HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 7375
City of Palo Alto (ID # 7375)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 1/23/2017
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP Program Resolution
Title: Public Hearing: Adoption of a Resolution for the Creation of a New
Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program in the Evergreen Park and
Mayfield Neighborhoods Bounded by Park Boulevard, Caltrain Rail Corridor,
Oregon Expressway, Page Mill Road and El Camino Real and Finding of
Exemption Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct a public hearing and take the following actions:
1. Adopt a resolution to implement the Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential
Parking (RPP) Program (Attachment A and Attachment B) as a one-year pilot and direct
staff to make corresponding changes to the RPP Administrative Guidelines (Attachment
C); and
2. Find the program exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
The Planning and Transportation Commission recommended this action with some
modifications on December 14, 2016, as described further below.
Executive Summary
Beginning in early 2014, the City has been actively addressing parking and transportation
challenges throughout the City using a multi-faceted approach focused on parking
management, parking supply, and transportation demand management programs. Parking
management strategies have included the development of a city-wide Residential Preferential
Parking (RPP) ordinance, which was adopted in December 2014, as well as establishment of a
new RPP district in residential areas surrounding Downtown. The city-wide RPP ordinance
(Attachment D) includes parameters for neighborhoods to petition and request a new RPP
district, or to request annexation to an existing RPP district.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
On May 9, 2016, City Council directed staff to move forward with the implementation of an RPP
program in the Evergreen Park neighborhood north of the California Avenue business district.
The staff report from this meeting is available at
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/52162. The minutes from this
meeting are available at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/52738.
On July 14, 2016, Staff conducted a community workshop at the PAUSD administration building
to introduce the concept of RPP to neighborhood residents, property owners and business
owners. This workshop was followed up by a resident focus group on August 25 and business
focus group on September 29. A second public workshop was held on October 11 to present a
draft of the RPP program design, and a survey was sent to residences and property owners on
October 31. Presentations and notes from the public meetings are available at
http://paloalto.parkingguide.com/evergreen-park-rpp-program/ and a copy of the survey is
included as Attachment E. (The notes from the business focus group meeting are unavailable,
however a summary of the discussion is provided below.) As of November 28, Staff had
received 330 returned surveys with 226 voting in favor of RPP implementation as described in
the survey.
Consistent with the survey, the attached draft resolution would establish an RPP district within
the area bounded by Park Boulevard, the Caltrain rail corridor, Oregon Expressway, Page Mill
Road, and El Camino Real. Within that area, two-hour parking would be allowed on-street
during the hours between 8:00am and 6:00pm, and only vehicles displaying a valid permit could
park for longer during those hours. Residents would be eligible to obtain up to five permits; the
first one would be free, and the others would cost $50 each. Up to 125 non-resident
(employee) permits would be available for purchase on either side of the California Avenue
business district (i.e. 125 in the Evergreen Park zone and 125 in the Mayfield zone). Employees
on the waiting list for California Avenue business district parking lots and garages and low-
income workers would be given preference. Non-resident permits would cost $149, and there
would be a discounted rate for low-income workers of $50.
If the City Council approves the resolution as drafted, staff would order permits, arrange for
installation of signs, and conduct outreach such that enforcement could begin around April 1,
2017. The program is envisioned as a one-year pilot, and adjustments could be made based on
experiences during that year.
Background
Per the City-wide RPP Ordinance, residents may self-organize and request the formation of an
RPP district in their neighborhood. The process, as outlined in the Ordinance, is as follows:
City of Palo Alto Page 3
1. Residents must request a petition from the Planning and Community Environment
Department. The petition includes a narrative portion and a signature form to
demonstrate resident support.
2. The Director of Planning and Community Environment reviews all petitions received by
March 31 of each year.
3. Following receipt of the petitions, Staff reviews and brings forward the complete
petitions to the Planning and Transportation Commission for prioritization. (For this past
year, the Planning and Transportation Commission provided feedback on prioritization
at its April 27 meeting.)
4. After prioritization, Staff initiates work on the priority RPP programs(s). The assumption
has been that limited resources preclude the simultaneous processing of all requests
(hence the need for prioritization). Staff’s work includes gathering additional
information, community outreach, and stakeholder engagement. This process includes
parking occupancy counts and a stakeholder process to develop a program that meets
the needs of all parties as best as possible.
5. At the end of the community outreach and stakeholder engagement process, the City
Attorney prepares a draft resolution(s) outlining the parameters of the new program(s).
6. Staff brings the proposed RPP program(s) to the Planning and Transportation
Commission by the end of the same calendar year. The PTC reviews the draft resolution
and makes recommendations to City Council regarding the new RPP program(s).
7. Following these steps, the City Council will hold a public hearing to review the proposed
resolution, and to adopt, modify, or reject the proposed RPP program(s).
As of the March 31 petition deadline, staff had received a petition from the Evergreen Park
neighborhood to join the College Terrace resident-only parking program. The petition included
the area bounded by Park Boulevard, Caltrain Rail Corridor, Cambridge Avenue, and El Camino
Real. Residents noted parking overflow on weekdays, and attributed the parking impacts to
employees of neighboring businesses, employees from nearby office buildings, Caltrain
commuters, and Stanford University affiliates, including faculty, staff, students, and visitors.
Residents also noted safety concerns related to bike routes in the neighborhood.
Staff presented this petition, along with three others, to the Planning and Transportation
Commission on April 27 for prioritization, as required in the city-wide RPP ordinance. The
commission voted 5-0-2 for a motion that read:
Council should find budget for all four [RPP programs], but to prioritize them that
Evergreen [Park] and Southgate are top priority and that Crescent Park and
Edgewood are secondary priorities.
City Council Direction
Staff presented the four RPP petitions and the recommendation of the Planning and
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Transportation Commission to City Council on May 9. On an 8-0 vote, with Councilmember
Kniss not participating, City Council passed the following motion and directed staff to move
forward with the Evergreen Park RPP program:
A. Direct the Finance Committee to identify a budget allocation for implementation
of Residential Preferential Parking Programs (RPP) for the Southgate and
Evergreen Park Neighborhoods and attempt to align deployment of both RPP
programs; and
B. Implement an RPP in the Southgate neighborhood through a stakeholder process
including looking at engineering, enforcement, and Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) solutions with Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD)
where appropriate; and
C. Implement an RPP in Evergreen Park through a stakeholder process including
parking management options and determining how many permits to be sold for
low income workers as well as retail and personal service workers from the
adjacent California Avenue district; and
D. Recommend that the Crescent Park neighborhood be added to the Downtown
RPP eligibility area and if the neighborhood is not annexed, the residents can
come back as the third priority for a separate RPP; and
E. Edgewood Plaza would be fourth priority; and
F. Direct Staff to explore options including sharing permits so that low income
workers as well as retail and personal service employees can afford permits.
Occupancy Surveys
The City’s transportation engineering and planning consultant conducted three different
parking occupancy surveys in May, October, and November. On Tuesday, May 24, the surveys
were conducted during three time periods: 7:00-9:00am, 12:00-2:00pm, and 5:00-7:00pm. The
survey area was bounded by Churchill Avenue, Bryant Street, North California Avenue,
California Avenue, and El Camino Real. In the Evergreen Park neighborhood, the surveys
documents occupancy rates over 85% on the following blocks:
1800 Ash Street (mid-day)
2100 Ash Street (morning and mid-day)
2000 and 2200 Birch Street (mid-day)
200, 300, and 400 College Avenue (morning and mid-day)
400 Leland Avenue (mid-day)
400 Oxford Avenue (morning and mid-day)
300 Oxford Avenue (mid-day)
100 Park Avenue (morning and mid-day)
2000 Park Boulevard (mid-day)
400 Stanford Avenue (morning, mid-day and evening)
City of Palo Alto Page 5
The data clearly shows high occupancy on the blocks closest to the California Avenue business
district and El Camino Real. This high occupancy begins in the morning and continues through
mid-day, only decreasing in the evening. Overall, the mid-day period appears to have the most
demand for parking, as the majority of the streets within the Evergreen Park neighborhood are
at or above 50% occupancy at this time.
On Tuesday, October 4, the surveys were conducted overnight in order to estimate the number
of resident motor vehicles currently occupying on-street parking spaces in the Evergreen Park
neighborhood. The survey area was bounded by Park Boulevard, Caltrain rail corridor, College
Avenue, and El Camino Real. The counts were conducted at 11:30pm, a time of day when most
employee and guest vehicles are not parked on the streets of the Evergreen Park
neighborhood. However, there may still have been motor vehicles parked on-street by Stanford
University students who may not be eligible to store a vehicle on campus and long distance
travelers using Caltrain. A total of 362 motor vehicles were observed to be parked on-street at
the time of the overnight survey. This represents 44.7% of the total on-street parking supply. A
large number of these vehicles were observed on College Avenue and Oxford Avenue, streets
abutting multi-family housing and the California Avenue business district.
On Thursday, November 17, parking occupancy surveys were conducted in the Mayfield area
during four time periods: 7:00-9:00am, 12:00-2:00pm, 5:00-7:00pm and 11:30pm. The survey
area was bounded by North California Avenue, Caltrain rail corridor, Oregon Expressway, Page
Mill Road and El Camino Real. In the Mayfield neighborhood, the survey documents occupancy
rates over 85% on the following blocks:
2500 Ash Street (evening)
2500 Birch Street (evening)
300 Grant Avenue (morning and mid-day)
400 Grant Avenue (mid-day)
2500 Park Boulevard (evening)
200 and 400 Sheridan Avenue (mid-day)
300 Sheridan Avenue (morning and mid-day)
The data clearly shows high occupancy on the blocks closest to El Camino Real. This high
occupancy is mostly during the mid-day period. In the evening period, the blocks closest to the
California Avenue business district become more occupied. The results of all parking occupancy
surveys are included in Attachment F.
Public Outreach
In the evening of July 14, Staff convened a community workshop at the PAUSD administration
building to introduce the concept of Evergreen Park RPP program to neighborhood residents,
property owners and business owners. Staff presented information on the city-wide RPP
City of Palo Alto Page 6
ordinance, parameters of the existing Downtown RPP program and gathered feedback from
attendees at a break-out session following the presentation. Many attendees disagreed with
the workshop format and requested that future meetings include a group question and answer
period immediately following the presentation. Feedback varied, but some of the key topics
included:
Availability and number of employee parking permits
Category of business eligible for employee parking permits
Supply of parking within California Avenue business district
Hours of enforcement
Applicability of College Terrace resident-only parking program
Requirements for transportation demand management
Types and prices of resident parking permits
This community workshop was followed by an evening resident focus group on August 25. The
focus group meeting was held at the Wesley United Methodist Church. This meeting was
organized as an informal conversation, where all attendees were encouraged to speak openly
to the entire group. Feedback varied, but some of the key topics included:
Program schedule
Boundary of program
Review of parking occupancy data
Structure and parameters of program and resolution
Phase-out of employee parking permits over time
Supply of parking within California Avenue business district
Needs of residents as compared to the needs of businesses
Need for better management of Stanford football game impacts and street sweeping
Types and prices of resident parking permits
Plans for mail survey
Availability and number of employee parking permits
Pedestrian and bicycle safety
Parking enforcement needs
The residents in attendance also provide Staff with a draft resolution which was created by the
original organizers of the Evergreen Park RPP petition. The resident-drafted resolution is
included as Attachment G.
On September 29, Staff convened a late-morning business focus group at the offices above
Keeble & Shuchat Photography. This meeting was organized as an informal conversation, where
all attendees were encouraged to speak openly to the entire group. Several residents opted to
attend this meeting as observers. Feedback varied, but some of the key topics included:
General deference to residents on parameters of program
Hours of enforcement
City of Palo Alto Page 7
Length of unpermitted parking period
Type and duration of employee parking permits
Supply of parking within California Avenue business district
In the evening of October 11, Staff convened a second community workshop at the PAUSD
administration building to introduce the initial Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP program concept
to neighborhood residents, property owners and business owners. Staff presented information
on the recommended boundaries, employee parking zones, enforcement hours, resident
permit types and prices, and employee permit numbers, types and prices. Staff also outlined
next steps, answered questions, and gathered feedback from attendees at a break-out session
following the presentation. As a result of the previous requests, Staff incorporated a group
question and answer period immediately following the presentation. Feedback varied, but
some of the key topics included:
Availability and number of employee parking permits
Employee parking permit numbers by employee parking zone
Ability of the two-hour limit to address parking capacity issues in areas closest to
California Avenue business district
Hours and methods of enforcement
Desired parking occupancy rates
Types, prices and quantities of resident parking permits
Phase-out of employee parking permits over time
Size and location of employee parking zones as related to the clustering of vehicles in
areas closest to California Avenue business district
Requirements for transportation demand management
Survey of Residents and Property Owners
On October 31, Staff mailed out 1,652 surveys to all residential properties and property owners
within the proposed RPP district, which is bounded by Park Boulevard, Caltrain Rail Corridor,
Oregon Expressway, Page Mill Road and El Camino Real. The surveys were due back to the City
by the end of the day on November 23. As of November 28, Staff had received 330 returned
surveys with 226 voting in favor of RPP implementation as described in the survey. The RPP
program design elements included in the mail survey are listed below:
• Permits would be required to park any vehicle on-street in excess of two (2) hours
between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
• All area households would be eligible for one (1) annual permit sticker free of
charge and could purchase up to three (3) additional annual permit stickers at a
cost of $50 each. Residents could also purchase up to two (2) transferable annual
permit hangtags for $50 each, and up to 50 transferable one-day permit
City of Palo Alto Page 8
hangtags per year for $5 each. The transferable permit hangtags may be used on
any vehicle, including household visitor vehicles.
• Employees of businesses located within the area would be eligible to purchase
transferable one-day permit hangtags for $5 and annual permits stickers for
$149. All employee permits would be specific to one of the two employee parking
zones (see included map for proposed area and employee parking zone
boundaries). Discounted annual permit stickers would be available to low-income
employees for $50.
• A maximum of 125 annual employee permits would be available in each of the
two proposed employee parking zones, for a total of 250. Preference would be
given to low-income employees and those already on the waiting list for the City-
owned garages and lots in the area.
The results of the mail surveys can be found in Table 1.
Table 1: Results of Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP Program Mail Survey
Area
To
t
a
l
Ma
i
l
e
d
Ou
t
To
t
a
l
Re
t
u
r
n
e
d
YE
S
Re
s
p
o
n
s
e
NO
Re
s
p
o
n
s
e
No
t
Re
t
u
r
n
e
d
YE
S
Re
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ra
t
e
To
t
a
l
Re
t
u
r
n
e
d
Ra
t
e
California Avenue Business District
(existing two-hour parking zone) 342 37 25 12 305 68% 11%
Evergreen Park 646 206 149 57 440 72% 32%
Mayfield 664 87 52 35 484 60% 13%
Total 1652 330 226 104 1229 68% 20%
Source: Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment, December 2016
Planning and Transportation Commission Recommendation
On December 14, 2016, Staff presented a draft Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP program
resolution to the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC). The PTC voted to recommend
that City Council take the following action(s):
1. Adopt a resolution to implement the Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential
Preferential Parking (RPP) Program as a one-year pilot and direct staff to make
corresponding changes to the RPP Administrative Guidelines; and
2. Find the program exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA).
The PTC also included the following recommendations in their motion:
A. Amend the resolution to designate the Mayfield neighborhood as an Eligibility Area
and allow each block-face to opt in with a petition to the Director of Planning and
Community Environment as outlined in the RPP Administrative Guidelines. Employee
City of Palo Alto Page 9
Parking Permits would only be released within the Mayfield neighborhood as
individual block-faces are admitted to the RPP program.
B. Amend the resolution to divide Employee Parking Zone A into subzones in order to
discourage bunching of employee vehicles on streets closest to the California
Avenue business district.
Staff has incorporated recommendation B into the revised resolution. A small typographical
error identified by the PTC has also been corrected in the revised resolution in order to clarify
the ability of households within the RPP district to receive one free annual resident parking
permit sticker, and staff has incorporated a change to the hours of enforcement to be more in
line with the residents’ request as explained further below. The verbatim minutes from the PTC
meeting are included as Attachment H.
Discussion
During the month of October, Staff used the results of the initial data collection, first
community workshop, focus group meeting, and secondary data collection effort to begin to
draft the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP program structure. Important elements considered,
included the following:
What areas should be included in the RPP district? Which parts of the California Avenue
business district should be included? Will inclusion of the entire business district place
an unfair burden on the Evergreen Park neighborhood if employee parking permits are
issued?
During which hours should the RPP program be enforced? How should enforcement be
accomplished?
What types of resident parking permits should be issued, how much should they cost,
and what quantity will each household be permitted to purchase?
Should employee motor vehicles be permitted to park on neighborhood streets? If so,
how many should be permitted at one time?
What types of employee parking permits should be issued, how much should they cost,
and what quantity will be available?
What types of businesses should be permitted to purchase employee permits? How
should employee permits be allocated?
Should employee parking permits be phased out over time?
Should the RPP program include eligibility areas to the south and east or should it be
assumed that these neighborhoods would be part of future RPP programs?
District Boundaries & Zone Structure
Staff recommends that the boundaries of the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP be the northern
edge of properties along the north side of Park Boulevard, centerline of the Caltrain rail
corridor, centerline of Oregon Expressway, centerline of Page Mill Road and centerline of El
City of Palo Alto Page 10
Camino Real. All streets within these boundaries should be part of the Evergreen Park-Mayfield
RPP district and all households, employees and businesses within these boundaries should be
eligible for resident parking permits or employee parking permits. Existing daytime two-hour
parking restrictions within the California Avenue business district (shown in brown in Figure 1)
should remain in place, as should existing parking restrictions along the east side of El Camino
Real. All existing parking restrictions within the Mayfield area (shown in beige in Figure 1), with
the exception of loading zones and areas where parking is prohibited for safety reasons, should
be nullified and RPP restrictions put in place.
While the petition submitted by residents in March only included the area bounded by Park
Boulevard, Caltrain rail corridor, Cambridge Avenue, and El Camino Real, Staff believes that the
inclusion of the Mayfield area is necessary to better distribute permitted employee parking and
prevent the relocation of unpermitted employee and long term parking to the Mayfield area
south of the California Avenue business district. This decision was reached after discussing
various other scenarios with residents, employers and other stakeholders. Staff also believes it
is necessary to include the businesses along El Camino Real within the boundaries of the
district, since some of them currently rely on on-street parking. Including these businesses in
the RPP program would mean this parking is no longer free, and would encourage them to use
alternate modes/strategies, and the number of permits available could be reduced in future
years, as additional off-street supply and transportation demand management strategies are
developed in the area. (See the section on employee permit reductions below.)
As noted earlier, the Planning and Transportation Commission questioned whether the
Mayfield area should be included in the district from the start, or be considered an Eligibility
Area instead, where residents would have to petition to be added to the program
administratively. The PTC also suggested dividing the Evergreen Park employee parking zone
into two employee parking zones to ensure employees don’t cluster in the blocks immediately
adjacent to the California Avenue business district. The map below and the attached resolution
reflect the PTC recommendation to create two employee parking zones in the Evergreen Park
neighborhood, but do not reflect the recommendation to create an Eligibility Area. This is
because of concerns that non-resident vehicles would overwhelm the streets on that side of the
business district if it’s not included from the beginning.
Figure 1: Proposed Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP District Boundaries
City of Palo Alto Page 11
Source: Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment, October 2016
Enforcement Hours
Staff initially recommended that enforcement hours for the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP
program be consistent with the enforcement hours for the Downtown RPP program, which are
Monday through Friday from 8:00am to 5:00pm. After consideration of comments received at
the Planning and Transportation Commission meeting and comments submitted by residents,
staff is now recommending that signs in the area indicate enforcement between 8:00am and
6:00pm. This would mean that Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP parking permits would be
required to park any motor vehicle on-street in excess of two (2) hours during these
enforcement hours.
At the resident focus group meeting, there was a discussion regarding even longer enforcement
hours, with some residents suggesting expanding the enforcement hours to 6:00am in the
morning and 7:00pm in the evening and/or conducting enforcement on the weekend to
address parking issues related to Stanford University football games and the California Avenue
farmers’ market. The resident-drafted resolution suggests extended enforcement hours during
weekdays.
City of Palo Alto Page 12
The staff recommendation for 8:00am to 6:00pm reflected in the revised resolution would add
one more hour to the 8:00am to 5:00pm period used for the Downtown RPP program and could
also be considered for the downtown area. Adding an additional hour to the posted hours of
enforcement in the evening would not necessarily require additional work shifts for the
enforcement officers, since they could still enforce the two-hour restriction between 8:00am
and 5:00pm.
The parking occupancy data shows very few streets within the Evergreen Park neighborhood
approaching 85% occupancy during the 5:00-7:00pm weekday period. Several block faces in the
Mayfield neighborhood exceed the 85% occupancy rate between 5:00pm and 7:00pm and
enforcement later into the evening should be considered for this area after the one-year pilot.
A handful of streets in Evergreen Park closest to California Avenue and El Camino Real, as well
as Grant Avenue and Sheridan Avenue in Mayfield, exceed 85% occupancy during the 7:00-
9:00am weekday period. However, with enforcement beginning at 8:00am, early morning
parkers would need to move their vehicles before 10:00am, unless they have an RPP parking
permit. This will discourage long-term parkers from using these streets.
Resident Parking Permits
Staff recommends that all Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP district households should be eligible
for five resident permits. One annual resident parking permit sticker would be free of charge
and residents would be able to purchase up to two additional annual resident parking permit
stickers at a cost of $50 each, as well as two transferable annual resident parking permit
hangtags for $50 each. This is consistent with the downtown program, and similar to that
program, households would also be able to purchase up to 50 transferable one-day resident
parking permit hangtags per year for $5 each. The transferable resident parking permit
hangtags may be used on any vehicle, including household visitor vehicles. These resident
parking permit numbers, types and fees are consistent with the Downtown RPP program and
have worked well to-date. The resident-drafted resolution includes very similar
recommendations for resident parking permits. However, the residents have requested that
additional resident parking permits be available for $40 each, which is $10 less than the Staff
recommendation. The residents also recommended that households be eligible to purchase up
to 80 transferable one-day resident parking permit hangtags per year: 30 more than
recommended by Staff.
Parking Occupancy and Supply
The overnight parking occupancy surveys in the Evergreen Park neighborhood documented a
total of 293 motor vehicles parked on-street at 11:30pm on a weeknight and a total supply of
655 on-street parking spaces. This represents 44.7% of the total on-street parking supply.
Therefore, it can be assumed that 55.3% of the available on-street parking is not being used by
City of Palo Alto Page 13
neighborhood residents to store their personal vehicles. This available space is more limited
closer to the California Avenue business district and on blocks with multi-family housing.
The overnight parking occupancy surveys in the Mayfield neighborhood documented a total of
132 motor vehicles parked on-street at 11:30pm on a weeknight and a total supply of 362 on-
street parking spaces. This represents 36.5% of the total on-street parking supply. Therefore, it
can be assumed that 63.5% of the available on-street parking is not being used by
neighborhood residents to store their personal vehicles. This available space is much more
limited on the 400-block of Grant Avenue, which exceeds 85% occupancy in the overnight
period.
A total of 592 on-street parking spaces were vacant overnight in both Evergreen Park and
Mayfield. If the unknown quantity of Stanford University student vehicles and Caltrain
passenger vehicles were to be factored in, the supply available for non-resident uses would
increase, as this type of long term parking would not be permitted in an RPP district.
Employee Parking Permits
Staff recommends that employees of businesses located within the Evergreen Park-Mayfield
RPP district should be eligible to purchase annual employee parking permit stickers for $149.
The cost of an annual garage and lot permit within the California Avenue business district is
currently $149. All employee permits would be specific to one of the three employee parking
zones (as shown in Figure 1). Discounted annual permit stickers would be available to low-
income employees for $50. This is consistent with the Downtown RPP program, and similar to
downtown, staff is also recommending that employees be eligible to purchase one-day
employee parking permit hangtags for $5 each.
Staff recommends that a maximum of 250 annual employee permits should be available in the
Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP district: 75 Employee Parking Permits in Employee Parking Zone A,
50 in Employee Parking Zone B and 125 in Employee Parking Zone C. A total of 425 motor
vehicles were occupying on-street parking spaces overnight within the three proposed
employee parking zones. If we assume that these vehicles represent the demand for
neighborhood resident parking within the district, then there are a total of 592 on-street
parking spaces available for other uses. Some of this space will be occupied by household
guests, neighborhood visitors, contractors, and service providers.
Based on the data from the Downtown RPP program, about 30-40% of annual permit holders
are expected to park on street within the district at any given point in time. If 250 employee
parking permits are issues, then we could expect that about 90 employees would be parked
within the district on an average day. This represents about 15% of the available on-street
parking, reserving 85% for other uses. It is expected that some clustering will occur and many
employees will park on the blocks closest to their places of employment. Staff can monitor this
City of Palo Alto Page 14
during the one-year pilot period and propose adjustments when needed. The resident-drafted
resolution recommends that only 10% of the existing legal on-street parking spaces be made
available for use by vehicles with employee parking permits. This represents only 102 permits
and would result in as few as 30 employees parked within the district on an average day. A
significant amount of curb space would likely remain vacant. The resident-drafted resolution
also recommends that one-day employee parking permit hangtags not be available under the
Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP program.
Staff recommends that preference should be given to low-income employees and those already
on the waiting list for the City-owned garages and lots in the California Avenue business district.
Low-income status should be defined using the same parameters as the Downtown RPP
program. There are currently about 250 applicants on the garage and lot waiting list and, during
the focus group meeting, many of the business owners stated that by the time their employees
reach the top of the list, they no longer work in the area.
Both City Council and the residents at the focus group meeting expressed an interest in limiting
the employee parking permits to those employed in retail or personal service establishments.
Establishing which employers are eligible and which are not could be a complex and time-
consuming exercise, and some low-income employees work in office environments serving as
custodians, administrative assistants, food service workers, and in other support roles. If
employee parking permits were limited to only retail or personal service establishments, these
individuals would be ineligible to purchase permits. Also, staff and consultants would find it
difficult to administer a program based on use, rather than income, and the time and cost
involved to explain/verify the preferred uses and resolve disputes would increase, taking
resources away from other aspects of customer service.
Employee Parking Permit Reduction
Residents of Evergreen Park have requested that the number of employee permits be reduced
each year, such that they are zero after five years. Staff does not recommend implementation
of an employee parking permit reduction or phase out at this time, although that could be
considered after the one-year pilot.
Unlike the downtown area, there is no coordinated effort to encourage the use of alternative
transportation, reduce SOV trips or enhance transit service within the California Avenue
business district. The California Avenue Station also currently has much less robust train service
than Palo Alto Station and a fewer number of high-frequency bus routes service the area. While
requiring employees who currently park on the street for free to obtain a permit will itself
incentivize those employees (and employers) to seek out alternatives, staff recommends also
focusing on improving the transportation options for California Avenue business district
employee before reducing the amount of available parking. It’s also notable that the City is
working towards construction of a new parking garage, which should add to the off-street
City of Palo Alto Page 15
parking supply in several years, and that the City and Stanford Research Park are both
committed to advocating for enhanced Caltrain service at the California Avenue Station.
Eligibility Areas
Staff does not recommend the establishment of Eligibility Areas for the Evergreen Park-
Mayfield RPP program. In the Downtown RPP area, Eligibility Areas are streets just outside of
the designated RPP district that can administratively opt into the program when there blocks
begin to experience increase parking occupancy. This allows the program to expand quickly to
address spillover from the designated RPP district. As proposed, the Evergreen Park-Mayfield
RPP district will be bordered by the existing College Terrace resident-only parking district to the
west, the planned Southgate RPP district to the north, the Caltrain rail corridor to the east and
Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road to the south. Staff believes that any spillover Evergreen
Park-Mayfield RPP district into the Old Palo Alto neighborhood to the east or Ventura
neighborhood to the south should be addressed through additional RPP programs, not an
expansion of the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP district. These neighborhoods are fairly separate
from the California Avenue business district employee and would likely need a different type of
program.
Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP Resolution
The draft Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP resolution is included as Attachment A. It provides for
implementation of the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP program as a one-year pilot by enacting
the following measures:
Establishes Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP District boundary (map is included as
Attachment B)
Establishes a cap of 250 annual employee parking permits for the first year of the
Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP program. Permits will be allocated by employee parking
zone.
Creates an employee parking zone structure to delineate where employees are eligible
to park in the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP District (map is included as Attachment B)
Policy Implications:
The following Comprehensive Plan goals, programs and policies are relevant to the
implementation of the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP program:
POLICY T-2:
Consider economic, environmental, and social cost issues in local
transportation decisions.
POLICY T-45:
City of Palo Alto Page 16
Provide sufficient parking in the University Avenue/Downtown and California
Avenue business districts to address long-range needs.
PROGRAM T-50:
Continue working with merchants, the Chamber of Commerce, neighbors,
and a parking consultant to explore options for constructing new parking
facilities or using existing parking more efficiently.
PROGRAM T-51:
Work with merchants to designate dedicated employee parking areas.
POLICY T-46:
Minimize the need for all-day employee parking facilities in the University
Avenue/Downtown and California Avenue business districts and encourage
short-term customer parking.
POLICY T-47:
Protect residential areas from the parking impacts of nearby business districts.
PROGRAM T-52:
Evaluate options to ensure maximum use of the City parking structures in
the University Avenue/Downtown and California Avenue areas.
PROGRAM T-53:
Discourage parking facilities that would intrude into adjacent residential
neighborhoods.
Resource Impact
Costs associated with establishment of a new RPP district will include those associated with
installing signs, ordering/printing permit stickers and hangtags, providing permit fulfilment
through a website, associated customer service, and increased parking enforcement. A total of
$280,000 was budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2017 Adopted Operating Budget for the planning,
maintenance, and operation of new RPPs for Evergreen Park and Southgate. Staff is working on
an estimate of costs for the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP program, which will be brought to
Council at a later date with any necessary budget and contract amendments for the City
Council’s consideration.
Timeline
If the Council adopts the resolution on January 23, 2017, staff expects that the program could
be in place and ready for enforcement on or about April 1, 2017.
City of Palo Alto Page 17
Environmental Review
This program is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations since it
can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the adoption and implementation of this
program may have a significant effect on the environment and Section 15301 in that this
proposed resolution will have a minor impact on existing facilities.
Attachments:
Attachment A - Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP Resolution Draft Unapproved (PDF)
Attachment B - Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP Zone Map (PDF)
Attachment C - RPP Administrative Guidelines Approved (PDF)
Attachment D - Citywide RPP Ordinance (PDF)
Attachment E - Evergreen Park-Mayfield Mail Survey (PDF)
Attachment F - Parking Occupancy Survey Maps (PDF)
Attachment G - Resident Focus Group Resident-drafted Resolution (PDF)
Attachment H - PTC Verbatim Minutes 2016-12-14 (PDF)
NOT YET APPROVED
1
Resolution No. _____
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing the Evergreen
Park‐ Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking District Under Chapter 10.050
of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Rescinding Conflicting Parking Restrictions
Within the RPP District
R E C I T A L S
A. California Vehicle Code Section 22507 authorizes the establishment, by city council
action, of permit parking programs in residential neighborhoods for residents and other
categories of parkers.
B. On December 15, 2014 the Council adopted Ordinance No. 5294, adding Chapter
10.50 to Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Municipal Code. This Chapter establishes the
city‐wide procedures for RPP Districts in the city.
C. On May 9, 2016, the City Council directed city staff to implement a Residential
Preferential Parking program in the Evergreen Park area.
D. Beginning in July 2016, a stakeholders’ group comprised of Evergreen Park residents
and business interests met two times and made its recommendations to the City on the
particular rules to be applied to the Evergreen Park ‐ Mayfield RPP District.
E. On December 14, 2016, the Planning and Transportation Commission held a public
hearing to consider the proposed Evergreen Park ‐ Mayfield residential preferential parking
program.
F. The Council desires to establish the area for the Evergreen Park – Mayfield
residential preferential parking program pilot and to rescind existing parking restrictions that
conflict with the restrictions established by this RPP district.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES, as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The criteria set forth in Section 10.50.030 for designating a Residential
Preferential Permit Zone have been met as follows:
1) That non‐resident vehicles do, or may, substantially interfere with the use of on‐street
or alley parking spaces by neighborhood residents;
2) That the interference by the non‐resident vehicles occurs at regular and frequent
intervals, either daily or weekly;
3) That the non‐resident vehicles parked in the area of the proposed district create
traffic congestion, noise, or other disruption (including shortage of parking spaces for
residents and their visitors) that disrupts neighborhood life;
NOT YET APPROVED
2
4) Other alternative parking strategies are not feasible or practical.
SECTION 2. Trial Period. The Trial Period for the Evergreen Park ‐ Mayfield RPP District shall be
for one year, and reevaluated at that time.
The RPP District shall remain in force until the City Council takes action to extend, modify, or
rescind. The City Council shall consider whether to make the RPP Districts and their parking
programs permanent, modify the Districts and/or their parking regulations, or terminate them
no later than March 31, 2018.
SECTION 3. Hours and Days of Enforcement. The parking regulations shall be in effect Monday
through Friday from 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM. During the regulated days and hours of enforcement,
no person shall park a motor vehicle in one of the designated Employee Parking Areas within
the Evergreen Park – Mayfield RPP for more than two continuous hours, except for electric
motor vehicles parked at an electric vehicle changing station, which shall be regulated by
signage installed at the charging station. A vehicle lawfully displaying a Resident Parking Permit
or an Employee Parking Permit shall be exempt from the two‐hour limit. Vehicles exempt from
the parking regulations contained in Chapter 10.50 are exempt from this restriction. Outside of
these enforcement hours, any motor vehicle may park in the Evergreen Park – Mayfield RPP,
subject to other applicable parking regulations.
SECTION 4. Parking Permits.
A. Employee Parking Permits. The City may issue Employee Parking Permits for the use by
employees working in the California Avenue business district area as specified in Exhibit
A and Table 1. Employee Parking Permits shall be subject to the following regulations:
a. Duration. Employee Parking Permits will be available in the form of transferable
one‐day permit hangtags and annual permit stickers.
b. Commuting Only. Employee Parking Permits are for the exclusive use by
employees working for California Avenue business district businesses while
commuting to work.
c. Signage and Allocation of Spaces. All Employee Parking Permits will be specific
to one of the two employee parking zones as specified in Exhibit A.
d. Maximum Number of Permits Issued. A maximum of 250 annual Employee
Parking Permits will be available: 75 in Employee Parking Zone A, 50 in Employee
Parking Zone B and 125 in Employee Parking Zone C. Preference will be given to
low‐income employees and those already on the waiting list for the City‐owned
garages and lots in the area as of the effective date of this resolution.
B. Resident Parking Permits.
1. Each resident living within the Evergreen Park ‐ Mayfield RPP may receive up to
three annual permit stickers as well as up to two transferable annual permit hangtags.
NOT YET APPROVED
3
2. Each resident living within the Evergreen Park ‐ Mayfield RPP may purchase up to
50 transferable one‐day permit hangtags per year, which may be used on any vehicle
including household visitor vehicles.
C. Applicability.
1. The restrictions of the RPP adopted by this resolution shall apply to the city blocks
identified in Table 1, which are meant to specify those areas visually represented in
Exhibit A.
