summa. 9
10
Commissioner Summa: Thank you. I have a few questions for staff about the list. One is that 11
the item Packet Page 77 which is the minutes I the item about soft clarifying the software 12
Downtown and not having it be for the Errata list of Errata. I don't think that you caught part of 13
my concern about that and that was that if we have software Downtown there should be a limit 14
on the size of the company. So I thought that part of my comments and that's in the minutes 15
on Page 77 was missing. 16
17
And then on Page 5 at the bottom of Page 5 under Land Use Element Goal L‐1 that is not in 18
italics, but is that the first part it starts revised Goal L‐1 dimension demographic diversity. Was, 19
is that the first… Yes, so… It's Page (interrupted) 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Ms. Costello: Alright, is that in a Packet Page? I'm sorry. 2
3
Commissioner Summa: It's Page 6 of Attachment A. It's Page 6, Packet Page 6 in Attachment A. 4
5
Ms. Costello: So it's Packet Page 84. 6
7
Commissioner Summa: That's possible, yes. 8
9
Ms. Costello: Ok, great. I’m just I'm looking at one thing. 10
11
Commissioner Summa: Yeah, sorry. I wrote down Page 6. So at the bottom I think that's a new 12
comment, maybe? 13
14
Ms. Costello: Yes, it is. 15
16
Commissioner Summa: Ok. So it's a it's the beginning of the comment that's italicized on the 17
next page and continued. Because I didn't see it in the earlier… 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Ms. Costello: We put… we did at the last, excuse me, at the last meeting we mentioned that 1
people could send in written comments until Tuesday. 2
3
Commissioner Summa: Right, right. 4
5
Ms. Costello: And so the written comments that came in we put in italics. 6
7
Commissioner Summa: Right, but my question is it's not in italics so I was confused if it was part 8
of the on the next page, Page 7, the that comment. Because it's not… I was just confused 9
because it's not in italics. I think it is the top of Page 7 is a continuation. Is that correct? 10
11
Ms. Costello: No. I think they were two separate comments. Sometimes we get comments that 12
are, but I think the bottom of Page 6 was a new comment. But you know what? We'll check. 13
14
Commissioner Summa: Yeah that's what I was saying because it was (interrupted) 15
16
Ms. Costello: I'm sorry. The car the bottom of I’m… excuse me. The bottom of Page 6 was an 17
existing comment. We will double check, but (interrupted) 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Summa: Ok, because I didn't have it in the previous August 9th list of comments 1
that's why I asked. 2
3
Ms. Costello: It may have been, it may have also been a verbal comment that was made at the 4
(interrupted) 5
6
Commissioner Summa: Ok. 7
8
Ms. Costello: August 30th meeting. So what we took was verbal comment, written comments 9
that we had received, verbal comments that we got at the meeting on August 30th and then, 10
but people had heard those so we did not show those in italics. 11
12
Commissioner Summa: Ok. 13
14
Ms. Costello: What we did show in italics was written comments that we received after the 15
meeting so people would know what they had not heard or seen before. 16
17
Commissioner Summa: Ok, thank you. And then at the on August 9th at the bottom there were 18
two comments that weren't carried over and they are from the August 9th written version of 19
the comments. I can give it to you, it's probably just easier. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Ms. Costello: Yeah, that would be fine. 2
3
Commissioner Summa: Because they weren’t carried over to this. I don't think it's, I don't think 4
we have to redo it because of it, but they should get in the final version. 5
6
Ms. Costello: Absolutely. That's very helpful because we are trying to find any errors that we’ve 7
made as we get to the end here. 8
9
Commissioner Summa: Ok, I'll give it to you at the end. 10
11
Ms. Costello: Oh, perfect. 12
13
Commissioner Summa: It's just easier than talking about it. Thank you. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Excuse me, so let me just quickly interject because I want to make sure are either 16
of the items that weren’t carried over items that you nominated? 17
18
Commissioner Summa: I think they both were. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: Items you nominated? 1
2
Commissioner Summa: No, not items I nominated. No. 3
4
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I just want to make sure because if (interrupted) 5
6
Commissioner Summa: They were just old items that didn’t get carried over. It's not I don't 7
think it's significant for tonight's discussion. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Fantastic. So then in that case let's move on. I have a light from Commissioner 10
Gardias. Again anybody of those the individuals who nominated this I would like to see your 11
lights up so that we can begin a discussion on this topic. Commissioner Gardias. 12
13
Commissioner Gardias: Actually I was going to speak about the formal matter, not about the 14
topic. So which I think it proceeds in any discussion. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: I'm happy to hear you on this topic. 17
18
Commissioner Gardias: Very good. So thank you. So I disagree with the way that that you 19
proposed to conduct this meeting because I believe that it sounded to me like that some of 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
those that received many votes may be during the discussion talked out of being presented to 1
the Council. That's how I understood we would be proceeding and I think that pretty much if 2
there is an agreement of four Commissioners I for me it's a clear signal that those four read the 3
text and they are ready to support this specific either Motion or recommendation to the 4
Council. 5
6
Commissioner Monk: I don't view it that (interrupted) 7
8
Chair Alcheck: Hold on, hold on, hold on. Are you done? Ok, thank you. I don't disagree with 9
that notion. I'm going to give you a quick example of where there are some components of this 10
process where there might be sort of two competing comments within the Land Use Element 11
and, but to respond to what you're directly saying for example with number one this is a fairly 12
straightforward statement and it has four votes. I think the question now is is does it have 13
seven? It may not have risen to the top of the list for all seven of us, but maybe all seven of us 14
can get behind it in which case right now while we review Item Number 1 I want to determine 15
where Commissioners stand on this topic aside from the four and if I have more than seven 16
then I think we can make a Motion to include it and its specific language. There might be for 17
example a Motion made by one of the members who nominated this to include this specific 18
language in our communication and someone may want to add an amendment or maybe adjust 19
the language to see if we can get greater consensus and then of course there could be an item 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
here where three of the seven don't feel the same way in which case I just want to make sure 1
we get on record that there is a different view and we communicate that as well to City Council. 2
3
I think one of the objectives here isn't for City Council to only hear what the majority of 4
Commissioners feel. I think the idea here is that this letter will, this communication will 5
represent the viewpoints of the Commissioners in their review of the Comp Plan. And so I'm 6
trying to be very much I think the process that we've designed is intended to be mindful of 7
what could be various opinions on this topic. So I have a light from Commissioner [Note‐Vice‐8
Chair] Waldfogel and please. 9
10
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Ok, is were you've done with that? Ok, let me get started on Item 11
Number 1 then which is expanding our stock of family oriented housing. So I this is something 12
that I think we need to prioritize more in the Comp Plan. I mean family oriented housing is 13
something that’s defined Palo Alto over the years and we need to continue our notion of 14
neighborhoods that are walkable to commercial districts which is something I think we’ll pick 15
up an Item Number 2 more thoroughly. But I don't think we really capture this because there 16
are really only a couple places where we can do this at any scale. I mean I'd actually like to see 17
us set some tangible goals and targets for adding family oriented housing at all income levels, 18
but really the only places where we can fit that in any scale are either in some of the 19
commercial center districts or in which are captured under L‐4 and there's really no language 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
under Goal L‐4 to capture I mean I'm missing where we're really talking much about housing in 1
the commercial center districts. And then in the employment districts, L‐5 which I mentioned 2
at the last meeting we don't actually capture this category on the land use map and we need to 3
fix that. But we have some fairly vague language about possible residential use in the Research 4
Park, but we specifically exclude the possibility in L‐5.4 from the East Bayshore and San Antonio 5
of possibly considering those as new residential neighborhoods. 6
7
So I guess what I'm advocating is a view that we could build out some large scale residential 8
neighborhoods if we actually think about the available land in these districts and we target that 9
development. Now if we do that we also have to be mindful that we have to do that in a… that 10
this impacts community services, that we need a language that captures what this does to 11
schools and how to pay for schools that we would need to service those areas. Some of you 12
may have noticed that Mountain View has just reported I think in the Post last week that 13
Mountain View has noticed that they may need some new schools. 14
15
Commissioner Summa: Double. 16
17
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Well, it's a good thing. I mean it's a good problem to have. Parks, other 18
types of community services, and even commercial districts adjacent to these neighborhoods 19
because we've always defined our neighborhoods as having as being walkable and walkable 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
means that they’re walkable to something, right? So they can't just be hermetic. So the 1
question is how can we capture some of this language? I mean how do we, what can we say 2
about the commercial centers and the employment districts to encourage or encourage 3
exploring development of larger scale neighborhoods whether it's a single‐story or whether it's 4
townhouse or whether it's low‐rise/mid‐rise, whatever the format is, but I just don't see that 5
language in here that would let us do that kind of thing. So just any comments on why that 6
language isn't here? 7
8
Ms. Gitelman: I don't know what to say entirely. I think the housing policies that are in the 9
Housing Element aren't obviously included in this packet. We do identify sites for housing all 10
over the City, not the Research Park, but in a variety of areas in the Housing Element that is not 11
being currently updated. In the Land Use Element here we've grouped the housing related 12
policies in Goal L‐2. There was that the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) however and I think 13
often at the Council a focus rather than on family housing on encouraging small units, 14
workforce housing, kind of new housing types that we see the city that doesn't have a great 15
stock up. So I think the Commission’s suggestion to add an emphasis on family housing and all 16
of the issues attendant with that I think that is an idea that has not been raised previously and 17
that would be a good point for you to make in your report. 18
19
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Great. Ok, I will see if anyone else has any other comments to add. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: Thank you, Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. The next light is 2
Commissioner Rosenblum. 3
4
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, just a quick response on this and then maybe a question to 5
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel to clarify a little bit about your intent. When we reviewed the Housing 6
Element and thought about the Comprehensive Plan with relation to what Palo Alto needs for 7
housing through the lifetime of this plan the couple trends that struck me were first that Palo 8
Alto is losing its share of population between basically graduating college and starting a family. 9
So that group of people have diminished in terms of the proportion that they make up in Palo 10
Alto and we've gained a lot of elderly people so we’ve gained a lot of senior citizens over time. 11
And so a couple of the things that we're focused on in Housing Element was how do you make 12
housing more affordable overall? How do you make housing that accommodates our growing 13
senior population? And how do you make housing that's appropriate for this group people 14
we’re losing which are the young people starting out. And sometimes those three things all 15
intersect because very young people and very old are often either fixed income or no income or 16
low income and often need similar types of housing. And so I think that there was a lot of 17
emphasis on how do you build housing in a way that's denser i.e. that tends to be cheaper, 18
more affordable, often can be serviced by public transit, and so it's things that you can get away 19
without a car for example. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
And so my question then to Vice‐Chair is recognizing that a lot of Palo Alto is already family 2
friendly meaning it's R‐1 neighborhoods, low rise, and it’s the vast majority of our land available 3
for housing. Do you mean more how do you make places that are family friendly i.e. walkable 4
community oriented places that have small neighborhood parks, etcetera? So more community 5
oriented or do you mean literally family? Like housing stock that has two to three bedrooms 6
that will be occupied by a family? And so I was confused what the intent was there. 7
8
Chair Alcheck: Thank you, Commissioner Rosenblum. Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] 9
Waldfogel? 10
11
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Am I on? There we go. Thank you. Good questions. So in preparing for 12
this I looked at some of the census data on population trends. When this plan, when this Comp 13
Plan work began the biggest demographic bulge in the in that census data was probably about 14
22 years old that the biggest bulge right now is 28 years old. It's pretty easy to see the trend 15
that that biggest bulge will be in their thirty's and forty's in prime family forming years over the 16
period when this plan is carried out. The largest population group right now is 28 years old. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: In Palo Alto? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: That's the biggest demographic group in the United States. And that's 1
the group that we need to accommodate. We and in fact you see this I mean you we're seeing 2
(interrupted) 3
4
Commissioner Rosenblum: So I just quick clarifying question. Are you saying Palo Alto or the 5
United States (US)? 6
7
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: This is in the US. That's the group that we that's the group we need to 8
accommodate. I mean you actually see that there's a decline in the size of the cohort behind 9
that; that the current 17 year old cohort is smaller than that then the current 25 year old 10
cohort. I mean we've actually seen some things like reductions in college enrollments that 11
they're already predicting this. So it's really important for us to look forward in this plan, not to 12
look backward. We have to solve the 2030 problems, the 2025 problems, not the 2010 13
problems. And family housing is a looking forward issue it's not a looking backward issue. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. I'll chime in here. This 16
was not one of the “PTC comments” that I nominated. One of the issues that I'm having with 17
this specific PTC comment as it's articulated here on this page is that I'm not sure what we're 18
really telling our Council here. One of the things that I heard from Commissioner [Note Vice‐19
Chair] Waldfogel tonight was that the commercial districts are really the only places that can 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
accommodate growth and housing. So if there is consensus on this Commission that we want 1
to communicate to Council that they need to promote growth in housing in our commercial 2
districts then I think that's a very valid communication to the Council. So I would sort of 3
appreciate clarity from the individuals that are sort of supporting this specific statement to help 4
me understand... It the way it's written it's sort of seems like we're throwing our hands up. So 5
where do we have spaces to accommodate and how do we ensure neighborhoods receive full 6
investment in schools and our current neighborhoods are built out and don't provide 7
substantial spaces for new family orientated development. I think those statements are all 8
true. If our Comp Plan is going to address that problem then it should identify the areas where 9
there is space and I think you've done that and then it should aggressively promote 10
development of family oriented housing. 11
12
I will suggest that I think both of you are making sort of factually correct statements. I think 13
that the bulk of our community is made up of an ageing cohort and the largest demographic 14
that's growing in the nation as a whole may be this sort of millennial group, this 28 year old 15
aged group that Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel mentioned. If our… I don't know 16
that we need to specify tonight what type of housing we would encourage specifically whether 17
it would be more affordable senior housing to sort of accommodate the community members 18
that we have already or family oriented housing to accommodate the community members we 19
wish to have, but I guess my hope is that we could have some people comment on what exactly 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
they we should be communicating to City Council with respect to this particular comment and if 1
there is a goal or policy specifically that could be addressed that would be helpful for me too as 2
we proceed with this discussion. I have lights from Commissioner Gardias, oh excuse me, yeah, 3
Commissioner Gardias, Commissioner Lauing, and then Commissioner Summa. 4
5
Commissioner Gardias: Thank you. So when I think about the statement I find it natural with 6
City of Palo Alto and for this reason and I already spoke about this I think that Palo Alto’s stance 7
with a family and then there is a natural reason to pretty much to follow this policy and expand 8
our stock of family oriented housing across the areas over the other type of housing. So I think 9
that if there was going to be a policy I would propose this statement because we need to 10
somehow quantify where we would be seeking this growth in the in the family oriented 11
housing. 12
13
There were recent, we recently supported a few rental buildings and a couple of buildings with 14
the micro units and I totally agree that there should be units like this across the town, but I 15
think that we arbitrarily try to expand the stock of those micro units and rental units against 16
farther family oriented housing which I would think that family oriented housing is the place 17
the family can anchor itself, grow, and have kids. They could go to the local schools and be part 18
contribute to this community. That's how I see Palo Alto and I would be supporting this 19
statement from this perspective. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Gardias. Commissioner Lauing. 2
3
Commissioner Lauing: Yes, I don't think this one should be very controversial and I think we 4
should be able to get a commitment to family housing and more stock. I think that family 5
housing and families are obviously a very important value and that's what the Comp Plan is 6
about to Palo Alto. Not exclusively, but we have spent a lot of time appropriately talking about 7
smaller units where people can have entry level and make sure we don't skip those 8
demographics. But at some point I didn’t know the statistic that was quoted by Vice‐Chair 9
Waldfogel, but at some point they start to make babies and they can't stay in those little units 10
anymore. It's that simple and we don't want them to have to move out again after we just 11
provided for them to get here we'd like to have them to have a place to raise a family. That 12
doesn't mean a half acre and a three car garage, but it means something other than micro 13
units. So I think it's perfectly appropriate to have something itemized probably in two point, in 14
L‐2 talking about the ongoing need for family housing as well as the other ones. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Lauing. Commissioner Summa. 17
18
Commissioner Summa: Thank you. So I agree with some of the comments I've heard and I think 19
that I also saw this as not just increasing the stock, but maintaining the family neighborhoods 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
and maintaining a family neighborhoods that have the services that family need which is 1
walkable short trips to services and personal services and retail and also schools. I mean I am 2
just struck personally and anecdotally about the people I see moving into my neighborhood and 3
they’re new families with kids and they're from all over. And obviously as Council Member 4
Filseth used to always say we do two things in Palo Alto, we raise great kids and we raise 5
startups. 6
7
So I think that is an essential core to what Palo Alto is as a community is raising families and 8
having good schools and all these services and walkable neighborhoods. So I saw this 9
statement as being kind of like apple pie and it already has a majority of Commissioners 10
supporting it. So I think it's to it's importance I think it's already clear since it has majority 11
support and it's a it's pretty much an apple pie statement I think and I don't think it precludes 12
other types of housing in other situations. Thanks. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Thank you, Commissioner Summa. Commissioner Rosenblum. 15
16
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, just quickly I just took a look at the Housing Element just to 17
make sure that we're saying things that are consistent. So I understand Commissioner [Note 18
Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel is talking about national trends. There is a table in the beginning of our 19
Housing Element so I think it's Page 11 that tracks our growth since 1980 and so every ten years 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
from US Census data through 2010. And it is interesting that the group that declines, the only 1
group that declines in Palo Alto is childbearing years from 1980 to 2010 declined 15 percent, 2
from 2000 to 2010 declined 7 percent. The group that is growing in Palo Alto most rapidly 3
there are kids which does imply that people are forming families so there's and I'll explain the 4
difference I think in the data why there's that inconsistency in a moment and seniors. The 5
reason why this group from 18, the childbearing group, 18 to 44 is declining is because within 6
that is a subgroup which is the people from 18 to before they have a family and we've lost most 7
of them and then they come back when they have kids and they want our school district. But 8
they’ve hauled out that group. 9
10
And so I agree this is sort of an apple pie statement. We all want more housing. We want the 11
services that families need. Palo Alto is about families going to good schools and so I like this 12
except I think the Comp Plan is a document that's a strategy document that's around what kind 13
of city, what kinds of things do we want to address? And to me to the extent that we're making 14
value tradeoffs to say we need more of this kind of housing, we need more of these kinds of 15
services, I personally think that we need to accommodate our growing elderly population and 16
we need to do something to reverse this trend of people of young people starting out not be 17
able to stay in our community. I think it has a lot of impact on multigenerational families. I 18
think it has impact on innovation. It has impact on the kind of city that we are. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
And the final piece is and I'll find this in the Housing Element in a moment, I just haven’t had 1
time to find the table, but I do believe it's the vast majority of our current housing stock is a 2
family housing multi‐bedroom units and I can find it confirm that. But so my I guess my only 3
note to the statement and I agree it's a majority, it should go to Council, maybe end debate 4
here, but the only thing that I'll note is this is the area we have the most housing for the group 5
of people that is declining the… is increasing at the lease rate where we have the lease 6
problem. And so to me it's just not the sort of thing that I would want to emphasize in our 7
strategic plan, but I agree that like it is apple pie. We’re a core of families. We want to make 8
sure that family housing remains affordable, plentiful, and the services are there. It just doesn't 9
seem like that's the thing to note in terms of our strategy. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Thank you, Commissioner Rosenblum. Commissioner Monk. 12
13
Commissioner Monk: My comment is a bit of a general comment in that in looking at how these 14
were polled with the votes I don't agree that they represent any sort of majority whatsoever. I 15
did not do my submission of my top 10 based on what I thought were going to be the most 16
popular. I did it based on things that I wanted to get covered without determining whether or 17
