Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
20210412plCC
701-32 DOCUMENTS IN THIS PACKET INCLUDE: LETTERS FROM CITIZENS TO THE MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL RESPONSES FROM STAFF TO LETTERS FROM CITIZENS ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS ITEMS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES AND AGENCIES ITEMS FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE, AND REGIONAL AGENCIES Prepared for: 04/12/2021 Document dates: 03/24/2021 – 03/31/2021 Set 1 Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet reproduction in a given week. 1 Baumb, Nelly From:herb <herb_borock@hotmail.com> Sent:Sunday, March 28, 2021 6:18 PM To:Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:March 29, 2021 Council Meeting, Item #2: City Clerk Recruitment Process CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Herb Borock P. O. Box 632 Palo Alto, CA 94302 March 28, 2021 Palo Alto City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 MARCH 29, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AGENDA ITEM #2 CITY CLERK RECRUITMENT PROCESS Dear City Council: Please remove this item from the Consent Calendar and amend the proposed contract to comply with the Brown Act regarding open meetings. The second paragraph on page 2 of the staff report (ID # 12151) reads: Once Council provides authorization to proceed with this recruitment, the selected executive recruitment firm will begin by conducting 1‐1 appointments with each Council Member to discuss the ideal skills, experience, workstyle, and characteristics desired for the position. The executive recruitment firm will then incorporate feedback from the 1‐1 interviews to develop the job announcement. The CAO Committee will assist the executive recruiter to finalize the announcement, and the application acceptance period begins when the job announcement is publicly posted. It is a violation of the Brown Act for anyone to have private sequential meetings with a majority of the members of a legislative body to discuss the "ideal skills, experience, workstyle, and characteristics desired" or to "assist the executive recruiter to finalize the [job] announcement" for a Council Appointed Officer. Meetings for those purposes must be open meetings that are properly noticed in accordance with the Brown Act to permit the public to comment 2 and observe the Council's deliberations as has been done for prior recruitments of Council Appointed Officers. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Herb Borock 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Andie Reed <andiezreed@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, March 28, 2021 8:14 AM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Fwd: Letter from PNQL attorney Attachments:Final Letter to CC. March 25, 2021.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council Members, Just noticed that our (PNQL) attorney, Leila Moncharsh, didn't put "Castilleja" in the subject line when she sent her letter to you. I attach here, in case it got missed. Thanks, Andie Reed ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Leila H. Moncharsh <101550@msn.com> Date: Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 1:47 PM Subject: Letter from PNQL attorney To: tom.dubois@cityofpaloalto.org <tom.dubois@cityofpaloalto.org>, pat.burt@cityofpaloalto.org <pat.burt@cityofpaloalto.org>, lydia.kou@cityofpaloalto.org <lydia.kou@cityofpaloalto.org>, Alison Cormack <alison.cormack@cityofpaloalto.org>, greg.tanaka@cityofpaloalto.org <greg.tanaka@cityofpaloalto.org>, Eric Filseth <eric.filseth@cityofpaloalto.org>, greer.stone@cityofpaloalto.org <greer.stone@cityofpaloalto.org>, city.council@cityofpaloalto.org <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>, Ed Shikada <ed.shikada@cityofpaloalto.org>, Stump, Molly <Molly.Stump@cityofpaloalto.org>, French, Amy <Amy.French@cityofpaloalto.org>, Jonathan Lait <jonathan.lait@cityofpaloalto.org> ‐‐ Andie Reed CPA 160 Melville Ave Palo Alto, CA 94301 530-401-3809 LAW OFFICES VENERUSO & MONCHARSH DONNA M. VENERUSO (d.’09) 5707 REDWOOD ROAD, SUITE 10 LEILA H. MONCHARSH OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA 94619 TELEPHONE (510) 482-0390 FACSIMILE (510) 482-0391 Email: 101550@msn.com March 25, 2021 City Council City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton, 5th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Castilleja School EIR – City Council Hearing – March 29, 2021 Dear Council Members: I am the attorney for PNQL and this letter addresses the prior City Council hearing held on March 15, 2021, only. My clients are grateful for your Council’s attention to the major issues involved with Castilleja’s expansion plans. My comments address legal issues in response to many of the excellent points made by your Council during that hearing. A. The Relationship of Risks versus Benefits Favors a Partial Increase of Enrollment and Not the Entire Requested Increase of 415 to 540 Students During the hearing, City Council Member (Member) Cormack made the accurate comment that the enrollment portion of the permit application drives other issues related to the school’s expansion plans. She focused on “necessity” and “benefits.” Ms. Kaufman listed as necessary: more students to fill language classes and pay teachers, a junior varsity team, more electives, and the like. In discussing benefits, Ms. Kaufman talked broadly about the benefits of girls’ education. She did not explain how the City’s residents, who do not generally use Castilleja would receive any benefit. Ms. Kaufman’s answer about “necessity” begs the question: Where are the parents? A $50,000 per year, top-rated education benefits the student and her parents in pursuit of an enriching school experience and admission into a good college. The costs listed by Ms. Kaufman should fall to the parents in exchange for the benefits their children receive. As Member Filseth commented, the costs related to expansion of the school, including mitigating the impacts of the school’s noise and traffic should not be shouldered by neighbors. In search of equality, Member Stone and Vice-Mayor Burt questioned whether any benefits flowed from the school to the greater community. They understood that the City Council cannot morally and ethically use its permitting discretion to benefit only wealthy families. Ms. Kaufman’s response failed to alleviate their concern. The City has no legal, independent way to determine if Castilleja is assisting financially disadvantaged children without an independent audit and access to school records. A City cannot legally impose and enforce a CUP condition requiring inclusion of underprivileged children in private schools. City Council City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton, 5th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Castilleja Project March 25, 2021 Page 2 Mayor DuBois also commented about community benefits. Prior city councils had granted modified use permits and had deeded city land to the school to satisfy its expansion requests. To now further accommodate the school’s never-ending appetite for expansion by rewriting ordinances would have serious ramifications and not benefit Palo Alto citizens. Mayor DuBois correctly felt that the multiple, enumerated problems with the proposed project were not due to deficiencies in the zoning code. He focused on the framers’ intent when drafting the variance and FAR ordinances and concluded that the project did not satisfy those intentions, and appeared to be “a square peg in a round hole.” Mayor DuBois’s comments reflected concerns about the risks the City would be assuming if it continues granting more expansion rights to the school. a. The City’s Risks of Continuing to Grant Expansions of Castilleja’s Enrollment Outweigh Any Potential Benefits Following upon Member Cormack’s weighing of benefits, weighing the risks to the City serves as a counterbalance. Member Filseth explained the constraints faced by private commuter schools located in residential neighborhoods. Eventually, he reasoned, they come to a crossroad where they either move or live with the constraints placed on them by the City to address negative impacts. However, there is another step to this analysis. A third avenue of dealing with constraints is to ignore them as Castilleja has done with its use permit enrollment and event caps. It also followed the pattern of some institutions by buying up adjacent houses and “landbanking” them for future expansions. Legally, nothing prevents the school from continuing this practice and then returning to the City Council for more expansions. If the school eventually chose to move, how much of the six acres could be repurposed? Considering the zone, the highest and best use would be housing but especially with the underground garage, expensive demolition costs likely would prevent any developer from making the necessary investment. A commissioner answered that another school would just move in. However, demographics do not support that Palo Alto will need more school buildings in the near future. Further, there is no obvious market for another school to incur the maintenance costs and upkeep of a school constructed for 540 students. Having six acres in a prime residential zone sit empty is a financial drain for any city. Ms. Kaufman’s implied claim that if its project application is granted, it will remain “as is” for the “next 100 years” is blatantly unreliable and legally unenforceable. Also, schools generally have master plans in 20-year increments, not 100 years. There is no legal way for the City to impose and enforce a “no further expansion” condition. The only legal control your City Council has over Castilleja is to make very careful planning decisions that serve the entire City, not just one institution, and avoid granting the instant grandiose permit application in its current condition. City Council City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton, 5th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Castilleja Project March 25, 2021 Page 3 b. The Solution Is to Grant a Smaller Enrollment Increase, Remove the Underground Garage and Reduce the Size of the Large Building Almost all private independent schools in California stay relatively small, run on financial shoestrings, comply with their use permits, and maintain good relationships with their communities. The size of private schools is available from the California Department of Education at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/si/ps/. Halfway down the page, find regularly updated excel data showing all of the private schools throughout the state. Across, is a column with the total number of students in each private school. The larger schools are almost all parochial schools. An exception is Harker in San Jose with 2078 students spread over several campuses. If you look at the older data, you will notice that almost all of the small private independent schools in California are nonprofits. They maintain about the same enrollment and rely on tuition increases, contributions from alumni and businesses, fundraisers, and estates. Your Council ordering a redesign that reduces the proposed project should not damage Castilleja. Surely years ago, city staff and the school’s attorney advised Ms. Kaufman that your Council can legally even deny the entire application. Redesigning the project to accommodate a smaller-than-planned increased enrollment and removing the garage should resolve many of the negative impacts. B. The Framers of the Tree Ordinance Intended to Protect Large Oak Trees from Demolition During the hearing, Member Stone focused on the tree ordinance and trees #140 and #155. Mr. Dockter and Mr. Passmore disagreed about the meaning of the Tree Ordinance. Mr. Dockter took the position that the two trees did not meet the code provisions for removal. Mr. Passmore contended that the ordinance allowed for removal of one tree because it was in the building area, but the other oak tree that was in a planter was “a close question” as to whether the ordinance would allow its removal. Member Stone asked about the intent behind the ordinance. To figure out the framers’ intent, I looked for the Resolution adopting the ordinance, but was unable to find it on the Internet. However, I did find several articles from the time when the ordinance was first adopted. (See attachment 1.) In 1996, the City Council voted 8-1 to adopt the ordinance and issued a moratorium on cutting down oak trees prior to the date when the ordinance would become effective. At that time, the ordinance included an exemption if the planning director determined that “saving the tree would reduce the otherwise permissible building area by more than 25 percent.” In 1999, the City Council voted to give protected trees even more protection: “Now property owners will not be able to develop land if the building work will potentially damage the roots and limbs of heritage trees or endangered oaks.” City Council City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton, 5th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Castilleja Project March 25, 2021 Page 4 Reading the entirety of these two 1990s articles indicates that the framers intended strict enforcement. For example, the fee for violating the ordinance went from about $100 in 1996 to $5,000 in 1999. The City Council seemed proud of its work adopting the ordinance to protect endangered oak trees. It appeared from other articles that after the City Council adopted the Tree Ordinance in 1996, it authorized retaining Mr. Dockter to implement the ordinance and act as the city arborist. The first edition of the Tree Technical Manual was published in 2001 and in the upper left corner of the index page, Mr. Dockter is listed as the author: “Prepared for the City Manager by Dave Dockter, Managing Arborist.” (See excerpts, Attachment 2.) Mr. Dockter was intimately familiar with the Tree Ordinance almost from the day the City Council adopted it. C. A Sample CUP for Archer, a Similar Private, All-girls School Mayor DuBois asked for examples of CUPs for private schools, similar to Castilleja. Attachment 3 is the CUP for Archer, an all-girls private school in Los Angeles. It is about the same size as Castilleja. Of interest to your Council may be the transportation conditions. Like Castilleja, Archer is located in an area of the city with traffic congestion from other sources. The solution was to require about 80% of the school’s trips occur by bus, walking, shuttles, or bikes. D. The City Should Allow Public Comment on Any Recommended or Proposed Text Amendment We have been informed by Ms. French that no public comment will be permitted at the next hearing on March 29, 2021. If there will be discussion during that hearing about amended ordinance text, please allow the public an adequate opportunity to comment on it. Thank you for considering our comments. Very truly yours, Leila H. Moncharsh Leila H. Moncharsh, J.D., M.U.P. Veneruso & Moncharsh LHM:lm cc: Clients ATTACHMENT 1 Tree protecrion law passes https:/'www.paloaltoonlinc.comlweekly/morgue/newst I 996_Jul_ 1 ... Publication Date: Wednesday Jul 17, 1996 CITY COUNCIL: Tree protection law passes Council also wants morntorium on tree removal until ordinance takes effect in 1997 by Peter Gauvin Although Palo Alto is well known for its tree-lined residential streets, the city has never had a law aga inst the removal or harming of trees on private property--until now. On Monday, the City Council approved 8-1 an ordinance that would protect two species of oak trees--valley oaks and coast live oaks--when the trunks are at least I I .5 inches in diameter. It also would protect so-called "heritage trees," trees designated by the city for their special history, size or appearance. I lowevcr, heritage trees could be designated only with the property owner's consent. "I'm very happy to support this ordinance," said Council member Gary Fazzino. "Tl will protect trees and provide prope1ty owners with the flexibility they need." The ordinance wil l not become elTective until January 1. I 997. and any building applications made between now and then will be exempt. The five months will allow the city time to hire a new arborist for the Planning Department and to prepare a tree technical manual on how to care for oaks and other protected trees. But the council was concerned that the time lapse before the law goes into effect would allow some builders or home remodelcrs to topple trees before they're protected. Thus, the council directed tJ1e city attorney to come up with a moratorium on single-family construction and remodels that afTect oaks and heritage trees, with exceptions for legitimate reasons for removal. The new law comes 21 years after a first attempt to protect trees on private prope1ty failed and four years after a stricter ordinance nan-owly lost on a split 4-4 vote. Council member Dick Rosenbaum was on the council in I 975, although he doesn't remember which way he voted then. But he said the new ordinance really isn't necessary. "It's difiicult to argue that the conm1Unity has been laid bare" since 1975, he said. And Mayor Lanie Wheeler said she has been subject to no small amount of grief from Council member Liz Kniss since she was the missing swing vote in 1992. "I was on a very impo1tant business trip ... to Hawaii," Wheeler said. adding that she would have supported the ordinance then. That proposal would have protected any and all trees greater than 16 inches in diameter. The council directed that the new ordinance be brought back in December 1997--before five of their terms wind up--for review and the possible addition of new tree species. But council members were also clear they did not want to stick property owners with a proposed $310 fee for city review of arborist's repmts when they're seeking to remove a protected tree, particularly if it's obviously dead or diseased. They recommended that staff come back with a fee in the $50-$100 range. ~Back ug to the Table of Contents Pag~ Palo Alto bans cutting down oak trees https://www.paloaltoonline.com/weekl:y/morgue/news/ 1996 _Ju I 3 ... I ,...r I Publication Date: Wednesday Jul 31, 1996 PALO ALTO: Palo Alto bans cutting down oak trees Interim law meant to protect native oaks until new ord inance takes effect Cut down an oak tree--facc a $5.000 fine. That's now the law in Palo Alto, where the City Council has placed a moratorium on the cutting down of native oak trees on all private property. The council passed the ban to prevent anyone from cutting down the trees before the city's new tree protection ordinance takes effect on Jan . I. 1997. Violators of the moratorium could be hit with a fine of up to $5.000 per tree. The council adopted the tree protection ordinance on July 15. But Ken Schreiber. director of Planning and Community Environment, said his department needs until the first of the year to hire an arborist to enforce the ordinance. get administrative procedures in place and to develop a tree protection manual on how to care for oaks and other so-called "heritage" trees. The council was concerned that the five-month delay might provide a window for property owners or developers to remove questionable oak trees. The City Council voted 8-1 last week to approve the moratorium. which is a simplilied version of the tree protection ordinance. It prohibits the removal of Valley Oaks and Coast Live Oaks which are 11.5 inches in diameter or greater when measured four and one-hal C feet above their base. However. there are exemptions for any tree that the planning director determines to be dead. dangerous or constitutes a nuisance; if'the tree is located in the designated building area of a single-family lot; and if saving the tree would reduce the otherwise permissible building area by more than 25 percent. Council member Dick Rosenbaum was the lone vote against the moratorium, and the ordinance as well. Rosenbaum said he doesn't believe the law is necessary. He was on the council in 1975 when a law protecting trees on private property was first considered. rt failed, but Rosenbaum said that in the 21 years since there hasn't been a great loss of trees on residential property. Kate Feinstein. a member of the city's Tree Task Force that recommended the ordinance, said it is a "moderate and reasonable ordinance" that will help en sure that Palo Alto continues to be known and loved for its urban forest. The council asked that the ordinance be brought back in Oecembt.:r 1997 for review and the possible addition of another species to the list of protected trees. --Peter Gauvin U Back ug to the Table of Contents Pag~ 1/?1/?0? I 1· J 'i PM 3/20/2021 Hentage trees given greater protection Publication Date: Wednesday May 19. 1999 CITY COUNCIL: Heritage trees given greater protection Palo Alto passes law to limit building impact on historic trees Palo Alto may have been named for an ancient redwood tree, but until Monday night, some of the city's most valuable heritage trees were at the mercy of the latest building boom. On Monday night, the City Council voted to strengthen and extend Palo Alto's existing tree ordinance to give heritage trees greater protection. Now property owners will not be able to develop land if the building work will potentially damage the roots and limbs of heritage trees or endangered oaks. The city 01iginally passed its tree ordinance in 1996, but the language wasn't specific enough to protect some centuries-old trees close to private development sites. 1 n February 1998, local environmentalists became aware of several endangered oaks, inc luding one in front of a proposed new home on Sequoia Avenue. The City Council hurriedly approved an emergency ordinance to close some of the loopholes in the ordinance. Monday night's unanimous council decision served to make those safeguards permanent. Under the ordinance as 01iginally drafted, cutting down any native oak tree on privale property can incur a fine of up to $5,000. And while coast live oaks and valley oaks measuring more than 11 I /2 inches in diameter are automati cally protected under these regulations, other historic trees have to go through a rigorous nomination and application process before they quulify for city protection. A heritage tree can be nominated by anyone, but the written consent of the property owner also must be obtained. To qua Ii ry, a tree must confo1111 to one of the following standards: -It is an outstanding specimen of a desirablt! species; -It is one of the largest or oldest trees in Palo Alto; -It is distinctive in form. size, age, location or historic significance. The final decision to designate a tree for protection is made by the City Council. https://www.paloalloonline.com/weekly/morgue/news/1999 May 19 TREES.html 1/2 3/20/2021 Hentage trees grven greater protection This February, Palo Alto approved its ve1y first heritage tree: a 100-year-old redwood on La Donna Street that was nominated by private property owners. This summer, three more Palo Alto trees await historic designation: El Palo Alto, the coastal redwood tree that gave the ci ty its namc--"tall tree" in Spanish; a coast live oak in city-owned Rinconada Park; and a redwood tree on private property. A protected tree may be taken down only if it is directly in the building area of a proposed development project, if construction will result in the death of the tree, or if it's already considered dead or dangerous. The tree must be replaced in accordance with city standards. While Palo Alto is renowned for its tree-lined streets, Councilwoman Sandy Eakins pointed out Monday night that the city's tree ordinance lacks teeth compared to other cities' regulations, which typically protect more than just two species. But the new law, which relics largely on the citizens of Palo Alto to nominate heritage trees, passed 8-0 with little debate (Councilwoman Liz Kniss was absent.) rn other action Monday night, council members also unanimously approved a new building project proposed by SAP Labs lnc., the hosts of this year's City of Palo Alto Black & White Ball . The 64,636-square- foot, two-sto1y research office will replace a smaller building at 34 l 0 Hillview Drive, just beneath Coyote Hill. The new building wi ll draw heavily on influences from the Coyote Indians, according to the project's designers. Council members also unanimously approved a two-story addition to a two-sto1y home on Page Mill Road, which is surrounded on all sides by open space. However, they were severely chasliscd for doing so by Verdosa Avenue resident John Baca, who pointed out that the cumulative impact of the council's decisions was gradually eroding the city's open space. "You have a I 00 percent record of approving these things." Baca said. "I don't think it's really wise for Palo Alto lo go around talking about protecting open space when it is doing th e opposite." Baca suggested that the city develop its own open space ordinance. In the final action of the night. the City Council unanimously approved a $4.3 million relief sewer project for Amarillo Avenue and Embarcadero Way. The project will involve tunneling under Highway I 0 I and sensitive marsh lands. --Vicky A1111i11g I., .. Back UP-to the Table of Contents Pag~ httmd/www Olllo;iltoonlinA c:om/wAPklv/morm1AinAw!:l1999 MAv 19 TRFF8 html ?/? ATTACHMENT 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO Standards & Specifications Palo Alto Municipal Code, Chapter 8.10.030 Photograph by Alvin Dockter June, 2001 First Edition Department of Planning and Community Environment "In Palo Alto, it's the trees!" x City of Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual Published by The City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Phone 650-329-2441 Fax 650-329-2154 Sixth Printing 2016 First Edition 2001 World Wide Web Version This document is available on the Cit of Palo Alto's website: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/environment Cover Photo In 1997, Palo Altans celebrated their love for trees by enacting a tree preservation ordinance. This cover photo shows citizens enjoying the shade of a grand Valley Oak protected by ordinance and native to our region. Embracing the preservation of these trees demonstrates our investment in \he future. See page xi, Intent & Purpose, for more. --Photo by Alvin M. Dockter printed on recycled paper containing 30% post consumer chlorine-free fiber City of Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual CITY OF PALO ALTO TREE TECHNICAL MANUAL STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS Palo Alto Municipal Code. Chapter B.10 030 Prepared for the City Manager by Dave Dockter, Managing Arborlst Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................... i INTENT AND PURPOSE . ........ .. .................................................................... xi INTRODUCTION • Use of the Manual ......................................................... xiii Palo Alto's Regulated Trees ......................................................................... xiii Palo Alto Municipal Code ............................................................................. xiii Protected Categories ................................................................................... xiv Required practices .......................................................................................... xiv Recommended practices ................................................................................ xiv Definitions . .. . ............................................................................................... xiv Appendices . . ................................................................................................ xv Assumptions and limiting conditions ................................................................ xv SECTION 1.00 DEFINITIONS ...................................................................... 1-1 SECTION 2.00 PROTECTION OF TREES DURING CONSTRUCTION . . . ............................................................ 2-1 Introduction ... .... .. ... ... .. .. ........................................................................... 2· 1 2.10 Tree Protection and Preservation Plan ......................................... 2·1 2.15 Pre-construction requirements ......................................................... 2-2 Site plan ....................................................................................................... 2-2 Verification of tree protection ......................................................................... 2-2 Pre-construction meeting ............................................................................... 2-2 Protective tree fencing .................................................................................. 2-2 Size and type of fence ............................................................................... 2-2 Area to be fenced ...................................................................................... 2-2 Tree protection zone ...................................................................................... 2-4 Activities prohibited ....... . ... ..... ... .. . .................. .... .. ... . .. . .. ......... ........ ......... 2-4 Activities permitted or required ................................................................... 2-5 Erosion control ............................................................................................ 2-5 Tree pruning, surgery and removal ............................................................... 2-5 Pruning limitations ...................................................................................... 2-5 Minimum pruning .................................................................................... 2-5 Maximum pruning ................................................................................... 2-5 Tree workers ........................................................................................... 2-5 Surgery ...................................................................................................... 2-6 Tree removal procedure .............................................................................. 2-6 Tree removal ........................................................................................... 2-6 Stump removal ....................................................................................... 2-6 2.20 Activities during construction and demolition near trees ............................................................................. 2·6 Soil compaction ........................................................................................ 2-6 City of Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual ATTACHMENT 3 LINN K.WYATT CHIEF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR LfTY OF LOS ANGELES1 DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING ASSOCIATE ZONING ADMINISTRATORS R. NICOLAS BROWN SUE CHANG LOURDES GREEN CHARLES J. RAUSCH, JR. JIM TOKUNAGA FERNANDO TOVAR DAVIDS. WEINTRAUB MAYA E. ZAITZEVSKY July 29, 2013 Elizabeth English (A)(O) The Archer School for Girls 11725 West Sunset Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90049 Cindy StarretUBeth Gordie (R) Latham & Watkins, LLP 355 South Grand Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560 CALIFORNIA MICHAEL J. LOGRANDE DIRECTOR OFFICE OF ZONING ADMINISTRATION 200 N. SPRING STREET, 7'" FLOOR Los ANGELES, CA 90012 (213) 978-1318 ERIC GARCETTI FAX: (213) 978-1334 MAYOR www.planning.lacity.org CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) APPROVAL OF PLANS 11725 West Sunset Boulevard Brentwood-Pacific Palisades Planning Area Zone R3-1, RE11-1 D. M. : 135B145 C. D. : 11 CEQA : ENV 2012-3300-CE Legal Description: Lots 3, 4, 18-21; Westgate Heights Tract Pursuant to Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 12.24-M and Condition No. 44 of Case No. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA3) dated November 14, 2007 (corresponding Council File No. 98- 2181), I hereby: DETERMINE: that the applicant has substantially complied with the terms and Conditions of approval previously established, MODIFY Condition Nos. 5, 13, 40.a, 44, 50, and 52, and ADD Condition Nos. 34.g and 44.i as incorporated with the other unchanged Conditions, into a new comprehensive list of Conditions, labeled Exhibit B-3 of this determination, and a Chart of Special Events, labeled Exhibit C, in conjunction with the continued use and maintenance of a private school for girls in the RE11-1 and R3-1 Zones. OBSERVANCE OF CONDITIONS-TIME LIMIT-LAPSE OF PRIVILEGES All terms and conditions of the approval shall be fulfilled before the use may be established. The instant authorization is further conditional upon the privileges being utilized within three years after the effective date of approval and, if such privileges are not utilized or substantial physical construction work is not begun within said time and carried on diligently to completion, the authorization shall terminate and become void. TRANSFERABILITY This authorization runs with the land. In the event the property is to be sold, leased, rented or occupied by any person or corporation other than yourself, it is incumbent upon you to advise them regarding the conditions of this grant. AN EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY -AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE2 VIOLATIONS OF THESE CONDITIONS, A MISDEMEANOR Section 12.29 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code provides: "A variance, conditional use, adjustment, public benefit or other quasi-judicial approval, or any conditional approval granted by the Director, pursuant to the authority of this chapter shall become effective upon utilization of any portion of the privilege, and the owner and applicant shall immediately comply with its Conditions. The violation of any valid Condition imposed by the Director, Zoning Administrator, Area Planning Commission, City Planning Commission or City Council in connection with the granting of any action taken pursuant to the authority of this chapter, shall constitute a violation of this chapter and shall be subject to the same penalties as any other violation of this Code." Every violation of this determination is punishable as a misdemeanor and shall be punishable by a fine of not more than $2,500 or by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. APPEAL PERIOD -EFFECTIVE DA TE The applicant's attention is called to the fact that this grant is not a permit or license and that any permits and licenses required by law must be obtained from the proper public agency. Furthermore, if any Condition of this grant is violated or if the same be not complied with, then the applicant or his successor in interest may be prosecuted for violating these Conditions the same as for any violation of the requirements contained in the Municipal Code. The Zoning Administrator's determination in this matter will become effective after AUGUST 13, 2013, unless an appeal therefrom is filed with the City Planning Department. It is strongly advised that appeals be filed early during the appeal period and in person so that imperfections/incompleteness may be corrected before the appeal period expires. Any appeal must be filed on the prescribed forms, accompanied by the required fee, a copy of the Zoning Administrator's action, and received and receipted at a public office of the Department of City Planning on or before the above date or the appeal will not be accepted. Forms are available on-line at http://planning.lacity.org. Public offices are located at: Figueroa Plaza 201 North Figueroa Street, 4th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90012 (213) 482-7077 Marvin Braude San Fernando Valley Constituent Service Center 6262 Van Nuys Boulevard, Room 251 Van Nuys, CA 91401 (818) 374-5050 If you seek judicial review of any decision of the City pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5, the petition for writ of mandate pursuant to that section must be filed no later than the 90th day following the date on which the City's decision became final pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. There may be other time limits which also affect your ability to seek judicial review. NOTICE The applicant is further advised that all subsequent contact with this office regarding this determination must be with the Zoning Administrator who acted on the case. This would include clarification, verification of condition compliance and plans or building permit CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 3 applications, etc., and shall be accomplished BY APPOINTMENT ONLY, in order to assure that you receive service with a minimum amount of waiting. You should advise any consultant representing you of this requirement as well. FINDINGS OF FACT After thorough consideration of the statements contained in the application, the plans submitted therewith, the report of the Zoning Analyst thereon, the statements made at the public hearing on May 23, 2013, all of which are by reference made a part hereof, as well as knowledge of the property and surrounding district, I find that the requirements for authorizing a conditional use plan approval under the provisions of Section 12.24-M have been established by the following facts: BACKGROUND The property is a slightly sloping, irregular-shaped, interior, through parcel of land, consisting of six record lots, totaling approximately 6.20 acres, having a frontage of 300 feet on the north side of Sunset Boulevard and a frontage of 600 feet on the south side of Chaparal Street and a depth varying from 300 to 600 feet. The property features a slight upslope from Sunset Boulevard to Chaparal Street. The front portion of the site is developed with a one-and two-story Spanish Colonial Revival style building formerly utilized as a residential home and convalescent facility for elderly women (Eastern Star). Currently, the building is the Archer School for Girls. The subject site contains approximately 6.2 acres of land in the R3-1 and RE11-1 Zones, and is designated Medium Residential and Very Low II Residential in the Brentwood-Pacific Palisades Community Plan. The existing school is comprised of approximately 95,000 square feet of floor area, and the site includes administrative offices, school classrooms, assembly and meeting rooms, a large play field, a sport court and two surface parking lots with 109 striped parking spaces. Archer was first approved by the City of Los Angeles to operate at its current location in 1998 under a Conditional Use Permit Case Nos. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(ZV), BZA 5618, 5619 and 5620; and CF-98-2181, and has been in continuous operation at 11725 Sunset Boulevard since a Certificate of Occupancy was issued on May 26, 1999. The surrounding properties are within the RE11, RE15, RD3, R3, [Q]R4, and C2 Zones and are characterized by slightly sloping topography and semi-and fully-improved streets. The surrounding properties are generally developed with one-and two-story single-family dwellings north of the site. Multi-family and commercial uses are located along Sunset Boulevard and extend to the east, west and south of the site. A small shopping center and two service stations are located on the south side of Sunset Boulevard at the intersection with Barrington Avenue. Other institutional and quasi-public uses include four schools within the immediate vicinity of the project site: Brentwood Lower School, Brentwood Upper and Middle School, Saint Martin of Tours, the Sunshine School, and the Synagogue School. The Kenter Canyon Elementary School and Mount St. Mary's College exists within one to two miles of the site. The adjoining properties to the north of Chaparal Street are zoned RE 15-1 and developed with two-story single-family dwellings on estate-sized lots. The adjoining properties to the south of Sunset Boulevard are zoned R3-1 and [Q]R4-1 and are developed with three-and four-story apartments and condominiums with over street-level parking. The adjoining CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 5 located in the RE11 Zone as well as access to these parking areas to be across property classified in a less restrictive zone; permit the construction, use and maintenance of a turf covered playing field to be located in the RE 11 Zone; permit the proposed gymnasium/multi-purpose building to be located in a more restrictive zone (RE11) than that required for the main use on the site (R3); and permit the proposed facility to provide 109 off-street parking spaces instead of the approximate 415 spaces required. Case No. ZA 11709-On December 27, 1951, the Zoning Administrator granted the construction of a staff building, superintendent unit and carport for 16 autos for a two year period. Case No. ZA 11173 -On May 12, 1950, the Zoning Administrator denied the construction of a one-story staff facility with an 80-foot setback from Chaparal Street and partially_granted the construction of a two-story addition to the rear of the existing Eastern Star Home building and a setback of 200 feet from Chaparal Street. On June 4, 1950, the Board of Zoning Appeals denied the Eastern Star Home Association appeal. Case No. ZA 4021 -In 1931, the Zoning Administrator approved a conditional variance (Ordinance No. 68,813) to permit the establishment and maintenance of a facility for aged members of the Eastern Star Home Association. One condition requires that the buildings be set back at least 224 feet from Chaparal Street. Surrounding Properties: Case No. ZA 97-0749(YV) -On December 30, 1997, the Zoning Administrator approved an application to permit the installation of a 12-foot high wall in the rear yard setback of two contiguous single-family residences and a 6-foot high fence with 6-foot high gates in the front yard setback at 11706 Chaparal Street. Case No. ZA 95-0404(CUZ) -On August 29, 1995, the Zoning Administrator approved a conditional use at 11967 Sunset Boulevard, to permit an approximately 4,800 square-foot addition to an existing parochial school and an approximately 1,000 square-foot residential addition to an existing rectory. Case No. ZA 93-0388(CUZ) -On May 18, 1993, the Zoning Administrator terminated the zoning case for a conditional use at 11960 Sunset Boulevard, to permit a private school with a maximum enrollment of 166 students. Case No. ZA 92-0372(CUZ) -On September 11, 1992, the Zoning Administrator approved a conditional use at 105 South Barrington Place, to permit the continued maintenance and operation of a private junior high/senior high school having approximately 100,000 square feet of development. Further, with said school having a minimum of 190 improved on-site parking spaces and an additional 122 unimproved spaces on the adjacent Veterans' Administration property; and, a maximum enrollment of 695 students (copy attached). Case No. GUZ 78-108 -On June 16, 1978, the Zoning Administrator approved a conditional use to permit the modification of City Plan Case No. 1273 which previously authorized a private elementary school at 12001 Sunset Boulevard, to CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE6 now permit a one-way, loop driveway system for the pickup and delivery of school children along the Bundy Drive frontage, instead of from the Saltair Avenue frontage. PUBLIC HEARING: The public hearing for the subject matter was held on May 23, 2013 at the West Los Angeles Municipal Building, Second Floor Hearing Room, 1645 Corinth Avenue and was attended by the applicant [Archer School staff, members of the board of trustees, past and current presidents of the parents' association, parents, the head of school], the applicant's representatives [Beth Gordie and Cindy Starrett of Latham & Watkins], residents in the area and the representatives of the Brentwood Community Council and Council District 11. After explaining the procedures to be followed during the course of the hearing and the scope of the subject application, the Zoning Administrator invited the public to present oral and written testimony. The applicant and the applicant's representatives stated the following: • • • • • • • • • The Archer school has been at the subject site since 1999 . ~s indicated in the Zoning Administrator's findings forthe prior condition compliance eviews, which were conducted in 2004 and 2007, the Archer school has attained ubstantial condition compliance. The school has two neighborhood liaison meetings per year. The last meeting was on November 3, 2012 and the next meeting will be on June 12, 2013. For each school year, students are informed of the conditions to comply for traffic and parking. The Archer school students are not allowed to drive alone . The traffic mitigation measures require a minimum of 50% bus ridership; however, the school achieved an average ridership of 80% or more. During peak hours, an average ridership has been 7 persons per vehicle. The students are not allowed to park or to be dropped off on the neighboring streets. The community liaison always follows up on tl1e neighbors' concerns/complains . An environmental Impact Report is being prepared for the Archer School Forward project. The representative of the Brentwood Community Council spoke in support of the application. • The Archer school conditional use permit has the most stringent conditions. • The school administration has been taken an immediate action to correct non- compliance of the conditions. The school took disciplinary action for students who violated traffic and parking conditions. • The school has achieved higher ridership than the average ridership required by the conditional use. The current/past parents, current/past presidents of the Archer School Parents' Association, members of the Archer School Board of Trustees, and residents spoke in support of the applicant stating that the school has attained substantial compliance with the required conditions. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 7 • The Archer school students/parents understand that they have to comply with the traffic and parking conditions required by the conditional use permit. • Most students take a bus. • The school made substantial improvements on Sunset Boulevard and is respectful to its neighbors. • The school preserves an architectural character. • New parents have been informed of the required parking condition and understand that students are not allowed to be dropped off on the neighboring streets. • During special events, no queuing occurred on the surrounding streets. • Parents are constantly reminded of off-site parking at the Veteran's Affair parking lot. • Some parents moved to the area to send their kids to Archer School. • The school has completed the traffic mitigation measures required in the traffic management plan. • Approximately 80% of the students take a bus. • The school has reached out to the community to be informed of any issues associated with the operation of the school and has been in close contact with the local business association. • The school has worked to improve pedestrian safety at the intersections. • Two crossing guards are recommended at the intersection of Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue. The adjoining property owner at 11840 Chaparal Street, and the property owner of 134 North Westgate Avenue expressed the following concerns: • The school has generally been a good neighbor; however, recently there has been a lack of condition compliance resulting in adverse impacts to the surrounding properties. • Due to noise from the athletic field during school hours, the surrounding neighbors cannot enjoy their yards until late evening. [The noise from the school recorded at 134 North Westgate Avenue was played at the hearing.] Sound sensors at the walls of the athletic field are recommended to monitor the noise level. • The neighbors have been concerned about the use of and lack of landscape around the school owned property at 141 North Barrington Avenue. Until the hearing forthe subject application has been scheduled, the school has not maintained the property well resulting in a blighting appearance. • The single-family dwelling at 141 North Barrington has been vacant and such a vacant appearance may cause health and safety issues to the surrounding neighbors. • The adjoining property is the most affected neighbor. Students congregate in the athletic field next to the adjoining property resulting in noise impacts to the residents of 11840 Chaparal Street. • The future meetings for the proposed school expansion should be sent to residents beyond a 500-foot radius. • Even though it is not frequent, students are dropped off and/or park on the surrounding streets, on Chaparal Street and Barrington Avenue especially on graduation day or special events. • The existing fence and net barrier between the athletic field and the adjoining property is ineffective to mitigate errant balls and excessive noise. A more extensive landscape barrier is needed to mitigate the noise and errant balls going over the fence barrier to the neighboring property. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 8 The representative of Council District 11 spoke in support of the school and submitted a letter of support. In response to the public comments, the applicant's representative stated the following: • An Environmental Impact Report [EIR] is being prepared for the proposed school expansion named Archer School Forward. A new traffic and noise study will be included in the EIR to address potential traffic and noise impacts. • A new underground parking and a gymnastic building are proposed as part of the proposed expansion. • The school owned property at 141 North Barrington Avenue is patrolled by security guards. • A total of eight school buses are in operation in the morning and twice after school at 3:15 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. • No access from/to Chaparal Street is permitted except for emergency. • Students and parents park at the Brentwood Village public parking lot located at 201 South Barrington Place. • A total of nine students who are juniors and seniors drive with an average of three to four students per car. • There are crossing guards at the intersection of Barrington Avenue and Sunset Boulevard. • The Draft Environmental Impact for the proposed expansion is expected to be circulated for public review. The first phase of the proposed expansion is planned to commence in June, 2014. The following was submitted to the file: • A letter dated May 21, 2013 from Council Office 11 in support of the school stating that the school has demonstrated a track record of compliance. • A letter dated May 20, 2013 from the Brentwood Community Council in support stating that the school has complied with the required conditions. The Community Council suggested that an Archer school trip counts should be in the hours between 3 p.m. and 7:15 p.m. and the permitted unspecified events should be defined. • A letter dated May 14, 2013 from the Brentwood Park Property Owners Association, Inc. in support of the school stating that the school is an asset to the community and has worked diligently to ensure all operating conditions are in compliance. • Letters dated October 9, 2012 and May 20, 2013 from the westerly adjoining property owner of 11840 Chaparal Street [Eric Waxman] indicating that the school has not attained full compliance with the required conditions. The immediate neighbors have organized their website www.archerneighbors.com in response to the proposed expansion "Archer Forward". The concerns mentioned in the letter include the use of the school owned property at 141 North Barrington as a storage facility, students being dropped off on Barrington Avenue and parents parking on Chaparal Street, noise from the athletic field, the neighborhood liaison meetings required to discuss any compliance issues being used to seek support for the proposed expansion plans, amplified sound on the athletic field, violation of the limits on weekend field use, a lack of barrier/buffer between the athletic field and the adjoining property resulting in errant balls landing on the neighbor's property and noise impacts, and a lack of transparency with the neighbors in connection with the proposed expansion plans. [The letter dated CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 9 October 9, 2012 included 25 signatures signed by neighbors, whom the westerly adjoining property owner represents.] • Approximately 50 letters/e-mails were received from the residents and current/past parents and trustees of the Archer school. [Some are duplicative.] A majority of the neighbors expressed concerns about traffic, parking congestion and violation of the required conditions mentioned by the westerly adjoining property owner. Few neighboring property owners including the adjoining neighbor at 11718 Chaparal Street indicate that the school has been a good neighbor. The communication received from parents/students and trustees of the school states that the school has attained a full compliance with the required condition. REVIEW OF COMPLIANCE WITH PRIOR CONDITIONS OF ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA3) DATED NOVEMBER 14, 2007: 1. All other use, height and area regulations of the Municipal Code and all other applicable government/regulatory agencies shall be strictly complied with in the development and use of the property, except as such regulations are herein specifically varied or required. STATUS: There was no communication or documentation in the record to suggest any violation with this condition. 2. The use and development of the property shall be in substantial conformance with the plot plan submitted with the application and marked Exhibit "A", except as may be revised as a result of this action. STATUS: Per the field site staff, investigative staff determined compliance. The plot plan submitted to the file indicates no changes to the existing school. 3. The authorized use shall be conducted at all times with due regard for the character of the surrounding district, and the right is reserved to the Zoning Administrator to impose additional corrective Conditions, if, in the Administrator's opinion, such Conditions are proven necessary for the protection of persons in the neighborhood or occupants of adjacent property. STATUS: This review provides an opportunity to assess the degree of compliance. 4. All graffiti on the site shall be removed or painted over in the same color as the surface to which it is applied within 24 hours of its occurrence. STATUS: The site visit revealed there was no graffiti present. 5. The physical plant shall be limited to the existing main building which contains a floor area of 95,500 square feet including eight dwelling units limited to occupancy by school personnel and visiting guests, a proposed gymnasium building with a maximum floor area of 12,000 square feet located in the southeast corner of the lots zoned RE-11 and approximately 75 feet south of the property line along Chaparal Street, a maintenance building located at the northwest corner of the gym and shall be no closer to the Chaparal Street property line than the gym and shall be harmonious with the gym and attached, with a maximum floor area of 709 square CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE10 feet and a height not to exceed 16 feet, an "east" and "west" parking area, a turf- covered athletic field, 200 bleacher seats located on the south side of the field and no more than 60 feet long and 5 feet high with 5 tiers of seats,, enclosing fences, driveways and landscaping. STATUS: Per site inspection, no dwelling units or gymnasium exists on site; the site contains an athletic field and the main building. The Exhibit "A" in the prior determinations indicates that a gymnasium and maintenance building were previously approved; but, they were never built as reflected on the plot plan submitted with the current application. The dwelling units in the prior convalescent home were remodeled for the existing school. 6. The use of the subject property shall be limited to a private school for girls, Grades 6 through 12, with a maximum enrollment of 518 students. Maximum total enrollment is not intended to be reached. This number recognizes the inability of school admissions staff to know with precision the number of students who will actually matriculate relative to the number of students who are sent acceptance letters, and provides a cushion to protect the school from being out of compliance with its targeted baseline enrollment of 450 students. STATUS: Per applicant's statement, the enrollment for the 2011-2012 school year was 430 students. The school remains as a private school for girls, Grades 6 through 12. 7. Use restrictions: a. Rental or lease of the facilities is not permitted, with the exception of not more than one day every five years by the Los Angeles Conservancy for a maximum of 200 people. [The term "rental of the facilities" is not dependent upon the payment of a fee. The use by homeowner and civic groups or an athletic contest not including an Archer Team, for example, is not permitted.] STATUS: Per applicant's statement, Archer school does not rent or lease the facilities, with the exception noted in this condition. No comments have been received to support non-compliance with this condition. b. Parking provided on-site shall not be utilized for events or uses occurring at off-site locations unless the property owner files a shared parking application pursuant to Section 12.24-X,20 of the Municipal Code, and is granted such request. A public hearing must be held. STATUS: The applicant states that on-site parking is not utilized for events or uses occurring at off-site location. No comments have been received to suggest non-compliance with this condition. c. Rental or lease of the property for filming shall not be permitted at any time. STATUS: Per applicant's statement, Archer does not rent or lease the property for filming. No comments have been received to suggest non- compliance with this condition. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 11 8. Gymnasium. a. The proposed gymnasium building shall not exceed 36 feet in height above existing adjacent ground elevation. b. Any structures on the roof, such as air conditioning units and other equipment, shall be fully screened from view of adjoining lots. c. The maximum number of seats, whether fixed or movable, shall not exceed 450. d. The maximum occupancy of the building shall not exceed 500 persons at any time, unless the Fire Department establishes a lesser number, and shall be so posted. STATUS: Archer has not constructed the approved gymnasium. 9. Trash storage and removal. a. Trash shall be contained within an enclosed area indicated on the plot plan and located at least 35 feet from any property line and not within view of adjoining properties or the public street. Trash pickup shall be made within the property, during the hours between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. STATUS: As shown on Exhibit "A", the trash bin is contained within an enclosed area located more than 35 feet from any property line and not within view of adjoining properties or the public street. The applicant indicates that trash pickup is made within the property, during the hours between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. b. The trash hauling company shall be informed by the applicant in a letter that all activity associated therewith shall be conducted in a manner so as not to interrupt traffic on the adjoining streets or cause excessive noise, disturbance or parking problems. The letter shall indicate that no service shall be permitted during the hours of student drop off and pick up. The applicable hours shall be stated in the letter. Upon mailing such letter to the trash hauling company, the applicant shall transmit a copy thereof to the Zoning Administrator. STATUS: A letter informing the trash hauling company of the required restrictions has not been submitted to the file; however, the applicant states that Archer contracts with Consolidated Disposal for its trash hauling. Archer has informed Consolidated Disposal that all activity associated therewith shall be conducted in a manner so as not to interrupt traffic on the adjoining streets or cause excessive noise, disturbance or parking problems. No service is permitted during the hours of student drop off and pick up. No complaints have been received indicating violation of this condition. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 12 10. Historic Resources a. All construction on the property shall be subject to design approval by the Cultural Heritage Commission. The existing main building shall be subject to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitation of Historic Structures. b. New construction shall be compatible with the existing main building in accordance with the concepts described in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Preservation Brief No. 14, published by the National Park Service. c. Significant existing designated historic landscape features, including the front lawn, courtyard and fountain shall be retained. New landscaping shall respect the historic character of the building and, where possible, recreate or reference documented historic landscaping. STATUS: The subject plan approval application is to review the applicant's condition compliance. No construction is proposed or associated with the subject application. The significant features (lawn, courtyard, fountain) have been retained. The applicant has provided documentation that the site is a Historical Monument, dated July 19, 1989. 11. Hours of operation shall observe the following limitations per Exhibit B-2: a. For classroom instruction: 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday for the main building, 7:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday for the gym, and 7:40 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday for the field. No classroom instruction is permitted on Saturday, Sunday or national holidays, with the exception of Columbus Day and Veterans Day when those days are used as regular school days. STATUS: The hours of the school operation are consistent with the hours required in this condition. No comments have been received indicating non-compliance with this condition. b. For gymnasium use: 7:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday for class instruction, 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday for athletic practice, 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday for competitions/other schools (notice to neighbors required), 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., Fridays for athletic practice, 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., Fridays as needed for competitions/other schools (notice to neighbors is required), 1 O a.m. to 9 p.m., Saturdays for athletic practice and 10 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturdays as needed for play offs (notice to neighbors required). No gymnasium use is permitted on Sundays with exception of 3 admissions open houses between the hours of 12 p.m. to 5 p.m. (notice to the neighbors is required) or national holidays. STATUS: The approved gymnasium has not been constructed. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE13 c. For outdoor use: 1) Passive use: 7:40 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday and 1 O a.m. 6 p.m., Saturdays. No passive use is permitted on Sunday and national holidays, with the exception of Columbus Day and Veterans Day when those days are used as regular school days. Passive use is limited to schools students, staff and families as long as no "fans" or excessive noise is generated. Examples of passive uses include picnics, walking, sitting and eating lunch in designated areas. ii) Athletic use: 7:40 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, with a limitation of 100 students at one time and 6 p.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday for athletic practice. Saturday use is limited to 4 days a year with a 4 hour period between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. for a school use within the established school program. No activities of any kind [e.g., setting up, deliveries, warm ups] shall take place on the field prior to 9 a.m. Within the 4 hour period limit, the 4 Saturday uses shall permit practices between the hours of 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., as needed, and competitions/other schools with a goal of being played between the hours of 3:30 p.m. and 6 p.m. Notice to the neighbors is required for competitions/other schools. Athletic use is not permitted on Sundays or national holidays, with the exception of Columbus Day and Veterans Day when those days are used as regular school days. STATUS: The hours, use, and special events submitted by the applicant indicate that the passive use and athletic use has been within the hours and dates required in this condition. No complaints have been received indicating violation of this condition. d. Teacher preparations, normal school maintenance, parent conferences with teachers, school board meetings and similar customary school activities cumulatively limited to 40 vehicles on the property at one time are permitted to 9 p.m., Monday through Friday. STATUS: The school conducts such activities and meetings until 9 p.m. Monday through Friday. e. Not more than 47 Special Events are authorized. All Special Events are listed in Exhibit B-3, and summarized below. Full utilization of the 109 striped parking spaces on-site is limited to daily class time, parent conferences and teacher meetings, Competitions/Other Schools, scheduled performances, Back to School Nights, Graduation, and the annual Holiday Boutique. No parking is permitted on the athletic field. Permitted hours of Special Events are limited to those listed in Exhibit B-3, including any time needed to clean and restore the site, if necessary. 1) Back to School Nights -two days during the school year, Monday through Friday, 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. 2) School Performances -four days during the school year, Fridays and Saturdays, 6 p.m. to 11 p.m. [approximately 200 attendees] CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE14 3) Graduation -one Saturday during the school year, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. 4) School Dances/Socials -four days during the school year, Fridays and Saturdays, 6 p.m. to 11 p.m. 5) Admissions Open Houses/Events -four Sundays and one Saturday, 12 noon to 5 p.m., each calendar year 6) Parents Association Holiday Boutique -one day during the school year, Saturday 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. This event is open to the public. Only if the east parking lot is full may entering vehicles park in the west parking lot. 7) Parent Orientations -Two days during the school year, Monday through Friday, 6:30 p.m. to 10 p.m. 8) School Plays -Three Fridays and three Saturdays, 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., each calendar year. 9) Twenty-two additional days annually as per Exhibit B-3, including: STATUS: a. Thirteen days, Monday through Saturday, 10 a.m. to 9 p.m., and b. Nine days, Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday, 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Parking for these events shall be limited to 65 vehicles on-site and shall be located in the east lot. Written notification via US mail and electronic mail by the property owner is required to the Zoning Administrator, Council Office, President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association, Chair of the Brentwood Community Council, the Brentwood Village Chamber of Commerce, and all abutting and adjacent neighbors at least 45 days prior to such event date(s). The written notification of the special events required in this condition has not been submitted to the file; therefore, it is not clear whether sucl1 notification was mailed to tl1e Zoning Administrator, Council Office, and other organizations and neighbors within the specified time. The special events list submitted to the file indicates compliance with the condition. No complaints have been received indicating non- compliance with this condition. The adjoining neighbor attended the hearing, but, did not indicate whether or not the notifications of the special events were received. f. The permitted maximum number of cars parked on-site is limited to those listed in Exhibit B-3. "Car" is defined as a passenger car with the maximum capacity of 10 persons. Events that require more parking shall use remote lots. STATUS: Events that require more parking use remote lots. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE15 g. Motorized sweeping of the parking lots and driveways and motorized landscape maintenance shall occur only between the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday. STATUS: The applicant states that motorized sweeping of the parking lots and driveways is not allowed. Motorized landscape maintenance occurs only between the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 12. At least 109 permanent, striped parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.21-A,5 of the Municipal Code. STATUS: 109 striped parking spaces are provided on site. 13. The applicant shall inform parents, students, faculty and staff in writing on an annual basis of all rules regulating school traffic and parking. A copy shall be mailed to the Zoning Administrator at the same time. The applicant shall maintain a progressive disciplinary system of enforcement in which the first violation shall result in suspending driving privileges to and from school for one week (both parent and students). The second violation shall result is suspending driving privileges two weeks (both parent and student). The third violation shall result in suspending driving privileges for one year (both parent and student). A violation requires that the student ride the bus. The school administration shall maintain a list of license plate numbers of all families whose children are enrolled as well as the license plate numbers for each employee who parks on the property. STATUS: At the beginning of each school year, Archer informs parents, students, faculty and staff on an annual basis of all rules regulating school traffic and parking. A copy of the letter that Archer sent to parents and students for the 2012 -2013 school year has been submitted to the file. Archer maintains a progressive disciplinary system of enforcement. The school administration maintains a list of license plate numbers of all families whose children are enrolled in the carpool program as well as the license plate numbers for each employee who parks on the property. 14. One or more parking monitors in orange vests or other distinctive attire shall be located at each driveway entrance during all drop off and pick up hours and at all special events to preclude parking on neighborhood streets (Chaparal and Barrington Avenue), noise from car horns, car radios, car alarms and loud voices, and to maintain smooth ingress to and egress from the parking areas. The monitors shall prevent exiting vehicles from traveling westbound on Chaparal Street or exiting onto Barrington Avenue and turning northbound. Monitors shall report any violations to the school administration, including any off-campus drop offs or pick ups which are observed, and applicable license plate numbers. Students who walk or bike to or from campus must have established proof of residency in the immediate area, or be issued a photo identification "transit pass". CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE16 STATUS: Archer Security monitors all school entrances during pick up and drop off hours and at all special events as required. Access from/to Chaparal Street is for emergency only and is not permitted during drop off or pick up hours or for special events. Archer's Transportation Coordinator and Archer Security enforce the rules regarding transportation and prohibiting parking on neighborhood streets. Archer Security reports any violations to the Transportation Coordinator. The Transportation Coordinator keeps a log of all violations observed or reported and enforces compliance. Archer Security checks in all walkers, bikers, and public transportation riders, and if any student arriving at the school does not have proper permission for these modes of transportation, the school issues a transportation violation. In addition, for the 2012 -2013 school year, Archer contracted with Division Patrol, Inc. to provide crossing guards at the intersection of Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue. Division Patrol, Inc. provides two crossing guards at the intersection on all school days from 7:00 a.m. -8:00 a.m., 11 :45 a.m. -12:45 p.m., and 2:45 p.m. - 3:45 p.m. Archer voluntarily contracts with Division Patrol, Inc. to provide the crossing guards as a security measure for the students and other members of the community at the intersection of Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue. 15. Any school-operated van and bus and all other vehicles which bring students to school and take them home shall park, load and unload students within the property and not on any adjoining streets, except that a maximum of 15 student carpool vehicles may park off-site at a Veterans Administration parking lot approved by the Zoning Administrator. The site shall be within student walking distance to the campus. The school shall issue identification permits to each vehicle parking at the lot. School personnel shall monitor such off-site parking location for student safety and to ensure that only student driver-registered carpool vehicles park in such lot and that no student vehicle is parked on neighborhood streets. STATUS: Archer operates approximately 8 to 10 bus routes with one a.m. run and two p.m. runs: an early p.m. bus at 3:15 p.m. and a late p.m. bus at 5:30 p.m. No vehicles which bring students to school and take them home are permitted to park, load and unload students on any adjoining streets. For the 2011 -2012 school year, there were nine registered student- driven carpools that parked off-site at the Brentwood Village parking lot on Barrington Place, which is located at 201 South Barrington Place between the Post Office and Chayote Street. Archer issues identification permits to each vehicle parking at the lot. School personnel monitor the off-site parking location for student safety and to ensure that only student driver-registered carpool vehicles park in such lot and that no student vehicle is parked on neighborhood streets. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE17 Despite the school's effort to monitor students parking and being dropped off on neighborhood streets, letters received from the residents, and comments received at the hearing indicate that students are occasionally dropped off and park their cars on neighborhood streets. 16. Except during special events, all faculty, administrators, other employees and visitors shall be instructed by persons acting on behalf of the school to park on-site at designated locations. STATUS: Except during special events, all faculty, administrators, other employees and visitors are instructed to park on-site at designated locations. 17. The applicant shall implement a Traffic Management Program with a Trip Reduction Plan to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportation and the Zoning Administrator prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or temporary certificate of occupancy. Components of such efforts shall include: a. Achieving an average vehicle ridership of 3.0 persons per vehicle beginning January 31, 2000 through the following or similar actions. Failure to achieve the 3.0 ratio on schedule shall require the applicant to reduce the maximum number of students enrolled in the first September thereafter by an amount equal to the number of students below the 3.0 ratio and a $2, 100 fine for each trip to be deposited into the Neighborhood Protection Fund per DOT [e.g., a 3.0 ratio and an enrollment of 450 students, plus 50 faculty and administrative staff, results in 166 vehicles and a hypothetically observed 2.7 ratio results in 185 vehicles. Multiply 19 (the difference between 185 and 166) times 3.0 for a total reduction of 57 students]. Students who live within one-half mile of the property and who sign a contract with school administrators promising to walk to and from school every day and students who sign a contract with school administrators promising to bicycle to and from school every day may, at the discretion of the school administration, be issued a "transit pass" and for purposes of determining average vehicle ridership they shall be considered as carpool riders. STATUS: Archer implemented a Traffic Management Program with a Trip Reduction Plan prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, which was approved May 26, 1999. The Transportation Management Program for 2012-2013 was submitted to the file. Transportation Management Program provides transportation options to Archer students; students may arrive at Archer by school bus, parent-driven carpools with at least three students plus the driver in the car, student-driven carpools for 11th and 12th grades with four students in the car including the driver, walking/biking, or public transportation. Archer requires each student to choose and register for her selected mode of transportation. During the 2011 -2012 school year approximately 85 percent of the students used the school bus, there were 18 registered parent-driven carpools, nine registered student-driven carpools, and 23 registered student walkers. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE18 Traffic Monitoring Reports for 2004 -2006 were submitted as part of the prior 2007 Plan Approval application. Copies of the Traffic Monitoring Reports that were conducted in 2007 and 2008 have been submitted to the subject Plan Approval Application. Traffic count conducted since January 31, 2000 showed that Archer achieved an average vehicle ridership of 3.0 persons or more per vehicle. b. Appointing an overall school traffic coordinator for the program, appointment of parent coordinators for each class, distribution of literature explaining the program, distribution of family names and phone numbers so that parents can identify potential carpool opportunities, and requiring parents to sign a contract for carpool plan participation. STATUS: Archer has a traffic coordinator for its program and appoints grade level parent representatives for each class. c. Providing preferred parking locations for carpool vehicles. STATUS: Archer provides preferred parking locations for employee carpool vehicles. d. Scheduling classes to avoid peak hour drop off and pick up activity of nearby schools. STATUS: Prior to establishing its own drop-off and pick-up times for its first year of operations at the school, Archer conducted a comprehensive survey of the starting and ending class times of five schools in the nearby area. These included Brentwood Lower Campus, Brentwood Upper Campus, Saint Martin of Tours, Sunshine Pre-School, and University Synagogue. Archer then developed its start times so that these times would not conflict with or overlap those of the other schools. A copy of Archer's 2011 -2012 Daily Schedule is submitted to the file. In preparation for the Plan Approval application, Archer reviewed the starting and ending class times for each of these schools and confirmed that the schedules are staggered to the extent practical. A summary of the starting and ending class times for these schools is also included in the case file. e. Conducting annual traffic counts for 5 years, beginning in 2004, at all school driveways at the applicant's expense by a licensed traffic engineer to be taken on one day of a typical five-day school week between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. in October on a date not to be disclosed to the school in advance. The Department of Transportation shall be informed by the engineer prior to the taking of such traffic counts to permit their observation of same. STATUS: The applicant has completed its requirement to conduct annual traffic counts. Copies of the Traffic Monitoring Reports that were submitted in 2007 and 2008 are included in the case file. f. Investigating or implementing distribution of public transit passes or subsidies for faculty and administrators. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE19 STATUS: Archer has investigated distribution of public transit passes or subsidies for faculty and administrators. g. Submitting annual Traffic Management Program Reports to the Zoning Administrator, Department of Transportation, Council Office and President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association indicating average vehicle ridership and compliance with implementation mechanisms above, or others as approved by Department of Transportation and the Zoning Administrator. Such reports shall be considered at the review of operations set forth in Condition No. 44. STATUS: Copies of the Traffic Monitoring Reports were submitted as set forth in Condition No. 48 through November 2008. As part of Archer's 2007 Plan Approval application Archer submitted copies of the Traffic Monitoring Reports for 2004 -2006. Copies of the Traffic Monitoring Reports that were submitted in 2007 and 2008 are included in the subject file. A copy of Archer's Transportation Management Program and Transportation Registration Form for the 2012 -2013 school year sent to Archer families is attached to the subject case file. h. Utilization of vans/buses to transport 50% of the student enrollment on a daily basis within two years from the date of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. STATUS: Archer has utilized buses to transport at least 50% of the student enrollment on a daily basis since two years from the date of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. During the 2011 -2012 school year approximately 85 percent of the students used the school bus. 18. A maximum of 15 student carpools are permitted consisting of 3 students in each vehicle. Additional carpools are permitted consisting of 4 or more students in each vehicle. Student drivers are limited to only the 11th and 12th graders. STATUS: Student drivers are limited to only the 11th and 12th graders. For the 2011 -2012 school year there were nine registered student-driven carpools. Student carpool parking is in the Brentwood Village parking lot on Barrington Place, which is located at 201 South Barrington Place between the Post Office and Chayote Street. 19. A school fee of not less than $750 per student per year shall be charged to support the school's student busing program. The school shall contract with a licensed transportation provider and offer routes designed to achieve bus usage by 50 percent of the enrollment within two years of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. The transit provider shall utilize transit routes to and from the property which minimize use of local streets and minimize congestion on major and secondary routes, to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportation. STATUS: Archer charges a school fee of not less than $750 per student per year to support the school's student busing program. Archer contracts CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 20 with a licensed transportation provider and offers routes that achieve bus usage by at least 50 percent of the enrollment. 20. Special Event Parking a. If a special event at the property is expected to attract more than the permitted number of cars per Exhibit B-3, then off-site parking for vehicles in excess of those limitations shall be provided at the Veterans Administration property and/or other locations which the school may secure, to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator. Except for school staff, faculty, and employees who are permitted to utilize on-site parking, all guest parking for Grandparents' Day (if applicable) and 12th Grade Graduation shall be provided at the Veterans Administration property and/or, to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator, other locations which the school may secure. Those persons attending the event shall be instructed to park in such off-site parking locations, and a shuttle service shall be provided to transport visitors to the school. The off-site locations shall not include any parking on residential streets within 500 feet of the school. STATUS: If a special. event at the property is expected to attract more than the permitted number of cars per Exhibit B-3, then off-site parking for vehicles in excess of those limitations is provided at the Brentwood Village parking lot on Barrington Place, which is located at 201 South Barrington Place between the Post Office and Chayote Street. Those persons attending the event are instructed to park in such off- site parking locations, and a shuttle service is provided to transport visitors to the school. The Brentwood Village parking lot is located south of Sunset Boulevard. b. The school administration shall institute a program by which parking is assigned prior to the scheduled event to parents, visitors, staff and faculty at a specific location, whether on-site or off-site. Such a program shall be designed to avoid traffic congestion and circulation problems associated with drivers arriving at the subject property or other designated off-site parking locations and being turned away due to insufficient parking capacity. Condition 11.f provides additional on-site parking restrictions. STATUS: Archer assigns parking to parents, visitors, staff and faculty prior to the scheduled events at a specific location, whether on-site or off- site. As described above, Archer complies with the additional on- site parking restrictions provided in Condition 11.f. 21. All exterior signs shall be of an identification or directional type and shall be indicated on plans submitted to and approved by the Zoning Administrator prior to the issuance of permits therefore. STATUS: Staff site visit indicates the exterior signs are informational and directional signs. To support Archer's outdoor athletics, the school has one electronic scoreboard at the outdoor athletic fields. The scoreboard is fully concealed behind the masonry wall and is not visible from any public right-of-way. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 21 22. Delivery vehicles shall enter and exit the property from Sunset Boulevard only. The property owner shall instruct companies who deliver to do so between 7:30 a.m. and 6 p.m. but outside the stated hours of student drop off and pick up. STATUS: Delivery vehicles enter and exit the property from Sunset Boulevard only. Archer instructs companies who deliver to do so between 7:30 a.m. and 6 p.m. but outside the stated hours of student drop off and pick up. 23. Buses shall enter and exit the site via Sunset Boulevard only. Buses shall queue within the internal campus driveways. The school shall monitor buses to make sure they do not idle with their engines running. Neither buses nor passenger vehicles shall queue on local streets or Sunset Boulevard except as permitted by DOT, e.g. left turn lanes for entering school on Sunset Boulevard. STATUS: Buses enter and exit the site via Sunset Boulevard only. Buses queue within the internal campus driveways. The school security monitors buses to make sure they do not idle with their engines running. Neither buses nor passenger vehicles are permitted to queue on local streets or Sunset Boulevard. 