TABLE 1
STREET BLOCKS ENFORCED
Park Blvd. 1700, 1800, 1900, 2000, 2100, 2200‐
2211, 2555‐2599, 2600
Park Ave. 100
Leland Ave. 200, 300, 400
Stanford Ave. 200, 300, 400
Oxford Ave. 200, 300, 400
College Ave. 200, 300, 400
Birch Ave. 1800, 1900, 2000, 2100, 2200‐2288,
2518‐2575, 2600
Ash St. 1800, 1900, 2000, 2100, 2502‐2599,
2600, 2700
Grant St. 100, 200, 300, 400
Sheridan Ave. 200, 300, 400
SECTION 5. Other Matters.
A. Cost of Evergreen Park ‐ Mayfield RPP District Parking Permits. During the initial
trial period of one year the cost of Parking Permits shall be:
1. Resident Permit – First annual permit sticker free; second and third annual
permit sticker $50/each/year; transferable annual permit hangtags (up to
two) $50/year.
2. Resident Visitor Daily Permit – Can purchase up to fifty at $5/each.
3. Employee Parking Permits
1. Standard Annual Permit ‐‐$149/year
2. Low‐income Annual Permit ‐‐ $50/year
NOT YET APPROVED
4
3. Employee Visitor Daily Permit ‐ $5/each
SECTION 6. Rescind and Repeal Existing Parking Restrictions.
A. Section 2 of Resolution 4051 hereby repealed and replaced with the restrictions of this
RPP district.
B. 2 Hour Parking. The 2 hour parking restrictions as identified in Exhibit A shall remain in
effect.
C. Conflicting Restrictions. In the event City staff should, at a later time, discover additional
parking restrictions within the areas specified by Exhibit A or within the city blocks
identified in Table 1 that conflict with the restrictions of this resolution, but are not
expressly rescinded, the RPP restrictions of this resolution shall control.
SECTION 8. CEQA. This resolution is exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Title 14 of the California
Code of Regulations since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the adoption
and implementation of this resolution may have a significant effect on the environment and
Section 15301 in that this proposed resolution will have a minor impact on existing facilities.
SECTION 9. Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
Enforcement shall commence, pursuant to Chapter 10.50 and the California Vehicle Code, when
signage is posted.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
__________________________ __________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
_______________________ ___________________________
Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Director of Planning and Community Environment
El C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
Par
k
B
l
Pag
e
M
i
l
l
R
d
Oliv
e
A
v
Pep
p
e
r
A
v
Cali
f
o
r
n
i
a
A
v
Cam
b
r
i
d
g
e
A
v
Coll
e
g
e
A
v
Oxfo
r
d
A
v
She
r
m
a
n
A
v
Gran
t
A
v
Ash
S
t
Ash
S
t
Birc
h
S
t
Birc
h
S
t
Yale
S
t
She
r
i
d
a
n
A
v
Stan
f
o
r
d
A
v
Lela
n
d
A
v
Park
A
v
Al
m
a
S
t
Par
k
B
l
Park Bl
Peers Park
Jerrry Bowden
Park
Cal
t
r
a
i
n
Calt
r
a
i
n
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
OLD PALO ALTO
COLLEGE
TERRACE
STANFORD
UNIVERSITY
SOUTHGATE
VENTURA
Cali
f
o
r
n
i
a
A
v
Legend
Employee Parking
Zone B
Employee Parking
Zone C
Evergreen Park
Residential Preferential
Parking Program
Boundary
Two-Hour
Commercial
Parking to Remain
Employee Parking
Zone A
Proposed Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential
Parking Program Map and Employee Parking Zone Boundaries
Version 2.0
City of Palo Alto
Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Administrative Guidelines
Updated October 31, 2016
PURPOSE
The City of Palo Alto is committed to preserving the quality of life of its residential neighborhoods. On
December 2, 2014, City Council adopted a City‐wide RPP Ordinance which allows any neighborhood
within the City to petition to become a Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) District, where
neighborhood parking is regulated for non‐permit holders. Three documents govern the creation of an
RPP District in Palo Alto:
1. Chapter 10.50 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, which outlines the criteria which must be met
and the process which must be taken for a residential neighborhood to become an RPP District;
2. A neighborhood‐specific resolution, which must be adopted by the City Council and outlines the
specific characteristics of the RPP program;
3. The document within, “RPP Administrative Guidelines”, which provides additional detail on RPP
program implementation. The Guidelines may be modified at a City staff level, and provide
detail on policies and procedures related to RPP Districts.
All three documents work in concert to govern the development and operation of the City’s RPP
Districts, and all should be reviewed prior to an RPP District’s initiation.
PARKING PERMIT POLICIES
Resident Permit Eligibility
The requirements to obtain a parking permit as a resident are:
A completed application form (online) in the residents’ name and address.
A current DMV vehicle registration for each vehicle the applicant is requesting a parking permit.
Proof of residency/ownership in the resident’s/owner’s name reflecting the permit address in
the permit area. Acceptable proof of residency shall be a driver’s license, the vehicle
registration, a utility bill, car insurance policy, lease agreement or a preprinted personal check
with the resident’s name and address.
1. The residential permit can be purchased on an annual duration online at
www.cityofpaloalto.org/parking. Parking permits are issued for uses within the RPP District
area. Standard long‐term residential parking permits are not transferable between vehicles.
Annual permit cost may be pro‐rated for purchase midway through the annual timeframe.
2. Guests of Residents: A resident is also eligible to purchase up to two (2) transferable hang‐tag
permits for guests, which are annual permits that may be used for a nanny, baby‐sitter,
caregiver, household employee, or other regular visitor to the household. Annual hangtag
permits must be purchased by the resident of the household and may be transferred between
vehicles. Only two (2) annual hangtag permits are allowed per household.
3. Visitors of Residents: Any resident within the RPP District area is eligible to purchase daily
permits annually for events which may take place at a household. Daily permits must be
purchased by a resident of the household and are only valid for a single day use. Each household
can receive a maximum of 50 daily permits each calendar year.
Version 2.0
Employee Permit Eligibility (applicable to downtown RPP and others as designated by resolution):
Annual, quarterly, five‐day and daily Employee permits are available.
The requirements to obtain a parking permit as an employee are:
A completed application form (online) with the employees’ name and address.
A current DMV vehicle registration for each vehicle for which the applicant is requesting a
parking permit.
Proof of employment at a business in the employee’s name, which includes an address within
the RPP District. Acceptable proof of employment shall be a W‐2 wage statement or letter from
employer.
All employees who work at a registered, code‐compliant business within an RPP District are eligible to
purchase permits, unless otherwise restricted by the City for parking capacity reasons. Parking permit
stickers or hangtags are issued to employees within the RPP District.
Where applicable, the City may decide to issue permits which are transferrable between employees of
the same business. These permits will be in the form of a hangtag, which must be placed on the
rearview mirror of the employee vehicle. Possession of an employee permit which is assigned to a
specific block or zone does not entitle the employer to renew a permit in the same block or zone.
Annual permit cost may be pro‐rated for purchase midway through the annual timeframe.
If an employee with an annual permit leaves the company, the employer may transfer the remaining
balance of the unused permit to another employee by returning the original permit and transferring the
balance of time to a new one. The new permit will expire at the same date of the original permit
expiration. The City may, at its discretion, issue Employee Guest permits to eligible employers within an
RPP district, for use by their guests or visitors.
The City may immediately revoke all permits issued to businesses and employees at businesses that are
unregistered and/or operating in violation of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and/or state and federal
regulations.
Reduced Price Permits: Certain employees may be eligible for a reduced‐price permit if they meet either
of the income requirements listed below. Proof of income must be provided at the time of purchase,
and information may be audited at any time by the City.
INCOME VERIFICATION OPTIONS
a. Option A: Employees who earn an annual income which is exactly or less than $50,000.
The City will evaluate this limit annually and adjust for inflation.
b. Option B: Employees who make a pre‐tax hourly wage which is exactly or less than 2x
the governing city or state minimum wage (whichever is greater) are eligible for a
reduced price permit.
Submittal requirements provided for proof of income include: tax return and two consecutive wage
statements.
Version 2.0
Other Policies
1. Any attempt to alter the permit shall immediately render the permit invalid.
2. Permit holder assumes full responsibility of any loaning of their vehicle.
3. Possession of an RPP permit does not guarantee a parking spot. It is understood that a greater
amount of parking permits may be issued than there are available on‐street parking spaces. This
may create an environment of natural competition for on‐street parking between neighborhood
residents and other permit holders.
4. Permit validity: RPP permits are not valid in any City parking garage or lot, and City‐issued
garage or lot permits are not valid in RPP Districts. RPP permits are only valid for the RPP District
for which they are issued.
5. The City of Palo Alto is not responsible for the loss of or damage to any vehicle or its contents.
6. Abandoned Vehicles: Parking a vehicle unmoved longer than 72 consecutive hours on a City
street is in violation of PAMC 10.60.07(d). Parking permits shall not exempt vehicles from this
requirement.
7. For new vehicles or license plates, the permit holder must surrender the current valid permit to
the Revenue Collections office. If the permit does not come off intact, pieces will be accepted.
8. Temporary Permits: Temporary permits can be printed online once a valid permit holder has
submitted payment for a permit. The temporary permit must be displayed on the front
dashboard.
9. Replacement Fees: There is a permit replacement fee of $10.00 for regular permits reissued for
any reason, prior to the normal renewal period.
10. Refunds: Refunds are issued on annual permits only, and a refund will only be given through the
third quarter and prorated at the quarterly rate. The permit holder must remove the current
permit and return it to the Revenue Collections office.
11. Permit Placement: The permit must be affixed on the outside of the rear windshield driver’s
side lower left corner, or left side of the bumper. Do not place your permit in any other location.
Placing your permit in another location or behind tinted windows may invalidate your parking
exemption.
12. Vehicle Eligibility: Parking permits may be issued only for passenger non‐commercial and
passenger commercial (i.e., SUV’s, small pick‐up trucks, etc.) vehicles registered to residents
residing within the residential parking permit area. Vehicles defined as oversized by the City’s
Oversized Vehicle Parking ordinance, such as commercial trucks, boat trailers, RV’s (camping
trailers, motor homes, etc.), trailers and work‐type commercial vehicles, including taxis and
limousines, are not eligible for residential parking permit program permits.
Eligible Exceptions for a Parking Permit Sticker
Company Cars – A residential parking permit sticker may be issued for residents who have company cars
as their primary transportation vehicle. To obtain a permit, the person must be a legal resident within
the residential permit parking area who has a motor vehicle for his/her exclusive use and under his/her
control where said motor vehicle is registered to his/her employer and he/she presents a valid
employee identification card or other proof of employment that is acceptable to the City.
Leased Cars – A residential parking permit sticker may be issued for a resident who has a leased car. To
obtain a permit, the person must be a legal resident within the residential permit parking area who has
a motor vehicle registered to a vehicle‐leasing company and/or leased to the resident’s employer,
providing said vehicle is for the resident’s exclusive use and provides proof or the lease agreement
which is acceptable to the City.
Version 2.0
The requirements to obtain a parking permit sticker for a company or leased car are:
A completed application form in the residents’ name and address.
A current DMV vehicle registration for each vehicle the applicant is requesting a parking permit.
Proof of residency/ownership in the resident’s/owner’s name reflecting the permit address in
the permit area. Acceptable proof of residency shall be a driver’s license, the vehicle
registration, a utility bill, car insurance policy, lease agreement or a preprinted personal check
with the resident’s name and address.
Caregivers – Caregivers may be issued a parking permit sticker for a permit parking area provided the
address of the resident receiving the care is within said parking area.
The requirements to obtain a parking permit sticker for a caregiver are:
A completed application form in both the residents’ and caregivers name and address.
A current DMV vehicle registration for each vehicle for which the applicant is requesting a
parking permit.
Proof of residency/ownership in the resident’s/owner’s name reflecting the permit address in
the permit area. Acceptable proof of residency shall be a utility bill, car insurance policy, lease
agreement or a preprinted personal check with the resident’s name and address.
A letter from the resident identifying the permit applicant as the caregiver.
Fine Amount
The fine for violation of the Residential Parking Permit Program regulations is set within the City’s
Comprehensive Fee Schedule.
Misuse of Parking Permits
Any person selling, fraudulently using, reproducing or mutilating a parking permit issued in conjunction
with the residential parking permit program shall be guilty of an infraction and shall be subject to a
citation for each offense and the forfeiture of all permits in conflict, or such other fine or penalty as the
City Council may set by ordinance.
Neighborhood Support for RPP District Implementation
As outlined in the ordinance, the City may choose to conduct a survey of a proposed neighborhood to
determine whether support exists for RPP District implementation. The survey may be conducted either
prior to the recommendation of RPP District implementation to Council, or during a trial period of the
program, but before final implementation. The survey shall be conducted electronically or via U.S. mail.
Each household using a separate U.S.P.S. address will be allowed one (1) vote either in favor or against
the implementation of an RPP program. The current threshold for RPP District implementation is a vote
of 70% of the returned surveys in favor of implementation.
Eligibility Areas
As outlined in the ordinance, the City Council may adopt a resolution identifying particular areas as RPP
Eligibility Areas. Following the adoption of the RPP Eligibility Areas, residents within these areas may
petition the Director of Planning and Community Environment to be annexed into an existing RPP
District. The petition must include the following:
• A completed application form (online) including the residents’ names and addresses.
Version 2.0
• A current DMV vehicle registration of each vehicle for which any RPP District parking permit had
previously been approved in the applicants’ names.
Upon the receipt of a petition that includes the above information for a simple majority, or 50%+1 of the
identified segment’s neighbors, the City may choose to conduct a survey of the proposed neighborhood
to determine whether additional support exists for annexation into the existing RPP District. The survey
shall be conducted electronically or via U.S. mail. Each household using a separate U.S.P.S. address will
be allowed one (1) vote either in favor or against annexation into the existing RPP District. The current
threshold for RPP District implementation is a vote of 70% of the returned surveys in favor of
implementation.
Approval of annexation for RPP Eligibility Areas will take effect without Council adoption.
Opt Out Procedures
Current residents of an existing RPP District that no longer wish to participate in the RPP program may
petition to opt out of their RPP District between January 1st and March 31st of the year. The petition
must be submitted to and will be approved at the discretion of the Director of Planning and Community
Environment.
Residents of the same existing RPP District shall initiate a request to opt out of their RPP District by
neighborhood petition. The petition will be available as a standard form online, and must include the
following:
• A completed application form (online) including the residents’ names and addresses.
• A current DMV vehicle registration of each vehicle for which any RPP District parking permit had
previously been approved in the applicants’ names.
Upon the receipt of a petition that includes the above information for a simple majority, or 50%+1 of the
identified segment’s neighbors, the City may choose to conduct a survey of the proposed neighborhood
to determine whether additional support exists for opting out of the RPP District. The survey shall be
conducted electronically or via U.S. mail. Each household using a separate U.S.P.S. address will be
allowed one (1) vote either in favor or against opting out of the existing RPP District. The current
threshold for RPP District implementation is a vote of 70% of the returned surveys in favor of opting out.
Petitions that do not include a simple majority of the identified segment’s neighbors will not be
considered for opt out.
Effective upon approval of their opt‐out petition, residents will no longer be entitled to RPP District
resident parking permits.
Approval of an opt‐out petition may not be construed to waive compliance of the RPP District parking
restrictions that remain in place.
Upon the approval of an application, the City shall provide written notice electronically or via U.S. mail
to all residents impacted by the opt‐out, including the effective date of the opt‐out, the expiration date
of any remaining valid parking permits, and contact information for further inquiries or concerns.
Occupancy Study Requirements
Version 2.0
During the course of RPP District initiation, the City will conduct parking occupancy studies for the
neighborhood in question. Studies will be conducted at various hours and be compared to an inventory
calculation to show percentages of occupancy by block face. Weekday studies will not be conducted on
Mondays, Fridays or holidays.
Version 2.0
Neighborhood Petition Form
City of Palo Alto Residential Parking Permit Program Request Form
The purpose of this form is to enable neighborhoods to request to be annexed to an existing Residential
Preferential Parking area or the initiation of a Residential Preferential Parking Program in accordance
with the City of Palo Alto’s adopted Residential Parking Permit Program Policy and Procedures. This form
must be filled out in its entirety and submitted with any request to:
City of Palo Alto
Transportation Division
250 Hamilton Avenue, Floor 5
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Feel free to attach additional sheets containing pictures, occupancy maps, additional testimony or
additional text if the space provided is insufficient.
1. Requesting Individual’s Contact Information
Name: ____________________________________________
Address: ____________________________________________
Phone Number: _______________________________________
Email: _______________________________________
2. Please describe the nature of the overflow parking problem in your neighborhood.
1. What streets in your neighborhood do you feel are affected by overflow parking?
2. How often does the overflow occur?
3. Does the impact vary from month to month, or season to season?
3. Can you identify a parking impact generator that is the cause of overflow parking in the
neighborhood? Are there any facilities (churches, schools, shopping centers, etc.) near this location
that generate a high concentration of vehicle and pedestrian traffic? Please list your understanding of
the causes:
Version 2.0
4. Please describe how a Residential Parking Permit Program will be able to eliminate or reduce
overflow parking impacting the neighborhood. Please include your suggestion for the boundary of the
program:
5. Is there neighborhood support for submittal of this Residential Parking Permit Program application?
Have you contacted your HOA/Neighborhood Association?
Version 2.0
Neighborhood Petition Form (Street by Street Basis)
THE UNDERSIGNED BELOW AGREE TO THE FOLLOWING:
1. All persons signing this petition do hereby certify that they reside on the following street, which is
being considered for residential preferential parking: ______________________________________
2. All persons signing this petition do hereby agree that the following contact person(s) represent the
neighborhood as facilitator(s) between the neighborhood residents and City of Palo Alto staff in matters
pertaining to this request:
Name: _________________________ Address: ___________________ Phone #: __________________
Name: _________________________ Address: ___________________ Phone #: __________________
Name: _________________________ Address: ___________________ Phone #: __________________
ONLY ONE SIGNATURE PER HOUSEHOLD
Name (Please Print) Address Phone Number Signature
1.________________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
2.________________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
3.________________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
4.________________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
5.________________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
6.________________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
7.________________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
8.________________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
9.________________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
10._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
11._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
12._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
13._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
14._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
15._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
16._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
17._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
18._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
19._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
20._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
21._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
22._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
23._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
24._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
25._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
26._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
27._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
28._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
29._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
30._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
Version 2.0
31._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
32._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
33._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
34._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
35._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
36._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
37._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
38._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
39._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
40._______________ _________________________ __________________ ___________________
Ordinance No. 5294
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Title 10
(Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code by Adding
Chapter 10.50 (Residential Preferential Parking Districts)
and Section 10.04.086 (Parking Enforcement Contractor)
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto does 0 RDAIN as follows:
Section 1. Chapter 10.50 (Residential Preferred Parking Districts) is
hereby added to Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to
read as follows:
Sections:
RESIDENTIAL PREFERENTIAL PARKING DISTRICTS
Purpose
Definitions
RFP Designation Criteria
Initiation by City Council
Initiation by Neighborhood Petition
10.50.010
10.50.020
10.50.030
10.50.040
10.50.050
10.50.060
10.50.070
10.50.080
10.50.090
10.50.100
Establishment of Residential Preferential Parking Districts
Administration of Districts
Annexation of New Areas to Existing Districts
Modification or Termination of Districts
Violations and Penalties
10.50.010 Purpose.
Residential preferential parking districts are intended to restore and enhance the
quality of life in residential neighborhoods by reducing the impact of parking
associated with nearby businesses and institutional uses. The procedures and
standards in this chapter are intended to provide flexibility so that the city council
may adopt, after consultation with residents and neighboring businesses and
institutions, parking programs that appropriately protect each neighborhood's
unique characteristics. Residential preferential parking districts should be
designed to accommodate non-residential parking when this can be done while
meeting the parking availability standards determined by the city to be appropriate
for the district in question. Residential preferential parking programs may be
designed to reduce non-residential parking over time to give non-residential
parkers time to find other modes of transportation or parking locations.
10.50.020 Definitions.
The following words and phrases shall have the following meanings:
140826 jb 01312SOC 1 December 9, 2014
a) "Director" shall mean the director of planning and community environment.
b) "Dwelling unit" shall mean a self-contained house, apartment, stock
cooperative unit, or condominium unit occupied by a single household exclusively
for residential purposes. These residential purposes may include lawful home
occupations.
c) "Employee permit" shall mean a permit issued to an employee working at a
business located within an RPP District or as defined in an RPP district specific
resolution.
d) "Guest permit" shall mean a permit issued to a Resident on an annual basis
for use by a person visiting a residence in an RPP District or for workers providing
services such as caregiving, gardening, repair maintenance and construction, to the
Resident. The number of Guest permits issued to Residents shall be specified in
administrative regulations adopted by the Director.
e) "Non-resident vehicle" shall mean a vehicle operated by a person whose
destination is not to a residence within the Residential Preferential Parking District.
f) "Resident" shall mean a natural person living in a dwelling unit in an RPP
District.
g) "Residential Preferential Parking District" or "RPP District" shall mean a
geographical area in which the city council has established a preferential parking
permit system pursuant to California Vehicle Code section 22507.
h) "Visitor permit" shall mean a temporary 24-hour permit issued to a Resident
for use by a person visiting a residence in an RPP District.
10.50.030 RPP Designation Criteria
The council may designate an area as a Residential Preferential Parking District
based upon the following criteria:
(1) That non-resident vehicles do, or may, substantially interfere with the use of
on-street or alley parking spaces by neighborhood residents;
(2) That the interference by the non-resident vehicles occurs at regular and
frequent intervals, either daily or weekly;
(3) That the non-resident vehicles parked in the area of the proposed district
create traffic congestion, noise, or other disruption (including shortage of parking
spaces for residents and their visitors) that disrupts neighborhood life;
( 4) Other alternative parking strategies are not feasible or practical.
10.50.040 Initiation by City Council
The city council may, by motion, initiate consideration of a RPP District by directing
staff to undertake the analysis and outreach process set forth in Section ·
10.50.0SO(d) and (e).
10.50.050 Initiation by Neighborhood Petition
Residents may request the formation of an RPP District in their neighborhood. The
request shall be made, and considered, in the following manner:
(a) Form of Application.
140826 jb 0131250C 2 December 9, 2014
(1) The director shall establish a standard form for the application for the
formation of a new RPP District, as well as a list of submittal requirements for use
by interested residents. These requirements shall include a narrative describing the
nature and perceived source of non-residential parking impact, as well as suggested
district boundaries. The director shall also approve a standard form for use in
demonstrating resident support for the application.
(2) Residents shall initiate a request for establishment of an RPP District by
neighborhood petition by completing the official application form.
(3) Residents are encouraged to consult with the employers and employees
thought to be the source of the parking impact as they develop their proposals.
(b) Timing and Review of Applications. Each calendar year, the Director of
Planning and Community Environment shall review all applications received prior
to March 31st of that year to determine whether the RPP District criteria established
in this Chapter are met.
( c) Prioritization of Applications. Applications determined by the Director to
meet the criteria in paragraph (b) above shall be presented to the Planning and
Transportation Commission. The commission shall review the requests and
recommend to the director which proposal or proposals should be given priority for
review and possible implementation in the current calendar year. In making its
recommendations, the commission shall consider the severity of non-residential
parking impact, the demonstrated level of neighborhood support, and the staff
resources needed to process requests.
( d) Staff Review of Applications and Community Outreach.
Once an application has been selected for council consideration during the current
calendar year, staff shall promptly review the application, gather additional
information and conduct a community outreach program. At a minimum the
review process shall include the following:
(1) The City shall complete parking occupancy studies to quantify the nature of
the problem identified in the petition. Data shall be collected when schools in the
Palo Alto Unified School District and Stanford University are in session, unless these
institutions are irrelevant to the problem to be addressed.
(2) Upon completion of the consultation and outreach process, the city attorney
shall prepare a draft resolution containing the proposed boundaries and hours of
enforcement. Staff shall undertake a survey of resident support within the RPP
District. The results of this survey shall be included in and reported to the planning
and transportation commission and the city council.
( e) Planning and Transportation Commission Review. Staff shall bring the
proposed RPP District to the planning & transportation commission no later than
September of the calendar year in which consideration began. The commission shall
review the draft resolution at a noticed public hearing and make a recommendation
to the city council regarding the RPP District. This recommendation may include
140826 jb 0131250C 3 December 9, 2014
proposed modifications of the boundaries. The commission's recommendation shall
be forwarded to the city council no later than September 30th.
10.50.060 Establishment of Residential Preferential Parking Districts
(a) Adoption of Resolution Establishing District. Following the completion of the
procedures described in Section 10.50.050, the City Council shall hold a public
hearing on a proposed resolution to establish the residential preferential parking
district. The resolution may specify a trial period of up to two years. Any such trial
period shall begin running after the signs have been posted and permits issued. The
council may adopt, modify, or reject the proposed resolution.
(b) Resolution. The resolution shall specify:
(1) The findings that the criteria set forth in Section 10. 50.030 have been met.
(2) The term of the trial period, if applicable.
(3) The boundaries and name of the residential preferential parking district. The
boundary map may also define areas which will become subject to the regulations of
the residential preferential parking district in the future if the council approves a
resident petition for annexation as provided in Section 10.50.080 below.
( 4) Hours and days of enforcement of parking regulations and other restrictions
that shall be in effect for non-permit holders, such as two-hour parking limits,
overnight parking limits, or "no re-parking" zones.
(5) The number of permits, if any, to be issued to merchants or other non-
residential users, which number may be scheduled to reduce over time.
(6) Resident permit rates which are set by City Council policy will be uniform
across each district.
(7) Such other matters as the Council may deem necessary and desirable,
including but not limited to fee rates and whether non-residential parking permits
are allowed to be issued and transferred.
( c) Permanent Adoption. Before the expiration of the trial period, if applicable,
the city council shall hold a noticed public hearing and determine whether the RPP
District should be made permanent as originally adopted, modified or terminated.
The council's action shall be in the form of a resolution.
10.50.070 Administration of Districts
(a) Issuance and Fees.
(1) No permit will be issued to any applicant until that applicant has paid all of
his or her outstanding parking citations, including all civil penalties and related fees.
(2) A residential parking permit may be issued for a motor vehicle if the
following requirements are met:
A. The applicant demonstrates that he or she is currently a resident
of the area for which the permit is to be issued.
140826 jb 0131250C 4 December 9, 2014
B. The applicant demonstrates that he or she has ownership or
continuing custody of the motor vehicle for which the permit is to be issued.
C. Any motor vehicle to be issued a permit must have a vehicle
registration indicating registration within the area for which the permit is to be
issued.
(3) Visitor or guest parking permits may be issued for those vehicles or to those
individuals or households that qualify for those permits under the resolution
establishing the RPP District.
( 4) Employee parking permits may be issued to those individuals and for those
vehicles that qualify for such permits under the resolution establishing the RPP
District.
(b) No Guarantee of Availability of Parking. A parking permit shall not guarantee
or reserve to the permit holder an on-street parking space within the designated
residential preferential parking zone.
( c) Restrictions and Conditions. Each permit issued pursuant to this Section shall
be subject to each and every condition and restriction set forth in this Chapter and
as provided for in the resolution establishing the specific RPP District, as may be
amended from time to time. The issuance of such permit shall not be construed to
waive compliance with any other applicable parking law, regulation or ordinance.
(d) Exemptions. The following vehicles are exempt from RPP District parking
restrictions in this Chapter: ·
(1) A vehicle owned or operated by a public or private utility, when used in the
course of business.
(2) A vehicle owned or operated by a governmental agency, when used in the
course of official government business.
(3) A vehicle for which an authorized emergency vehicle permit has been issued
by the Commissioner of the California Highway Patrol, when used in the course of
business.
( 4) A vehicle parked or standing while actively delivering materials or freight.
(5) A vehicle displaying an authorized exemption permit issued by the City of
Palo Alto.
(6) A vehicle displaying a State of California or military-issued disabled person
placard or license plates.
(7) A vehicle parked for the purpose of attending or participating in an event
taking place at a school within the Palo Alto Unified School District or another event
venue within the RPP District, provided that the vehicle is parked within two blocks
of the venue, the venue has requested and received approval from the City at least
fourteen days before the event date, and the venue distributes notices to all
addresses within a two -block radius of the venue. The RPP District Resolution
shall specify the covered venues and number of permitted events per year.
(8) All vehicles are exempt from parking restrictions pursuant to this Chapter on
the following holidays: January 1, July 4, Thanksgiving Day, and December 25.
140826 jb 0131250C 5 December 9, 2014
( e) Authority of Staff
a. The director is authorized to adopt administrative regulations that are
consistent with the purposes of this Chapter. Prior to adoption the director shall
conduct a noticed public meeting soliciting input on such guidelines.
b. The Police Department or private parking enforcement contractor as
approved by the Chief of Police shall have the authority to enforce the
administrative regulations established pursuant to this Chapter.
10.50.080 Annexation of New Areas to Existing Districts
Residents of any block may petition the director for annexation into a contiguous
RPP District. The petition shall be on forms provided by the department. If the
petition meets the criteria established in administrative regulations adopted by the
director, a resolution annexing it to the RPP District shall be prepared by the city
attorney and submitted to the city council, together with the director's
recommendation on the proposed annexation. The city council may approve, deny,
or modify the annexation.
10.50.090 Modification or Termination of Districts
(a) Opting out. After final adoption of an RPP District, Residents may file an
application with the director to opt out of the RPP District. The minimum number of
blocks and percentage of units supporting the opt-out shall be specified by the
director in the administrative guidelines. Applications for opting out shall be made
in the form and manner prescribed by the director and shall be acted up on by the
director. Any opt out application shall be filed within ninety (90) days after council
adoption of the resolution establishing the RPP District.
(b) Dissolution. The city council following a noticed public hearing may adopt a
resolution dissolving the RPP District:
(1) Upon receipt and verification of a petition signed by 50% or more of all the
households within an approved RPP District boundary, or
(2) Upon findings by the City Council that the criteria for designating the RPP
District are no longer satisfied.
10.50.100 Violations and Penalties
(a) No person shall park a vehicle adjacent to any curb in a residential
preferential parking zone in violation of any posted or noticed prohibition or
restriction, unless the person has a valid and current residential preferential
parking permit, visitor permit, guest permit or employee permit for that vehicle, or
is otherwise exempt. Violations of this sub-section shall be punishable by a civil
penalty under Chapter 10.60.010.
(b) No person shall sell, rent, or lease, or cause to be sold, rented, or leased for
any value or consideration any RPP District parking permit, visitor permit or guest
permit. Upon violation of this subsection, all permits issued to for the benefit of the
140826 jb 0131250C 6 December 9, 2014
dwelling unit or business establishment for which the sold, rented, or leased permit
was authorized shall be void. Violation of this sub-section (b) shall be punishable as
a n infraction.
( c) No person shall buy or otherwise acquire for value or use any RPP District
parking permit, guest permit or visitor permit except as provided for in this chapter.
Violation of this sub-section (c) shall be punishable as an infraction.
SECTION 2. Section 10.04.086 (Parking Enforcement Contractor) of Title
10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby added to read as
.follows:
10.04.086 Parking Enforcement Contractor
"Parking Enforcement Contractor" means any duly qualified company that the City
has entered into a contract with and that has been approved by the Chief of Police to
provide enforcement of Chapter 10.50 relating to Palo Alto Municipal Code
infractions only in parking zones. Enforcement includes both the issuance and
processing of citations for RPP District parking violations.
SECTION 3. Section 10.08.015 (Authority of Parking Enforcement
Contractor) of Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is
hereby added to read as follows:
10.08.015 Authority of Parking Enforcement Contractor
The City may enter into a contract with a duly qualified company, approved by the
Chief of Police, to provide enforcement of Chapter 10.50 relating to RPP District
parking violations (as permissible by the Palo Alto Municipal Code).
SECTION 4. Section 10.60.010 (Parking violations punishable as civil
penalties) of Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is
amended to read as follows:
10.60.010 Parking Violations Punishable as Civil Penalties
Except as otherwise provided, violations of any provision of Chapters 10.36, 10.40,
10.44, 10.46, aru:l 10.47. and 10.50 of this Title 10 (hereinafter referred to as a
"parking violation") shall be punishable by a civil penalty (hereinafter referred to as
a "parking penalty"). These parking penalties, together with any late payment
penalties, administrative fees, and other related charges shall be established by
ordinance or resolution of the city council.
SECTION 5. CEQA. T~is ordinance is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuantto Section 15061(b)(3) of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations since it can be seen with certainty that
there is no possibility the adoption and implementation of this Ordinance may have
140826 jb 0131250C 7 December 9, 2014
a significant effect on the environment and Section 15301 in that this proposed
ordinance will have a minor impact on existing facilities.
SECTION 6. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of
this ordinance, or the application to any person or circumstances, shall be held
invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance which
can be given effect without the invalid provision or application and, to this end, the
provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after
the date of its adoption.
INTRODUCED: December 2, 2014
PASSED: December 15, 2014
AYES: BERMAN, BURT, HOLMAN, KLEIN, KNISS, PRICE, SCHARFF, SCHMID
SHEPHERD
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
~
Interim City Clerk
APPROVED:
140826 jb 01312SOC 8 December 9, 2014
November 7, 2016
Dear Resident,
Residents of Evergreen Park have requested the establishment of a Residential Preferential Parking (RPP)
program in your area. The City of Palo Alto is conducting a survey (attached) to determine whether the
proposed program is supported by a majority of residents. In order for the City to establish an RPP program and
implement weekday parking restrictions, a 70% positive response rate from this survey is required. Please
indicate whether you support the introduction of an RPP program in your area by completing and returning the
enclosed survey in the stamped, pre-addressed envelope provided by Wednesday, November 23, 2016.
As currently envisioned, the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP Program would limit the number of non-resident
vehicles that could be parked in the neighborhood, and would include the following parameters:
Permits would be required to park any vehicle on-street in excess of two (2) hours between 8:00 a.m.
and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
All area households would be eligible for one (1) annual permit sticker free of charge and could purchase
up to three (3) additional annual permit stickers at a cost of $50 each. Residents could also purchase up
to two (2) transferable annual permit hangtags for $50 each, and up to 50 transferable one-day permit
hangtags per year for $5 each. The transferable permit hangtags may be used on any vehicle, including
household visitor vehicles.
Employees of businesses located within the area would be eligible to purchase transferable one-day
permit hangtags for $5 and annual permits stickers for $149. All employee permits would be specific to
one of the two employee parking zones (see included map for proposed area and employee parking
zone boundaries). Discounted annual permit stickers would be available to low-income employees for
$50.
A maximum of 125 annual employee permits would be available in each of the two proposed employee
parking zones, for a total of 250. Preference would be given to low-income employees and those already
on the waiting list for the City-owned garages and lots in the area.
This is proposed as a trial program, which would be reevaluated after one year. If extended, the City Council
may elect to reduce the number of employee permits annually based on City transportation goals and increased
parking supply. Please complete and return the enclosed survey by November 23, 2016. If you have additional
questions, please feel free to contact Transportation Division staff at 650-329-2520 or
transportation@cityofpaloalto.org.