not it was going to be supported by other folks. So for example if I knew something was going 18
to be brought up I would have voted for something else because I don't want to waste my vote 19
on something that I knew would already get brought to your attention. So I really think it's 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
misguided to look at this document and say oh, because there's a bunch of fours here and some 1
three those are higher priority than the twos because I'll tell you these number four's this is the 2
first time that I've really seen these were in the packet just a couple days ago and they were 3
mostly written in letters by various Commissioners more recently. So they weren't items that 4
we had discussed in the past that's probably why they're listed here tonight. So it doesn’t mean 5
they are in any priority, they're new items. So I just really want to make that a distinction 6
because I think if we’re referring to these as oh, there's four votes and I don't think it's accurate 7
in saying that there’s a majority there. I think whatever we decide tonight will be the defacto 8
majority of support of all of these. 9
10
Going back to this Number 1I really don't see what it's doing in the Comp Plan. It doesn't seem 11
like an appropriate comment to have to include in the Comp Plan. It's more for the Housing 12
Element. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Monk. Look I’ll weigh in here. I agree. I think this 15
is vanilla. I think what we're saying is Palo Alto we want to ensure that this is a good place for 16
families to live. I tend to agree with Commissioner Rosenblum’s standpoint here which is that if 17
you could point me in the direction of a project that you're familiar with that has 15 micro units 18
I would say wow, I had no idea. I don't know that we've developed any micro units in this City 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
and so when I think about what I want our Comprehensive Plan to emphasize it’s the 1
development of a diversity of housing types. 2
3
So I'm not saying I stand in the way of this item, I won't. But it's not really communicating a 4
goal that I think is of critical importance. So if the next individual that speaks wants to make 5
the Motion that this exact language is included in our communication then it we’ll take a vote 6
on it and it can be the end of the conversation, but I would like at least the minutes to reflect 7
that my perspective is that we haven't actually built out those 60 senior units that we talked at 8
great length about on Maybell. And we didn't really build out any micro units yet. And we have 9
not developed we haven't seen in our town significant development of what I would call diverse 10
housing units as opposed to for example the large majority of housing in our City being three 11
bedroom/two bath, four bedroom/three bath houses, multi… what you would call family 12
oriented housing, all the quarter acres with backyards. So the question is: is are we from my 13
perspective is are we were communicating to Council that we want to see them make more of 14
an effort in the Comp Plan to encourage other housing types that might address the needs that 15
aren't being met by the overabundance of family oriented housing that we have and the lack of 16
supply of other diverse housing types that we don't have. That's where I stand on this issue and 17
I'm happy for anybody to sort of move this issue forward if they would like to. I have lights 18
from Commissioner Summa and Commissioner Monk. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Summa: Yes, so I appreciate all these comments, but I do think it's important 1
remember I believe Palo Alto has 44 percent renters. I don't know if that's an accurate statistic 2
or if it's gone up. So we have a lot of people who rent and don't own homes and we also have a 3
lot of existing housing stock. And I make I'll just anecdotally note my what my neighborhood I 4
live in Lower College Terrace as it's called where there are a lot of really existing tiny 5
apartments for people. So I feel like there's a lot of existing diversity and I also think it's 6
important to maintain that and I don't think old people are moving to Palo Alto because it’s too 7
expensive. And I think the fact that 18 year olds leave is an aspect of being 18ish. I know I left 8
my home when I was that age and whether or not they come back later to live here so I would 9
agree with Commissioner Gardias. This is a very natural situation. Thank you. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Ok, Commissioner Monk. 12
13
Commissioner Monk: If this is going to be made into Motion I'd like to see it put as a phrase 14
rather than a hypothetical question. Thank you. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Thank you, Commissioner Monk. Commissioner Rosenblum. 17
18
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, I'll just to state for the record so I did find the table that I was 19
looking for. Palo Alto is 79 percent housing with two or more bedrooms across rental and 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
owner occupied. So if you want three bedrooms and above it's 57 percent. So at any rate I 1
again I would I'm happy I agree with Commissioner Monk we should the Motion should say 2
what we want not a theoretical thing. I'm happy to support the majority of this Commission 3
that feels this is important. My personal view is again the vast majority of housing in this town 4
is two or more bedrooms. The demographics are shifting in a way that this isn't the main pitch 5
point for our community, but sure we’re a family oriented community and to the extent that 6
the document represents that I’m happy to support a statement. But I agree with 7
Commissioner Monk that I don't quite know what the statement is based on this line. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I don't have any lights. Would anybody like to move this item forward? No, 10
why don’t… no, why don’t you proceed. Light up the board if you'd like to continue. We can 11
come back to you. I don't want to move away from this until we get a statement that a 12
majority of us can stand behind. Commissioner Summa. 13
14
Commissioner Summa: So I have a question. I didn't think we were going to rewrite these 15
things. I thought we were going to pass them along. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Well so I’ll clarify for you. The goal for tonight is for us to determine what… I'll 18
give you an example. Look at Number 3 here. It's got two contrary statements. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Summa: Yes. 1
2
Chair Alcheck: So we can't just move that along and the question is: is when we say some PTC 3
members this and some PTC that I'd like to conclude at this meeting whether it's 4‐3 or 5‐2 or 4
6‐1 or 2‐2‐2 on a separate item. So the goal here from my perspective is that when we author 5
our letter to City Council I am hopeful of two things. Number one, that we've given them a list 6
of statements that represent our view, our collective view on certain items and that they will 7
also be able to very clearly rely on our hopefully excellent minutes tonight to determine how 8
other Commissioners who didn't support those items felt with respect to the things that got the 9
most votes. 10
11
Commissioner Summa: Ok, but so are we going to rewrite each one of these because I think 12
that could I wasn't expecting we would do that. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Well, here is the flaw. Right now if any one of the individuals who nominated 15
this item would like to make a Motion for this exact text to proceed we can take a vote on it. I 16
don't know that it would get all seven, but we can see. The other option is that it appears that 17
maybe one of the nominators is sort of drafting a different statement to build greater 18
consensus is what I suspect and if that is the case then there may be the vote may turn out 19
differently. We can do either. I'm not standing in the way of anybody's individual interest to 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
pursue their own sort of process here. I'm just trying to create a opportunity for this to be 1
effective consensus building and to be perfectly honest clear. Ok, I have a light from 2
Commissioner Rosenblum. 3
4
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, just I hope that this is helpful. Commissioner Lauing and I 5
were some of the authors of this process so I just want to reflect back on some of the intention 6
of that. I had thought that what we're going to do was to do essentially a quick poll of what 7
items the group of us thought were important and that's what resulted in this list of 19. Out of 8
that there was going to be probably two things that happened. First, these things will be 9
passed to Council, but second there was going to be a small subset that we were discuss at 10
great length to say well, we spent a lot of time on transaction transactional things, just voting 11
yes/no send it forward, but there be a small number of things that we thought were really 12
important and let's take the time deliberate. So an example of that is our overall parking policy 13
and strategy. Another example is Transportation Demand Management (TDM) or 14
Transportation Management Association (TMA) programs. So I had thought that what we 15
would get out of this out of 19 there would be those 6‐2 or 6‐1/5‐2 things that would just get 16
passed through. And then second that hopefully we could agree say I think we think these are 17
the three things that we should really take one more session on and then come up with some 18
considered opinion and rationale so that what Council gets is essentially like small reports from 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
the dais of around again an example is parking. And there would be a lot of issues that come 1
up under that rubric. 2
3
So anyway that was what I had thought we defined as part of process was that we were a little 4
bit frustrated by having so many transactional items where we’d just vote then pass it through. 5
That there are some items we wanted to discuss in detail, but recognizing that we're not going 6
to do that for the 200 items that we started with. Even 19 that’s too much. And so that out of 7
this hopefully we'll have a couple that had enough meat that maybe at the end we can make 8
some Motions to say I'd like to discuss this topic and put this on the agenda and get some 9
things through. 10
11
Commissioner Lauing: Can I comment since I was quoted? 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Ok, hold on. I have a light from Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel and 14
would do me a favor, light up your board so that I can call on you next. Commissioner [Note 15
Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. 16
17
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I’m sorry. Do you want to say something before I propose a specific 18
Motion? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Lauing: Yeah, I was just going to comment on as Commissioner Rosenblum said 1
we were kind of the instigators of this. So I just wanted to talk about the procedural 2
expectations and so I essentially agree with what he said which is why I asked at the beginning 3
if we were going to actually go through all 19 recognizing that some of them are not detailed as 4
to this is where it's going to fit in the policy. I think it would be ideal at the end if we had 15 or 5
whatever they are that we do have policy oriented so we're very specific about that. And I 6
agree we don't have time with our extraordinarily sadly limited amount of time to really debate 7
thoroughly 19 which I'd love to do, but we just don't have that much time to get to the end. I'm 8
happy to follow the Chairs’ process (interrupted) 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Yeah. 11
12
Commissioner Lauing: But I agree with (interrupted) 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Look, I appreciate what you're saying. I hope that the items that for example I 15
nominated that I care significantly about to communicate to staff that maybe didn't fall in your 16
radar you will use the time when we discuss them to encourage me to add potentially 17
comments that you could add to them that will make it more likely for your support or not. The 18
goal here is… look, to be perfectly honest the statement as this is written to me is not 19
particularly relevant for me to communicate to Council. If four people on this Commission want 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
to proceed let them make that Motion. We’ll take the vote. We’ll move on. I'm just what I'm 1
what I suggested in my comments on this item were with the intent of just maybe improving it 2
a little bit so that I could stand behind it. That's all. And any Commissioner could say I don't 3
think that's an improvement and I don't want to include it and here's my Motion and we move 4
on. And it's a simple as that. It’s not, I don't intend for this to be sort of personally upsetting or 5
frustrating and I think that the more concise and clear we are the faster this process can go. 6
Ok, I have a light from Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. 7
8
MOTION #1 9
10
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Am I on or off? Here we go, I’m on. Be nice if these lights came up above 11
the... So here's the proposal. In light of Palo Alto’s traditional family orientation we need 12
housing policies that encourage building more family oriented housing for all demographics. 13
We recommend adding policies to L‐4 and L‐5 to accommodate larger scale family oriented 14
housing development in retail and commercial districts and policies to ensure school and other 15
service impacts are fully mitigated. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I would like to treat that as a like a Motion or if not if that's acceptable. 18
19
SECOND 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Commissioner Monk: I'd like to second the Motion and I have one question. Are you 2
distinguishing between for rental or purchase or just leaving that vague? 3
4
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Very vague. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so we have a Motion to edit this Item Number 1 and we have a second. Does 7
anybody wish to speak to the Motion? To be clear we’re this Motion essentially is saying that 8
not only do we want to communicate something that we've just heard regarding Item Number 9
1, but this is the specific text of that communication. Ok, I see no lights. I see a light. 10
Commissioner Rosenblum. 11
12
Commissioner Rosenblum: I just have a question for the for our attorney. Do we have language 13
in any Comp Plan document or City planning document that accounts for school 14
planning/mitigations? 15
16
Ms. Gitelman: We did have a discussion of this very issue with the Council and I think we ended 17
up adding a policy, but it will take a minute to find it. We labored over this with the Attorney 18
staff and (interrupted) 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Rosenblum: But we are permitted to do so? 1
2
Ms. Gitelman: Yeah. 3
4
Commissioner Rosenblum: Ok. 5
6
Ms. Gitelman: We’ll find it for you. 7
8
Commissioner Rosenblum: I’m fine with the answer as long as we are permitted to do so I don't 9
need to see where it exists. 10
11
Ms. Gitelman: There are limitations as to what we can say and we crafted a policy very carefully 12
to stay within those limitations. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I don't see any other lights so I'm going to call for the vote on this item. All 15
Commissioners in favor of supporting the Motion please raise your hand and say aye. Ok, all 16
Commissioner opposed? Ok, Commissioners Rosenblum and Alcheck oppose. All others 17
support. So 5‐2. That message is communicated. Would you like to speak to your dissent? 18
19
MOTION #1 PASSED (5‐2, Commissioner Rosenblum and Chair Alcheck opposed) 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Commissioner Rosenblum: None. Nothing new. Already been stated for the record. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Great. Alright, moving on Item Number 2, this is he Land Use Element narrative 4
and maps. I'm not going to read it out loud, but you guys can all look it over. Please light up my 5
board if anybody would like to discuss this item. I have Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] 6
Waldfogel. 7
8
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I’d rather not start, but if no one else is lit up I’ll do it. So the current 9
Comp Plan is built on a three way distinction between residential districts, commercial districts, 10
and employment districts. And the residential districts and commercial districts by current 11
Comp Plan I mean the one that's in effect today, not the one that we're currently considering. 12
And the commercial districts and the residential districts have a I hate to use this word 13
synergistic relationship that the residential districts provide customers to the commercial 14
districts and the commercial districts provide services to the residential districts. I mean this is 15
very clear. It's reiterated over and over in the definitions of the districts. The employment 16
district is our third category. The current Comp Plan calls out the Research Park, the medical 17
area, I think San Antonio corridor and East Meadow as employment districts. Perhaps part of 18
Embarcadero extension is an employment district, but it explicitly calls out a distinction 19
between these different categories. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
So now I'm just going to stop and tell you a little story about what's going on. So in my day job 2
the other day I visited a small tech company in Downtown Palo Alto. It’s a group of guys who 3
just recently moved here from Israel, really nice guys, they got 1,000 square feet and they just 4
took in I think they just drew $17 million dollars Venture Capital (VC) investment from one of 5
my favorite venture firms. I won't name names. Good guys on all sides, but as I was visiting 6
them in their very nice second floor space over coffee shops and all kinds of good stuff I just 7
kept wondering how many tax accountants or therapists could possibly compete with guys who 8
just raised $17 million for rent. I mean it's sort of unfathomable because guys in that position 9
$10 a foot that’s not an issue. You know $12 a foot wouldn't be an issue. I mean just for them 10
having a Palo Alto address means a lot because it's actually a way they signal to their partners, 11
to other potential investors, to potential employees that they're in the game. And to the extent 12
they're in the game and that they're occupying space this is space that's not available for 13
neighborhood services. 14
15
Ground floor retail protection is a great step although retail has other issues that we can talk 16
about it's not in peril if you look at Stanford Shopping Center, if you look at Town & Country. 17
It's certainly in peril if rents are too high, but we have this situation where we're saying look 18
let's have global companies with strong balance sheets, sometimes infinite budgets for rent, 19
compete with the little guy. I mean it's like saying the 49ers can go scrimmage with the Gunn 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
High School Junior Varsity (JV) football team. Sure they're both on the field playing football, but 1
someone's going to get hurt. It's just not going to work out. So that's what we've really lost. 2
3
I mean it's funny the language around commercial districts is mostly pretty good, but it doesn't 4
acknowledge that something really big has happened in Downtown Palo Alto and in Cal Ave. in 5
the last decade which is the kind of commercial services that the neighborhoods rely on have 6
been economically crowded out by other uses. And I think the Comp Plan either needs to step 7
up and say this is a big shift in our vision of how the town, of how the City is organized, possibly 8
redefine those districts as mixed‐use or as adjuncts to Research and Development (R&D) or we 9
need to double down and say these are still neighborhood serving commercial districts and we 10
have to protect space for the kinds of services. I mean I'll just end on this note which is we've 11
recently seen issues like dentists and doctors complaining about available space. We've heard 12
issues about not for profits, about music schools looking for space and we've crowded all those 13
uses out of our commercial districts. We've seen most of our auto repair leave town. So 14
districts that should be service commercial I can think of a half dozen examples of that. We’re 15
crowding out all these valuable residential services. So this plan has some good language about 16
that, but then from time to time we see a language slipped in which completely undermines the 17
general philosophy of the commercial districts. I'll stop on that note. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I have a light from Commissioner Rosenblum. Oh, I’m sorry, I’m sorry. I have 1
a light from Commissioner Summa and then Commissioner Rosenblum. 2
3
Commissioner Summa: So I agree with the comments of Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] 4
Waldfogel and I also think it's really disappointing to me I when we moved from Downtown 5
Palo Alto to our house in College Terrace we specifically wanted to live close to services and the 6
train and that's why we wanted to stay in Downtown. And I see all of these services I see them 7
slipping away and sure we've got a lot of new restaurants, but at some point we could have too 8
many. So it's disappointing to me to have to drive to another town to buy art supplies or 9
greeting cards when I could just walk to my little Downtown that I purposely located next to. 10
And I think it really I you know those as interesting and nice as some of these startups are and 11
not to I wouldn’t name names either, but they don't provide anything to create a diverse and 12
vibrant town. People don't go to them except the people working there. You walk by them 13
they don't have products in the stores. You don't have a relationship with the people that work 14
there like you might at your cobblery shop. So I think it is it's affecting not only how complete 15
this town is that we are losing these things, but also it's making it a less vibrant and diverse 16
place for residents and also for the people that work here because they can't walk around and 17
see those things either. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
So I think it's a very important issue. It was an issue that came up a lot at the CAC and it's come 1
up a lot here. So thank you. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok, Commissioner Rosenblum. 4
5
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, I think it's important issue and actually I didn't understand this 6
whole block until Vice‐Chair described it I think quite eloquently. And so I agree with the issue. 7
In some ways it's analogous to a lot of what we're asking for around Below Market Rate (BMR) 8
housing, more affordable housing, you want diverse community, you also want a diverse set of 9
services and businesses in our community. The difference to me though is. If you offer an 10
apartment at well below market rate there becomes a point where to an individual it's a safe 11
place to live in a great community near good schools, etcetera. It's attractive. 12
13
Retail is facing something different. A lot of retailers just don't survive because of a lot of 14
market pressures. And when retail preservation came up before this Commission a while back I 15
went and talked to a bunch of retailers. So I think I forget the number I called. It was around 16
12 different retailers of different types and I talked to them and very rarely they list rent as 17
their biggest issue. They said we can't get employees. They don't live anywhere around here, 18
they come in from like Gilroy. And so if they get even a job offer even for $5 per hour less 19
closer to home they take it. They leave constantly. So you want to solve my problem figure out 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
how employees can live near me. Second is foot traffic. I need customers. And so to 1
Commissioner Summa’s to answer part of a statement that you made around what do these 2
businesses bring, talk to any retailer. They really depend on the workers here. So you talk to 3
the cobbler who's making custom shoes or looking to get their shoes repaired? Who is actually 4
going into a dry cleaning shop? A lot of them are the workers who live around here. So it is an 5
important ecosystem question, but at the same time the loss of diversity of services is a 6
problem. 7
8
I don't know if there's anything here that actually gives me something to latch onto to say yes, 9
this is a great idea to support. It talks about mixed‐use designations. There were some specific 10
areas around for example designating and I think the Vice‐Chair had suggested this in the past 11
and it came up around the music schools and psychological health services operating out of our 12
churches, but designating churches in such a way that allows them explicitly to carry on certain 13
community services so they don't have to that this doesn't become like a grey market economy 14
where they have businesses that are businesses, but they have to act like they're not but 15
they're serving the neighborhood. 16
17
I don't know what the answer is here. I do think it's an important issue. I don't see anything in 18
particular here that I'm not sure where this would even fit in the Comp Plan. I it's a statement 19
to say it's important to have diversity of businesses. I don't see things here that necessarily get 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
to that, but I guess there are different levels of things within the Comp Plan. I personally think 1
the one thing as a City that we've done which is retail preservation ground floor citywide I think 2