24. Except for egress to accommodate pick up and drop off of students as specified by the Department of Transportation study and limited to one hour in the a.m. and one hour in the p.m. with vehicle limit and emergency vehicle access, vehicular access via any Chaparal Street driveway is prot-1ibited and shall be precluded by a gate installed with locking mechanisms/keys. Monitors shall restrict cars from exiting onto Chaparal when there is a queue at Chaparal and Barrington. STATUS: Except for emergency vehicle access, there is no vehicular access via the Chaparal Street driveway. Access is precluded by a gate installed with locking mechanisms/keys. 25. Prior to the sign-off of any plans by the Zoning Administrator for any building permit and prior to the change in occupancy, the applicant shall submit parking, driveway and circulation plans to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportation, the Department of Building and Safety and the Bureau of Engineering, as applicable. STATUS: No change in occupancy, no sign off of the plans by the Zoning Administrator are associated with the subject application. 26. Prior to any sign-off of plans by the Zoning Administrator, the applicant shall submit plot plans to the Fire Department for review and approval and install fire hydrants if required, and comply with any plot plan requirements. STATUS: The subject application is to allow a review of the applicant's condition compliance; therefore, this condition is not applicable to the subject application. 27. An Emergency Procedures Plan shall be established identifying guidelines and procedures to be utilized in the event of fire, medical urgency, earthquake or other emergencies to the satisfaction of the Police Department and Fire Department prior CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 22 to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. A copy of such document shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator upon its approval. STATUS: Archer established an Emergency Procedures Plan prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, which was issued on May 26, 1999. A copy of such document was submitted to the Zoning Administrator upon its approval. 28. A Security Plan shall be developed in consultation with the Police Department, outlining security features to be provided in conjunction with the operation of the school, prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. In addition, the property owner shall provide to the West Los Angeles Area Commanding Officer a diagram of the site indicating access routes and any additional information that might facilitate police response. The applicant shall submit evidence of compliance to the Zoning Administrator. STATUS: Archer developed a Security Plan in consultation with the Police Department, outlining security features to be provided in conjunction with the operation of the school, prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The certificate of occupancy was approved May 26, 1999. In addition, Archer provided to the West Los Angeles Area Commanding Officer a diagram of the site indicating access routes and any additional information that might facilitate police response. 29. The property shall be internally secured when not in use. STATUS: The property is internally secured when not in use with a guard station at the driveway entrance. 30. Prior to the sign off of any plans by the Zoning Administrator, the applicant shall submit plans to the satisfaction of the Bureau of Street Lighting and the Street Tree Division of the Bureau of Street Maintenance. No street lights are required along the Chaparal Street frontage unless and until the north side of the street is so improved. STATUS: No sign off of plans is associated with the subject plan approval application. 31. Prior to the sign off of any plans by the Zoning Administrator, the applicant shall submit plans to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division of the City Engineer and provide evidence that fees required pursuant to Ordinance No. 171,502 have been paid in full. No sidewalk or curb is required along the Chaparal Street frontage unless and until the north side of the street is so improved. STATUS: No sign off of plans is associated with the subject plan approval application. 32. All lighting shall be directed onto the site. Floodlighting shall be designed and installed to preclude glare to adjoining and adjacent properties. Outdoor lighting shall be designed and installed with shielding such that the light source cannot be seen from adjacent properties. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 23 STATUS: All lighting is directed onto the site. Floodlighting is designed and installed to preclude glare to adjoining and adjacent properties. Outdoor lighting is designed and installed with shielding such that the light source cannot be seen from adjacent properties. Existing lighting within the campus consists of low-level exterior lights adjacent to the school building and along pathways for security and way-finding purposes. In addition, lamps within the on-site surface parking areas also are provided for security purposes. 33. The athletic field shall not be lighted except for low level security lighting. STATUS: The athletic field is not lighted except for low level security lighting. 34. Noise mitjgation: a. No outdoor public address system shall be installed or maintained on the subject property. No paging system shall be installed which is audible outside the building in which it is located. STATUS: No outdoor public address system has been installed or maintained on the subject property. There is no paging system which is audible outside tile building in which it is located. b. A solid masonry wall 6 feet in height shall be built around the western parking lot between the field and parking lot to shield noise from neighbors. Solid masonry walls at the north, east and west property lines as well as the southerly property line adjoining residential uses shall be constructed a variable 6 to 10 feet in height after written consultation and response with each property owner to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and with review and final wall approval by and to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and prior to construction of the proposed gymnasium and prior to the use of the athletic field for athletic purposes. The Chaparal/Westgate Neighborhood Landscaping/Improvements Committee shall be established to recommend the appropriate wall heights, landscape buffers, buffer design and other improvements. On the north property line, the decision to have a wall or maintain the existing hedge cover and landscaping shall be recommended by the property owners on the north side of Chaparal opposite the school and the Committee. STATUS: There is a solid masonry wall around the western parking lot between the field and parking lot to shield neighbors from noise. c. No amplified music or loud non-amplified music is permitted outside with the exception of one Saturday per school year for the High School Graduation ceremony between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Written notice to the neighbors and Council Office 10 days prior to the event is required. STATUS: No amplified music or loud non-amplified music is played outside with the exception of one Saturday per school year for the High School Graduation ceremony between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Staff CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 24 previously used a non-permanent address system for limited uses on the athletic field including practices and games. Archer was notified of concern regarding this use, and since being notified Archer has ceased its use of the non-permanent address system on the athletic field. d. The gymnasium shall contain no openable windows on the north and east, openable windows, however, may be installed on the west and south. No doors shall be oriented to the north, east or west unless required by law, and then, only for emergencies or deliveries. All windows shall be double glazed. Windows and door shall remain closed whenever there is active use (except door may be used for entry/exit purposes). STATUS: Archer has not constructed the approved gymnasium. e. Compressors and other equipment which may introduce noise impacts beyond any property line shall be enclosed by walls or otherwise attenuated so as to be inaudible off-site. STATUS: Compressors and other equipment that may introduce noise impacts beyond the campus property line incorporate noise attenuation features as required by the LAMC. f. No exterior bells are permitted. Musical instruments used by members of the school's band or orchestra shall be confined to within the main building and the gymnasium. STATUS: Archer has no exterior bells. Musical instruments used by members of the school's band or orchestra are confined to within the main building. 35. The applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and Council Office identifying existing and proposed landscaping. The plans shall include all open areas not used for buildings, driveways, parking areas, or walks. a. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan identifying existing landscaping of the exterior side of the required fence aqjacent to Chaparal Street as confirmed by the stamped approval of the Division of Street Trees. b. The plans shall preserve the existing landscape between Sunset Boulevard and the existing main building except where removal of existing landscaping is required due to street widening along the project frontage. c. Landscaping shall be utilized to mask maintenance facilities and utility apparatus that would otherwise be visible off-site. d. All removed trees with a trunk diameter of 8 inches or greater shall be replaced on a minimum one-for-one basis with 36-inch box or larger. e. All new landscaping shall comply with the Water Conservation Ordinance (Ordinance No. 170,978). CASE NO. ZA 9.8-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 25 STATUS: No new landscape plan is required for the subject application. The school has been landscaped as required. All removed trees with a trunk diameter of 8 inches or greater were replaced on a minimum one-for-one basis with 36-inch box or larger. All new landscaping complies with the Water Conservation Ordinance (Ordinance No. 170,978). 36. The property shall be maintained in an attractive condition and shall be kept free of trash and debris. STATUS: Staff visit indicates that the site was well-maintained and free of trash/debris. 37. Construction of tree wells and planting of street trees and parkway landscaping shall be to the satisfaction of the Street Tree Division of the Bureau of Street Maintenance. STATUS: 38. Construction Not applicable to the subject application. Such construction was completed as required. a. The applicant shall provide a construction schedule to the Council Office, President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association and to adjacent property owners at least 30 days prior to the commencement of demolition, site excavation and construction. Hours of excavation, hauling and all types of construction shall be limited to 7:30 a.m. through 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. No such activities are permitted Saturday, Sunday or national holidays. b. A construction relations officer shall be designated by the property owner to serve as a liaison with neighbors concerning construction activity. c. All construction vehicles shall access the property via Sunset Boulevard. Chaparal Street shall not be used as a construction haul route. d. Construction-related vehicles may arrive at the site no earlier than 7 a.m. so that actual construction may begin at 7:30 a.m. Construction worker vehicles shall exit the property by 5 p.m. This condition does not apply to construction personnel engaged in supervisorial, administrative or inspection activities. e. Construction personnel and construction-related vehicles shall not park on any street in the neighborhood. Haul trucks and construction equipment shall be cleaned, watered and/or covered before leaving the property. Any material spilled on the streets adjacent to the property shall be removed immediately by the contractor. Construction equipment and trucks shall be staged on the property. Haul trucks shall not queue on streets adjacent to the property. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 26 f. A maximum of two catering truck visits daily is permitted and such trucks shall be accommodated within the property. Catering truck operators shall be instructed in writing not to use their horn or other loud signal. A copy of such letter shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator. g. Any portable toilets shall be on the property and not visible from adjoining properties or the public street. h. All excavating and grading activities shall be suspended when sustained wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour in the excavation area, as enforced by the property owner and contractor. The construction area shall be sufficiently dampened to control dust caused by grading, hauling and wind. i. Compressors shall have noise suppression features so as to reduce noise impacts off-site. j. If noise levels from construction activity are determined to exceed 75 dBA at the property line of an adjacent property and construction equipment is stationary and operating for more than 24 hours, the equipment shall be turned off until a temporary noise barrier is erected between the noise source and the receptor to reduce the noise level to 75 dBA or less. The contractor shall take noise readings when loud activities is underway on a frequent basis. k. Sound blankets shall be used on all construction equipment where technically feasible. I. Fire Department access shall remain clear and unobstructed. m. All contractors involved in demolition and/or renovation activity shall comply with all applicable City, AQMD, Federal and State regulations including the requirements of SCAQIVID Rule 1403, pertaining to the removal of asbestos- containing materials. At least one representative of the contractor removing asbestos-containing materials who has successfully completed the Asbestos ·Abatement Contractor/Supervisor course pursuant to the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act shall be present during any stripping, removing, handling, or disturbing of asbestos-containing materials. Warning labels, signs, and/or markings shall be used to identify any asbestos-related health hazards created by demolition or renovation activity. STATUS: The construction was completed and the school has been in operation since 1999. No new construction is associated with the subject plan approval application. 39. The applicant shall implement, to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportation, all of the following transportation improvements prior to the issuance of any Certificate (or Temporary) of Occupancy: a. Sunset Boulevard and Kenter Avenue --Widen the south side of Sunset Boulevard west of the intersection by 12 feet within the existing right-of-way CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 27 from Kenter Avenue to a point approximately 205 feet west of the Kenter Avenue center line, to install an exclusive eastbound right-turn-only lane. Restripe the eastbound approach of Sunset Boulevard to provide one left- turn lane, two through lanes, and the new right-turn-only lane. b. Sunset Boulevard and Bundy Drive --Widen the east side of Bundy Drive south of Sunset Boulevard by approximately three feet for a distance of approximately 175 feet. Restripe northbound Bundy Drive to provide a shared left-turn/through lane and an exclusive right-turn-only lane. c. Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue. 1) Dedicate 20 feet of property on the north side of Sunset Boulevard along the project frontage to provide a 50-foot half right-of-way. 2) Widen the north side of Sunset Boulevard by 15 feet along the project frontage from Barrington Avenue to a point approximately 500 feet west of the Barrington centerline. 3) Widen the south side of Sunset Boulevard by 5 feet from Barrington Avenue to Beverly Court. Widen the south side of Sunset Boulevard by 3 feet from Beverly Court to Granville Avenue. Modify the existing berm radius on the southwest corner of Sunset Boulevard and Granville Avenue. 4) Widen up to 14 feet on the south side of Sunset Boulevard from Barrington Avenue to a point approximately 200 feet east of the Barrington Avenue centerline. 5) Widen the west side of Barrington Avenue by up to 6 feet from Sunset Boulevard northerly to Chaparal Street to lengthen the southbound left-turn lane. The curb lane shall be converted to an optional left- turn/through/right-turn lane. 6) Restripe the eastbound approach of Sunset Boulevard at Barrington Avenue to provide for a left-turn-only lane, two-way left turn median, two through lanes and a right-turn only lane. 7) Modify and install traffic signal equipment as necessary and install split signal phasing for the southbound and northbound traffic to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportation. Modify/install/ remove street lights, trees, raised islands, storm drains, curbs and gutters as necessary. 8) Modify the raised islands at the southwest and southeast corners and restripe the northbound approach to provide a left-turn lane, and optional through/right-turn lane and a right-turn-only lane. Overlap phasing is provided to allow the traffic in the right-turn-only lane to move at the same time that the westbound left-turn traffic on Sunset Boulevard has a green arrow. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 28 d. Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Place --Restripe the northbound approach of this intersection to provide one left-turn and two right-turn-only lanes. Modify the traffic signal to allow an eastbound right-turn overlap phase with the northbound "green" phase. e. Sunset Boulevard and Church Lane --Widen the north side of Sunset Boulevard up to 10 feet for a distance of approximately 450 feet west of the intersection, to allow the existing southbound right-turn-only lane to function as a "free-right" lane. STATUS: The required improvements were completed prior to the issuance of Certificate Occupancy for the school. No new construction/ improvement is associated with the subject plan approval application. 40. The applicant shall establish and maintain a continuous program of communication with the surrounding community which, as a minimum, shall include the following components: a. A designated community relations representative and telephone number for neighbors to contact regarding any complaints or concerns. Calls shall be responded to by the following business day. A Neighborhood Liaison Committee shall be established composed of a representative from the Archer School, President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association, representative from the Council Office, Chair of the Brentwood Community Council, the Private Schools Representative of the Brentwood Community Council, President of the Brentwood Village Chamber of Commerce, all residents immediately abutting and adjacent to the school, and two members of the local neighborhood appointed by the Council Office. The Neighborhood Liaison Committee shall meet not less than two times per year. The representative from the Archer School shall meet at reasonable times with neighborhood representatives in an attempt to resolve such issues. A log shall be kept of all complaints and concerns including complainant's name, date, time, phone number, nature of complaint and the response or resolution offered. A copy of the log shall be made available to the Zoning Administrator in conjunction with the review of conditions set forth under Condition No. 44. The school administration shall be responsible for disseminating the name and phone number of the Archer School representative to the Council Office, Neighborhood Liaison Committee, all abutting and adjacent property owners, the President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association, the Chair of the Brentwood Community Council, the President of the Brentwood Village Chamber of Commerce, and the Zoning Administrator. The neighborhood representatives shall also be responsible for disseminating their updated names and phone numbers to the representative from the Archer School. STATUS: According to the applicant, Archer has a designated community relations representative and maintains a telephone number for neighbors to contact regarding any complaints or concerns. The contact information has been disseminated to the community as required. Calls and e-mails are responded to by the following business day. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 29 Since Archer commenced operation in Brentwood in 1999, the school has hosted biannual Neighborhood Liaison meetings for a total of 28 neighbor meetings over the past 14 years. Archer maintains a log of all complaints and concerns including complainant's name, date, time, phone number, nature of complaint and the response or resolution offered. A copy of the log is provided to the case file showing the following number of calls: • School year 2007-2008: 11 calls • School year 2008-2009: three calls • School year 2009-2010: No comments recorded • School year 2010-2011: 11 calls • School year 2011-2012: 17 calls The complaints include the following: • too much water from sprinklers on Chaparal Street, • AC units cycling on and off at night, • talking loudly in the parking lot, • loud music on the weekend before 7 a.m., • fire alarm going off during the night, • students being picked up across the street from school, • students being dropped off at Barrington Court, • girls screaming during the day, • students and parents parking on residential streets, • neighbors playing soccer on the field, • inconsiderate drivers driving in an unsafe and reckless manner, • mattresses being left by the west entrance gate, • brown patches on the lawn, • playing music on their phone during lunch, • girls sitting by the neighbor's window having lunch, • blasting music on the weekend, • noise and overgrown trees from the easterly adjoining property, • a light left on in the building, • class being held outside after 8 a.m. and the level of noise, • the metal manhole covers in the east driveway making loud noise when drivers drove over them, • girls littering on Barrington Avenue. Tl1e log indicates that the complaints were responded/addressed by the school staff. b. The school shall distribute a schedule every September to the Council Office, the Neighborhood Liaison Committee, all abutting and adjacent adjoining property owners, the Brentwood Homeowners Association, the Chair of the Brentwood Community Council, the Private Schools Representative of the Brentwood Community Council, and the Zoning Administrator announcing the dates and times of all special events for the next 12 months. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 30 STATUS: The applicant stated that prior to the start of school each year, Archer distributes the dates and times of all special events for the next 12 months to the community as required. A copy of the 2012 -2013 Special Events list is included in the case file showing back to school nights, school performances, graduation, school dances, admissions open house and interviews, parent orientation, school plays and 22 other special events. The event calendar includes the dates, times and the nature of the events. 41. For the existing main building, the project shall be provided with an air filtration system. However, this requirement shall not preclude the installation of operable windows which permit passive heating and cooling. STATUS: Per applicant's statement, Archer has an air filtration system for the Main Building. Investigative staff reports indicate there were operable windows. 42. The Department of Water and Power and the Southern California Gas Company shall be consulted regarding feasible energy and water conservation features which shall be incorporated into the design of the project. STATUS: Incorporated through previous approvals; no construction proposed. 43. The course of instruction offered at the school shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Education Code of the State of California for courses required to be taught in private independent schools. STATUS: Per the applicant's statement, the course of instruction offered at the school complies with all applicable requirements of the Education Code of the State of California for courses required to be taught in private independent schools. 44. Five years from the effective date of this determination, the property owner shall file a Plan Approval application and associated fees together with mailing labels for all property owners and tenants within 500 feet of the property, as well as the President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association, the Chair of the Brentwood Community Council, and the President of the Brentwood Village Chamber of Commerce. The matter shall be set for public hearing with appropriate notice. The purpose of the Plan Approval shall be to review the effectiveness of, and the level of compliance with, the terms and Conditions of this grant, including the effectiveness of the carpool program, the management of circulation impacts of parking associated with Special Events and any documented noise impacts from parking operations and athletic activities on the surrounding residential properties. Upon review of the effectiveness of and compliance with the Conditions, the Zoning Administrator shall issue a determination. Such determination may modify the existing terms and Conditions add new terms and Conditions or delete one or more of them, all as deemed appropriate. The Zoning Administrator may also require one or more subsequent Plan Approval applications, if deemed necessary. The application shall include the following minimum information: CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 31 STATUS: The subject application was filed as required. The mailing list for the subject application included the community organizations and the council office, to which the hearing notice was required to be mailed. a. The number of students enrolled by Grade level. STATUS: The total enrollment indicates 430 students for grades 6 through 12. b. Physical modifications involving expansion or change of use or location. STATUS: No physical modifications are associated with the subject application. The applicant states that since the issuance of Archer's Certificate of Occupancy in 1999, there have been no changes of use or significant modification of the site except for a few minor modifications. Since the last Plan Approval application in November, 2007, the basement Art Room was rehabilitated and given minor cosmetic improvements in 2010 including the installation of vinyl composition tile flooring. This rehabilitation included no changes to the original steel casement hopper windows in arched openings. In the summer of 2012, Archer conducted a minor renovation of the first floor science classrooms and lower level restrooms. c. Operational changes to the school such as hours of operation, parking policy or formation of liaison committees with the community. STATUS: No changes to the existing operating conditions are proposed by the subject application. d. Copies of the traffic monitoring report set forth in Condition No. 48 shall be simultaneously sent to the Council Office, the Neighborhood Liaison Committee, the President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association, the Chair of the Brentwood Community Council, the President of the Brentwood Village Chamber of Commerce, and any abutting or adjacent neighbor so requesting a copy. STATUS: The school conducted annual traffic counts for 5 years, beginning in 2004. Copies of the Traffic Monitoring Reports that include these traffic counts were submitted as set forth in Condition No. 48 through November 2008. As part of Archer's 2007 Plan Approval application Archer submitted copies of the Traffic Monitoring Reports for 2004 - 2006. Copies of the Traffic Monitoring Reports that were submitted in 2007 and 2008 are included in the case file. Archer has completed its requirement to conduct annual traffic counts. e. A summary listing of attendance at each special event and identification of the events which utilized on-site parking only and which utilized off-site parking. STATUS: A total of 47 Special Events are permitted. A summary listing attendance at each special event and identification of the events which utilized on-site parking and which utilized off-site parking for the CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 32 2011 -2012 school year is included in the subject case file. The applicant also submitted a list of the Special Events held on Archer's campus during the 2010 -2011, 2009 -2010, 2008 -2009, and 2007 -2008 school years showing the special events held on campus since the last 2007 plan approval application were in compliance with the required conditions. f. The status of obtaining access easements that would enable vehicles on site to exit directly onto Barrington Avenue in lieu of exiting onto Chaparal Street. STATUS: When the applicant first obtained its CUP in 1998, obtaining access easements that would enable vehicles on site to exit directly onto Barrington Avenue was contemplated. The applicant subsequently determined, based on its operations that such an access easement was unnecessary due to the low volume of traffic generated by the school. The exit along Chaparal Street is used primarily for emergency vehicle access. g. The status of participation in efforts to develop a comprehensive and effective schedule for staggering drop off and pick up times among the nearby schools so as to be sensitive to the preferences of their respective parent and student bodies and no less so to the property owners affected by such otherwise uncoordinated, and possibly duplicative traffic patterns. STATUS: Prior to establishing its own drop-off and pick-up times for its first year of operations at the school, the applicant conducted a comprehensive survey of the starting and ending class times of five schools in the nearby area. These included Brentwood Lower Campus, Brentwood Upper Campus, Saint Martin of Tours, Sunshine Pre-School, and University Synagogue Pre-School. Archer then developed its start times so that these times would not conflict with or overlap those of the other schools. A copy of Archer's 2011 -2012 Daily Schedule and a summary of the starting and ending class times for other schools nearby are included in the subject case file. Archer schedule indicates the starting and ending times at 7:50 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., respectively. Other schools have starting class times between 7:55 a.m. to 9:10 a.m., and ending class times between 12 p.m. and 3:15 p.m. Archer has maintained the same starting and ending class times. h. The status of any plan for the respective schools to share vans and buses or to consolidate disparate transit programs into a common transit carrier if doing so would result in a cost-effective diminution of total vehicle trips. STATUS: Archer previously reached out to nearby schools regarding working together to develop a shared transit program. No decision has been reached on a shared transit program. During the 2011 -2012 school year approximately 85 percent of Archer's students used the school bus. 45. All school administrators, faculty and school board members shall be provided a copy of the instant determination. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 33 STATUS: The applicant states that the school informs all school administrators, faculty and school board members about the terms and Conditions included in its Conditional Use Permit. 46. The school shall stagger beginning and ending class times so as to minimize conflict with other schools in the area. In conjunction therewith, the applicant shall submit to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator a summary of drop off and pick up times applicable to tl1e nearest five schools prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. STATUS: Archer conducted a survey of the starting and ending class times of five schools in the nearby area. These included Brentwood Lower Campus, Brentwood Upper Campus, Saint Martin of Tours, Sunshine Pre-School, and University Synagogue Pre-School. Archer then developed its start times so that these times would not conflict with or overlap those of the other schools. Archer has maintained these same starting and ending class times. [Refer to Condition No. 44.g above.] 47. Prior to the issuance of any certificate or temporary certificate of occupancy for school use, the property owner shall submit to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportation a Neighborhood Traffic Protection Plan designed to control the intrusion of school-generated traffic into the surrounding residential neighborhood and prevent on-street school-generated parking in the vicinity. a. b. c. STATUS: Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, $100,000 cash or a letter of credit for such amount shall be deposited in a Neighborhood Protection Fund and made available to the Department of Transportation for implementation of such Protection Plan. Among the measures to be considered are speed humps, a "No Left Turn" sign at the Barrington Avenue/Chaparal Street intersection and restricted/ preferential parking. The applicant shall submit a copy of such plan to the Zoning Administrator, Council Office and the Liaison Committee upon its approval by the Department of Transportation and the Neighborhood Protection Committee. Prior to the issuance of its certificate of occupancy on May 26, 1999, Archer submitted to the Department of Transportation and Neighborhood Traffic Protection Plan. On June 4, 2003, the Zoning Administrator issued a Letter of Modification authorizing the Department of Transportation to release the letter of credit obligation because there was no further purpose in holding the guarantee of funds as "[t]he record of performance with regard to traffic and parking since the commencement of classes in the Fall of 1999 demonstrates there is no need for any further mitigation in this regard." Furthermore, the Zoning Administrator dissolved the Neighborhood Traffic Protection Plan Committee established to review and approve a plan for the expenditure of the funds because it no longer had any mission. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 34 48. A Traffic Monitoring Report shall be submitted to the Department of Transportation, Zoning Administrator and Council Office for review in April and November for the first three years following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Thereafter, the report shall be submitted each November for at least an additional five years [2004 through 2008]. Such reports shall conform to requirements provided by the Department of Transportation. STATUS: During the 2004 Plan Approval process, Condition 48 was updated to insert the clarification in brackets that the annual November reports would be from 2004 through 2008. As part of Archer's 2007 Plan Approval application Archer submitted copies of the Traffic Monitoring Reports for 2004 -2006. Copies of the Traffic Monitoring Reports that were submitted in 2007 and 2008 are included in the subject case file. 49. Page 1 of the grant and all conditions of approval shall be printed on the building plans submitted to the Zoning Administrator and all other affected City departments who are required to sign-off on building plans. STATUS: No building plans are associated with the subject application. 50. Prior to the issuance of any permits relative to this matter, a covenant acknowledging and agreeing to comply with all the terms conditions established herein shall be recorded in the County Recorder's Office. The agreement shall run with the land and shall be binding on any subsequent owners, heirs or assigns. The agreement must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for approval before being recorded. After recordation, a copy bearing the Recorder's number and date shall be provided to the Zoning Administrator for attachment to the subject case file. STATUS: No covenant and agreement recorded for the prior 2007 determination [Case No. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA3)] was submitted to the subject file. 51. As of July 1, 2001, power pole access shall be from the subject property only and not from the easterly adjoining property by July 1, 2001. STATUS: The applicant states that power pole access is from the subject property only and not from the easterly adjoining property. 52. As of July 1, 2001, a retractable net of sufficient height and width shall be installed and maintained to prevent soccer balls from landing on the property at 11840 Chaparal Street. The net and any appurtenant structures shall be retracted or lowered when soccer games or practices are not occurring. Prior to installation, the applicant shall obtain written concurrence from the affected property owner as to the proposed design, and to subsequently obtain the sign-off of the Zoning Administrator. STATUS: The required retractable net was installed and maintained along the western boundary of the soccer field as required. However, the adjoining neighbor at 11840 Chaparal Street testified at the hearing CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 35 that balls are still coming into his yard and girls hang out in the soccer field adjacent to his property resulting in substantial noise impacts. The Zoning Administrator recommends that, in addition to the conditions and limitations imposed upon the applicant, the Councilmember of the Eleventh District convene a meeting of the Heads of School for the five existing schools in the vicinity as well as the Head of the Archer School with the objective of voluntarily developing a comprehensive and effective schedule for staggering drop off and pick up times among all such schools so as to be sensitive to the preferences of their respective parent and student bodies and no less so to the property owners affected by such otherwise uncoordinated traffic patterns. Such meeting should also consider opportunities for the respective schools to share vans and buses or to consolidate disparate transit programs into a common transit carrier if doing so would result in a cost-effective diminution of total vehicle trips. The Zoning Administrator shall consider any such cooperative efforts in this regard in the scheduled review of Archer's operation. AUTHORITY FOR PLAN APPROVAL Section 12.24-1\11 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code provides in part: "M. Development, Change or Discontinuance of Uses: 1. Development of Site. On any lot or portion thereof on which a conditional use is permitted pursuant to the provisions of this section, new buildings or structures may be erected, enlargements may be made to existing buildings, existing uses may be extended on an approved site, and existing institutions or school developments may be expanded as permitted in Subsection L of this Section, provided plans therefore are submitted to and approved by the Commission or by a Zoning Administrator, whichever has jurisdiction at that time ... ". FINDINGS: Archer School has been in operation at the subject location since 1999 as a Certificate of Occupancy was issued on May 26, 1999 per the conditional use permit approved under Case No. ZA 98-0158(CUZ). The school's compliance with the operating conditions required by the conditional use permit was reviewed three times in the past on January 25, 2001, June 17, 2004 and November 14, 2007. The subject application is the fourth review of the condition compliance as required in Condition No. 44 of the 2007 determination under ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA3). No changes are proposed to the existing school facility or operation in conjunction with the subject application. As summarized in the Condition Compliance Section of this determination, the applicant has attained substantial compliance with the imposed conditions. However, there are still outstanding issues the school needs to improve including noise from the athletic field, students being dropped off or picked up on adjoining streets, students/parents parking on Chaparal Street and Barrington Avenue, errant soccer balls landing on the neighboring property, etc. The review of the log for complaints indicates that there have been maintenance issues for school indoor lighting, an alarm system, an automatic sprinkler system for the landscaped area, a lack of maintenance and use of the school owned property at 141 North Barrington, and malfunction of the air conditioning system resulting in noise and disturbance to the surrounding neighbors. The westerly adjoining property owner at 11840 Chaparal Street stated that the existing fence along the westerly property line is CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 36 not effective in preventing soccer balls from landing on his property and students hang out in the area adjacent to his property resulting in noise impacts. The residents complain that students and parents park their vehicle on the surrounding streets and students are picked up and dropped off on the surrounding streets. In order to correct the deficiencies, the following conditions were modified or added. Condition No. 5 is modified for clarification. The prior convalescent home was remodeled for the existing school facility and there are no dwelling units on the school campus. Condition No. 13 is modified to ensure that parents, students, faculty and staff are informed of all rules regulating school traffic and parking including the school's disciplinary policy for violation so they are all aware of the consequences of violation. Condition No. 34.g is added to mitigate noise impacts to the surrounding properties. Except for regular athletic use and other permitted uses, students will not be allowed to hang out in the area adjacent to the westerly adjoining properties. Posting a sign informing students of this condition is required. Condition No. 40.a is modified to ensure that the community has an opportunity to address the applicant's non-compliance issues with the operating conditions at the required community meetings. The residents complain that the community meetings are intended to discuss the school's compliance with the operating conditions, but, have recently been used to promote the proposed Archer School Forward school expansion project. The meeting agenda is required to include a review of any complaints or concerns received from the community. Condition No. 44 is modified to require the next plan approval application to be filed within five years from the effective date of the subject determination. Condition No. 44.i is added to ensure that the required average vehicle ridership of 3.0 persons per vehicle is maintained. Condition No. 50 is modified to ensure the operating conditions as modified and added in this determination are recorded in a Covenant and Agreement in the County Recorder's Office. Condition No. 54 is modified to correct the deficiencies associated with the existing fence along the westerly property line to prevent soccer balls from landing on the adjoining property. All other prior conditions are retained as the conditions of the subject determination. The applicant is required to file a Plan Approval Application for condition compliance review within five years from the effective date of this determination. If the operation has been conducted appropriately and without creating problems, then a subsequent decision may take that into favorable consideration. A record of poor compliance and/or nuisance complaints would allow the City the discretion to add more restrictive conditions in order to mitigate the alleged impacts. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 37 ADDITIONAL MANDATORY FINDINGS 1. The National Flood Insurance Program rate maps, which are a part of the Flood Hazard Management Specific Plan adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 172,081, have been reviewed and it has been determined that the property is located in Zone C, areas of minimal flooding. 2. On l\lovember 30, 2012, the project was issued a Notice of Exemption (Subsection c, Section 2, Article II, City CEQA Guidelines), log reference ENV2012-3300-CE, for a Categorical Exemption, Class 1, Category 22, Article 111, Section 1, City CEQA Guidelines (Sections 15300-15333, State CEQA Guidelines). I hereby adopt that action. SUE CHANG Associate Zoning Administrator Direct Telephone No. (213) 978-3304 SC:lmc cc: Councilmember Mike Bonin Eleventh District Adjoining Property Owners CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 38 "ATTACHMENT A-2013" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. All other use, height and area regulations of the Municipal Code and all other applicable government/regulatory agencies shall be strictly complied with in the development and use of the property, except as such regulations are herein specifically varied or required. 2. The use and development of the property shall be in substantial conformance with the plot plan submitted with the application and marked Exhibit "A", except as may be revised as a result of this action. 3. The authorized use shall be conducted at all times with due regard for the character of the surrounding district, and the right is reserved to the Zoning Administrator to impose additional corrective Conditions, if, in the Administrator's opinion, such Conditions are proven necessary for the protection of persons in the neighborhood or occupants of adjacent property. 4. All graffiti on the site shall be removed or painted over in the same color as the surface to which it is applied within 24 hours of its occurrence. 5. [MODIFIED] The physical plant shall be limited to the existing main building which contains a floor area of 95,500 square feet including eight dwelling units limited to occupancy by school personnel and visiting guests, a proposed gymnasium building with a maximum floor area of 12,000 square feet located in the southeast corner of the lots zoned RE-11 and approximately 75 feet south of the property line along Chaparal Street, a maintenance building located at the northwest corner of the gym and shall be no closer to the Chaparal Street property line than the gym and shall be harmonious with the gym and attached, with a maximum floor area of 709 square feet and a height not to exceed 16 feet, an "east" and "west" parking area, a turf- covered athletic field, 200 bleacher seats located on the south side of the field and no more than 60 feet long and 5 feet high with 5 tiers of seats,, enclosing fences, driveways and landscaping. 6. The use of the subject property shall be limited to a private school for girls, Grades 6 through 12, with a maximum enrollment of 518 students. Maximum total enrollment is not intended to be reached. This number recognizes the inability of school admissions staff to know with precision the number of students who will actually matriculate relative to the number of students who are sent acceptance letters, and provides a cushion to protect the school from being out of compliance with its targeted baseline enrollment of 450 students. 7. Use restrictions: a. Rental or lease of the facilities is not permitted, with the exception of not more than one day every five years by the Los Angeles Conservancy for a maximum of 200 people. [The term "rental of the facilities" is not dependent upon the payment of a fee. The use by homeowner and civic groups or an athletic contest not including an Archer Team, for example, is not permitted.] CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 39 b. Parking provided on-site shall not be utilized for events or uses occurring at off-site locations unless the property owner files a shared parking application pursuant to Section 12.24-X,20 of the Municipal Code, and is granted such request. A public hearing must be held. c. Rental or lease of the property for filming shall not be permitted at any time. 8. Gymnasium. a. The proposed gymnasium building shall not exceed 36 feet in height above existing adjacent ground elevation. b. Any structures on the roof, such as air conditioning units and other equipment, shall be fully screened from view of adjoining lots. c. The maximum number of seats, whether fixed or movable, shall not exceed 450. d. The maximum occupancy of the building shall not exceed 500 persons at any time, unless the Fire Department establishes a lesser number, and shall be so posted. 9. Trash storage and removal. a. Trash shall be contained within an enclosed area indicated on the plot plan and located at least 35 feet from any property line and not within view of adjoining properties or the public street. Trash pickup shall be made within the property, during the hours between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. b. The trash hauling company shall be informed by the applicant in a letter that all activity associated therewith shall be conducted in a manner so as not to interrupt traffic on the adjoining streets or cause excessive noise, disturbance or parking problems. The letter shall indicate that no service shall be permitted during the hours of student drop off and pick up. The applicable hours shall be stated in the letter. Upon mailing such letter to the trash hauling company, the applicant shall transmit a copy thereof to the Zoning Administrator. 10. Historic Resources a. All construction on the property shall be subject to design approval by the Cultural Heritage Commission. The existing main building shall be subject to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitation of Historic Structures. b. New construction shall be compatible with the existing main building in accordance with the concepts described in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Preservation Brief No. 14, published by the National Park Service. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 40 c. Significant existing designated historic landscape features, including the front lawn, courtyard and fountain shall be retained. New landscaping shall respect the historic character of the building and, where possible, recreate or reference documented historic landscaping. 11. Hours of operation shall observe the following limitations per Exhibit B-2: a. For classroom instruction: 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday for the main building, 7:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday for the gym, and 7:40 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday for the field. No classroom instruction is permitted on Saturday, Sunday or national holidays, with the exception of Columbus Day and Veterans Day when those days are used as regular school days. b. For gymnasium use: 7:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday for class instruction, 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday for athletic practice, 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday for competitions/other schools (notice to neighbors required), 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., Fridays for athletic practice, 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., Fridays as needed for competitions/other schools (notice to neighbors is required), 10 a.m. to 9 p.m., Saturdays for athletic practice and 10 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturdays as needed for play offs (notice to neighbors required). No gymnasium use is permitted on Sundays with exception of 3 admissions open houses between the hours of 12 p.m. to 5 p.m. (notice to the neighbors is required) or national holidays. c. For outdoor use: 1) Passive use: 7:40 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday and 10 a.m. 6 p.m., Saturdays. No passive use is permitted on Sunday and national holidays, with the exception of Columbus Day and Veterans Day when those days are used as regular school days. Passive use is limited to schools students, staff and families as long as no "fans" or excessive noise is generated. Examples of passive uses include picnics, walking, sitting and eating lunch in designated areas. ii) Athletic use: 7:40 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, with a limitation of 100 students at one time and 6 p.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday for athletic practice. Saturday use is limited to 4 days a year with a 4 hour period between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. for a school use within the established school program. No activities of any kind [e.g., setting up, deliveries, warm ups] shall take place on the field prior to 9 a.m. Within the 4 hour period limit, the 4 Saturday uses shall permit practices between the hours of 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., as needed, and competitions/other schools with a goal of being played between the hours of 3:30 p.m. and 6 p.m. Notice to the neighbors is required for competitions/other schools. Athletic use is not permitted on Sundays or national holidays, with the exception of Columbus Day and Veterans Day when those days are used as regular school days. d. Teacher preparations, normal school maintenance, parent conferences with teachers, school board meetings and similar customary school activities CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 41 cumulatively limited to 40 vehicles on the property at one time are permitted to 9 p.m., Monday through Friday. e. Not more than 47 "Special Events" are authorized. All Special Events are listed in Exhibit B-3, and summarized below. Full utilization of the 109 striped parking spaces on-site is limited to daily class time, parent conferences and teacher meetings, Competitions/Other Schools, scheduled performances, Back to School Nights, Graduation, and the annual Holiday Boutique. No parking is permitted on the athletic field. Permitted hours of Special Events are limited to those listed in Exhibit B-3, including any time needed to clean and restore the site, if necessary. 1) Back to School Nights -two days during the school year, Monday through Friday, 6 p.m. to 1 O p.m. 2) School Performances -four days during the school year, Fridays and Saturdays, 6 p.m. to 11 p.m. [approximately 200 attendees] 3) Graduation -one Saturday during the school year, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. 4) School Dances/Socials -four days during the school year, Fridays and Saturdays, 6 p.m. to 11 p.m. 5) Admissions Open Houses/Events -four Sundays and one Saturday, 12 noon to 5 p.m., each calendar year 6) Parents Association Holiday Boutique -one day during the school year, Saturday 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. This event is open to the public. Only if the east parking lot is full may entering vehicles park in the west parking lot. 7) Parent Orientations -Two days during the school year, Monday through Friday, 6:30 p.m. to 10 p.m. 8) School Plays -Three Fridays and three Saturdays, 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., each calendar year. 9) Twenty-two additional days annually as per Exhibit B-3, including: a. Thirteen days, Monday through Saturday, 10 a.m. to 9 p.m., and b. Nine days, Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday, 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Parking for these events shall be limited to 65 vehicles on-site and shall be located in the east lot. Written notification via US mail and electronic mail by the property owner is required to the Zoning Administrator, Council Office, President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association, Chair of the Brentwood Community Council, the Brentwood Village Chamber of Commerce, and all abutting and adjacent neighbors at least 45 days prior to such event date(s). CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 42 f. The permitted maximum number of cars parked on-site is limited to those listed in Exhibit B-3. "Car" is defined as a passenger car with the maximum capacity of 10 persons. Events that require more parking shall use remote lots. g. Motorized sweeping of the parking lots and driveways and motorized landscape maintenance shall occur only between the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 12. At least 109 permanent, striped parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.21-A,5 of the Municipal Code. 13. [MODIFIED] The applicant shall inform parents, students, faculty and staff in writing on an annual basis of all rules regulating school traffic and parking, and the school's disciplinary policy for violation. A copy of said notice to parents. students. faculty and staff and a disciplinary action taken for violation during the preceding school year shall be mailed to the Zoning Administrator at the same time. The applicant shall maintain a progressive disciplinary system of enforcement in which the first violation shall result in suspending driving privileges to and from school for one week (both parent and students). The second violation shall result is suspending driving privileges two weeks (both parent and student). The third violation shall result in suspending driving privileges for one year (both parent and student). A violation requires that the student ride the bus. The school administration shall maintain a list of license plate numbers of all families whose children are enrolled as well as the license plate numbers for each employee who parks on the property. 14. One or more parking monitors in orange vests or other distinctive attire shall be located at each driveway entrance during all drop off and pick up hours and at all special events to preclude parking on neighborhood streets (Chaparal and Barrington Avenue), noise from car horns, car radios, car alarms and loud voices, and to maintain smooth ingress to and egress from the parking areas. The monitors shall prevent exiting vehicles from traveling westbound on Chaparal Street or exiting onto Barrington Avenue and turning northbound. Monitors shall report any violations to the school administration, including any off-campus drop offs or pick ups which are observed, and applicable license plate numbers. Students who walk or bike to or from campus must have established proof of residency in the immediate area, or be issued a photo identification "transit pass". 15. Any school-operated van and bus and all other vehicles which bring students to school and take them home shall park, load and unload students within the property and not on any adjoining streets, except that a maximum of 15 student carpool vehicles may park off-site at a Veterans Administration parking lot approved by the Zoning Administrator. The site shall be within student walking distance to the campus. The school shall issue identification permits to each vehicle parking at the lot. School personnel shall monitor such off-site parking location for student safety and to ensure that only student driver-registered carpool vehicles park in such lot and that no student vehicle is parked on neighborhood streets. 16. Except during special events, all faculty, administrators, other employees and visitors shall be instructed by persons acting on behalf of the school to park on-site at designated locations. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 43 17. The applicant shall implement a Traffic Management Program with a Trip Reduction Plan to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportation and the Zoning Administrator prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or temporary certificate of occupancy. Components of such efforts shall include: a. Achieving an average vehicle ridership of 3.0 persons per vehicle beginning January 31, 2000 through the following or similar actions. Failure to achieve the 3.0 ratio on schedule shall require the applicant to reduce the maximum number of students enrolled in the first September thereafter by an amount equal to the number of students below the 3.0 ratio and a $2, 100 fine for each trip to be deposited into the Neighborhood Protection Fund per DOT [e.g., a 3.0 ratio and an enrollment of 450 students, plus 50 faculty and administrative staff, results in 166 vehicles and a hypothetically observed 2. 7 ratio results in 185 vehicles. Multiply 19 (the difference between 185 and 166) times 3.0 for a total reduction of 57 students]. Students who live within one-half mile of the property and who sign a contract with school administrators promising to walk to and from school every day and students who sign a contract with school administrators promising to bicycle to and from school every day may, at the discretion of the school administration, be issued a "transit pass" and for purposes of determining average vehicle ridership they shall be considered as carpool riders. b. Appointing an overall school traffic coordinator for the program, appointment of parent coordinators for each class, distribution of literature explaining the program, distribution of family names and phone numbers so that parents can identify potential carpool opportunities, and requiring parents to sign a contract for carpool plan participation. c. Providing preferred parking locations for carpool vehicles. d. Scheduling classes to avoid peak hour drop off and pick up activity of nearby schools. e. Conducting annual traffic counts for 5 years, beginning in 2004, at all school driveways at the applicant's expense by a licensed traffic engineer to be taken on one day of a typical five-day school week between the hours of 7 a.m. and 9 a.m. in October on a date not to be disclosed to the school in advance. The Department of Transportation shall be informed by the engineer prior to the taking of such traffic counts to permit their observation of same. f. Investigating or implementing distribution of public transit passes or subsidies for faculty and administrators. g. Submitting annual Traffic Management Program Reports to the Zoning Administrator, Department of Transportation, Council Office and President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association indicating average vehicle ridership and compliance with implementation mechanisms above, or others as approved by Department of Transportation and the Zoning Administrator. Such reports shall be considered at the review of operations set forth in Condition No. 44. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 44 h. Utilization of vans/buses to transport 50% of the student enrollment on a daily basis within two years from the date of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. 18. A maximum of 15 student carpools are permitted consisting of 3 students in each vehicle. Additional carpools are permitted consisting of 4 or more students in each vehicle. Student drivers are limited to only the 11th and 12th graders. 19. A school fee of not less than $750 per student per year shall be charged to support the school's student busing program. The school shall contract with a licensed transportation provider and offer routes designed to achieve bus usage by 50 percent of the enrollment within two years of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. The transit provider shall utilize transit routes to and from the property which minimize use of local streets and minimize congestion on major and secondary routes, to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportation. 20. Special Event Parking a. If a special event at the property is expected to attract more than the permitted number of cars per Exhibit B-3, then off-site parking for vehicles in excess of those limitations shall be provided at the Veterans Administration property and/or other locations which the school may secure, to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator. Except for school staff, faculty, and employees who are permitted to utilize on-site parking, all guest parking for Grandparents' Day (if applicable) and 12th Grade Graduation shall be provided at the Veterans Administration property and/or, to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator, other locations which the school may secure. Those persons attending the event shall be instructed to park in such off-site parking locations, and a shuttle service shall be provided to transport visitors to the school. The off-site locations shall not include any parking on residential streets within 500 feet of the school. b. The school administration shall institute a program by which parking is assigned prior to the scheduled event to parents, visitors, staff and faculty at a specific location, whether on-site or off-site. Such a program shall be designed to avoid traffic congestion and circulation problems associated with drivers arriving at the subject property or other designated off-site parking locations and being turned away due to insufficient parking capacity. Condition 11.f provides additional on-site parking restrictions. 21. All exterior signs shall be of an identification or directional type and shall be indicated on plans submitted to and approved by the Zoning Administrator prior to the issuance of permits therefore. 22. Delivery vehicles shall enter and exit the property from Sunset Boulevard only. The property owner shall instruct companies who deliver to do so between 7:30 a.m. and 6 p.m. but outside the stated hours of student drop off and pick up. 23. Buses shall enter and exit the site via Sunset Boulevard only. Buses shall queue within the internal campus driveways. The school shall monitor buses to make sure they do not idle with their engines running. Neither buses nor passenger vehicles CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 45 shall queue on local streets or Sunset Boulevard except as permitted by DOT, e.g., left turn lanes for entering school on Sunset Boulevard. 24. Except for egress to accommodate pick up and drop off of students as specified by the Department of Transportation study and limited to one hour in the a.m. and one hour in the p.m. with vehicle limit and emergency vehicle access, vehicular access via any Chaparal Street driveway is prohibited and shall be precluded by a gate installed with locking mechanisms/keys. Monitors shall restrict cars from exiting onto Chaparal when there is a queue at Chaparal and Barrington. 25. Prior to the sign-off of any plans by the Zoning Administrator for any building permit and prior to the change in occupancy, the applicant shall submit parking, driveway and circulation plans to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportation, the Department of Building and Safety and the Bureau of Engineering, as applicable. 26. Prior to any sign-off o'f plans by the Zoning Administrator, the applicant shall submit plot plans to the Fire Department for review and approval and install fire hydrants if required, and comply with any plot plan requirements. 27. An Emergency Procedures Plan shall be established identifying guidelines and procedures to be utilized in the event of fire, medical urgency, earthquake or other emergencies to the satisfaction of the Police Department and Fire Department prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. A copy of such document shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator upon its approval. 28. A Security Plan shall be developed in consultation with the Police Department, outlining security features to be provided in conjunction with the operation of the school, prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. In addition, the property owner shall provide to the West Los Angeles Area Commanding Officer a diagram of the site indicating access routes and any additional information that might facilitate police response. The applicant shall submit evidence of compliance to the Zoning Administrator. 29. The property shall be internally secured when not in use. 30. Prior to the sign off of any plans by the Zoning Administrator, the applicant shall submit plans to the satisfaction of the Bureau of Street Lighting and the Street Tree Division of the Bureau of Street Maintenance. No street lights are required along the Chaparal Street frontage unless and until the north side of the street is so improved. 31. Prior to the sign off of any plans by the Zoning Administrator, the applicant shall submit plans to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division of the City Engineer and provide evidence that fees required pursuant to Ordinance No. 171,502 have been paid in full. No sidewalk or curb is required along the Chaparal Street frontage unless and until the north side of the street is so improved. 32. All lighting shall be directed onto the site. Floodlighting shall be designed and installed to preclude glare to adjoining and adjacent properties. Outdoor lighting shall be designed and installed with shielding such that the light source cannot be seen from adjacent properties. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 46 33. The athletic field shall not be lighted except for low level security lighting. 34. Noise mitigation: a. No outdoor public address system shall be installed or maintained on the subject property. No paging system shall be installed which is audible outside the building in which it is located. b. A solid masonry wall 6 feet in height shall be built around the western parking lot between the field and parking lot to shield noise from neighbors. Solid masonry walls at the north, east and west property lines as well as the southerly property line adjoining residential uses shall be constructed a variable 6 to 10 feet in height after written consultation and response with each property owner to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and with review and final wall approval by and to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and prior to construction of the proposed gymnasium and prior to the use of the athletic field for athletic purposes. The Chaparal/Westgate Neighborhood Landscaping/Improvements Committee shall be established to recommend the appropriate wall heights, landscape buffers, buffer design and other improvements. On the north property line, the decision to have a wall or maintain the existing hedge cover and landscaping shall be recommended by the property owners on the north side of Chaparal opposite the school and the Committee. c. No amplified music or loud non-amplified music is permitted outside with the exception of one Saturday per school year for the High School Graduation ceremony between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Written notice to the neighbors and Council Office 10 days prior to the event is required. d. The gymnasium shall contain no openable windows on the north and east, openable windows, however, may be installed on the west and south. No doors shall be oriented to the north, east or west unless required by law, and then, only for emergencies or deliveries. All windows shall be double glazed. Windows and door shall remain closed whenever there is active use (except door may be used for entry/exit purposes). e. Compressors and other equipment which may introduce noise impacts beyond any property line shall be enclosed by walls or otherwise attenuated so as to be inaudible off-site. f. No exterior bells are permitted. Musical instruments used by members of the school's band or orchestra shall be confined to within the main building and the gymnasium. 9.:. [ADDED] Except for regular athletic use and other permitted uses, students shall not be allowed to hang out in the area adjacent to the westerly adjoining properties in order to mitigate noise to neighbors. A sign informing students of such a school policy shall be posted on the wall and conspicuous place along the western boundary of the field and the western parking lot. Within 30 days from the effective date of the subject determination, evidence of compliance with this condition. e.g., a notice distributed to students and CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 47 photographs of the posted signs etc., shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for inclusion in the case file. 35. The applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and Council Office identifying existing and proposed landscaping. The plans shall include all open areas not used for buildings, driveways, parking areas, or walks. a. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan identifying existing landscaping of the exterior side of the required fence adjacent to Chaparal Street as confirmed by the stamped approval of the Division of Street Trees. b. The plans shall preserve the existing landscape between Sunset Boulevard and the existing main building except where removal of existing landscaping is required due to street widening along the project frontage. c. Landscaping shall be utilized to mask maintenance facilities and utility apparatus that would otherwise be visible off-site. d. All removed trees with a trunk diameter of 8 inches or greater shall be replaced on a minimum one-for-one basis with 36-inch box or larger. e. All new landscaping shall comply with the Water Conservation Ordinance (Ordinance No. 170,978). 36. The property shall be maintained in an attractive condition and shall be kept free of trash and debris. 37. Construction of tree wells and planting of street trees and parkway landscaping shall be to the satisfaction of the Street Tree Division of the Bureau of Street Maintenance. 38. Construction a. The applicant shall provide a construction schedule to the Council Office, President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association and to adjacent property owners at least 30 days prior to the commencement of demolition, site excavation and construction. Hours of excavation, hauling and all types of construction shall be limited to 7:30 a.m. through 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. No such activities are permitted Saturday, Sunday or national holidays. b. A construction relations officer shall be designated by the property owner to serve as a liaison with neighbors concerning construction activity. c. All construction vehicles shall access the property via Sunset Boulevard. Chaparal Street shall not be used as a construction haul route. d. Construction-related vehicles may arrive at the site no earlier than 7 a.m. so that actual construction may begin at 7:30 a.m. Construction worker vehicles shall exit the property by 5 p.m. This condition does not apply to CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 48 construction personnel engaged in supervisorial, administrative or inspection activities. e. Construction personnel and construction-related vehicles shall not park on any street in the neighborhood. Haul trucks and construction equipment shall be cleaned, watered and/or covered before leaving the property. Any material spilled on the streets adjacent to the property shall be removed immediately by the contractor. Construction equipment and trucks shall be staged on the property. Haul trucks shall not queue on streets adjacent to the property. f. A maximum of two catering truck visits daily is permitted and such trucks shall be accommodated within the property. Catering truck operators shall be instructed in writing not to use their horn or other loud signal. A copy of such letter shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator. g. Any portable toilets shall be on the property and not visible from adjoining properties or the public street. h. All excavating and grading activities shall be suspended when sustained wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour in the excavation area, as enforced by the property owner and contractor. The construction area shall be sufficiently dampened to control dust caused by grading, hauling and wind. i. Compressors shall have noise suppression features so as to reduce noise impacts off-site. j. If noise levels from construction activity are determined to exceed 75 dBA at the property line of an adjacent property and construction equipment is stationary and operating for more than 24 hours, the equipment shall be turned off until a temporary noise barrier is erected between the noise source and the receptor to reduce the noise level to 75 dBA or less. The contractor shall take noise readings when loud activities is underway on a frequent basis. k. Sound blankets shall be used on all construction equipment where technically feasible. I. Fire Department access shall remain clear and unobstructed. m. All contractors involved in demolition and/or renovation activity shall comply with all applicable City, AQIVID, Federal and State regulations including the requirements of SCAQIVID Rule 1403, pertaining to the removal of asbestos- containing materials. At least one representative of the contractor removing asbestos-containing materials who has successfully completed the Asbestos Abatement Contractor/Supervisor course pursuant to the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act shall be present during any stripping, removing, handling, or disturbing of asbestos-containing materials. Warning labels, signs, and/or markings shall be used to identify any asbestos-related health hazards created by demolition or renovation activity. / \ CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 49 39. The applicant shall implement, to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportation, all of the following transportation improvements prior to the issuance of any Certificate (or Temporary) of Occupancy: a. Sunset Boulevard and Kenter Avenue --Widen the south side of Sunset Boulevard west of the intersection by 12 feet within the existing right-of-way from Kenter Avenue to a point approximately 205 feet west of the Kenter Avenue center line, to install an exclusive eastbound right-turn-only lane. Restripe the eastbound approach of Sunset Boulevard to provide one left- turn lane, two through lanes, and the new right-turn-only lane. b. Sunset Boulevard and Bundy Drive --Widen the east side of Bundy Drive south of Sunset Boulevard by approximately three feet for a distance of approximately 175 feet. Restripe northbound Bundy Drive to provide a shared left-turn/through lane and an exclusive right-turn-only lane. c. Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue. 1) Dedicate 20 feet of property on the north side of Sunset Boulevard along the project frontage to provide a 50-foot half right-of-way. 2) Widen the north side of Sunset Boulevard by 15 feet along the project frontage from Barrington Avenue to a point approximately 500 feet west of the Barrington centerline. 3) Widen the south side of Sunset Boulevard by 5 feet from Barrington Avenue to Beverly Court. Widen the south side of Sunset Boulevard by 3 feet from Beverly Court to Granville Avenue. Modify the existing berm radius on the southwest corner of Sunset Boulevard and Granville Avenue. 4) Widen up to 14 feet on the south side of Sunset Boulevard from Barrington Avenue to a point approximately 200 feet east of the Barrington Avenue centerline. 5) Widen the west side of Barrington Avenue by up to 6 feet from Sunset Boulevard northerly to Chaparal Street to lengthen the southbound left-turn lane. The curb lane shall be converted to an optional left- turn/through/right-turn lane. 6) Restripe the eastbound approach of Sunset Boulevard at Barrington Avenue to provide for a left-turn-only lane, two-way left turn median, two through lanes and a right-turn only lane. 7) Modify and install traffic signal equipment as necessary and install split signal phasing for the southbound and northbound traffic to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportation. Modify/install/ remove street lights, trees, raised islands, storm drains, curbs and gutters as necessary. 8) Modify the raised islands at the southwest and southeast corners and restripe the northbound approach to provide a left-turn lane, and '-~ / CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 50 optional through/right-turn lane and a right-turn-only lane. Overlap phasing is provided to allow the traffic in the right-turn-only lane to move at the same time that the westbound left-turn traffic on Sunset Boulevard has a green arrow. d. Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Place --Restripe the northbound approach of this intersection to provide one left-turn and two right-turn-only lanes. Modify the traffic signal to allow an eastbound right-turn overlap phase with the northbound "green" phase. e. Sunset Boulevard and Church Lane --Widen the north side of Sunset Boulevard up to 10 feet for a distance of approximately 450 feet west of the intersection, to allow the existing southbound right-turn-only lane to function as a "free-right" lane. 40. The applicant shall establish and maintain a continuous program of communication with the surrounding community which, as a minimum, shall include the following components: a. [MODIFIED] A designated community relations representative and telephone number for neighbors to contact regarding any complaints or concerns. Calls shall be responded to by the following business day. A Neighborhood Liaison Committee shall be established composed of a representative from the Archer School, President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association, representative from the Council Office, Chair of the Brentwood Community Council, the Private Schools Representative of the Brentwood Community Council, President of the Brentwood Village Chamber of Commerce, all residents immediately abutting and adjacent to the school, and two members of the local neighborhood appointed by the Council Office. The Neighborhood Liaison Committee shall meet not less than two times per year. The representative from the Archer School shall meet at reasonable times with neighborhood representatives in an attempt to resolve such issues. The Neighborhood meeting notice and agenda shall be mailed to the Neighborhood Liaison Committee at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting. The meeting agenda sl1all include a review of any complaints or concerns received from the community and their resolutions. A log shall be kept of all complaints and concerns including complainant's name, date, time, phone number, nature of complaint and the response or resolution offered. A copy of the log and minutes and agenda of the Neighborhood Liaison meetings shall be made available to the Zoning Administrator in conjunction with the review of conditions set forth under Condition No. 44. The school administration shall be responsible for disseminating the name and phone number of the Archer School representative to the Council Office, Neighborhood Liaison Committee, all abutting and adjacent property owners, the President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association, the Chair of the Brentwood Community Council, the President of the Brentwood Village Chamber of Commerce, and the Zoning Administrator. The neighborhood representatives shall also be responsible for disseminating their updated names and phone numbers to the representative from the Archer School. b. The school shall distribute a schedule every September to the Council Office, the Neighborhood Liaison Committee, all abutting and adjacent adjoining CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 51 property owners, the Brentwood Homeowners Association, the Chair of the Brentwood Community Council, the Private Schools Representative of the Brentwood Community Council, and the Zoning Administrator announcing the dates and times of all special events for the next 12 months. 41. For the existing main building, the project shall be provided with an air filtration system. However, this requirement shall not preclude the installation of operable windows which permit passive heating and cooling. 42. The Department of Water and Power and the Southern California Gas Company shall be consulted regarding feasible energy and water conservation features which shall be incorporated into the design of the project. 43. The course of instruction offered at the school shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Education Code of the State of California for courses required to be taught in private independent schools. 44. [MODIFIED] Within five Nv-e years from the effective date of this determination, the property owner shall file a Plan Approval application and associated fees together with mailing labels for all property owners and tenants within 500 feet of the property, as well as the President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association, the Chair of the Brentwood Community Council, and the President of the Brentwood Village Chamber of Commerce. The matter shall be set for public hearing with appropriate notice. The purpose of the Plan Approval shall be to review the effectiveness of, and the level of compliance with, the terms and Conditions of this grant, including the effectiveness of the carpool program, the management of circulation impacts of parking associated with Special Events and any documented noise impacts from parking operations and athletic activities on the surrounding residential properties. Upon review of the effectiveness of and compliance with the Conditions, the Zoning Administrator shall issue a determination. Such determination may modify the existing terms and Conditions, add new terms and Conditions or delete one or more of them, all as deemed appropriate. The Zoning Administrator may also require one or more subsequent Plan Approval applications, if deemed necessary. The application shall include the following minimum information: a. The number of students enrolled by Grade level. b. Physical modifications involving expansion or change of use or location. c. Operational changes to the school such as hours of operation, parking policy or formation of liaison committees with the community. d. Copies of the traffic monitoring report set forth in Condition No. 48 shall be simultaneously sent to the Council Office, the Neighborhood Liaison Committee, the President of the Brentwood Homeowners Association, the Chair of the Brentwood Community Council, the President of the Brentwood Village Chamber of Commerce, and any abutting or adjacent neighbor so requesting a copy. CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 52 e. A summary listing of attendance at each special event and identification of the events which utilized on-site parking only and which utilized off-site parking. f. The status of obtaining access easements that would enable vehicles on site to exit directly onto Barrington Avenue in lieu of exiting onto Chaparal Street. g. The status of participation in efforts to develop a comprehensive and effective schedule for staggering drop off and pick up times among the nearby schools so as to be sensitive to the preferences of their respective parent and student bodies and no less so to the property owners affected by such otherwise uncoordinated, and possibly duplicative traffic patterns. h. The status of any plan for the respective schools to share vans and buses or to consolidate disparate transit programs into a common transit carrier if doing so would result in a cost-effective diminution of total vehicle trips. i. [ADDED] Evidence of compliance with Condition No. 17a, which requires an average vehicle ridership of 3.0 persons per vehicle for the last 5 years prior to the required plan approval application. 