Regards,
JOSHUAH D. MELLO, AICP
Chief Transportation Official
Proposed Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking Program
Resident Survey
(One Response Per Household Please)
Name: ______________________________________________________________________________________
Street Address: _______________________________________________________________________________
Unit Number: ________________________________________________________________________________
Phone Number: ______________________________________________________________________________
E-mail Address: ______________________________________________________________________________
Please select only one of the options below:
□ We support the implementation of parking restrictions as outlined in the attached letter. If parking
restrictions are enacted, we recognize that residents without valid permits will also be subject to citations.
□ We do not support the implementation of parking restrictions as outlined in the attached letter.
Comments:
Please return survey by November 23, 2016 to: City of Palo Alto
Transportation Division
250 Hamilton Avenue, Floor 5
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Or by email to:
(transportation@cityofpaloalto.org)
If you have additional questions, please feel free to contact the Transportation Division at 650-329-2520 or
transportation@cityofpaloalto.org.
Park Blvd
El Camino Real
Alma St
Bryant St
Emerson St
El Camino Real
Park Blvd
Ash St
Churchill Ave
Birch St
High St
College Ave
Gran
t Ave
Stanfo
rd Av
e
Seale Ave
Oxford Ave Cambridge Ave
Castilleja Ave
Lowell Ave
Olmsted Rd
Sherman Ave
S California Ave
Oregon Ave
Kellogg Ave
Leland A
ve
She
ridan Ave
Mariposa Ave
Serra St
Tennyson Ave
Coleridge Ave
N C
alif
ornia Ave
Miramonte Ave
Ramona St
Madrono Ave
Santa Rita Ave
Rinconada Ave
Escobita Ave
Sequoia Ave
Park A
ve
N
els
o
n
R
d
Portola Ave
New
Mayfi
eld Ln
Sam Mcdonald Rd
Jacaranda Ln
Nevada Ave
Melville Ave
Embarcadero Rd
Park Blvd
Emerson St
Ash St
Birch St
Sheridan Ave
Ramona St
Oregon Expy
High St
W:\San Jose N Drive\Projects\_SJ16_Projects\SJ16_1668_Palo_Alto_On_Call\Graphics\GIS\MXD\AM_Occupancy.mxd
City of Palo AltoSouthgate & Evergreen ParkAM Peak Parking Occupancy Rates
AM (7-9 AM) Occupancy
0-49% Occupancy
50-84% Occupancy
85%+ Occupancy
No Parking Anytime
No Stopping Anytime
Study Area
NN.T.S.
Data Collected May 24, 2016
Park Blvd
El Camino Real
Alma St
Bryant St
Emerson St
El Camino Real
Park Blvd
Ash St
Churchill Ave
Birch St
High St
College Ave
Gran
t Ave
Stanfo
rd Av
e
Seale Ave
Oxford Ave Cambridge Ave
Castilleja Ave
Lowell Ave
Olmsted Rd
Sherman Ave
S California Ave
Oregon Ave
Kellogg Ave
Leland A
ve
She
ridan Ave
Mariposa Ave
Serra St
Tennyson Ave
Coleridge Ave
N C
alif
ornia Ave
Miramonte Ave
Ramona St
Madrono Ave
Santa Rita Ave
Rinconada Ave
Escobita Ave
Sequoia Ave
Park A
ve
N
els
o
n
R
d
Portola Ave
New
Mayfi
eld Ln
Sam Mcdonald Rd
Jacaranda Ln
Nevada Ave
Melville Ave
Embarcadero Rd
Park Blvd
Emerson St
Ash St
Birch St
Sheridan Ave
Ramona St
Oregon Expy
High St
W:\San Jose N Drive\Projects\_SJ16_Projects\SJ16_1668_Palo_Alto_On_Call\Graphics\GIS\MXD\Midday_Occupancy.mxd
City of Palo AltoSouthgate & Evergreen ParkAM Peak Parking Occupancy Rates
Midday (12-2 PM) Occupancy
0-49% Occupancy
50-84% Occupancy
85%+ Occupancy
No Parking Anytime
No Stopping Anytime
Study Area
NN.T.S.
Data Collected May 24, 2016
Park Blvd
El Camino Real
Alma St
Bryant St
Emerson St
El Camino Real
Park Blvd
Ash St
Churchill Ave
Birch St
High St
College Ave
Gran
t Ave
Stanfo
rd Av
e
Seale Ave
Oxford Ave Cambridge Ave
Castilleja Ave
Lowell Ave
Olmsted Rd
Sherman Ave
S California Ave
Oregon Ave
Kellogg Ave
Leland A
ve
She
ridan Ave
Mariposa Ave
Serra St
Tennyson Ave
Coleridge Ave
N C
alif
ornia Ave
Miramonte Ave
Ramona St
Madrono Ave
Santa Rita Ave
Rinconada Ave
Escobita Ave
Sequoia Ave
Park A
ve
N
els
o
n
R
d
Portola Ave
New
Mayfi
eld Ln
Sam Mcdonald Rd
Jacaranda Ln
Nevada Ave
Melville Ave
Embarcadero Rd
Park Blvd
Emerson St
Ash St
Birch St
Sheridan Ave
Ramona St
Oregon Expy
High St
N:\Projects\_SJ16_Projects\SJ16_1668_Palo_Alto_On_Call\Graphics\GIS\MXD\PM_Occupancy.mxd
City of Palo AltoSouthgate & Evergreen ParkAM Peak Parking Occupancy Rates
PM (5-7 PM) Occupancy
0-49% Occupancy
50-84% Occupancy
85%+ Occupancy
No Parking Anytime
No Stopping Anytime
Study Area
NN.T.S.
Data Collected May 24, 2016
Park Blvd
El Camino Real
Alma St
Bryant St
Emerson St
El Camino Real
Park Blvd
Ash St
Churchill Ave
Birch St
High St
College Ave
Gran
t Ave
Stanfo
rd Av
e
Seale Ave
Oxford Ave Cambridge Ave
Castilleja Ave
Lowell Ave
Olmsted Rd
Sherman Ave
S California Ave
Oregon Ave
Kellogg Ave
Leland A
ve
She
ridan Ave
Mariposa Ave
Serra St
Tennyson Ave
Coleridge Ave
N C
alif
ornia Ave
Miramonte Ave
Ramona St
Madrono Ave
Santa Rita Ave
Rinconada Ave
Escobita Ave
Sequoia Ave
Park A
ve
N
els
o
n
R
d
Portola Ave
New
Mayfi
eld Ln
Sam Mcdonald Rd
Jacaranda Ln
Nevada Ave
Melville Ave
Embarcadero Rd
Park Blvd
Emerson St
Ash St
Birch St
Sheridan Ave
Ramona St
Oregon Expy
High St
\\Fpsj03.fpainc.local\data\Projects\_SJ16_Projects\SJ16_1668_Palo_Alto_On_Call\Graphics\GIS\MXD\Overnight_Occupancy.mxd
City of Palo AltoEvergreen ParkOvernight Parking Occupancy Rates
Overnight (11:30 PM) Occupancy
0-49% Occupancy
50-84% Occupancy
85%+ Occupancy
Study Area
NN.T.S.
Data Collected October 4, 2016
Oregon AveRamona StSanta Rita Ave Ramona St
Colorado
Ave
O
r
e
g
o
n
A
v
e
El Dorado
Ave
N California AveWashington Ave
Rinconada Ave
El Camino Real
Sherman Ave
Santa
Rita
Ave
Palo Alto Sq
S California Ave
Acacia
Ave
Ol
m
s
t
e
d
R
d
Ca
mbridge
Ave
Staunton Ct
Pepper Ave
J
a
c
ar
an
da
L
n
Page Mill Rd
New Mayfield Ln
Birch St Sheri
d
an Ave
Olive Av
e
Oxfo
rd Ave
Gr
a
nt
Ave
Park Blvd
Ash St
Stan
ford Ave
College Av
e
Ore
g
o
n Ex
py
Alma St
W:\San Jose N Drive\Projects\_SJ16_Projects\SJ16_1668_Palo_Alto_On_Call\Graphics\GIS\MXD\Mayfield_AM_Occupancy.mxd
City of Palo AltoMayfieldAM Peak Parking Occupancy Rates
AM (7-9 AM) Occupancy
0-49% Occupancy
50-84% Occupancy
85%+ Occupancy
No Parking Anytime
No Parking 5 PM-8 AM
Study Area
NN.T.S.
Data Collected November 17, 2016
Oregon AveRamona StSanta Rita Ave Ramona St
Colorado
Ave
O
r
e
g
o
n
A
v
e
El Dorado
Ave
N California AveWashington Ave
Rinconada Ave
El Camino Real
Sherman Ave
Santa
Rita
Ave
Palo Alto Sq
S California Ave
Acacia
Ave
Ol
m
s
t
e
d
R
d
Ca
mbridge
Ave
Staunton Ct
Pepper Ave
J
a
c
ar
an
da
L
n
Page Mill Rd
New Mayfield Ln
Birch St Sheri
d
an Ave
Olive Av
e
Oxfo
rd Ave
Gr
a
nt
Ave
Park Blvd
Ash St
Stan
ford Ave
College Av
e
Ore
g
o
n Ex
py
Alma St
N:\Projects\_SJ16_Projects\SJ16_1668_Palo_Alto_On_Call\Graphics\GIS\MXD\Mayfield_Midday_Occupancy.mxd
City of Palo AltoMayfieldMidday Peak Parking Occupancy Rates
Midday (12-2 PM) Occupancy
0-49% Occupancy
50-84% Occupancy
85%+ Occupancy
No Parking Anytime
No Parking 5 PM-8 AM
Study Area
NN.T.S.
Data Collected November 17, 2016
Oregon AveRamona StSanta Rita Ave Ramona St
Colorado
Ave
O
r
e
g
o
n
A
v
e
El Dorado
Ave
N California AveWashington Ave
Rinconada Ave
El Camino Real
Sherman Ave
Santa
Rita
Ave
Palo Alto Sq
S California Ave
Acacia
Ave
Ol
m
s
t
e
d
R
d
Ca
mbridge
Ave
Staunton Ct
Pepper Ave
J
a
c
ar
an
da
L
n
Page Mill Rd
New Mayfield Ln
Birch St Sheri
d
an Ave
Olive Av
e
Oxfo
rd Ave
Gr
a
nt
Ave
Park Blvd
Ash St
Stan
ford Ave
College Av
e
Ore
g
o
n Ex
py
Alma St
N:\Projects\_SJ16_Projects\SJ16_1668_Palo_Alto_On_Call\Graphics\GIS\MXD\Mayfield_PM_Occupancy.mxd
City of Palo AltoMayfieldPM Peak Parking Occupancy Rates
PM (5-7 PM) Occupancy
0-49% Occupancy
50-84% Occupancy
85%+ Occupancy
No Parking Anytime
No Parking 5 PM-8 AM
Study Area
NN.T.S.
Data Collected November 17, 2016
Oregon AveRamona StSanta Rita Ave Ramona St
Colorado
Ave
O
r
e
g
o
n
A
v
e
El Dorado
Ave
N California AveWashington Ave
Rinconada Ave
El Camino Real
Sherman Ave
Santa
Rita
Ave
Palo Alto Sq
S California Ave
Acacia
Ave
Ol
m
s
t
e
d
R
d
Ca
mbridge
Ave
Staunton Ct
Pepper Ave
J
a
c
ar
an
da
L
n
Page Mill Rd
New Mayfield Ln
Birch St Sheri
d
an Ave
Olive Av
e
Oxfo
rd Ave
Gr
a
nt
Ave
Park Blvd
Ash St
Stan
ford Ave
College Av
e
Ore
g
o
n Ex
py
Alma St
N:\Projects\_SJ16_Projects\SJ16_1668_Palo_Alto_On_Call\Graphics\GIS\MXD\Mayfield_Overnight_Occupancy.mxd
City of Palo AltoMayfieldOvernight Parking Occupancy Rates
Overnight (11:30 PM) Occupancy
0-49% Occupancy
50-84% Occupancy
85%+ Occupancy
No Parking Anytime
No Parking 5 PM-8 AM
Study Area
NN.T.S.
Data Collected November 17, 2016
EVERGREEN PARK RESIDENTIAL FOCUS GROUP RECOMMENDATION
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing the Evergreen Park
Residential Parking District Under Chapter 10.50 of the Municipal Code
1 8/24/2016
A. California Vehicle Code Section 22507 authorizes the establishment, by city council
action, of permit parking programs in residential neighborhoods for residents and
other categories of parkers.
B. On December 15, 2015 the Council adopted Ordinance No 5294, adding Chapter
10.50 to Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This
Chapter establishes the city-wide procedures for RPP Districts in the city.
NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The criteria set forth in Section 10.50.030 for designating a
Residential Permit Zone have been met as follows:
1) That non-residential vehicles do, or may, substantially interfere with the use of
on-street or alley parking spaces by neighborhood residents;
2) That the interference by the non-residential vehicles occurs at regular and
frequent intervals, either daily or weekly;
3) That the non-resident vehicles parked in the area of the proposed district create
traffic congestion, noise, or other disruption (including shortage of parking spaces
for residents and their visitors) that disrupts neighborhood life;
4) Other alternative parking strategies are not feasible or practical.
EVERGREEN PARK RESIDENTIAL FOCUS GROUP RECOMMENDATION
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing the Evergreen Park
Residential Parking District Under Chapter 10.50 of the Municipal Code
2 8/24/2016
SECTION 2. District Established. Pursuant to Chapter 10.50, the Evergreen Park
Residential Parking District (EPRPD) is hereby established. The boundaries of the
EPRP District are shown on Attachment A attached to this resolution and made a part of
it.
Blocks that are directly adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the EPRP
District may become subject to the regulations of the EPRP District in the future if
the Council approves a resident petition for annexation as provided in Palo Alto
Municipal Code Section 10.50.080.
Individual Block Faces may opt out of the District if 51% of the residents in the
block face petition the city to remove the block face from the District. A petition
for re-inclusion into the District may not be made until at least one year after
removal.
SECTION 4. Hours and Days of Enforcement. The parking regulations shall be in
effect Monday through Friday from 6:00 am to 7:00pm. During the regulated days and
hours of enforcement, no person shall park in an on-street parking space within the
EPRP District for more than two continuous hours without a valid permit, except a
vehicle parked at an electrical recharging station shall be allowed four hours parking
while recharging. No re-parking is allowed in the District after the initial two hours limit
has expired without a permit. A vehicle lawfully displaying a Resident Parking Permit
shall be exempt from the two-hour limit and may park in any legal parking space within
the District. Other vehicles exempt from the parking regulations are contained in
Chapter 10.50. Outside of these enforcement hours, any motor vehicle may park in
EPRP District subject to other applicable parking regulations.
SECTION 5. Residential Parking Permits
A. Duration. Residential permits shall be made available on an annual basis and
may be renewed if the applicant continues to be eligible to receive a permit.
One-day visitor permits for residents will also be available.
B. Purchase of Permits. Requirements and eligibility for purchase of permits for
residents shall be listed in the Administrative Regulations. The occupant of a
residential property in the EPRP District may purchase residential permits. All
EVERGREEN PARK RESIDENTIAL FOCUS GROUP RECOMMENDATION
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing the Evergreen Park
Residential Parking District Under Chapter 10.50 of the Municipal Code
3 8/24/2016
permits shall be in the form of hang tags and shall be interchangeable between
vehicles.
C. Permit Sales.
1. Residential Permits. Each residential address may purchase permits at the
costs listed in Section 6.
2. Daily Visitor Permits. Each residential address may purchase up to 80 Daily
Visitor Parking Permits annually. These permits shall be in the form of
“scratcher” hang tags, using an on-line issuance system, or such other form
as the City may decide. The permit shall clearly indicate the address to which
it was issued and the date for which it is valid.
3. Annual Guest Permits. Each residential address may purchase up to two (2)
annual guest permits which are transferable within a household. The permit
shall clearly indicate the address to which it was issued and the time period
for which it is valid.
SECTION 6. Cost of Residential and Residential Visitor Parking Permits.
A. Residential Standard Permits.
a. Residents shall receive up to four (4) permits per residential address.
First Permit Free $0
Second through Fourth Permit $40/year
B. Annual Guest Permits. A residential address may purchase up to two (2)
Annual Guest permits at $40/year
C. Visitor Daily Permit. $5 each.
SECTION 7. Merchant Parking Permits and Distribution of Parking Spaces.
A. Ten percent of the existing legal on-street parking spaces in the EPRP District
shall be made available for use by vehicles with Merchant Parking permits.
Location of the use of these permits shall be equitably distributed throughout the
District.* The number of these available spaces shall be reduced by 20% of the
original number each year. The number of Merchant Permits sold shall not
exceed the number of spaces designated for workers shown in 7.A.
B. The annual cost of Merchant Permits shall be established in consultation with the
Merchant stakeholders.
C. No daily Merchant Permits will be available for purchase.
EVERGREEN PARK RESIDENTIAL FOCUS GROUP RECOMMENDATION
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing the Evergreen Park
Residential Parking District Under Chapter 10.50 of the Municipal Code
4 8/24/2016
SECTION 8. Exempt from CEQA. This ordinance is exempt from the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations since it can be seen with certainty that
there is no possibility the adoption and implementation of this Ordinance may have
significant effect on the environment and Section 15301 in that this proposed Ordinance
will have a minor impact on existing facilities.
SECTION 9. Effective date. This resolution shall take effect upon the date of
Ordinance No. 5294, amending Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Alto Municipal
Code by Adding Chapter 10.50 (Residential Preferential Parking Districts) and Section
10.04.086 (Parking Enforcement Contractor). Enforcement shall commence pursuant to
Chapter 10.50 and the California Vehicle Code, when signage is posted.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED: 2016
*Merchant Parking distribution options:
1) Designate one parking space in each block face that has ten or more legal
parking spaces, as a space that is available for use with a Merchant Permit
2) Designate a named street on each Merchant permit. Parking with that permit
would be restricted to that street.
3) Other ??
EVERGREEN PARK RESIDENTIAL FOCUS GROUP RECOMMENDATION
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing the Evergreen Park
Residential Parking District Under Chapter 10.50 of the Municipal Code
5 8/24/2016
_______________________
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 Agenda: December 14, 2016 2
Council Chambers 3
250 Hamilton Avenue 4
6:00 PM 5
6
Call to Order / Roll Call 6:07 pm 7
Commissioner Fine absent 8
9
[Note‐did not record] 10
11
Oral Communications 12
The public may speak to any item not on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,2 13
14
Chair Alcheck: [Recording starts in progress] it’s an opportunity for Oral Communications, 15
members of the public who submit a card can speak for a few minutes on any topic. I don’t 16
believe we’ve received any cards; cards specific to Oral Communications or cards specific to an 17
agendized item? Yeah, ok. So let’s move on. 18
19
Agenda Changes, Additions, and Deletions 20
The Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management. 21
22
Chair Alcheck: Are there any changes, additions or deletions that we need to let anyone know 23
about? Good. 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.
1
City Official Reports 2
1. Assistant Director's Report 3
2. 2016 and 2017 Planning and Transportation Commission Meeting Schedule and 4
Assignments 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Ok, why don’t we start with the report from the Assistant Director then? 7
8
Jonathan Lait, Assistant Director: Great, thank you. Just wanted to this is the last Planning and 9
Transportation Commission (PTC) meeting of the year. Just wanted to thank the Commission 10
for all of your work and support over the year and I’m looking forward to 2017 and to 11
Commissioner Tanaka, congratulations and good luck next year with your new duties and 12
responsibilities. I’d also like to thank Commissioner or Vice‐Chair Asher for attending the City 13
Council meeting on Monday for the Council’s discussion on the housing impact fee ordinance, 14
the two ordinances that went forward. The City Council did adopt the ordinances and included 15
the PTC recommendation to lower the fee for rental units to $20 a square foot. And that’s it, 16
that’s the end of the report. Thank you. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I'm going to just remind my fellow Commissioners to email our secretary 19
their availability, their basically three months they would like to be present for Council 20
meetings and let her know. I think before we jump in I'll just say that I'll acknowledge that this 21
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
is our last meeting together Mr. Tanaka, Commissioner Tanaka. And it's also our last meeting 1
with Commissioner Fine who couldn't be here tonight. But it's been really wonderful serving 2
with you, I'm sure I speak for everybody and it's not really goodbye because you're just moving 3
upstairs, if you will. So good luck to you and let us know if there’s anything we can do. 4
5
Study Session 6
Public Comment is Permitted. Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 7
Action Items 8
Public Comment is Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Fifteen (15) minutes, plus three (3) minutes rebuttal. 9
All others: Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 10
3. Review and Recommendation to the City Council for the Creation of a New 11
Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program in the Evergreen Park and Mayfield 12
Neighborhoods Bounded by Park Boulevard, Caltrain Rail Corridor, Oregon 13
Expressway, Page Mill Road and El Camino Real 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Ok, alright so why don’t we get started with Item Number 3 to review the 16
Residential Preferential Parking (RPP). 17
18
Jonathan Lait, Assistant Director: If you could just give us one minute to get set up we'll be 19
ready. 20
21
Joshuah Mello, Chief Transportation Official: Good evening Chair, Commissioners; my name is 22
Josh Mello. I’m the City's Chief Transportation Official and currently I represent the City's entire 23
Parking Department. So unfortunate I don’t have anybody else to bring with me, I'll be doing 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.
the presentation on the Evergreen Park Mayfield RPP program. This is the first step before you 1
bring the program to City Council on January 23rd. So I'm going to do a very brief presentation 2
and I think there's more that we can all benefit from in the question and answer (Q&A) session 3
and hopefully we can help mold this into something that we can then bring to City Council. 4
5
So a little bit of background on how we got here today; as you know there's a citywide RPP 6
ordinance that has a very specific set of steps that are required in order for a neighborhood to 7
implement an RPP program. Those steps are outlined in the ordinance which is linked in the 8
staff report I provided, but generally it has several findings that need to be made including 9
nonresident vehicles interfering with the use of a street by neighborhood residents, that this 10
interference occurs at frequent intervals, and also this congestion and nonresident vehicle 11
occupancy creates noise, traffic congestion or other disruption. It also urges staff to look at 12
other options before moving into an RPP program immediately and implement any parking 13
strategies that may be feasible. 14
15
So back in March of this year we received a resident petition from the stakeholders in the 16
Evergreen Park neighborhood who self‐organized and circulated a petition which is one of the 17
first steps in the RPP ordinance. In April if you remember we brought to you four separate 18
petitions that were submitted by residents and you made a recommendation to City Council 19
that we move forward with Evergreen Park and Southgate. We then went to City Council in 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.
May and brought your recommendation forward and City Council concurred and directed us to 1
move forward with the Evergreen Park RPP. They also directed us to implement some 2
engineering and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) projects and programs in 3
Southgate before moving forward with a Southgate RPP program. 4
5
Immediately following the City Council meeting we began to collect data including daytime 6
parking occupancy counts for all of the entire Evergreen Park neighborhood as well as 7
surrounding neighborhoods. And these counts are taken at three points in time during a typical 8
weekday. We also began the stakeholder process planning, Council directed us to use a 9
stakeholder process to determine the program design and also determine the number of 10
permits that should be issued to employees of merchants and retail establishments in the Cal 11
Ave. Business District. Between July and November we undertook a fairly extensive 12
stakeholder process and we also conducted several supplemental data collection efforts as the 13
conversation evolved with the stakeholders in the community we noticed gaps in some of our 14
data and we were able to supplement that data collection through the months of July and 15
November. That concluded with a public meeting where we presented the draft program 16
design to the greater community in October and then we are bringing this to you this evening 17
for your consideration. And we look forward to moving on the City Council and then 18
implementation with a goal of beginning enforcement in April of 2017. 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 stakeholder process in this case kicked off with a community workshop at the Palo Alto 1
Unified School District (PAUSD) headquarters on July 14th. We had very good attendance at 2
that meeting. At that meeting we presented some of the parameters of the current Downtown 3
RPP Program with the recognition that that would not be a one size fits all program and we 4
could not just duplicate all of the Downtown parameters for the Evergreen Park program. 5
Residents in a breakout session following our presentation were able to provide some input as 6
to what some of the major issues are in their community around parking and parking 7
occupancy. They also provided us with a very important feedback on what they think would 8
and would not work from the Downtown RPP Program. 9
10
August 25th we held a resident focus group at a church in the neighborhood. This focus group 11
was oriented strictly towards the residents and what the residents may feel are the most 12
important issues around an RPP program. We gained some very important feedback. At that 13
meeting the residents submitted a draft resolution that was resident generated that is also 14
included in your packet. September 25th we convened a business focus group meeting in order 15
to ascertain what some of the issues and concerns of the business community may be. We 16
heard very good feedback at that meeting as well and came to understand some of the 17
challenges that the businesses have around parking in the Cal Ave. Business District. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
On July 14th we held or I'm sorry, that should be October 14th we held our community 1
workshop Number 2 at the PAUSD headquarters. At that workshop we presented the draft 2
program design which is before you this evening. We presented the all of the parameters of 3
the program including number of permits, permit prices, strategy for employee permit 4
distribution and sales, enforcement hours, and a whole host of other program parameters. And 5
we also received very good feedback from the residents at a breakout session following the 6
presentation at that meeting. 7
8
Finally, we mailed out a 1,652 surveys on October 31st and we gave the residents three weeks 9
to respond to that survey. The deadline was immediately before the Thanksgiving holiday. We 10
did have a couple hiccups with the survey and we were able to FedEx some additional surveys 11
to some multifamily buildings that due to mailing errors had not received the surveys. We've 12
received a fairly decent response from that. In the survey which is also including your packet 13
we outline what the proposed parameters of the program would be, the proposed boundaries, 14
and also asked folks whether they would support or not support the implementation of such a 15
program. 16
17
Going quickly through some of the data collection and I know you'll likely have some questions 18
about specifics around this data so I’ll go through quickly and then we can come back to it. We 19
collected daytime occupancy counts for the Evergreen Park neighborhood that was the first 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.
data collection effort. We do three separate counts we do morning, midday, and evening. In 1
Evergreen Park we found that the midday is the busiest time of day for parking occupancy. 2
There are thirteen blocks that are over 85 percent occupancy at specific periods and 85 percent 3
occupancy is generally the rule of thumb used for parking management in higher density 4
downtown business districts. It’s by no means perfect measure for a residential area; however, 5
there is no other guidance out there around what you know as far as thresholds for parking 6
occupancy and residential neighborhoods that are more similar to Evergreen Park so that's the 7
rule of thumb we've been using to date. 85 percent occupancy or below generally means that 8
there is more than two spaces per block available so one space per side, generally when you 9
start to get over 85 percent that means people are not able to find a parking space on the block 10
of their destination. And not surprisingly we found that blocks near California Avenue and El 11
Camino Real have the highest occupancy. The further you get from those two corridors the 12
lower the occupancy is. 13
14
The next round of data collection was an Evergreen Park night time, an overnight data 15
collection. This was done at 11:30 p.m. when most residents would generally be home and the 16
reason we did this was to determine the estimated number of resident vehicles that are parked 17
in the neighborhood. Now granted there is probably some long term Caltrain parkers and some 18
Stanford students that may leave their vehicles overnight as well so we'd want to subtract some 19
of that as we begin to get into these numbers. With this count we found that 44.7 percent 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.
the available curb space was occupied, so a little bit under half of the curb space is utilized by 1
residents of the neighborhood assuming that the overnight count is an effective measure of the 2
resident demand for the parking. Again not surprisingly College Avenue has the highest 3
nighttime occupancy. That street is mainly comprised of multifamily housing units so there 4
tends to be more of a parking demand from the residents there. So we found a higher 5
occupancy along College Avenue. 6
7
Throughout this process we struggled with how large the district should be and how we should 8
deal with the California Avenue Business District. Initially we discussed dividing the California 9
Avenue Business District in half and only allowing businesses North of Cal Ave. to purchase 10
Evergreen Park permits. If we were to include the entire California Avenue Business District we 11
did not think it was fair that Evergreen Park should bear the entire burden of spillover parking 12
from employees in the California Avenue Business District. So one of the decisions that we had 13
to make was how large the district should be and how the businesses within the California 14
Avenue Business District should be treated. So in the end we made the decision to expand the 15
area to include the Mayfield neighborhood which is south of the California Avenue Business 16
District and really has an odd assortment of parking regulations: time of day restrictions, 17
loading zones, and then a lot of unregulated or two hour parking. And there is actually a lot of 18
multifamily housing on the west side of this neighborhood so we included that area and 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.
immediately upon making the decision that we would propose including this we did some 1
parking occupancy counts in Mayfield as well. 2
3
The daytime count in Mayfield again we found the midday was the busiest time of day. So this 4
is when most of the businesses are open and customers are visiting the businesses so that's not 5
surprising. We found eight blocks over the 85 percent occupancy at specific periods of the day. 6
And then this was interesting, the blocks near El Camino Real actually had the highest 7
occupancy. We didn't really see as much demand on the California Avenue side in Mayfield as 8
we did on El Camino. And I think the night time occupancy counts explains some of that; 9
there's a lot of multifamily housing along Grant closer to El Camino, so the overnight counts 10
showed a lot of occupancy closer to El Camino as well. We actually found lower occupancy 11
overnight in the Mayfield area, only 36.5 percent of the available space was occupied. The 12
block of 400 Grant Avenue exceeds 85 percent occupancy overnight which is fairly unusual and 13
again that's a lot of multifamily housing and we also would need to discount any long term 14
Caltrain parkers or Stanford students from these numbers as well. 15
16
The survey results are on this slide. As I mentioned earlier we mailed out 1652 surveys to 17
residential units. We did mail some out by mistake to business enterprises; those were not 18
included in the final tally. So there were actually 1,800 surveys mailed out. We re‐verified it 19
after the receipt of the surveys and discounted 200, so 1652 were from residential units. 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.
had a 20 percent return rate, 32 percent from Evergreen Park and 13 percent from Mayfield. 1
And of those 20 percent that were returned 72 percent support the program in Evergreen Park 2
and 60 percent support the program in Mayfield for an average vote of support of 68 percent 3
between the two neighborhoods. 4
5
So now I'm going to give you an overview of the recommended program design. This is a draft 6
program design for your review and comment. The boundaries are proposed to be the parcel 7
boundaries for the properties along the north side of Park Boulevard, the Caltrain rail corridor, 8
Oregon Expressway and Page Mill Road, and El Camino Real. We are proposing two employee 9
parking zones, a Zone A which is shown in blue and would essentially be the Evergreen Park 10
neighborhood and then an employee parking Zone B which is the green area also known as 11
Mayfield. We are recommending keeping the existing two hour commercial parking in the core 12
of the California Avenue Business District. That’s shown in brown. 13
14
The parameters of the program are very similar to the Downtown RPP. The proposed 15
parameters, excuse me. The enforcement hours would be Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to 16
5:00 p.m. Resident parking permit stickers three would be available annually at $50 each; three 17
per household. Resident parking permit hang tags two annual hang tags would be available for 18
$50 each and then residents would also be able to purchase up to fifty daily permit hang tags at 19
$5 each per year. For employee permits there would be 250 total annual permits and they 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.
would cost $149 each. This is the same price as the garage and lot permits for the California 1
Avenue Business District and we would recommend allocating 125 permits to each of the 2
employee parking zones so Zone A would have 125 permits and Zone B. would have 125 3
permits. 4
5
For employee parking permit priority we really struggled with the direction we got from Council 6
and also the wishes of a lot of the community members were to limit employee permits to so‐7
called merchants or retail establishments. That would require us to perform some kind of 8
verification using an employer classification code. We don't really have classification codes for 9
a lot of you know all of the businesses there’d likely be some that were straddling two different 10
classifications and it would be up to city staff or to use their judgment or we would have to 11
come back with some type of language in the resolution that actually got a little more clarity, 12
provided a little more clarity as to how we would identify retail and merchant establishments. 13
So what we're recommending instead is to give priority to low income employees. 14
15
Low income employees work in all types of businesses even offices have janitors and custodians 16
and cafeteria workers and others who would qualify as low income, but they might not 17
necessarily be considered as working for merchants or retail establishments. We would also 18
like to give priority to those on the wait list for the garages on the Cal Ave. Business District. 19
There's currently 249 folks on the wait list the last time I checked. And the low income permits 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.
would be available for $50 per year which is the same price for the Downtown RPP low income 1
employee permits. And then finally there'd be unlimited daily permits available for employees 2
only to purchase at $5 each. And we recommend these because we want to provide employees 3
the opportunity to take different modes of transportation on Monday they may take Caltrain, 4
but on Wednesday they may want to park and we don't want to incentivize them driving every 5
day by making the annual permit the only available option for them. So this allows a little more 6
flexibility for employees’ schedules and different commuting patterns. 7
8
So this is where it gets a little bit complicated, we're recommending a cap of 250 employee 9
annual permits. Throughout the life of the Downtown RPP we've conducted occupancy studies 10
which determine how many employees are parked on the street at any given point in time. 11
And it's we usually do the midday when most of the employees are on parked on street that are 12
going to be there that day. We've shown that about, we've documented about 35 percent or 13
less of the employee permit holders show up on any given day and are on street at any point in 14
time. So if we were to sell 100 permits only about thirty‐five employees would show up at a 15
particular point in time. So in Evergreen Park the 250 number represents after you take into 16
that 35 percent figure we estimate that about 15 percent of the available overnight capacity 17
would be occupied so there's a little over half of the space that's vacant in Evergreen Park 18
overnight so that means about half the space is not being used by residents. So the 250 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.
number represents fifteen percent of the available overnight capacity. It also is roughly equal 1
to the number of people that are on the wait list in the Cal Ave. Business District. 2
3
And during the business focus group we heard that the wait list is so long I think it's over a year 4
right now that typically a lot of the service workers are fairly short term. They don't stay 5
employed at one place for an extremely long time. A lot of their employees leave before they 6
reach the top of the wait list. So they're having a lot of them are really struggling with where to 7
direct their employees to park, so we think we'd like to make a concerted effort to clear that 8
wait list and help people find parking that's legal and within the regulations of the City of Palo 9
Alto and I think there's a lot of people that might be jumping around right now testing the 10
boundaries of enforcement and I think we need to clear that waiting list if possible. 11
12
We're not recommending an employee parking permit reduction at this time. If you remember 13
there was quite a bit of discussion around the Downtown RPP about ratcheting down the 14
number of employee permits over time. The number that's been discussed is 10 percent per 15
year. When we made that recommendation to Council we tied it directly to the 30 percent 16
single occupancy Vehicle (SOV) reduction goal of the Downtown Transportation Management 17
Association (TMA). We also tied it into the additional supply that will be created Downtown by 18
the garage on Lot D. We don't feel that we're at that point in the Cal Ave. Businesses District 19
where we can recommend a reduction in employee permits without ramping up our TDM 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.
efforts and doing a thorough look at what that increased supply with the parking garages 1
associated with the Public Safety Building will do to the demand. I think we're recommending 2
this as a one year pilot program so I think it would make sense to look at a reduction in 3
employee permits in future years of the program as we get a better handle on the demand and 4
the supply in the Cal Ave. Businesses Direct. 5
6
We're also not recommending eligibility areas. So for the Downtown RPP we created areas just 7
outside the district that were called eligibility areas and these allowed individual streets to self‐8
organize and petition the Planning and Community Environment Department for admission into 9
the RPP and it did not require Council action. It allows them to administratively opt in and we 10
did that Downtown in an attempt to anticipate where spillover would occur and get out in front 11
of that and allow residents to quickly become part of the RPP program. For Evergreen Park and 12
Mayfield generally there are fixed boundaries and barriers around the entirety of the district. 13
To the east you have the Caltrain corridor, to the west you have El Camino and on the other 14
side of El Camino is the College Terrace RPP which is already in place so there is very little 15
opportunity for spillover. We do think that there may be potential spillover in Old Palo Alto and 16
Ventura, but we think it would be wise to let them organize their own RPP programs with 17
different parameters from Evergreen Park and Mayfield. 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.