was poorly done. I think for retail to survive you want to pick a good area for retail and 3
concentrate so every store front is full, it's vibrant, it's around people that can work there and 4
buy there and that making everything all over the City have to find a retailer makes for lots of 5
empty pockets everywhere. I think it was a poor move and it doesn't address a big problem 6
that retailers have. I just think was a blunt instrument and not that well thought out. 7
8
At the same time I do think that reserving spaces for well below market rate services is a good 9
idea. I'm just not sure exactly how it gets implemented or if there are other models for other 10
cities that are good. Anyways so I've said my piece on this. I support this idea. I'm not sure 11
how it works exactly. I think it's important, but it's more difficult in some ways than BMR 12
housing. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Rosenblum. I’ll jump in here. I this is a perfect 15
example of why I am glad that we're sort of following this process because when I saw this item 16
in our list I didn't quite appreciate what it was getting at and I think Commissioner [Note Vice‐17
Chair] Waldfogel’s comments were really thoughtful. My context is similar Commissioner 18
Rosenblum’s. I recently had a very in‐depth conversation with a hotel proprietor that's opening 19
a new hotel and his biggest issue I mean they're trying to open up the doors this month and 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
they're having it, they're struggling like crazy to hire staff in the kitchen and in the hotel. And to 1
the extent where they're paying two times the rate they're paying in Los Angeles where they 2
operate hotels too and it's simply because the housing and the commute are creating barriers 3
for employees to come. And I think that I imagine that this is the same situation that probably 4
all restaurants and retailers are really struggling to do as well. 5
6
There is this is an interesting discussion because we're not talking about retail preservation 7
we're talking about a floor up. We're talking about the second floor. And I agree, we've seen a 8
dramatic change. I grew up here and I don't know that I would look… we had Commissioner 9
Summa make an interesting comment earlier. She quoted City Council Member Filseth saying 10
we do two things well we raise good kids and we raise good start ups. I don't know that I would 11
suggest that the startup that received $17 million dollars is sort of the norm. What I've noticed 12
in the last decade in Downtown Palo Alto is that we're losing the startups and we're getting the 13
J.P. Morgan’s and the thousand dollar an hour attorneys. Those are not the kind of attorneys 14
that you go to when you have a dispute with your neighbor about where they put the fence or 15
anything for that matter that's not corporate. 16
17
So I guess my issue is here when you were speaking you sort of mentioned things like 18
veterinarians and doctors and dentists and I think that one way we could ensure that services 19
like those were protected would be to incorporate them in some element of ground floor retail 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
preservation. The wider we make and we had this discussion during our retail preservation 1
debate which was should we be incorporating not just your Merriam‐Webster version of retail, 2
but sort of a wider description of the definition of retail. I think once you get to the second 3
floor the distinguishing between a $17 million funded startup and a $1,200 lawyer is to me… it 4
lacks like a clear winner and loser. 5
6
If we're talking about for example an art store that we want to preserve that goes into retail. 7
So I guess it's I would be curious to know how we could craft this statement so that it 8
communicated that we wanted commercial tenants that served our neighborhoods. Again, I'm 9
having a hard time sort of picturing exactly what that is, but I do sort of wonder if the best 10
solution there is to incorporate them in some of our retail preservation which is now citywide. 11
That could actually create a retail preservation ordinance that I could be more proud of because 12
it would allow the “hardcore” or “real retail” to congregate where it will and then the areas that 13
really aren't suitable for retail, but now are preserved could become areas that are suitable for 14
services like dentists, veterinarians, accountants, I guess to some extent community banks, 15
therapists, and stuff like that which are transactional. They have a customer who comes in and 16
in some respects there is a retail service component as opposed to a business to business (B2B) 17
component. So that's where I stand on that issue, but I do really appreciate the thoughtful 18
comment. I have now Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel, Commissioner Monk, and 19
then Commissioner Summa. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: So just a couple of quick responses. I appreciate the directional support. 2
I mean I think that the retail preservation as we have it now is both too broad and too narrow. 3
So it possibly covers too much ground floor geography, but doesn't capture our ability to 4
implement these second floor services. So I think that's possibly that's the tool. I'm not… it 5
seems like a slightly blunt instrument for an interesting discussion. 6
7
On this point about the difference between different I think you're right that the $1,000 an 8
hour lawyer and the $17 million startup are possibly the same category although I can tell you 9
that all my $1,000 an hour lawyers have left Downtown Palo Alto and they’re either in the 10
Research Park or in East Palo Alto. So strangely enough most of the guys that I work with have 11
gone elsewhere. I mean maybe the rents are too high. I don't know what the reason is. I mean 12
I know that… Well, I know that they don't pack them in as tight as some of the startups do. So 13
and then just the well, let me leave it at that and see what other people have to say. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I have a Commissioner Monk and then Commissioner Summa. 16
17
Commissioner Monk: I just want to acknowledge commish or Vice‐Chair Waldfogel for putting 18
this together. I think it's an important issue. What Commissioner Rosenblum stated really 19
resonated with me pretty much on every level. And in particular in regards to the reasons why 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
we're seeing or one of the reasons why we're seeing a decline in retail being more attributed to 1
lack of workers being able to be attracted to this area. So I'm wondering if it would make sense 2
to try to think of some sort of policies and I was going to go more into this under the retail item 3
that I had voted for separately rather than here, but I'd like to see the City or staff take some 4
sort of proactive approach to really addressing the issue. There are problems with the retail 5
protection ordinance. Those buildings are just sitting empty. It's very depressing and while 6
other businesses have help wanted signs every one of them practically. So if we want to have 7
more services and more retail we need to figure out how do we can get workers here and 8
parked. I think that's the main thing that we should work on and if there's a policy in that 9
regard that could happen I would advocate for that. Thanks. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Monk. Commissioner Summa. 12
13
Commissioner Summa: Thanks. So I think this is kind of this is not just about retail this is about 14
a balance of the residential districts, commercial, and employment districts. So what has 15
happened is that the commercial districts have sort of morphed into becoming employment 16
districts and it's not just retail, it's not just shops, it's all the services as well. So I think it's an 17
important distinction to make. I also I we don't have to preserve this, we don't have to write a 18
new way to preserve this. The municipal code it's very clear about it especially in the little C 19
zone, CN, CS, and CC about restricting the kinds of business to in especially in CN to the kinds 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
that people will walk in and use. So I don't think we need to rewrite the municipal code here I 1
think we need to acknowledge that there's maybe been some slippage and blurring between 2
commercial districts and employment centers and strongly reaffirm that we believe that's 3
important for a vibrant and useful community where people don't have to get in cars and drive 4
to find those things. Thank you. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Summa. I don't have any other lights so if anybody 7
wishes to sort of jump in here? Ok, Commissioner Lauing. 8
9
Commissioner Lauing: Yeah, just briefly correct this isn't retail. We've had this painful example 10
in front of us recently about the music schools and they needed to use the churches and that 11
was also to benefit the churches. I don't think were in that business to create benefits to 12
churches, but music schools are never going to be defined as retail. Maybe gymnastics are or 13
things like that. So it's this is a comment about neighborhoods and quality of neighborhoods 14
and making sure that you can get the services there. So I definitely support the tone of this, but 15
I would have to see it in specifics in terms of how that would be implemented as a policy. 16
When it gets down to the issues about the maps that's something that at some future date we 17
could take a look at and work on together to make any adjustments necessary there, but I think 18
the devil's in the details on this one. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Lauing. I would like to suggest and see what my 1
fellow Commissioners think about this in the past we've had staff articulate sort of a thought 2
statement based on the various opinions that have been mentioned here. And I think tonight 3
across this stage we've sort of heard Commissioners each touch on what Commissioner [Note 4
Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel raised. I we have a second meeting on this topic. I don't have a light 5
here sort of suggesting a statement or even suggesting this statement as a whole. If there is 6
that Motion we can discuss it, but another option could be that staff could somehow 7
summarize the discussion that we've just had in a way that we can review it next week or at our 8
next meeting. I'd love to move on to Item Number 3 if there aren’t more comments on item. 9
You can add many comments. Anybody who wants to light up the board can add comments. I 10
have a light from Rosenblum and a light from Waldfogel. Go ahead. Go ahead Commissioner 11
[Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. 12
13
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Ok, sorry. The reason why it's hard to actually write up a policy is that at 14
some level the policies are already here. So if you read Goal L‐4 commercial centers, I'm not 15
going to read it out loud to you. If you read policy L‐4.5 University Avenue Downtown it's 16
substantially describes districts that conform with this vision that's in this paragraph or that 17
that we've been discussing and I'm very grateful for the directional support that people have 18
expressed. So substantially this is what we say in the Comp Plan. It's also what we say in the 19
current Comp Plan. I mean these goals and these policies are substantially lifted from the 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
existing Comp Plan and carried into this one. And so in some ways I'm left scratching my head 1
because this is the law of the land so to speak or the policy framework that we live within and 2
yet experientially this has slipped away from us. So the question is what do we have to do? I 3
mean I guess I'm putting this back on staff. What do we have to say if we want to provide 4
direction that we want to recapture and prioritize these goals and policies that are already 5
articulated in the plan? 6
7
Ms. Gitelman: Well, I could make a suggestion here. I mean I think it is possible that the 8
Commission could recommend to the Council that they take a minute to evaluate the 9
distinctions between the commercial centers and employment districts and look at 10
strengthening policies to support walkable neighborhoods with professional services as well as 11
ground floor retail. I mean I think that the Commission's making a point about those 12
professional services that aren’t really covered in the ground floor retail ordinance and some of 13
you have had suggestions about how those two concepts could be blended together. And so I 14
think that is a new idea that the Council would like to hear from you so maybe a Motion or a 15
statement recommending that the Council look to support, look to strengthen policies about 16
the walkable neighborhoods including both professional services and ground floor retail would 17
be something that could get agreement here. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you very much Director Gitelman. I'm going to go to Commissioner 1
Rosenblum and I'm also going to suggest that if somebody would like to move what Director 2
Gitelman just suggested and we can proceed too. 3
4
Commissioner Rosenblum: So I was going to try to support the Vice‐Chair in first observing the 5
same thing which is in principle this I think what's being suggested exists in our Comp Plan. To 6
make it have some more teeth my reading at least listening to you is that we're going to try to 7
extend something like retail protection to services. So it’s service protection; want diversity of 8
services, diversity of retail. The thing that I do find troubling here, the piece I wouldn't 9
necessarily support is if there's some attempt to use this as a sharpening of zoning distinctions 10
between commercial and employment districts. I think that the trend at least in our Comp Plan 11
has been to encourage mixed‐use wherever possible and that's for many reasons, but it has 12
benefits of traffic smoothing throughout the day, of having people be able to support so if I'm 13
working in one area I can support those local businesses and vice versa, etcetera, etcetera. So 14
it has again if we're thinking about modern urban planning most cities that we consider great 15
cities are great partially because they've knocked down some of those distinctions. That you 16
walk around and there are people who are working and also shopping and playing all in the 17
same areas. So if this is about preserving a diversity of services just like we're trying to preserve 18
a diversity of retail and diversity of housing 100 percent for it and I would suggest that the 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Comp Plan have language in it around preserving a diversity of services to service our 1
community. 2
3
If it's also about sharpening zoning distinctions and again when I read about like where did we 4
go wrong with city planning and I had a brief discussion about Level of Service (LOS) and why 5
that led to evil and about parking minimums and why that led to bad city planning one of the 6
other principles was the sharp zoning distinctions forcing people to live in one part of town and 7
drive to another part of town where they work and yet another part of the town where there 8
are commercial activities and that was thought to be, that was the American invention. In 9
Europe you lived above the store. You had the store downstairs. You everything was located 10
centrally and so that was an American innovation and a lot of cities are now trying to undo that 11
right? And try to get these zoning distinctions to be more mixed. 12
13
Anyway so if there's two principles here one I completely agree, preservation of diversity of 14
services. I'm not sure if it's if it's overburdened with the second thing or not which is around 15
the sharpening of distinctions in commercial districts. So I'm not sure if that was intended. I 16
might be reading into it, but I heard two different things and so Vice‐Chair’s original statement 17
about preserving these people from getting squeezed out I completely agree with. But I think I 18
also heard particularly from you Commissioner Summa that we want to get back to sharpening 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
the kind of enforcement around the distinction between commercial and employment districts 1
and I'm not sure if I fully understand it or would support that. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Rosenblum. I don't see any lights. I’ll mention that 4
I 100 percent agree with that statement so for what that's worth in our minutes. Would 5
anybody else like to make a comment? Do we want to communicate anything on this item to 6
Council? Sorry, I have two lights. I have ok, I have Commissioner Summa. 7
8
MOTION #2 9
10
Commissioner Summa: So no I to answer my colleague no it's not to sharpen a distinction of 11
zoning it's to I'm not sure what you mean even, but really the intention is to preserve walkable 12
neighborhoods with services. And I think there's also very strong language which was an area 13
of agreement at the CAC about encouraging mixed‐use buildings. So it's not to attack mixed‐14
use buildings at all. In fact many of these buildings are mixed‐use anyway. So yeah, no. It's 15
really to keep this City a city with full services and it's professional services, personal services, 16
and retail walkable or at least at short distance for everybody and to not have a blurring 17
between the employment centers which the Research Park does not have those other kinds of 18
serve… I mean there's big, big law firms, but it doesn't have those other kinds of services. And 19
I'm not actually so the idea is to keep the other places diverse. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
So and I mean we could try to rewrite this right now, but we could move… I would move that 2
we just pass this along. I think it's self‐evident and unless somebody wants to try to rewrite it 3
I'd move that we just pass this along to Council the way it's written. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: Do I have a second? 6
7
SECOND 8
9
Commissioner Gardias: Second. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Commissioner Gardias. Ok, thank you Commissioner Gardias. You lit your light 12
up. Was that to second or to speak? Go ahead. 13
14
Commissioner Gardias: Same thing. Same thing, second, I said it. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Oh, ok. Thank you, Commissioner Gardias. Ok, so we have a Motion on the floor 17
and a second. Would anybody like to make a comment at this time? I have Commissioner 18
Lauing. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Lauing: Yes, I was going to suggest earlier before this Motion, but I'm not in favor 1
of the Motion because I think that it could be extraordinarily important, it could be 2
extraordinarily add to the value of the Comp Plan, and I think that it's not self‐explanatory as a 3
number of Commissioners noted tonight that they were some thought it was something 4
different. So I think it’d be well worth continuing this item until it could be appropriately in 5
detail taken up by the Commissioner and potentially City to just get it right so we're 6
communicating exactly what we think. So that's why I wouldn't support that current Motion. 7
8
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I'm going to make a comment. I really I'm not a huge fan of the Substitute 9
Motion process because I think it doesn't really give the makers of Motions the opportunity to 10
be heard. So I won't do that here, but I will suggest that I don't I wouldn't support this language 11
as it's written if we vote on it which I will put to a vote in a minute. But I would support a 12
Motion that more closely tracked the language of Director Gitelman’s statement which was to 13
encourage City Council to incorporate policies that… I'm paraphrasing at this point, but more 14
dramatically protected services. Would you mind by any chance do you have that written down 15
what you? So you don't have to do it now, but what I would suggest to you all is that if we had 16
a Motion that was had a more clear ask I would support that. You don't have to read it now. 17
Any other comments? Does anybody want to speak to their Motion? I mean I can take a vote 18
and we can see where the chips fall and… 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Could I just ask them? 1
2
Chair Alcheck: Yeah absolutely, please. Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. 3
4
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Commissioner Summa a question. Would you support an amendment to 5
give Director Gitelman some discretion to use this language as guidance toward developing 6
some... 7
8
Commissioner Summa: So you would want to continue it and discuss it in the next meeting, is 9
that what you're saying? 10
11
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Well to bring some language forward for the next meeting. 12
13
Commissioner Summa: Yeah, if the Motion fails. 14
15
VOTE 16
17
Chair Alcheck: I'm going to suggest that we put this to a vote. Let's see where we are and 18
maybe we can efficiently move forward. All those in favor of this Motion please raise your 19
hand. I have one, two, three, three takers going once. All those opposed to this Motion please 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
raise your hand. Three. All those abstaining? Ok, I'm going to count that as an abstention. We 1
have Commissioners Summa and Rosenblum and Gardias supporting the Motion, 2
Commissioners Monk, Alcheck, and Lauing not supporting the Motion and Commissioner [Note 3
Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel in the truest sense of the word abstaining. Would anybody else like to 4
make a Motion? Commissioner Lauing. 5
6
MOTION #2 FAILED (3‐3‐1, Vice‐Chair Waldfogel abstained) 7
8
MOTION #3 9
10
Commissioner Lauing: Yes, I'd like to move that we continue this and get very specific language 11
that captures the essence of the core points and vote on it at the next meeting. 12
13
Ms. Gitelman: Through the Chair I think we'd be happy to take that direction even without a 14
Motion. Just so we understand your desires I think we've heard the desire to emphasize this 15
kind of neighborhood services in addition to retail services and the also the concept of walkable 16
neighborhoods that are accessible to residential districts and I think there are a couple other 17
points made in the course of the conversation. We'll try and put that all in kind of a positive 18
statement and bring it back for your action next time. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: Thank you, Commissioner [Note‐Director] Gitelman. I'm going to actually second 1
this Motion and I’ll suggest that I think a fruitful way this could work is that if you felt that there 2
were sort of multiple statements that you had a hard time putting together you could break 3
them down into bullets and when we look at it next week individuals could sort of opine about 4
which elements of whatever statement you craft they agreed with and it would help us as 5
opposed to having to go up and down one statement. I have light from Commissioner Summa. 6
7
Commissioner Summa: So I think I can support this Motion and I just I think it's important for 8
staff to emphasize that there was a there's that there's been a blurring of kind of the distinction 9
between the commercial centers and employment centers and that was an important idea that 10
the these personal services, professional services, and retail cannot compete with these 11
startups such these well‐funded startups such as Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel 12
illustrated in his earlier example. 13
14
VOTE 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Summa. Alright in an effort to sort of keep this 17
train rolling and moving to the next item I'm going to quickly take a vote on this Motion. All 18
those in favor of Commissioner Lauing’s Motion please raise your hand and say aye. It's 19
unanimous. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
MOTION #3 PASSED (7‐0) 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok Commission we are moving on to Item Number 3. This is the L‐1 Growth 4
Management where there is conflicting messages here about citywide growth and the overall 5
cap and how we want to communicate to City Council where this Commission stands on that. 6
So any individuals who nominated this or anyone in particular would like to comment or start 7
this discussion off? I see a light from Commissioner Rosenblum. Thank you. 8
9
Commissioner Rosenblum: So this item just became just came before our City Council and so to 10
some extent they've already made this water under the bridge, but hopefully we can record our 11
thought for the future. I've spoken on this item a number of occasions and I'm pretty 12
passionate about it. When this ordinance was originally passed it was right after the City ran a 13
giant process of citizen engagements, the Our Palo Alto Summit, and this was specifically on the 14
agenda. So hundreds of Palo Alto citizens debated this item and weighed in on what method 15
for controlling growth people were most interested in. And the method that the City Council 16
chose was the least favorite which was a hard cap. And the reason why I think many people 17
didn't favor it was because people felt that the issue we're trying to control for was traffic and 18
congestion and we're using a cap as a way to try to control that. That office construction is 19
viewed as a culprit for cars and to make fewer cars be on our street we will control the number 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
of offices that get built. And the people who wanted alternative methods felt that the City and 1
buildings and developers could contribute to a better use of our time and funds. So basically 2
what we call the TMA which I think has been a poor stepchild that no one really has shown that 3
much consideration or love for while we had meeting after meeting about office caps. So I feel 4