45. All school administrators, faculty and school board members shall be provided a copy of the instant determination. 46. The school shall stagger beginning and ending class times so as to minimize conflict with other schools in the area. In conjunction therewith, the applicant shall submit to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator a summary of drop off and pick up times applicable to the nearest five schools prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 47. Prior to the issuance of any certificate or temporary certificate of occupancy for school use, the property owner shall submit to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportation a Neighborhood Traffic Protection Plan designed to control the intrusion of school-generated traffic into the surrounding residential neighborhood and prevent on'-street school-generated parking in the vicinity. a. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, $100,000 cash or a letter of credit for such amount shall be deposited in a Neighborhood Protection Fund and made available to the Department of Transportation for implementation of such Protection Plan. b. Among the measures to be considered are speed humps, a "No Left Turn" sign at the Barrington Avenue/Chaparal Street intersection and restricted/ preferential parking. c. The applicant shall submit a copy of such plan to the Zoning Administrator, Council Office and the Liaison Committee upon its approval by the Department of Transportation and the Neighborhood Protection Committee. 48. A Traffic Monitoring Report shall be submitted to the Department of Transportation, Zoning Administrator and Council Office for review in April and November for the first three years following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Thereafter, the CASE NO. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) PAGE 53 report shall be submitted each November for at least an additional five years [2004 through 2008]. Such reports shall conform to requirements provided by the Department of Transportation. 49. Page 1 of the grant and all conditions of approval shall be printed on the building plans submitted to the Zoning Administrator and all other affected City departments who are required to sign-off on building plans. 50. [MODIFIED] Prior to the issuance of any permits relative to this matter Within 15 days from the effective date of the subject determination, a covenant acknowledging and agreeing to comply with all the terms conditions established herein shall be recorded in the County Recorder's Office. The agreement shall run with the land and shall be binding on any subsequent owners, heirs or assigns. The agreement must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for approval before being recorded. After recordation, a copy bearing the Recorder's number and date shall be provided to the Zoning Administrator for attachment to the subject case file. 51. As of July 1, 2001, power pole access shall be from the subject property only and not from the easterly adjoining property by July 1, 2001. 52. [MODIFIED] As of July 1, 2001, a retractable net of sufficient height and width shall be installed and maintained to prevent soccer balls from landing on the property at 11840 Chaparal Street. The net and any appurtenant structures shall be retracted or lowered when soccer games or practice are not occarring. Prior to installation, the applicant shall obtain written concurrence from the affected property owner as to the proposed design, and to subsequently obtain the sign-off of the Zoning Administrator. The applicant shall evaluate the effectiveness of the existing retractable net and the fence/wall along the westerly property line to prevent soccer balls from landing on the adjoining property. Prior to correcting the deficiencies, the applicant shall review a new or modified design of the errant ball mitigation measure with the affected property owner. Within 120 days from the effective date of the subject determination. evidence showing that the deficiencies are corrected as required in this condition. shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator. The Zoning Administrator recommends that, in addition to the conditions and limitations imposed upon the applicant, the Councilmember of the Eleventh District convene a meeting of the Heads of School for the five existing schools in the vicinity as well as the Head of the Archer School with the objective of voluntarily developing a comprehensive and effective schedule for staggering drop off and pick up times among all such schools so as to be sensitive to the preferences of their respective parent and student bodies and no less so to the property owners affected by such otherwise uncoordinated traffic patterns. Such meeting should also consider opportunities for the respective schools to share vans and buses or to consolidate disparate transit programs into a common transit carrier if doing so would result in a cost-effective diminution of total vehicle trips. The Zoning Administrator shall consider any such cooperative efforts in this regard in the scheduled review of Archer's operation. ZA 98-0158(CUZ)(PA4) ARCHER SCHOOL USE OF SITE Exhibit 8-3 EVENT MAIN GYM FIELD PARKED CARS1 Classes Mon -Fri 7 a.m. -6 p.m. Mon -Fri 7 a.m. -6 p.m. Mon -Fri 7:40 a.m. -6 p.m. 109 Parents Conference/ Mon-Fri 6 p.m. -9 p.m. 109 Teachers Meetings Regular Athletic Use Mon -Fri 7:40 a.m. -9 p.m. Mon -Fri 7:40 a.m. -6 p.m. 25 Archer Teams Practice Mon -Fri 3:30 p.m. -6 p.m., and Mon -Fri 3:30 p.m. -6 p.m., and 10 25 10 Sat 10 a.m. -6 p.m. with 4-Sat 10 a.m. -6 p.m. with 4-hour limit hour limit Competitions/Other Mon -Fri 3:30 p.m. -6 p.m. Mon -Fri 3:30 p.m. -6 p.m.3 as needed3 Schools2 4 Dances2 Fri -Sat 6 p.m. -11 p.m. 109 4 Performances2 Fri -Sat 6 p.m. -11 p.m. 109 5 Admissions Open Sat/Sun 12 p.m. -5 p.m. Sat/Sun 12 p.m. -5 p.m. 109 Houses2 2 Back To School2 Mon -Fri 6 p.m. -10 p.m. Mon -Fri 6 p.m. -10 p.m.3 109 1 Graduation2 Sat 10 a.m. -3 p.m. Sat 10 a.m. -3 p.m.3 109 2 Holiday Boutique2 Fri 7:40 a.m. -6 p.m. and Sat 109 10 a.m. -6 p.m. 21 Unspecified2 Mon -Sat 10 a.m. -9 p.m. Mon -Sat 10 a.m. -9 p.m. 65 1 Conservancy2 Once/5 years 10 a.m. -9 p.m. Once/5 years 10 a.m. -9 p.m. 109 *No field parking allowed *All holidays excluded, except for Columbus Day and Veterans Day Passenger cars with 10 maximum capacity 2 Notice requirement .3 "As needed" -when an event is not appropriate indoors or when the school cannot accommodate its needs indoors. EXHIBIT "C" CHART OF SPECIAL EVENTS -2013 ZA 98-0158{CUZ}{PA4} Approx. Attendance {includes Parked Cars Faculty & Event Name Time/Day On-Site Staff) Existing «··R&Ws~ Existing m (per CUP) }Jtf· 200.... ·. · (per CUP) ~~etermi·. 1 Back to School 6PM-10PM 109 300 Night (Mon-Fri) (Middle School) 2 Back to School 6PM-10PM 109 200 Night (Mon-Fri) (Upper School) 3 School 6PM-11PM 109 120 Performance (Fri & Sat) (CLIP allows 200) 4 School 6PM-11PM 109 120 Performance (Fri & Sat) (CUP allows 200) 5 School 6PM-11PM 109 150 Performance (Fri & Sat) (CUP allows 200) 6 School 6PM-11PM 109 150 Performance (Fri & Sat) (CLIP allows 200) 7 Graduation 10AM-3PM 109 750 (12th Grade) (Sat) (Off site parking provided for all guests.) 8 Dance 6PM~11PM 55 50 ("6th Grade Social") (Fri & Sat) 9 Dance 6PM-1 'IPM 55 50 ("7th Grade Social") (Fri & Sat) 10 Dance 6PM-11 PM 55 50 ("8th Grade Social") (Fri & Sat) 11 Dance 6PM-11PM 55 100 ("9th & 10th Grade (Fri & Sat) Social") Exhibit "C" Approx. Attendance (includes Parked Cars Faculty & Event Name Time/Da On-Site Staff) 12 Admissions Open 12 NOON-5PM 50 500 House (Sun) 13 Admissions Open 12 NOON-5PM 50 500 House (Sun) 14 Admissions Open 12 NOON-5PM 50 500 House (Sun) 15 Admissions Open 12 NOON-5PM 50 500 House (Sun) 16 Admissions Open 12 NOON-5PM 50 100 House (Sat) 17 *Holiday Boutique 10AIV1-6PM 109 400 (Sat) 18 Unspecified Event 10AM-9PM 65 80 (i.e. 8th Grade (Mon-Sat) Graduation) 19 Unspecified Event ~QAM 9PM 65 200 (Parent Orientation (Mon Sat) -To be delineated) 20 Unspecified Event ~QAM 9PM 65 200 (Parent Orientation-(Mon Sat) To be delineated) 21 Unspecified Event ~QAM 9PM 65 120 (Middle School (Mon Sat) Play-To be delineated) 22 Unspecified Event ~QAM 9PM 65 120 (Middle School (Mon Sat) Play-To be delineated) 23 Unspecified Event ~QAM 9PM 65 120 (Upper School Play-(Mon Sat) To be delineated) 24 Unspecified Event ~QAM 9PM 65 120 (Upper School Play-(Mon Sat) To be delineated) 2 Exhibit "C" Approx. Attendance (includes Parked Cars Faculty & Event Name Time/Day On-Site Staff) 25 Unspecified Event ~QAM 9PM -6~~i~i~~~ 65 120 (All School Musical-(Mon Sat) \ --(~ --f~~ To be delineated) ---, .. ' 26 Unspecified Event 10/\M 9PM ----6PM:~'OPl)Th+ --65 120 ··::0--___ --~ -,,,, --- (All School Musical-(Mon Sat) l'·-:0t'/' '(~at~Ja' -__ .. :i11 To be delineated) ·-:-----\ -- 27 Unspecified Event 10AM-9PM 65 550 ' (i.e. Grandparents' (Mon-Sat) (Off site parking Day) provided for all guests.) 28 Unspecified Event 10AM-9PM 65 300 (i.e. New Family (Mon-Sat) Social) 29 Unspecified Event 10AM-9PM 65 120 (i.e. Senior Dessert (Mon-Sat) Night) 30 Unspecified Event 10AM-9PM 65 150 (i.e. Art Gallery (Mon-Sat) Show) 31 Unspecified Event 10AM-9PM 65 150 (i.e. Art Gallery (Mon-Sat) Show) 32 Unspecified Event 10AM-9PM 65 150 (i.e. Art Gallery (Mon-Sat) Show) 33 Unspecified Event 10AM-9PM 65 100 (i.e. Speaker) (Mon-Sat) 34 Unspecified Event 10AM-9PM 65 75 (i.e. Junior College (Mon-Sat) Night) 35 Unspecified Event 10AM-9PM 65 75 (i.e. 1 oth Grade (Mon-Sat) College l\Jight) 36 Unspecified Event 10AM-9PM 65 75 (i.e. 9th Grade (Mon-Sat) College Night) 37 Unspecified Event 10AM-9PM 65 30 (i.e. Dad's & (Mon-Sat) Daughters' Movie l\Jight) 3 Event Name 38 Unspecified Event (i.e. Spanish Speaking Parent i'Ji ht) 47 Special Events Total Time/Da 10AIV1-9PM (Mon-Sat) NOTE: All attendances indicated are estimates. 65 4 Parked Cars On-Site Exhibit "C" Approx. Attendance (includes Faculty & s~ 25 I 40 (100 max.) 30 (100 max.) 20 (100 max.) 30 (100 max.) 30 (100 max.) 40 (100 max.) TBD (100 max.) TBD (100 max.) TBD (100 max.) 2 Baumb, Nelly From:Bruce McLeod <mcleod.bruce@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, March 27, 2021 3:20 PM To:Cormack, Alison; tanaka.greg@cityofpaloalto.org; Burt, Patrick; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Stone, Greer; DuBois, Tom Cc:Council, City Subject:1310 Bryant Street - Castilleja parking requirements Attachments:Castilleja Parking requirements McLeod.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. City of Palo Alto March 26, 2021 City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: 1310 Bryant Street; Castilleja Expansion Project UBC Parking Requirements The California Building Code (2019) defines off-street parking requirements for schools in Chapter 17 Section 57. The applicable sections below seem fairly clear – and under code, the school does not come close to providing the number of off-street parking spaces required. (Indeed, the school currently does not meet the code requirements. Is the Council prepared to exacerbate the current non-compliance?) Below is the applicable UBC code section and calculations based on Castilleja’s current and proposed plans. 17.57.040 Off-street parking requirements Educational Facilities. 27. Schools: High schools shall provide the greater of the following: At least one parking space for each employee and one parking space for every three students in the eleventh and twelfth grades, OR At least one parking space for every three seats in the main auditorium or stadium, whichever is the greater Current Castilleja off‐street parking: 3 Employees: There are 140 employees in the Castilleja staff directory. That’s 140 required parking spaces for staff. Students: With the currently allowed 415 students equally distributed over 7 grades (59+ each grade ) there are roughly 118 juniors and seniors; one space for every three is 39 required parking spaces for students o Total = 140 plus 39 = 179 required on‐site parking spaces Existing site has only 86 off‐street spaces (48% of the requirement) Proposed Castilleja enrollment of 540 with no increase in employees: Employees: There are still 140 employees. 140 required spaces. Students: At enrollment of 540 with all new enrollment (125) going to high school there are roughly 243 juniors and seniors, or 81 required spaces for students. o Total = 140 + 81 = 221 Proposed plans including the garage only provide 104 off‐street spaces (47%of the requirement). Event Parking: Castilleja’s large events occur not in a stadium or auditorium but in the Circle. Under the proposed plan a large event like graduation could include graduates (120), faculty, staff and administrators (80‐100) school support staff (20‐30), guests (300), and outside service (30+) ‐ easily at least 570 people requiring 190 parking spaces, well above the designated parking spaces even with parking on Speiker Field. Where do these extra 80‐120 cars park each day, not to mention the overflow from large events? Unlike any other school in Palo Alto, public or private, they park on the surrounding neighborhood streets. It is clear that both the UBC requirements and the California Department of Education (CDE) site design recommendations both understand the need for schools to provide adequate off‐street parking for their staff, students and visitors. Why should Castilleja be otherwise enabled? The City Council should recognize that applying a parking standard based on teaching stations is insufficient, woefully inadequate, and in clear conflict with Building Code requirements as well as the CDE guidelines. This minimal standard encourages overdevelopment and overuse of this 6.1 acre site and should not be allowed for a Conditional Use in an R‐1 neighborhood. Given Castilleja’s inability to self‐park onsite, the Council should condition the CUP to require a significantly more extensive shuttling program and mandate that all gatherings in excess of 100 attendees need to be held off‐site, outside this R‐1 neighborhood. As currently configured, the lack of off‐street parking and its proposed increase (30+% more un‐parked cars) constitute a significant impact on the neighborhood with no adequate mitigation and should be reason not to make the findings to certify the EIR or approve the project. Thank you for your time and consideration, Bruce McLeod 1404 Bryant Street Palo Alto 4 Bruce McLeod 650‐465‐2908 City of Palo Alto March 26, 2021 City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: 1310 Bryant Street; Castilleja Expansion Project UBC Parking Requirements The California Building Code (2019) defines off-street parking requirements for schools in Chapter 17 Section 57. The applicable sections below seem fairly clear – and under code, the school does not come close to providing the number of off-street parking spaces required. (Indeed, the school currently does not meet the code requirements. Is the Council prepared to exacerbate the current non-compliance?) Below is the applicable UBC code section and calculations based on Castilleja’s current and proposed plans. 17.57.040 Off-street parking requirements Educational Facilities. 27. Schools: • High schools shall provide the greater of the following: • At least one parking space for each employee and one parking space for every three students in the eleventh and twelfth grades, OR • At least one parking space for every three seats in the main auditorium or stadium, whichever is the greater Current Castilleja off-street parking: • Employees: There are 140 employees in the Castilleja staff directory. That’s 140 required parking spaces for staff. • Students: With the currently allowed 415 students equally distributed over 7 grades (59+ each grade ) there are roughly 118 juniors and seniors; one space for every three is 39 required parking spaces for students o Total = 140 plus 39 = 179 required on-site parking spaces • Existing site has only 86 off-street spaces (48% of the requirement) Proposed Castilleja enrollment of 540 with no increase in employees: • Employees: There are still 140 employees. 140 required spaces. • Students: At enrollment of 540 with all new enrollment (125) going to high school there are roughly 243 juniors and seniors, or 81 required spaces for students. o Total = 140 + 81 = 221 • Proposed plans including the garage only provide 104 off-street spaces (47%of the requirement). Event Parking: • Castilleja’s large events occur not in a stadium or auditorium but in the Circle. Under the proposed plan a large event like graduation could include graduates (120), faculty, staff and administrators (80-100) school support staff (20-30), guests (300), and outside service (30+) - easily at least 570 people requiring 190 parking spaces, well above the designated parking spaces plus the capacity of Speiker Field. Where do these extra 80-120 cars park each day, not to mention the overflow from large events? Unlike any other school in Palo Alto, public or private, they park on the surrounding neighborhood streets. It is clear that both the UBC requirements and the California Department of Education (CDE) site design recommendations both understand the need for schools to provide adequate off- street parking for their staff, students and visitors. Why should Castilleja be otherwise enabled? The City Council should recognize that applying a parking standard based on teaching stations is insufficient, woefully inadequate, and in clear conflict with Building Code requirements as well as the CDE guidelines. This minimal standard encourages overdevelopment and overuse of this 6.1 acre site and should not be allowed for a Conditional Use in an R-1 neighborhood. Given Castilleja’s inability to self-park onsite, the Council should condition the CUP to require a significantly more extensive shuttling program and mandate that all gatherings in excess of 100 attendees need to be held off-site outside this R-1 neighborhood. As currently configured, the lack of off-street parking and its proposed increase (30+% more un-parked cars) constitute a significant impact on the neighborhood with no adequate mitigation and should be reason not to make the findings to certify the EIR or approvethe project. Thank you for your time and consideration, Bruce McLeod 1404 Bryant Street Palo Alto 5 Baumb, Nelly From:Janet L. Billups <jlb@jsmf.com> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 6:26 PM To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; Stump, Molly; Yang, Albert; Lait, Jonathan; French, Amy; Kathy Layendecker; Mindie S. Romanowsky; nkauffman@castilleja.org Subject:Castilleja School Responses to City Council Questions Attachments:NanciKauffmanCCLtrFinal3.26.21.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Palo Alto City Council, The attached letter, submitted by Nanci Kauffman, on behalf of Castilleja School, responds to Council’s questions regarding Castilleja’s proposed project. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Kind regards, Janet Billups, Legal Assistant Jorgenson, Siegel, McClure & Flegel LLP 1100 Alma Street, Ste. 210 Menlo Park, CA 94025 Ph. 650-324-9300 jlb@jsmf.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e‐mail and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipients and contain information that may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received this e‐mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e‐mail and delete the message. Any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of this communication by someone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. 1310 Bryant Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 650.328.3160 castilleja.org Nanci Z. Kauffman Head of School Women Learning. Women Leading. March 26, 2021 Sent via Email: City.Council@CityofPaloAlto.org City of Palo Alto City Council Palo Alto City Hall 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Castilleja School Responses to City Council Questions 16PLN-00258 SCH#2107012052 Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members, At the March 15, 2021, meeting, City Council members raised a number of important questions regarding Castilleja’s proposed project, and I would like to respond here by highlighting areas in the application materials that provide answers. Generally speaking, I heard concerns about possible “intensification” of our block, however our campus and the neighborhood will become less intense due to these three approaches: 1. Architecture and landscaping designed to respond to and to reduce impacts 2. Environmental mitigations that improve upon current conditions 3. Conditions of approval that are more restrictive than those found in our current CUP Ultimately, our new CUP is a far more restrictive permit than our current CUP when it comes to traffic, events, noise, and hours of operation. Similarly, our design plans, which have advanced and changed significantly through this iterative process, improve upon current conditions with lower rooflines, increased setbacks, reduced massing, hidden parking, and more trees. We believe that anything that benefits Castilleja must also benefit our neighborhood. We all care very deeply about this corner of Palo Alto, and this letter is intended to outline those shared benefits and answer your questions using information that is already contained in the administrative record (sources identified in the attachment). The mitigations and conditions are more restrictive of school activities than the existing conditions in the school’s current CUP and will serve to benefit the health, safety and public welfare of the community. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5159B1EE-E8BA-440F-9A9F-58154BCC79F9 Women Learning. Women Leading. Question Topic Response Enrollment Enrollment Increases Must be Earned. Enrollment is capped at 426 until project milestones are met and trip caps are complied with. Condition No. 4 provides that if the “no net new trip” standard is not met for the preceding three reporting periods, the school cannot grow its enrollment. There will be no burden on city resources to go through subsequent CUP processes, because the conditions of approval contain a built-in mechanism to ensure that enrollment is not a right, it must be earned. Modest Phased Enrollment Increases. The first potential increase in enrollment of up to 25 additional students would be in the academic year following the completion of the underground parking garage. With the completion of the garage, the maximum possible enrollment would be 490 students until completion of all remaining project construction and removal of temporary buildings. At that point, provided that the school continues to maintain no-net new trips, enrollment could increase by no more than 25 students per academic year until reaching the maximum enrollment of 540 students. Transportation No Net New Trips. The Planning Commission imposed a more stringent condition than outlined in the EIR’s Mitigation Measure 7a by recommending approval of Condition No. 22, which requires a reduction from 2.4 trips per student (or 1,477 average daily trips) to no net new trips (or 1,198 average daily trips). Castilleja is not currently held to a daily trip limit. The proposed limits on peak hour trips are more restrictive than those currently accepted by the city: Current: 456 trips (511 trips with 20 percent TDM reduction) EIR mitigation: 440 trips PTC condition: 383 trips DocuSign Envelope ID: 5159B1EE-E8BA-440F-9A9F-58154BCC79F9 Women Learning. Women Leading. Stringent Real Time Monitoring and Enforcement. Condition No. 22 requires stricter enforcement than required by the EIR and requires permanent ongoing real-time monitoring to evidence compliance with the no net new trip standard. No other project in Palo Alto has real time monitoring. If the no net new trip standard is violated, additional TDM measures are required, and enrollment must be reduced by 10 percent, in the next academic year. Any violation of trip requirements can lead to CUP enforcement actions, revocation and/or imposition of administrative penalties. (Condition No. 30). At all times, the school must keep a deposit of $15,000 on file with the City to cover all City administrative costs to monitor Castilleja’s performance (Condition No. 31). Parking the Project The Project Complies with the City’s Parking Requirements. Palo Alto’s Code requires that our school provide 104 spaces on-site for our project. We understand that the Code restricts us from parking any of the required 104 spaces off-site to meet this parking requirement. Below Grade Parking is Designed to Retain Homes and Ensure Tree Preservation. The below grade parking facility was reduced from the original project to retain two homes and preserve additional trees. The current garage design does not require the removal of any trees. If concern remains regarding trees 102 and 120, the size of the parking facility could be reduced by 4-5 spaces to support the health of those trees. Benefits of Below Grade Parking for Community Preserves Green Space and Enhances Residential Feel. Underground parking removes cars from view and increases greenspace (including an athletic field) and allows for more landscaping. Below grade parking avoids lighting required for at grade parking. Environmentally Superior. The EIR concludes that our current proposal (Alternative 4) with underground parking is environmentally superior and an aesthetic improvement as compared to (i) the project as originally proposed and, (ii) as compared to the no garage alternative, which would impact the neighborhood in an aesthetically negative way. Reduces Noise. Underground parking removes from the neighborhood the noise associated with car doors shutting and other car related sounds. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5159B1EE-E8BA-440F-9A9F-58154BCC79F9 Women Learning. Women Leading. Retains Trees. A reduced parking facility footprint allows the project to retain 6 additional coastal redwoods, numbers 115-120, as compared to the original project proposal. Further reducing the size of the garage by 4-5 spaces, would bolster the health of tree numbers 102 and 120. Noise Well-Below Residential Acceptable Noise Levels. The EIR found that moving bus pickup/drop-off internal to the campus and locating deliveries and trash pick-up below grade reduces noise from current levels to “well-below the Comprehensive Plan normally acceptable noise level for residential properties.” Loudspeaker Use Limited. Condition No. 12 requires the school to comply with the city’s noise ordinance and stipulates that NO outdoor amplified sound equipment is allowed without approval of a noise exemption permit from the City, except for the pool. The school is prohibited from amplified sound in the pool between 8pm and 7am. EIR Mitigation Measure 8a establishes a performance standard that must be attained when the loudspeaker system for the pool area is designed to ensure that loudspeakers would have less than significant impact. None of the above noise restrictions are included in Castilleja’s existing CUP. Pool Noise Limited. The pool will be built 15 feet below grade and surrounded by a sound wall to further reduce noise. The EIR concludes there will be a less than significant noise impact from the use of, and activities at, the pool. This is a significant improvement from the existing at grade pool condition. Special Events Reduced Number of Events. Condition No. 6 limits the school to 74 special events per school year. Special events are defined to be more than 50 attendees. No more than 37 may exceed 100 attendees. This is an approximately 20 percent reduction from the 90 special events requested by the school and an even greater reduction from the over 100 events currently held per year, pursuant to the existing use permit. Restricted Days and Evenings. The existing CUP for the school is silent on hours and days of operation, but Condition No. 6 of the proposed new CUP specifies: Restricted Evening Events: Weekdays: Max. of 32/year. Saturdays: Max. of 5/year. Restricted Evening Hours for Events: 6 pm–8pm, except performances which must end by 10 pm No Sunday Events. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5159B1EE-E8BA-440F-9A9F-58154BCC79F9 Women Learning. Women Leading. Event Access to PAUSD. PAUSD may use the campus up to 5 times/year with approval of each request by the Director of Planning. These events do not count toward Castilleja’s special events. Trees Retained Trees, Tree Mitigations and Tree Tally at Project Completion. At project submission, there were 164 trees on campus. Since then, 12 trees have died of natural causes, and there are currently 152 trees on campus. Project Alternative 4 will remove 14 trees (2 of which are heritage oaks: Tree 155 and 140) and retain 138 existing trees on site, before mitigation. Required Tree Mitigations: Plant 110 new trees (99 onsite and 11 offsite or pay in-lieu fee). Additional (voluntary) Tree Mitigation: Plant 9 new trees onsite. Onsite Tree Tally at Project Completion: 138 Retained Trees onsite 108 New trees to be planted onsite 246 Total Trees Mitigation Measure 4b requires that prior to construction the school develop a Tree Protection and Preservation Plan, subject to city arborist review and approval, to ensure extreme care is taken to protect the health and longevity of the trees. The ONLY Heritage Trees Proposed for Removal are in Fair to Poor Health and Located Internal to Campus. Tree 155: This courtyard tree is in fair health and is proposed for removal because it impacts the ability to build below grade deliveries and trash pick-up. At project completion, existing trees 80/145/146 will be located in this vicinity. Tree 140: This tree internal to campus is in poor/failing health and needs to be removed regardless of the project. Preservation of Coast Live Oak Near Pool. Tree 89: The arborist report showed the major root zone to be small/ limited and thus less likely to be impacted during construction. Also, 90% of the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) is already paved, which will serve to protect the roots during construction. At project completion, the pavement will be removed and replaced with decomposed granite and landscaping, which will improve the current setting/environment around the tree. Aesthetics & Sustainability Increased Setbacks. The school buildings will be setback further from the street than existing buildings. Lower Height. The new building is proposed with lower roof lines than current buildings. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5159B1EE-E8BA-440F-9A9F-58154BCC79F9 Women Learning. Women Leading. Neighborhood Compatibility. Architects studied neighborhood homes for inspiration in designing the new building. Additional changes were made to the massing and the building materials in response to input from neighbors and the ARB. Sustainable Design. The project would replace outdated, inefficient buildings with modern, net-zero, 100 percent electric buildings, reducing the school’s demand on the power grid, reducing greenhouse gases and helping the city achieve its sustainability goals. The information above responds to specific concerns expressed by Councilmembers on March 15, 2021, but is only a snapshot of the full record. With these answers at your fingertips and the weight of the full record, I hope it becomes easier to see how our project will improve the neighborhood and benefit the health, safety and public welfare of Palo Alto. As a reminder, the project is supported by hundreds of residents of Palo Alto—a number of whom live directly adjacent to campus—who have spoken at hearings, written letters, and signed petitions to urge you to approve this important project, as proposed, including the below grade parking. After reviewing these specifics, if the City Council would like to seek project modifications to address remaining concerns, Castilleja is prepared to engage in a conversation with the City Council at the upcoming meeting on March 29, 2021, so the Council can confidently vote to approve the project. Finally, as the head of Castilleja School, I respectfully request that you certify the Final EIR on Monday, March 29, 2021. At least one Planning Commissioner noted that this is one of the most thorough and exhaustive EIRs in the history of Palo Alto. The Final EIR adequately analyzes the proposed project and alternatives, including the reduced garage and the no garage alternatives. Nothing will be gained by delaying the certification of the Final EIR. Once again, we respectfully request you take this step. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, Nanci Z. Kauffman Head of School Cc: Ed Shikada (Ed.Shikada@cityofpaloalto.org) Molly Stump (Molly.Stump@cityofpaloalto.org) Albert Yang (Albert.Yang@cityofpaloalto.org) Jonathan Lait (Jonathan.Lait@cityofpaloalto.org) Amy French (Amy.French@cityofpaloalto.org) Kathy Layendecker (klayendecker@castilleja.org) Mindie Romanowsky (msr@jsmf.com) Attachment DocuSign Envelope ID: 5159B1EE-E8BA-440F-9A9F-58154BCC79F9 Administrative Record Sources Enrollment 1. Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report (ID #11772), November 18, 2020, packet pages 73 to 74. 2. Castilleja School Final Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 3 Project Description, page 3-12 and 3-13. Transportation 3. Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report (ID #11772), November 18, 2020, packet pages 78 to 80. 4. Letter from the City of Palo Alto, Planning and Community Environment dated February 29, 2014 5. Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report (ID #11772), November 18, 2020, packet pages 85 and 86. 6. Letter from City of Palo Alto, Planning and Community Environment dated September 25, 2013 imposing administrative penalties. 7. Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 18.53.030 and 18.52.040. 8. Castilleja Master Plan and Conditional Use Permit Application, Parking. 9. Castilleja School Final Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 13 Alternatives, pages 13-40 and 13-41. 10. Castilleja School Final Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 8 Noise, page 8-16. 11. Plan Sheets Responsive to City’s Urban Forester’s Comments, Michael Bench, Consulting Arborist, dated September 28, 2020. Noise 1. Castilleja School Final Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 8 Noise, page 8-16. 2. Castilleja School Final Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 8 Noise, page 8-22. 3. Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report (ID #11772), November 18, 2020, packet pages 75 and 76. 4. Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report (ID #11772), November 18, 2020, packet page 74 and 75. 5. Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report (ID #11179), October 28, 2020, packet pages 17 and 18. Trees 1. Castilleja School Final Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 3 Project Description, Figure 3-4. 2. Plan Sheets Responsive to City’s Urban Forester’s Comments, Michael Bench, Consulting Arborist, dated September 28, 2020. 3. BFS Landscape Architects, memo dated September 4, 2020. 4. Castilleja School Final Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 4 Land Use and Planning, page 4-42 and 4- 43. 5. Updated Tree List 2020. 6. Updated Tree Inventory for Project Alternative 2020. Aesthetics & Sustainability 1. Castilleja School Final Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 3 Project Description, page 3-17. 2. Castilleja School Final Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 3 Project Description, page 3-9.t 3. Architectural Review Board Staff Report (ID #11181), November 5, 2020. 4. Castilleja School Final Environmental Impact Report, Chapter 4 Land Use and Planning, page 4-20 and Chapter 5 Aesthetics, page 5-17. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5159B1EE-E8BA-440F-9A9F-58154BCC79F9 6 Baumb, Nelly From:Carla Befera <carlab@cb-pr.com> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 8:00 AM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Traffic pattern issues Attachments:Castilleja plan with traffic flows.pptx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council Members: During the March 8 Council meeting, a few members touched on traffic pattern issues related to the Castilleja expansion plans, but I do not believe a major aspect of that issue was addressed. Note that the project's EIR didn't suggest reducing enrollment, or requiring shuttling, to mitigate the three traffic-related "significant and unavoidable impacts", but instead recommended an alternative in which the school will "disburse" the traffic to three surface streets. What it does not address is the actual traffic patterns. Council Member Kou touched on this when she specifically asked how cars directed to drop off on Kellogg Street would arrive. Where an initial plan offered all entry and exit adjacent to Embarcadero (a plan that proved to be infeasible), the revised plan will require cars to travel on ALL adjacent streets. There is no direct path to Kellogg Street - a driver turning onto Bryant from Embarcadero would have to line up behind cars entering the garage or Bryant Street drop off lane, in order to reach Kellogg. In reality, those cars turn onto Waverly, and line up on Kellogg for their queue - and are then caught in the cross traffic of cars exiting the Bryant drop off. The only other route to this drop off area is driving north on Bryant and turning left (across the bike boulevard) to line up for the Kellogg drop off. This contradicts comments by the TDM specialists, who stated that "bike boulevard traffic would not be affected." As a resident on that corner, we can tell you that screeching brakes, horns, and near misses are an almost daily occurrence when school is in session. The attached is what the revised traffic patterns will actually look like, affecting all the neighborhood intersections, and adding traffic to all the area streets. We vehemently dispute the suggestion that spreading new traffic around to all sides of the school somehow mitigates its impact. The only viable way to keep the mitigation manageable is to reduce the allowed number of students, mandate that the school NOT PERMIT students to self-drive, and require all students arrive via a robust shuttling from public transportation and outlying areas. Many thanks for your consideration. Carla Befera To Alma To Alma To Paly Ke l l o g g S t r e e t Bryant Street Emerson Street Ch u r c h i l l A v e Waverly Street 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Caryn Huberman <yackybooks@hotmail.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 3:25 PM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Urgent: DO NOT approve underground garage for Castilleja! CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. To the members of the Palo Alto City Council: I urge you to vote NO on the expansion of Castilleja, in particular the enormous underground garage they propose. This unwanted structure and its years of construction will bring noise, chaos and pollution to this already crowded R‐zone surrounded by Embarcadero Road, Bryant Bike Blvd and containing narrow neighborhood streets. What Castilleja has proposed is simply OVERWHELMING for this area. For the residents of Palo Alto who live in and near the Castilleja neighborhood. Please, please DO NOT APPROVE OF THIS SELFISH, SELF‐CENTERED AND SELF‐SERVING bid to expand like an elephant in the living room. Giant projects do not belong in that area. Sensible, thoughtful and respectful institutions would find a much better solution to expansion and that is: Find a new location where growing big, bigger and biggest is possible and logical. Has anyone suggested to you that one reason Castilleja wants to hold on so very tightly to their Palo Alto address is cache? I believe that has a lot to do with their insistence on attempting to explode their space and push so vigorously to create a monster entity on their present campus. A giant school has no place in that neighborhood. It's as simple as that. Respectfully, caryn Huberman Yacowitz h 8 Baumb, Nelly From:PNQL-Now <info@pnqlnow.org> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 7:17 PM To:Burt, Patrick; Cormack, Alison; Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Council, City; Stone, Greer Subject:PNQL is confirming that you have Castilleja's Conditional Use Permit Attachments:CastillejaCurrCUP-yr2000.PDF CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, It has come to our attention that you may not have a copy of Castilleja's CUP. Please see the attached PDF. Regards, PNQL Planning Division November 2, 2000 Georgia 8oncl Castilleja School 131 0 Bryant Street Palo A Ito. CA 9430 I City of Palo Alto Depctrtmenl ofPlcmn ing and Community Environment Subject: 1310 Bt·yant Street (Castilleja School) Dear Ms. Bond: Attached to this letter is an approved Conditional Use Permit [OO-CUP-23 J adthuriLing Castil leja School to increase its enroll ment from 385 to 415 students and add 'two full- time faculty members. Castillej a School's request for 30 atlditio nal students was outlined in a letter to Lisa Grote dated August 28. 2000. The request was also reviewed at a public hearing he I cl on October! 9, 2000. At no time did Casti lleja School indicate that it was their intent to submit a later app li cation for additional students. The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the approved Conditional Use J?erm it does not provide for an increase in stu4ents of 415 students, and that any subseque~t request for additional sh1dents will not be favorable looked up by the City. The City Staff greatly appreciate Castilleja Schoo l's demonstrated willingness lo work with the ir neighbors to address ex:is ting trnffic and parking problems, as wel I as any impacts related to increasing the student population. However, the City is not ~ill ing to continue to approach increasing school enroll ment for Castilleja School in an incremental manner. Please contact me at 329-256 1 if you have any questions regarding this approval. Sincerely, cc: Rachel Adcox, Planner 250 Hamilton A:venue P.O. Box 10250 ' Palo Alto, CA 94303 650.329.244 1 650.329.2154 fax Ci~of Palo Alto Departmtnt of Pftmning and Community Environment Use Pennit OO-CUP-23 is approved to allow Castilleja School to increase the nnm.ber of enr~lled students from 385 to 41.5 students and add tWo fuU-dme fnculty members. The school is locatl.ld at 1310 Bryant Street, within the R· l (929) S\Jiglc Family Resldelltlal Zoning District. Project approval is ba.'ltd on the fullowing findings and is subject to conditions listed below. .... DI FINDINGS .