There are some kind of unsettled concerns that are ongoing from the resident business 1
community. The expansion of the boundary to include the Mayfield area, as you know the 2
original petition was just Evergreen Park. So as we, I mentioned earlier as we started to think 3
about the details of the program and how it would work we felt that adding Mayfield was a 4
necessary component to this program. There's also been a little bit of debate about what 5
happens with the businesses along El Camino Real. Are they considered part of the Cal Ave. 6
Business District? Are they eligible for permits? We’re recommending it; they should be 7
eligible for permits, but the permit cap would ultimately limit the number of employees parking 8
in the neighborhood. Their employees have they already cannot park across El Camino in 9
College Terrace so if we were to exclude them from the Evergreen Park/Mayfield RPP they 10
would be, have very limited opportunities for parking, especially some of the older structures 11
that were built before some of our newer parking standards. 12
13
There's also a difference of opinion on hours of enforcement. We're currently recommending 14
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The residents have asked for a 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. We've done a lot 15
of thinking about this and we think we could stretch to 6:00 p.m. potentially and not require 16
additional staffing. One of the reasons 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. works is it only requires one shift 17
of enforcement officers. If we go beyond that eight hours we would need to have a separate 18
shift and it would basically double the cost because we can't have somebody come in and just 19
work a couple hours we'd have fairly extensive staffing costs. 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
There's also a concern that employees will bunch towards the Cal Ave. Business District. We 2
think that may be an issue. We don't want to see a scenario where all of the employees park 3
on the blocks closest to Cal Ave., but during the Downtown RPP we had to first get a handle on 4
how many employees were parking where and we can't do that without permits to identify 5
who's an employee and who's a resident. During the Phase 1 of the Downtown RPP we were 6
able to identify bunching on the blocks closest to the Downtown core and if you remember 7
Phase 2 of the Downtown RPP program includes fairly small linear zones that radiate from the 8
Downtown core. Some of them are only a block wide and that was done to better distribute 9
employees so that's something we may need to advance in the future with Evergreen Park and 10
Mayfield once we get a handle on where the bunching is occurring. 11
12
There's also a little bit of difference of opinion on the number of employee parking permits 13
available in employee parking Zone B. The resident generated resolution recommended only 14
10 percent of curb space should be allocated to employee parking. And then I think you'll hear 15
tonight there's a couple of businesses that are unique and their situations are rather unique 16
and throughout the development of the Downtown RPP program some of the most difficult 17
types of businesses to accommodate were doctor's offices, dentist's, real estate offices, and 18
kind of nontraditional things that you don't typically find in a downtown and don't have some 19
of the same… they don't have a lot of the same demands that a downtown business 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.
have. So we're still trying to figure out the best way to deal with some of those and I think 1
you'll hear tonight from a couple of those businesses. 2
3
Next steps we’re hoping to bring a program forward to City Council on January 23rd and receive 4
direction to move forward. Immediately following that meeting we would begin fabricating 5
signs and selling permits and our goal is to begin enforcement on April 1, 2017. This is 6
concurrent with the Downtown RPP Program also starts in April. So we would hope to roll 7
them both out at the same time. And with that I will take any questions or comments. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok before we do that I just want to acknowledge that Commissioner Gardias 10
arrived shortly after the roll call. And… staff should we proceed with comments from the 11
community and then follow it up with opportunities for [unintelligible] for Commissioners to 12
ask questions? 13
14
Mr. Lait: Yeah, well unless there’s any questions on the presentation from the Commission this 15
would be a good time to open up to the public hearing. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Does anybody have any very specific questions or can we address questions 18
actually after comments? Ok, alright. Why don't we start with the comments, how many 19
speaker cards do we have? We have 12 speaker cards. Ok, let's set the time to three minutes 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.
per speaker card and if you could call the first speaker and then the person right after so that 1
they know they're up. Ok? 2
3
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Sure, thank you. First speaker is Paul Machado followed by Karen. 4
5
Paul Machado: Good evening, Commissioners. A few months ago this Commission 6
recommended an RPP for Evergreen Park. The proposal before you was the response. It calls 7
for selling 125 commercial permits in both Evergreen and Mayfield neighborhoods for a total of 8
250 permits for a one year trial period. Residents and staff met several times during the RPP 9
process and residents requested the number of commercial permits in the RPP area be reduced 10
and phased out over a five year period. It was the residents’ belief that if a commercial permits 11
were not phased out over time the proposal before you was merely for a permanent 250 car 12
commercial neighborhood parking lot. 13
14
As you are aware the City is suffering from both parking problems and major traffic congestion. 15
Encouraging 250 people a day to commute to our city is counterproductive. Next Monday the 16
City Council will vote on a new parking garage for the California Avenue area. The parking 17
spaces created by this garage will not only replace the parking the lost with the construction of 18
the nearby Police Station. It will also add about 150 more additional parking spaces in what is 19
now in the, over what now exists in the area. It is further noted that a major developer in 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.
California Avenue told residents at a community meeting that TDMs do not work without an 1
effective RPP in place. Without an effective RPP employees will continue to drive to work and 2
park in the neighborhoods. The developer said he was powerless to prevent this from 3
happening; therefore, with the construction of the new garage and the implementation of 4
effective TDMs the phasing out of commercial parking in Evergreen Park and Mayfield 5
neighborhoods over a five year period not only protects the neighborhoods, but reduces traffic 6
congestion. Accepting the RPP proposal with a five year phase out of commercial permits 7
appears to be appropriate and is recommended. 8
9
And tonight we found out when we went to the various meetings that we were eligible for one 10
free parking permit and three we could buy for $50 apiece. And tonight, dated today, that is 11
changed and they cancelled the one free resident parking permit and we can only buy three 12
annual permits at $50 apiece. So that's a concern which I wasn't aware of until tonight. Thank 13
you. 14
15
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. Karen followed by Marla Marnoza. 16
17
Karen [no last name given]: Good evening, Commissioners. Thanks for your consideration of 18
the Evergreen Park/Mayfield RPP and we really appreciate the work of Josh and Hillary and Sue 19
Ellen on this proposal. And let me first say that I support this proposal as a minimal first step. 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 see this as a pilot program and we hope that in a year we'll be back to talk about this and 1
look at making a more significant program that will help the residents really achieve a little 2
more balance in terms of parking in our neighborhood. 3
4
I see there's four major concerns to this proposal. The first is as Paul said, today is the first time 5
we learned that the City has decided to eliminate the one free parking space for the residents. 6
This is a bait and switch tactic that I seriously object to. When the proposal was sent to the 7
neighborhood residents in that survey it said that they would get one free permit per 8
household. To take that away after they already voted for it I find very objectionable and a 9
significant problem. People would not have voted for this in many cases if they knew they'd 10
have to pay for every permit. And I find that really unacceptable behavior on the part of the 11
City. 12
13
The second thing that concerns me is giving 19 percent of our spaces in Evergreen Park to 14
nonresidents and probably more like 40 percent of the spaces in the Mayfield area to 15
nonresidents. We're making our neighborhood a commercial parking lot and I have serious 16
objections to that especially if it's not significantly reduced over the next 5 years down to zero. 17
We realize that the City has serious problems with parking, but five years is plenty of time to 18
address that problem and remedy it. The other thing of course is the clumping problem and 19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
we’d really like to see that reduced over the after the first year because it seriously affects the 1
residents on California Avenue and College. Thank you for your help. 2
3
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. Marla Marnoza followed by Terry [Holtsummer]. 4
5
Marla Marnoza: Hi. I’m the 30 year resident of Oxford Avenue and like many residents in our 6
community I've seen particularly in the last couple of years an incredible parking problem and 7
traffic congestion. I don't think that the Commission fully understands the despair the residents 8
are at this point experiencing. I have a number of concerns and I would like to start with the 9
concern that the previous speaker addressed as to the free residents’ parking permit that was 10
taken away from us. And the second concern I have of course is the employee parking which 11
would make our neighborhood a paid parking lot. 12
13
I think the California Avenue District and the University Avenue District are not the same. The 14
California Avenue District is much smaller, it's only four blocks, it borders or so it borders on 15
one side on El Camino Real which has public transportation on the other side the Caltrain 16
station is readily available. It’s not like University Avenue that people have to go under the 17
underpass and go to University and it's kind of really inconvenient. It's very convenient 18
actually. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
So how does this particular proposal encourage the employers to have their employees taken 1
public transportation? It seems to me that this particular proposal is not consistent with the 2
policy of the City of Palo Alto that been having for a number of years when issuing permits for 3
business structures they have reduced the parking because the employees are going to take 4
public transportation. This particular proposal doesn't encourage that at all. As a matter of fact 5
it encourages our neighborhood to become a paid parking lot and I don't think that's the 6
direction we would like to go as a citizen, as businesses, as the City of Palo Alto [members to 7
go]. So I’m asking you to strongly reconsider the number of the employee issued permits. I 8
don't think it's really reasonable to expect the 250 permits should be issued for business 9
employees. This is just way too much. 10
11
Secondly, the vacancy rate in the evening was counted at 11:30 p.m. How many people should 12
be waiting till 11:30 p.m. to park in front of their house? I don't think that's reasonable. So I 13
thank you for your attention and for listening to our concerns and I hope you take them into 14
consideration. 15
16
Mr. Lait: Excuse me, excuse Me Vice‐Chair? Chair, if it's possible there’s I think there's an 17
opportunity for us to perhaps clarify about the free annual parking pass. I suspect you'll get a 18
number of other speakers and there might be an opening for us to just clarify that issue if we 19
may? 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Mr. Mello: Yeah, if I could permit there’s a the permit pricing is mentioned in two places in the 2
resolution. We're going to correct that. As proposed the residents would be eligible for one 3
free permit. The problem is the resolution addresses that in two different places so it's 4
confusing and the at places memo was addressing one of the sections of the resolution. So just 5
to clarify, the program as outlined in the survey where each household would be eligible for 6
one free permit is what is before you tonight. 7
8
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you for that clarification. I think we all had that question. Let's 9
see, we have Terry [Holtsummer] followed by David Schrum. 10
11
Terry [Holtsummer]: Ok, good evening, Commissioners. I just wanted to come tonight to voice 12
my support for the planned RPP for Evergreen Park and Mayfield. I actually live in the Mayfield 13
neighborhood and I have seen and felt daily the effects of commercial parking and traffic 14
congestion in my neighborhood. Often when I come home at night, I'm a schoolteacher in Palo 15
Alto, I park along Park Boulevard and in the Grant area and when I try to park in this area even 16
in 3:00 and 4:00 in the afternoon most of the parking spaces in my neighborhood are gone. 17
And most of them are gone until after 6:00 p.m. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
I would strongly urge the adoption of this RPP program with some reasonable adjustments. 1
One of the key adjustments must be this detailed plan to reduce commercial parking permits 2
every year. As other speakers have already said giving commercial people 250 parking spaces 3
every year is just asking them to… allowing them to park in our neighborhood on a really 4
permanent basis. We should be trying to encourage the businesses as much as possible in 5
reducing commercial employee parking either through other methods or some way of reducing 6
that and making sure that the parking spaces that are there especially in Mayfield are for the 7
residents that live in the area. 8
9
Another key adjustment I'd like to see made some people already mentioned it was the 10
enforcement hours. Someone said that the enforcement hours are 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 right now, 11
but I'd like to see this extended to an earlier time 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. at least because you 12
have to remember a lot of people are using those areas around the neighborhoods to avoid the 13
Caltrain parking fees. And parking in our neighborhoods, and parking in our areas, and taking 14
the train so they don't have to pay the fee for the parking lot and so they need to extend those 15
hours to make sure that the proper residents have access to those parking areas and that at 16
those times. 17
18
I won’t mention some of the area, other areas, but I strongly urge the adoption of this program 19
with some improvements that need to be made. And more input, very quickly more input from 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 community. I feel like some of our residents I live at Palo Alto Central which is the largest 1
condominium complex in the area. We weren’t properly notified of these programs and these 2
adjustments and we hope that in the future they will be notifying us more directly. Thank you. 3
4
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. David Schrum followed by Reza Riahi. 5
6
David Schrum: David Schrum, I live on Oxford Avenue, been in the neighborhood for 45 years, 7
watched this go from a quiet residential neighborhood where our streets were available to us 8
to it being a parking lot for the commercial district. The thing I really want to emphasize after 9
reading the report that you received is that the people in the neighborhood feel very strongly 10
that this is an issue of fairness and this is this is exactly what we count on our government to 11
assist us in securing for ourselves. One has a reasonable expectation that when one buys a 12
residential property in a place like Palo Alto or rents one that one is going to have access to 13
street parking for one's visitors, guests, and even one's own family. And the people in the 14
business district have a similar reasonable expectation that their streets will be primarily used 15
for them and there's… to allow the streets of the neighborhood to become an extension of the 16
business district is to corrode the setting for a human community in a way that makes it more 17
difficult for neighbors to be neighborly, people to come together with a spirit of community to 18
take care of the community because we feel that the thing outside our door is no longer an 19
extension of our homes, but it's rather a pathway for an invasion. And there's a vast literature 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.
on this that the people in your Planning Department can tell you about and bring you examples 1
of if you want to read it. 2
3
What one hopes is that this program as it evolves will take greater cognizance of that kind of 4
damage and will give the neighbors, the residents, an opportunity to reconstruct that little 5
piece of the earth as our territory, our earth, our home, our place to take care of, our place to 6
meet and greet on the street rather than be dodging the vehicles of people who do not know us 7
and who don't share the same kind of concern for us that we share for each other. So please 8
understand it's an issue of fairness and while that wasn’t reported to you in in the staff report 9
it’s something that people in our neighborhood care about very much. So sure, take it as it is 10
now rather than reject it, but please fix it over time so that once again our neighborhood 11
becomes ours. Thank you. 12
13
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. Reza Riahi followed by Stan [Belaits]. 14
15
Reza Riahi: Good evening, Commissioners; thank you for giving us the time to speak to you on 16
this topic. My name is Reza Riahi and I’m an endodontist in Palo Alto. I'm also the President of 17
the Mid‐peninsula Dental Society. Our Dental Society encompasses Mountain View, Los Altos, 18
Palo Alto, Menlo Park, and Atherton. I’ve been approached by a lot of our members who are 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.
very concerned about the way the RPP is being implemented, particularly in the Downtown and 1
now as it's expanding to other parts of the town. 2
3
I wanted to just provide some information about how it's affecting health care providers and in 4
particularly dentists. We have to about 280 active dentists who are involved in our Dental 5
Society which includes those cities that I mentioned. Dental offices in general are fairly static in 6
growth or grow very slowly. In fact when I had my executive director look up numbers of 7
dental practices over time the number of practices in Palo Alto, dental practices, have declined 8
over time because of the cost of probably having an office there, the leases and so forth. We 9
are, we rely greatly on our staff. We have highly trained staff that come in from long distances 10
to provide care. And if you look at we actually conducted a survey of our own we have 11
employees that come all the way from believe it or not Folsom, they come from Santa Cruz, 12
they come from all parts of East Bay where there is no real mass transit at this point to bring 13
them here. 14
15
Ninety some odd percent of our staff are female. That means they just by nature our 16
assistants, our staff are female, so late at night walking long distances to get to a train station is 17
not safe. We don't feel comfortable. I didn’t even have time to go change today because we 18
see emergency patients last minute so our staff have to stay with us so it's very difficult for 19
them to walk outside when it's dark in winter for long distances to get to their, to mass transit. 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 in general we're not here to speak against RPP. We understand the concern of the residents 2
that they do have to have parking. We just want to make sure that you understand that all 3
businesses aren't the same. Dental practices have been a part of the fabric of City of Palo Alto 4
for decades and they're not really growing to be causing or be active in causing the congestion 5
that you're seeing today. We just want to make sure if there's any possibility for the 6
Commissioners or for the Planning Department to consider a subset of permits that do not go 7
down to zero for health care providers or dentists because if we lose our staff we will have to 8
move. And so locally, the access to local health care or dental care would be lost that way. 9
Thank you. 10
11
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: [Unintelligible] followed by Tim [Malkay]. 12
13
Stan [Belaits]: Good evening all, I'm Stan and I want to preface this by the fact that we’re all 14
very fortunate to live and work here and that doesn't go unnoted that I’m a dentist here and 15
I'm here to offer a little bit of the perspective as the last point on the slide affected it. This is a 16
program any regulation can help any city going forward and I lived in many places in the United 17
States and over time I understand the implications of regulation. I just wanted to offer 18
residents and fellow councilman an opportunity to gain a little bit of an insight into our business 19
which is unique. It's an essential field and California Vehicle Code they refer to, when they refer 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 RPP there are some subsections that refer to essential employees and the way this has been 1
addressed in other cities across the states was that when permits were in question in areas 2
similar to ours employees were guaranteed to be able to purchase these permits going forward. 3
And as Reza Riahi noted our businesses are quite a bit different. We're not growing in 4
numbers. We serve mostly Palo Alto residents. Most of our offices are not taking new patients 5
and for a lot of them it's months wait to come in. And we're also different in that a lot of us 6
offer parking. So we actually take congestion off the streets and that's what we provide for our 7
patients. We serve emergencies and after hours for our patients as well. We have highly 8
trained staff so it's not a transient community and those are some of the things that make us 9
different. So we will appreciate it going forward as this program evolves there is a provision 10
that we’ll always be eligible to buy these permits. As again our numbers haven't changed and 11
it's an essential service that we provide. Thank you. 12
13
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Great, thank you. Tim [Malkay] and Patrick Sallery. 14
15
Tim [Malkay]: Hi, good evening and thank you very much for listening to our concerns. I'm also 16
a dentist. I have been practicing, I practiced in Stanford over in Lois Road and now I practice on, 17
in the, on the edge of the Evergreen neighborhood. When I built my office I was assured that I 18
would have eight parking spaces so that I had one for each one of my patients at the maximum 19
time. No or excuse me, 12 parking spaces so I could have one for one of my patients at any one 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
point in time coming and going. Now with this if RPP was taken down to zero where we would 1
have no parking at all. What that would require me to do as a provider to stay in business is to 2
have my staff park in the lot and move my patients to the neighborhood because they would be 3
less than two hours so they would be A‐Okay. That's not helping the situation at all. 4
5
And so I think that there's got to be some way we can work out a solution to protect the 6
environment of the community to keep a planning of having dentists in Palo Alto because if you 7
send dentists out of Palo Alto they cannot come back. There's just no way we can get staff in 8
this community to pay them the salaries to stay in this community and not travel long 9
distances. It's just way too much. So I'd like at least some consideration as my two colleagues 10
had said to somehow allow us some stability in terms of our parking issues going forward. 11
Thank you. 12
13
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. Patrick Sallery and Tommy [Derrick]. 14
15
Patrick Sallery: My name is Patrick Sallery. I’ve lived in Evergreen Park since 1949 and I just 16
wanted to say that this RPP is not just a neighborhood issue. It's not just a Not in My Backyard 17
(NIMBY) kind of thing. The RPP can affect the overall amount of traffic coming into the area 18
because it will as it goes It’ll force the people over time if they realize that we’re having the 19
draw down in five years or whatever time it picks down and whether it goes to 0 or 10 percent 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 have that time to prepare for what they're going to do and know that they're not going to 1
able to keep the neighborhood as a parking lot. I think it was in 1993 they built their one of the 2
parking lots. It's existing now on California Avenue and that was going to solve the traffic 3
problems and it obviously hasn't. And if we don't have something in this plan from right now 4
starting at the beginning when it comes time to draw things down nobody's going to have made 5
any plans for that. 6
7
I think it was about a year ago Stanford and some other large agencies came and addressed the 8
City Council and they talked about the carrot and the stick. And I think it sort of come to the 9
carrot on the stick. There were two different sticks involved at any rate. One holds a carrot 10
and the other whacks a horse when the horse is no longer interested in the carrot. And so you 11
can look at the RPP and the permits that the business can get as more or less a reward, it’s 12
something they can look forward to a place they can park, but if there's not a stick behind that 13
they're not it's not going to work. They need more motivation so that the draw down would 14
work as a carrot and the stick and so I think we need something along those lines, some sort of 15
draw down written into this instead of put off. And also it’d be good if something could, we 16
know what the distribution is roughly and it would be good if something could be used some 17
way that could be drawn down now otherwise we're going to keep the keep everything the way 18
it is where everything on College and Oxford are just over crowded and along El Camino. Thank 19
you. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. Tommy [Derrick] followed by [Christian Peace]. 2
3
Tommy [Derrick]: My name is Tommy [Derrick] I live on Leland Avenue. I've been in Evergreen 4
Park for about 40 years. I've been before you more than once. It would be lovely to see this 5
come to a final round and so I strongly urge you to recommend to the Council a yes vote on 6
this. 7
8
Some people would like to pit this, categorize this as residents against merchants; absolutely 9
not the case. Many of the merchants on California Avenue are very desirous of this program 10
because it provides a new massive amount of two hour parking for their customers, same for 11
patients. We believe it’s the business responsibility to cover the parking situations for their 12
employees. We welcome their customers, their patients into our neighborhood on two hour 13
limit. I live very close to a restaurant that today had major difficulty with their customers 14
parking for a special event that was going on because my whole block more than Josh’s 15
numbers was 100 percent parked mostly by employees by eight o'clock in the morning. And so 16
the [noon of minutes Sundance] people circled and circled and circled the block trying to find a 17
space. If we had a lot of open spaces available and so on it would not have been an issue. 18
19
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Set that aside there are two or three things that I think would improve this resolution. Section 1
3 talks about hours and days of enforcement. You heard them mention that we ask for a 6:00 2
to 7:00. The reason we asked for 6:00 to 7:00 is that's really what 8:00 to 5:00 enforcement is. 3
You got two hours so you can come at six o'clock and park there late no matter who you are or 4
what you are no permit necessary. You can park after 3:00 and stay right on through. So we 5
will be asking the Council and we urge that be included. Five year phase outs really important. 6
I could go through one for you. Yellow lights on, I'll call it quits. Make it happen guys. Thank 7
you. 8
9
[Christian Peace]: Good evening Commissioners, thanks for considering our RPP. This has been 10
quite a journey for everyone: the residents, the staff, the merchants. I guess making an RPP is a 11
little like making sausage. You don't really want to look under the covers too much. It's not 12
perfect, but I urge you to accept it as it's been presented by staff. There's a lot of concerns. I 13
think if we plan ahead after that year and are prepared with the City, the staff, and the 14
merchants for a crisp evaluation based on data after that year we can look at these issues in an 15
honest way and make a judgment how to proceed from there and adjust this program as 16
needed. Thank you very much. 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.
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. Andrew [Nepamuchino or musino], Doria Summa, and then 1
just a question; Wolfgang Dreger is it to speak on this agenda topic or something else? Ok, then 2
you'll be after Doria Summa. 3
4
Andrew [Nepamuchino]: Ok, I'm here today to comment on the terms of the Evergreen Park 5
proposed RPP program as currently written. As many Evergreen Park residents will agree we 6
expect this RPP program to be a substantial improvement over our current situation. If the 7
options are to take it as written or take nothing at all of course I’ll endorse it as written; 8
however, I do want to suggest that the program will be more fair if we issue 100 percent of the 9
permits to residents. People in the business district caused this problem in the first place by 10
failing to allocate enough space for parking and under this plan we the residents are paying for 11
their error. This is a classic example of externalities. If businesses and commercial real estate 12
owners want to internalize their costs they can provide their own space for parking and in the 13
meantime at least pay for parking procured from off site. To illustrate this point please 14
consider that if we neighborhood residents start parking cars in business district spots for our 15
use they'll be furious. I trust that everyone here can understand how any and all business 16
district parking in a neighborhood is a clear violation of the Golden Rule. 17
18
Lest anyone think that business district parking and Evergreen Park is without cost please 19
consider that as a bicyclist when streets are fully parked coming out of a driveway is far more 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.
dangerous. As we know from psychological principles anonymity decreases cooperation. If 1
somebody in the neighborhood is driving with a heavy foot I can go and discuss it with her or 2
him. I have much less recourse if somebody outside the neighborhood is driving dangerously. 3
Furthermore people who commute in from elsewhere have less of a vested interest in the well‐4
being of the neighborhood. When I was just a small boy residents of Evergreen Park worked 5
with your predecessors to reduce through traffic in the neighborhood; thanks to their efforts I 6
enjoy a much safer and more pleasant home environment today. Nonresident parking in the 7
neighborhood erodes these gains. All of the hundreds of nonresident vehicles represent traffic 8
into and out of the neighborhood and this traffic is a substantial portion of all total 9
neighborhood traffic. Thanks for considering these views. 10
11
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you, Doria Summa followed by Wolfgang Dreger and then any 12
others? I… that’s the last one I have. Any others anyone would like to bring forward? 13
14
Doria Summa: Good evening, Chair and Commissioners, I’m Doria Summa. I live in College 15
Terrace so I just want to preface my comments by saying you should definitely do what you 16
think is right and what the people in these neighborhoods tell you they want, but I do live in 17
College Terrace very close to El Camino so I have a little bit of experience with this. So I had a 18
few concerns. I was concerned with the discrepancy between the colleague's memo and what 19
staff had presented and I appreciate that they included Mayfield to make it more fair 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.
Evergreen Park, but I did think it was clear in the colleague's memo that this was to be for 1
merchants only not for other commercial tenants on in the Cal Ave. Business District. 2
3
It was unclear to me from the staff report that the day passes for business for the commercial 4
people would be unlimited just for those who had purchased permits for those businesses that 5
had purchased permits or for everybody in the Cal Ave. Business District and I think either way 6
that could be overwhelming to the residential streets and might really result in the streets 7
being really fully parked all the time. And without having it distributed the close in streets to 8
Cal, closer into Cal Ave. would really be parked fully all the time and I worry that that would 9
also displace people from the retail establishments. Especially at lunchtime it's very hard for 10
people to find parking spots to go to all the restaurants on Cal Ave. 11
12
I also I appreciate the reason for including El Camino on the eastside for this, but I do think that 13
any of the businesses, the blocks that are in the parking district have already paid into the 14
parking district and should be fully parked so I'm not sure why they should be included. And 15
lastly I am concerned in staff report it said with regards to an annual reduction it was decided 16
that that wouldn't be appropriate here because it was different than Downtown because there 17
was not an in place TMA or TDM. This is very puzzling to me. I think we all know that the Cal 18
Ave. business area has been identified as place ripe for densification and the reason is because 19
it's close to fixed transit. This staff report and there's Pedestrian and Transit Oriented 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 (PTOD), even the new ADU exemption area, also the rail corridor study, all of 1
these have wanted to pile density in that area so it was surprising to me that the staff report 2
would describe the train service there as not robust and it to be under served by express buses. 3
Thank you. And please do what the residents need. 4
5
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. Wolfgang Dreger and then Christopher Joy. 6
7
Wolfgang Dreger: Good evening. I am Wolfgang Dreger and I live in the neighborhood of 8
Evergreen Park for about 15 years now. I urge the Commission to adopt this resolution for the 9
moment as is, but I would also encourage a few modifications. First, I hope the clarification 10
from tonight is correct that every resident actually does get one free parking permit because 11
this is what we when we as a group worked with the City to work out this resolution also 12
communicated to the rest of the neighborhood. So it's a little bit astonishing that tonight I 13
come in and saw this on the piece of paper that suddenly there's no more single residential 14
permit, but as you clarified and I hope that's true that's not the case. 15
16
I encourage also a phase out over five years simply because we are a residential neighborhood. 17
There's as the previous speakers have already indicated we are a residential neighborhood. We 18
do not invade into the commercial part and so we hope and expect the same to happen the 19
other way around. And there's a new garage going up right next to the planned police building 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 with a net increase of 150 spots for an investment of a couple million dollars the City's 1
always talking about height limits and things like that. Why can't you please build a garage with 2
a few more net additional spots and this would make a huge impact especially for Mayfield the 3
smaller part of this RPP and of course also for Evergreen Park. So please make sure that when 4
you build a new parking garage in the area that it's really efficient and effective and serves a 5
purpose and it's not just there to say oh we built anyway a garage. 6
7
There's a lot of concern about the El Camino businesses. They do have their parking lots on 8
their premises. So they have already ample parking available for their staff and for their 9
employees and also for of course for the customers. In addition when you look from El Camino 10
towards Ash they are these cut off barriers, Oxford, Leland, and Park and half of that is [any 11
already] outside of the permit parking program boundaries. And that's anyway free parking in 12
addition for them so they're pretty well served in my opinion. 13
14
Another thing is the 8:00 to 5:00 limit. We definitely want to urge you to consider 6:00 to 7:00 15
p.m. because as people already did the math it's essentially 8:00 to 5:00 anyway. And when it's 16
just a single shift ok then please add one hour and do it from 9:00 to 7:00, but it's really against 17
these day parkers from startups. This is the main influx of people and we as a neighborhood we 18
never ever have anything against small businesses like well appreciated dentists, cobblers, 19
bakeries, etcetera. And they don't cause the problem. It's the startups and their employees 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 you can see when people park there for a whole day or longer when they come back they 1
have all their laptops. These are not hard working dentists. Thank you, good night. 2
3
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. Last card I have is Christopher Joy. 4
5
Christopher Joy: Thank you and I'd like to echo that man's comments that it's not the dentists 6
that are that caused this problem. I mean it’s like the number of us have been shrinking and 7
I've been in practice for 35years at 668 Homer Avenue and the people from the church up the 8
street used to park in my lot on Sundays and I didn't mind and people at night would use my lot 9
as well, but now as you raise the value of the parking we have it posted now you get towed if 10
you park in the lot and such. So I like my neighbors, I want to be a good neighbor, but I also 11
have a staff that can’t afford to live here and they commute from Hayward, San Jose, they're 12
women, they've been with me for 20 years. I've watched them raise their families and for them 13
it's just not possible to like walk long distances and things, take community and take public 14
transportation if you're going to get home and have any life with your family. So again it's not 15
an all or nothing as it relates to residents and businesses and I urge you to consider that when 16
you make your deliberations. Thanks. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Ok, what I would like to do tonight is ask my Commissioners to discuss the… 19
discuss this issue with one round of sort of comments. I'm going to start on this side and 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.
this way if that's alright. And what I would love to hear are specific areas... I, please take time 1
to ask staff questions if you have questions, but as you're making your comments it would be 2
very helpful if we had some specific areas identified where you think there are opportunities for 3
improvement or if not then be concise. Ok, Commissioner Rosenblum why don’t you kick us 4
off? 5
6
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, first thanks to staff for preparing this and thanks for so many 7
residents for coming out and voicing concerns and engaging in this process. The way I look at 8
this there's a structure that we're going through. We're looking at the boundaries, we're 9
looking at the cost, the time for enforcement, and whether or not certain businesses should be 10
included over others, and what should the costs for both residents and service workers or 11
employees be and the number of permits given out. Before going into the areas I'm 12
comfortable with or uncomfortable with I wanted to understand more about your learnings 13
from the Downtown RPP and particular the way I think about this is a balancing act. 14
15
Later this evening we're going to talking about retail preservation and specifically ground floor 16
protection. And it's supposedly so that we all love retail and we're trying to make this town 17
have vibrant retail, but we talk to any retailer and you say what is difficult about being a retailer 18
in Palo Alto the first thing that comes up is employees. It's hard to attract them. They come 19
from far away. We have to pay them a lot. They leave because it's very difficult to commute 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.
this long distance for again probably not very high wages. And this is harder for employees 1
probably to park and so we're trying to find a balancing act between something that makes the 2
neighborhood special. I live Downtown and I live Downtown so I can live within walking 3
distance of these places, but I also recognize that it's probably harder for me to park than when 4
I lived much farther away. 5
6
So my question for staff is based on the learnings that you've had for the downtown RPP there 7
was already information there about the proportion of permits that were being used on daily 8
basis and I want to make sure I understand this correctly. There are people the residents that 9
came that said 250 permits given out for employees. We will have 250 people parking in our 10
neighborhood on a daily basis. It seemed from the Downtown experience that you get 30 to 40 11
percent on a daily basis that are parking in the neighborhood so if 230 or 250 permits are issued 12
you’d expect to get 30 percent of them on a daily basis in the neighborhood. Is that, is… am I 13
understanding that correctly? 14
15
Mr. Mello: So we've conducted regular occupancy counts throughout the life of the Downtown 16
RPP Phase 1 and Phase 2 programs. Before our recent count on December 1st we were finding 17
about 30 to 40 percent of annual employee permit holders would show up during the midday 18
on an average weekday. And the midday is the busiest period so you could say that's the peak. 19
We just did a count on December 1st and we actually found that only 20 percent 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.
employee annual permit holders were actually parked on street, so 420 out of roughly 1,900 1
permits that have been sold. 2
3
Commissioner Rosenblum: Ok, so you’d expect about 80 to 90 of the 250 or so permits that [are 4
capped] to be on a daily basis (interrupted) 5
6
Mr. Mello: Yeah the number that we used in the staff report was we assume 35 percent which 7
is ninety permit holders. Now there would also be two hour parkers, visitors of households, 8
contractors, as well as a small number of daily employee daily permit parkers. 9
10
Commissioner Rosenblum: And what is the learnings been if anything from the Downtown 11
employers particularly those service businesses? So a gentleman just said for we don't want to 12
hurt the cobbler's, the dentists, I assume like small restaurants, etcetera. So those that were 13
truly concerned about their low income employees in particular have you had feedback from 14
those businesses Downtown if this has had any effect on employee retention, on their ability to 15
run a business? 16
17
Mr. Mello: I mean I've we've held several employer workshops when the permit sales were all 18
out we held one for Phase 2 and we get ongoing feedback. I mean some of the big takeaways 19
for me have been that a lot of the employers are actually stepping up and purchasing permits 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.
for their employees. There's a couple of large businesses Downtown that have done that. I 1
think we struggle a little bit educating some of the small businesses about the RPP program and 2
the options for employee permits. Generally the employer workshop that we put on most 3
recently was fairly the positive the feedback it was more about questions. I didn't hear a lot of 4
negative feedback. 5
6
I think one of the things that employers have struggled with is the low income permits are only 7
available for employees. The employers cannot purchase low income permits, they have to 8
purchase the full price permits. So that it's a little bit difficult. A lot of the low income 9
employees English may be their second language or they may not be as computer savvy so they 10
have some of the employers have actually had to set up accounts for their employees and then 11
buy their permit through the website on site at the business. 12
13
Commissioner Rosenblum: So I'm just trying to just trying to summarize it had there has not 14
been any outcry. There's been more questions, confusion, some issues with implementation, 15
but not really an outcry from the business community around this makes it hard to retain 16
employees, etcetera? 17
18
Mr. Mello: So we reached the permit cap about a month and a half ago Downtown and we're 19
starting to hear some concerns from some employers Downtown, some new businesses 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.