that it's first not a terribly effective tool, but it also is a distraction from what I think is a more 5
meaningful programs that we should be embarking upon. 6
7
Council took the step of making some relaxing of this cap. I wish they would do away with it 8
altogether. I think it's a poorly designed tool and I think that we should be all guns a blazing on 9
alternative means of getting people to our employment centers and that should be our main 10
focus. And that any building that goes up needs to have a fairly robust package that would get 11
people out of their cars, but that having a annual limit at this level is counterproductive. So 12
that's been my argument for two years now. It's my argument today. I think that it was not a… 13
I don't think it was a well thought out plan, but also I think it was against the will of again the 14
hundreds of citizens that engaged on this issue. So that's my piece. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Rosenblum. There aren’t any other lights. I’ll the 17
reason why I nominated this issue is for the same exact reasons. I do not disagree with 18
anything Commissioner Rosenblum said so if the minutes can show that I just am restating his 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
statement entirely so that you guys can understand where I stand. Ok, I have a light from 1
Commissioner Summa and then Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. 2
3
Commissioner Summa: So I do agree that the TMA is a poor stepchild and I would love to see 4
reports on individual buildings’ efforts such as 101 Lytton which was supposed to have reports 5
annually I think or maybe it was every two years on how well programs for specific buildings are 6
using. But that being said I do agree with you on that and I would like to see it better funded 7
and more completely integrated into just something we do in this City. That being said I 8
disagree that having the cap was against the will of the people. I think it was a very satisfactory 9
tool and I think that staff presented it as having been successful in the sense that we were 10
getting projects that had… mixed‐use projects that retained retail or had retail and kept the 11
office under the limit so it wouldn't be noticed and housing which I thought was an 12
improvement and going kind of the right direction in improving housing which I think we all 13
agree we need. So I don't see it is that. 14
15
I didn't nominate this. I didn't personally nominate this one. I didn't nominate any of the ones 16
as reading them that had either/or like some believe this and some believe that because how 17
do you…? It struck me when I read this one and a couple others that they should be split into 18
two separate things because it's hard to make a recommendation with two totally opposing 19
ideas. So those are my thoughts on that. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Summa. I have Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] 2
Waldfogel. 3
4
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. I think that this category is a great place to bring metrics back 5
into the Comprehensive Plan. Because at some level I agree that the issue is impacts and yet 6
there's nothing in the plan today about measuring anything about quality of life, about any kind 7
of impact. We should have metrics in the plan and we should meter growth based on 8
performance against those metrics. So if we're not having impacts, grow. If we are having 9
impacts then slow down, but without any kind of measurement without any kind of feedback 10
loop built into the plan it's really hard to say we should just have open ended policies about in 11
my opinion about office and Research and Development (R&D) development. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. I’m not seeing lights 14
so I'll try to encourage some discussion here which would be would you support, just something 15
to think about. Would you support a Motion that suggested that because in light of Council's 16
recent discussion on this exact topic so in light of that discussion the Motion could be that the 17
Commission encourages Council to further consider the cap and it and in conjunction consider 18
adopting metrics to create a foundation for basing growth decisions on performance 19
achievement. So some I'm just trying to food for fodder there. I have two lights, three lights 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
now, four lights. Commissioner Rosenblum, Commissioner Summa, and then I had 1
Commissioner Gardias and Commissioner Lauing. 2
3
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, so I want to respond quickly to the Vice‐Chair’s statement. I 4
agree with this that there aren't that many metrics and goals. There's a metric and goal around 5
Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) rate which I think is important or at least it was there, so what 6
the goal of the City is to reduce SOV percentage. I would like to see other metrics as well. So I 7
completely agree. So there should be metrics around total number of car trips in and out of the 8
City and our goals for those parking capacity utilization. There should be a number of quality of 9
life metrics. So I agree with this. 10
11
In terms of this particular item what I would like as an outcome would be a message to Council 12
saying the PTC thinks that the cap is the wrong tool. We would like to see a focus on offsets 13
both from a citywide level, so what degree of congestion do we want to deal with? Like so 14
basically what quality of life are we aiming for and on a project basis i.e. if you build a building 15
in the City what kind of offset fund are you paying into? What do you need to achieve and 16
show in order to build in our town? So that would be my preference is to send a signal that we 17
do want both the metrics to be collected and then define I think the Comp Plan probably 18
wouldn't necessarily define individual metrics, but that we do need a section in Comp Plan 19
that's like metric driven planning. I don't know if that exists and I’m not sure if that would 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
satisfy the Vice‐Chair, but I agree in general that we want to be managing two metrics. But my 1
hope for this item would be to send a signal back to say we agree or at least whatever number 2
agree that the cap is not the right tool for guiding growth in our City. We want to focus on 3
impact and quality of life. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: Thank you, Commissioner Rosenblum. Commissioner Summa. 6
7
Commissioner Summa: So this is kind of a tricky problem because there were two metric and 8
basically quality of life that we couldn’t use that term indicators in the Comp Plan that the 9
Council chose to take out and that was the community indicators and the development 10
requirements. So I don't know what to say because Council clearly didn't want those and those 11
were the two missing comments by the way also. So that [I rephrase], but anyhow so I don't 12
know what to say about that because it was clearly something that Council didn't want in there 13
so maybe there's a way it can be, because I agree with you, but maybe there's a way we can 14
restate it that would be restate those two groups of metrics that the community indicators and 15
the development requirements that would be more palatable to Council. I don't know. It's just 16
a thought. 17
18
Ms. Gitelman: Through the Chair if I can offer a observation? I'm glad that Commissioner 19
Summa raised this. This was the subject of a lot of conversation at the CAC and then at the 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Council because it was among the kind of options on managing growth that the CAC forwarded 1
to the Council and ultimately the Council's decision I think was based on the fact that we 2
already measure a ton of things in our performance report every year that accompanies the 3
budget document. In other ways we’re sort of measuring performance and I think one thing 4
the Commission could do is suggest that the Council look at a way to build a link between those 5
other efforts and the this plan. I don't know exactly how you would phrase it, but that might be 6
one way to get some of that back in that the Council said oh my God, we already do that in 7
another venue and ended up taking it out. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Yeah, no. Thank you Director Gitelman. I think that's a perfect suggestion 10
actually and I don't know that we need to burden ourselves with figuring out exactly how to 11
craft the language around the link or what links should be made. I think the general idea is 12
accurate, is sufficient, excuse me. Ok, I have two more lights here. I have Commissioner 13
Gardias and Lauing. 14
15
Commissioner Gardias: Thank you. So there are two items before I get to the metrics which the 16
topic I totally agree with. I believe that there should be a set of operational metrics or maybe 17
sort of let me take it, say it differently, planning metrics that we would be looking after on the 18
times that would pretty much show the relationship between different elements and then our 19
growth should be pretty much some standard deviation from those metrics. If it goes beyond 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
that we would be alarmed because we know that something would not be working. And I 1
remember we talked about metrics a couple of years ago. We had a very good discussion and 2
the same arguments are coming up again. So I'm totally for it if somebody wants to propose a 3
Motion to request or propose this set of metrics, planning metrics I’d be totally supporting 4
them, planning and transportation metrics of course. In terms of this item just this specific item 5
I was not really sure if this total number of votes is the right count here just listening to those 6
that were just saying that we're not supporting this. So I would just encourage staff just to 7
check them off if there were truly four votes for this. 8
9
Ms. Gitelman: I think it's correct. What the issue is here that there are two conflicting ideas in 10
this one box and so some people voted for it because they like one idea and some people voted 11
for because they like the other. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: I'm going to clarify something here. We approached the nominations from the 14
perspective of what topics do we wish to discuss at our next meeting, not what topics do 15
unequivocally agree with. So I nominated this item because I felt like it was a topic that I would 16
like to discuss and communicate a shared message to Council. So that is what I believe this 17
voting process entails. I don't think that the four people that voted for this necessarily felt the 18
same way as I did. They just all felt that there was something about this item that they 19
wanted… 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Commissioner Gardias: I totally agree, but I was just looking at her arithmetic. I was I just 2
couldn't find the four votes[unintelligible] (interrupted) 3
4
Chair Alcheck: [Unintelligible] I would encourage you [unintelligible] 5
6
Commissioner Gardias: I think the topic is interesting so we should just discuss it otherwise and 7
I think that it just went to the right track which is the metrics. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Gardias. I have Commissioner Lauing. 10
11
Commissioner Lauing: Yeah, just briefly I intentionally did not nominate this one. You actually 12
had brought it up as an example last time in our discussion. I said that's one that I don't think 13
we should talk about because for one thing we're not going to get consensus, but the reasons 14
are I think it's so recent since it's been debated in detail by CAC in Council and it's now out of 15
the Comp Plan. So in terms of looking at changes yes, of course procedurally we could add it 16
back, but I just don't think this one is one that we should go with just because of really the 17
timing. And I don't think we should rush to judgment on all of us trying to come up to speed 18
tonight on this issue. All of us haven't dealt with it as often as fortunately or unfortunately 19
Commissioner Rosenblum has had to do. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: Ok, well thank you for that comment. We do have though four individuals that 2
did want to elevate this issue to a communication topic. 3
4
Commissioner Lauing: I don't know if that's true. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: No, no. No, no. Four individuals nominated this item for discussion which 7
means that it that we're having this discussion and if during that discussion there is a consensus 8
then the discussion is the opportunity to see if we can build consensus. I appreciate that you're 9
not ready to jump on this, but I'm going to proceed with the conversation to see if anybody else 10
potentially does feel like there’s consensus. 11
12
Commissioner Lauing: Sure. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I have a light from Commissioner Rosenblum. 15
16
Commissioner Rosenblum: So I'd like to make a Motion. And first just to quickly I think again 17
make sure that I'm being accurate about this. Commissioner Lauing just said this is no longer in 18
the Comp Plan. I am confused by that. I think this is an item that is in the current draft that is 19
affirm the cap on office development. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: I believe the office cap, the overall office cap is in part of the element and the 2
annual development limit is not. 3
4
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah. 5
6
Ms. Gitelman: Yeah, the overall cumulative cap is in the plan and the annual limit on office R&D 7
is not. The Council's direction was to do that by ordinance. 8
9
Commissioner Rosenblum: I see. 10
11
Ms. Gitelman: Not a policy in the plan. 12
13
MOTION #4 14
15
Commissioner Rosenblum: Ok, so that's helpful. Ok, so to finish off this item so I would… I 16
think that this should be passed as feedback to Council we've brought this far, but I would 17
agree that that would actually thank you for that. That in my mind makes it probably not one 18
of those small items that we will choose to debate at length out of this longer group. The 19
language I would suggest as a Motion would be PTC recommends that rather than annual office 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
development cap that Council consider to focus on offsets and quality of life and other 1
indication metrics setting annual goals based on the based on the impacts of development 2
including traffic, noise, pollution, etcetera. So my recommended language would be focused on 3
impacts and set metric goals on those impacts. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: Thank you. Do I have a second? 6
7
SECOND 8
9
Commissioner Monk: I'd like to second the Motion. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Ok, Commissioner Monk seconded the Motion. Would either of you like to 12
speak to the Motion? 13
14
Commissioner Rosenblum: Very briefly. So just to reiterate a couple of points I think that this is 15
actually a good Comp Plan type issue. It's an overall guiding principle around how we approach 16
development and so if the way we approach development is with hard caps, but no 17
measurements then I think that it's a I think it's folly. I think we should approach development 18
with an eye towards mitigating the impact and having a small set of metrics that we set goals 19
for. So I agree with Director Gitelman’s suggestion that something that should be done at a 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Comp Plan level is try to link all these metrics that we do collect information on to the few that 1
we really care about. And so like I said one that was in the Comp Plan already there was a 2
reference to what we want our SOV rate to be. That’s a big goal. There may be a few others 3
around quality of life and around impact from traffic that we want to have sort of top level 4
indicators of are we on the right path or not, what we want to get to? So to speak to my 5
Motion I think the Motion gets to that. It says instead of a cap use this and set a couple of 6
metrics that we're going to try to abide by. 7
8
Chair Alcheck: Ok, Commissioner Monk would you like to speak to the Motion? 9
10
Commissioner Monk: I would just iterate that it's not an ideal measure and the other tools that 11
were advocated by Commissioner Rosenblum were more appropriate and that's why I 12
supported the Motion. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I have a light. If anybody else like to make a comment before we vote please 15
light up the board. I have one light for Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. 16
17
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: So I think that as long as the metrics that we're talking about capture 18
some of the neighborhood quality of life items that we were discussing in the previous under 19
Item 2 that I support this. I mean I think that unbridled commercial development, unbridled 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
office development is probably not exactly what we want to do, but having some way to 1
measure what is happening better than what we do now, better than some of the traffic 2
studies that we've seen over the last couple of years that I've been on this Commission and 3
then responding to that I mean if we're seeing problems that maybe we it may be that we can't 4
identify specifically what project caused a problem, but if we're seeing trends going in a 5
negative direction then I think that if we can use these metrics to put reins on then I support 6
this. So that's I want to reiterate that as long as we will use metrics, use quality of life 7
indicators as a way to positively put the reins on development, figure out what's going on and 8
then restart or retest after we've implemented mitigations then I think this is a good direction 9
to go. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. I just want to turn to 12
the maker of the Motion. Are is that qualification in line with your Motion? 13
14
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yes. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Ok, good. Alright so we're building consensus here. I have two more lights it's 17
Commissioner Gardias and then Commissioner Summa after which I will take a vote. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Gardias: Yeah so if this is the language that Commissioner Waldfogel just 1
proposed, I’m sorry, Vice‐Chair then I support it. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Thank you. Commissioner Summa. 4
5
6
Commissioner Summa: Yeah, so I'm sorry that I can't I like the second half of your Motion about 7
metrics and but I don't support the first part about getting rid of the cap. But also Council has 8
just voted on what they wanted to do with the cap. It's seems bizarre to give them direction 9
about something they've recently decided which is not a Comp Plan issue it's at the ordinance 10
level. So if you took out the first part about getting rid of the cap which I've already supported 11
so I won't speak again I could support the second part about collecting data and metrics. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Summa. I’ll make a quick comment that I think the 14
reason why I support this isn't that it contradicts what Council just did it's that it identifies the 15
sentiment that it shouldn't be that we set caps in a vacuum. If our metrics are saying that every 16
development we allow is dramatically affecting our and reducing the goals of our Comp Plan 17
and that the metrics are showing dramatic falls in quality of life or [unintelligible] single 18
occupancy vehicle rates then restricting development is fine. It's the sense that those two 19
aren't linked. It's the sense that we're operating with a global cap on all development and an 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
annual cap on office development in the absence of actually any tool to measure whether or 1
not that cap whether or not the development that we would have seen would have caused a 2
problem. 3
4
That's not to suggest that the development that's taking place hasn't caused problems. It's just 5
to suggest that moving forward the Council should consider this linkage. That's basically what I 6
think we're doing. So did you just re‐light? Yeah, ok. Last comment to Commissioner Summa 7
and then we’ll take a vote. 8
9
Commissioner Summa: So I what I'd like I know you don't like them, but I'd like to make a 10
Substitute Motion and if you could give me the language from the second part again of your 11
Motion? 12
13
Commissioner Rosenblum: I believe that the second part of the Motion was that we consider 14
that we tie quality of life and impact measures to our development plans and set specific goals 15
around a couple of key metrics. 16
17
SUBSTITUTE MOTION #1 TO MOTION #4 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Summa: Does staff have that? So I'd like to make that as a Substitute Motion 1
and for reasons I've already stated. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok, in order for the Substitute Motion to replace the current Motion on the floor 4
I need a second. 5
6
SECOND 7
8
Commissioner Gardias: I will second it. 9
10
Commissioner Rosenblum: So now could I make a substitute Motion and just keep this up all 11
night? 12
13
Chair Alcheck: No, unfortunately you can't, but I will suggest that you can speak to your dissent 14
if you wish to. So I'm going to we have a Substitute Motion on the floor. Let's take a vote. All 15
those (interrupted). Yeah, this Substitute Motion in essence strips the comments made by 16
Commissioner Rosenblum that relate to the suggestion that the cap is not the right tool. So it 17
essentially is saying that we should be linking the metrics to our growth strategies without 18
commenting I think opining on how we feel about the cap itself. Commissioner Summa’s main 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
concern was that she didn't agree that the cap was the wrong tool and I think that's her… Yeah. 1
So that's the Motion which... 2
3
Commissioner Lauing: You so we can have commentary on the Substitute Motion now. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: Yeah. Well here's what I would like to do. We have a Substitute Motion on the 6
floor and we have another Motion that's just been sort of pushed to the side. And I do want us 7
to be effective and concise and this will undoubtedly be something that the minutes will be 8
useful to Council so let's be efficient. I do if anybody wants to make a comment before I take 9
this vote light up the board. Ok, I have two lights, there will be two comments; Commissioner 10
Rosenblum and then Commissioner Lauing. 11
12
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah so just to take a couple things in order. The first the fact that 13
Council discussed this recently is irrelevant. We're talking about now a Comp Plan that goes for 14
over a decade. And so this is a record of what the PTC recommends in terms of growth strategy 15
which is core to our mission. This is what we do is we talk about development strategy, 16
etcetera. And so I don't really to me it's not that relevant that they had this on their agenda 17
recently. This is a guiding document and something that we're in the final stages of so I don't 18
actually I'm not that sympathetic to that argument. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
The second which is splitting this into two parts I think it makes the whole thing just not very 1
meaningful. Meaning the whole purpose of saying we should be metric oriented in our growth 2
strategy is to is as a alternative versus what we currently do which is we set a hard cap. So 3
we're saying no instead of that we should manage to impacts and here the measurements we 4
should use. What we're proposing is just to collect data which everyone likes and we like to 5
have data, but I'm proposing that that is the method that we set goals and that is the method 6
that we use to control growth. And so in splitting it I think it makes it just not very meaningful 7
that we're just saying we like data, we should set, we should collect metrics, we should have 8
goals and I agree with that. I think that's fine, but in particular we're actually just talking what 9
we're talking about in this section is how do we control development growth? And so if you 10
take that out it's just not, it doesn't mean much. It just says we're going to as a city we’ll have a 11
couple of metrics that we consider important which is a good thing to do, but it doesn't really 12
have much to do with the topic on the table which is how do we control development. So 13
anyway that’s my dissent against this Substitute Motion. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Rosenblum. The last comment before our vote is to 16
Commissioner Lauing. 17
18
Commissioner Lauing: Yes just having made the second just to add to my original comments the 19
Comp Plan is a strategic and policy document. The 50,000 square foot has been taken out so 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
that's just a guideline that can be overruled and the Comp Plan is driving policy. So having 1
growth monitored with strong metrics is one of the things we've said throughout the Comp 2
Plan is not there yet. So this is a good place to add it by making sure that we're monitoring the 3
growth which could then impact at I think a later date the elimination of that 50,000 square 4
foot cap to something else. So I think it's policy level versus tactic level. It's policy level versus 5
an ordinance that's in place. So that's why I would support the Substitute Motion. 6
7
VOTE 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you. At this time I'll take a vote. All those in favor of this Substitute 10
Motion please raise your hand and say aye. I have four in favor that's Commissioner Summa, 11
Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel, Commissioner Lauing and Commissioner Gardias. 12