-.. nnlng, vtmon J. Tht proposed use, at the proposed location, will 1101 be derrtmcmal or injurious 10 property or lmprove~nts tn the vicinity, and will not be dettime'rlral ro the publi¢ health. safety, geMral welfare or convenience. The proposed enrollment increase from 385 to 415 students and the addition of two full- time faculty members will nOf be detriinentaJ or injurious to property or improvements in 1hc area or to the pnbHc health. satety. general welfare or convenience. CastiUeja School has taken steps to improve the existing traffic congestion and parking ptoblems iwociated with the school, punruant to the conditions of approval for the Use Pennit previously issued for the modification of the administration buildiag [99-lJP-48]. These improvements include iru-Judi.og makiQg changes to the existing drop-off and piclc-up ar~ to improve traffic cfticicncy nt the sltc, adding approximately 14 new J)arlcing spaces, and implementing a Transportation Demand Management Program. Ju a condition of this Use Permit, Castilleja must also reconfigure the staffi'faculty parking lot to include no fewer than 44 parking spaces and A loading/unloading area for trudks and busses. l 2. The proposed use wtll be woa1ed and conducted in a manner In accord with the P~o Alto Comprehemlve Plan and the purposes o/Title 18 oftht Palo Alto Munlcipal·Colie. The site is located in a sing.lo-family midential zone where ptivate educational ~ilitic.!l arc conditionally permitt~. The educational facility will be used in accordaoc~ wi1h prescribed conditions of approval. The conditions of approval for the project ar;d Use Permit 99-UP-48 will help !educe the impacts on the surrounding area regs:rdina ttaf$c and palking. The improvements to the facility req\l1red by Use Penn.it 99-UP-48 and thls Use Permit will bring me site into more substantial oompUaoce with 1he parking requil'.QlleDts of Che Palo Alto Municipal Code. The required improvements will al.so be consistedt wi1h Goa.ls T-3 and T-4 of the Comprehensive Plan in that access for pedestrians. bicyclists and automobiles will be improved. 2.50 Jiaalllton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650.329.24'1 650.329.2154 WI 1310 Bryant Street (Castilleja School) Novem9er 2, 2000 Page2 CONDITIONS OF APPR.OY AL 1. All conditions of apJ?l'OV~ of Use.Permit 99-UP-48 shall remain in full force and effect and arc incorporated into the approval. of this pe1mit. ln partJcuJa.r. Cnstilleja shall continue to lnitie.tc tho scheduling of neighborhood meetings to provide an oplm dialog regarding the neighb(>rbood issues. TI1e meetings sliall occur twice n year, Qnce in June and once in October. The Current Planning Munagor shall be notified as to tbe time and date.of these mectlJlis and may attend. 2. The staff/faculty parking area at the oomerof Emersoo 11nd Kellogg Avenues shall be improved in a manner consistent ~th the site plan dated October 2, 2000 and sliall contain no fewer than 44 parking spaces. However, the plans sh81l be modified to incorporate parkina stall lengths and aisle widths as required by Pal<? Alto .h1unicipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.83.090(m). The two one-way driveways should also be narrowed to 16 feet in· width. An. application pa.ck.age for Architectural Review Board (A,R.B) review shall be submitted no later than three months from the date of this letter. The application package shall also include any and a1I physical improvements associated with the instafultion of the new swimming pool. 3. No approvals for any physical improvement.9 to 1he site are implied or given through the approval of this Use Permit. NOTE This Use Permit is granted in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Chapter 1~.90 of the City of Palo Alto Municipal Code. This pemtlt will become eHcctive ten days following the date of this letter. un1es.9 an appeal is filed as provided by Chapter 18.92 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. A oopy of this letter sball aaximpany all future requests for City permits rtlating ·to this approval. In the event that this approval Is appealed, an additional letter will be ttiailed with information regarding the scheduled hearil18 dates before the Planning Commission 11pd the City Council. In any case in which the conditions to the granting of a Use Permit have not been complied with, the Cunent Planning M~er shall give notic.o to the pcnnittoe of intention to revoke such Permit 1310 Bryant Street (Castillcja·Scbool) November 2, 2000 Page3 at least ten (l 0) _day11 prior to a ~g thereon. Following such hcerlna and if good ca:use exists therefore, the Current Planning Manager may revoke the Use Permit. A Use Pcnnit which has not been used within one (1) year after the date of granting becomes void, althoueh the Current Planning Manaeer ~y. without a bearins, extend the ~e fur an addi1ional year if an application to this effect is filed before the expin¢on of the first year, Applicant: OeoI'Qia Bond. Director of Finance and Operations Castilleja. School 1310 Bryant Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 Property Owner. Castilleja School 1310 Bryant Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 Planning Dlvi•lon I.ZECE~VED ·,·. B\": Cio/. of Palo Alto Del'art nie11l of Plrmn i11g and Community Environmi.?ll Us~ Pecmit 99-UP-48 is approve(l to allow Castilleja Scbool to decomraission 1,328 square 1a1 anct add 1,885 square feet, SS7 of which is to meet h.andlc.np uccessibility requirernerus at t.lie campus administration building. There is no new increase in Floor Area associated with ttie project. The request lo allow 40 qcld.itional students has been wi!hdrawn aru:t i.s therefore not-approved. Maximum enrollment allowed IS 385 students as approved in 1996, Any increase in enrollment requites a request for an amendment to this Conditional Use Pcfm.it. En.viromnental Assessment; &empt from the provisions of tbe Califqrnia Environmental Quality Act. Zone District R-1(949). I FINDINGS J. The propused use, at rhe proposed location, will 1101 be detrlmemal or l,Yt1rlous to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not ht! dttrim~ntal 10 the public health, safety, general welfare or conwnlence. The proposed addition w the elci.sting private educational fnciUty will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the area or to the public health, safety. general welfare or convenience in that no oew teaching stations will be added to the school. The project ini;ludes u new entryway, physical alteration~ to the administration building lilld changes to the existing dro(>'"off and pick-up areas to improve traffic efficiency at the site. ApproKimacely 20 new parking spaces Will be added to the site as a prut of the project for a total of 90 on-site parking spaces!. A Transportation Demand Mima.gement Program was submitted by the applicant dnd shall be implemented as n part of\ the conditions of project approvlll. Additiotutl parking spaces, improved drop-off ruld pick-up areas and implementation of tbe transportation demand management program will e1iliance pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile safety nod public convenience in the area. 2. The proposed ust! will be l<1cated and conducted in a mannttr In ac:cord with /hi! rato Alto Comprehensive. Plan and the purposes of Tille 18 of the Palo A Ito Mz.1ttiaipal Code. The site is currently locnted in a ~ingle-family residential zone and a private educational facility is a conditionally pcnnitted use in the zone. The educational facility will be used in accordance with prescribed conditions of approval. The prQposed physical addition to the facility will not increase the total Floor Area on the site. The conditions of approval wiU help ensure that the improvements to tbe fucility will reduce the impacrs on the swrouodi.ng area rcgardil\g parking and dropping-off and piclcing•up students. The proposed improvements to the facility will bring che site 2SO Hamilton Avtnue P.O. !lox 102!!0 Palo Alto, CA 9i0Cl) 650.329,2.441 6.50.329.2154 liu1 into more subs~nntial cornpl~ce with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance with regard to parking. The project is also consis1ent with Goals T-3 and T-4 of the Trnn·sponarlon element of the Compn:hensive Pinn in chat the proposed changes to .. . ihb sirli:°ii'culati6n. 'including the parking lot changes and the addition of improved signage, will improve access for pedestrians. bicyclisLs and automobiles. CONDITIONS OF A.PPROV AL PLANNING DEPARTMENT I. The site improvements shall be constructed as shown on the approved site d!an submitted with. the Castilleja School' Parking and Traffic Study P.~ogram received by 2. ;:, the C!ty of Palo Alto Planning Department urtfeQ.ruary 29~0001, and JlS consis~~nt with the Con<titions of Approval, Any modifications rnade to the design of the administration building as n result of o.rchitecruraJ review shall be incorporated \tlto revised plan$ and submitted to the Zoning Administrator after ftnnl architecfllral review approval is granted.· This Use Permit shall become effective on the same date that the final architeclt review approval becomes effective. 3. The proposed parking lot located off of Bryant Street is required to have a tree well where a row of 10 parking spaces exists on the right side of the lot The current site plnn shows 1 l spaces and Section I 8.83.100 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code requires one tree for every I 0 spaces so an edditionn.I tree shall be uddcd. 4. All existing street trees must be protected. during construction. The tree protection measures must be approved by the City of Palo Alto pl:lnning arborist and shall ~e in place prior. co any demolition or construction. 5. The policies identjfied in the Tronsportation Demand Man,agement Progrnm (TDM~. dated February 25. 2000, aod required by these Conditions of Approval, shall be fncorporated imo the Castilleja School long range planning go(l)s and made a part of the Board Policies and Procedures Manual. An annual report by scho~l administration sbaJI be made to the Board of Trustees, Zoning Administrator and ~e s1.4rroundlng neighborhood regarding the effectiveness of the TOM program. Th~ awiual report shall be reviewed at a Zoning Administrator public hearing. After three years of reviewing this ~rt at a publte hearing, the ZA can detemline that additional public hearings are not required and the annual rcpon can be reviewed 'll staff level. The ZA retains the ability to call a public hearing at any rime if complaints are received regarding non-<:ompliance with tbe TDM program. These TOM policies shall be implemented by the school at all limes and shall consist of the foUowing points; 2 I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. '-.._,\ 7. 8. Every January apd September, an. updated parking/traffic/pick-up/drop-off ···-pol!~Y.:~~11ll~:he;~m~e¢.:~0:P.~~~;~<i,·~9.~:;Qµ~·!aw:m~ W~:.tnQtµi.11g·.4rqf;~Qff · penodno remrn4 parents of tlie uttportnnce of the Parking and Trnffic pqlicy. Additional mailings shall be initiated as required and the monthly sc~ool publication, Around the Circle, shall have a traffic section to remind fi]ilies of policies. j A reorganization of the drop-off and pick~up areas shall be initiated so thnt 61h graders and chrpools with more tl;lan 2 students utilize the faculty/staff parking lot for d~op-off and pick-up. This plan shall remain in place from March 20001 to January 2001. After Januar.y 200 l, Castilleja school ·dhnll submit a pnrking [management plan to the City of Palo which distribute$ the drop.off and pick-up to maximize traffic flow around the campus. \The parking managen1ent·plan shall be reviewed at the annual ZA public heal-ing referred to in condition number 5. j Parents shLtll be i lStructed not to double-park on street or drop-off stud . nts ecross the street. Po.rents shall be instructed to rp.ove out of the driveway if:their daughter is lnot at the pick-up lo~trion and others are waiting. . . I Parents shall be 1\lStructed not to make left. turns Jfi or out of dm'.eways nt peak times. Signsi.sl'Uill be posted to indicate these tumin~ rule!!. In ndditipn, driveways shall be reconfigured to make left turns difficult for dri~ers thereby discouraging left turns. Castilleja School <~oes and shall continue to provide traffic monitors 'dur ng the regular school years. The traffic monitors shaU educate students and parents and enforc the circulation.related conditions of approval. The traffic monitors .srutll also be utilized during special school events nnd summer carbp to keep surrounding streets clear of congestion. During special events· and summer camp, thii:-monitors may not be wearing uniforms. During the regular sch09-l year, traffic monitors will wear ~nifonns . \ At least twice a da:,1, scbool personnel shall monitor the parking situation on site and surroundiqg publi~ streets. The school shall notify any violators ~1 f the need to move their car(s). Students, faculty a d staff shall be instructed to park only on the school side of the street. Dally1 monitoring of parking shall be conducted and offenddrs shall be instructed where 10 park. I 3 .· 9. A student govemment team shall continue to meet to heighten awnrenes and fl?~ .ne\.v ways f~r srudents t~ co~tribute to soluti ons. Student g~ve~rent off.leers have al~~ady met tw1ce·"'."1tb·Amanda J~nes who works tor the F ity , .. , .... _.. . . · .. : ... .,. •. : .. : .. ; .... ,_ ... : .. · _, .. :., · .. .:. ... ~~£~~)£: .. ~!~,!~-.!'~~81~"~l~~lW1~Y«= .:~R2.U9JJ.2.!1;P.l.M:;J; · The.:~cbool shall :·--· · · .......... · ·· ·· ~----.... -.............. · ·· · ····· ·• · .. _ ..... <itW.:!1~ .... d1scipi'ifµlff 'c<5nsequeri'cefTO-r-stuil~iiits-ana ·paient5 -who ... ao~not" . 10. 11. 12. cooperate with the parking requirements. The consequences sha.11 be communicated to the students, parents, and the surrounding neighborhJod. Castilleja shall tn J ve 4 of its 8 vans out of the faculty parking lot, nnd tanhem pnrk the other 4 vF.s so that 5 additional parking places shnll be ·ava ilabje in the lot. A landsciwing screen snail be developed to better screen the veh\cles from street view. I . Oversight for the Transportntion Demand Manngement Plan shall be the responsibility of the Head of School and the Director of Finance and 0Perntions. Oth~f stnff mny be assigned responsibilities regarding the 'fily operation and ent~r.cement of the plan. As the designated person or persons could change each year as job respo11Sibilities are redefiried, at the begiruhng of each year Caslilleja shall provide neighbors and th~ City of Palo 4,Ito Zoning Administri1tor with a list of individual contacts wi.th emnils and phf:>ne numbers. [t sha\1 .be the responsibility of the Director of Finance ~nd Operations to make sure all personnel fully understan4 and are traineEo compl~te their resronsibilities. A log shall be kept of all telephone calls d the expressed con9ems. The Director ofFino.nce and Opt:;rations shall rev ew the.log for trerids 'fld respond to remedy any problems. If any neighbo.r tl 1 ls the1r concern wns not properly responded to, they should contact the D1re¢tor of Finance and O~rations or· the Head of School. The administration shall at least annually review the T~ansportation Management flan with the Bo~d of Trustees, the nyighbors and the City of Palo Alto to. assltre its ongo ng responsiveness and success (see Condition #5). Castilleja shall prL ide daily.{when school is in session) traffic monitor ng at peak pick-up an1d drop-off times and for large special events, not only1 to enforce trafiic/pa:ridng policies, but also to enhance traffic awareness *d participation in thy program. Normally uniformed personnel shall do !he monitoring. The traffic monitor will oversee drop·otf f1[id pick-up in be designated areas and keep the roadway clear of waiting traffic. Additionai; y, the monitor shall trtake a daily round ofthe·school, identify vehicles that !).re not appropriately ~ked, and report them to school administration so that tihe cars ~an be movedJ~d appropriate action can be taken. The traffic moni~or shall report directly to the Superintendent of Building and Oroundl Infonnation regarding the studenr offenders shall be turned over to the De~n of Students 'for a9tion and parent offenders shall be turned over to the Director of Finance and Operations for action. 4 lJ.' At the·beginninr of every school year Castilleja shall set aside schedule~ time -.. ··-........ -·--·-_JQt.?:!-1.f.~.C.)>..ltY..!tn~L~!!ft:~!H~S~$1~r. tb~jJ:.(:;.e.r$ •. ~~ei~e an.LO. tag and review · -· -· ... .. -.... ·· ··· the.ffiiffifaft'.d·pnrkilig··t>Olicfos·: · · ·-· ... · · · · -.... · ...... ··· · .. · 14. 15 . 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. ' At the beginnin, of each semester Castilleja shall set aside scheduled tuhe for all students ~o r'egister their cars, receive· an I.D. tag, and review the ~affic . I and parking policies. J Parents and st,udents who do not follow the gµi<;lelines shall be confe . need with and ajudicj.al plan, which outlines consequences, shall he deveJop(:d for students. The judicial plan shall include the posSibility of warning lettrrs to students, disci plinary actio.ns and possible temporary suspension for repent violators. As part of the Administration Building remodel t'ie Bryant Street driVfway shall be lengthe~ed and widened into two lanes to provide off-street <ilrop- off/pick-up for apprqximately 16 cars. At off-peak times the curb lane qould provide approximately 5 spaces for visitor parking. I The Kellogg drir eway shall be lengthened behind a green planted ar~a to provide off-strejt drop-off/pick-up for approximately l 0 cars. 21 parking .spaces shall be included on the Emb~rcadero side of the sc iool when the Administration Remodel is comple~e. These shall replace the 7 existing spaces in front of that building. The 21 spaces shall be usJ for visitors and staff on-site parking. · For special events, Castilleja School shall utilize the . parking around the inrerior circle, with approval from the City of Pnlo Alto Fife Marshall, as Well as pursue tlie use of the parking lots at Palo Alto High School and Townland Country shopping center and any other available off-site parking .in priyate parking lot'i. \ Castilleja School shall continue to fac.ilitate relations wi.th alte~ve transportation providers such as Kids Kab and Olympi_an Leaming Cen~ers. Options for such ·1cypes of alternative transportation shall be made available to parents. Cast,lleja shall launch a major transportntion campaign with families to emphasize carpools and use of a Castilleja shuttle, the.Palo Alto shuttle, and other 1private van services. Every Castilleja family shall ~ive information promoting carpooling and provid:ing infonnation to facilltate carlvanpooling in their immediate ·geographic area. This i1'lfonnation shall be included in e~h of the three summer mailings, and Castilleja s 1 all 5 " ... 22. 2J. 24. 25. 26. 27. facilitate contracting with private transportntion providers st1ch as Kids Knb and Olympian LCMling Cemers . . c~91J~j~,,Sc.bo9Lshall ,.use .. the City of Pulo Aho free sh\lttlc-ser\lice or contin'ue to provide sbuttle service to ail faculty. and staff from the ·train station and shall develop and initiate a compreltcnsive incentive program to faculty, staff, and students for carpooling and using altemo.tlve mean! of transportation. 'Castilleja shall initiate tbe scheduling of neighborhood meetings to provide an open dialogue regarding the neighborhood issues. The meetings shall occur twice a year, once in June and once in Octobe~. The Zo11ing Administrator shall be noticed as to the time and dntc of the biaMual neighborhood meetings and may attend. Castilleja shall experiment with a plan for an assigned p:lrking progrum. The program sh.all be developed with the student government to explore such options as having assigned on-site parking spaces provided for all students who carpool and having all stUdents pnrk on-site. Castilleja shall designate Visitor's Parking Zones in the area or the Adminisvation Building (4 spaces) and th~ curb side of' the Bryant Street Drive (5 spaces) during of:l:peak ho~. Visitors not associated with the school shall register in the Administration Building. At that time they sh!ill be asked where they are plll'ked and redirected to the visitor's zones' if nccessary.(Ihese-t.rafflc·monito~ifoFmsreet...will.be iu~ntand operatjo~-:-] Castilleja School shall review its. event scheduling process to more strategically plan major schoul functions so school events do not occur on consecutive weekends. Special Bvents such as school dunGes shall utilize traffic mol'litors to help facilitate the traffic flow at end around the site. These traffic monitors moy i,ot be wearing unifonns, but shall be present arid working quri.ng dances. I Castilleja will review its event calendaring process and develop procedures to more strategicafly plan events and their timing placement on the calendar so that events such ns dances do not become bunched in consecutive nights or weekends. Additionally, Castilleja shall review the events that take place on campus with the intent of reducing lhe nwnbers. Castilleja has 5 major functions each year (Back to School Night, Gator Gathering, a major fund raiser dinner/dnnc~. Founder's Day Luncheon, and baccalaureate/graduation) that will bring almost ull st1Jdenls and parents to 6 28. 29. 3.0. ) I. the Castilleja Co.mpus. For these occasions Castilleja shall provide traffic monitors to make: sure that all vehicles park legally and safely on all s reet ·· ·:P~I..lS'.:: ¢iis.~_l_l~ja, sh~l.l n:i~xirni.ze _a,11_ cm-site p~i:kiO.g fl.n4 µ~ t~!ie.m: piirking whenever fe:J.Sible. ] Additionally, lhClre are several other events during the year, inclu~ing volunteer meetings, student seminar evenings, parent receptions, ~pen houses, parent grQUp meetings, guest Speakers, dances, school pertormn~ces, sports events, sci~nce exhibitions, etc., that require groups of from 50 to ) 00. A complete list of these events including date, time of event lllld nllinbqr of \ expected attende~s shall be published annually and distj-ibuted to neigh~OCs \:..... nnd the City of Palo Alto ZA. Events that are not directly related to Castilleja school shall not bf pennitted after the year 2000. CastilJeja shall review1 the parking/traffic requirements of each event and develop appropriate parking. Instructions shall I be included in event notifications. Ca$tilleja shall pro~ide traffic monitors fJr these events and shall direct as much traffic as poss'ble onto the school si~e, using a5sisted tandem parking, allowing students to use all lots after houri> (as opposed to just the student lots), ustng the day"'titne loading zones for 1parking, and utiliZing all resources to minimize impac~ to _street parking. for certain events, Castilleja shall make every effort 10 arrange off·site patking with nearby parking lots (such as Town and Coun~, Palo Alto High S9hool) and provide shuttle.service using school vehiclcl to transport people t1o and from the school. The availability of these lot~ is dependent on eve1~ts and cooperation from those lot owners. Castilleja shall de~elop nnd communicate to all parents (for middle school) and all students (for the upper school) a plan for pick-up and drop-offi of students and pari<in_g for all dances. Adffiittedly, these events bring non- Castilleja studeJ.lts to the school aud the sphool cannot always guarantee results; yet, much, of this can be absorbed onto the campus site. A tre$fic monitor shall be provided to help facilitate traffic and parking polic"ies. Castilleja shall provide directed parking ori the interior of the campus which, depending on the event, would include parking around th:e interior Cirele driveway, tande~ parking to maximize all on-site parking areas, a d temporary use of qaytime loading zones for parking. For school committee meetings which bring volunteers to the camp.us Castilleja shall cqordinate a parking plan; addressing the issues of t~e meeting times, thilt will be communicated to aU r.:ommittee members. At t~e beginning ofmeetlngs a reminder of parking policies sha.U be announced [to all attendees. AnyJne not following the policy shall be reques-ted lo move the car. For instance, ·here are several volunteer committee meetings which are scheduled monthly at 7:45 wn. Members of those committees shall be askf!d 7 to park in visitors' parking or along the street in non-residential areos ·($uch · as along the non-residential side of Waverley). Members who ~ave scheduled meet! ·gs after·the school day-shall ·be·required to park in school · · -·--" ~T·P~~_ld!?-.B~!o~ :i;.ri-4.:9'\ !h<'. s~h~<?l~~i-~~::9..f.~!!i:t;.§.!r~t·::·~Whe11:!ll~et:i.ng:11oiices:.'"°.~ ·.:·: --..... ::~~ sent to· corr1mittee·membeci, o parkinjfren1inde(sfiall 1£iil'Cliided. ·· --1 All summer caml families ~ostilleja shall be 1iiven mitten i~structionl for a drop-oft7pick-up procedure at the beginning of each ca'mp· session. Drop- off and pick-up shall be conducted on-site in the facuhy/staff.parldng iot. Counselors shall j facilitate getting campers into vehicles and ensure all pol~cies nre follmyed. Tt S~i!U'be the responsibility of the Director of Su~er Camp to enforce the-policies with parents. 32. 33 . 34. 35. 36. Castilleja School shall work with the neighborhood, City of Palo 11to Transportation Division o.nd Public Works Department to install bicycle warning signs and school zone signs, to paint "no parking'' red zones along the curbs next tol narrow driveways, and to designate a loading zone \ for commercial vebioles ·along Kellogg Avenue. Castilleja Scliool shnU study the possibility of relocating the Bryant Street driveway !bcatioh as well as reconfiguring the curb at the B~nnt Street/Embarcade~o Road intersection to slow traffic coming orrl of Embarcadero Road through the tum on to Bryant Street: Castilleja School shall coordinate with surrounding property owners to petition the City of Palo Alto for the installation of stop signs on Kellogg ~d Emerson and Emerson and Melville Streets. I The outcome of Jfforts required in #33, #34 an~ #35 Shall not effect he approval of this use permit (99-UP-48)-. T_he Use Permit shall remain v 1 id despite the outcorrte of those efforts. UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 6. If the electrical service needs to be upgraded to accommodate tpe facility, a load S1*et and appropriate elettrical diagrams shall be submitted to the Utilities Department for review.· 7. The applicant shall pay connection fees associated with the installation of any n w services by the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department. FIRE OEP ARTMENT a 8. A fire sprinkl71 system lbut meets the requirements ofNFPA Standard No. I). l 996 Edition (PAMC 15.04.160). The sprinkler system installation requires a sepurate submittal.to the Fire Prevention Bureau (PAMC 15.04.083). 9: '· ;:-ci\"·Ffte"De~~~f~snCi8Ci"20'feet in~iiith;iifill 13 '~6"of vertieal"ciearance is required. The road must meet weight access (60,000 lbs.) end turning radius (36 feet inside) requirements of a fire truck. Roud shu.11 be all weather and sh.all reach to within 150 feet of any point ori the titst floor exterior (98 CFC902.2.2). 10. Applicant shall provide a plan for maintaining safe means of egress Cor building occupants while work is underway in accordance with Article 87 of the 1998 California Fire Code. LISA GROTE Chief Planning Official March 17, 2000 NOTE This Use Permit is gnµit¢ in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.90 of the City of Palo Aito Municipal Code. This permit will become effective ten dil)'S fol lowing the date of this letter, unless an appeal is filed as provided by Chapter 18.92 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. A copy of this letter shall accompany all ~ture requests for. <pity permits relating to this approval. In the event that this approval is appealed, an additional lener will be mailed with infonnation regardins the scheduled hearing dates before the Planning CoIIUnission and the City Council. In uny case in whlc)l the conditions to the grn11ting of n Use Permit have not been complied with, the Zoning Administrator shaU give notice to the pennittee of intention to revoke sr,h permit at least ten (10) days prior to a hearing thereon. Following such hearing and if gQcid cause exists therefore, the Zoning Administrator may ~voke the Use Permit. A Use Permit which has not been used within one (1) year after the date of granung becomes void, although the Zoning Administrator may, without a hearing, extend the time for an additional year if an application to this effect is filed before the expiration of the first year . . 9 9 Baumb, Nelly From:Barbara Gross <barbara.ellen.gross@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 5:07 PM To:Council, City Subject:Castilleja Modernization Attachments:Palo Alto City Council.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Palo Alto City Council March 25, 2021 RE: Castilleja School Modernization Project Dear Councilmembers, I have previously expressed my views supporting the project. This is a different message. As a Palo Alto voter, I am disgruntled with the lack of leadership, planning and execution of several issues that would result in community progress. Castilleja Modernization: This project is not a coal mining plant. It is a 100-year-old exemplary girls’ school which is re-imagining its future. It has been presented, discussed, re-directed, re- engineered, modified, adjusted and re-designed to meet the highest environmental standards. The cost of the project has substantially increased due to ever increasing microscopic oversight. Demonstrate the leadership, thoughtful decision-making skills people voted you into office for. PASS THIS NOW! By-the -way, my other languishing issues: Chaucer Street Bridge Project Dntn Parking Garage University Ave. Upgrade Poorly planned traffic calming measures causing more problems than they solve Multiple Dwelling Housing Projects No incumbent will receive my vote until behaviors change. Barbara Gross Crescent Park 10 Baumb, Nelly From:Tom Shannon <tshannon2@cs.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 2:59 PM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:History (Saga) of Castilleja's Expanding Enrollment Number Attachments:Aug2013 Enrollment letter Casti to City.PDF CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council members: As you make final decisions next Monday regarding Castilleja School, I would like to put into context the school's drive for additional enrollment. We longtime neighbors of the school urge the City not to allow the 30% growth in enrollment the school is currently requesting. Not only is it bringing too much density to this residential neighborhood, but it is inconsistent with what the school previously claimed it needed to fulfill its mission. We argue that a more reasonable increase of 448 students - which is in keeping with the school's own earlier requests - would cause impacts our neighborhood would be more able to absorb. Below is a snapshot, by year, of how the school's requested numbers have evolved. 2000: Castilleja files a CUP amendment, requesting an enrollment of 425 students. City reduces this request to 415 with a caveat that the city will not look favorably on any future enrollment increases. Castilleja violates the enrollment cap starting in 2002, and knowingly continues the violation for the next 20 years. 2013: In July, Castilleja reveals its enrollment violation to neighbors for the first time, in a neighborhood meeting (minutes here). Nanci Kauffman tells neighbors current enrollment is 448 students (33 over its CUP cap). She justifies 448 to the neighbors as the “ideal” pedagogical- needed enrollment, given it allows for 64 students/grade level. She repeats this in a letter dated August 15, 2013 to Steven Turner, Advance Planning Manager for City of Palo Alto. (See letter attached.) In August, 2013, Castilleja Board Chair Joe Martignetti hosts another meeting with neighbors (minutes here) repeating that programmatically, "448 allows for better collaboration and enhanced learning environment." 2014: In August, a Small Working Group (“SWG”) of neighbors including Carla Befera, Bruce McLeod, Alan Cooper and Tom Shannon was formed to meet with Castilleja representatives Kathy Layendecker and Trustees Joe Martignetti and Barb Rosston to explore ways the school and neighbors could compromise and reach a mutually agreeable CUP. Nanci Kauffman was not a part of this group and did not attend any subsequent meetings. The school did NOT disclose any enrollment plans beyond 448 students, and assured the SWG that before submitting anything to the City the school would present its plans to the wider neighborhood for input and feedback. The school asked what the neighbors’ major concerns were. Discussions included moving all drop offs & pickups to inside the campus, implementing major shuttling efforts and moving all traffic ingress/egress to come off of Embarcadero. 11 2015: From Jan. – Mar. Castilleja reps continue to withhold any specific future enrollment number at SWG meetings. Finally Trustees Martignetti and Rosston state the school is now looking for max enrollment of 490 students, tied to an overall master plan redevelopment. 2015: In May-June, Castilleja trustee Joe Martignetti states that the school is now looking for an enrollment cap of 520 students. Also discussed was tying enrollment growth to specific TDM measures and traffic reductions. The architect’s presentation materials at this time include an enrollment projection of 520. 2016: In February, New Castilleja Board President Ken Hirsch attends SWG meeting and states that the school is now looking for a max enrollment of 540 students –a 30% increase of the current enrollment cap of 415. It seems clear to SWG that the school now plans to push all redevelopment variables to the max, ignoring concerns of neighbors. The school dismisses suggestions for shuttling, dividing its campus, increasing local enrollment, satellite parking. 2016: On June 16, 2016, Castilleja for the first time shows the Small Working Group (SWG) its plan with a new, underground garage that has ingress/egress into the residential neighborhood via Bryant & Emerson - with all school traffic remaining on the three surrounding residential streets - and a CUP amendment requesting an enrollment of 540 students. Thirteen days later, on June 29, the school files this application with the City. In summary: We neighbors request that Council stick with Castilleja’s original “pedagogically justified” enrollment of 448 students – the school’s initial goal back in 2014. We have no issue with the school modernizing its structures, but having lived with its unbridled growth, its lack of adherence to its current CUP, and the City's inability to oversee or enforce the CUP and Castilleja’s enrollment caps, we see no justification for allowing this massive increase in what is already the most dense school - public or private - in Palo Alto. SPOT ZONING - One final note to City Council members: if the City agrees to “spot” zone a parking garage, it invites other private schools like Stratford School at Garland and Challenger School (at the former Spangler site), as well as churches and other Conditional Use entities in R-1 neighborhoods to build underground garages with a spot zoning exception. One has to question how you can find this use of spot zoning to be “in the public’s interest.” Many thanks for your consideration, Tom Shannon (~CASTILLEJA O_) S c H 0 O L it\ugust 15, 2013 Steven Turner Advance Planning Manager City of Palo Alto :2so Hamilton Avenue, 5th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Conformance Report for Conditional Use Permit for Castilleja $choc>/ (CUP #00-CUP-23} Dear Mr. Turner: 1310 Bryant Street Palo Alto,1 CA 94301 fiS0.328.3160 ca:stilleja.org We are in receipt of your letter dated[August 5, 2013, regarding the status of Castilleja ! School's conformance with our Cond,tional Use Permit issued by the City of Palo Alto ! ("City") in November 2000 (CUP #004CUP-23 or "CUP"). In the letter, yo~ specifically I request conformance information reg,arding our enrollment for the 2013-¥014 academi5 years and the associated conditions. Since receipt of the letter we have carefully studie1CI our CUP and its conditions. Thus, In response to the City's request, we ~ave compiled : relevant data for the CUP conformance report ("Report"), hereby submitt.ed for your I review, to Include enrollment informafion, and a conformance summary for all the assodated conditions. As Indicated I~ the Report, and as highlighted belpw, Castilleja i9 regretfully out of conformance. Going'· forward, our Immediate fo9us is to resolve our non- conformance as quickly and responsibly as possible, and to Improve our parking and traffic management program~. ' The attached Report has been created in a format that provides a historip summary of our conformance from the academic years 2000 through present, and our projected conformance for the upcoming 2013-~014 academic year. In summary, Castilleja School conforms with the majority of the CU~ and the associated conditions of ~pproval; however, In a few instances, we are 9urrently out of conformance, or in partial- conformance. J Additionally, as Is highHghted In the ~eport, from an operations standpoint, several school protocols and events have changed since the issuance ol' the CUP which, in turn, el iminates the need for certain origim:ll conditions. These changed circumstances are as follows: I • Many physical mailings have been replaced with electronic forms of communication and website ~>ostings. Certain communication strealtis, such as the Around the Circfe publication referenced in the CUP, no lo~g~r exist. • Specific events, such as the i Gator Gathering" and the fundraise'r dinner dance) either no longer exist or are ~aid off-campus. 1 I WOMEN LEARNING I WOMEN q<ADING (~>CASTILLEJA OJ S C H 0 O L 1310 Bryant Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 650.328.:>160 castillaJ<1.org The Administration and Board of 1rrustees 4>f Castilleja School accept full responsibility for our enrollment i1~crease and the resulting non-conformance with the CUP and some associated conditions. As you review the Report, we would like to provide some background as to how our enrollment non-conformance evolved so that we can operate under the same set of llJnderstandings. Further, we intend t dili anti move forward to apr.!1_ for a new Conditlorial Use Permit for our 448 ,iris, as we as 'ent an_ exp ore adaitionai Tra~c DJ!!!laQd anagen:ient .. T M". rag tams hat will reduce impacts ,Muiv8rent ~.!be · 1:iriginal maximum enrollment o 5]fffs. Enrollment Background I As the attached year-over-year enrollment data details, Castilleja School historically used an avera,g~-dail~-attendal}~~-1!.!~~~ to conform to the CUP. Under that model, the annual average daily absentee count was subtracted from the total annual enrollment. As a result, between the academic y1~ars of 2000-2001 and 2009-2010, after the subtraction of absentee girls, the enrollment count fell below the enrollment limit and resulted in an internal inte_rpretati~ri_c[;::o~!~~~~':r:!~ w_i!~.J:t!S!.f.~_p. That said,. commencing In the ~~11-W1 2 acaae1m1c year, after analyzing 2010-11 data, 1t became clear to Castilleja School that the enrollment experienced under the average-daily- attendance model began to exceed T e 415-enrollment limit. With the above in mind, ~urin_g 1 ~:!1 ~-2012 academic le~r, we carefully reviewed our enrollment statistics, the impact on cl;ass counts and the associated programmatic CL.i.'// c_r ti~ considerations. Based on this analysis, we dete.rrnined that the oetlmal class size e_er , I f"l e grage exc~eded the cuun;mt 4 l !?.:-trnJlillmentlimlt. Larger class sizes in each grade level 11-·~ • .f /a J S woulB allow us to maintain Ideal teac er/student ratios while ensuring a quality academic .::::>1 ?:e l. program. In 2012, the administration decided I<? outline a process for seeking a new Conditional Use Permit from the City for an increc13sed enrollment limit. As a first step, the school commissioned a traffic analysis in April, 2012, and to date, has conducted a follow-up intersection analysis as well as a TDM study by Nelson Nygaard, a consulting firm which specializes In developing TDM plans for private schools operating in residential and Lirban settings. U,nfortl!_nately. oyc use R[Jbe averag,e-d?Jily-attendance me_tbod to conform with the CUP, and our subseguent i;1rogramr.natlc prio~jties. resulrtedl.jn our. ttX.ceedin9 ttie enrollment lfmlt. We oeeply re'gret our mistake and understand that the City may need to assess appropriate penalties. I Next Steps Our objective is to rebuild trust and to regain credibility and respoct with the City and our neighbors. To that end, Castilleja School is eager to resolve our non-conformance and apply for a new Conditional Use Permit for 448 girls (our 2013-2014 enrollment). WOMEN LEARNING I WOMEN LEADING ( ~CASTILLEJA Oj S C H 0 O L 0 1310 Bryant Street Palo Alto', CA 94301 Gs:o.32a.31Go c~st1llej<1.org We also take very seriously the reedback we have heard from our neighbors regarding the severity of the parking and traffid impacts they experience as a result of our school. In response to the City's request for proposing traffic and parking reductions, we intend to explore a number of the TOM stuchy recommendations, which includet . I . • Improve signage and markings; Increase parking enforcement through education, permitting and, ticketing; Improve on-site visitor parkinb access and satellite parking options; and Pilo_ta mornlrm shuttll;l s_ervlc~ from target enrollment zones such as Woodside, ~<;>rtola Valley, and Los Altos~ -· We concur that reducing our enronmk nt would pose undue hardship on the 33 girls who anticipate the start of school in a few~ weeks. Instead, we seek a permanent solution which addresses the neighborhood's needs and concerns , while ensuring continuity in the educational program for the girls icurrently enrolled for the 2013-2014 school year. In closing, please know that we com'jflunicated our enrollment non-conformance with oµr neighbors at the July neighborhood T eeting. As a result of compiling the Report, we have also gained a more complete ar d detailed understanding of the other are.as where we are regretfully out of conformanc~. At the upcoming neighborhood meeting on August 15, which coincidentally falls on the same day as the City's deadline for our conformance report, we Intend to an~wer questions as well as listen to specific nelghborhood:concerns and feedback reiated to our non-conformance ~ith the CUP conditions, so that we can begin to pfoblem solve in a collective way. ! I would welcome the opportunity to meet with you and your staff to discuss the Report and next steps. If you have any immklate questions, please contact me: at (650) 470-7702. : Sincerely, Nanci Z. Kauffman Head of School WOMEN LEARNING I WOMEN L EADING I 12 Baumb, Nelly From:Leila H. Moncharsh <101550@msn.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 1:47 PM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Stump, Molly; French, Amy; Lait, Jonathan Subject:Letter from PNQL attorney Attachments:Final Letter to CC. March 25, 2021.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. 