assumed that permits would be available and we're at the permit cap right now. 1
2
Commissioner Rosenblum: I see. 3
4
Mr. Mello: So we have recently heard a little bit of a concern. 5
6
Commissioner Rosenblum: And one final question now that you're actually selling permits for 7
businesses Downtown what has the mix been? So we just heard from a gentleman these are 8
tech workers that are coming in. This, these are not the local restaurants, for example. Has 9
there been any learnings about the mix of types of businesses that are parking in the 10
neighborhood? 11
12
Mr. Mello: I don't have those numbers on hand. I do know that the low income permits were 13
fairly popular. They represented a fairly significant portion of the total employee permits sold. 14
15
Commissioner Rosenblum: Ok. 16
17
Mr. Mello: But I don't have a breakdown by business type. 18
19
Commissioner Rosenblum: Thank you. Those are my questions for now. 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 Tanaka: And thank you also putting this together and thank you everyone for 2
coming out. I think this is a very important program. So I want to ask staff some questions 3
around the survey. So how do these results compared to the results that we saw for 4
Downtown or College Terrace in terms of buy in? 5
6
Mr. Mello: So both of those programs were implemented before I joined the City. My 7
understanding with Downtown is that it was under the threshold initially of 50 percent and they 8
actually had to reduce the RPP district boundary, the area, and then resurvey in order to get 9
above that 50 percent threshold. So I think the Downtown one was not as decisive as this 10
survey was the first go around. 11
12
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. 13
14
Mr. Mello: College Terrace I'm not familiar with the results of the survey for that. 15
16
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. Ok and [unintelligible] in terms of response rate. 17
18
Mr. Mello: I mean I would hazard to guess I… I'm not a statistician so I'm not sure what a typical 19
response rate is for a mail survey. I think if folks were very concerned about the 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.
they'd probably take the time to complete the survey and mail it in. I think non‐responses are 1
probably units that were vacant or people that were out of town or folks that were not 2
interested one way or the other how the program was implemented or not. So I don't 3
necessarily know that. We didn't get a lot back so we didn't have a lot of mail errors. We did 4
have a couple for some of the larger apartment buildings (interrupted) 5
6
Commissioner Tanaka: But do you know, do you know what the response (interrupted) 7
8
Mr. Mello: And we resent those. 9
10
Commissioner Tanaka: Do you know what the response rate was for this versus Downtown? 11
12
Mr. Mello: I don't. 13
14
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok, and then is this program cost neutral? 15
16
Mr. Mello: No. 17
18
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. How about the other programs? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Mr. Mello: No, none of the parking programs are cost neutral. 1
2
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. How much is it going to cost the City. 3
4
Mr. Mello: I think we estimated about $250,000 to $300,000 per RPP per year. 5
6
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. 7
8
Mr. Mello: But we're going to bring numbers to Council. We have to decide on the boundaries, 9
hours of enforcement before we can put together a package of costs. 10
11
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok, so in terms of enforcement what is the current enforcement in let’s 12
say College Terrace versus Downtown versus what you’re proposing here. 13
14
Mr. Mello: I'm sorry, could you repeat the question? 15
16
Commissioner Tanaka: So what I'm trying to do is I’m trying to get a comparison between the 17
different RPPs. So what is enforcement in College Terrace in terms of number of days/hours 18
versus Downtown versus what you’re proposing here? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Mr. Mello: So I don't know what the enforcement hours are for College Terrace that's not 1
underneath the citywide RPP ordinance. That was actually created before so it didn't go 2
through the same type of stakeholder process that's outlined in the citywide ordinance. 3
Downtown is from 8:00 to 5:00 and that's based on (interrupted) 4
5
Commissioner Tanaka: [Unintelligible] seven days a week, five days a week, what is it? 6
7
Mr. Mello: It's Monday through Friday 8:00 to 5:00 and I did want to clarify one of the 8
comments that we heard about Caltrain commuters during the public comment. The 9
enforcement begins at eight o'clock. So if someone were to arrive at 6:00 a.m. and leave their 10
car there they would be ticketed at 10:00 a.m. after the two hours elapses after the 11
enforcement begins at eight. 12
13
Commissioner Tanaka: I guess the reason why I'm asking is because I actually live in College 14
Terrace and there [unintelligible] there is the hours that we are allowed to park there, right? 15
Without a permit for more than two hours and then there's the actual enforcement in terms of 16
when do the when does the police actually go around and ticket people. And in College Terrace 17
I don’t believe it’s five days a week. I think it’s maybe like two days a week. That’s why I'm 18
asking, is it really five days a week in Downtown or not? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Mr. Mello: So Crescent Park and College Terrace are enforced by the Police Department. 1
Downtown and we would propose Evergreen Park and Mayfield as well are enforced by a 2
private contractor and they are extremely strict. They are assigned to the RPP district all day 3
long, Monday through Friday from 8:00 to 5:00. And it’s specific staff members who are 4
charged with enforcing RPP. That's why the 8:00 to 5:00 allows for one shift of workers. If we 5
were to go past 5:00 or start earlier than 8:00 there's a potential we would need to have an 6
additional shift of enforcement officers. And they're not doing other things, they're only 7
enforcing RPP. 8
9
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok because I... this is not our first RPP in the City, right? This is what, 10
our fourth? 11
12
Mr. Mello: It would be the third. 13
14
Commissioner Tanaka: The third, ok. 15
16
Mr. Mello: Crescent Park is a no overnight parking program. It's a little bit different. 17
18
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. Because I think what would be really interesting to see a 19
comparison between all the different programs, right? In terms of cost neutral, in terms 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.
how… how much in the hole is it digging the City, right? In terms of how much buy in you got 1
from the residents in terms of response rates, in terms of how many people said yes, I think in 2
terms of the types of enforcement, right? So I… because just look at this in the abstract. If this 3
was the very first program that's one thing, but this is not, right? We've done many of these 4
before and so we should learn from them and know what's effective and what's not effective. 5
And so I would expect to have that data readily available because to do that without… to make 6
these kind of decisions without having the data I think is not really learning from the past. And 7
then if you were to contrast the concerns of the businesses compared to what you saw in 8
Downtown how would you compare that? 9
10
Mr. Mello: So the Evergreen Park/Mayfield stakeholder process was much more accelerated 11
then the Downtown process. For the Downtown RPP there was actually a stakeholder group 12
there was convened and they met over a multi‐year period, I think a two year period. That 13
include business, included business representation. In the case of Evergreen Park the 14
stakeholder group was the residents who organized the petition. We had a business focus 15
group meeting and some business owners attended the two public workshops, but there was 16
not nearly as much interaction with the businesses in the Cal Ave Business District as there was 17
for the development of the Downtown RPP Program. And that's partly because we learned a 18
lot through this, the two years stakeholder process for the Downtown RPP meeting with the 19
different types of businesses, retail and office and services such as dentists and doctors’ offices. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
So I don't know if I could contrast the two, but I would say we learned a lot through the 1
Downtown stakeholder process and we were able to streamline the Evergreen Park process a 2
little bit in order to get something out there a little bit quicker. 3
4
Commissioner Tanaka: Would you characterize that you have done more outreach to the 5
businesses or you heard more from businesses in the Cal Ave. area then you did Downtown or 6
less? 7
8
Mr. Mello: Well I think [unintelligible] less just the design of the stakeholder process. It wasn't 9
intentional thing. The RPP Downtown was the first program so it was a very long and involved 10
stakeholder process with many, many more meetings than we had for the Evergreen 11
Park/Mayfield program. 12
13
Commissioner Tanaka: Because what I've heard from the attendees tonight is there's been 14
more than one person who said that the outreach wasn't very good. I heard it from maybe 15
three or four people who said the outreach wasn’t very good. And that's what I’m asking, and 16
that's [why I'm crazy] about these response rates because I'm trying to figure out is that really 17
true or not. And if you don't know what it was in other RPPs there are, their concerns may be 18
valid and maybe there wasn’t enough out reach. I don't know, but this is a it's a very important 19
program and I really think it’s important to make sure the constituents understand what’s going 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.
on and truly making sure you have buy in. And because you don't, you can't give me 1
comparative data to other programs I'm concerned about whether what I heard tonight is true 2
or not. So I mean you don't have hard data, but what’s your feel in terms of is this 3
representative of the most of the people in the area or you think that that there are some holes 4
in our outreach? 5
6
Mr. Mello: I can tell you that the Evergreen Park neighborhood was highly involved and I'm sure 7
they will agree that they were involved throughout the process. And I think they actually 8
walked around and helped notify their neighbors of the survey, the mail survey. We did not 9
mail the survey to the business district. We did send it to residential units within the businesses 10
district, but businesses do not receive (interrupted) 11
12
Commissioner Tanaka: But why not though? Why not? I mean business would be directly 13
affected, why not get their feedback as well? 14
15
Mr. Mello: The ordinance does not specify… you know it specifically calls out mail surveys being 16
sent to residential units. They’re the ultimate survey participants according to (interrupted) 17
18
Commissioner Tanaka: Well I mean we can make decisions based on the residents, but it would 19
be good to know how because the businesses are going to be severely impacted as well, right? 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
A lot of we heard several dentists here who said they’d be severely impacted because a lot of 1
their employees are female, not necessarily high paid, right? So wouldn’t it be important to 2
hear their voice as well? 3
4
Mr. Mello: Yeah we did not send mail surveys to any of the businesses and if we did we didn't 5
tally them in the final results. That's something we could look at in the future if… there may be 6
a separate mail survey for the businesses. I will say the Mayfield neighborhood was not part of 7
the original petition process. That was a decision that staff made to add that neighborhood in 8
order to prevent two things: to prevent Evergreen Park from bearing the entirety of the burden 9
of employee parking and also to anticipate spillover employee parking into the Mayfield 10
neighborhood which includes quite a few residential units. All of the residential units in the 11
entire our proposed RPP district received mail surveys or we attempted to mail employees, 12
sorry, mail surveys. There is a typical loss rate with any type of mass mailing like that, but we 13
did verify addresses. If we heard from anyone that surveys were not received we mailed those 14
back out. In one case we actually express mailed a bunch of surveys so the resident can walk 15
around to his neighbors and give them the surveys. 16
17
Commissioner Tanaka: So I know in College Terrace it was done block by block face, right? So 18
what's the thought about that in this kind of 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.
Mr. Mello: So one option is to instead of rolling the program out for the entire district from the 1
beginning you could recommend that we create eligibility areas. So for Downtown RPP we 2
created eligibility areas that were at the fringe of the district and that allows people to 3
administratively opt in to the program without having to go to Council. So it makes it a lot 4
easier to implement when they start to see employees spill over into the neighborhood. 5
6
Commissioner Tanaka: But I think you recommended that we don't do this for this program, 7
correct? 8
9
Mr. Mello: Well so if you weren't confident that there was enough input from the Mayfield 10
neighborhood one option could be to make the Mayfield area an eligibility area and not put 11
them into the program from the beginning. But we're not recommending any eligibility areas 12
as presented tonight. 13
14
Commissioner Tanaka: Sure. Because it's it has a response rate about 2 to 3x less, right? And 15
its approval rate was 60 percent. So while it's majority it's hard to know whether that's truly 16
representing everyone’s opinion. And it looks like some of the people that are parking there 17
are actually people who live there. Ok, that’s all the questions I have. Thank you. 18
19
Chair Alcheck: Alright, thank you Mr. Mello for the presentation. Did I just before I get started 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.
you said something earlier when you started and maybe I heard [unintelligible]. What did you 1
mean by you are the entirety of the… you represent the… what was that? 2
3
Mr. Mello: We currently have two vacancies and they both are in the Parking Division within 4
Transportation. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: So you are the entirety of the division? 7
8
Mr. Mello: Yes. Currently we're working quickly to get those positions filled. 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I'm going to start with the survey. Can you identify the boundary of the 11
survey for me? 12
13
Mr. Mello: Every residential unit within let me just find the map here. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Actually I'll make it really simple, is this the boundary? 16
17
Mr. Mello: No. So that the dark black line that’d shown on the map on the slide up on the 18
screen. 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: That's the boundary of the survey? 1
2
Mr. Mello: That's the boundary of the survey. Every residential unit within that boundary 3
received a survey. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: That’s what I thought. Would you mind putting this one up for me? 6
7
Mr. Mello: Sure. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so I'm doing this for all of us. Is there anybody in the audience from 10
Mariposa? Anybody live on Mariposa? How about Sequoia? I imagine not. I’m going to make 11
a quick point here. Oddly Park Boulevard seems to be very parked, right? It's the farthest 12
street on this map from Cal Ave. that's I mean I'm not including the edge of the map, but right 13
in the middle to the left if you can't see it Park Ave is parked and it struck me why would Park 14
Ave. be so heavily parked or excuse me, Park Boulevard, be so heavily parked and Park Ave. be 15
right next to it be green. Can you guys see that? If you look at Page 7 of the handout actually 16
it's a little easier to look at the page. It just struck me as odd that those two streets could co‐17
exist and be so different. It made me wonder if we apply a permitted parking program to 18
everything from Park Boulevard south. I hope that's the right direction, southeast? Southwest? 19
South. Would Sequoia Avenue essentially become a red parking area because clearly people 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 parking on Park Boulevard and not on Park Avenue because it's more convenient. This 1
could have been just that day or not. 2
3
The point of trying to make is that there is no such thing as a program that doesn't have 4
impacts that we aren’t, that we will foresee. There are going to be some unintentional 5
consequences and one of those consequences I would argue because there's randomly people 6
parking on Park Boulevard and right next to El Camino Real and I imagine there are some 7
businesses there is that because of course the nighttime is [unintelligible] different. It’s all… 8
not to sort of make the point, but the next slide shows you the exact opposite, right? So if you 9
look to the next slide Park Avenue now is red and Park Boulevard is green. Now the question 10
isn't what's going to happen to Park Boulevard and Park Avenue when you start this program 11
because both of them are within it, the question is what happens to Sequoia. 12
13
I would argue Sequoia is very likely to be heavily impacted and why do I feel very strongly about 14
that? Because when we did a residential parking program I don't know if that's the right 15
terminology in Crescent Park what we saw is that they did it block by block and it moved 16
parkers from one block to the next block to the next block to the next block and every six weeks 17
we got another street that wanted to be a part of it. It grows. Everybody gets really annoyed. 18
When you move your parking problem to their street they want to be a part of the survey. Now 19
I'm not suggesting we widen the survey because it might not work out for the people who are 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
most impacted, but it's an issue. It's an issue. 1
2
Mr. Mello: If I could Sequoia and Mariposa are in the Southgate neighborhood and we will be 3
moving forward with an RPP in that neighborhood immediately following the implementation 4
of Evergreen Park. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: I imagine the response rate in that survey will be higher as soon as you 7
implement. Look, when I read the report I thought that the response rate was pretty low. 8
Twenty percent struck me as very low which is which initially I thought maybe the survey 9
expanded to this entire area because that would that could possibly be one of the reasons why 10
this response rate was so low. The fact that the survey area was even smaller makes it a 11
concern. It is a little bit of a concern. We want as much input as possible. I don't know what it 12
means and then not only was the response rate low, but the no’s were high. I don't want to for 13
any just so we're clear here I'm not suggesting there isn't a problem. There's a problem. We 14
need to figure out how to solve it. I just thought that 104 out of 330 respondents saying no was 15
also I wouldn't I would have expected ninety percent of respondents to be concerned. So there 16
is that was also… that surprised me. I mean let me just pick your brain for a minute. Did, is that 17
what you expected? 18
19
Mr. Mello: The response rate? 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: No, that a third of respondents would oppose an RPP. 2
3
Mr. Mello: The Downtown one was very close initially. That survey had to be re‐administered 4
because there was a lack of support during the first survey and the boundaries were actually 5
shrunken order to remove the areas that had voted against. And we actually thought going into 6
this that Mayfield would have a lot less support than it actually showed in the survey and we 7
were considering how we were going to address that with the program design (interrupted) 8
9
Chair Alcheck: So then I guess I shouldn't be so surprised. You're suggesting that you actually 10
feel that the response was strong in favor of the RPP? 11
12
Mr. Mello: Yeah. I mean we are asking people to start paying for something that they now get 13
for free and I think generally across any discipline that is generally not a favored solution. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: That's a great point. Ok, so I’ll sort of opine on some of the comments and some 16
of the things that we're going to get to tonight. Hours of enforcement, there's a dramatic 17
difference between what happens at night and what happens during the day and I would I think 18
there's a question as to whether there is a dramatic difference between what happens at 9:00 19
a.m., noon, and 5:00 p.m. I imagine that anybody arguing for longer hours of enforcement 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.
believes that the problem isn't acute at noon; it's acute from 7:00 to 9:00. That said there is a 1
part of this there's a lot of things here I think we could work on, but I'm sort of loath to 2
essentially increase the cost of the program so dramatically to address enforcement hours until 3
we think we've got it right. So that's where I stand on that. I have a question about Caltrain. Is 4
the Caltrain lot typically full? 5
6
Mr. Mello: It's I mean the times I've observed it it's half to three quarters full, but we could get 7
numbers from Caltrain on what their utilization is. There's a $5 fee for daily parking there and 8
then a $55 fee for an annual pass on Caltrain. 9
10
Chair Alcheck: So I think it's safe to assume that there are Palo Alto residents not necessary in 11
this community that are driving to this Cal station [note‐Caltrain] to take it and I assume, I think 12
it's safe to assume that maybe there are individuals who are avoiding the daily cost by parking 13
in the neighborhood. If you had told, if you had said that the Caltrain lot is full then what do we 14
do with that? Because their inability to park somewhere means another car on the 101 or on 15
the 280 or somewhere else on our roads and it's just another piece of this that I think we have 16
to keep in mind. 17
18
One of the issues I think that we're going to deal with tonight is the phase out of permits. So 19
with respect to that my take is that we haven't yet reviewed the RPP Downtown which is 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
unfortunate because one of the things, I think one of the reasons why we approached the 1
implementation of the RPP Downtown as a pilot project and a phased project is because there 2
is a lot of unknowns here. We don't quite know what who's going to suffer, how they're going 3
to suffer, and every and this isn't just as simple as giving residents what they want. The issue 4
here is figuring out how we can achieve sort of the desired goals without creating a whole 5
nother [note‐not a word] set of problems that could upset people who serve our community 6
and live in our community. So I know that the City Council is supposed to review the possibility 7
of phasing out employee permits Downtown in February. I wonder if is that something that's 8
going to come to us as well? It may not and it's not the answer to that question isn't really 9
relevant for tonight, but my point is it would be interesting to have discussed that process 10
before incorporating it into an ordinance that's part of a pilot program since the last time we 11
went through this we weren't really comfortable from the outset creating a phase out. So I'll 12
just say that. 13
14
Ok so the last sort of element of this that concerns me is so there's sort of two pieces of 15
information you've provided tonight which I assume we've surprised you in the process of the 16
Downtown RPP that of the total number of permits you sold in the Downtown a far greater, a 17
far fewer number of them are being utilized on a daily basis. That I assume or it sounded like 18
you were suggesting that was something you didn't anticipate when we went through the 19
Downtown RPP. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Mr. Mello: We anticipated it, but we didn't have an exact number. I mean we're all really 2
learning in this process and that's why we've been pretty focused on implementing pilots first 3
because I think there's a learning process for not only staff, but for the community, for the 4
businesses, the residents of the neighborhood we need to figure out where that balance is and 5
you can't really design a program from the beginning that's going to work perfectly from day 6
one. 7
8
Chair Alcheck: Right. 9
10
Mr. Mello: So that's why we've learned a lot of lessons in the Downtown program that we've 11
been able to use for the development of the Evergreen Park, but we're still learning. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: So I'll give you an example of some of the information that I wish I understood 14
better from this report. For example, the number of parking permits you sold Downtown is 15
roughly… what was the number? Yeah. It wasn't clear to me if there was some formula like 16
you got to 1,900 Downtown because there are X number of what, commercial square feet or 17
whatnot? How did we get to 250 in Cal Ave.? Is how what is that relationship? One of… I’ll just 18
say before you answer, one of the questions for me going through this packet was what if that 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.
number’s wrong? What if that number’s too high or what if that number is really low? So if 1
there is that information including it in the packet or sharing with us now would be valuable. 2
3
Mr. Mello: Sure. So it's we did a similar calculation for Downtown, but I'll explain how we 4
calculated the 250 for Evergreen Park and Mayfield. Let me get to my page here. So for 5
Evergreen Park and Mayfield (interrupted) 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Wait, will you just share what page you’re on? 8
9
Mr. Mello: I’m on packet Page 18. The parking occupancy and supply and the employee parking 10
permit sections, packet Page 17 and 18. So there's a total supply within both Evergreen Park 11
and Mayfield of 1,017 on street parking spaces. And we calculate that by taking the legal curb 12
space and dividing by 22 which is the length of a typical parking space. So smaller cars you can 13
actually fit more cars so we're kind of 22 is the longest typical vehicle that would park on street, 14
passenger vehicle. So that means that there's 590… so and then we did an overnight parking 15
survey where we determined how many of those spaces were being used by residents because 16
we wanted to assume that there was a demand from the residents and we didn't want to 17
infringe on that demand because then we would start to see residents unable to find parking. 18
So what's left over after you subtract out the number of vehicles that are parked overnight was 19
592 spaces. 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. 2
3
Mr. Mello: And 250 permits we would expect 90 people to show up on a given day that 4
represents fifteen percent of the available space after you subtract the employees, I mean the 5
residents that are using the space. So that means that 85 percent of the available space is then 6
left over for contractors, two hour parkers, household visitors, service employees, anybody else 7
who may be visiting the neighborhood. So we think, we actually think that it's a fairly low 8
number of employee [unintelligible] I think they'll be significant capacity left over even with 9
those 90 employees that are parking on those 1,700 spaces. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so if the number 250 has no relationship to the number of employees down 12
there is, but it is based on what you're seeing except that in theory the 592 overnighters may 13
leave during the day and the overwhelming amount of people that are parking there during the 14
day may be… let's say, I don't know, do we have a number of how many people are parking 15
there during the day? 16
17
Mr. Mello: We do. I don't have a grand total. It's in the raw data from the surveys. It would be 18
under 1,017. 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: Right. Is it like, can you ballpark it? 1
2
Mr. Mello: It would be six… Well I mean there are some blocks that are 80 over 85 percent 3
approaching 100 percent occupancy. So there's some that are well, well below 35 percent. So 4
if I had to guess I'd say maybe 60 percent of the space so 600, 700 vehicles during the day. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: So this isn't… ok, so I just want to see sort of how. This is an example of sort of 7
trial and error. We're going to put 250 parking spaces out there and if they all go away in the 8
first three weeks then we know that number might be wrong. And to address some of the 9
concerns of the dental community which showed up in numbers tonight what happens then? 10
What happens if we implement a pilot and suddenly we have a problem with service staff in 11
this community being able to park? I mean I guess what they could do in theory is park on 12
Sequoia until the Southgate RPP occurred which is a walk, but what happens then? Are, is it 13
worth suggesting some process if the 250 mark is off? 14
15
Mr. Mello: I think you could recommend that we do some type of survey of the businesses after 16
the implementation and maybe try to ascertain whether this is creating a hardship for them. 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.
Mr. Mello: And then we could when we move to a permanent program we could bring forward 1
some recommendations based on that survey. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok. Alright. The last thing I want to mention is that if you live on new Mayfield 4
or College Ave., well hold on, let me put up the map. Let’s put up the map of the three zones. 5
Ok, so in in practice you'll have 250 permits, 125 allocated to the khaki color and 125 allocated 6
to the blue. If I were an employee and I had a permit to park in the blue my first and I worked 7
in the brown area let’s just describe it as that, as the core, Cal, then I’d want to be on College 8
Ave. And I imagine that I mean the map showed that there were individuals who wanted to 9
park on Park Boulevard in great numbers, but you get my point. We're not really doing 10
anything to help the individuals who are closer in terms of spreading out the use. 11
12
One way we did that Downtown is through subzones, right? I think a more perfect RPP here 13
might accomplish that because 125 cars could park right on College Ave. or [unintelligible] yeah, 14
College Ave. could be completely parked. And none of the residents on College Ave. could 15
benefit from the RPP, but Leland Ave. might be really great. And I don't know that that's the 16
goal of the program. I think the goal of the program is to distribute 125 cars on College Ave, on 17
Oxford Ave, on Stanford Ave, on Leland Ave, and Park Ave. If each one of those five streets had 18
to take 20 cars and we have side streets as well then there it might be easier. So there's a way 19
to do that, right? You could zone it 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.
1
So that would be one of my suggestions tonight is that we incorporate a approach where it's 2
not just blue it's a rainbow of colors and 125 permits were actually divided into 25 per rainbow 3
color. It's going to a little harder to enforce I imagine, but it's I think immediately going to I 4
don't want to ask how many people here are from College Ave. or Oxford Ave., but I imagine 5
that the response rates as you approach closer to California Avenue were higher on the survey 6
and those individuals are not going to be benefiting if 125 cars park on their street. 7
8
Mr. Mello: Just a couple points related to that. Based on our typical show rate for employee 9
permit holders we’re really looking at only about 45 employees showing up. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Right. 12
13
Mr. Mello: For each of the two zones. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: That's if our number is right though. 16
17
Mr. Mello: Yes. And then my second point would be for the Downtown RPP we had to do 18
exactly that. We created a very thin employee parking zones that radiated out from Downtown 19
and they got a little bit bigger the further from the core because we during Phase 1 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.
recognized that people were clustering along the first blocks. That creates a great deal of 1
complexity for employees who have to buy a permit that's specific to a zone and it also creates 2
some enforcement complexity. 3
4
Chair Alcheck: I’ll just sort of pose this to my fellow Commissioners. Is do we want to entertain 5
this notion or do we want to revisit that, do we want to have the pilot program be six months 6
long so that we can revisit this specific issue? Because if you know... So the last thing I want to 7
throw out there is I’d love to know whether Commissioners agree that when these permits get 8
allocated to the businesses if we were to do this rainbow program could somebody and let's say 9
the rainbow goes brown then blue then green then red and then orange, orange being the 10
farthest from Cal Ave. Is there a protection, is there a way for us to ensure that one employer 11
doesn't get stuck with orange, that there's some sort of lottery involved where you could you 12
might have one spot that's farther away, but some of your other spots… These are the things 13
that I think could drive some employers crazy is that they could suddenly get in this tertiary 14
area. So I don't, you don’t necessarily need to respond to that just now because I want to know 15
if we're even going to discuss the rainbow idea, but that's one idea that I’d love to get sort of 16
fellow Commissioner comments on. Alright, go ahead. 17
18
Mr. Mello: If I could jump in here we Commissioner Tanaka we did some research and we found 19
the response rate for the Downtown RPP survey; 4,500 households were surveyed and their 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.
response rate was thirty‐two percent and it was split about 50‐50. So then the program was 1
adjusted to a point where only the blocks that had a majority were put into the first phase of 2
the program. 3
4
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you. Alright, go ahead Commissioner Waldfogel [Note‐Vice‐Chair]. 5
6
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. I want to thank our entire Parking Department for showing 7
up today. It's a great showing. Also just want to call out to a couple of the public comments to 8
Mr. Riahi and the dentists appreciate you coming out and raising some issues that frankly I 9
wasn't aware of previously. So it's and I'll come back to that a minute and two comments Mr. 10
Schrum and Mr. [Nepamuchino] I mean the comments about corroding community and 11
anonymity decreases cooperation I think were also really telling. So they tell us something 12
about the neighborhood outlook. Also someone brought up an interesting point, could you just 13
comment about the businesses that are paid into the parking district? I'm actually not familiar 14
with what the parameters of that currently are in the Cal Ave. District. 15
16
Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney: So there is currently a parking assessment district in 17
the California Avenue area. The City issued a number of bonds years ago. Those bonds have 18
since been paid off and the bonds were used to build parking garages. The people who the 19
businesses in the area who paid into the assessment district received credit for parking spaces 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 were satisfied through the parking garages that were built with the bonds. And so those 1
current, those properties that have been previously assessed are essentially grandparented in 2
for a certain number of parking spaces that had been done in connection with that original 3
formation of the assessment district and construction of the parking garages. 4
5
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. And are we proposing that those businesses be eligible for 6
permits or that they not be eligible for permits? 7
8
Ms. Silver: I believe that they everyone would be eligible. 9
10
Mr. Mello: Yeah there's also an assessment district Downtown and those businesses are eligible 11
for the Downtown RPP permits. We're proposing a similar structure. 12
13
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Ok so we've set a precedent. Whether it's good or bad we've set a 14
precedent. Ok, great. And then just one final semi‐numerical question, I doubt we'll have an 15
answer to this, but do we just know roughly how many healthcare… dentist’s businesses, I 16
mean so how many businesses have the problem that we heard about from Mr. Riahi and the 17
dentists and do we know just order of magnitude is it 100 employees that we need to deal or 18
10? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Mr. Mello: I couldn't hazard a guess. I will tell you that we heard the same concern from 1
dentists along Middlefield Road when we implemented Phase 2 of Downtown RPP so I think it's 2
a recurring problem with the RPP programs. 3
4
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Would it be possible to ask Mr. Riahi to say something about that or? 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Do you by any chance have any information about the total number of dentists 7
that are working in this area? Would you mind coming up to the stand? I should rephrase, not 8
just dentists, dentists and your staff. 9
10
Mr. Riahi: So we did conduct a survey for the Downtown area. We haven't had a chance to 11
address these two areas yet, but for the Downtown area we have give me one second, I have to 12
pull it up. So 27 dental offices were affected by the Downtown RPP, 292 employees total; out 13
of 292 employees 276 are female and that's the number I have. And [date] between the 27 14
practices we also pooled the number of Palo Alto residents that they see as patients based on 15
their ZIP codes, 43,000 Palo Alto residents are patients in those 27 practices. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: So just clarification there 292 total potential employees, do you… and that's 18
Downtown. I mean do you just so we can appreciate this do you believe that the Downtown 19
dental practice is larger or smaller than the California Avenue dental practice? 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Mr. Riahi: I think Downtown is larger. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok. 4
5
Mr. Riahi: By what magnitude I don't know. I can come back to you with the actual numbers. 6
The problem is not us getting… we purchase, most of the dentists purchased permits for their 7
employees. That we have we've done it for the last year and a half. What scares us is a 8
reduction of this to zero as we lose parking for employees basically means we cannot stay here 9
to provide the care we need to provide. That's what scares us. Other than that we understand 10
the cost of doing business in Palo Alto and we're not against RPP. We understand the concerns 11
of the residents. That's all we, we just want to know if you guys can consider a subspecialty of 12
health care providers. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you. 15
16
Mr. Riahi: Thank you. 17
18
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you very much. I really appreciate that. So here's my thought on 19
this. I mean I think we should need to find some way to accommodate I wonder if we 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 dental offices or health care providers in the two hour districts in some fashion. 1
I mean we do have another degree of freedom here which is that we could accommodate, we 2
could create some kind of permit for essential health care workers to be in the business district 3
and to park in the business district. So I think we could solve both objectives concurrently. So 4
at least I would appreciate exploring that as a possibility. 5
6
I mean generally I support what's in front of us. I would very much like to see a five year phase 7
out. I think subzones are something that we whether we implement it today we need to be 8
pretty agile to respond if the if the fears turn out to be true. That's all I’ve got. 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Commissioner Gardias would you like to share your thoughts? 11
12
Commissioner Gardias: Sure, thank you. Thank you very much again same comment for 13
showing up in force and thank you very much for reaching out to the neighborhood. Good job. 14
15
I think there is Achilles’ heel of this report and which is basically in the week numbers. You can 16
refer, I could refer you to the discussion that we had when we were implementing initial RPPs 17
when Jessica Sullivan was here with us and we had the conversation or I had the conversation 18
with her and [concerned] that there would be something like a balance sheet provided of the 19
parking spots and the claimants to those spots. And my expectation would be that if staff 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.
comes back again with another either update or a new extension of the RPP there would be a 1
balance sheet with those numbers provided. So I wish that this was followed, but you want to? 2
3
Mr. Mello: Could you clarify what would be on that balance sheet? 4
5
Commissioner Gardias: Right, I mean you can refer to this discussion, but it's very simple, right? 6
So the balance sheets like a financial balance sheet has a left and right side debits and credits 7
which is pretty much the assets and claimants to those assets. Assets are organized or just are 8
sorted along the for liquidity and then they claimants are organized within the ownership 9
rights. So however you're going to organize it it's up to you, but I think that there should be a 10
solid count of the parking lots within either attractiveness or however you’re going to 11
categorize it and then the number of those that park currently on those available slots. That 12
will be the balance sheet before the parking program implementation. There should be 13
another one after the program is released. And then between those two there will be of course 14
number, there will be a difference between those that didn't that because of different reasons 15
are not parking there. 16
17
And so there should be a following question: what happened with those that are suddenly not 18
parking because we introduced restrictions? Where did those people go, right? So those 19
people were maybe going to the Southgate and might be going maybe there may be a spillover 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
effect to other neighborhoods, but pretty much the difference between those two will show 1
you the impact on some other areas. And there would have to be some scientific explanation 2
because there are people there maybe there are going to other neighborhoods, they may be 3
abandoning cars altogether and just using public transportation, there may be carpooling or 4
there may be taking different means of transportation and we would need to have explanation 5
for that. That would allow us to understand what’s the effect of the of the parking program. So 6
I would appreciate if for the next time if you could just, if you agree with this I think it's a 7
reasonable request, if you could just provide us the numbers in the pretty much balance sheet 8
format that would pretty much address variety of those questions like for example of the 250 9
number, where does that come from, right? So that's my main ask to you. 10
11
Mr. Mello: So that actually is a fairly complex request. We don't have a lot of those data points. 12
The closest thing we have to identifying users right now is the overnight parking survey that 13
demonstrates what the overnight demand is and we've had to infer that the overnight demand 14
represents the resident demand. We cannot tell who a vehicle belongs to when we do a 15
parking occupancy survey. We will be able to tell that once permits are issued because we'll 16
have resident permits, employee permits, and then unpermitted vehicles which are the two 17
hour parkers so we can certainly bring that kind of sheet back after the pilot is completed and 18
we have the data points and we could also put together something like after the Downtown 19
RPP. But ultimately I think we need a comprehensive parking management plan for the Cal 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.