All those opposed? That's Commissioner Rosenblum, Commissioner Monk and Commissioner 13
[Note Chair] Alcheck. Would either of you like to speak your dissent? I’ll just suggest that I 14
supported the original Motion as spoken and that's why I didn't support this Motion. 15
16
SUBSTITUTE MOTION #1 PASSED (4‐3, Commissioners Monk, Rosenblum, and Alcheck opposed) 17
18
Chair Alcheck: OK let's move on to Item Number 4. We had four nominations for the 19
sentiments in Item Number 4 related to committing to creating BMR housing for purchase and 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
rental. There is really a distinction in the language between purchase and rental when we talk 1
about affordable housing and BMRs, but anybody that wishes to sort of kick off this discussion 2
please do so. I have Commissioner Lauing. 3
4
Commissioner Lauing: Yes, this is one of the examples that I raised at last meeting relative to 5
how we might make suggested changes. Feel very strongly that we should take a strong stance 6
in terms of BMR and affordable housing. So the suggestion here is that this become a policy 7
not a program and that we potentially develop a quantifiable goal which I don't think we can do 8
tonight in terms of the specifics, but that at the end of 10 years we create X more units of 9
housing or if you want five and ten. It's part of the diversity that we all want. It's very 10
fundamental to our values in Palo Alto and I think we should raise it to the policy level, talk 11
about eliminating the barriers not just identifying them which I think somewhere else there was 12
that, and really, really focus on opening this type of housing up in a stronger way then it’s 13
stated. Thank you. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Lauing. I'm going to turn to staff before we go to 16
Commissioner Monk and then Commissioner Gardias. 17
18
Ms. Gitelman: Thank you, Chair Alcheck and Commissioner Lauing. Just two observations, one 19
is we do have a goal a 10 year goal in the Housing Element. It wouldn’t be a bad thing to cross 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
reference it here, but it does already exist. And potentially we could alter it or make it more 1
aggressive at some point in the future, but at this point we'd want the two elements to be 2
somewhat consistent. The other thing is I just wanted to make an observation I really think that 3
this is one of those things on your list that is in the apple pie category and that you may want to 4
proceed quickly to move this one and go on to some of the others that are going to be harder 5
lifts. 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Thank you. I actually couldn't agree more with that statement. I have two lights, 8
Commissioner Monk, Commissioner Gardias. 9
10
MOTION #5 11
12
Commissioner Monk: I'd like to make a Motion in support of this comment here and also thank 13
Commissioner Lauing for bringing it to our attention. If there is some language that would 14
cross‐reference it effectively that you'd like to propose I’d like to adopt that as my own. Go for 15
it Director. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you. Do I have a second? 18
19
SECOND 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Commissioner Lauing: Second. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok, if anybody would like to speak to the Motion or make a comment in general 4
please light up the board. I do have one light to Commissioner Gardias and then Commissioner 5
[Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. 6
7
Commissioner Gardias: Yeah, so my comment was to support to express support for this 8
statement since there is already a Motion on the floor I think it's a no brainer. And just 9
listening to you I think that there is a building up very quickly support for this and so I think that 10
this is going to succeed with majority of the votes or maybe even more. I just want to make 11
couple of comments because there is of course we have a Housing Element, but this Housing 12
Element may be strengthened with this policy because everything what we do of Housing 13
Element we build a pipeline, we don't build the housing. So that is a clear distinction that we 14
discussed last time when we had discussion if we had this stronger policy it would some 15
housing that are being proposed recently on the corner of Page Mill and El Camino would be a 16
subject of this policy. This is how I see it that this policy would be forcing us to take to prioritize 17
BMR units over some other discussion and for this reason I like it. Thank you. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I have Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel as the last comment 1
before we make a vote. 2
3
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Great, thank you. I’d just like a point of clarification because currently 4
this program is under Policy L‐1.3 which is infill development and so is the intent to elevate this 5
Program L‐1.3.1 into Policy I’ll call it L‐1.3 and a half and to remove the word infill or just I just 6
want some clarification. 7
8
Commissioner Lauing: Chair? May I respond to that? 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Yeah. You were just to be clear you're talking about Page on L‐27. 11
12
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Page L‐27 of the (interrupted) 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Program L‐1.3.1 15
16
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Because that's what this (interrupted) 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Yeah. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: That's just references. 1
2
Chair Alcheck: Clarifying, yes. 3
4
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Yes. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Yeah, of course Commissioner Lauing. 7
8
Commissioner Lauing: The short answer is correct. I think it should be elevated to policy level 9
which would then become L‐1.4 and then 1.4 and 1.5 would just get a different number and it is 10
not specifically infill. It’s in general. 11
12
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. 13
14
VOTE 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Ok, at this time we're going take a vote on this Motion; all those in favor of 17
supporting this Motion please raise your hand and say aye. I have one, two, three, it's 18
unanimous. Thank you. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
MOTION #5 PASSED (7‐0) 1
2
Chair Alcheck: Ok, moving on to Item Number 5. Support for Program L‐4.6.1 to prepare a 3
coordinated area plan for Downtown which is a huge undertaking and revise the program to 4
add the coordinated area plan should consider covering parts of University Avenue, converting 5
parts of University Avenue to pedestrian only zone. This item received four votes. I see some 6
lights on the board. I'm going to start with them. Commissioner Rosenblum. 7
8
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, I think that 90 percent of this is also apple pie. It's already in 9
there it's just for us to at the end of the Comp Plan process Council and staff are going to 10
probably have a list of things that they launch in terms of projects that then start implementing 11
some of the higher priority items. So part of this is just to say yeah, we think this is a high 12
priority item. A coordinated area plan is important so they need to launch that. It's a big deal. 13
14
The part of it that might not be apple pie was something that I inserted at the previous meeting 15
to say that they have language around what a plan should include and I felt that it would be a 16
good idea to specifically say we should look at pedestrianized zones. Many other cities have 17
them. Palo Alto does not have it. It would just be a nudge to say as you do this as you launch 18
this that a pedestrianized zone was thought of by the drafters of this plan as part of that. As 19
part of that coordinated area plan you should consider it. So part of it is already there and 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
we're just saying yes we think this is really important you should launch it and then part of it 1
that was not there before is to specifically call out a pedestrianized zone as something to be 2
studied. 3
4
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you. I have a light from Commissioner Summa. 5
6
Commissioner Summa: So I'm not sure this really needs to be called out in the Comprehensive 7
Plan because any Council any time can call for a coordinated area plan and we identified on the 8
CAC coordinated area plans that would take precedence over this Fry’s and even South El 9
Camino. And this there it's an awful lot of work and so and the staff time and resources to do 10
so many coordinated area plans at one time are limited. And I think that pedestrianizing part of 11
University Avenue in other words closing it to vehicle traffic is such a potentially divisive issue 12
that I don't think it should be tied to an area plan, but I just don't think an area plan needs to be 13
called out in the Comp Plan this specifically and that second part of it would be so unpalatable 14
to so many people in Palo Alto that it's kind of not desirable to put it there. So I am not really 15
supporting this one. Thanks. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Ok. I do see a light now, but I didn't a minute ago so I wanted to ask a clarifying 18
question here. What other coordinated area plans in your mind are sort of strategically 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
envisioned in this Comp Plan? Yeah because I don't I didn't maybe I missed it, but I don't know 1
that the Comp Plan is really calling out (interrupted) 2
3
Commissioner Summa: I think it calls out the Fry’s site. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: You're right. It does call out the Fry’s site. 6
7
Commissioner Summa: Necessary and then we have (interrupted) 8
9
Commissioner Rosenblum: So this is actually in the Comp Plan right now. So (interrupted) 10
11
Commissioner Summa: The Downtown one? Ok, I didn’t realize that. 12
13
Commissioner Rosenblum: 4.6.1. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: My question was what other one? Because you made… the implication was 16
there are so many happening other and these are the… 17
18
Commissioner Summa: Well no, we prioritized them on the CAC. I didn't I think maybe Council 19
added this. I don't remember us doing that, but I don't remember everything. But and then 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
South El Camino we thought was an important one and I notice that we have a scoping session 1
on yet a new one that I had never heard of coming up in October for North Ventura. 2
3
Ms. Gitelman: That’s Fry’s. 4
5
Commissioner Summa: That’s just Fry’s? Oh, we call it North Ventura. Ok. 6
7
Ms. Gitelman: Just because it includes a few more properties. 8
9
Commissioner Summa: Ok, I didn't realize that. So that's all. Yeah. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I have Commissioner Rosenblum then Commissioner Gardias. 12
13
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yes, I first want to make that clarifying statement that this is already 14
in the draft so the first part of this was just to say in a list of things to work on after this. I think 15
we're well overdue for a coordinated area plan for our Downtown. It’s a major transit center, 16
there's a lot of things that have that we've kind of done piecemeal Downtown. It’d be good to 17
have a more coordinated approach, but the second part of around pedestrianization I don't 18
think it's a problem that you think or I think that some people might find it appealing or some 19
people might find it divisive. It's just a call out. They already call out some elements of the 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
language it says a coordinated area plan considering X, Y, and Z and I'm saying add a clause to 1
say at least consider we’re for a town of our character and our size it's fairly common to have 2
say a Saturday market. So for example you do have a pedestrianized zone in California Ave. one 3
day a week. That's not that divisive. In fact I would argue many people like the California Ave. 4
farmers market and that is not a divisive issue. That having on one day a week two blocks of 5
University Ave. being pedestrianized may be appealing to people. So I'm not saying this has to 6
be done. I'm saying that it would be a good nudge that it's a part of this plan that's already in 7
the Comp Plan. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I have Commissioner Gardias and then Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] 10
Waldfogel. 11
12
Commissioner Gardias: Thank you. I believe that when I think about the Downtown 13
coordinated area plan I think that's nice to have. From my perspective the priorities are the 14
Fry’s area and we already agreed into it. It’s in the pipeline. I think that the second priority is 15
the California Avenue. That would be from my perspective the second area and the reason 16
would be that pretty much the risks in those areas and potential for the build out are the 17
greatest so I would prioritize those first two. And then in terms of this plan of course I would 18
have supported it had if we not had the railroad crossings in front of us which I think it's going 19
to take priority over this coordinated plan because we still have to maintain the crossing at 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
University giving the scarcity of crossing or potential crossings in the other areas. So for this 1
reason I would say yes I agree with this, but from my perspective it's nice to have and I would 2
say that this would be a second priority after those three that I just named. Thank you. 3
4
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I have Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. 5
6
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. Just a quick point of clarification and maybe a word maybe 7
propose a word change if your if you would accept it which is instead of the word consider use 8
the word study because I don't mind studying this. I'm not sure, I don't want voting in favor of 9
studying to be construed as an endorsement of a decision to do this. I mean I think that 10
Commissioner Gardias raises some very good points about potential conflicts with other 11
changes that may have to happen in traffic circulation, but I'm fine with studying this. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I'll weigh in too. I that's probably a good recommendation that I would also 14
support simply because look the objective here is not to sort of compete on the dais, the idea is 15
to sort of see if we can build consensus. And I don't believe that the notion that Commissioner 16
Rosenblum is suggesting is that he wants all of us to endorse a pedestrian only zone that's 17
permanent on University Avenue. I think what he's suggesting is that a pedestrian only zone 18
can do very appealing things for a Downtown area. I think we just had one a week and a half 19
ago where we shut down University for almost seven blocks for an arts fair that I think lasted 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
two days. So that's a great example of how we turn our Downtown into a place of congregation 1
for the entire community. So study/consider it makes no difference to me; I would support this 2
message being communicated to City Council and I wouldn't limit it to just to the University 3
coordinated plan. I would suggest that all of the coordinated area plans should include a study 4
of pedestrian only zone incorporation to the extent that it is appealing to this, those doing the 5
study. Ok, I have one light from Commissioner Summa and then I guess it would be nice to 6
have a Motion. 7
8
Commissioner Summa: So I think studying whether we should do it is a prudent idea and I did 9
from the way it was worded I did think that Commission Rosenblum was suggesting a 10
permanent shutdown of all or part of University Avenue. So and I would like to point out that 11
we can already shut down or use University Avenue for a congregating place when we want to 12
like the art fair, etcetera. We could have the farmer's market there on Sunday if we wanted to 13
so I don't think it's that necessary, but I'm not against studying it, studying whether we should 14
do it. I'm not I worry about piling too many things on at one time especially with all the 15
uncertainty about the rail the railroad. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Ok. I have no other lights so if we're going to communicate anything on this item 18
to Council then we’ll need a Motion. I know people might be gun shy because a Substitute 19
Motion is such a quieting tactic. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Tell you what I'll move this (interrupted) 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Hold on, I have a light. I do. Commissioner Rosenblum then Commissioner [Note 4
Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. 5
6
Commissioner Rosenblum: You're right though, I'm not going to make a… it seems foolish to 7
ever make a first Motion here. Never like why would you ever do that? It’s like those cycle 8
races where nobody wants to be in second. 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Let's stick with this process and see if we can maybe encourage more first 11
Motions. Let, just a minute Commissioner Rosenblum you have the floor. 12
13
Commissioner Rosenblum: I’ll pass. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Ok, Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. 16
17
MOTION #6 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: So I’ll move the language of the comment with the word study replacing 1
the word consider. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Can I get a second? 4
5
SECOND 6
7
Commissioner Rosenblum: I'll second that. 8
9
VOTE 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Great. I'd like to put this to a vote. I don't see any lights if anybody would like to 12
quickly make a comment? Ok, seeing no lights all those in favor of the Motion on the floor 13
please raise your hand and say aye. That is five Commissioners. All those opposed? Ok, we 14
have two Commissioners opposing, Commissioner Gardias and Commissioner Summa. Great. 15
16
MOTION #6 PASSED (5‐2, Commissioners Gardias and Summa opposed) 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I'm excited to suggest to you all that we've gotten we've made our way 19
through all of the items that received four votes. What I would like to do is ask the Commission 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
right now if we want to take a five minute break or continue to work here? So let's do it like 1
this if all those in favor of taking a five minute break raise your hand? No… 2
3
Commissioner Gardias: Just kidding. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: Ok, alright. I anybody that wants to take a break I don't personally want to 6
break, but anybody that… Ok, let me do that again. Anybody interested in taking a five minute 7
break raise your hand. I have four individuals so we're taking a five minute break and when we 8
get back we'll continue with the first item that received three nominations. Thank you. 9
10
[The Commission took a break] 11
12
Chair Alcheck: The dais. We can reconvene here with… Ok, let's reconvene please beginning 13
with Item Number 6. This is require companies located in Palo Alto to create a joint TMA for all 14
companies or open buses to other companies. I see a light from Commissioner Rosenblum. 15
16
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, I think this isn't a great idea. I think we do want to require 17
Palo Alto companies to join the TMA and to contribute to a overarching organization. I think 18
what this is saying is that if you're going to run a bus service so if you're Hewlett‐Packard (HP) 19
and you have buses then you have to have a shared bus service. And I first I don't think it's 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
practical, but I also think we want to have an organization not like a thousand small 1
organizations. And so I just think it's not the right direction. I think our TMA needs support and 2
needs to be better participated in. I would support this and I think there are items we're going 3
to look at later around support for the TMA and what relationship companies should have for 4
like a Downtown TMA, but I don't support that companies that set up in Palo Alto need to have 5
an open TMA of their own which I think is what this language says. 6
7
Chair Alcheck: I don't see any other lights, but I'll make a similar comment. I think this is a 8
phenomenally terrible idea because any company that is considering reducing SOV trips 9
through this one program of theirs would suddenly be subject to so many more considerations 10
that they would have to make for the general public and the ultimate goal is that all of our 11
companies sort of consider different programs to get vehicles off the road. The notion that we 12
would also ask our companies to provide general transportation for residents seems like an 13
extraordinary ask. That's not to say that we don't want them to participate in a global TMA 14
which is I think what you're saying, but I don't I would not encourage City Council to take on 15
this measure. I have a light from Commissioner Gardias. 16
17
Commissioner Gardias: Yeah, so this is I proposed this item and it was supported by a couple of 18
my colleagues and I can give you the reason why pretty much I proposed it. There were a 19
couple of items so in general I thought that there was not too much of the emphasis on the 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Transportation Element that's number one. We focus on Land Use, but I think that the ideas 1
from the Transportation Element are lost and this is one of those to pretty much to strengthen 2
the Transportation. And one of my observation is that there is many, many TMA programs 3
organized by different companies and those TMA programs only serve themselves. So if there 4
is an opportunity for those companies to collaborate, to make some joint ventures in opening 5
their TMA for other companies, I think that we should support we should propose it and then 6
enforce it on the Palo Alto area and also send signal to other municipalities that such a program 7
is possible. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Gardias. I don't have any lights on this topic, but I 10
think that the statement is very straightforward so what I would suggest is that we have a 11
Motion on the floor that we can either vote up or vote down because I don't know that this is 12
one where we don't really understand the goal of the statement. The question is is do people 13
agree with it or not as a majority. So I'm going to ask that somebody please make a Motion and 14
(interrupted) 15
16
MOTION #7 17
18
Commissioner Summa: I move that we move on to the next item. Can I do that? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: She made a Motion that we move on to the next item that we abandon 1
communicating anything on this topic to Council. Do have a second? 2
3
Commissioner Rosenblum: I also want to move on the next item, but I do think it deserves a 4
hearing and if again if it gets voted down I think if this was Commissioner Gardias’ suggestion 5
and I think it deserves do we agree with it or not. I've already stated my case. I don't think it's 6
practical. I don't think companies can be forced to have joint TMA programs. I do think it also 7
undermines what we're trying to do with creating a TMA program for given areas within Palo 8
Alto. So I think it has some, I think it's both suffers from practicality and undermines a program 9
that we're trying to support. 10
11
MOTION #7 FAILED FOR LACK OF SECOND 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I'm going to suggest that it didn't receive a second. I also just want to make 14
a quick statement here. I agree with the sentiment, let's give Commissioner Gardias the 15
opportunity to make a Motion and get his vote heard. This process of… I have no control 16
whether we make Substitute Motions or we make Motions before the other person can make a 17
Motion, but I do think that if we take on that sort of tactic frequently we will it will result in a 18
breakdown of our process from the perspective of trying to build consensus. People should 19
have an opportunity to hear their Motion voted on and if they are about to make a Motion we 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
should try to consider them the respect of giving them a chance to make the Motion not to say 1
that you were trying to disrespect him, but the point here is that I agree with that sentiment. I 2
want to encourage us in this process to be as thoughtful about consensus building as possible. I 3
have two lights Commissioner Summa then Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. I do 4
want also to encourage someone to make a Motion so that we can hear this topic. 5
Commissioner Summa. 6
7
Commissioner Summa: Thank you. So I also appreciate the sentiments and I think that really 8
there's so the TMA is a Transportation Management Agency. I think what would be more 9
appropriate here is a Transportation Demand Management, a TDM, and because we do require 10
TDMs for some companies and buildings, locations, but so that's specific to the building and 11
then the TMA is an overarching program for the City. So I think what you I think it might make 12
more sense to require companies located in Palo Alto to create their own TDM program and 13
then the second part open buses to other companies were you thinking that if a bus wasn't full 14
other companies could coordinate and use like some companies bus? Is that what you were 15
thinking? 16
17
Commissioner Gardias: If I'm not mistaken Mountain View has its own cross corporate TMA 18
program. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: I’m sorry, hold on. Commissioner Gardias, please. 1
2
Commissioner Gardias: Thank you. So if I'm not mistaken Mountain View has its own TMA 3