13 Baumb, Nelly From:Alan Cooper <akcooper@pacbell.net> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 1:16 PM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; Lait, Jonathan; French, Amy; Alan Cooper Subject:Castilleja: A compromise proposal Attachments:Aug2013CastitoCityenrollmt.PDF CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, Please seek a compromise solution. ‐ give Castilleja permission to replace buildings based on updated floor area measurements and relevant existing city codes. ‐ give Castilleja the increase to 448 students they previously formally stated they would request for their CUP based on pedagogical justification (see attached letter from Castilleja to the City) not the 540 students they now want based on a TDM justification. ‐ give the neighborhood fewer traffic, parking and noise impacts * no net new Casti trips, to also include Casti cars only on public right of way. * arrival only by shuttle requirement, to reduce parking (i.e. limit cars allowed) * 45 events (i.e. 1/2 of the 90 events Castilleja requested) * no school activity of any kind on Sunday (i.e. other than emergencies). * only 10 outdoor events per year with amplified sound. * all CUP rules apply for the calendar year (i.e. academic and summer) Thank you for seeking an equitable compromise solution to this complex issue! Alan Cooper 270 Kellogg Ave (for 37 years) (~CASTILLEJA O_) S c H 0 O L it\ugust 15, 2013 Steven Turner Advance Planning Manager City of Palo Alto :2so Hamilton Avenue, 5th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Conformance Report for Conditional Use Permit for Castilleja $choc>/ (CUP #00-CUP-23} Dear Mr. Turner: 1310 Bryant Street Palo Alto,1 CA 94301 fiS0.328.3160 ca:stilleja.org We are in receipt of your letter dated[August 5, 2013, regarding the status of Castilleja ! School's conformance with our Cond,tional Use Permit issued by the City of Palo Alto ! ("City") in November 2000 (CUP #004CUP-23 or "CUP"). In the letter, yo~ specifically I request conformance information reg,arding our enrollment for the 2013-¥014 academi5 years and the associated conditions. Since receipt of the letter we have carefully studie1CI our CUP and its conditions. Thus, In response to the City's request, we ~ave compiled : relevant data for the CUP conformance report ("Report"), hereby submitt.ed for your I review, to Include enrollment informafion, and a conformance summary for all the assodated conditions. As Indicated I~ the Report, and as highlighted belpw, Castilleja i9 regretfully out of conformance. Going'· forward, our Immediate fo9us is to resolve our non- conformance as quickly and responsibly as possible, and to Improve our parking and traffic management program~. ' The attached Report has been created in a format that provides a historip summary of our conformance from the academic years 2000 through present, and our projected conformance for the upcoming 2013-~014 academic year. In summary, Castilleja School conforms with the majority of the CU~ and the associated conditions of ~pproval; however, In a few instances, we are 9urrently out of conformance, or in partial- conformance. J Additionally, as Is highHghted In the ~eport, from an operations standpoint, several school protocols and events have changed since the issuance ol' the CUP which, in turn, el iminates the need for certain origim:ll conditions. These changed circumstances are as follows: I • Many physical mailings have been replaced with electronic forms of communication and website ~>ostings. Certain communication strealtis, such as the Around the Circfe publication referenced in the CUP, no lo~g~r exist. • Specific events, such as the i Gator Gathering" and the fundraise'r dinner dance) either no longer exist or are ~aid off-campus. 1 I WOMEN LEARNING I WOMEN q<ADING (~>CASTILLEJA OJ S C H 0 O L 1310 Bryant Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 650.328.:>160 castillaJ<1.org The Administration and Board of 1rrustees 4>f Castilleja School accept full responsibility for our enrollment i1~crease and the resulting non-conformance with the CUP and some associated conditions. As you review the Report, we would like to provide some background as to how our enrollment non-conformance evolved so that we can operate under the same set of llJnderstandings. Further, we intend t dili anti move forward to apr.!1_ for a new Conditlorial Use Permit for our 448 ,iris, as we as 'ent an_ exp ore adaitionai Tra~c DJ!!!laQd anagen:ient .. T M". rag tams hat will reduce impacts ,Muiv8rent ~.!be · 1:iriginal maximum enrollment o 5]fffs. Enrollment Background I As the attached year-over-year enrollment data details, Castilleja School historically used an avera,g~-dail~-attendal}~~-1!.!~~~ to conform to the CUP. Under that model, the annual average daily absentee count was subtracted from the total annual enrollment. As a result, between the academic y1~ars of 2000-2001 and 2009-2010, after the subtraction of absentee girls, the enrollment count fell below the enrollment limit and resulted in an internal inte_rpretati~ri_c[;::o~!~~~~':r:!~ w_i!~.J:t!S!.f.~_p. That said,. commencing In the ~~11-W1 2 acaae1m1c year, after analyzing 2010-11 data, 1t became clear to Castilleja School that the enrollment experienced under the average-daily- attendance model began to exceed T e 415-enrollment limit. With the above in mind, ~urin_g 1 ~:!1 ~-2012 academic le~r, we carefully reviewed our enrollment statistics, the impact on cl;ass counts and the associated programmatic CL.i.'// c_r ti~ considerations. Based on this analysis, we dete.rrnined that the oetlmal class size e_er , I f"l e grage exc~eded the cuun;mt 4 l !?.:-trnJlillmentlimlt. Larger class sizes in each grade level 11-·~ • .f /a J S woulB allow us to maintain Ideal teac er/student ratios while ensuring a quality academic .::::>1 ?:e l. program. In 2012, the administration decided I<? outline a process for seeking a new Conditional Use Permit from the City for an increc13sed enrollment limit. As a first step, the school commissioned a traffic analysis in April, 2012, and to date, has conducted a follow-up intersection analysis as well as a TDM study by Nelson Nygaard, a consulting firm which specializes In developing TDM plans for private schools operating in residential and Lirban settings. U,nfortl!_nately. oyc use R[Jbe averag,e-d?Jily-attendance me_tbod to conform with the CUP, and our subseguent i;1rogramr.natlc prio~jties. resulrtedl.jn our. ttX.ceedin9 ttie enrollment lfmlt. We oeeply re'gret our mistake and understand that the City may need to assess appropriate penalties. I Next Steps Our objective is to rebuild trust and to regain credibility and respoct with the City and our neighbors. To that end, Castilleja School is eager to resolve our non-conformance and apply for a new Conditional Use Permit for 448 girls (our 2013-2014 enrollment). WOMEN LEARNING I WOMEN LEADING ( ~CASTILLEJA Oj S C H 0 O L 0 1310 Bryant Street Palo Alto', CA 94301 Gs:o.32a.31Go c~st1llej<1.org We also take very seriously the reedback we have heard from our neighbors regarding the severity of the parking and traffid impacts they experience as a result of our school. In response to the City's request for proposing traffic and parking reductions, we intend to explore a number of the TOM stuchy recommendations, which includet . I . • Improve signage and markings; Increase parking enforcement through education, permitting and, ticketing; Improve on-site visitor parkinb access and satellite parking options; and Pilo_ta mornlrm shuttll;l s_ervlc~ from target enrollment zones such as Woodside, ~<;>rtola Valley, and Los Altos~ -· We concur that reducing our enronmk nt would pose undue hardship on the 33 girls who anticipate the start of school in a few~ weeks. Instead, we seek a permanent solution which addresses the neighborhood's needs and concerns , while ensuring continuity in the educational program for the girls icurrently enrolled for the 2013-2014 school year. In closing, please know that we com'jflunicated our enrollment non-conformance with oµr neighbors at the July neighborhood T eeting. As a result of compiling the Report, we have also gained a more complete ar d detailed understanding of the other are.as where we are regretfully out of conformanc~. At the upcoming neighborhood meeting on August 15, which coincidentally falls on the same day as the City's deadline for our conformance report, we Intend to an~wer questions as well as listen to specific nelghborhood:concerns and feedback reiated to our non-conformance ~ith the CUP conditions, so that we can begin to pfoblem solve in a collective way. ! I would welcome the opportunity to meet with you and your staff to discuss the Report and next steps. If you have any immklate questions, please contact me: at (650) 470-7702. : Sincerely, Nanci Z. Kauffman Head of School WOMEN LEARNING I WOMEN L EADING I 14 Baumb, Nelly From:JIM POPPY <jcpoppy55@comcast.net> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 9:32 AM To:Burt, Patrick; Cormack, Alison; Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Council, City; Stone, Greer Subject:Mayor DuBois Shows Leadership on Castilleja Attachments:density2.jpg CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, I'd like to highlight some of Mayor DuBois's comments from the March 15 meeting. Most of these comments came at around midnight so everyone may not have heard them clearly. 1. This project should have had a study session: Council should not be hesitant to kick this project back for a major re-design. The scale of the project runs counter to the zoning standards established by many City Councils before you to minimize the "intensification of use" in R1 neighborhoods. A project of this scope deserves to be evaluated in depth. Mayor DuBois: "All of the activity around the project suggests we are trying to fit a very large square peg into a round hole." 2. Dispersed circulation should be applied to a no-garage alternative: The planning department and Dudek have been very biased in favor of this project since the beginning. The no-garage alternative was largely ignored. Trees were not included in the resource section of the EIR. Offsite alternatives for parking were dismissed quickly, even though there are many options. Planning went so far as to contort codes into calling the garage a basement. This project deserves a fair treatment of all elements, with public input on the issues. Everyone supports educating young women. That is not the issue. 3. Concerns about precedents for churches and schools on large lots in R1 zones: No matter how narrowly you try to define boundaries to this project, if you allow an underground garage and the intensification of use this project brings, you will be establishing a very dangerous precedent for all of Palo Alto. 4. It's hard to understand the need for a garage Mayor DuBois stated he would like to reduce the parking requirement. The Mayor pointed out that Nobu is a project with minimal parking. It's not unusual. And there are options available in Palo Alto for remote parking. 15 5. School density should be evaluated Castilleja already has the highest density of students per acre of any Palo Alto school, public or private, and greater than any private school in the region. Adding more students will exacerbate this intensification of use. 6. The TDM is not enforceable, including penalties for violations Castilleja has been in violation of their CUP for 20 years and they have consistently been dishonest with the City and the public about how they represent the neighbors. The mandatory meetings with neighbors have had no dialog, only a hard-nosed reiteration of the school's plans for development. The school should be required to earn additional enrollment by demonstrating a true commitment to reducing car trips, including not allowing students to drive. Many private schools in the area do not allow students or staff to park on campus. 7. The proposed garage is inconsistent with the zoning code The responsible decision is to not allow an underground garage in order to support sustainability goals, preserve trees, and minimize the intensification of use in an R1 zone. You do not need to appease the school by allowing a smaller garage. This would have been a major issue if the City had conducted a study session. 16 8. There is no hardship for Castilleja Mayor DuBois: "This is an exceptionally large request for a variance...not convinced it's a unique situation...Larger lots have lower FAR, something that is built into the code...I don't think the school would suffer substantial hardship" City Council: Please act responsibly for the entire community and do not make special exceptions for an elite institution. There is no benefit to the community to increase the intensification of a commercial development in an R1 neighborhood. Do not allow the garage, and limit enrollment to 450 until the school demonstrates a sincere and innovative approach to reducing impacts. Thank you, Jim Poppy 100 block of Melville Ave ACREAGE ENROLLMENT DENSITY Castilleja (current) 6 434 72 Castilleja (allowed by CUP) 6 415 69 Castilleja (proposed) 6 540 90 Pinewood -Los Altos 7 300 43 Stratford -Palo Alto 10 482 48 Stratford -San Bruno 10 250 25 Palo Alto High School 44.2 1994 45 Gunn High School 49.7 1885 38 Menlo School 31 795 26 Hillbrook -Los Gatos 14 414 30 JLS Middle School 26.2 1205 46 Nueva School K-8 & High School 36 713 20 Crystal Springs Middle & High School 10 323 32 Peninsula School 6 252 42 Sacred Heart 64 1186 19 Woodside Priory 51 385 8 17 Baumb, Nelly From:Helen MacKenzie <helen@co-capital.com> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 5:54 PM To:Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Castilleja School CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council members, Please add our names to the list of people writing to express our urgent support for Castilleja's modernization and increased enrollment. We understand that you are seeking to understand the public benefits of their proposal. To us, improving their neighborhood is a profound public benefit. This project does the following: ‐ Improves the aesthetics of the neighborhood by removing cars from the streets and beautifully redesigning the buildings ‐ Significantly reduces the number of events at the school ‐ Increases the tree canopy by 50% The underground garage is a far superior project because it will keep the sight and sounds of cars away from homes. That is a huge public benefit. Please do what's best and make our streets quieter. Thank you, Helen and David MacKenzie Helen MacKenzie Managing Director Artemis Fund and Co‐Capital Partners 1030 University Avenue Palo Alto CA 94301 650‐867‐8282 Helen@Co‐Capital.com 18 Baumb, Nelly From:davedockter@comcast.net Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 7:14 PM To:Council, City Subject:Castilleja School Project_Tree Resources Memo to City Council CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. MEMORANDUM Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers: 1. In your deliberations to certify the EIR, you would want to be aware of a potential fatal flaw that exists—directly causing a conflict with the municipal code (Tree Ordinance). This constitutes a significant environmental CEQA impact and is a conflict you must resolve before certifying an EIR or approving its parts. The EIR conflict is highlighting a scenario with potentially serious and significant impacts to all R‐1 zoned parcels/lots within your city limits. Background 2. Your receipt of the EIR review for this project from the Planning and Transportation Commission contained a flawed understanding of the tree ordinance relating to protected tree removal authorization on R‐1 parcels. 3. In error, the EIR preparer and applicant’s reasoning assumes a benefit awarded only to vacant lots, and wrongly assumes that removal of a category of trees is allowable [see §8.10.050 (b)(2)]. The EIR has applied the flawed reasoning to an entire category of trees to be removed (see entire list on page 3‐57, Responses to Comments, Ltr. B4), and includes protected oaks #140 and #155 which are in the way of various improvement features. 4. Because Castilleja is not a vacant parcel/lot, it cannot qualify for this section of the Tree Ordinance—but instead should use the correct section that all other R‐1 parcels/lots are required to use [§8.10.050 (b)(1)]. This interpretation error was further assumed to be permissive under the advice of planning staff, urban forestry and city attorney and directed as such to the EIR preparer. You are now presented with the EIR problem to be vetted. Discussion of Significant Impact from the Tree Ordinance Error—Consequential Effects 5. If the flawed Castilleja EIR interpretation of the Tree Ordinance citation were to be certified by Council, it would become a new precedent and a departure from other councils of the past 25 years. 6. Using the reasoning of the Castilleja precedent, any degree of future development on any other R‐1 parcel/lot would be allowed to clear‐cut protected & other trees in the buildable 19 area outside the setbacks. This potential would incentivize a trend of city‐wide protected tree canopy removal with development. Sustainability, regional and environmental benefits would be reduced. This begins to define the city‐wide impact. 7. In other words, on R‐1 lots, aggressive land development proposals and over‐reach may seek to clear‐cut lots of protected trees if they are not regulated/protected. 8. The existing tree ordinance statute [the correct § 8.10.050 (b)(1)] adequately protects trees and requires that R‐1 development be articulated and designed to be built with a protected tree. This is a primary intent of the Tree Ordinance—and what R‐1 entitlements have been using for years. 9. An additional cause for concern, these past R‐1 home designs have complied with the correct Tree Ordinance statute guidance and expense. They could be aggrieved as an unfair business practice action if the Castilleja precedent changed the rules suddenly. 10. Because the flawed Tree Ordinance citation has such long‐term and significant consequences for other R‐1 properties and neighborhoods throughout the city, it would be appropriate for you to clarify/vet the Tree Ordinance conflict section from those informing the EIR preparer: senior city attorney, planning staff, urban forestry. The City Manager should ensure this with you. 11. After vetting this Tree Ordinance conflict for the public record, your clarification would then signal the appropriate or reactive development potential for R‐1 properties and real estate transactions. Conclusion 12. Council should direct the applicant and EIR preparer to revise/amend the EIR to utilize the correct tree ordinance statute for R‐1 parcels/lots—revising all appropriate sections of the MMRP, RULA, FEIR, Conditions of Approval, etc. 13. If you do allow the flawed interpretation to prevail as a one‐off decision unique only to Castilleja—allowing the protected list of trees to be removed—I recommend ‐‐in some way‐‐ isolating the decision from negatively impacting the rest of Palo Alto neighborhoods. It has been said that a state recognized protocol instrument, Statement of Overriding Circumstances, has been used for similar purposes in other well‐prepared EIRs. I hope the above information helps to better vet the EIR, offer your changes and requirements, for your eventual determination for the best project. Respectfully submitted, David Dockter ISA Tree Risk Assessor Qualified & Certified Arborist WE‐0351‐A American Planning Association 21 Baumb, Nelly From:Stephen Band <sband@erols.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 1:51 PM To:Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Castilleja: Note from Washington, DC CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council Members, I am writing about Castilleja School's modernization project. Although I wish to be completely respectful, I believe I must speak to you in direct terms. I will make four points: 1. Please realize that your handling of this project is being closely watched not only around the country (I am watching from Washington DC) but also around the world, far beyond the confines of Palo Alto. The reason is the enormous respect and admiration in which Castilleja is held as a clear worldwide leader and model in girls' education at a time when girls' education, and gender equity more broadly, are right at the top of agendas world‐wide. Many around the country and the world are searching for opportunities to help advance these critical causes. You have the great good fortune of having such an opportunity placed before you right here, right now. Many hopes and aspirations therefore ride on your decisions, and a national and global spotlight will be on you this evening. 2. Second, I must say that many who watched your deliberations on this project on March 15th were taken aback by what they saw. The reasons included: (a) the apparent lack of reasonable respect for, even courtesy towards, Castilleja as one of Palo Alto's most‐admired and longest‐established institutions; (b) the apparent total lack of appreciation for the time (over six years, I believe) and money (hundreds of thousands of dollars, no doubt) that the School has poured into preparing this project and into satisfying every requirement and demand placed on it by your own City Government. That may have been a necessary burden (I expect it was). Nevertheless, it must have been an extraordinarily heavy burden on a smallish not‐for‐profit institution with an educational mission. That should be recognized; (c) the apparent fundamental lack of understanding of what Castilleja is attempting to do. Their project cannot be shoe‐ horned into some kind of generalized "pro‐growth" versus "anti‐growth" template. That obscures the actual issue. That issue is whether the School should be permitted to undertake an impeccably planned and extremely careful modernization project that is required to equip it for the second and third quarters of the 21st century. (I note, in passing, that, as far as I can see, Castilleja is the *original* resident of this neighborhood. The R‐1 zone has therefore been created around it subsequently, and every other neighbor has freely chosen to build or buy a residence next or near to the School. This "seniority" deserves recognition and should undoubtedly be taken into account in your deliberations); (d) the apparent blindness to the way in which Castilleja has worked, over a period of years, and at the direction of your own Government, to remove and mitigate *every* identified possible negative impact that the project might have on the neighborhood. That is why a large majority of neighbors now support the project. Would that all project sponsors were such model citizens. Again, this should be recognized by Council Members; (e) the overtly dismissive attitude of some Council Members towards years of work by its own staff, experts, and consultants, and the apparent indifference to dragging Castilleja into that surprising morass. That was a truly extraordinary sight. 22 In short, and not to mince words, many observers found the demeanor and speech of some Council Members on March 15th, including senior members, extremely surprising. They are hoping for something completely different this evening. 3. In every similar project of which I have knowledge, neighbors have clamored for an underground parking garage to take parking, traffic, loading, unloading, etc. off the streets and out of sight and hearing. Most project sponsors resist the idea because underground parking garages are expensive to build. In this case, remarkably, Castilleja is willing to build the garage and to operate it under the most stringent conditions. Opposition to the garage is, therefore, baffling. Council Members must therefore ask skeptical questions about what is motivating that opposition among the small minority of neighbors who say they are against the garage; 4. Some Council Members appear to be attracted by a "partial approval" approach ‐ approving one aspect of the project (perhaps the building) but denying another (perhaps the requested increase in student numbers). But the project has obviously been constructed very carefully to hang together *as a whole*. Therefore, stripping out or cutting back one component risks causing the whole edifice to collapse. I believe, in particular, that any attempt to cut back the maximum number of students (540) the School has asked for would be a grave mistake. This is a quite reasonable increase; the School has agreed to build up to it gradually and with stringent conditions; and the reasons for the requested increase are absolutely admirable ‐ the absolute need to modernize the School's academic offerings and to increase access to its exceptional education. It is surely not the Council's role to double‐guess these educational and equity‐based judgments. Thus any attempt by the Council to "thread the needle", perhaps in an effort to give something to everyone, risks disaster: you would almost certainly end up pleasing noone. Worse, you would risk salami slicing the whole project to death which would, in turn, risk stripping Castilleja of its worldwide leadership position in girls' education, or possibly driving it out of Palo Alto altogether. That would be a disaster for Palo Alto and its reputation, and would be viewed with astonishment and disbelief around the world. The Council would be judged to have administered a cynical bureaucratic mugging aimed at the heart of gender equity itself. It is essential to approve the project as a whole. As Palo Alto's leaders, you have an extraordinary opportunity this evening to show that Palo Alto deserves it's reputation as a model community by approving the very careful, very thoughtful, and completely reasonable modernization project that Castilleja has placed before you. That way, you can show the nation and the world how to lead the way in girls education and gender equity. That would be a huge achievement. Please don't blow it. Respectfully yours, Stephen Band 23 Baumb, Nelly From:Kathy Croce <kathryncroce@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 1:23 PM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Castilleja Project CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. My family and I are neighbors who live on Emerson Street directly across from Castilleja. While I agree that the education that Castilleja provides is excellent, I feel that there is a compromise and a limit between what the school is asking for and what the city of Palo Alto and the neighbors should give up. My biggest concern is the quality of life for the surrounding neighbors in Old Palo Alto. The significant increase in enrollment will contribute to existing problems with traffic in Palo Alto and especially in the neighborhood. The traffic issue isn't just isolated to the block that Castilleja sits on although there are major safety concerns there. I have witnessed many near misses at the parking lot exit on Emerson, one being a student exiting on her bike. The majority of traffic on Emerson is going to Embarcadero at a higher than posted rate of speed. This combined with an underground garage exit with traffic able to go in all three directions will have unintended negative consequences. The potential Churchill closing and subsequent impact on Embarcadero should be taken into consideration. If and when Churchill is closed it will cause a shift in traffic volume and patterns in Palo alto. That leaves Embarcadero as the only access to the school without driving through the surrounding neighborhood. The Churchill closing will also impact the Paly students who drive or are dropped off and route them down Embarcadero. The proposed Castilleja expansion compounds these problems and should be considered when making a decision. I would like to see the school modernize in a way that isn't overwhelming to the neighborhood. Let's find a compromise that helps Castilleja accomplish their goals while in a R-1 neighborhood. Thank you, Kathryn Croce Emerson Street 24 Baumb, Nelly From:Cormack, Alison Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 1:12 PM To:Council, City Cc:Stump, Molly Subject:Fw: Please support Castilleja Campus Improvement Plan Forwarding for the public record From: Jim Fitzgerald <jimfitz8@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2021 1:10 PM To: Cormack, Alison <Alison.Cormack@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: Please support Castilleja Campus Improvement Plan CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Alison: I emphatically request that you approve the Castilleja campus update and improvement before you now. The Castilleja campus improvement project provides immeasurable benefit to the community and society at large and is of no financial burden to the general public. This particular project has been held hostage by a small vocal group who make unsubstantiated claims and have demonstrated zero willingness to meet in the middle. In good faith and incurring significant cost Castilleja has repeatedly met and exceeded the requests of this antagonistic group only to be met with a new set of objections. I am confident, there is no campus improvement plan that this group will accept. In making the many adjustments to their plan Castilleja has reduced noise, increased green space, improved, and reduced traffic flow, accommodated concerns over school events, increased the tree canopy, updated, and enhanced the beauty of the campus and reduced environmental impact on Palo Alto. All of this done both because these are worthy objectives and Castilleja always strives to be a good citizen in the community they love. This doesn’t even count the most important enhancement of increasing the capacity of the school to provide world class education for girls and train the next generation of women leaders. So again, I implore you to do the right thing and approve the Castilleja campus update and improvement plan. Respectfully, JIm Fitzgerald 106 Walter Hays Dr. Palo Alto, CA 94303 -- Jim Fitzgerald M: 650 888-1293 Email: jimfitz8@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimfitz8 αιεν αριστευειν 25 Baumb, Nelly From:Cormack, Alison Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 12:57 PM To:Council, City Cc:Stump, Molly Subject:Fw: Castilleja reimagined proposal Forwarding for the public record From: Yair Blumenfeld <yairb@stanford.edu> Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2021 9:27 PM To: Cormack, Alison <Alison.Cormack@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Maya <singer.maya@gmail.com> Subject: Castilleja reimagined proposal CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Alison, Thank you so much for listening to our voices these past weeks/months as we’ve advocated on behalf of Castilleja and its proposal. We truly appreciate the time you’ve taken to learn about the salient issues that we and our neighbors have tried to highlight. In advance of tomorrow’s meeting we again want to reiterate our strong support on behalf of the school, the proposal, and its global educational mission. We find the proposal to be environmentally and architecturally superb, and the new underground garage will undoubtedly decrease any direct impact the remodel has on the neighborhood. Please consider this plan carefully and allow the school to enrich the lives of girls and young women for generations. Sincerely, Yair & Maya Blumenfeld 26 Baumb, Nelly From:Suzanne Keehn <dskeehn@pacbell.net> Sent:Sunday, March 28, 2021 8:57 PM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Castilleja CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. I totally agree with Chris Robell's letter below, and I'm sure many others would as well. Castilleja has a mission to grow and educate girls, which is certainly a worthwhile goal. However, to expand in a neighborhood that is single family homes, not even in an area with large lots, such as I live in, will impact the neighborhood in all the ways that have already been expanded upon. More traffic, drop offs and pickups, the Embarcadero increase traffic issue etc. Castilleja has not been known for keeping, abiding to their agreements on the number of students, and we haven't enforced them. The underground basement, really a parking garage, in a residential neighborhood is a precedent we as a community don't need or want. Let's break the precedent and follow the codes, ordinances etc. and encourage the school to use Mills College, which is closing, more room etc. fills all the parameters they say they need. AND much better for our environment. Sincerely, Suzanne Keehn 94306 Dear City Council, As you meet this coming Monday to discuss Castilleja, I hope you will disregard the fact that it is a worthy pursuit to advance women’s education (albeit less than one third from Palo Alto). Even though this is a great endeavor, it should not cloud your decision making. I don’t think the merits of the activity being conducted should heavily influence the approval process. This reminds me of the Mercedes dealership building plans last year near the Baylands. Some members of the PTC questioned whether another car dealership is appropriate or a good business plan given where the future is going. In the end, the clear answer was the business model cannot influence the decision. Furthermore, one could make the argument that the Casti project, with underground 27 “basement” (aka parking garage), removal of historic trees, and significantly more single occupancy vehicle trips, is terrible for the environment so you should deny this application. This project needs to be evaluated based on whether or not it is consistent with our EXISTING ordinances (zoning, trees, noise, etc.). I think it is inappropriate to twist/contort our existing code and pretend it is legal and appropriate when clearly it isn’t. I believe the arguments of credible speakers that the proposed plan violates existing tree ordinances (e.g. Dave Docktor testimony) and zoning violations (Jeff Levinsky and others). And please don’t change our ordinances on the fly to accommodate this project. It sets a terrible precedent and would erode public trust. Thank you, Chris Robell 28 Baumb, Nelly From:Rita Vrhel <ritavrhel@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Sunday, March 28, 2021 11:06 AM To:Council, City Subject:Castilleja CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello: Despite Ms. Kaufman's assertions, Castilleja expansion plans calls for ADDING approx. 45, 000 sq feet of classroom space to the existing campus.This does not include the sq. footage of the garage. 9,000 sq. feet are above ground; 36,000 sq. ft are below ground and are NOT counted in the FAR. How is it, that so many years into this process, the total and accurate sq. footage of the current campus and proposed campus are not known? I would think the Planning/Building Dept. Staff would have required this vital information from day 1 of the process. Please hold Castilleja accountable by requiring accurate current and projected sq. footage, denying the garage, requiring a shuttle program for all students, limiting special events to a reasonable number and expanding enrollment by10 % over 5 years. This will protect our City Codes from blatant abuse, control anticipated traffic, preserve Bryant St as a safe route to school, preserve neighborhood tranquility and character while still allowing Castilleja to expand their campus (mostly) as requested and for a limited increase in enrollment. This project will likely determine the future of Palo Alto. Will "special interests" be given the green light and our Codes mangled or will special interests be required to follow our codes as residents must? Thank you so much. Rita C. Vrhel Phone: 650-325-2298 29 Baumb, Nelly From:Bill Schmarzo <schmarzo@yahoo.com> Sent:Sunday, March 28, 2021 8:45 AM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City; Bill Schmarzo Subject:Please Vote NO on Castilleja Expansion Exception CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council members, please vote NO on the Castilleja expansion exception request. Castilleja is a private enterprise that provides no services or benefits to Palo Alto, but whose expansion will create substantial costs and a dangerous precedence if they are allowed to continue to ignore the housing and zoning laws that govern everyone else in the city. It is an elitist school who justifies this harmful expansion by belittling the quality of women's education at the fine Palo Alto public schools; they act as if Castilleja is the only institution in the area that is concerned about STEM for women. Poppycock. Thanks for helping to maintain the covenant that the citizens of Palo Alto have struck with our neighbors. Sincerely, Bill Schmarzo 1550 Emerson St 30 Baumb, Nelly From:Agarwal (Corporate), Amit <amit@amazon.com> Sent:Saturday, March 27, 2021 11:32 PM To:Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Support for Castilleja Plan CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Officials – I wanted to write in support for Castilleja’s plan. As a Palo Alto Resident, I appreciate the effort they have put in place over the years to listen to diverse perspectives and come up with a plan that would not only help them educate more aspiring girls but would also be good for the city and the environment. I am excited that plan will get parked cars off the street, reduce traffic/noise and crowding during events, and improve the tree canopy. And of course, further the reputation of the city as a center for academic excellence. Thanks and Regards Amit Agarwal 80 Crescent Dr. Palo Alto 31 Baumb, Nelly From:Terrie McDonald <mcdonald7@ix.netcom.com> Sent:Saturday, March 27, 2021 5:06 PM To:Council, City Subject:Supporting Castilleja's modernization CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. To All Concerned, I am a longtime Palo Alto resident who is urging support of Castilleja School’s proposal for modernization as it is currently drafted. My family has lived in Old Palo Alto for almost seventy years, and in that time, we have taken part in, benefitted from, and been subjected to considerable inconvenience during the modernization of our neighborhood. I’d be hard pressed to identify more than a few residences among the hundreds that I’ve passed on my daily walks that haven’t upgraded at some point, along with the attendant uptick in noise, vehicles, and foot traffic. But the aggravation passes (albeit one nearby property took eight years), and life goes on. I would note that plenty of the signs I see opposing Castilleja’s proposed plan are in yards that have seen their fair share of construction over the years. Castilleja is within its rights to update their campus in a manner consistent with their low‐key, sustainable presence in our community. They’ve implemented an aggressive transportation‐demand‐management program that has successfully reduced vehicle traffic; they’ve incorporated feedback from neighbors and the City in multiple revisions of their proposal; and they’ve put forth a project that, upon completion, will truly be an asset to Palo Alto. The Castilleja garage, which is consistent with the City’s preference for underground parking, as expressed in its Comprehensive Plan, will do a great deal to get cars off the streets and improve neighborhood aesthetics. Per the CUP’s restrictions, the garage will not result in more traffic; it will simply streamline existing vehicle trips. I am particularly encouraged by Castilleja’s focus on sustainability in its latest design proposal, as well as the new tree plan that will result in a drought‐resistant, residential‐friendly landscape. Finally, amidst the focus on specific impact metrics, I encourage elected officials not to lose sight of the larger picture: this proposal will allow a longstanding Palo Alto institution to continue its important mission of educating young women in this community. I consider Castilleja’s proposed high school enrollment increase to be the most essential part of the plan before the City Council. My daughter attended Casti and benefitted enormously from the school’s rigorous academics, unique extracurricular offerings, and all‐girls environment. While Palo Alto has phenomenal public schools (which other family members have attended), Castilleja was the right fit for her—and we are so fortunate to have this community asset within walking distance of our home. The modest enrollment increase that Castilleja has proposed would only be allowed if neighborhood traffic stays the same. Allowing more young women access to a Castilleja education without impacting the community should be a no‐brainer. Please, certify the Environmental Impact Report and move this project forward. Do not be bamboozled by the few loud objectors purporting to speak for the neighborhood. I am a longtime local, and this project has my full support. Sincerely, 32 Terrie McDonald Lowell Ave., Palo Alto 33 Baumb, Nelly From:Leannah Hunt <lhunt@sereno.com> Sent:Saturday, March 27, 2021 3:01 PM To:Council, City Subject:Castilleja Revised Plan for Monday's Agenda CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. March 27, 2021 To: Mayor Dubois and members of the Palo Alto City Council From: Leannah Hunt, Byron St. Palo Alto I support the underground garage and maintaining Speaker Field for field games and athletics in our neighborhood. Additionally, I support offering the Castilleja experience to more girls in the Upper School. Not only would more girls be offered the Castilleja educational experience, but it would add new students to the school community for those girls who attend for seven years. As a resident of 51 years and a homeowner in Old Palo Alto I do feel that the proposed project for Castilleja School has been fully analyzed over many years and deserves the support of your council to move ahead to approve the plans to develop the underground garage to provide parking for school staff and enable the playing fields to be preserved for student’s use. As a Realtor for the past 32 years in Palo Alto I have viewed the underground garages which were permitted in the past in the residential areas of town and feel that they have been proven as safe alternatives to above ground parking. This project has sufficient visibility for safety and is a proper use of space in a community with a finite amount of space. The permit for the underground garage for the synagogue in town attests to the validity of this plan. My daughter spent two wonderful years at Castilleja and this community has certainly benefited from the over 100 years of this educational institution. I have viewed and participated in the Planning and Transportation hearings along with various community meetings these past number of years. You should now act to recommend approval of this reimagined plan which more fully utilizes the space available in order to provide a more updated academic atmosphere. Relocating truck deliveries to the garage, providing better play fields and bringing the pool below current ground area is totally justified. The ARB and HRB both recommended approval and the underground garage is the best alternative for the area environment which is adjacent to Embarcadero. Now it is up to you to move ahead with the school application which has been well received by many neighbors and members of the community which appreciates this fine institution. The school listened and revised the garage plan, and you should do what is best for Palo Alto and enable this school to educate more young women who will benefit from a well developed new building plan. Yours truly, 34 Leannah Hunt Byron St. Palo Alto Leannah Hunt SRES,CIPS,GRI, RPAC Hall of Fame REALTOR® To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. t. 650.400.2718 w. LeannahAndLaurel.com a. 350 Cambridge Ave Suite 100 Palo Alto, CA 94306 DRE 01009791 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 35 Baumb, Nelly From:Valerie Milligan <valerie.milligan5@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, March 27, 2021 8:36 AM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Please vote NO on Castilleja Expansion CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council Members: Please vote NO on the Castilleja expansion for all the reasons so factually and eloquently expressed by other concerned citizens. In addition, my major objection is that Castilleja serves only about 110 Palo Alto residents, is not a major employer, nor does it pay taxes to our community. Why support a plan that only causes detriment to our community with basically zero benefit? Best regards, Valerie Milligan 2573 Park Boulevard, Unit U102 Palo Alto, CA 94306 36 Baumb, Nelly From:Nancy Ginsburg <nancygins@comcast.net> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 5:18 PM To:Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:I support Castilleja School's CUP and masterplan CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear Council Members, I am writing to support Castilleja”s CUP and masterplan. I believe that Castilleja's educational program educates and supports our young women and the school’s thoughtful expansion is necessary so that more girls can receive an outstanding education that will prepare them to be contributors to our community and beyond. I am writing as a Palo Alto homeowner, a mother of four daughters and a psychologist who treats adolescents and children in Palo Alto and our surrounding area. Nancy Ginsburg , Ph.D 30 Tevis Place Palo Alto, CA 94301 37 Baumb, Nelly From:Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 1:55 PM To:Jo Ann Mandinach Cc:Council, City; City Mgr; Tanaka, Greg; Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Kou Lydia; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Burt, Patrick; Dave Price Subject:Re: Casti / Community Letters /City Priority Survey CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Excellent points that had to be made. The city needs to WAKE UP. Sent from my iPhone On 26 Mar 2021, at 12:08, Jo Ann Mandinach <joann@needtoknow.com> wrote: Dear Mayor, City Manager and City Council Members, Apologies if I'm repeating myself or others but the link in the CC agenda email to community comments remains missing; several of us looked for it last night because we didn't want to repeat ourselves and waste your time and ours. But alas the link is missing and has been for several weeks. 