Ave. Business District. We don't have a lot of those data points at all and a parking 1
management plan would allow us to do, delve a little bit deeper and address some of the those 2
issues. We're doing one for Downtown right now and ultimately I'd like to do a similar 3
management plan for the Cal Ave. Businesses Direct. 4
5
Commissioner Gardias: Right. I understand that you may have some reservations, but I would 6
like to encourage you. Not, we will of course not to hold you accountable for the errors, but it 7
would [at least] show that the [pop] forward how we can approach this program in a scientific 8
way. And I think that my colleagues would appreciate the count. I'm sure that Eric would like it 9
very much. But, (interrupted) 10
11
Mr. Mello: Sorry, one more point and in regard to the number 250 that's explained on Page 17 12
and 18 of the packet (interrupted) 13
14
Commissioner Gardias: Right, yes, I understand. 15
16
Mr. Mello: How that calculation was derived. 17
18
Commissioner Gardias: But if we had it in front of us, right, comprehensive set of numbers it 19
would allow us just to juggle with those numbers in a variety of ways, right, create statistics for 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
our understanding. Of course there is a number of the issues that you may or obstacles that 1
you may face on the road toward creating one, how to identify the claimant's, right, but there is 2
a number of approaches that you can take. Statistical one, as long as you provide some 3
footnotes so we can understand where the numbers are coming from at least we would have 4
the comprehensive set of numbers. So that's my ask to you, right? 5
6
There is another thing that I would like now I have a couple of scattered comments if you still 7
have a moment. So number one is that I think that there is I don't know if you've ever thought 8
about this, but I think there is opportunity to tie the employer surveys to the parking 9
applications because I know that there was a problem with enforcing or with obtaining the 10
business data because of the employee server, but if you just give a carrot and stick and you say 11
that ok well if you apply for a parking spot then you would need to fill out the survey. If you are 12
not, if the survey is not on the file you are not eligible for the parking. This would immediately 13
increase, just give you a boost to the survey program so that then just provides with the better 14
data. 15
16
So that's another comment. Couple of other small items… those are rather asks that I would 17
like you to clarify for us. How do you verify current the low income employees? 18
19
Mr. Mello: Sorry. I believe it's through a pay stub and/or a letter from the employer stating 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.
what the salary is. 1
2
Commissioner Gardias: Ok, so I'd like to just for your understanding clarify one aspect that 3
there is a difference of a parking spot although it may be negligible for employer versus 4
employee. Because for the first one it's a tax deductible expense and with the if it's a 5
corporation this is 32 percent plus 6 or 7.5 percent of California and that's pretty much tax 6
deductible. For an employee it's out of pocket, right? Unless they have a cafeteria plan that's a 7
totally different story. So I would recommend that, but that may be for our separate session 8
that this should be somehow thought through and probably also make it simpler. My 9
recommendation would be just to allow the employers to apply for the permits and then 10
distribute them within the among the office or their enterprise. It's of course not the discussion 11
for today, but it’s my recommendation. I think it would simplify the administration on your side 12
and then you would offset the burden of some administration that you currently like a 13
verification of the low income you would just pretty much impose the burden on the employers 14
as opposed to yourself, right? And that’s this comment. 15
16
And then a couple of other small items; I think that if you come to us next time it would be fair 17
and this I refer to the comments that I heard from the upcoming Council Member, 18
congratulations again Greg Tanaka, that ask about the cost neutrality. Would be nice to have 19
the set of the numbers that would just tell us what would be the cost of the parking spot if 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 RPP programs would be cost neutral, right? Because otherwise what we're doing today 1
somebody else pays for somebody else’s parking program in this neighborhood. It may be 2
other neighborhoods or it may be coming from the State, from the City income, but 3
nevertheless right it's not somebody else pretty much pays for this neighborhood eligibility for 4
the parking. 5
6
Mr. Mello: So we could probably have those numbers for the Council meeting on January 23rd. 7
So if you wanted to make a recommendation that we provide a cost structure that's revenue 8
neutral when we present to Council we could certainly do that. 9
10
Commissioner Gardias: Of course. I think it would be interesting for Council, but I'm sure that 11
we would appreciate this if you're going to come back to us with a follow up session. Thank 12
you very much. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, it's sort of always been my firm belief that perfect can be the enemy of good. 15
So what I would like to do right now is if there is support for it is I'd like to put a Motion that 16
suggests that we recommend to City Council the RPP as it's written. And what I would like to 17
do is very efficiently make suggestions on excuse me, make amendments to that 18
recommendation to improve it in the ways that this Commission sees fit. I think we can do 19
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
Mr. Mello: If I could just recommend one change to the resolution based on the confusion 2
around the free permit for households. 3
4
Chair Alcheck: Yeah. 5
6
Mr. Mello: Before you make that Motion on packet Page 25 the first paragraph, Item Number 1, 7
it should read each resident living within the Evergreen Park/Mayfield RPP may receive up to 8
three annual permit stickers as well as up to two transferable annual permit hang tags and the 9
cost is covered in Section 8 down at the bottom and it clearly says the one, one permit is free. 10
The confusion is the word purchase and the Item Number 1 should be changed to receive. 11
12
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so noted. Please make that note. And we’ll operate under that revised 13
ordinance language. I just want to set out from the beginning here this the goal here will be to 14
see if we can achieve an ordinance that we're all comfortable supporting. If through this 15
process of suggested amendments we don't get there we will still have the opportunity to vote 16
it down, but let's see if we can get it there. And what I would like to suggest is our 17
amendments can essentially follow a process where staff we ask staff to provide Council with 18
this version of a section of this and I don't know that we need to review it again. So is there 19
anybody willing to make a Motion? 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 2
3
Commissioner Rosenblum: I make a Motion to… I make a Motion to recommend to Council they 4
adopt the RPP program as written with the amendment, amended language around received 5
versus purchase of the problems. 6
7
SECOND 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I'll second that Motion and I'd like to open up the floor for any amendments. 10
11
Commissioner Rosenblum: Can I speak though to (interrupted) 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Yes you can speak to your Motion. Sorry. 14
15
Commissioner Rosenblum: So I think that I might be in the minority here. I think that actually 16
the presentation is pretty data rich. The one piece of data that I think is missing is on the 17
impact to employers in the area. We have a number of dentists here, but I don't necessarily 18
see dentists as different from restaurant owners, toys shop owners, cobblers. They have 19
people that come in for the day to work and they have customers that come in for shorter 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.
periods. So I think that there's a lot of them that have concerns and it would be good to see 1
those addressed. 2
3
Now I like the Motion or I like the ordinance as written though. And just to speak to it, first I 4
think the methodology used to determine the number of permits that would be given for 5
businesses is fairly generous. So after getting down to getting out all the residents uses down 6
to 600 that are unused to still have 85 percent be free for other uses I think is actually quite 7
conservative. Second, the phase out at this stage doesn't make a lot of sense to me. This can 8
be revisited over time as we see what happens, but right now again the businesses should 9
continue to be there given the cap that you already put for what I would consider a low ceiling. 10
I don't see that being a necessary step. 11
12
The boundary looks logical and especially I agree with Commissioner Alcheck [Note‐Chair] that 13
this problem will just get shifted the next district which also has an RPP in the works. And the 14
enforcement hours look reasonable. The case that was given around Caltrain parkers, they'll be 15
ticketed within two hours. That to me does not seem like a major enforcement problem. 16
Similarly based on your usage maps at seven o'clock map most streets are down to yellow and 17
green with still a one street red abutting the night time business of Cal Ave., but for the most 18
part the pressure has been relieved. So the enforcement hours also look reasonable to me. So 19
I make the Motion that we adopt the resolution to Council as written. 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. I won’t, I don't have much to add. I just want to reiterate one 2
comment which is that I also am convinced I think I approach this with the notion that maybe 3
the response rate was low, but I found that the information presented tonight compelling. That 4
this is not something we typically get a high response rate when you ask individuals to pay for 5
something that's going to potentially create a higher number of opposition. So I don't feel that 6
the survey itself is problematic. That's all I’m going to add because I had said that that was 7
problematic earlier and I don't feel that way anymore. I would like to open it up now if there is 8
anyone including the maker of the Motion is… has this opportunity who would like to make 9
any… I'm, we’re going to treat them as unfriendly, Unfriendly Amendments to the Motion. 10
11
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I realize that this may not need to be part of the ordinance language 12
because my understanding is the ordinance is just for the one year trial. That's all we're 13
authorizing. I would like to add some advisory language around this for the, to the Council 14
around three issues and maybe I’ll just take them one at a time. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Please. 17
18
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: The first one is to propose and I'll, I’m going to test the first five year 19
phase out, see if I get a second for a five year phase out recommendation. 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 can you clarify? 2
3
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #1 4
5
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: That we phase out employee parking over a five year period so because 6
there's no other district in town where we've permanently built nonresident parking into the 7
RPP structure. In the Downtown district we have a definitive… at least the neighborhood 8
believes we have a definitive plan with a date certain for phase out of employee use. In College 9
Terrace it's resident only. In Crescent Park it's resident overnight. So this would be unique if 10
we don't provide some direction for a phase out. So might I get a second on that? 11
12
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #1 FAILED 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Is there anybody wanting to second a five year phase out? Ok seeing none 15
[unintelligible]. 16
17
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #2 18
19
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Ok, well let me just try on a phase out that’s concurrent with 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.
Downtown, with the Downtown RPP phase out. Any second for that? 1
2
Chair Alcheck: Ok, hold on. So that's a little complicated because there isn't a phase out 3
currently in Downtown and that meeting is going to take place after (interrupted) 4
5
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Right, but when that's adopted to recommend that this RPP, that this RPP 6
receive the same consideration that Downtown RPPs receives for its phase out. That these be 7
taken together. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so let me just ask staff a quick question. Do you anticipate that this item will 10
be in front of City Council before the phase out question on the Downtown RPP will be in front 11
of City Council? 12
13
Mr. Mello: Yes. The Evergreen Park/Mayfield RPP is being considered by Council on January 14
23rd and we’re currently scheduled to present the Downtown RPP permanent program on 15
February 6th. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so the timing is problematic because they will have not actually reviewed the 18
Downtown parking phase out at before having reviewed this recommendation which is to align 19
the phase out with that one. I mean I can we can see if there's a second, but is there a way 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.
maybe we can… is there some other idea they can make this work? 1
2
Commissioner Gardias: No. I just want to clarify about our rules. Have a clarification about our 3
rules because I thought that if there is a Motion on the floor the first is Friendly Amendment 4
and then, but it looks like you are seeking for a second from whom? Are you looking 5
(interrupted) 6
7
Chair Alcheck: I’m treating (interrupted) 8
9
Commissioner Gardias: [Unintelligible] additional Motion that would replace the initial one 10
(interrupted) 11
12
Chair Alcheck: No. 13
14
Commissioner Gardias: Because I just… [Unintelligible‐crosstalk] 15
16
Chair Alcheck: No, no. 17
18
Commissioner Gardias: Amendments to the Motion that was (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.
Chair Alcheck: And we’re treating them as unfriendly; all of them. 1
2
Commissioner Gardias: I'm sorry. I don't believe that we have this right to just change the 3
rules. 4
5
Ms. Silver: You can modify the sort of the practice on voting on amendments if the Chair elects 6
to conduct it that way. 7
8
Chair Alcheck: I can, here let me just clarify. As a seconder of the Motion in order for an 9
amendment to be treated as friendly both individuals who supported the initial Motion would 10
have to accept an amendment as friendly. I am unequivocally asserting that I wouldn't accept 11
any amendments as friendly in an effort to create a process by which we can vote on each item 12
individually as opposed to waiting till the end of this process. So this way we can figure out 13
whether there is support, we can go through the process of asking if the amendment would be 14
treated friendly by the individual maker and by the seconder, but I'm going around I’m making 15
the process more efficient by suggesting we treat each amendment as unfriendly. 16
17
Commissioner Gardias: Right, I understand, but there is a possibility of created of proposing 18
substantive Motion that would receive a second and in this case it would pretty much would go 19
against the Motion that's on the floor. So (interrupted) 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: Right, there's always (interrupted) 2
3
Commissioner Gardias: And that's pretty much that wasn't clear in this process. 4
5
Mr. Lait: So Chair if I may? 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Yeah, go ahead. 8
9
Mr. Lait: So to that point that would be a Substitute Motion and if there was a Substitute 10
Motion made and a second to that then that is the Motion that's on the floor and that's the one 11
that has the… takes precedence and would be voted on and if it failed you would go back to the 12
original Motion. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: So right now we have a Motion on the table and I'm asking if there are any 15
individuals that would like to propose amendments to it. At any time someone could propose a 16
Substitute Motion which would then take precedence, but what I'm hoping is that we can work 17
within the confines of the process. 18
19
Commissioner Gardias: Right, but this wasn’t clear. So if because I in this case, right, I 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.
like to restart the process because after this clarification we know that there could be a 1
substantive Motion on the floor which was not clear in the initial proposal. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok, we don't need to restart the process because any time you can make a 4
substantive Motion, a Substitute Motion, excuse me, but right now Commissioner Waldfogel 5
[Note‐Vice‐Chair] is proposing an amendment to the Motion that's currently on the floor. As 6
soon as he's done if you'd like to make a Substitute Motion you could or if you'd like to propose 7
an amendment to the Motion you can, but we're not really out of process yet. So what I'd like 8
to continue. So what I'm proposing to you is I can, we can ask for the second if you'd like on the 9
suggestion or if there's a way that you can rephrase the language so that maybe it works with 10
the timeline I'm giving you that chance. 11
12
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Ok, I'm just looking for a language that… I’m looking for language that 13
endorses phase out as part of this process because I otherwise this would stand unique as the 14
only RPP in the City that does not have some intent of phase out. So perhaps you have some 15
thought on this so? 16
17
Mr. Mello: So the Downtown RPP pilot did also not have a phase out, but by the time the 18
Evergreen Park/Mayfield RPP comes up for a vote to make it permanent there may have been a 19
phase out established Downtown. So I think the timeline works, but we're talking a year from 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.
April 2017 when Council would be considering a phase out in the Evergreen Park/Mayfield RPP 1
program. After the pilot has elapsed when they make the program permanent that would be 2
the time. So I think you could recommend that at the time that Council makes the Evergreen 3
Park/Mayfield RPP permanent they implement a consistent phase out. I guess a phase out 4
that's consistent with what was done in the Downtown RPP. 5
6
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #2 FAILED 7
8
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Yeah, that's too far in the future for me to worry about honestly. Ok, it 9
doesn't sound like we have a lot of enthusiasm for phase out at this point or phase out 10
direction. That's unfortunate, but I just wanted that to be clear. 11
12
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #3 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I'll suggest an amendment. It's difficult for me to ascertain whether the 250 15
is an accurate number or not. That's the one issue here I'm a little uncomfortable with. I want 16
to suggest based on the experience we've had Downtown so it sounds like in Downtown it's 17
been eight months, right? 18
19
Mr. Mello: It started in September of 2015. 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, so it's been over a year. 2
3
Mr. Mello: Yes. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: It took us over a year and when did we hit the cap? 6
7
Mr. Mello: The cap was only established as part of Phase 2. So there was no cap during Phase 1 8
and we hit the cap about a month and a half ago. So Phase 2 rolled out in April 1st of 2016. 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so if the here's my suggestion, the cap wasn’t, was… if the cap if the equation 11
to determine the cap that was used Downtown was used here that same methodology and it 12
took a year to hit that cap or more to hit that number in Downtown. My question is or my 13
suggestion would be that we create a period of time where any employee application for a 14
permit would be granted without cap for let's say three months. So we would give employers 15
three months to submit applications for employee permits. Now my understanding is those 16
there are currently employee permits in the parking lots, right? 17
18
Mr. Mello: Yes. There's a separate permit that is available for purchase for the garages and 19
lots. 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: And those are priced? 2
3
Mr. Mello: The Downtown garages and lots or the Cal Ave. (interrupted) 4
5
Chair Alcheck: No, the Cal Ave. 6
7
Mr. Mello: The Cal Ave. garages and lots an annual permit is $149. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: So they’re the same price? 10
11
Mr. Mello: Yes. 12
13
SECOND, VOTE 14
15
Chair Alcheck: So my suggestion would be that… Well, ok. So I have two suggestions. I do I 16
think there is and I'll get the second one later. There should be a some differentiated pricing to 17
encourage parking in the, it would be a problem if the parking in the garages went down and 18
the parking in the streets went up. But my point is that my concern is that there will be an 19
issue and it will take a year for us to address it with dental staff or any health care staff. That'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.
my big concern. And I know that we think only 90 people will be there, but if the real number 1
of employees is 600 then 200 will be there or 220 and that is, that's my concern. And so I'm 2
inclined to my proposal is that for the first three months the program there is no cap and we 3
determine whether or not we even hit it. If we're so convinced, I’ll make the case real quick, if 4
we're so convinced the number is right like it is Downtown then we should hit the cap. This 5
would basically be a failsafe. 6
7
So that's my proposal. I would need a second. Ok, we have a second. No he I’m assuming 8
they're unfriendly. It's an Unfriendly Amendment. So I need a second for this Unfriendly 9
Amendment. Ok, so I have one. I don't need to speak to it any more. Would you like to speak 10
to the… ok. Ok, so the way this works is that we're going to vote on this amendment right now 11
and see if their support for it. So if you don’t want to speak to the suggestion then we’ll do 12
that. 13
14
Ok, all in favor of this proposed amendment say aye. Two; and all opposed? Ok, so it fails. 15
16
Any other amendments on the table? Oh sorry, I'm sorry. The light situation is a little 17
problematic. Commissioner Tanaka. 18
19
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #3 FAILED (2‐3, Commissioner Fine absent) 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 Tanaka: Ok, so largely I think this program is headed in the right direction. So I 2
do support it, but as someone that’s going to be gone to Council next year I and it’s something 3
I've told everyone here many times I actually think that we should empower the Planning and 4
Transportation Commission (PTC) more. I think that more decision making should happen here 5
so by the time it hits Council most of the loose ends are taken care of. And so my only 6
reluctance on this program is that there are some loose ends. Like we don't know the 7
financials, right? So that’s something which it means on Council we would have to [beat] the 8
financials. We don't know what the business community really thinks because we didn't look at 9
the survey. They really didn’t survey them. So that's also another loose end. 10
11
And so that's my only kind of caveat here is that I would actually like PTC especially going 12
forward to actually get a lot of these loose ends tied up so by the time it hits Council it's almost 13
like on a Consent Calendar. Now of course I’m just one of nine so there’s probably going to be 14
a lot of other opinions, but that's what I would like to see. Is like more, the stuff more fully 15
fleshed out because Councils going to be looking at a lot of other issues as well and it would be 16
good if PTC could take on this role. So that's my desire. 17
18
Now with that said I do have a few thoughts here. So first thought is and it's a really first a 19
question to staff. So we have these surveys, do we know where the surveys came from? Like 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
what street people are on, what block face? Or is it just anonymous? 1
2
Mr. Mello: We have addresses and we're currently geocoding all of those addresses by parcel. 3
4
Commissioner Tanaka: You don't have like a map that shows a percentage of yeses on block 5
faces. 6
7
Mr. Mello: We will, yes. We don't have that currently. It's taking time to geocode each survey. 8
9
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok, so here is something I would desire of staff going forward is I think 10
the PTC should have the information that Council has. So it shouldn’t be like ok we have to 11
make decisions with less information than what Council get. Because if you want the PTC to 12
actually make better decisions they need to know what's going on too, right? So that’s first my 13
desire is that we I would have liked to see the financials here and I would have liked to have 14
seen where the how the survey results are by block face by block face. 15
16
Because we don't have that we have to make some decisions kind of with missing data. I would 17
propose that Mayfield because it only has a 13 percent response rate which is about a third or 2 18
to 3x less then Evergreen Park or what we saw Downtown. And it also has a very low yes 19
response rate that that one becomes a block face by block face what was the term used? 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Mr. Mello: An eligibility area. 2
3
Commissioner Tanaka: Eligibility area, yeah. Eligibility area. And (interrupted) 4
5
Chair Alcheck: Hold on. I like where are you going. Can we make it a specific amendment and 6
then parse out the… I think you're coming up with another suggestion. 7
8
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok let's do one at a time. 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Yeah. 11
12
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #4 13
14
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok, so my amendment is that Mayfield is the eligibility area and it comes 15
in block face by block face. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Ok, does anybody need any clarification on what that means? 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 second. Would anybody like to speak to it? 4
5
Commissioner Rosenblum: I think Commissioner Tanaka already expressed it, but it is a very 6
low set of data they received back, very low response rate, low set of data. I think it should be 7
eligible for the reasons stated which is that the problem will just get shifted into their 8
neighborhood. It's important, but they don't have data to actually define the boundary 9
properly. So I support having a block face by black face surveyed eligibility. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I’m… staff I’ll let you. 12
13
Mr. Mello: Yes, for the eligibility areas in the Downtown RPP we held those permits in reserve. 14
I would assume you'd expect us to do the same for so we would hold 125 permits in reserve 15
until specific streets in Mayfield opted in and then we would release those permits. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Ok. 18
19
Commissioner Tanaka: Sorry, wait so what are you saying? So I guess what I'm saying is I’d like 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
to see the College Terrace style opt in where people if over 50 percent people like buy in. 1
2
Mr. Mello: Yes and what I’m saying is (interrupted) 3
4
Commissioner Tanaka: I see some streets there that are red at night, red [unintelligible] during 5
the day and I bet you those are residents. And those reasons may not appreciate having to pay 6
for parking suddenly. 7
8
Mr. Mello: Yes so for eligibility areas in the Downtown RPP we assigned a permit number to 9
each street based on the supply and we held those permits in reserve until that particular street 10
opted into the program. So if we were to move forward with Mayfield as an eligibility area we 11
would only release 125 permits for Zone A. And then when Zone A, Zone B opted in we would 12
release 125 permits or we would release a prorated amount based on the street that opted in. 13
14
Commissioner Tanaka: So are you saying that block face by block face gets voted in or you 15
saying the whole thing all at once? 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Hold on. Hold on a second. This is your amendment. 18
19
Commissioner Tanaka: Yeah. 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 you can decide (interrupted) 2
3
Commissioner Tanaka: What my amendment is (interrupted) 4
5
Chair Alcheck: But what we would need to provide staff is clarity. 6
7
Commissioner Tanaka: Yeah. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Because right now they have 125 permits assigned to the blue area and 125 10
assigned to the khaki area. So if we're going to treat the khaki area as a block face then 125 11
permits aren't going to be issued and only 125 are going to issue the blue. And then if for 12
example Grant Avenue decided to initiate then a third of the 125 would be available and then if 13
Grant to (interrupted) 14
15
Commissioner Tanaka: Oh. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Does that make sense? 18
19
Commissioner Tanaka: Yeah, that’s fine. 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, that’s what he’s suggesting. Ok, alright so are you comfortable voting at this 2
point? Ok great; all those in favor? 3
4
Commissioner Gardias: I just I need a clarification because I [unintelligible] if you don't mind 5
just restating this in a simple way so we can follow? Thank you. 6
7
Commissioner Tanaka: So basically what I'm proposing because of the very low response rate 8
we got from Mayfield that it's an eligibility area. And what that means is that each block face is 9
voted in with a 50 percent majority, a 50 percent higher majority or higher majority in order to 10
be in this program and that the employee permits get prorated in. The amount of employee 11
permits get prorated in according to the block face. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Would staff provide I think we have a question on the dais. 14
15
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Yeah, I'm sorry. How would that get initiated? So what would Grant 16
Avenue need to do say to opt in? I mean directionally I'm kind of neutral on this, but I’d just 17
like understand how hard it would be for Grand Avenue to be included if they need to be or 18
wanted to be. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Mr. Mello: So the way the eligibility area process works for the Downtown RPP is a street is 1
designated as an eligibility area by Council and then a street can for, you know, assemble and 2
submit a petition to the Director of Planning and Community Environment and then if the 3
petition meets the threshold of 50 percent then we send a mail survey out. And typically we 4
want a 70 percent response rate in order to admit street into the RPP. And then that can be 5
done administratively by the Director without having to go to Council. So it's a much shorter 6
process and the signs can be installed and enforcement can begin through an administrative 7
action. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok. Are there any other questions about this? 10
11
Commissioner Gardias: Yeah because I just want to understand it, right? Because it just looks 12
more riskier than it sounds. That I think that I can imagine a scenario that pretty much all 13
blocks would opt out and then suddenly from the employer perspective there is no parking area 14
in the blue and khaki zone. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: What this is saying (interrupted) 17
18
Commissioner Gardias: That's right. Ok so, but so it would take a blue zone out of that 19
employer parking eligibility fully. 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: No, no. There will be 125 permits available immediately upon implementation of 2
this RPP in the blue zone. In the khaki zone it will remain as it is today and primarily because 3
we feel, because the proposed, because the people who already spoke to the Motion feel that 4
there wasn’t enough of a response rate. If you agree with them then that amendment will take 5
place. If you don't then it won't. Essentially what will happen is Grant Avenue would have to 6
participate in a process by which they would apply to be included in the RPP if they wanted to. 7
Because the proposal of the amendment doesn't feel that there's enough information to 8
suggest that they even wanted to in the first place he wants them to go through a secondary 9
process to participate. 10
11
Commissioner Gardias: Are we talking about employer permits or just a full participation to 12
RPP? 13
14
Chair Alcheck: We're talking about the restrictions that would only allow people to park there if 15
they had a permit so essentially those streets would be unrestricted. Employees could park 16
there, anybody could (interrupted) 17
18
Commissioner Gardias: So the entire program, right? 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Chair Alcheck: Entire program. Yeah, yeah. Ok, I’m going to put this to a vote. All those in 1
favor of the proposed amendment please say aye and raise your hand. Ok that's three. All 2
those opposed? Abstentions? Ok, we have three in favor, [two and zero] nays, and one and 3
two abstentions, excuse me. Can you proceed with… 4
5
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #4 PASSED (3‐0‐2‐1, Commissioner Fine absent) 6
7
Commissioner Tanaka: Thank you. So the second one is I think that and I'm trying to think of 8
this one as amendment or something totally different, but so maybe staff you tell me. But I 9
think the PTC should see or should discuss and make a recommendation on the Downtown 10
phase out. So I'm not quite sure where that fits in, but I think that's something that the PTC 11
should do before Council sees it. 12
13
Commissioner Gardias: If I don't know what's the procedure right now, but if that is the intent 14
which was originally intent by Commissioner Waldfogel [Note‐Vice‐Chair] I would second it if 15
that's a place for, room for seconding this amendment. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: So just so before (interrupted) 18
19
Ms. Silver: I'm sorry, did you say Downtown phase out or…? 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 Tanaka: Downtown phase out. Yeah, the Downtown (interrupted) 2
3
Ms. Silver: Ok. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: Hold on. Before we get clarification I think what the proposal is: is there, do we 6
have, can our recommendation include delaying this on Council's calendar (interrupted) 7
8
Commissioner Tanaka: I’m not saying delaying it. I'm just saying that I think the Downtown 9
phase out is something that the PTC should look at and (interrupted) 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Right. So that's calendared for February 6th or something. So you in theory 12
would like this to come up after that date? 13
14
Commissioner Tanaka: No, I don't care. My main point is I think the PTC should look at look and 15
make a recommendation on the phase out in Downtown before a Council sees it. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Yeah that… Ok. 18
19
Ms. Silver: So that is, that's not really agendized for this meeting. 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 Tanaka: Ok, ok. So then we’ll... 2
3
Chair Alcheck: We don't currently have a phase out on the program. 4
5
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok, that’s fine. Ok. 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Ok. 8
9
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #5 10
11
Commissioner Tanaka: So the next one here is I like the idea, I forgot who made the 12
recommendation, but I like the idea of the permits, employee permits being distributed among 13
employers, to them rather than to the employees directly. So I forgot who made the 14
recommendation? But yeah, Commissioner Gardias, a great idea; so I'd like to propose it as an 15
amendment. 16
17
SECOND 18
19
Commissioner Gardias: 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
Chair Alcheck: Can I just ask a point of clarification? What happens if an employer, if a small 2
business owner who doesn't appreciate the process or is uninformed doesn't get a permit and 3
their employee needs one… would, would it, are you suggesting that that employer, that 4
employee has to just deal with their boss. I mean I'm just curious. Could an employee 5
purchase a permit or? 6
7
Commissioner Tanaka: Actually I’d like to ask Commissioner Gardias. This was his idea. What 8
would you recommend? 9
10
Commissioner Gardias: Well, I would just shift the burden to the employers. That's the premise 11
and just offloaded from our duties. That's number one and that would their headache, not 12
ours. And I think that the same question you may ask what happens if the employee is not 13
informed, right, and doesn't apply for a parking permit. So I think that employers they have 14
more understanding of their business. There would have to be some sort of appropriate 15
proportional assignment of the parking slots to those employers that participate in the survey 16
and are eligible for this parking program and they would apply and they would receive them. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Ok. Any questions about this? Alright then lets (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.
Mr. Lait: Well I'm sorry, we’re… we didn’t hear the Motion or the amendment. 1
2
Chair Alcheck: The current amendment is that this program, correct me if I’m wrong, but I 3
believe the current amendment is that this that the purchasing of the employee the permits for 4
employees be made available only to employers as opposed to employees. That is that current, 5
would staff like to comment on this? 6
7
Mr. Mello: Yeah I have a couple comments on this. First during the development of the 8
Downtown RPP there was a concern that some of the larger businesses would purchase 9
employee permits wholesale and that the benefits of the permits would not be seen by some of 10
the service workers at restaurants and smaller businesses. So I think that's where in the 11
Downtown RPP that's why there are some restrictions around who can purchase employee 12
permits. Also the majority of the employee permits are stickers, decals that are affixed to a 13
vehicle for the entire annual, the entire year that the permit is valid. If employers were to 14
purchase these they would only be able to distribute them to one employee and then they 15
would have to cancel it when that employee left. 16
17
An alternative is the hang tags and during our business focus group meeting we actually had 18
quite a few business owners request the ability to purchase hang tags that they could give to 19
employees because some of their employees only work there for three months, six months, 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.
an annual permit doesn't make sense. So if they had a permit that they could give to their 1
employee when they arrive for work and then take back, but however Downtown there was a 2
lot of resistance to that because there were concerns about fraud between employees trading 3
them, employees trading permits or selling permits. There was also concerned that again that 4
the large businesses would dominate the employee permits and purchase the bulk of them and 5
also abuse the hang tags. So there is some tradeoffs. 6
7
Administering that would also be difficult because currently as written there is a preference for 8
garage waitlist. People on the garage wait list as well as low income employees and our intent 9
was to have a an early release of permits for low income employees and then follow that with a 10
release period for garage and lot wait list holders and then open up the permits to all 11
applicants. So if employers were only, the only ones eligible to purchase the employee permits 12
some of those elements would need to change. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so I'm just going to push it to you real quick, do you want to revise your? 15
16
Commissioner Tanaka: Yeah actually I do. So this thing is more complicated than I thought. So I 17
think there's a couple things. So on one hand the problem with giving the permits to 18
employees especially employees that work in retail or some area where there is a lot of 19
turnover is you have these permits locked up by people who probably don't work 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.
anymore after three months or six months. So you have this turn problem. On the other hand 1
you have all this administrative stuff which I don't know about so that's actually a good point. 2
Do you have an idea of how to make this work so that it's employer driven? Because employers 3
[unintelligible] the three to six months turn that you get with retail employees, but what's a 4
way where we can handle this because I've heard this concern not just from Commissioner 5
Gardias, but I heard from other businesses of having this issue where the permits get eaten up 6
by transient employees who only work for three months. 7
8
Mr. Mello: Yeah. 9
10
Commissioner Tanaka: And so that is actually a real problem. So how do we handle that? So I 11
think I have a couple of ideas. One is to have a shorter permit period so maybe have a three 12
month permit or a six month permit and then they would be released quicker back into 13
circulation. Another is to allow employers to purchase a certain number of hang tags. So let's 14
assume the average small business has five employees. Maybe we allow a business to purchase 15
up to five transferable employee tags and they could be given to on Monday Employee X works, 16
on Tuesday Employee Y works. They could use, share a permit and then when that employee 17
leaves the employer would be able to take that permanent back and give it to a new employee. 18
19
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. I actually like both those ideas, but I maybe before we make a full 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 maybe it’s worth a discussion. 1
2
Chair Alcheck: Yeah. So let me ask a quick clarifying question. Is it safe for us to assume that 3
you are going to implement the all of the current processes for the Downtown RPP in this 4
program? So for example is there going to be a low income like the for example you specifically 5
said that low income permits were released a little earlier than permits to employers. Is that 6
same process going to be followed? 7
8
Mr. Mello: So Downtown has no priority. All the permits are released first come first serve. 9
There are low income permits available, but those are the same permits. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: So what were you saying? I just what I'm trying to do is I'm trying to figure out if 12
(interrupted) 13
14
Mr. Mello: The resolution that's before you this evening for the Evergreen Park/Mayfield RPP 15
includes a preference for low income employees as well as people that are already on the 16
garage and lot wait list. 17
18
Chair Alcheck: Got it. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Mr. Mello: And the way we were going to do that was to have specific release periods for each 1
of those constituencies. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: So I sort of see there's two options here. You can make an amendment that 4
suggests… that the… it’s any amendment. You can make any amendment, but you seem I'm 5
hearing from you that you're interested in potentially different time periods. That's one thing 6
and also not exactly sure where we are with the proposal about who gets to buy them. So what 7
I would really like to do is have you restate an amendment and then if there is something you'd 8
like staff to prepare for Council or to provide more information we can do that. I don't know if 9
we want to open the discussion up at this time or how they implement the time period. I think 10
if there is support for that we can just move forward with that. 11
12
Commissioner Tanaka: Ok, well it's actually not originally my idea. It's actually Commissioner 13
Gardias. So I’d like to get Commissioner Gardias’ (interrupted) 14
15
Chair Alcheck: How about this, how about you withdraw your amendment and if he wants to 16
make it he can make it. 17
18
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #5 WITHDRAWN 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 Tanaka: Ok, sure. 1
2
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so is there anybody that would like to make an amendment? 3
4
Commissioner Gardias: No. I just I think that it's not about the amendment it's just about the 5
future. I think that my understanding is that we're going to I mean first of all I appreciate a 6
Council Member just proposing this Motion [note‐Unfriendly Amendment], but I think that 7
we're going to come back to this discussion in the future. There's a number of the observations 8
and good ideas that we can have and from my perspective I'm not really hard on this just to 9
introduce it now because it's a little bit outside of the topic for this discussion, but I would 10
appreciate if review of the RPP would be put on our agenda in February or in March where we 11
would just review all this ideas comprehensively. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Ok let’s make a clarification here. Is the RPP is do we need to include language 14
here that the RPP, we recommend that the RPP come back to us at its one year anniversary. 15
Because I'm asking this because I know that the phase out is going to City Council. We've talked 16
about that for the Downtown and it's not coming to us currently. So if that's something we 17
wanted would we need to recommend that? Right? 18
19
Mr. Mello: Yeah, we would pass it along the Council. 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. So would you like to recommend, would you like to propose that our 2
recommendation include a recommendation that we get to review it in one year as well? 3
4
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #6 5
6
Commissioner Gardias: I think it's understood per se, isn't it? No? Then just I would just add it 7
as an amendment that (interrupted) 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok. Can get a second? 10
11
Commissioner Gardias: One year after implementation. 12
13
SECOND, VOTE 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Second? Ok. I don't think we need to, do you want to speak to it? Good. Alright 16
so all those in favor of recommend, amending the current Motion to include a recommendation 17
that we review this in one on the anniversary date of its implementation please say aye and 18
raise your hand. That's unanimous. 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.