program so if you go to the Caltrain station you may observe that there are shuttles that that 4
you cannot get to if you are a private citizen and then they go to some destination. I don't 5
know the details of this program, but I know that it exists and I think that it's funded or it's 6
organized by a number of the companies. So this pretty much proposal was to create a 7
program like this to make companies to jointly create TMA program, those large companies like 8
VMware, HP, and some other large employers that have interest in moving their employees. 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you. I have Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel and then 11
Commissioner Rosenblum. Again looking for Motions here, thank you. 12
13
MOTION #8 14
15
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Whoops. Ok, let me take a stab at this because I think there's some good 16
things here and I think I've also heard some reasonable objections. So I'm not going to get this 17
exactly right on the first try, but let me see if I can come close. I think the sentiment is to 18
require employers and we might want to qualify this by size, but located in Palo Alto to 19
participate in TMA and tell me if TMA is the right word to use here, could be something 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
different, and consider opening the TMA whatever TMA facilities that they provide to other 1
TMA participants where practical, where practicable. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok. We have a Motion suggesting language entirely different than the item and 4
I would need a second. 5
6
Commissioner Gardias: You know it may be different language, but it reflects the intent that I 7
had with this specific item. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so are you seconding the Motion? 10
11
SECOND 12
13
Commissioner Gardias: I can second the Motion, yes. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Ok. Would anybody like to speak to this Motion? I have a still a light from 16
Commissioner Rosenblum. 17
18
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah. Well process wise can I make a Substitute Motion then now? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: You can. 1
2
Commissioner Rosenblum: Ok. So if we're in the topic of TDM/TMA so first I want to make a 3
statement then I'll make a Motion. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: Staff do we have an item that received three votes about TMA? I just the reason 6
why I ask is because if we do then it may be that that is similar enough to this new Motion that 7
we maybe raise that item. It doesn't have to incorporate three votes, it could have two votes 8
just so that we kind of create a little bit more of a global discussion. Because if the item is now 9
shifting to… 10
11
Ms. Gitelman: I think this is the item about the TMA. There isn’t another one. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Ok. I just wanted to make sure so that when we didn’t have something very 14
similar later. Ok, please continue. I'm sorry. 15
16
SUBSTITUTE MOTION #1 TO MOTION #8 17
18
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah that was what so my statement is that we have an item that's 19
a more global consideration of TMA and TDM programs for Palo Alto and I would suggest that 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
we move on from this and move and have a more structured discussion around how if any 1
suggestions we have for Palo Alto wide TMA and TDM programming we should have. A couple 2
of responses to things I've heard though which is requiring TMA by company and then to share 3
it with other companies what Mountain View has is essentially a TMA for Mountain View. So it 4
means many companies participate. That's what we're trying to do in Palo Alto. It's not forcing 5
VMware if they have a bus to also allow other people from other employees to ride their bus. 6
You know certainly they can choose to do that, but they are contributing to a citywide program 7
and that's what we're also trying to do here. 8
9
To Commissioner Summa’s point that companies should be required to have TDM measures in 10
place we are suggesting that for buildings, right? So you put up a big building you have to put 11
in TDM measures. I have a five person company, you have an eleven person company, we're 12
not going to be… each of these small entities we're trying to get them to join again a larger 13
entity together so that together they could have they can have Caltrain Go Passes, etcetera. So 14
I just think we're suggesting things that aren’t the way these programs work and you need scale 15
for these programs and that's the only way they work. The whole reason we're trying to bind a 16
lot of companies together is so they have buying power to have buses to buy Caltrain Go Passes 17
so essentially what Stanford has, Marguerite shuttles, Go Passes, etcetera. And so what this is 18
specifically doing is atomizing like making it small and so it's exactly opposite of the way these 19
programs work. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
So my Substitute Motion if we're going to go there is to forego this item or bind it to the item 2
around TMA/TDM programs more generally. And we consider if we want a program that is 3
many small companies each running their own and being forced to allow other companies to 4
partake or are we looking to support a global TMA program and TDM at the building level. So 5
that's my suggestion would be that we can get to the same issue as part of that bigger 6
discussion. So that's my Substitution Motion. 7
8
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I want to make a quick clarification here because there is an item on Page 2 9
of our list PTC members had differing views on offering incentives for TDM achievements. Is 10
that the item that you are thinking is coming? 11
12
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yes. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I suspect you nominated that? 15
16
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yes. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so did I. I don't see it in our list. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Ms. Gitelman: Yeah, thank you for pointing that out. We're checking our spreadsheet. 1
2
Chair Alcheck: I think it's sufficient to just suggest that at least two of us nominated it. I don't 3
need to sort of have… 4
5
Ms. Gitelman: So (interrupted) 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Did anybody else nominate this particular item? It's on Page 2. It says, “PTC 8
members had differing views on the offering incentives for TDM achievements.” Ok, I know 9
that it had it got two votes so I just, just so we're clear because this document that we're using 10
right now doesn't have that item. I will add it. Did you, did anybody else vote for it? I need to 11
know. 12
13
Commissioner Monk: Yeah, it was one that I wanted to have discussed. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Ok, alright. So I'm going to add it to the number to the list of threes because I 16
know I nominated it, it sounds like Eric did, and it sounds like you have two check marks next to 17
it as well. Ok, so just so we're clear here Eric was suggesting that we return to this conversation 18
when we talk about that issue which is a little broader and also discusses TDM measures 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
related to parking. I didn’t want anybody to be confused that we weren't going to return to this 1
discussion because it's not in our list. Ok, so we have a Substitute Motion on the floor. 2
3
Ms. Gitelman: And I'm sorry could we hear the Substitute Motion again? 4
5
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yes. The Substitute Motion is that we forego this discussion and 6
combine it with the discussion of the TMA program more generally. So rather than voting the 7
vote is the Motion is do we have companies have an open TMA program that allows other 8
companies to participate I think and I'm suggesting that we have that we forego this question 9
and have the discussion as part of the other TMA related. 10
11
Ms. Gitelman: Yeah. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: So just to be clear does your tally reflect that there was more than one vote for 14
this item? 15
16
Ms. Gitelman: We're still looking. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Ok. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Ms. Gitelman: But I think I guess I'm going back to what the Chair asked of staff a few minutes 1
ago which is if there is another item that you think should be on this list that addresses this 2
issue why don't we just discuss both the items right now as (interrupted) 3
4
Chair Alcheck: Right. That my concern was he was starting to move to suggest that we come 5
back to it when we get to that item and then I didn't see the item on the list and I was 6
concerned that if it got a up vote or a down you know anyways… I think it's clear what I was 7
worried about. 8
9
Commissioner Gardias: If I may? 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Yeah so just so we're clear here the item that believe I Commissioner Rosenblum 12
is talking about is the third bullet on Page two of the list that all of us had over the weekend. 13
That if I’m, if I took my tally right we had Commissioner Rosenblum, Commissioner Monk, and 14
my (interrupted) 15
16
Ms. Gitelman: You could just read it again for the record. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Yeah it's PTC members had differing views on the offering, on offering incentives 19
for TDM achievements. Some suggested lowering parking requirements for projects with 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
successful TDMs. Others felt that permanent parking reductions are not appropriate for 1
uncertain future trip reductions. So it was a topic that touched upon TDM programming. 2
3
So what I'll suggest is that because this item also received three votes that we’ll and it's higher 4
on the list in terms of this item that we're currently reviewing that if your Motion passed if your 5
Substitute Motion passes we’ll begin that discussion immediately. If it doesn't we will continue 6
this discussion and then the next topic will be this item which is on the list at a higher position 7
in terms of order. Ok, so we have a Substitute Motion on the floor which is essentially to 8
incorporate this discussion into the discussion of the next topic. Do I have a second? 9
10
SECOND 11
12
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I'll second this [Note Substitute] Motion. Would anybody like, I have a 13
comment from Commissioner Gardias. Would anybody else like to make a comment before we 14
take a vote? 15
16
Commissioner Summa: Can staff confirm that there were the votes to get it on the list. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: So here’s my sheet. Eric can show you his sheet. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Ms. Costello: Yeah we’re, excuse me, we’re checking. Unfortunately in consolidating it we have 1
to go back and re… we collapsed all the columns and we have to go back and spread them back 2
out again, but if you have the sheets and you I think it's fine. 3
4
Chair Alcheck: Yeah, I decided I don't think it makes a difference because as long as I… I feel 5
very comfortable that clearly there's at least two so it’s a topic of review. 6
7
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I’d like to call the question. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Go ahead. 10
11
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Well that just means we vote. That ceases debate and we vote on the 12
Substitute Motion. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: You’d like to vote on the Substitute Motion? 15
16
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Yeah, I'd like to call the question of the Substitute Motion. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Ok, but I have a Commissioner who wants to make a comment. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I think calling the questions cuts off comment. 1
2
Chair Alcheck: Ok, alright so there's a Substitute Motion on the floor. Does anybody need it to 3
be repeated? 4
5
Commissioner Summa: Yes, please. 6
7
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, the Substitute Motion is simple which is that we rather than 8
voting on this item we combine it with the other TMA/TDM related item and we have a more 9
general discussion about the formation of a TMA/TDM programming for Palo Alto versus a 10
separate vote on this and then later another vote on a related topic on TDM/TMA. So the 11
[Note‐Substitute] Motion is to combine this with the other item and a vote on them together. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Ok and Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel raise the call to question if I 14
got that right. So we will take the vote. All Commissioners in favor of the Substitute Motion 15
please raise your hand and say aye. Ok, we have… did you vote as well? Ok, so we have six in 16
favor. All Commissioners opposing? Ok, Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel opposes 17
that [Note‐Substitute] Motion. 18
19
SUBSTITUTE MOTION #1 TO MOTION #8 PASSED (6‐1, Vice‐Chair Waldfogel opposed) 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: So this Item Number 6 is tabled. We will move to 6.1 which is the third item on 2
this list on Page 2 of the packet that we received for the purposes of clarity I want to confirm 3
that we have three nominations for this item. That item is PTC members have different views 4
on offering incentives for TDM achievements. Some suggested lowering parking requirements 5
for projects with successful TDM programs. Others felt that permanent parking reductions are 6
not appropriate for uncertain future trip reductions. Ok, I have a light from Commissioner 7
Rosenblum then a light from Commissioner Gardias. Commissioner Rosenblum then 8
Commissioner Gardias. 9
10
Commissioner Rosenblum: Sorry, just opening my notes on this on this item. So there are a 11
number of things that were about the TMA/TDM that were all clustered together of which we 12
only had two that received three votes, but I think this is one of those big issues. So I think the 13
TMA and the TDM programs under it are one of the things that Council has highlighted as one 14
of the cornerstones of our planning and transportation policies going forward. So I think that in 15
order to have a successful program we need a couple of things. We need a source of funds. So 16
we need to fund this thing. So just like Stanford you need come with money for to give 17
everybody Caltrain passes, run shuttles, and market the program, and have the operational 18
support. And you need participation. You need lots of companies to come in and participate 19
together so that you have enough people going to different places because if you want to run a 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
bus to Hayward and a bus to Fremont and a bus to San Mateo and a bus to all these different 1
places you need liquidity, you need enough people that are going to participate so you can have 2
enough buses going to the right places so it's not just Caltrain dependent. 3
4
So if I break this into two parts the first part was what we were just discussing which is this idea 5
to have individual companies have their own TMAs and then get other companies to be able to 6
join their TMAs. I think that undermines liquidity. So it makes it so your program doesn't really 7
work. It would be as if Stanford had every one of their schools have their own TMA or each 8
department had to have their own TMA. It works because you have Stanford as a whole having 9
the shuttle system and buying the Caltrain passes at the rate that they can get as a large entity. 10
11
But then the second part is what we're discussing now which is where does the funding come 12
from? And the three sources of funds that are the most obvious are first the parking fees from 13
paid parking programs and that's something that Council is discussing. Second are employee 14
fees, so per head if you have employees you pay in to this program and the third developer 15
fees. When you build a building you need to put up money for TMA and that's what's being 16
discussed in this item which is developers you can charge them all kinds of things, but you can 17
charge them a lot more if you're saying well you don't have the expense of those extra five 18
parking spaces. You would have had to build those and those are $60,000 apiece. That's 19
$300,000 that we now want for this program. That's a huge expense that they would like to 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
forgo. Now you could still charge them more. You could still say well you're still making margin 1
and we'll get, we’re going to take as much as we can, but this is a big item that's well aligned 2
with the goals of a TMA program or TDM program which is to reduce the reliance on cars. So 3
the beauty of it is A) it's a lot of money, and B) it's philosophically aligned. It's reducing reliance 4
on cars to pay for a program that reduces cars. So there's a great symmetry there. 5
6
So anyway to take these two kind of in parallel the first issue which we just discussed I think is 7
kind of the opposite of a successful TMA program. It takes a large program and splits it into lots 8
of small programs and then the second is where does the funding come from? I would have 9
loved if actually this item had all the three funding sources, but we're only talking about one 10
here which is developer funds. And what's being said here is that we would contemplate a 11
tradeoff between parking and funding a TMA that if you put up the funds you can get a certain 12
reduction of parking. I think that's actually a big pot of money and I think it's a good one to look 13
into. I would support these other pots of money as well we just didn't have them on the list. 14
So that's my discussion and that's why I’d like to discuss both these things. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Commissioner Rosenblum would you help us by suggesting what sort of program 17
or what recommendation you would make to Council? So that this particular issue has 18
confusing elements here so maybe you can help us have a concise statement to walk or talk 19
around. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah. So the alternative to Commissioner Gardias’ idea I would say 2
is that companies in Palo Alto be required to join Palo Alto’s TMA. So they pay fees into this 3
association so you have those buses like you have in Mountain View, part one. Part two is 4
about cost and this is this item now this new item which is that developers also pay into the 5
TMA in partial exchange for a and I’m trying to be careful of the language here, but it's there is 6
some degree to which you can reduce your parking requirement in exchange for funding into 7
the TMA. So it's like density bonuses for BMR and other kinds of programs where in exchange 8
for some it's say let's 10 percent reduction in parking acquirement you pay more into a TMA 9
program. So at the Comp Plan level we wouldn't dictate its 10 percent reduction is the cap, 10
etcetera. At the Comp Plan level it would be something like all companies pay into TMA, 11
developers will pay in to fund this in exchange for partial reduction of parking requirement 12
where appropriate. Something like that, but it's essentially talking about the ground rules for 13
the TMA and then where one source of funds should come from. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you. I have a light from Commissioner Gardias; anyone else that would 16
like to speak? Thank you. Keep lighting up my board. 17
18
Commissioner Gardias: Yeah, so my intention behind this first item that we just discussed and 19
combined with the second one was to pretty much make the companies to participate in the 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
citywide TMA program. Would they be joining each other programs? It doesn't matter for me, 1
right? The vision that I had in front of me was the sign of the buses go Mountain View [oid] or 2
however they were called which was Mountain View [road] TMA program. So I would support 3
any policy that would require the companies at certain threshold to participate in the citywide 4
TMA program. 5
6
The funding issue it's a secondary issue that I see here, right? And I have a different perspective 7
about this I think that the companies they have either reached [TDR] programs or some other 8
expenditure to support employees so they could solely focus on providing on subsidizing 9
transportation without needs to have some other funds. I think that the companies specifically 10
within the Stanford Research Park (SRP) are doing well enough to pay for this program solely 11
without the additional subsidies from the developers which should be focused on the [TDR] 12
programs as opposed to TMA programs because this way we would be shifting the 13
development funds and all the taxes from the development toward the companies subsidizing 14
their employees as opposed to subsidizing those that live in the houses those developers built. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Ok. I'm going to I saw your light go up. I’m, do you want to respond to that 17
before we move on? Ok. I’m going to go back to Commissioner Rosenblum and then we'll 18
move on to Commissioner Summa then Waldfogel. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Rosenblum: Just a quick response. So I think you and I are basically in 1
agreement. So we’re in agreement on part one around the goal of this which is to get 2
companies to participate in a joint program which is citywide or region wide. Part two though 3
is funding. I agree businesses should pay for a lot of this and that would be just per head. 4
However, the thing that again I really advise everyone that hasn't done this to watch videos of 5
the Stanford program managers talk about how they implement the program where the money 6
came from etcetera. So a lot of the money came from not having to build parking. They 7
basically took a lot of the money out of the capital budget that would have gone to parking fees 8
and turned it into operational fees. So they bought buses and they subsidized Caltrain, 9
etcetera. There's a lot of money in the development. 10
11
The thing that I like best though is aligning incentives. So the three stakeholders I just 12
mentioned are people who park so you make it more expensive to park and you're taking the 13
revenue from that and putting it into a program that allows people to get here without their 14
car. You're making, you're taking money from the development so that you are less reliant on 15
cars. They don't subsidize car use and then putting that into this alternative system. And 16
you're taking money from the employers that are causing a portion of the problem by having 17
the employees coming to town. And so I like the idea of having those are causing the impacts 18
change the incentive structure. So it's a philosophical thing. I also think it's always good to 19
have multiple funding sources just from a business sustainability standpoint it's good to have 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
because developer fees are spiky whereas employee fees will be ongoing year after year and 1
parking fees God knows. The people may decide they hate paying for parking. That may go 2
away it hasn't started yet and people rumble about it. 3
4
So at any rate I think you and I are mostly in agreement it’s just on the funding side I would say 5
what I'm proposing here is a mechanism for developer fees. I would also ideally like to say it 6
should be a three part developers, business owners, and people who park. People who come 7
into our community and park should are the three legs of what we should have as a funding 8
strategy. 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Ok, Commissioner Rosenblum thank you for that explanation. I’m before I go to 11
Commissioner Summa then Waldfogel I’m going to give Commissioner Gardias one more 12
opportunity. I really am hoping we can build consensus among our Motion makers here so 13
Commissioner Gardias go ahead. 14
15
Commissioner Gardias: Yeah, I agree we’re getting to the yes, but just one comment. I think 16
that Stanford example is not a good example because Stanford is a large employer as opposed 17
to a developer of a condominium building that you would require the funds to go towards 18
subsidizing HP for example. So that's not I think that this would not be the appropriate proper 19
appropriation of the funds. So I disagree with the funding portion, but the rest I agree totally. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Gardias. Let’s go to Commissioner Summa then 2
Waldfogel and then I’ll make a comment. 3
4
Commissioner Summa: Ok, I so I think I kind of agree with Commissioner Gardias. I think well I 5
think it's premature because I don't think the TMA is I think it's too nascent. There's nothing for 6
people to really be required to do yet, but I'm sure at some point there will be. And I think it's 7
interesting to consider requirement and employee like some kind of fee per head for 8
employees, but and I was going to make the same point that Commissioner Gardias made. The 9
Stanford example is very different because there's one property owner and they can make all 10
the rules. So it doesn't always strike me as the best analogy. And I'm not understanding how 11
this would work with in the assessment district Downtown the in lieu parking. 12
13
So it's I personally think it's premature to start trading parking spots I mean you can I like the 14
creativity of funding sources and I like charging employee tax, but it seems like you can't 15
replace a missing parking spot a physical missing parking spot with money. So I'm not 16
comfortable with doing that now, hopefully sometime in the future we will be able to do that 17