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #6 PASSED (5‐0‐1, Commissioner Fine absent) 1
2
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #7 3
4
Chair Alcheck: Ok, are there any other amendments? I'll propose one. I propose that staff 5
present to City Council a what I'm going to call it the rainbow zone, a rainbow of zones. 6
Subzone, sorry. I would like to propose that we amend the ordinance so that the employee 7
parking Zone A be broken up into subzones and the permits be distributed so that we have a 8
better distribution of permits. So would anybody like to second that? 9
10
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I would like to have a way to respond if it’s a problem, but I don’t know 11
that I want to dictate it that it has to happen now. 12
13
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #7 FAILED 14
15
Chair Alcheck: I see no seconds. How about this? Well, let me ask staff if it's a problem is there 16
a process? 17
18
Mr. Mello: We could come back with a resolution at any point in time that would supersede the 19
resolution that create created the RPP. 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: How would that… there doesn't seem to be support for this idea. So I'm going to 2
leave it and if somebody else wants to make a suggestion they can. 3
4
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Well so what would that look like? I mean how would we determine if 5
let's say it turns out all it's all cuts all the parking is concentrated on College Ave. how long 6
would it take for us to turn around some kind of subzone proposal? 7
8
Mr. Mello: So the permits would be sold by zone. So somebody would have an A on their 9
permit. We would have to make that change when the permit expired. We couldn't change 10
midstream because somebody is expecting to be able to park in Zone A for a year or six months 11
or whatever the period is. So it would probably have to happen after the year when the 12
permits expire. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok. I want to do this, why don’t you, I’ve already pulled it. You want to put it 15
back in? 16
17
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #8 18
19
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Yeah so I’ll put it back in recommending the creation of subzones. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
SECOND 2
3
Chair Alcheck: I'll second that. I don't need to speak to it. 4
5
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Nah, we’ve said enough. 6
7
VOTE 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok. All those in favor of Council reviewing a subzone map please say aye and 10
raise your hand; we have three ayes. All those opposed? Two. Ok. Typically when a Motion 11
passes and there’s opposition would like to speak to your opposition? Go ahead. 12
13
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #8 PASSED (3‐2‐0‐1, Commissioner Fine absent) 14
15
Commissioner Rosenblum: When you create subs zones you hurt liquidity of the whole system. 16
I think it becomes incredibly complex and so I think you're creating a system that will be 17
complex, illiquid, difficult for residents and service workers and everyone. I just think it'll be 18
difficult to administer. So again, I live in Downtown North. I’m part of this district. I've seen it 19
in operation now for over a year. I just can't imagine having Downtown North A, B, C, D 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.
through F and we all have to park in our individual little zone. So. 1
2
Chair Alcheck: Ok. I think Council will appreciate that information. Do you have, want to speak 3
to your opposition? 4
5
Commissioner Gardias: I had exactly the same thoughts and the system some sort of liquidity 6
and with creating subzone it just becomes rigid and it's hard to administer. Thank you. 7
8
Chair Alcheck: Ok. Ok, are there any other amendments to the Motion, to the proposed 9
Motion? Going once? Ok, I see… oh, I see one. Go ahead. 10
11
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #9 12
13
Commissioner Gardias: So I'd like to propose a Motion to phase out the commercial parking for 14
within the five years starting with the time of the implement [unintelligible] implementation. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Ok just for clarification can I treat it as an amendment? 17
18
Commissioner Gardias: Well, I’m not sure what the rules are. I mean you can either treat it as 19
an amendment if you or if not it would become such tentative Motion. 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, I’m going to treat it as an Unfriendly Amendment to amend the current 2
Motion. 3
4
Commissioner Gardias: Five years of the commercial parking phase out starting with the time of 5
implementation, of the pilot implementation. 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Can I get a second? 8
9
SECOND 10
11
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I’ll second. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Would you like to speak to your second? 14
15
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I support this. I would like to find a way to accommodate some of the 16
special cases like the health care in this situation, but I think that it's important for the 17
neighborhood that we declare that the neighborhoods are not business district parking 18
districts. 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: Does anybody need any clarity on what's being proposed? 1
2
Commissioner Tanaka: Didn’t we already just talk about this? I don't understand like… 3
4
VOTE 5
6
Chair Alcheck: It’s an amendment on the floor. I'm going to put it to a vote. All those in favor 7
of amending the current Motion to include a five year phase out beginning on the day of 8
implementation of the employee parking permits please say aye and raise your hand. That's 9
two. All those opposed? Ok, that's three. So that fails. I'm seeing no other amendments on 10
the table. So I'd like to put the current Motion as amended… 11
12
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #9 FAILED (2‐3‐0‐1, Commissioner Fine absent) 13
14
Mr. Lait: And just so we're, there’s perfect clarity (interrupted) 15
16
Chair Alcheck: I would like you to clarify. 17
18
Mr. Lait: Thank you. I’ll summarize a little bit, but it's a Motion to move the staff report, the 19
resolution contained in the staff report changing in Section 4b1 the word “purchase” 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.
“receive” with the following amendments: that the Mayfield neighborhood be able to identify it 1
as an eligibility area and allow each block face to opt in with a petition to the Director, and 2
employee permits being issued on a prorated basis, and the only other amendment is that the 3
employee parking Zone A be divided into subzones. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: No. No, no subzones failed. No! Subzones passed. Commissioner Tanaka, 6
myself, and Waldfogel supported it. Quick point of clarification on the block face amendment 7
how soon could a block face participate in that process? Could they do it before 8
implementation begins? 9
10
Mr. Mello: If we created an eligibility area how soon could they petition to join the RPP? 11
12
Chair Alcheck: Yes. 13
14
Mr. Mello: They would have to wait till after the resolution was adopted by Council and took 15
effect. Are resolutions 30 days from adoption or immediate? So immediately after the 16
resolution was adopted by Council they could petition the Director of Planning and Community 17
Environment to join the RPP. 18
19
Chair Alcheck: Ok. That's all I just wanted to clarify that any case members of the community 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.
wanted to understand that process. 1
2
Mr. Lait: There were there was one other amendment and that was for the PTC to request the 3
City Council that the PTC have a review in the in one year. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: The participate in the review of the pilot? 6
7
Mr. Lait: Yes 8
9
VOTE 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Ok, I'd like to put this Motion as amended to a vote. All those in favor of this 12
recommendation please say yes and raise your hand. Ok, great. It’s unanimous. I’m going to 13
stop asking for yes. I'd like to make just a quick recommendation when you take this to Council 14
with respect to these amendments for example, the block face amendment, I think it would be 15
very helpful if for the community to understand how that process would work as Council’s 16
reviewing it. And if there are other sort of idiosyncrasies about what we recommended just 17
walking the community through those in that staff report. Alright, I’d like to take a two minute 18
break. No, five minute break and then we'll start on Item Number 4. 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 PASSED (5‐0‐0‐1, Commissioner Fine absent) 1
2
Commission Action: Recommend to Council adoption of the staff proposed Resolution 3
as written with the amended language to modify Section 4 B 1 replace "purchase" with 4
"receive". Motion made by Commissioner Rosenblum, seconded by Chair Alcheck. The 5
motion was APPROVED 5‐0. 6
7
Amended Motion: 8
A. Recommend to the City Council that the employee parking be phased out in 5 9
years, motion made by Vice‐chair Waldfogel; motion FAILED due to lack of 10
second. 11
B. Recommend to the City Council that the employee parking be phased out in a 12
manner consistent with the Downtown parking program. Motion made by Vice‐13
chair Waldfogel; motion FAILED due to lack of second. 14
C. Recommend amending the Resolution that for the first 3 months of the program 15
there be no cap. Motion made by Chair Alcheck, seconded by Commissioner 16
Tanaka; motion FAILED 2‐3 Commissioner Rosenblum, Gardias and Waldfogel 17
against. 18
D. Amend the Resolution to allow Mayfield as an eligibility area and allow each 19
block face to opt in with a petition to the Director of PCE ‐ Employee permits 20
would be issued on a prorated basis [Petition requires 50% of the owners 21
supporting inclusion, followed by a city‐initiated survey and 70% or better 22
response rate to allow incorporation]. Motion made by Commissioner Tanaka, 23
seconded by Commissioner Rosenblum, motion APRPOVED 3‐0‐2 ( Vice‐chair 24
Waldfogel and Commissioner Gardias abstained. 25
E. Amend the Resolution allow the employer purchase permits instead of the 26
employee. Motion made by Commissioner Tanaka, seconded by Commissioner 27
Gardias, MOTION WITHDRAWN. 28
F. Recommend to the City Council that the Planning and Transportation 29
Commission review the RPP in one year. Motion made by Commisioner Gardias, 30
seconded by Commissioner Rosenblum, motion APPROVED 5‐0. 31
G. Amend the Resolution to divide Employee Parking Zone A into subzones Motion 32
made by Chair Alcheck, motion FAILED due to a lack of a second. 33
H. Amend the Resolution to divide Employee Parking Zone A into subzones. Motion 34
made by Vice‐chair Waldfogel, seconded by Chair Alcheck, motion is APPROVED 35
3‐2 Commissioner Gardias and Rosenblum AGAINST) 36
_______________________
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. Recommend to the City Council that the employee parking be phased out in 5 1
years starting with the time of Pilot Program implementation. Motion made by 2
Commissoner Garidas, seconded by Vice‐chair Waldfogel motion FAILS 3‐2 3
Commisioners Tanaka, Rosenblum and Chair Alcheck AGAINST. 4
5
The Commission took a break. 6
7
4. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code 8
(PAMC) Title 18 (Zoning), Chapters 18.04 (Definitions), 18.30(F) ((Automobile 9
Dealership (AD) Combining District Regulations)), 18.52 (Parking and Loading 10
Requirements), and 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards) Adding Sections 11
18.40.160 (Replacement Project Required), 18.40.170 (Deferral of Director’s Action), 12
and 18.42.140 (Housing Inventory Sites Small Lot Consolidation) and Repealing 13
Chapter 10.70 (Trip Reduction and Travel Demand). The Proposed Ordinance is 14
Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Sections 15
15061(b)(3). 16
17
[Note‐out of order, took Number 5 first (below)] 18
19
Chair Alcheck: It is 10:00. What I would like to do is see how much we can get through of this 20
item, Item Number 4. I’m wondering if are we comfortable setting a time limit of 10:30? Ok. 21
22
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Well what do we have to get done on this today? Is there anything we 23
have to get done today? 24
25
Chair Alcheck: I'm going to suggest that we just get let staff make their presentation and then 26
we can begin and we'll see how we're doing and if there's a concern we can sort of bifurcate. 27
Staff if you would? 28
_______________________
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
Jonathan Lait, Assistant Director: So due to the time and the Commission's interest we're going 2
to be have a we’re going to breeze through this presentation because we'd rather hear your 3
comments. Ok. 4
5
Woman staffer: Ok. Good evening, Commissioners. So basically tonight I'm going to review the 6
proposals that were the proposed amendments that were brought forward to you last month 7
on the November 9th study session. We've got some objectives that we talked about before 8
addressing state law, Housing Element implementation, updating the code for text changes and 9
such, and so forth. And these changes are related to our Affordable Housing Code, our 10
entitlement review process, our off‐street loading requirements, and our Transportation 11
Demand Management (TDM) plan. And we're adding a new topic tonight and that is related to 12
the floor area calculations for auto dealerships located in the AD, Auto Dealership overly. 13
14
So I'm just going to jump right into it. So all of these amendments we had brought forward last 15
month to discuss it and basically I've made the notation for all of these if something's changed 16
we haven't changed anything unless noted on these slides. So we have proposed definition 17
updates for some housing related definitions and we're going to be correcting some loading 18
space or updating some loading space items. The first one is to correct the error in the loading 19
space requirement table. The second is to clarify the mixed use requirements for projects. 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.
the last loading one is to allow Director’s adjustments for loading spaces. And the next ones we 1
have to allow the deferral of the Directors’ decision to Council for action, establish standards 2
for when a TDM plan is required for a project, and the next one is to update the Housing 3
Density Bonus regulations. So this one is going to be deferred to next year; staff didn't have 4
enough time to prepare the appropriate ordinance language. So that will come to you soon 5
early next year. 6
7
The next one is the to allow to require discretionary approvals to be completed before the 8
demolition permit is approved and no changes there. And the next one is to allow the use of 9
mechanical lifts in projects. So this one and the following one we did have extensive 10
conversation at the last meeting and staff has basically incorporated your comments and 11
feedback into the draft ordinance that's attached to the staff report. So allowing the kind of 12
lifts and the next one is to provide incentives to encourage consolidation of small housing 13
inventory sites. 14
15
And the very last one that we also discussed was to allow hotel conversions to affordable 16
housing units. So we're not planning to pursue this at this time. It was clear that there was 17
definitely more analysis needed. So that's going to be postponed to a future time. 18
19
Alright so the very last one here is the newly added item. So we have some changes being 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.
proposed for floor area for auto dealership uses in the AD overlay. So the first one is to exempt 1
a floor area used for customer vehicle queuing for service drop off and the second one is to 2
exempt floor area used for parking requirements related to service areas. 3
4
So that was a quick wrap up that's all of them. So basically upon your recommendations were 5
we've got this tentatively scheduled for Council review on February 13th. Thank you. 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Ok thank you, staff. We did review this very recently and if you reviewed the 8
minutes and you looked at the current staff report then you know that a majority of our 9
comments are included. I think that the actually the best I'm going to ask if anybody wants to 10
speak on anything that they believe is controversial, but if someone is inclined I will absolutely 11
accept a Motion to make this recommendation and give people an opportunity to make 12
adjustments in the same process that we've used now for two meetings which is by 13
amendment, by unfriendly amendment. So I see one light, Commissioner Tanaka is that you? I 14
see a… you… I see another light so do you want me to call on that person? Ok, alright. So 15
Commissioner Rosenblum I see a light. Go ahead. 16
17
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, I this item I know that we reviewed for also something like 18
three hours the previous time and I was gratified to see all of our comments included and also 19
just the changes included. I'd be prepared whenever we want to make the Motion and go by 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.
our previous process where if anyone wants to add an amendment, but I found it consistent 1
with our discussion. Everything was reflected. I think that we had a pretty deep discussion on 2
each of these items previously. So whenever it's time to make a Motion I'm happy to make it. 3
4
Chair Alcheck: I will accept Motions now. 5
6
Commissioner Rosenblum: Ok, I'd like… 7
8
Chair Alcheck: I have no other lights, so… 9
10
MOTION 11
12
Commissioner Rosenblum: Ok then I'll make a Motion to accept staff recommendation as 13
written. 14
15
SECOND 16
17
Chair Alcheck: Do I have a second? I have a second. Would you like to speak as a second to 18
your Motion? Ok. Commissioner Tanaka. At this time if anybody would like to amend to 19
suggest an amendment this would be the time. Commissioner Tanaka. 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
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #1 2
3
Commissioner Tanaka: So page, Packet Page 87. So I see that E. says mechanical car lifts shall 4
not be used for required guest parking residential developments and I don’t see a good reason 5
why not so I think we should strike that. Page, Packet Page 87 E. basically I think we should 6
allow… Yeah. I can’t see why, why would we not want it to use in residential unless staff has a 7
good reason, but I don’t I can’t see why not. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so the proposed amendment is to strike Item E. Do I have any seconds? 10
11
Commissioner Gardias: I’m sorry, which one? A? 12
13
Chair Alcheck: So this is Page 87. The proposal is to lift the restriction that mechanical car lifts 14
shall not be used for any required guest parking in a residential development or for accessible 15
parking spaces or loading spaces. Or is it actually just to remove it for guest parking? Let me 16
clarify. Are you suggesting that parking lifts could be used for accessible parking and how 17
(interrupted) 18
19
Commissioner Tanaka: Yeah, no. I was really talking about the guest parking (interrupted) 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so it's, sorry. 2
3
Commissioner Tanaka: Sorry. 4
5
RESTATED UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #1 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Proposed amendment is to modify E. and remove the words “required guest 8
parking in residential development.” So that would mean that mechanical boat [Note‐car] lifts 9
could be used for required guest parking in a residential development. Like an apartment 10
complex that had to have a certain number of guest spots those could be operated with 11
mechanical lift. 12
13
Commissioner Gardias: Yeah, I agree with this. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: You second it? 16
17
SECOND 18
19
Commissioner Gardias: I second it. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Chair Alcheck: Ok, great. Would you like to speak your second? 2
3
Commissioner Gardias: Yeah I just I don't see justification for not applying the car, the 4
mechanical car, the car lifts for this purpose. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Ok. 7
8
Commissioner Tanaka: Oh, should I speak or no? 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Would you like to speak to it? 11
12
Commissioner Tanaka: Sure, real quick. So I mean land value is real expensive in Palo Alto. We 13
should maximize the use of our land. Having mechanical car lifts does that so I can't see why 14
we should not allow that. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Do you mind if I ask of staff a point of clarification? When we're talking about 17
just so I'm clear I used the example of an apartment complex and guests which I assume are 18
overnight guests or maybe even evening guests. Is there another subset of residential guest 19
parking different than what I'm thinking of in this scenario? 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
Woman staffer: No. So for residential projects there is a requirement that there's a certain 2
number of guest parking spaces. So it could be used for just a short term visit, something 3
overnight, but there are no other types of guest parking. 4
5
Chair Alcheck: Would like a prospective tenant, someone who wants to apply to live at a 6
residential apartment complex be considered a guest? 7
8
Woman staffer: Yeah, I would assume so because guests’ spaces are the ones that are not 9
dedicated to the units. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Got it. Ok. Thanks for that point of clarification. Does anybody else have a 12
question or clarification on this item? Ok, so let's put it to a vote. All those in favor of removing 13
the language that I’ve identified in Section E. please raise your hand. All those opposed? 14
Would the opposition like to speak to their opposition? That's three for and two opposed. 15
Please do. 16
17
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #1 PASSED (3‐2‐0‐1, Commissioner Fine absent) 18
19
Commissioner Rosenblum: The reason the language was inserted I believe was that there’s 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
skepticism that if you have mechanical lift people will actually use it. So if you're short term 1
guest and so that will lead to more on street parking. So part of the parking requirements for 2
residential is to assuage neighbors for example that you’re not going to create parking 3
problems in the neighborhood. So counting their parking requirements for short term being 4
mechanical left I think will be met with skepticism by neighbors and I think rightfully so. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Thank you. Would you like to speak your? 7
8
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I concur with Mr. Rosenblum’s comments. 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you. I think Council will appreciate that information. Are there any 11
other amendments? Ok. 12
13
Commissioner Gardias: If you don't mind I just I'm trying to find I was on the phone back then 14
and so I'm trying to find out I proposed insertion of removal of the small lots that are subject of 15
the consolidation. I proposed removal of those small lots from the parking requirements and I 16
was going through the 18.42.140 on Page 81 trying to find where this found its place. 17
18
Woman staffer: So I can respond to that. We did not eliminate the parking requirements for 19
the small lots. 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: Ok. 2
3
Woman Staffer: Because that [unintelligible] recommendations. 4
5
Commissioner Gardias: So it means that not all of the comments were inserted so then I have a 6
following questions, which items were not inserted or were changed from [unintelligible] 7
conversation? So I would like to get the list of those. That's Number 1 because it just puts into 8
doubt the this whole Motion. 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Ok, hold on. Hold on. I need to clarify something here. We went through this 11
process last time and it was the onus was on staff to determine based on our process whether 12
there was support for certain changes. And that is a tough process to determine whether or 13
not there's enough support for a proposed change. The flipside of that is the onus is upon us 14
during our review of this project, this item to determine whether or not our proposed changes 15
were incorporated and if they weren't to re‐suggest them as amendments now and have an 16
opportunity to make a case to your fellow Commissioners. I don't think that there it would be 17
possible for staff to prepare a list of which of your comments last time were incorporated or 18
not. Do you have that 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.
Woman staffer: So for the specific item it's actually I did call it out in the staff report. It's on 1
Page 9 of the or Page 9 of the staff or Page 72 of the packet on the top and then it includes our 2
staff response. So basically our staff response was that we felt that eliminating parking 3
requirements altogether for these types of projects could have a significant parking impact so 4
that's something that we didn't pursue at this time. So definitely if it's a recommendation 5
(interrupted) 6
7
Commissioner Gardias: Right. So on which page it is? 8
9
Woman staffer: It is on Page 72 of the packet and the bullet points up at the top it's the third 10
bullet down and it says, “Eliminate parking requirements altogether from projects.” 11
12
Chair Alcheck: What I really want to highlight real quick is this process that I’ve set us in for the 13
last few meetings is really designed for us to be very specific about our changes, make cases for 14
them, to really have an opportunity to address everybody's specific concerns. The onus though 15
is upon each of us to do the homework to know what has changed in a particular ordinance and 16
how staff has dealt with it and if they feel like the staff response still doesn't address your 17
concern to make your concern to your fellow Commissioners in the in this amendment process 18
so that we can deal specifically with an issue and determine whether or not there's consensus. 19
If there isn't consensus regardless of how anybody feels then that amendment is not going 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.
happen. So what I suggest we do is if you feel strongly about this why don’t you make 1
(interrupted) 2
3
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #2 4
5
Commissioner Gardias: Yeah, so I'm going to just it’s just responding to this, right? I mean just 6
took me by surprise because I heard different story as a neutral direction, right? I understood 7
that all of them were incorporated and now I understand that not all of them, right? So this 8
was one of them. 9
10
So let me just make a case why I proposed this because there is number of the small property 11
owners that would have ability or that to develop and care about their properties. If we 12
propose a policy that pretty much drives this specific the specific consolidation of the small lots 13
we pretty much select the winners and we select the losers. And the losers may be those that 14
because of some reason will not be will not have comparable power, economic power, to 15
develop their property as the guys that have ability to buy them out and then develop the 16
property. And then I think that from perspective of our City that has number of the small 17
business owners and the property owners it's not the right move. So for this reason I think that 18
we should support those small property owners as we would support others equally. For this 19
reason I propose that we should remove the burden on the parking requirements to set 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.
field straight. So I would like to propose Amendment to Paragraph 18.42.140 to remove 1
parking requirements on the for the small properties subject of the consolidation. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok before I ask for a second does anybody want to ask any clarifying questions or 4
need clarification on this? Commissioner Tanaka. 5
6
Commissioner Tanaka: So wait, so which there’s A through I. Which one did you want to 7
change? 8
9
Commissioner Gardias: This is 18, this is Page 81. 10
11
Commissioner Tanaka: Oh, I know. I’m on there. Wait, wait… 12
13
Commissioner Gardias: On Page 81 there is a Paragraph 18.42.140 Housing Inventory Sites 14
small lot consolidation. It is pretty much expression of the policy that we define in the Housing 15
Element in 2014 and that policy was to drive number of the affordable units by allowing parties 16
to consolidate small lots into larger lots (interrupted) 17
18
Commissioner Tanaka: No, I get that, but did you want to change on… like so I see sub‐bullets A 19
through I. Which bullet (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
Commissioner Gardias: I would like to add the sub‐bullet to this whole section that would allow 2
owners of the small lots subject of the consolidation to be exempt from the parking 3
requirements. 4
5
Mr. Lait: So I think that’s specified if I may Chair. That’s specified on Packet Page 82, letter J. 6
where we stay no parking is required for residential units less than 500 square feet regardless 7
of bedroom count. If I'm understanding the Commissioner's comment there's no parking 8
requirement for any units produced. 9
10
Commissioner Gardias: That's correct. 11
12
Mr. Lait: So it's an amendment to the Letter J. on Packet Page 82. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: So if you turn to Page 82, Number J., Letter J. on Page 82 you would amend no 15
parking is required for residential units less than 500 square feet regardless of bedroom count 16
you would amend that to no parking is required for residential units. 17
18
Commissioner Gardias: Right, but there would be (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.
Chair Alcheck: Am I understanding that right? Is that what your question was? Ok. 1
2
Commissioner Gardias: There would be distinction, right? Because I believe that if they are 3
they would be under this Paragraph 18.42.10 that they would have to contribute to the 4
affordable units. 5
6
Mr. Lait: Well so these are for 100 percent affordable this is for the production of 100 percent 7
affordable rental. So you're not paying into a fee also for that. 8
9
Commissioner Gardias: Right. So if you if we exempt them under this section then if they 10
contribute to the affordable rental or ownership units then they would be exempt fully from 11
the parking restrict… the parking requirements? 12
13
Mr. Lait: So just so I'm clear, this provision would only apply for these I don’t know, 20 some 14
odd properties where they were to join with another and build 100 percent affordable housing 15
units. 16
17
Commissioner Gardias: That's correct. 18
19
Mr. Lait: Ok. And so what I'm hearing you're saying is that if somebody were to do that you 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
don't want to have a parking requirement for the residential units that are produced. 1
2
Commissioner Gardias: On their own before without consolidation. 3
4
Mr. Lait: Oh, without consolidation. 5
6
Commissioner Gardias: Without consolidation. I understand that this is applicable for the 7
consolidation so if the room is somewhere else that you know (interrupted) 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Maybe this (interrupted) 10
11
Commissioner Gardias: [unintelligible] relevant for this. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Maybe I'm hoping staff can help us figure this out. Maybe you can identify the 14
concern. What are you trying to prevent? 15
16
Mr. Lait: It’s the existing Housing Inventory Sites so it has nothing to do really with this because 17
this is seeking to consolidate. 18
19
Chair Alcheck: This is pre‐consolidation I think is what (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
Mr. Lait: But you're saying for the existing parcels as they exist today you want to create 2
incentives (interrupted) 3
4
Commissioner Gardias: Exactly. 5
6
Mr. Lait: For those owners to build housing. Affordable housing? 7
8
Commissioner Gardias: Yes, exactly. 9
10
Mr. Lait: And not have parking be a part of the (interrupted) 11
12
Commissioner Gardias: Subject to the same condition as those that would be subject of the 13
consolidation conditions give them credit for parking. 14
15
Mr. Lait: So if you can give, so let can we just talk about that while you move onto the next, if 16
there is another? 17
18
Chair Alcheck: So just so I’m clear is staff understanding this as an entirely new section or do 19
they perceive this as an amendment to an existing section? 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Mr. Lait: Yes, we do believe that it’s a new section. What we're trying to do and what the 2
objective here is is to implement the Housing Element which is seeking to encourage lot 3
consolidation so that you get more efficiency, probably more units, and so what I'm hearing is 4
to create an incentive to not keep them, to not consolidate them by means of having parking be 5
not provided, not required for the development. 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Ok. What I would like to do if are you open to suggesting that as a second 8
Motion after we deal with this Motion? 9
10
Commissioner Gardias: Well I mean it could be considered in a number of ways. I mean I 11
understand that because of the policy that we have and we have to implement it under 12
Housing Element we are pursuing the lot consolidation, but we can either create a separate 13
section or we can just pretty much change the title of this section and then or just pretty much 14
create exemption under the same section. It would meet the requirements. 15
16
Chair Alcheck: Ok. I'm trying to figure out how we can proceed with this so there’s sort of two 17
questions. Number 1 is we don't really have precise language to review on this item and so 18
without that I think what I would like to do is suggest that you propose and see if there's a 19
consensus for asking staff to create that language and bringing it to us to review. 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
Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney: And I think what staff is struggling with here is that it 2
appears to us that your recommendation is to give some zoning incentives to a few properties 3
in town and that has not been agendized. 4
5
Commissioner Gardias: I totally understand, but I also have a concern that just by meeting this 6
without creating a level playing the level fields that we incentivize some over the others. And I 7
totally understand that this hasn't been agendized so for this reason I was proposing this as a 8
either exemption or change of the title of the section so we can still meet this proposal from my 9
perspective. I might be the only one. My colleagues may might disagree with this, right? But 10
from my perspective if this passes without the other it just pretty much it shifts the balance of 11
power toward certain property owners. 12
13
Chair Alcheck: Ok so I'm not really sure how to proceed. What I would like to do is suggest that 14
either we operate on the premise… yeah. We operate on the premise that this is an 15
amendment and I ask for a second or we treat it as a Motion to ask staff to come back to us and 16
see if there’s support for that. Either way we get to vote on whether or not there’s support for 17
this. 18
19
Mr. Lait: Ok. So I think our perspective on this is that this is not been properly agendized 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.
establish that (interrupted) 1
2
Chair Alcheck: Ok. It would be fair though to have a Motion to see if we could revisit this at a 3
next meeting and see if there's consensus for that. 4
5
Mr. Lait: You could. 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Ok. So what I'm going to do is suggest that we vote on the Motion on the table 8
as amended and then I'll allow Commissioner Gardias to make another Motion tonight asking 9
staff to bring this item back to us and see if there is a second for that Motion. So wanted… are 10
you comfortable with that? 11
12
Commissioner Gardias: Could you repeat it please how we? 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so the issue is that you would like to discuss a topic that hasn’t been 15
agendized. So the process for doing that would be to make a Motion tonight and see if it 16
carries requesting that staff bring us this item agendized for the purposes of reviewing a 17
Planning Code amendment that would (interrupted) 18
19
Commissioner Gardias: As a separate topic? 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: As a separate topic because it hasn't been agendized. 2
3
Commissioner Gardias: Ok, but I can also just propose another Motion? I can propose a Motion 4
to remove this section entirely from tonight's consideration. 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Yeah an amendment to remove this from the current Motion. You can propose 7
that. 8
9
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #2 10
11
Commissioner Gardias: Yes so I'm going to propose this Motion [note‐Unfriendly Amendment] 12
to remove this section because of that reason from the consideration tonight. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Ok, alright there is an amendment. I under (interrupted) 15
16
Commissioner Gardias: Section 18.42. (interrupted) 17
18
Chair Alcheck: The entire Section A. through J., Page 80. So if I'm stating correctly there is 19
currently an amendment to remove the Housing Inventory Site small lot consolidation section. 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.
Do I have a second? Do I have a question about a second? 1
2
Commissioner Tanaka: I… ok. Can the maker talk about rationale why he wants to do that? 3
4
Commissioner Gardias: So rationale is pretty much this that it would elevate some property 5
owners over the others. That the consideration. That’s the concern, I'm sorry. So for this 6
reason I would like to just change the language of this, have the staff come back to us on a 7
separate time, and then revise it so similar rights of building out their properties would be 8
giving to those owners that want to build affordable housing, but doesn't want to consolidate. 9
10
SECOND 11
12
Chair Alcheck: Any more questions? Ok so we have a second of the amendment. 13
14
Mr. Lait: Chair? Just one comment; this section is the reason we're here. This is the reason why 15
we're moving this ordinance forward. 16
17
Chair Alcheck: I understand that. 18
19
Mr. Lait: 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: I’m… I understand that. Ok, so I have a second for an amendment to the 2
proposed Motion. Do you want to speak your second? 3
4
Commissioner Tanaka: Sure. So the reason why I support it is although I’m a little bit confused 5
by it, but the reason why I support it is because I think he's trying to fix a problem and I think 6
the Commission should have time to fix the problem because I think if we’re trying to fix it on 7
Council we’re going to be even more confused. So that's why I’m entertaining it. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok. Does anybody else wish to address this issue before we vote? 10
Commissioner Rosenblum. 11
12
Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah I want to address this issue. So this does gut the entire 13
purpose of this of a lot of our discussion. The City's policy is to state that in trying to create 14
affordable housing we need to have enough lot liquidity you need to have a large enough lot to 15
have the Below Market Rate (BMR) housing be offset by market rate housing. And when you 16
have small lots the reason that we're doing this is because empirically we found that small lots 17
don't result in affordable housing for that reason. And so the whole reason to have this there is 18
to force this incentive towards consolidation. So you're right it is providing incentives for 19
certain kinds of property owners specifically to achieve a policy goal. So yeah so this does 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.
confuse me because this is the empirical result of observing that small lots don't provide the 1
opportunity to have either BMR be offset or just an efficient place for someone like Palo Alto 2
Housing Corp. to develop a property. That's just not the way to do it. 3
4
VOTE 5
6
Chair Alcheck: Ok. I literally couldn't agree with you more. At this time though I'm going to put 7
this proposed amendment to the current Motion to a vote; all of those in favor please raise 8
your hand. We have one in favor. All those opposed? We have three opposed. All abstaining? 9
We have one abstainer. So that fails. So we have a Motion on the table as amended. Would 10
staff like to clarify the current Motion as amended? 11
12
UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #2 FAILED (1‐3‐1‐1, Commissioner Fine absent) 13
14
Mr. Lait: So I have move the staff report amending Section 9 to Item E. removing the required 15
parking, the lifts for guest parking to allow that. 16
17
VOTE 18
19
Chair Alcheck: Ok, so all those in favor of the Motion as amended please raise your hand. 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.
unanimous; unanimous support for the Motion. Ok. That concludes Item Number 4. 1
2
MOTION PASSED (5‐0‐0‐1, Commissioner Fine absent) 3
4
Commission Action: Recommend that the City Council Adopt the staff recommended 5
ordinance. Motion made by Commissioner Rosenblum, seconded by Commissioner 6
Tanaka motion is APPROVED 5‐0. 7
Amended Motion: 8
A. Amend Section 9 ‐ 9.18.54.020(b) Item E to remove required parking in guest 9
parking, motion made by Commissioner Tanaka, seconded by Commissioner 10
Gardias, APPROVED 3‐2 Commissioner Waldfogel and Rosenblum AGAINST. 11
B. Amend the ordinance to remove Section 5 18.42.140 from the ordinance. Motion 12
made by Commissioner Gardias, seconded by Commissioner Tanaka; motion FAILED 13
3‐1‐1; Vice‐chair Waldfogel and Chair Alcheck Against; Commissioner Rosenblum 14
Abstained. 15
5. Recommendation to the City Council for the Adoption of an Ordinance Making 16
Permanent Interim Urgency Ordinance 5330 (Limiting the Conversion of Ground 17
Floor Retail and Retail Like Uses), With Some Modifications; Extending the Ground 18
Floor Combining District to Certain Properties Located Downtown and in the South 19
of Forest Avenue Coordinated Area Plan; Modifying the Definition of Retail; Adding 20
Regulations to Improve Pedestrian Oriented Design Standards; and Related Changes. 21
The Proposed Ordinance is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act 22
(CEQA) Per Section 15308 23
[Note‐out of order, took Number 5 first before Number 4 (above)] 24
25
Chair Alcheck: Alright, what I'd like to do right now is begin with Item Number 5 instead of 26
Number 4 and what we'll do is… that last item took a little longer was, as you could tell, 27
complicated, more complicated than I think we imagined. What I would like to do is begin 28
_______________________
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.
tonight with Item 4 as it, what I'm going to term as an abbreviated session. I’d like staff to 1
prepare, to present its report. I'd like to take comments from the public that we have here and 2
then what I would like to do is have one efficient, very efficient round of questions from the 3
Commission to staff so that when we bring this item back for a second session some of the 4
issues that you may have uncovered in your review for tonight are responded to. So with that 5
please begin your presentation. 6
7
Staff woman: Thank you, Chair. Tonight we're bringing to you the first public hearing on the 8
Retail Preservation Ordinance and I would like to introduce Jeannie Eisberg. She's the City 9
consultant who is the Project Manager for this project. 10
11
Jean Eisberg, Lexington Planning: Hi. Good evening, Chair Alcheck and Members of the 12
Commission; again, my name is Jean Eisberg and I'll just give a short presentation and then if 13
you have any questions I'm happy to provide more detail. 14
15
So based on the City Council's direction staff has prepared a draft ordinance for retail 16
protection citywide and in Downtown and South of Forest Avenue 2 (SOFA 2) and we're 17
requesting your review of a recommendation to the Council to protect City, excuse me, to 18
protect retail conversion citywide, add design standards in two of the combining districts in 19
Downtown and California Ave., and modify the GF Foundry Downtown. So just looking back 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.