when we have realistic transit options and the TMA is really up and running. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you. Just a quick comment just so keep, bear this in mind, these we're 1
really trying to communicate ideas to City Council. Nothing we do right now is about now. This 2
isn't about now and we're not even authoring the text of the Comp Plan. We're just trying to 3
communicate suggestions or considerations for Council when they review our review of the 4
Comp Plan. So I don't want anybody to walk away from this and think that a vote tonight is 5
about charging a company or charging a land… this is these are just concepts. Ok, 6
Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. 7
8
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you and [will you] should do a time check pretty soon. Whoops. 9
Thanks. We should do a time check pretty soon and see how many more of these we can cover 10
tonight. So Stanford and last month in the Stanford General Use Permit (GUP) presentation we 11
saw that Stanford has reached at least a temporary saturation point in their TMA that the rates 12
are not going up. The we didn't really get an explanation of what caused that and my 13
suggestion is we just don't know how scalable that TMA programs are in this region. I mean 14
that Stanford's probably a best case and I forget the number, but their performance hasn’t 15
improved much over the last couple of years. 16
17
So my feeling on this is that I would agree with Commissioner Summa. Lowering parking 18
requirements based on TMA is what I'd call a bet on hope not a bet on performance. And TMA 19
performance is year by year while missing parking spaces are gone forever. So I don't think 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
that's a good tradeoff. I don't think it's appropriate to shift the risk of TMA performance on to 1
the general public; however, if the thinking here is let’s build parking spaces at kind of our best 2
sense of utilization and perhaps downstream we can provide mechanisms for landlords to rent 3
out spaces that TMA programs demonstrably remove the need for in that building and I say 4
demonstrably. Metrics, actual accounting for how people get there and how many people are 5
getting there, but if we if we're talking about something like that where spaces get built and 6
then we envision some mechanism to share spaces that are getting built and perhaps over the 7
long term we revise the ratios and hey, if what we're seeing is this long term secular trend over 8
10 years or 15 years that supports a lower demand for parking spaces then directionally I 9
support that. But in the short term I think it's critical that the spaces get built and that TMA be 10
implemented in parallel with that. That we find appropriate funding sources for TMA short 11
term, but we can't do that by just not building the spaces short term. That's an unacceptable 12
risk for the general public. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I'm going to make a comment and then we'll go to Commissioner Rosenblum 15
then Lauing. So I think there's an opportunity here. I think that there's a chance that we can 16
get at least four votes here and so I’m going to reach and I’m going to try to suggest you a few 17
ideas to consider in support of what Commissioner Rosenblum is suggesting. The first is that I 18
think that the notion that it's a... what was? I don't know what you the… it was a action and 19
hope as opposed to what was that? It was a bet on hope. I don't actually think that's accurate. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
I think that we have results demonstrated by Stanford our closest neighbor right now. So we 1
don't have to go out of this City to see demonstrative results as a result of their program. 2
3
I also think that I want to suggest something to you. An employer comes and an employer 4
goes. It could be Google now, it could be Intuit, it could be some small company inside of a 5
new development it's gone after two years. But the development as it makes its way through 6
the process is affected by the expectations that the developer is demonstrating. For example, 7
the developer is going to build X Square feet. We determine based on our code this is how 8
many parking spaces you're going to need, but we don't really want this many cars coming. So 9
in exchange for reducing your parking requirement we want you now up front, this is a great 10
opportunity, you don't have to build that underground parking garage four floors down with 11
mechanical lifts each one costing $50,000. Here is your savings in exchange make a substantial 12
funding to a TDM program. That is the opportunity to fund this program not just on a yearly 13
basis because anything you did with an employer would have to be annual because they could 14
be gone next year. You're not going to make a five year agreement. They're not they might not 15
be here. Their lease might not be there. The whole point is they could actually move. 16
17
And so I would suggest that when you're thinking about whether it's the developer or not don't 18
I don't I'm not interpreting Commissioner Rosenblum’s common as this is the only 19
recommendation. I think of it as we're encouraging City Council to consider this one population 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
the developers as a place to also seek funding because what we are allowing them to develop 1
we require X parking, but we don't want those cars and we want them to participate in the 2
solution in such a substantial way. But it's not for nothing they will save tremendous funds on 3
the development because they may not have to dig deep, they may not have to import car lifts, 4
etcetera. 5
6
And I'll make one other point. I think Stanford is an excellent example. Stanford is not an 7
employer, it is a landowner. And landowners develop. The reason why Stanford is an applicant 8
is because they are a landowner. They're the only landowner employer that we've seen in 9
recent history. Maybe the Jewish Community Center (JCC) is another example of a dramatic 10
landowner and employer, but most developments are not brought by the companies. So the 11
companies have a very different relationship with the property they come in and whatever 12
parking spaces they have they're going to use. In addition to those parking spaces they might 13
also have a program because guess what their employees don't want to sit in traffic. The 14
reason why they're doing the buses is because they're trying to get their employees here and 15
their employees are saying forget it I'm not coming all the way down there if I have to sit in two 16
hours of traffic. So right now a lot of these TDM programs are basically employee benefits. 17
Those employee benefits don't necessarily improve our standard of living here, our LOS. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
The way we can improve our LOS is by making sure that the developers in this town are 1
participating in those programs from a strategic view way out in front getting ahead of it. I 2
know that I can save $1,000,000 on my parking garage underneath this building if I spend that 3
$1,000,000 on a TMA program. Why wouldn't they? What's the cost for them? The question is 4
is will it be successful and I'm not saying right now we have to determine that. I'm just 5
suggesting that we put forward this idea that we begin to grapple with these ideas. That's sort 6
of my recommendation so I don't know if that's a good enough sort of argument to see if we 7
can get you on board on this on this Motion that hasn't even been made yet, but this idea of a 8
Motion. So anyways I’ll stop there. We have Commissioner Rosenblum, no. We have 9
Commissioner Rosenblum and then Commissioner Lauing and then Commissioner [Note Vice‐10
Chair] Waldfogel. 11
12
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah so just a couple things, one is the applicability of Stanford. The 13
whole reason for our TMA is that previously Stanford, Google, so large bodies, large employers 14
were able to have a program where they could run buses and provide benefits for their 15
employees, but all the companies based in Palo Alto that are much smaller had no opportunity 16
so therefore they have a lot more people driving. So the whole point is to act more like 17
Stanford. So if we say it's not applicable the whole reason to do this is to bind together all 18
these companies under one authority. And then Stanford develops their own land and so you 19
say well the developers here are separate. Yes, they have a separate role. So at Stanford 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
they'd have to pay to build a parking garage and we're saying that here someone else is building 1
the building, taking that risk, we're tracking the money from them just like Stanford would 2
extract that money from a budget. So the whole point is to act more like Stafford, to act like a 3
single corporate entity that has a program that has enough scale to it to get going. So I do think 4
it's applicable, but you have to start acting like a corporate entity. You have to start acting like 5
this whole group is together on this thing. 6
7
Now about the practicality and this is it a bet on hope versus a bet on some certainty of places. 8
The Comp Plan is the strategic document so it's saying what kind of incentives do we want to 9
put in place for the future? And right now we subsidize driving. So we force everyone to build 10
fully park buildings. We force all of us to have garages and enough space to park all of our cars. 11
We force everyone to invest in driving infrastructure and yet we have to buy our own Caltrain 12
passes. And I always give this example of when I commuted to work in San Mateo I paid over a 13
$1,000 a year to take Caltrain even though I had free parking in the building because my 14
building had to be fully parked. It was an employee benefit. So my driving has always been 15
subsidized, but I've always paid full freight for doing the better thing. And what we're talking 16
about is philosophically does our Comp Plan want to start to reverse those incentives? So I'm 17
saying as a philosophy we should be looking to trade parking, the dollars that go into parking, 18
for dollars that go into TMA. And if we think that TMA is the future that we have to start acting 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
like a larger entity like Stanford that can have large scale programs like they have in Mountain 1
View. 2
3
Where do the funds come from? I'm suggesting the fund should come from the thing we're 4
trying to start to do less of which is subsidize driving. And it is subsidizing like building parking 5
spaces is super expensive and that is a subsidy that we're giving to drivers. And I'm saying that 6
maybe drivers need less subsidy. Maybe we should be subsidizing people arriving by train or 7
subsidize our ability as a community to have more frequent shuttle routes. Like someone's got 8
to pay for the stuff and we either make developers pay for my individual car when I come and 9
park or we make them pay for the shuttles that we can use as a community. So anyways that’s 10
my pitch is that it's a philosophical thing in this document to say we're willing to trade some 11
parking in exchange for funding for this community good. So that said and I do think we just 12
need to realize that Stanford is applicable or at least that's what we're trying to do is act more 13
like Stanford and combine forces with all of these small businesses. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I have a Commissioner Lauing then Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] 16
Waldfogel and then Commissioner Gardias. 17
18
Commissioner Lauing: Yeah, thanks. I think an important distinction here is this is listed as a 19
program. This is not listed as a policy so I'm delighted that the programs are in here after the 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
prior debate we've had in our City about that, but it doesn't rise to the level of a policy which 1
has more of a strategic impact than the program. The program has staff discretion, we will 2
have a lot of activity in some of those programs helping put together so I want to state that first 3
of all. Secondly it's a two page program so it's a very important program and it covers almost 4
two full pages, but there's interesting wording in there such as monitor the success of TDM 5
measures. 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Would you call it, would you call out the page number you’re on? 8
9
Commissioner Lauing: T‐23, monitor the success of TDM measures. I just picked out a couple 10
here. Evaluate the performance of pilot programs implemented by the TMA. So it emphasizes 11
the using I can’t remember who said this now, it's still a nascent program. It's just getting 12
going. We need more data, we need more evaluation of that. So I'm actually pretty 13
comfortable with what's here right now because it's at the program level. I'd be a little more 14
concerned if we were talking about this at the policy level. I think there's a lot of good ideas 15
here that have to be evaluated longer term, but I don't think we're missing anything by not 16
revising or suggesting any revisions to what's already listed here in this program. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you Commissioner Lauing. Next speaker is Commissioner [Note Vice‐19
Chair] Waldfogel. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you, Commissioner Lauing for pointing that out. I think you're 2
right that what's in the plan and what's in the programs is actually pretty good. Although there 3
are some questions, did have some questions on that. My point on this is maybe Stanford's a 4
good example, maybe they're not. Hard to say. I mean certainly the work day at Stanford and 5
the work day at a lot of the companies that we're talking about are different so perhaps these 6
things work perhaps they don't, unknown. 7
8
But the more important point is who owns the risk if missing parking spaces are needed or are 9
not needed. I mean is that risk on the general public? Is that risk on the building owner? Is 10
that risk on the current tenant of the building? And I would completely support a program that 11
reduces parking requirements for developers if they then pass along the risk to their tenant and 12
say look, if we're actually going to count how many vehicles are coming into town through your 13
tenancy and if the number of vehicles coming to town is greater than the number of parking 14
spaces available then you have to reduce the density of your tenancy. So very simple as long as 15
the developer and the tenant own the risk of fewer parking spaces I'm fine with fewer parking 16
spaces, but if the risk is on the general public that people will continue to drive that the cars will 17
be parked in the neighborhood or that they'll be orbiting anyhow then I think that's an 18
unacceptable risk to pass along to the general public. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I have the light here which is a Commissioner Gardias. Please, take the floor. 1
2
Commissioner Gardias: Yeah so looking at the at this what Commissioner Lauing suggested 3
which was he pointed us to the Policy T‐1.2 I believe, right, or the program underneath? So 4
that my intention was to strengthen the Policy T‐1.2 which would pretty much require a certain 5
size of employees to join this program not just to collaborate with Palo Alto. Just to make it 6
citywide and make a large employers to really participate in this program as a mandate or close 7
to the mandate. This is number one. 8
9
In terms of the discussion about the parking bonuses and then allowing them to pretty much to 10
gain space in exchange of participation in this program I believe that TDM and TMA are two 11
different programs. And although they are related because at the end of the day they are 12
focused on reducing the traffic I believe that there are different mechanisms for funding both 13
of them and also there is a ownership of those programs. The ownership is distinct as well. 14
And for this reason I suggest to keep the discussion separate and also I want to just take your 15
attention to the Page Number 3 where we have the item Goal Number 8 which talks about the 16
parking requirements. So Eric if you're interested in discussing TDM program I suggest without 17
making a Motion to combine it with this Point 8 and then just focus the discussion on TMA. 18
Because I think that we agree on TMA, but I strongly disagree with funding TMA by the 19
developers because they pretty much that's a different source in my perspective, different 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
mechanism that deals with a specific building and it's not applicable and I already talked about 1
this twice. Thank you. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok. So I'm not sure that I have consensus here, but (interrupted) 4
5
Ms. Gitelman: Chair Alcheck I hesitate to jump in here, but if the objective is to ensure that 6
more employers or developers will join the TMA and I think that's the objective of some of you 7
or one of the objectives I think that is already covered in these programs. There's a program 8
here that says formalize TDM plan requirements that are applicable to developers by ordinance 9
and within that ordinance it is says establish a list of effective TDM measures including TMA 10
membership. So it may not be a headline item in this policy and program list here, but it is here 11
and I think many of the sentiments that the Commissioners are expressing about the nascent 12
nature of the TMA and our desire to grow that and the importance of the TMA as a city 13
program and the TDM efforts that were engaged in I think all of those things are here. And if 14
there is anything that you see missing I haven't heard it yet. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Let me ask you question. I think part of the effect of Commissioner Rosenblum’s 17
or part of the sort of goal of the Commissioner Rosenblum was trying to achieve here was this 18
notion of connecting the cost of parking with the opportunity for funding and this notion that 19
our Comp Plan is not really acknowledging that we may be subsidizing the very thing that we 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
are trying to oppose. So I'm I don't disagree with you. I think all of us are behind the general 1
programs here. I think there's also potentially and I may be speaking for myself here, but a 2
general frustration that we have not really empowered our TMA goals. And this notion of 3
incorporating developers in the process was in an effort I think that Commissioner Rosenblum 4
was making that I was supportive of and it may not have consensus, but it was I think it was a 5
stiffening of those programs that you were going for. So I have a light from Commissioner 6
Rosenblum. I have a light from Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. We’ll see if I get a 7
Motion on this item and then move on. 8
9
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah so first Director Gitelman thank you for that. At least the 10
discussion had two parts one was something new that I think Commissioner Gardias had 11
inserted, but I think we've misunderstood what the intent was. So the new item I wanted to 12
discuss because I was opposed to it meaning if we wanted employers who have a TMA program 13
or TDM program to have to allow others to piggyback on their programs which was the way it 14
was written I was saying that would undermine a citywide TMA which is what we're trying to 15
do. So discussion number one was I was saying that's a bad idea. We shouldn't do that. 16
17
And then part two was something I had proposed I think a while back which is responding to 18
some of the language that is already in the plan that was affirmatively saying that as a City 19
we're willing to trade parking for funding that that’s a good trade. It is here. It's in it's here and 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
I’d call it fairly weak language which says allow property owners to achieve reductions by 1
contributing to citywide so reductions could be a number of different things. 2
3
Commissioner Lauing: Where are you reading please? 4
5
Commissioner Rosenblum: This is Program T‐1.2.2 on T‐23. Yeah. So it is there is language that 6
says like a number of dimensions you can get compensated for these things including and I was 7
looking for more affirmative language just to say as a City we are trying, we're willing to trade 8
parking which is huge for this other goal which is big. And parking is a divisive issue. So I was 9
trying to like call this out in particular. If this is something that people feel really uncomfortable 10
with we can put to a vote. I'm not obviously I feel passionate about I feel quite honestly that 11
we have this program that we all talk about, but don't do a lot for which is this TMA as a 12
nascent body and we spend a lot of time other things. And I'm trying to affirmatively say I want 13
to get funding for this. I want to make it real. I want it to have teeth and some of the and I'm 14
trying to identify the big pots of money and one of those is the money that goes into parking. 15
16
So for the point of moving forward part one now that I understand Commissioner Gardias’ 17
intent seems to be boiled down to we should encourage all employers to join the citywide TMA. 18
And I think there's already some language in there that suggests that. Yes. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Part two was me calling out parking reduction as a specific trade off which is already suggested 1
by the language here although not explicitly so. And I’m fine to put that to vote. So I can make 2
a Motion. If we want to vote down that's fine. There is already language there that is more 3
umbrella language that would suggest that parking reductions are one of the mechanisms that 4
could be used. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Are you making a Motion? 7
8
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, I would make a Motion unless someone else has comments to 9
make before I make a Motion. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: I have a three lights so I'm going to go down that list, but if you want to make a 12
Motion then make a Motion. If not then I'll go down this list and you can relight up the board 13
and I can come back to you. 14
15
Commissioner Rosenblum: Ok. Let me let them make their comments first. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Ok, that's fine. I have a Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel then Monk. 18
You’ll defer? Ok. I have Commissioner Monk then Guardias. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Monk: So I had brought this up when we discussed this element in the past and I 1
think it was recorded, but I'll just bring it up again and it might address the issue. But in 2
reference to the language on T‐23 that you just read Commissioner Rosenblum on allowing 3
property owners to achieve reductions by contributing to citywide employment district shuttles 4
I would propose adding some language in there or other proven transportation programs such 5
as TMA. That would be the language I would propose adding that are not directly under the 6
property owners’ control. Is an amenable solution to… I can show it to you so... 7
8
Commissioner Rosenblum: [Unintelligible] It doesn’t exactly [unintelligible]. 9
10
Ms. Gitelman: Chair Alcheck I don't know if we heard a second to the Motion that's on the 11
floor. Was there a second? 12
13
Chair Alcheck: I’m sorry, are you suggesting that Commissioner Monk made a Motion? 14
15
Ms. Gitelman: No, Commissioner Rosenblum (interrupted) 16
17
Chair Alcheck: No, Commissioner Rosenblum did not make a Motion. 18
19
Ms. Gitelman: He did not? Ok. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: He did not. He said he was going to wait for the remaining comments. I'm sorry 2
so what was the conclusion of that discussion? 3
4
Commissioner Monk: That if folks can direct their attention to the bottom of Page T‐23 in the 5
Comp Plan its Program T‐1.2.2. It's the last bullet on that page. If you allow property owners to 6
achieve… or other proven transportation programs and then insert the language “such as the 7
TMA, that are not directly under the property owners’ control.” 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, is that a Motion? 10
11
Commissioner Rosenblum: So we just had this discussion offline, but just to make it explicit it 12
isn't exactly so this this whole thing by the way the reduction that is being referred to in this 13
section is reduction in SOV rates that they can achieve through various means including their 14
own program or a citywide program. It doesn't refer to tradeoffs that if they do enough of this 15
then they can achieve for example a lower parking requirement. So that is not explicit. And so 16
that’s what I’m saying; I'm proposing that language be inserted explicitly so Commissioner 17
Monk that doesn't exactly do. This is what they already have which is that you contribute to 18
some other program to achieve your reduction goal, but you get no benefit from that in terms 19
of reduction in parking requirements for example. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
MOTION #9 2
3
Chair Alcheck: I'm going to make a suggestion that maybe that we don't have consensus on this 4
item and it can't move forward, but because it's in because all of these items in on are in our 5
top list it can be what essentially can happen is that this discussion can all the discussions we 6
have tonight can essentially be included in our communication. That there was a discussion 7
about this, but it didn't have a consensus. And there was a discussion about this and it did have 8
consensus. And so if you're comfortable with that I think that that's a better way. We've talked 9
about this all along throughout this process that the notion that we would all get behind every 10
issue is unlikely and even we might have a hard time getting consensus behind many issues, but 11
that we can communicate areas where we spent time discussing and had thoughtful discussion. 12