the interim urgency ordinance this prohibits ground floor or basement retail and retail like uses 1
citywide from converting into office or other nonretail uses. It was adopted during a period of 2
time in the City and particularly Downtown where we were seeing a lot of vacancies, vacant 3
retail spaces being replaced by office uses. This is the list of uses that the interim ordinance 4
protects and you'll see the same list of uses is carried forward in the draft ordinance. 5
6
The Council twice discussed priorities for permanent retail protections and these are the 7
outcomes that drove the draft ordinance before you tonight. I'm not going to go into them in 8
detail, but they are in the report. The Architectural Review Board (ARB) discussed some of the 9
potential design standards in their meeting in November and they expressed support for more 10
transparency, for recesses, articulation, but also supported the continued implementation of 11
the existing design guidelines in the City. 12
13
There are seven key points to the ordinance laid out in the staff report. First, modifying the 14
definition so this provision removes the extensive list of retail uses that's in the code and 15
focuses instead on the intent of retail uses to promote active pedestrian oriented uses during 16
public, excuse me, open to the public during typical business hours and the sale and services for 17
customers and clients. And this is intended to respond to the changing nature of retail both in 18
Palo Alto and across the country shifting towards restaurants, experiences, services as opposed 19
to retail sales. 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 Number 2 this provision continues the citywide moratorium on retail conversions. So these 2
protections would be codified in the use classification tables of zoning district. One notable 3
change is that the draft ordinance only protects uses that are permitted or conditionally 4
permitted in the underlying zoning district. 5
6
In terms of [waiters] first the ordinance proposes to maintain the existing economic hardship 7
threshold that requires demonstration of an unconstitutional taking. Additionally, except in the 8
Downtown GF the ordinance provides an opportunity to consider an alternative viable use if it 9
meets the intent of the zoning district. The current GF district proposes purposes are focused 10
on type of use and on the Downtown. The proposed revision here seeks to capture the 11
contribution of architectural form such as transparency and pedestrian orientation in this 12
purpose statement and also to clean up the Downtown focused language acknowledging that 13
the GF district is applied elsewhere in the City. 14
15
In terms of Downtown the draft ordinance continues the interim ordinance provision to restrict 16
the conversion of basements, but only in the GF districts Downtown. And then the next two 17
slides show modifications to the GF district regulations Downtown. So first fitness studios and 18
similar uses up to 15 customers would be permitted by right except on University Avenue 19
where the Council was concerned about window coverings and here students’ studios 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.
more than 15 students would be considered a commercial recreation use which are subject to 1
conditional use permits. The ordinance also proposes to remove the existing provision that 2
allows 25 percent of the ground floor area to be occupied by use in the underlying CD district 3
such as office and this is intended to strengthen the retail core. 4
5
In terms of design standards the ordinance proposes to require clear glass with only a minimal 6
amount of tinting, 70 percent of the sidewalk fronting frontage would be required to have 7
transparent doors and windows. Window coverings in non‐conforming spaces such as office 8
spaces in the GF that front onto a sidewalk would be prohibited during business hours. And 9
here there would be some exceptions for uses that require privacy and that these uses we 10
would encourage or require artwork displays of merchandise or other visual interest. 11
12
Lastly a map amendment is intended to expand the Downtown core area where ground floor 13
retail and the design standards I just mentioned would be required to create a more continuous 14
retail experience on the ground floor. So looking at the map the dark pink areas show the 15
existing GF boundary. In yellow the map identifies proposed locations near Alma, University, 16
and Hamilton where the GF foundry would be brought back, restored from its pre 2009 map 17
locations. Some of these properties shown in yellow are currently occupied by uses that are 18
not permitted in the GF overlay so such as office, financial services, real estate offices. As a 19
result these properties would become non‐conforming uses and they would be required 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.
comply with the GF provisions if those uses vacated; however, some of these properties were 1
designed as offices and do not have architectural features that typically would support retail 2
development. So this may limit what property owners can do, can lease to. A note on the SOFA 3
2 plan, the SOFA 2 plan currently prevents new ground floor office in the Homer/Emerson 4
corridor. So this ordinance would extend protections to other retail and retail like uses in SOFA 5
2 namely in, along Addison Street and would also allow for the alternate viable use waiver 6
process that I mentioned. 7
8
In terms of outreach we conducted 17 informal interviews last month with community 9
members and other stakeholders that live and work in Palo Alto including developers, property 10
owners, small business owners, store managers, architects, residents. Their feedback is 11
summarized in the report. Generally it was mixed. There's mixed support for the existing 12
interim ordinance and for the proposed extension of it. 13
14
This lays out our work so far and the timing going forward. The ordinance the interim 15
ordinance expires in April and so we're looking to go to the Council in February for the first 16
reading of the permanent ordinance. And lastly the Commission and staff have received some 17
correspondence since the staff report was published expressing concern about the extension of 18
the GF foundry, concerns about where private educational facilities may be located, desire for 19
more flexibility and allowing different types of uses to replace retail, and concerns about traffic 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 parking especially Downtown. That concludes my presentation. I'm happy to answer any 1
questions. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok. I would like to invite the individuals who filled out comment cards to come 4
speak. I will allot five minutes per speaker. 5
6
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I’d like to start with Mike Powers followed by Simon Cintz. 7
8
Mike Powers: Good evening, Commissioners; my name is Mike Powers. I'm with McNellis 9
Partners in Palo Alto. We’re as you're probably aware we’re owners of a number of properties 10
in the Downtown corridor including the West Elm building. With [Roxy Wrap] years ago we put 11
Anthropologie in a building. Also Lululemon is a tenant and the infamous Alma Plaza. So we've 12
had over, we have 35 years’ experience. Probably 70 projects of which over 60 are retail. So I 13
think you have in your packages John McNellis’ transmittal indicating kind of the difficulties that 14
retail developers have. And in terms of trying to come up with ordinances that protect the 15
unique nature of Downtown Palo Alto while at the same time can have some serious negative 16
consequences in terms of future uses for building. 17
18
So I'm not going to take much of your time here. Just to point out a couple things I think kind of 19
our opinion that the expansion of the geographic areas to the SOFA really was going to, 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.
don't own property by the way so it doesn't have a negative impact on us per se, but I just think 1
there'd be a tremendous difficulty for those property owners in finding retailers that are 2
interested. All the hard and soft good retailers are going to Stanford which is a kind of a very 3
nice high class problem that the City has when you have one of the world's literally one of the 4
world's best shopping centers just walking distance away from a downtown. So you are 5
attracting some of the best retailers, but not necessarily per se in the Downtown corridor 6
unless they fit into a very specific parameters. 7
8
The other thing I think that the retail world has changed and so if you're looking at expanding 9
the definition of retail services the type of services we see in our 25 plus shopping centers, the 10
type of tenants that we're attracting, the soft goods retailers aren't there, the hard goods, 11
electronics, aren't there. It's more along the lines of medical offices, financial institutions, 12
fitness, some of what you're addressing here, some clearly aren't fitting into the retail 13
definition as being suggested, but I think we would urge you to keeping the right vitality of 14
ground floor properties as an expansive of a definition in terms of services, retail, quasi‐office 15
that are open to the public whether it be the State Farm Insurance agencies, title companies 16
that will go a long way in addition to restaurants to helping keep up the vitality and uniqueness 17
of Palo Alto. And I'm here to answer any other questions from retailer perspectives if you want, 18
but with that thank you for your 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.
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. Simon Cintz followed by Ben Cintz. 1
2
Simon Cintz: Good evening, my name is Simon Cintz. My brother Ben is going to speak next 3
here. Our firm, our family has been in Palo Alto since the early 1950’s when fine dining on 4
University Avenue meant eating at the lunch counter at Woolworth's Five‐and‐Dime. We own 5
four small commercial properties in Palo Alto. 6
7
We're, I want to specifically speak about Section 5 of the proposed ordinance. This is the 8
blanket citywide prohibition against any and all ground floor retail conversion. This is a one size 9
fits all approach to retail preservation. It doesn't matter what type of retail. It doesn't matter 10
where the retail is located. It doesn't matter whether or not the retail is viable in this location. 11
It ignores most of the issues that should be considered in a carefully thought out process. Is the 12
way Palo Alto wants to do zoning and city planning? It's important to note that almost all of 13
Palo Alto’s existing retail is currently protected by current zoning and ordinances. Section 5 of 14
this proposed ordinance only serves to protect a very small portion of Palo Alto’s existing retail 15
including retail properties where retail is no longer viable. What is the real benefit of this 16
proposed citywide prohibition against ground floor retail conversions? That's an important 17
question. 18
19
Let's imagine what would happen if this ordinance was in place when our family applied 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.
convert our 1960’s auto repair garage to what is now about a 3,400 square foot medical/dental 1
office building at 882 Emerson in the SOFA area. We now have two dentists and one doctor in 2
our building. More than half of their patients are Palo Alto residents. It cost us hundreds of 3
thousands of dollars to do the conversion which you could only do because of an increased rent 4
that we would get from medical office space. 5
6
If this ordinance had been in place prior to the conversion Palo Alto would still have an auto 7
garage at our location. The garage parking was surrounded with a chain link fence along the 8
sidewalk. The junk cars were parked nearest the fence because they weren't going to go 9
anywhere soon. It was just plain ugly. Palo Alto citizens have benefited more by having access 10
to medical/dental services now offered in our building instead of having an auto garage. The 11
citizens of Palo Alto have benefited by having many of the old auto garages in the SOFO area 12
converted to non‐retail uses. For example, this ordinance would have prevented the 13
conversion of the auto garage at 930 Emerson to what now occupies the space. It is a state of 14
the art private school. Many of the students are from are from Palo Alto families. Isn’t our 15
community benefited more by a school than an auto garage? 16
17
This citywide prohibition against ground floor retail will interfere with the process of making 18
adjustments in neighborhoods which will allow them to better adapt to change in an 19
appropriate way. One might argue that the ordinance provides an appeals process. 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.
Unfortunately, it still sets the bar much too high to get a realistic exception to do a conversion. 1
The actual effect will be that no retail no matter how non‐viable or how inappropriate it is for a 2
neighborhood now or in the future will be able to convert to use that is more beneficial to the 3
citizens of Palo Alto. A suggestion in SOFA and possibly other areas of Palo Alto small 4
medical/dental uses should be allowed as a permitted retail conversion under restricted 5
circumstances. Small medical/dental offices benefit our community and can be successful in 6
areas that have limited pedestrian traffic. Doctors and dentists often get their referrals from 7
health plans and the like and can operate in areas that other retail is not or that other that 8
retail is not viable. 9
10
Finally this proposed ordinance that we are considering tonight fails to follow a careful process 11
that our City has followed in the past. When the 2009 retail ordinance was being developed a 12
stakeholder group was formed. We had a number of meetings. When SOFA 2 was being 13
developed there were many community meetings. In the case of this proposed ordinance 14
which affects all retail areas of our City only 17 people were interviewed by a consultant. Many 15
people, ourselves included, were not on given an opportunity to participate. This does not 16
legitimately qualify as community outreach for an ordinance that affects so much of our City. 17
Thank you. 18
19
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you very much. Ben Cintz 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.
1
Ben Cintz: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Benjamin Cintz. My brother, Simon, just 2
spoke. I live in Palo Alto, live in the Midtown area now. Used to live near Professorville prior to 3
that and grew up here and then moved away and moved back. It's a wonderful city. And I have 4
my law office on El Camino here in Palo Alto as well. 5
6
What I'd like to address tonight really is two things, one is that I think the stakeholder meetings 7
there needs to be more outreach. I wrote to Hillary Gitelman and on September 1st. On 8
September 2nd she got back to me and I had asked her about the stakeholder participation and 9
she said thanks for this message Ben, we are reaching out to you and other stakeholders as we 10
move forward. Stay tuned. I was not contacted. Now I don't need to be contacted, but the 11
point is that I think others do. And I think it should be a process similar to other stakeholder 12
processes which is where the stakeholders get together and have a discussion; my 13
understanding that this process was an interview process where people were interviewed. I 14
was part of the stakeholder process for Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) and I 15
think it was a very useful process and I think we could utilize that process again. This is an 16
important decision for the entire City because it affects all properties as my brother pointed 17
out. So I think it would be important to make a recommendation that further input be provided 18
because I think the future of properties in Palo Alto and the quality of life in Palo Alto are 19
affected. Thank you. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: Ok. That concludes public comment. What I'd like to do now is essentially 4
bifurcate this review of this item, but I think to make our next opportunity more effective I 5
think it makes sense for us to go and have one round of comments or questions so that maybe 6
some of those comments and questions can be staff can prepare answers to those comments 7
or questions next time we meet. So you may have answers now. My preference is that you 8
don't answer and we pick this up with the staff having the opportunity to respond to our 9
questions. And the best way to do that is to sort of address them in the minutes or use the 10
minutes of this next piece for that. Ok, so why don't we start on this end with Commissioner 11
Gardias and go straight down and [unintelligible] you could spend a few minutes laying the 12
groundwork for our next meeting. 13
14
Commissioner Gardias: Thank you. So I just want to understand the objective because it's 15
stated clearly that staff wants to recommend adoption to the City Council, but I understand 16
that you're proposing there is going to be a follow up meeting and it is we will not meet the 17
staff recommendation tonight. 18
19
Chair Alcheck: Yeah. I'm not going to call for a Motion on this item. We're going to postpone 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 review of this to the next meeting. 1
2
Commissioner Gardias: That's fine. So in terms of the comments and we tried to establish 3
procedure with Chair Fine back not that long ago that we would respond immediately to the 4
constituency that speaks to us. Would you mind just responding to this concerns about 5
possibility of broadening, listening to the merchants and those that are subject of this possibly 6
permanent regulation. Is there a possibility to broaden this, the reach out to the community 7
and the stakeholders before the follow up meeting? 8
9
Jonathan Lait, Assistant Director: So I’ll look to the Chair just to see if I got the impression you 10
didn’t want to have a question and answer (Q&A), but rather (interrupted) 11
12
Chair Alcheck: Yeah. That’s a unique question because he wants to know if you can do it before 13
the follow up. My real preference is we sort of identify the areas of concern/questions and we 14
allow staff to address them at the next meeting since we have to we really do have to get Item 15
Number 4 and we're running late. So I don't want this to turn into a dialogue. I really would 16
prefer we don't do that. So my preference would be that you present all their concerns and 17
questions and then staff will answer those the next time we meet, ok? 18
19
Commissioner Gardias: So that's the question that I ask that. My question is that I 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.
appreciate and I'm sure the community and stakeholders if there is a broader survey or reach 1
out to the community and the merchants for their input to this ordinance before the next 2
meeting. So that's my first comment. Then if I can go from the top and I'm going to go by the 3
pages because that's how I allocated my comments. So please bear with me, they may be 4
scattered. 5
6
So if I go through the, the first item is the definition and then it seems to me in general that we 7
are just getting very prescriptive in number of the ordinances which on the one hand which 8
maybe satisfies our number of the inputs that we're getting and number of the shake hands 9
that we have to make, but on the other hand just makes administrative burden upon ourselves 10
because to each one of these processes we need to have exception that's later on reviewed by 11
the Director as opposed to the pure law that just clearly states to the developers, merchants, 12
and everybody else how this should work. Definition of the retail in this and then specifying 13
different uses of retail use or retail like uses is an example of this. My comment is pretty much 14
just to simplify the definition, get rid of all these different categories or different types of the 15
retailer. Just stay with the retail. Everybody knows what it is. We know what retail services 16
are. We should have two categories; we should have one definition for each one. So that's my 17
first comment. 18
19
Number two is that I have a question that since we were not expecting answer I will just convey 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.
this to you. It says on Page Number 229 about the pipeline projects and for the follow up 1
meeting I would like to pretty much know… I'm just going through the questions because that 2
was the ask. How many pipeline projects are we have for this that would be subject of this 3
ordinance? 4
5
Then on Page 236 there is a passage, there is a paragraph this is under subsequent ordinances 6
and studies and then it just talks about the future work which is Paragraph Number 2 and talks 7
about the Planned Community (PC) zone parcels. So I know that we have historical PC zone 8
parcels, but [unintelligible] we don't have any longer the PC zoning. I would like to have a 9
clarification about this paragraph, what it talks about. 10
11
I'm going to jump briefly to the Page 243, 243 that talks about design standards. In general 12
Paragraph 18.30a.085 it's just a piecemeal. We need to have a clear drive. Are we getting into 13
the design standards for retail or we don't. And I think that this will be the discussion that we 14
should have among ourselves and to in order to justify the position of this Commission, but 15
clearly the design standards that are here presented to us about the windows and the windows 16
covering this is just a small part of the comprehensive design standards there should be or 17
there should not be in this ordinance. Right now you're just proposing us just two of them, 18
exterior windows and coverings, but then and then also I think that height of the windows 19
some it’s somewhere else, but then as you may know it's much more than this, right? We 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.
talk about like the height of the clear ceiling for the retail. We can talk about the windows 1
space in terms of the active retail. We can talk about the distances between the buildings and 2
access points. We can talk about the limitation of the office lobby. We can talk about the 3
transparency of the glazing and how far the wall that would be from the facades how far there 4
will be any wall that's that would define the initial space. I'm just giving you a couple of 5
examples because the design standards it's much more than just two paragraphs or two points 6
that are in here. So I would like to just either have really deep draft on this so we can discuss 7
this or just drop it altogether from the list. 8
9
Another example is that if you talk about lobby sizes. It's the same story. You can… it should be 10
on also under the design standards. Example is that the building that's next to CVS on 11
University where you have a pretty much lobby that serves nobody I think that house it's 12
housed over there currently where pretty much [passerbyers] they see empty lobby. There is 13
no service. There is no retail. When it was designed it was designed with no public in mind 14
whatsoever. It's just an empty space. So that's an example, another example of this how we 15
should regulate this. When you think about the great cities like New York you know that that 16
majority of the facade is the selling space and then if you want to get to the second level then 17
pretty much there is only just a door and then you just behind this door there is a staircase 18
behind this or the entire front façade is taken with the retail space and you get to the building 19
from the back side. 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 want to just (interrupted) 2
3
Commissioner Gardias: There's (interrupted) 4
5
Chair Alcheck: Just a second. I want to take the opportunity to just encourage Commissioners 6
that if they can also, we should also use the opportunity to email staff in the next several weeks 7
specific questions that they can add to this list. Because what I really would like if everyone 8
takes ten minutes we're not, we’re going to be here another hour. So if as we go through this if 9
there's lots of questions consider writing an email to staff directly which I hope I will ask staff to 10
incorporate into this longer list of questions. 11
12
Yeah, why don't we do this? Why don’t we set the timer? I’m going to give you two more 13
minutes to get through your questions and then I’m going to give everybody five minutes to get 14
through theirs. Ok? 15
16
Commissioner Gardias: Ok, I will do my best. So if you go to Page 246 on at the bottom there is 17
a Paragraph 2b that talks about a 2,000 foot radius that is for the applicant to present the 18
burden for exemption, if I remember. What is 2,000 feet? It's 300, this is 300 meters. This is 19
unreasonable burden up on the merchants just to ask them to do the survey [unintelligible] 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.
them up and submit to the City in their radius of 300 meters. It's a large distance. I'd 1
recommend just to remove it all together. 2
3
Also when you talk about the on the same page Paragraph C, waivers and adjustments, this 4
should be periodic. This should be the wavier and adjustments should be for a period of time. 5
If we allow for an exemption from this regulation this should be for a specific period of time 6
upon which this extension expires. So there should be aware period and there should be a 7
definition for how long this exemption would take place. And so my proposal is that pretty 8
much waiver would expire within three years. Thank you. 9
10
Chair Alcheck: Commissioner Waldfogel [note‐Vice‐Chair]. 11
12
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: I'll try to be brief. I first of all thank you for very clear presentation. I like 13
the graphics. I really support the idea of Downtown district vibrancy. I agree with 14
Commissioner Gardias we shouldn't be too prescriptive. I mean I think our goal is to create an 15
interesting Downtown. I mean I would I think that the core needs to be needs to read urban. 16
It’d be great if there were some kind of unexpected urban experiences possible outside of core. 17
So I just think as long as we can define it along those terms I'm comfortable. 18
19
The medical office, dental office, health care, we need these in town. I've heard anecdotes in 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.
San Francisco that things like urgent care storefronts or deactivating business districts I’d kind 1
of like to understand I mean maybe you guys can come back to us with just some comments 2
about what's the right way to weave those kind of offices into an urban fabric. I don’t have a 3
really strong point of view right now. I also think it would be great if you could when you come 4
back if you could show us some prototypes. Are we trying to look like Chestnut Street in San 5
Francisco? I mean I'm not prescribing, but just saying are we're trying? I don't think we're 6
trying to look like Rodeo Drive in Beverly Hills, but it's another prototype we all get or Melrose 7
Street in West Hollywood or these are all possible prototypes. And I just think if we could say 8
these are kind of the prototypes that we’re aiming for in the core and adjacent to the core that 9
would be helpful. 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Alright, I’ll be brief as well. This is not in any particular order. I think my issues 12
with the report are that it lacks context, and important context. The majority of none of this 13
Commission was here in 2009 and more importantly a great deal number of our staff really 14
wasn't, right? Our Director, our Assistant Director, and one of the things that may be the result 15
of the lack of interviewing or actually I don't even really love the idea of the word interviewing, 16
but sort of the lack of outreach maybe sort of a fundamental lack of context. And so I'm 17
grappling with two sort of concerns. 18
19
Number one I believe that the pitchforks in town are being raised because of traffic related 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.
office. And we’ve adopted an office cap last year and now and the interim retail ordinance as it 1
was and, but and now we're expanding on this interim retail ordinance in ways that in my mind 2
sort of ignore the context. And so what I'm hoping is is that we can understand the context 3
better with new information. What is that information? I think it's really important to 4
understand what happened in 2009. In 2009 and I'm going to shed light on this, but I'm hoping 5
that you will actually shed light on this when we meet or staff will shed light on this. We had 6
this situation where if there was more than 5 percent vacancy in retail you could convert it into 7
office and at that time we had 15 percent vacancy and the and the community came together, 8
the business owner, retailers owners came together and staff came together and they decided 9
to sort of remove that safety valve or what I would call a safety valve for retailers and in 10
exchange put forward the 2009 ordinance. Despite the fact that I would argue that retail is just 11
a use that has substantially suffered in the last 10 years we had the highest retail sales ever last 12
year. 13
14
So this notion that we're going to now expand what was pretty restrictive into a more 15
restrictive and more encompassing and farther reaching thing seems counterintuitive to me in 16
general. Why are we going here? Is it because we really don't want any more office and this is 17
another tool to just stop office? If that's the case ok, but are we actually helping retail? And 18
that context I think is really important. I think the reason why the report lacks it is probably 19
because the outreach to business owners was not sufficient enough. And I think when we meet 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.
again I'm going to sort of discuss that same issue, that there may have not been enough and 1
sufficient outreach reach. 2
3
And the most important thing I want to suggest tonight which is that I think at the next meeting 4
I'm going to strongly encourage us to consider in a more expansive view of what is retail. It 5
may be that anything that where people come in to spend some money should be accepted as 6
retail: banks, you heard one individual talk about State Farm. Retail is not despite this great 7
year we had retail is not doing that well. And my biggest concern is that we're not setting them 8
up to succeed in the same way that we may have in 2009. 9
10
I also am concerned about the citywide proposal. We were talking really about a specific G area 11
and then this element of the ordinance is going to dramatically change it in a way that we didn't 12
discuss last year. And I think the last piece of context here is that… the without that without 13
incorporating more sort of business owners into this it sort of freaks me out because they were 14
a big part of the 2009 process that stakeholders group. Again, that goes back to context. So 15
that those are my comments; I'd love to see those addressed or to at least have a discussion 16
about those elements next time we meet. Commissioner Tanaka. 17
18
Commissioner Tanaka: So I’ll keep this really brief. So I think what this proposal does is it really 19
kind of uses the stick so to speak to try to force retail to be in Palo Alto which in general I 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.
actually want to have very vibrant strong retail in Palo Alto. I think, I don’t think anyone here 1
doesn’t, but I think that the part that I think is really lacking is the carrot, right? Is to actually 2
make property owners want to have retail because retail will do well. And it's not that retail 3
can't do well in Palo Alto because we look at Town & Country. It’s done amazingly well since it's 4
been kind of renovated and Stanford Shopping Center’s also doing extremely well. And I think 5
what they've done is they've created a business environment that allows retail to thrive and it's 6
not, it wasn't, it didn't happen because of some sort of mandate, right? Some sort of forcing of 7
retail there, it happened because the creation of retail was good, the business environment was 8
good, they had a right mix of retail. 9
10
And I kind of want to echo what some of my fellow Commissioners said earlier which is I think 11
what we should do is because this is actually a really complex problem. It’s not something that 12
we’re going to solve in even one meeting. I think this is going to actually how we get strong 13
vibrant retail in Palo A is not a simple easy question. I think what we should do is and I think 14
one of the speakers mentioned this earlier, but I think we should form a stakeholder group with 15
retail professionals, right? Property owners, people who are in retail to really look at how do 16
you make vibrant retail in Palo Alto? What do we need to do to enable this business 17
environment that would that rather than trying to force the property owner to put retail in the 18
property owner will want to do it because the retail will make a ton of money, right? You [take 19
a] percentage rent. They could get all these other kind of… it's drawn in versus being forced in 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 I think if we just try to force it what happens is you create vacancies, right? I mean 1
maybe we want retail here, but they couldn't, they can’t rent it out to a retailer, right? It and 2
that I think that's not good for anyone. 3
4
So I think maybe even on the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) maybe there 5
should be some sort of subcommittee to really look at this issue more closely, but I think it 6
needs to really involve folks in the business community that know a lot about retail and can 7
actually study some of the barriers that that doesn't enable strong retail here in Palo Alto. And 8
then we can start addressing some of those barriers and how to get rid of them. So because I 9
think this is very much the stick approach versus trying to also create the business environment 10
that allows retail to thrive. So that's my thoughts. 11
12
Commissioner Rosenblum: I’ll also try to be very brief because I think everyone has brought up 13
several of the points that are on my mind. So since this original urgency ordinance was adopted 14
I've always felt it's too one dimensional and it's a very surface level analysis of retail, meaning 15
we love retail therefore make it so that retail is protected on the ground floor. And not only 16
that, we don't particularly like nail salons so let's restrict those and we don't… the “we” are 17
people sitting up here and I find it frankly a little disturbing that a town that has this much 18
talent is doing things this one dimensionally. 19
20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
I think retail is a complicated issue especially given today's environment of what's changing in 1
consumption habits, but when I talk to retailers again they say Number 1 difficult for me to 2
retain employees, Number 2 you are simultaneously driving away my customers i.e. a lot of 3
these retailers Downtown especially rely on the people who are working Downtown as their 4
employer as their customers. So you're simultaneously making it difficult for my employees to 5
live here, for my customers to shop here and yet you say you love me and you want me to take 6
more space. So what I would propose doing is I do think that this is something we should take 7
time on and have a proper stakeholder group that has more representatives. I think there were 8
five retailers represented, I don't know how many the property owners are listed by their 9
names I believe so I don't know how many of them were property owners versus neighborhood 10
activists, etcetera. But I think that you should do a good job of bringing us a very 11
representative stakeholder group together and then this is an opportunity. 12
13
I think SOFA is an example of a pretty good I don't know if that was a specific plan or area plan 14
under the term of art of how plans come together, but I think it's time for a pretty specific plan 15
around the way retail, housing, and employment work together. And by that I may not just 16
where they're permitted, but how they work together. So for example, I work for Palantir, a 17
large Downtown concern. We've done experiments where employees are encouraged to go to 18
local businesses and we basically we’ve done pilot programs where we reimburse or that we 19
introduce to local restaurants and stuff, but it's it takes work for someone to figure this 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 can local employees spend their dollars in our local environment without overwhelming 1
the capacity of any individual restaurant for example. But there's a tremendous opportunity 2
between housing employment and retail and I think by analyzing it at the surface level that 3
we're doing we're really doing a disservice to what could be a great area. 4
5
The only really specific comment I have is there are some buildings that simply were not built 6
for retail because they were built under a regime where they were not part of this retail district. 7
So for example, the buildings at the corner of University and Alma as an example and 8
somewhere in this ordinance or in the study we need to talk about what do we do about these 9
kinds of cases and why are we including them if we know that they can't comply? And so what 10
is the plan for that? But in general I agree that this should be put more towards a I hate to say 11
it, but a study session but it should be a fairly extensive group that gets together. This is a big 12
deal. It's not something that I think people on the dais without really talking to retailers should 13
just be making up. 14
15
Chair Alcheck: Ok, thank you. This, the make‐up of this Commission is going to change in 16
January and the make‐up of the City Council is going to change in January. I know that there is 17
a perceived deadline for this because of the sunset of the ordinance. I don't know how this is 18
going to play out. Judging by some of the comments it sounds like two meeting, having this at 19
the next meeting may not create a final result if some issues aren’t… So I don't know that that'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.
the case because again this Commission will change its make‐up, but I don't know I mean we 1
will postpone this now to our next meeting or how will this, how will we deal with this calendar 2
issue? 3
4
Mr. Lait: Well so yeah we would recommend that the item get continued to January 11th where 5
we can have more input from the Commission. We kind of did a once pass and there wasn't the 6
ability to go back and forth. 7
8
Chair Alcheck: Right. I think that that's wise and I'm going to call for that Motion. It's 9
hypothetical because the make‐ups are so confusing here, but if at that time the new 10
Commission desires to explore this even further that may require some sort of involvement in 11
determining how you want to proceed with the sunset situation if you don't have enough time 12
to get in front of Council. 13
14
Mr. Lait: Right. So I… 15
16
Chair Alcheck: I guess what I'm really trying to say is I don't know that moving forward to 17
Council without… let's do this next meeting and see what happens. I'm just suggesting to you 18
that it may be prudent to have a portion of the discussion next time revolve around how we 19
would deal with the timeliness of this if we couldn't get it done in January 11th. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Mr. Lait: Ok. And I don't think it has to be solved on January 11th, but it would probably need to 2
be solved by the next meeting in January to get this to Council or maybe a meeting in February, 3
maybe the first meeting February to get this to Council in March. The absolute latest that we 4
can get this to the Council I think is right around the 14th and I'm not sure if that's a Monday, 5
but like mid‐March is the idea because there’s got to be a first reading and then a second 6
reading and then the ordinance effective 30 days after. 7
8
Chair Alcheck: So what I guess our goal will be to if we determine that we want to pursue a 9
greater amount of research into this topic and create stakeholder groups then we'll make that 10
recommendation as quickly as we can in the processes that we have and then it will be up to 11
that new City Council to determine whether or not they want to do that or not. 12
13
Mr. Lait: Right. And I guess what I would say is and we can have more of an offline 14
conversation about it if you want, but I think that there's I don't think this Commission wants to 15
hold the advancing an ordinance so that the Council is not able to act on a policy direction that 16
they told us which was to implement (interrupted) 17
18
Chair Alcheck: No, I don't think we're going to do that. The question is is whether you will 19
proceed with a recommendation to pass the ordinance or recommendation to not. 20
_______________________
1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at
the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,
provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.
2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.
3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
1
Mr. Lait: Right. Ok. 2
3
Chair Alcheck: And I hope that we will be able to arrive at one of those choices in one meeting, 4
but I think it might be wise when you do your calendaring to at least save some space in case 5
we exceed that time. 6
7
Mr. Lait: Ok, yeah. That I think we can accommodate. Thank you. 8
9
Chair Alcheck: Ok, alright so I'm going to ask for a Motion right now to what's the correct 10
terminology here? 11
12
Mr. Lait: Continue to January 11th. 13
14
Chair Alcheck: Continue this agendized item to the January 11th meeting, our next meeting in 15
the 2017. Can I get a Motion? 16
17
MOTION 18
19
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: So moved. 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: Second? 2
3
SECOND 4
5
Commissioner Gardias: Second. 6
7
Chair Alcheck: Great. All those in favor please raise your hand. Ok that passes unanimously. 8
Thank you to the people who came out to speak tonight and thank you to staff for hanging 9
around. 10
11
MOTION PASSED (5‐0‐0‐1, Commissioner Fine absent) 12
13
[note—go back up to Item 4] 14
15
Commission Action: Continue to the public hearing to January 11, 2017 Motion made 16
by Chair Alcheck, seconded by Commissioner Gardias, motion APPROVED 5‐0. 17
Approval of Minutes 18
Public Comment is Permitted. Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 19
20
Chair Alcheck: I am going to ask that I have a Motion for approval of the minutes. 21
_______________________
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 2
3
Vice‐Chair Waldfogel: So moved. 4
5
SECOND 6
7
Commissioner Rosenblum: Second. 8
9
VOTE 10
11
Chair Alcheck: Thank you. All those in favor of approving the minutes from the last meeting 12
please raise your hand. Ok, that's unanimous. 13
14
MOTION PASSED (5‐0‐0‐1, Commissioner Fine absent) 15
16
Committee Items 17
Commissioner Questions, Comments or Announcements 18
19
Chair Alcheck: Committee items and Commissioner questions, comments, or announcements. 20
So I just want to thank Commissioner Rosenblum and Commissioner Waldfogel [Note‐Vice‐21
_______________________
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], I want to thank both of you actually for all the effort you put into that subcommittee. 1
It's incredible. And I really, really appreciate… all of us really, really appreciate it and thanks for 2
and thank you Commissioner Waldfogel [Note‐Vice‐Chair] for participating on Monday night at 3
the City Council. And then the last comment I want to make is to acknowledge that this is our 4
last time sitting down with Commissioner Tanaka and if anybody wants to say anything you’re 5
welcome to, but it's been great. Are there any other things that I need to do? The next 6
meeting is January 11th. Is that right? Ok, this meeting is adjourned at 10:35. 7
8
Adjournment 10:35 pm 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 Adrian Fine 7
Commissioner Przemek Gardias 8
Commissioner Eric Rosenblum 9
Commissioner Greg Tanaka 10
11
Get Informed and Be Engaged! 12
View online: http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city‐of‐palo‐alto or on Channel 26. 13
14
Show up and speak. Public comment is encouraged. Please complete a speaker request card 15
located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Commission 16
Secretary prior to discussion of the item. 17
18
Write to us. Email the PTC at: Planning.Commission@CityofPaloAlto.org. Letters can be 19
delivered to the Planning & Community Environment Department, 5th floor, City Hall, 250 20
Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301. Comments received by 2:00 PM the Tuesday preceding 21
the meeting date will be included in the agenda packet. Comments received afterward through 22
2:00 PM the day of the meeting will be presented to the Commission at the dais. 23
24
Material related to an item on this agenda submitted to the PTC after distribution of the 25
agenda packet is available for public inspection at the address above. 26
Americans with Disability Act (ADA) 27
It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a 28
manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an 29
appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, 30
or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329‐2550 (voice) or by emailing 31
ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 32
24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service. 33