13
So if you're comfortable with that I would make a Motion right now that we move on to the 14
next topic. What I’d very much like to do is at least finish all the items that got three votes. 15
And let's move on and this conversation can be incorporated as an area where we didn't have 16
any consensus. I have lights and I’ll we’ll go through them, but if anybody would like to second 17
that Motion I would accept a second at this time. 18
19
SECOND 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Commissioner Rosenblum: I'll second that. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok, we have a Motion on the floor. We have three lights Commissioner Gardias 4
or excuse me, two lights Commissioner Gardias and Commissioner Summa. 5
6
Commissioner Gardias: So I don't know how to proceed with this, but I was about to propose a 7
Motion about TMA program only. So I don't know how you want to deal with this. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: I can withdraw my Motion. If you think you can build consensus today I will I can 10
happily withdraw my Motion. 11
12
Commissioner Gardias: This is only about TMA program. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: What I'd like to do is be very efficient with the time. So why don't you give it a 15
try? 16
17
Commissioner Gardias: So this is verbiage of the proposed Motion. 18
19
MOTION #9 WITHDRAWN 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: I’ll withdraw my Motion and I’ll open the floor to your Motion. 2
3
MOTION #10 4
5
Commissioner Gardias: So proposed Motion is to strengthen TMA program and require 6
employers larger than small business over small business to participate in citywide TMA 7
program. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok. Either way can I get a second on this Motion or a comment on this Motion 10
or clarification on this Motion? 11
12
Commissioner Lauing: What's the language? 13
14
Chair Alcheck: I think that correct me if I’m wrong. I think what you're doing is you're trying to 15
make a suggestion that City Council consider strengthening the TMA program by incorporating 16
language related to employee membership. 17
18
Commissioner Gardias: Requiring larger mid and larger size employers to participate in citywide 19
TMA program. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: Yeah. You're not authoring a specific program, you're making a general 2
recommendation for consideration? 3
4
Commissioner Gardias: Well I mean it's very specific because there would be a requirement 5
which I think it's a big change from this what we have currently. 6
7
SECOND 8
9
Commissioner Rosenblum: I’ll second that. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Ok. We have a second on the floor. I’m sorry, staff is calling our attention. 12
13
Sandra Lee, Assistant City Attorney: Thank you Mr. Chair. Sandy Lee, City Attorney's Office. I 14
just wanted some clarification because it's not clear to me what participation in the TMA is and 15
to the extent that it is and I don't know if you want to clarify that further Commissioner, but to 16
the extent that it's some kind of financial contribution that would that could such as a per head 17
tax that would require a vote of the people. So I just wanted to raise that as an issue that we 18
could not today just require all large existing employers to participate financially in supporting 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
the TMA, but if we're focused on developers and offsetting impacts then that would be 1
appropriate. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Well better late than never. Ok, thank you for that. Alright. 4
5
Commissioner Gardias: Hold on a second so let's ask so what is the reason why we cannot? 6
Because we have different policies and programs so why we cannot strengthen it? 7
8
Chair Alcheck: What I would like to do actually is sort of take City Attorney's advice just on her 9
word. And I think it's a good conversation to sort of explore why we can't pursue a per head 10
requirement fee, but what I'd like to navigate away from this. I feel like we're spending a lot of 11
time on an issue that's going to be very difficult to build consensus on and if this Motion is 12
flawed on its head then I think we should abandon it. I will sort of turn to the two people 13
involved in this Motion to see if any of them want to withdraw their support? 14
15
Commissioner Gardias: No, I’m sorry. There needs to be a reason. I mean respectfully if there 16
is a reason of course we will change the Motion or something like this, but please give us the 17
reason. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Rosenblum: I have alternative language that will satisfy the attorney I think. 1
Again, this is just a this is a forward looking document so the language should be worked to 2
ensure full participation among employers in Palo Alto for to participate in the TMA. So the 3
concern is that if we say require all employers that that require and that and if participation is 4
interpreted to mean you have to fund it then that's that has to be subject to a vote, but if we 5
say that the goal of the Comp Plan is to encourage full participation then I think that probably 6
can be said. And it’s slightly stronger than what is currently in there which is language around 7
developers, etcetera. It just says that we are going to work to have full participation of 8
employers in Palo A in the TMA. Would that satisfy you Commissioner Gardias? I also think 9
would that without satisfy the Attorney? 10
11
Ms. Lee: Yes, Commissioner. 12
13
Commissioner Gardias: But I still want to know the reason. Is there a legal reason why you are 14
suggesting not to use the language? I understand this is very sharp language and it would 15
require employers, large employers meet [at large] to participate in this program. So what’s 16
the reason not to request their participation. 17
18
Ms. Lee: Requests is not the concern. My concern was with the word requiring participation to 19
the extent that participation means a financial contribution such as on a per employee basis 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
which could potentially be done, but it would couldn’t be done by ordinance without a vote of 1
the people because it could be a tax. 2
3
Commissioner Gardias: That's exactly what it is and I we have number of other policies that 4
require similar commitment. 5
6
Ms. Gitelman: Commissioner Gardias I think you're hearing that some of your colleagues and 7
staff are happy to have some policy change or program wording in here it's just a question of 8
wording it carefully so we don't run afoul of this issue. So I think Commissioner Rosenblum had 9
some suggestions. We could come up with another alternative, but the idea is to say if you 10
would like to recommend to the Council that they pursue a requirement or consider a 11
requirement or support full participation we can come up with a number of different ways to 12
phrase it. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I want to for the process do you accept his revision? 15
16
Commissioner Gardias: Yes, I do. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so we have a Motion on the floor as revised. Is staff comfortable, do they 19
understand the language? Good, so do I. No, we have a second. Commissioner Rosenblum 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
seconded the Motion that he helped author. I have lights from Commissioner Summa and 1
Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel. Before I turn to you do you want to speak before 2
we vote? 3
4
Commissioner Summa: So what we're voting on now just seems redundant with what's already 5
in here. It’s it doesn't encompass Commissioner Rosenblum’s funding sources at all, it just said 6
let's try to make this thing work which is already in here and it's all of our intentions. So I think 7
it's completely unnecessary and if you want to vote you should vote on, we should vote on the 8
part that we likely don't all agree with which is the idea of passing along the risk of not parking 9
buildings as Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel said to the general public. That’s 10
(interrupted) 11
12
Chair Alcheck: Ok, unfortunately we have a Motion on the floor so unless you intend to make a 13
Substitute Motion in favor of that policy I'd like to put to vote what we actually have on the 14
floor. 15
16
SUBSTITUTE MOTION #1 TO MOTION #10 17
18
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Summa: So I'll make a Substitute Motion that we should vote on the funding 1
sources recommended by originally recommended by Commissioner Rosenblum including most 2
importantly parking reductions for fees 3
4
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so if I understand you correctly you're making a Substitute Motion right now 5
that you don't support? 6
7
Commissioner Summa: Correct. I'm saying we should (interrupted) 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Would anybody like to second Commissioner Summa’s Substitute Motion which 10
she will not be supporting? 11
12
Commissioner Summa: No. I am saying we should vote on the aspect of this (interrupted) 13
14
Chair Alcheck: I understand, but there is a Motion on the floor and you are making an effort to 15
table it so that we can vote on a Motion that you are proposing now that you actually don't 16
intend to vote up. So I want to (interrupted) 17
18
Commissioner Summa: No, no, no, no. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION #1 ON MOTION #10 FAILED, VOTE ON MOTION #10 1
2
Chair Alcheck: I need to get a second on this Substitute Motion. Does anybody second this 3
Substitute Motion? Ok, there are no seconds. I do plan on calling the question. Good. We're 4
going to put this to a vote. We have a Motion on the floor it’s seconded by Commissioner 5
Rosenblum. All those in favor of the Motion on the floor please raise your hand and say aye. 6
We have five in support of this Motion. All those opposed? We have two Commissioners who 7
oppose the Motion, Commissioner Summa and Commissioner Lauing. Ok, that concludes this 8
discussion of this item. 9
10
MOTION #10 PASSED (5‐2, Commissioners Summa and Lauing opposed) 11
12
Chair Alcheck: We have I would like to suggest that we have our list is all over the map. I’m 13
missing a page. We have it I’m not wrong we have Item Number 7, Item Number 8, 9, 10, 11, 14
and 12 that all receive and Item Number 13 and 14 that all received three votes. That's a lot of 15
items that I doubt will be able to get through. It's not infrequent that our colleagues at the City 16
Council level stay late to have important discussions, but I don't want to make that decision 17
unilaterally I don't even think I could. So I do think we could maybe get through least one more 18
item if we worked at it to what would probably be 11:30, but I would like to know if the rest of 19
the Commission is interested in doing that? The consequence of not doing that would be that 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
at our next meeting we would have two tasks. Number one determining how we will collect 1
the discussion that we had right now into our communication, there's a little bit of a process 2
discussion there. And in theory we could continue to discuss some of these items. Our hope 3
tonight was to get through more of this so let me ask my question. Do are you are you guys 4
interested in continuing for another 45 minutes? Commissioner Lauing. 5
6
Commissioner Lauing: Just in general six hour meetings I think are a little bit difficult to keep 7
focused so I would like to maybe go another maybe one more and then push it. However I’d 8
also like to point out that at the beginning we talked about we have 19 and we got through 6, 9
we might get through 7. So at this rate we're not going to get through it next week either. So 10
that raises the issue of we have to trim some of these or we have to add another meeting or we 11
have to talk a lot more efficiently which you know… 12
13
Chair Alcheck: I agree. I would add that once you get into the two vote items in theory 14
consensus could be determined pretty quickly. If we don't have enough votes for it we can pass 15
on it, but it's the threes and fours that are a little more complicated. 16
17
Commissioner Lauing: Yeah I do think that there were a couple Commissioners that noted that 18
they weren’t voting for things that they wanted to pass, they were voting for things that they 19
wanted to discuss. So that might be… 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: That's true. Anybody else want to make a comment on whether you want to I'm 2
happy to support the idea of doing one more, I'm happy to support the idea of doing two more. 3
I just want a consensus here Commissioners. I have a light from Commissioner Summa. 4
5
Commissioner Summa: Is it possible that we could just vote on the items without trying to 6
achieve consensus? I mean I envisioned us voting rather [unintelligible]. 7
8
Chair Alcheck: The next item for example has two opinions. Some say LOS is good some say 9
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) is. It’s without a discussion that's an incoherent vote. I don't I’m 10
not disagreeing with the (interrupted) 11
12
Commissioner Summa: Can we skip around and go out of order and vote on the ones that we 13
can just vote up or down? 14
15
Commissioner Lauing: Why would you want to do that without debate? That was the whole 16
point of this process. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: I didn't nominate items that I agreed with. I nominated items that I think 19
deserved more discussion so I think that voting them up and down would be counterintuitive. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Commissioner Summa: Ok. 2
3
Ms. Gitelman: Chair Alcheck there’s I mean one kind of compromise position here is to get a 4
Motion on the floor before debate so ask for each item ask someone to make a Motion. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Have the first person who… yeah. 7
8
Ms. Gitelman: There’s the Motion and then a second and then you're actually debating an 9
action. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: I agree. I think that that's a good path because we've spent a lot of time talking 12
about the concepts and then we spent a lot of time talking about the articulation of the concept 13
and maybe we could condense those into the same thing. Thank you for that suggestion. Ok, 14
Commissioner Monk. 15
16
Commissioner Monk: On the next item before us I know that it was heavily debated is there a 17
way that we could just perhaps reference our prior transcript on it and maybe skip that for 18
tonight because I think that's a long… 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: Well what I would suggest is that the person or the individuals that nominated it 1
make a Motion right away and then if then Commissioners could decide not to debate it and 2
vote. 3
4
Commissioner Monk: My only concern is that on some of these we've had big discussions so I 5
just want to acknowledge that and not have to repeat what's been what we’ve already gone 6
through. 7
8
Chair Alcheck: No, here's the thing I'm very comfortable with not spending a lot of time talking, 9
but that’s that only happens when everybody on this Commission decides I'm not going to 10
spend a lot of time talking on it. So if a motion maker makes a Motion and nobody really wants 11
to have a debate about it then they don't have a debate. Ok, are you inclined to continue? 12
13
Commissioner Monk: I'm inclined to support the meeting getting continued, but if I’m alone I’ll 14
stay. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: You mean not continuing tonight? Ok. Commissioner Rosenblum. I have a light 17
from Commissioner Rosenblum. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah I mean if we’re voting on push on or call it day I would call it a 1
day. I'm getting a little frazzled and it's just not… 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok. 4
5
Commissioner Rosenblum: I find my own thoughts to get suspect after a certain time so. 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so I have Commissioner Summa do you feel the same way? Yeah. 8
9
Commissioner Summa: I’m happy to do what most want to do. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Ok. I have two Commissioners who want to stop. Anybody else? 12
13
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I would I’m ready to stop too. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Ok, Commissioner... that’s three we just need one more and then I don't have to 16
keep pushing you guys. 17
18
Commissioner Gardias: I can continue my next meeting is at 7:00. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Lauing: I already suggested that we stop, but… 1
2
Chair Alcheck: You suggested that we did one more. Ok, we have a desire to conclude tonight. 3
4
Ms. Gitelman: So Mr. Chair if we can just have a brief conversation about our goals. 5
Commissioner Lauing articulated we’re up against it. We have one more scheduled meeting. I 6
think the staff would be willing to start earlier than six o'clock if the Commission could 7
accommodate that. We'd be interested we could also help you in help facilitate a meeting that 8
tries to get through more material however you might want that assistance. Maybe getting 9
Motions on the floor immediately might be one way to speed it up. Maybe just getting rid of 10
some of the things at the bottom of this list and sticking with the fours and the threes is one 11
way. But we would also be open to scheduling a special meeting if that’s (interrupted) 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Let me ask you a question. Do you know what else is on the agenda for the 14
meeting on the 27th? 15
16
Ms. Gitelman: This is the only item on the agenda. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Ok. I would venture to suggest that I am comfortable beginning that meeting as 19
early as 3:00 p.m. if it made a difference. So if the Commissioners felt like they could come 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
earlier to that meeting and we could accomplish a significant amount before the wee hours of 1
the evening I just need to know how you guys feel about that. It doesn't have to be 3:00, it 2
could be 4:00, but as early as you're available maybe you could let us know right now. 3
4
Ms. Gitelman: And we'd be happy to bring in dinner if you want to start at 4:00 we could take a 5
break at 6:00 for… 6
7
Chair Alcheck: I'll just go down the line. Commissioner Gardias do you have availability on the 8
27th to start a meeting earlier? 9
10
Commissioner Gardias: Not that early. I can start 5:30, but not that early. 11
12
Chair Alcheck: 5:30. Ok and Commissioner Lauing? 13
14
Commissioner Lauing: I can start pretty much at any time. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Ok, Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel? 17
18
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: 5:00ish. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: 5:00ish. Ok, you know where I am. And you Commissioner Monk? 1
2
Commissioner Monk: I’m fine. 3
4
Chair Alcheck: Fine with what? 5
6
Commissioner Monk: I just want to (interrupted) 7
8
Chair Alcheck: Could you begin at four o'clock? 9
10
Commissioner Monk: That's fine. 11
12
Chair Alcheck: Commissioner Summa? 13
14
Commissioner Summa: [Unintelligible] anytime. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Commissioner Rosenblum. 17
18
Commissioner Rosenblum: 4:00 p.m. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I have one, two, three, four, five individuals that can start at 4:00. I think the 1
question is is how do I proceed? We don't need to have seven individuals present to have a 2
quorum and to have a meeting and I think that the task of determining how to move forward if 3
the five of us can build consensus as to some of the topics it could be sufficient. We didn't have 4
seven Commissioners at all of our meetings on this review in general, but does staff have an 5
opinion about how to proceed here? 6
7
Ms. Gitelman: Yeah I hesitate to advise you on this. I think this Commission has been working 8
very well this evening as a full body. It's been most constructive I think when the Commission 9
has been fully present and participating. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Yeah, I don't disagree with that. 12
13
Ms. Gitelman: So I know you can conduct a business with a quorum, but I don’t know I’ll just 14
question whether (Interrupted) 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Ok, well why don't we do this? Why don't we (interrupted) 17
18
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Monk: Perhaps the Commissioner Gardias could weigh in on the two or three 1
ones that we might discuss or maybe he can advocate ones that he wouldn't want to be here 2
for and we could start those, something along (interrupted) 3
4
Commissioner Lauing: He might be able to do 5:00 he just said. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Then let's go for 5:00. Commissioner [Note Vice‐Chair] Waldfogel you think you 7
can make 5:00 squeak by? 8
9
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I can make 5:00 work. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Ok then we've got seven people who can make 5:00 work. 12
13
Ms. Gitelman: And we'll bring in some food so we can get started right away and then take a 14
break after a couple hours and eat. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: That would be delightful. Ok, so it will be our only item so we'll start earlier and 17
we'll also get to it sooner. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Commissioner Monk: And I just want to mention that I think I didn't communicate correctly on 1
my list so I think two of my items were not on. I don't know if they were captured or not so. 2
3
Ms. Costello: Through the Chair? We're going to double check the list. We'll just double check 4
it tomorrow and if there’s (interrupted) 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Would you mind actually when we meet next week I think will be helpful if we 7
had a new spreadsheet that removed all the items that we've dealt with. 8
9
Ms. Costello: Yeah, yeah. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: So that we can have (interrupted) 12
13
Ms. Costello: Right. We will create a new spreadsheet and if we missed something we'll go 14
back and double check because we were doing it quickly and then we were trying to create a 15
format so we might have missed some and there was some miscommunication. So we will go 16
back and double check and if there's something with a two or three we'll put it back on there 17
and we'll create a new sheet that takes off what we've already discussed. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: Ok, alright. I just want to say two things. Number one thank you to all of you. I 1
know this is a really challenging process. I know it's a struggle. I want to thank staff for being 2
here really late. I we really appreciate it and I think we all have the same goals here. 3
Commissioner Monk is suggesting ice cream as (interrupted) 4
5
Commissioner Monk: This weekend there's the (interrupted) 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Oh, the ice cream social. Ok, yeah. Any other comments other than the ice 8
cream social announcement that anybody wants to make real quick before we (interrupted) 9
10
Commissioner Monk: And there’s a rail study… 11
12
Ms. Gitelman: Saturday rail (interrupted) 13
14
Chair Alcheck: For all of you viewers out there. 15
16
Commissioner Monk: I’ve RSVPed to that and I don’t know if other Commissioners have. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Come to the rail study. Ok, thank you. I'm going to conclude this meeting it's 19
11:01. Thank you again everybody for your hard work. See you in two weeks. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Approval of Minutes 2
Public Comment is Permitted. Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 3
There are no minutes to be approved at this meeting. 4
Committee Items 5
Commissioner Questions, Comments or Announcements 6
Adjournment 7
8
11pm 9
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Palo Alto Planning & Transportation Commission 1
Commissioner Biographies, Present and Archived Agendas and Reports are available online: 2
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/ptc/default.asp. The PTC Commission members are: 3
4
Chair Michael Alcheck 5
Vice Chair Asher Waldfogel 6
Commissioner Przemek Gardias 7
Commissioner Ed Lauing 8
Commissioner Susan Monk 9
Commissioner Eric Rosenblum 10
Commissioner Doria Summa 11
12
Get Informed and Be Engaged! 13
View online: http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city‐of‐palo‐alto or on Channel 26. 14
15
Show up and speak. Public comment is encouraged. Please complete a speaker request card 16
located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Commission 17
Secretary prior to discussion of the item. 18
19
Write to us. Email the PTC at: Planning.Commission@CityofPaloAlto.org. Letters can be 20
delivered to the Planning & Community Environment Department, 5th floor, City Hall, 250 21
Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301. Comments received by 2:00 PM two Tuesdays preceding 22
the meeting date will be included in the agenda packet. Comments received afterward through 23
2:00 PM the day of the meeting will be presented to the Commission at the dais. 24
25
Material related to an item on this agenda submitted to the PTC after distribution of the 26
agenda packet is available for public inspection at the address above. 27
Americans with Disability Act (ADA) 28
It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a 29
manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an 30
appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, 31
or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329‐2550 (voice) or by emailing 32
ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 33
24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service. 34