1) Casti expansion: A traffic study of what Casti's construction will do to Embarcadero traffic is in order and long overdue. We laughed out loud at the PA Post headline 2/25 re the Churchill Crossing: City reaches a crossing: Traffic study will precede decision. Perhaps there's a lesson there re Casti that would have saved citizens years of frustration AND the expense of hiring their 38 own consultants because the city failed to do its homework years earlier. Fact finding first? What a concept. Doing traffic surveys, defining Medical/ Retail at T&C and researching Ellis's track record with tenants etc. BEFORE conducting hearings, preparing reports and all the other elements of the Palo Alto process might be an idea whose time has come and could save us endless hours, countless meetings, money wasted on staff and consultants and endless citizen frustration. 2) City Priority Survey from the City Manager. Many wanted to take the survey but couldn't because we'd forgotten our passwords since the last survey and couldn't reset them. Council member Kuo tried to get this problem fixed but couldn't. So your priority survey results are incomplete, erroneous and surprising. Why has "Wellness" replaced real priorities like traffic problems, wasteful spending, lack of accountability, Palo Alto Utilities annual $20,000,000 "overcharges" illegally funneling OUR money to the General Fund and more? Why are we staffing up for Wellness education when we all have our own health practitioners? What's the city's expertise in Wellness? Speaking of expertise, what's the city's expertise in Fiber-to-the- Home? How did it become a priority when the city can't even technically manage a simple Priority Survey or provide links to Community CC letters? Why are we wasting money competing with the big experienced providers who are surely laughing at PA's hubris while ignoring REAL problems reflected in past surveys? (I remind you that the city failed DECADES ago on its similar internet connectivity project; trust me I know the guys who worked on it and frustrated residents who tried to use it.) 39 Please improve your "outreach" by conducting a comprehensive survey of OUR concerns and please start doing your homework FIRST before wasting OUR time and tax dollars. Most sincerely, Jo Ann Mandinach Middlefield Road Palo Alto, CA 94301 40 Baumb, Nelly From:Jo Ann Mandinach <joann@needtoknow.com> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 12:09 PM To:Council, City; City Mgr; Tanaka, Greg; Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Kou Lydia; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Burt, Patrick Cc:Dave Price Subject:Casti / Community Letters /City Priority Survey CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor, City Manager and City Council Members, Apologies if I'm repeating myself or others but the link in the CC agenda email to community comments remains missing; several of us looked for it last night because we didn't want to repeat ourselves and waste your time and ours. But alas the link is missing and has been for several weeks. 1) Casti expansion: A traffic study of what Casti's construction will do to Embarcadero traffic is in order and long overdue. We laughed out loud at the PA Post headline 2/25 re the Churchill Crossing: City reaches a crossing: Traffic study will precede decision. Perhaps there's a lesson there re Casti that would have saved citizens years of frustration AND the expense of hiring their own consultants because the city failed to do its homework years earlier. Fact finding first? What a concept. Doing traffic surveys, defining Medical/ Retail at T&C and researching Ellis's track record with tenants etc. BEFORE conducting hearings, preparing reports and all the other elements of the Palo Alto process might be an idea whose time has come and could save us endless hours, countless meetings, money wasted on staff and consultants and endless citizen frustration. 41 2) City Priority Survey from the City Manager. Many wanted to take the survey but couldn't because we'd forgotten our passwords since the last survey and couldn't reset them. Council member Kuo tried to get this problem fixed but couldn't. So your priority survey results are incomplete, erroneous and surprising. Why has "Wellness" replaced real priorities like traffic problems, wasteful spending, lack of accountability, Palo Alto Utilities annual $20,000,000 "overcharges" illegally funneling OUR money to the General Fund and more? Why are we staffing up for Wellness education when we all have our own health practitioners? What's the city's expertise in Wellness? Speaking of expertise, what's the city's expertise in Fiber-to-the-Home? How did it become a priority when the city can't even technically manage a simple Priority Survey or provide links to Community CC letters? Why are we wasting money competing with the big experienced providers who are surely laughing at PA's hubris while ignoring REAL problems reflected in past surveys? (I remind you that the city failed DECADES ago on its similar internet connectivity project; trust me I know the guys who worked on it and frustrated residents who tried to use it.) Please improve your "outreach" by conducting a comprehensive survey of OUR concerns and please start doing your homework FIRST before wasting OUR time and tax dollars. Most sincerely, Jo Ann Mandinach Middlefield Road Palo Alto, CA 94301 42 Baumb, Nelly From:Wally Whittier <wallywhittier@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 8:27 AM To:Council, City Subject:Subject: Castilleja’s Garage: the devil is in the details CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Palo Alto City Council Members At your 8 March meeting, the Council rightly concentrated its discussion of the Castilleja proposal on matters of policy and precedent. There are many issues however, in particular with respect to traffic and the garage, whose impacts are not completely captured at the policy level. For example: The claim that all deliveries will be moved to the garage. The Sysco Company food services delivery truck (tractor and attached trailer) regularly double parks on Kellogg while unloading. A typical trailer is 48 feet in length. Even the most skilled driver will struggle to negotiate the turn into the garage on Bryant. The exit will be equally difficult. Unless home owners on Emerson facing the exit are prohibited from parking in front of their homes, there is insufficient free space to allow the tractor/trainer to turn right or left. Waste management pickup will be in the garage. This approach has entry/exit difficulties similar to the Sysco vehicles noted above. The Waste Management trucks are wider and require more ceiling height. It seems doubtful that noise from pickup operation won’t be detrimental to classrooms that adjoin the loading zone Student/biker safety is at risk turning off of Embarcadero onto Bryant. The turn is constrained by the middle of the street concrete barriers protecting bikers. Councilwoman Kou’s question regarding the turn off of Embarcadero got a very superficial answer from Staff, with basically a top view cartoon map with an arrow indicating traffic flow. The current Embarcadero West lane layout provides space for 3 to 4 cars. At that rate per signal cycle, backup along Embarcadero is inevitable. Note: a bit further along Embarcadero, the turn into the PALY parking lot requires a traffic light to manage the flow into the lot. Bryant St traffic mixing pedestrians, bikes and cars is a safety risk. To address EIR findings of impacts of the original garage capacity, the school added a second student drop-off on Bryant. Ironically, reducing the garage size and adding a drop off crescent brings more cars to that Bryant St. block. The ARB assessment of surface level parking vs the garage was lukewarm. The ARB member stated ”aesthetics” favored the garage. That is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, but it seems a stretch to apply that criterion for street level parking bordered by moving Embarcadero traffic. The neighbors on Emerson facing the garage exit favor the street level design A Residential Parking Permit (RPP) Zone may be required (Mentioned by Councilman Burt). The 18 March Daily Post reported Nanci Kaufman as saying. ”one way or another Palo Alto 43 all-girls school will provide parking for its employees..” Are neighbors going to be forced to pay the annual $50/car fee guard against an aggressive policy? The Council should reject the Castilleja application and encourage the school to re-apply with a no garage plan Wallace Whittier Bryant St. Palo Alto 44 Baumb, Nelly From:Jeff Levinsky <jeff@levinsky.org> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 7:00 AM To:Council, City Subject:Castilleja Does Not Need an Underground Garage CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Councilmembers: Thank you for your efforts to handle Castilleja's application. Given the many problems created by the proposed underground parking garage, it's important to consider other ways Castilleja can meets its parking requirements. These include a TDM, surface parking, and/or stacked parking units. Here’s a quick discussion of how each of those could work: Castilleja presently has 86 surface parking spaces, which includes 4 tandem spaces. Tandem spaces are legal in the R‐1 zone per 18.54.020(d). Castilleja proposes to have just 26 surface parking spaces after the rebuild. However, the new buildings are not adding floor area and will only minimally increase lot coverage. Specifically, Table 4.1 on page 99 of the March 8, 2021 City Council Staff Report on Castilleja says the remodel will increase lot coverage from 24.3% to just 25.3%. That leaves more than enough surface space to retain the current 86 parking spaces. The EIR says that proposed rebuild will require 104 parking spaces, so only 18 more parking spaces are required if all existing 86 surface parking spaces are retained. The project is potentially eligible for a 20% parking reduction under the TDM rules at 18.52.050 Table 4. Such a reduction would reduce its required parking to 83 spaces, which is less than the current 86 spaces onsite. The two ramps for the underground garage require more than 4,000 sq. ft. of surface space, so eliminating the underground garage frees up that much more space for surface parking. Depending on layout, nine or more spaces could fit into that much area. The remaining nine spaces can be handled via a reduced TDM or new surface spaces. Castilleja could also make up the shortfall of 18 spaces via stacked parking, as is being used at the nearby private school at 930 Emerson, whose stacker unit is on High Street. Castilleja may even be able to incorporate the stacked parking into the new buildings as basements without increasing gross floor area or site coverage. The EIR unfortunately did not thoroughly examine surface parking options. Its short discussion on page 13‐9 (see https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/77807) incorrectly claims that using surface parking would require building footprints to shrink and failed entirely to consider putting stacked parking units into the basement of the new Academic Building. In short, there are multiple ways that Castilleja can meet its parking requirements without the underground parking garage. Thank you, Jeff Levinsky 45 Baumb, Nelly From:Elaine Uang <elaine.uang@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 6:26 AM To:Council, City Subject:Castilleja Realized CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Palo Alto City Council Members, As a fifteen year homeowner in the city of Palo Alto, I voice my strong support for the improvements that Castilleja has proposed. As a transit and bike infrastructure advocate, I want to commend Castilleja for having one of the strongest Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs for independent schools in the area. For fifteen years, I have seen multiple (2.5!) school generations of Casti students at the University Ave train station in the mornings, waiting patiently to board a connecting shuttle. On the days I biked or walked my own kids at nearby schools, I would frequently pass many Casti girls commuting to/from Casti on their bikes. I've also known staff members who have taken Casti up on their TDM policies to reduce SOV by biking or using other forms of travel. Five or so years ago, I had the pleasure of biking over to participate on a STEAM panel and lead a Global Week session ‐ and bking over allowed me to organically connect with other community members on bikes as well. Castilleja's small community of several hundred people has done a far better job of TDM than most other Palo Alto organizations and companies that bring in tens of thousands of other people ‐ and Castillja deserves recognition for their TDM efforts. Many opposed to the project often bash the parking garage (even after the early opposition specifically ASKED for a garage), but the garage will actually improve bikeability and bike safety along Bryant St, our beloved Palo Alto Bike Boulevard, by reducing number of cars on Bryant, especially coming in and out of the drop off zone. Castilleja has been a treasured Palo Alto institution for over 100 years, well before Palo Alto instituted arbitrary zoning rules for monoculture single family uses. Having educational institutions within our neighborhoods is what makes our community livelier and more interesting. The proximity to two train stations and excellent bike infrastructure will no doubt give Castilleja one of the smallest transportation related carbon‐footprints of any Palo Alto institution, even post‐ COVID. The proposed campus improvements will benefit our neighborhoods and should be approved immediately. I only wish their proposal had been approved sooner because it's past due for Castilleja Reimagined to be Castilleja Realized. Sincerely Elaine Uang Downtown North 46 Baumb, Nelly From:Cormack, Alison Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 3:58 PM To:Council, City Cc:Stump, Molly Subject:Fw: Castilleja Forwarding for the public record From: Natalie Dean <natalie.m.dean@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 22, 2021 1:29 PM To: Cormack, Alison <Alison.Cormack@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: Castilleja CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council Member, Today I am writing to express my support for Castilleja’s modernization plan that is nearing its final hearings. I have lived in Palo Alto my entire life and I went to Castilleja for high school. I can honestly say Castilleja was one of the best experiences of my life and it helped shape me into the confident woman I am today. After eight years of discussion, modifications, and evolution, the school’s demonstrated commitment to the community is one of the reasons I support this project. Castilleja has laid out a plan that will reduce traffic and get parked cars off the neighborhood streets as well as allowing more young women to receive the high quality education that Castilleja has to offer. It is time that the City Council looks at the facts and realizes that there are no negative impacts of this project and allows Castilleja to move forward. Sincerely, Natalie Dean (Class of 2017) 701-32 DOCUMENTS IN THIS PACKET INCLUDE: LETTERS FROM CITIZENS TO THE MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL RESPONSES FROM STAFF TO LETTERS FROM CITIZENS ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS ITEMS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES AND AGENCIES ITEMS FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE, AND REGIONAL AGENCIES Prepared for: 04/12/2021 Document dates: 03/24/2021 – 03/31/2021 Set 2 Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet reproduction in a given week. 47 Baumb, Nelly From:Cormack, Alison Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 3:21 PM To:Council, City Cc:Stump, Molly Subject:Fw: Castilleja Reimagined project! Forwarding for the public record From: Carol C. Friedman <carolcfriedman465@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 22, 2021 3:23 PM To: Cormack, Alison <Alison.Cormack@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: Castilleja Reimagined project! CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello Alison, As a nearby neighbor in Old Palo Alto to Castilleja School, I am strongly supporting the underground garage for Faculty & Staff parking below ground. Spieker Field should be maintained above ground for team sports and fitness, not an eyesore of an above ground parking lot on the Embarcadero. This Field will maintain the beauty of the neighborhood and the residential feel of a girls school. Additionally, I am a strong supporter for a larger Upper School with 540 girls in the student body. The Middle School is a fine, small size that is appropriate for the transition from elementary schools to a larger 6‐12 girls school. I particularly like adding new students to the Upper School. Not only would it provide more qualified girls to attend and enjoy the excellent Castilleja educational experience, but also it would add a few new students to the existing dynamic, energetic student community in grades 9‐12! It is time to make a decision and vote to support the Castilleja Reimagined project.! Ailson, thank you for your thoughtful consideration for the Castilleja Reimagined project. Please vote to support girls' education! Carol C. Friedman 465 Lowell Avenue 48 Baumb, Nelly From:Ken Kornberg <ken@kornberg.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 3:08 PM To:Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Underground garage application by castilleja CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Palo Alto City Councilperson , I was a member of the Palo Alto ARB for 6 years (~2002‐2008). We approved several Castilleja projects. I was always impressed that each project regardless of its purpose and value to Castilleja, was sensitive and a significant benefit to the architectural and environmental nature of the neighborhood. I am doing very little local work as an architect now, so I have not followed the controversy around this project, but from an architectural and neighborhood standpoint, the concept of locating an underground garage under the playing field seems like a tremendous long‐term neighborhood benefit. During that 6 year tenure on the Board, I believe I supported every project with underground parking. They were difficult and expensive for the owners, but always took existing parking off the streets and provided a net benefit to the surrounding community. I felt as an ARB member that it was important to encourage and support those proposals. Whether a supporter or opponent of the Castilleja expansion program, this underground proposal seems to be a valuable asset to the community. Ken Kornberg Ken Kornberg KORNBERG ASSOCIATES | ARCHITECTS ph: 650.321.1295 www.kornberg.com 49 Baumb, Nelly From:Carla Befera <carlab@cb-pr.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 2:11 PM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Overlooked item: Castilleja plan CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council Members: I would like to bring your attention to a facet that has been overlooked in all recent discussions of Castilleja's proposed growth. Buried deep in its materials is the school's plan to add ALL its proposed increased enrollment to its high school classes. (See page 85 of this document presented to Council.) As you consider traffic turning right onto Bryant Street to queue for three monitored lanes of entry (the garage, the Bryant Street drop‐off, and those trying to reach the Kellogg Street drop‐off lanes) ‐ no one has mentioned where all the self‐driving High School students will go. That traffic will NOT be tracked via the driveway monitors. While parents are waiting in line to drop off middle school students, high school students ‐ on whom the school has placed no restrictions about self‐driving to school ‐ will cut through nearby residential streets, looking for on‐ street parking. There has been little or no mention of this impact, and it will not be monitored or reported. We have lived across the street from the school for over 50 years, and contrary to Nanci Kaufman's assertion that student drivers are "closely monitored," we have seen many, many students over the years park across the street from our house on Bryant at Kellogg. We have NEVER seen a car sticker identifying them as a Casti student driver (which is easy to confirm, as they walk directly towards the school wearing Castilleja school uniforms), nor have we ever seen any school monitors coming out to check the cars. Ever. If granted, the school's new make‐up would include over 350 high school students. The proposed underground parking garage holds 78 cars. The current staff is over 140, and there are no specifics in the plans or CUP about how much additional staff will be added to accommodate a 30% increase in students (another omission we question. Why is there not a staff cap, as specified in other private school CUPs?). You heard Nanci Kaufman equivocate at the last City Council meeting about whether the school is planning to continue parking any of staff offsite at a local church. Where will these staff and students park? How will the City or the school monitor how many arrive and exit the neighborhood every day, if they are not using the school driveways' trip counters? What residential streets and intersections will be impacted by their driving patterns? I respectfully ask you to consider this unexamined impact as you deliberate on allowing the school to increase its enrollment, and consider the conditions of its proposed CUP. Neighbors are happy to see the school modernize its buildings, but do not agree with its ambition to cram more students on this small parcel in a residential neighborhood. Many thanks for your attention to this matter, Carla Befera 1404 Bryant Street, Palo Alto 51 Baumb, Nelly From:Anne Avis <aavis@mac.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 10:58 AM To:Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Castilleja plans are GOOD for Palo Alto CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council Members, Castilleja’s plans awaiting approval by the City of Palo Alto will improve the neighborhood in which we live as neighbors. We write in support and recommend immediate approval. Our daughter attended middle school there in the early 2000’s. We live 2 blocks away. The school has taken care to improve the experience of neighbors living nearby. We are so appreciative! Palo Alto is a city that values education. Our neighborhood is so lucky to have Casti nearby. This plan further reduces traffic, noise, accountability to the neighborhood and city. Plus it will set Casti up to provide terrific education for girls for years to come. We SUPPORT approval of Casti’s plans. Anne and Greg Avis 1545 Waverley St Palo Alto, CA 94301 Anne Avis aavis@mac.com 650-387-7085 52 Baumb, Nelly From:Eduardo Llach <eduardo@kromephotos.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 9:58 AM To:Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:I want to express my support for Castilleja’s plan and urge you to approve it. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, Thank you for all the work you are doing to improve Palo Alto. I want to express my support for Castilleja’s plan and urge you to approve it. I live across the street from Paly and have seen it grow 30%+ since I’ve been here, with multiple additional buildings. I applaud it, and similarly I want to express my support for Castilleja’s plan to also admit more students without adding more traffic and their plan to move parking underground is a great one that solves so many of the problems brought by neighbors + it was approved by your Planning team. My grandmother graduated from Castilleja in 1917 and I benefited from her education, I spent a lot of time w/ her as a child. Let’s expand the possibilities to all students! As a neighbor of Paly, I know that Paly has added almost 600 students to campus since Castilleja’s last CUP. That’s more than an ENTIRE Castilleja. If Castilleja wants to try to add 25 more students while reducing traffic below current levels, why on earth would we want to stop them? They cannot increase above 25 students if traffic increases. All schools serve the public good, and if this school can reach its pedagogical goals, offer more opportunity, and reduce traffic, this is a win for all of us. Next, I know you are hearing from PNQL about resistance to moving parking below ground. I hear from other close neighbors of the school who can’t wait for the underground parking. As I mentioned, I live beside Paly, and I wish the surface parking outside my house would move below ground and be replaced with green space. Castilleja is giving the neighbors a gift by moving parking underground. If the parking needs to stay in surface lots, I think PNQL might fight that, too, moving the goalposts again. Look to the EIR and the Comp Plan for guidance; those are tools that are supported by data and public policy. We all want a better Palo Alto, and Castilleja’s plans are a clear improvement. Sincerely, Eduardo Llach Churchill Ave. 53 Baumb, Nelly From:Brian Kelleher <BKelleher@nvidia.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 7:29 AM To:Council, City; Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer Subject:Castilleja and underground parking CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Honorable Mayor DuBois and Councilmembers, I support underground parking. Who wouldn’t? It is safer, cleaner, quieter, and greener. That must be why it is supported by many immediate neighbors, the EIR, the Comprehensive Plan, and hundreds of Palo Altans. Near neighbors demanded underground parking, and Castilleja administrators went to the Board of Trustees and advocated for it. The school wanted to meet the needs of the neighbors and improve conditions in the neighborhood. I implore you to listen to the support of immediate neighbors OTHER THAN PNQL. There are MANY neighbors who want to get CARS OFF OF THE STREETS. The school reduced the size of the garage, preserved homes, and conserved trees to address the demands of other neighbors. It could be time to admit that the small number of opposing voices have conflicting opinions. The school has responded to all, finding an excellent middle path that is compliant with the Comprehensive Plan and the Tree Manual. The EIR found NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS. Years of revision and study support the current iteration with: 1. Increased setbacks 2. Lower rooflines 3. Fewer events 4. Decreased noise 5. Reduced massing 6. Improved aesthetics 54 7. NO NEW TRAFFIC, in fact daily trips will need to DECREASE The public benefit of schools should be obvious to all. The need to support women should be more clear than ever after the job losses women have experienced due to the pandemic. It is not enough to SAY you support women’s education; you must also take action to support opening opportunities for girls and women. Thank you, Brian Kelleher 512 Coleridge Ave. Palo Alto 94301 55 Baumb, Nelly From:Cormack, Alison Sent:Wednesday, March 24, 2021 10:29 PM To:Council, City Cc:Stump, Molly Subject:Fw: Castilleja Garage Forwarding to the public record From: Jim Migdal <jimmigdal@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 12:07 PM To: Cormack, Alison <Alison.Cormack@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Burt, Patrick <Pat.Burt@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Victoria Thorp <victoriathorp@gmail.com> Subject: Castilleja Garage CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Alison, Pat, I hope all is well with you and families and that you've managed to stay healthy over the past 12 crazy months. I'm writing about the Castilleja garage which is coming up before the council. I'm supportive based on what I've read. While Castilleja screwed up the CUP stuff years back, it feels like they cannot shake the mantle for traffic/congestion etc in Palo Alto. This plan should reduce traffic and noise by getting rid of the trucks that come into the neighborhood every day. I realize that there are those in opposition ‐ esp neighbors who seem to just oppose anything the school does and would prefer to have the school move. Casti has been there over 100 years and has strived to be a good neighbor ‐ reducing traffic / congestion around the school in response to neighbor concerns. Full disclosure ‐ Victoria and I had two daughters go through Castilleja ‐ one who is now a junior at Paly (was there only for middle school) and the other a freshman in college who stayed through 12th grade. I live in Crescent Park ‐ not in area that would be impacted near the school. Thank you for reading. No response needed/expected. Best, Jim 56 Baumb, Nelly From:DavidandGlowe Chang <davidandglowe@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 24, 2021 8:23 PM To:Council, City; Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer Subject:Please support Castilleja's request to remodel and new CUP CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Palo Alto City Council, We live directly across the street from Castilleja on Bryant Street, and we want you to approve Castilleja’s plans to create underground parking. It is an investment in our neighborhood that we, the homeowners, will benefit from every day. Underground parking is preferred by the Comprehensive Plan and the EIR because: It improves the aesthetics in the neighborhood It preserves and increases greenspace It improves safety on the bike boulevard by moving cars below ground It does not need to be repaved or resealed It is environmentally superior because it reduces water contaminants in the run-off It reduces noise and activity around the block The school is mandated to add parking spaces with any remodel; the municipal code requires the school to provide 108 spaces on-site. I and other neighbors would FAR RATHER have parking moved underground than look at and hear surface parking. The underground parking does not have negative impacts. Years and years of study in the EIR confirm this. We sincerely hope that you will trust these FACTS as you realize the value of this project. This underground parking was asked for by direct neighbors and remains widely supported by direct neighbors, like us. Overall, the benefits to Palo Alto and our neighborhood are clear More opportunity with FEWER cars Sustainable architecture and landscaping More trees and greenspace Fewer events We are among the neighbors who are eager to see this proposal approved. Respectfully submitted for your consideration, Glowe and David Chang 1345 Bryant St. Palo Alto 57 Baumb, Nelly From:Carol Danaher <cldanaher@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 24, 2021 2:11 PM To:Council, City Subject:regarding Castilleja new CUP and Masterplan CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, I value the excellence in education and experience that Castelleja provides to young women. Castilleja has responded well to community concerns regarding traffic, noise, parked cars... etc. City agencies have approved their plans. I encourage you to vote with approval in support of this extraordinary institution. Best regards, Carol Danaher 1355 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto, CA 94301 58 Baumb, Nelly From:James WItt <jw@jameswitt.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 24, 2021 2:08 PM To:Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Dave Dockter vrs Oak trees CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. I was building homes in Palo Alto long before Dave Docktor was hired and Im still building homes in Palo Alto now that thankfully he is gone. The trees at Castilleja could be moved. The council is operating on old thinking regarding saving too many trees in light of the Paradise fire. The council is operating on old thinking regarding pandering to a few cranky neighbors vrs the future benefits Castilleja bring to the community. In the same way the new ADU rules are in our future interest at the expense of some neighbors crankiness. Thanks James Witt www.JamesWitthomes.com 59 Baumb, Nelly From:Nelson Ng <lofujai@ymail.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 24, 2021 2:00 PM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; Lait, Jonathan; French, Amy Subject:Castilleja Expansion Project CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, A number of important issues surfaced during the Council deliberation on the Castilleja Expansion project on March 15th. I hope the City Council will dig deep into each of these issues to uncover the true ramifications of your decisions to the City of Palo Alto now and the future. Garage 1. Should Castilleja's proposed underground garage in an R1 neighborhood be counted toward the FAR? I respectfully disagree with a couple of the council members' suggestion that the square footage of Castilleja's proposed underground garage should not be counted toward the FAR. As Ms. Amy French pointed out the reason for garage to be counted as part of the FAR in R1 is to limit the size of the building base on the size of the lot. Castilleja's proposed design of a big box store building is already above the current FAR limit. Why does the city think Castilleja is entitled to circumvent the current FAR rule so they can avoid redesigning their project to be compliant? 2. Should the City grant special privileges to Castilleja by amending text of City code to have an underground garage? Underground garages are not allowed in R1 neighborhood. The staff argues that since the text didn't mention businesses, therefore it is allowed. On the other hand, did they consider that the original text didn't take businesses into account because businesses are not normally allowed in an R1 neighborhood? By allowing Castilleja to have an underground garage, this will give the businesses more property rights than single family home owners in an R1 zoned neighborhood. If the City really crafts an amended City code to allow a business to have an underground garage in R1, how do you prevent more applicants from coming to the Council to ask for other code changes to get approval specifically for their projects in the future? If the City feels a real need for code amendment, an unbiased/non favoritism approach should just close the current loophole to explicitly ban underground garages for businesses alongside residences. 3. Why does Castilleja need an underground garage? 60 Castilleja provided a number of contradicting reasons for wanting an underground garage. Please investigate the true reasoning to determine if it is really needed: Neighbors want the garage, the school claimed On May 3rd 2017, PNQL submitted letters from 47 immediate neighbors for Castilleja and copying the City of PA stating that the neighbors DO NOT want the underground garage and reasons. For the last 4 years, Castilleja has had plenty of opportunity to work on a no garage solution, but they refused. Garage parking is for students or staff During the March 15 2021 Council meeting, Ms. Kauffman stated that the garage is for staff not students. However, the application stated there will only be 10 additional staff to support increased enrollment. Does it sound reasonable to support the extra parking for 10 staff by requiring the neighbors, the city and the environment to suffer a significant multi months/years construction impact to build an underground garage? The City requires Castilleja to have a garage Castilleja claims building the underground garage is due to the current city code's parking space requirement. This problem can be easily solved by City Council amending the code to reduce the number of required parking spaces by requiring Castilleja to reduce the number of cars coming to campus. Wouldn't that be a much more environmentally friendly solution rather than displacing tens of thousands of tons of earth to build an underground garage? 4. Should it be a reduced size garage? The current proposed underground garage provides 78 parking spaces. Combining with the proposed surface parking, 23 net new spaces compared to the currently available parking on campus. For 23 net new spaces, it is already unreasonable to justify a multi million dollars project. By reducing the number of underground spaces beyond 30%, it will result in a net loss of new parking spaces. Does that really make sense? Parking Spaces Existing Current proposed expansion plan Net new bases on current proposal If underground garage space is reduced by 30% Underground 0 78 78 54.6 Surface 81 26 ‐55 ‐55 Total On Site 81 104 23 ‐0.4 5. Is underground garage truly the solution for the next 100 years? 61 In the March 15th 2021 meeting, Ms. Kauffman claimed the garage will allow them to update the school's campus to be ready for the next 100 years. Given the rapid advancement of technology and climate change, shouldn't we be considering much more environmentally sound solution for the traffic problem than building an underground garage? Certifying EIR 1. Should the current EIR be certified when the current garage design with distributed drop off was not studied? Although this was not discussion in the March 15th meeting, it is an important issue of the current EIR. During the DEIR, the previous garage design with a single entrance from Bryant and a single exit from Emerson was found to have "Significant and Unavoidable Impact" to the neighborhood. The neighbors requested the latest garage proposal with multiple drop off to be studied as part of the final EIR but it was denied. How can a "Significant and Unavoidable Impact" just disappear base on theoretical assumptions instead of real study data? 2. Should the current EIR be certified when Bike Safety was not fully studied? Ms Katherine Waugh from Dudek stated the reason the EIR stating there is no accident during their study period is because the 2/13/18 accident of a car striking a pedestrian with scooter and a bicyclist who were sent to Stanford Hospital happened at the intersection of Embarcadero and Bryant while the EIR only included accident on a "segment of the frontage of Bryant Street only". In order for cars to enter the proposed garage at the Bryant street entrance, they have to make left or right turn from Embarcadero at this major intersection of Bryant and Embarcadero. So why are accidents at the Embarcadero/Bryant intersection not studied to determine safety issues to Palo Alto residents? Ms. Waugh also stated in the EIR that the bicycle accident rate is acceptable. Can you please ask Ms. Waugh what is the acceptable bike accident rate? Ms. Waugh said that this incident was an outlier and that it is lower than the state average. What cities factor into this state average? Might they be comparing this to LA. Is this a fair comparison? Palo Alto prides itself on its bike friendly routes. Why would it allow any project to jeopardize any of the Bike Safe Routes? 3. Should the current EIR be certified when event impact was not studied? Although Castilleja's current CUP allows for 5 major events plus several more per school year, Castilleja has consistently held more than 100 events. Now Castilleja is applying for 90 events per school year while the city staff is recommending 74 without asking the impact to be studied. Therefore, I am asking the council to require the EIR to study the impact of the events before determining the limit of the number of events per school year. Despite a couple PTC commissioners praised the extensiveness of the EIR, the above are just 3 examples of a long list of issues with this EIR. The EIR is supposed to identify all real impact of a project to the neighborhood. It should not be use merely as a checkbox item to gain project approval by citing technicality to avoid finding the true impact of the project. Trees 1. Should we allow staff to freely interpret the trees ordinance to remove trees? 62 The staff cited that the tree ordinance provides a process to remove a healthy protected tree if all possible remedy are exhausted. Tree 155 is at the path of a driveway, the City council must scrutinize the design to see the best remedy to save this protective tree. The tree ordinance is design to protect trees not to kill trees. Future 1. What is maximum allowable impact to this R1 neighbor and how will that support Castilleja's expansion ambition? In the March 15th 2021 meeting, Ms. Kauffman stated that there is great need of all-girls education that is growing at an exponential rate. Without knowing Castilleja's maximum enrollment buildout for the next 20 years, how can we be sure that they will not come back to ask for more enrollment after their current request is approved. Nanci Kauffman answered the council that this is it... Yet in the past Castilleja promised in applying for the 2000 CUP that 415 would be the maximum number. Shouldn't Castilleja be looking at additional sites to grow to satisfy the exponential growth rate of needing all girl education as many other schools such as Harker, Pinewood, and Stratford have done, to name a few? I ask that the City Council not certify the Castilleja EIR or a new CUP until all of these pertinent questions have been answered. Thank you, Nelson 63 Baumb, Nelly From:Matt Leary <matt.leary@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 24, 2021 1:34 PM To:lison.cormack@cityofpaloalto.org; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Council, City Cc:Matt Leary Subject:Castilleja School masterplan CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, For your meeting on Monday, March 29, please note my position on Castilleja’s proposal. I am a Palo Alto resident, support Castilleja’s plan, and encourage each of you to approve that plan. It is my opinion that Castilleja's new CUP and masterplan will improve the neighborhood and Palo Alto. Important aspects of the plan, for me, are increasing the tree canopy by adding over one hundred new trees, reducing traffic, establishing strict consequences for non‐compliance, increasing green space, and reducing environmental impact on City of Palo Alto and the demands on the City of Palo Alto's infrastructure ‐ stormwater system, power grid, gas supply. The Castilleja program excels at educating young women who are motivated to make a difference in Palo Alto and beyond. I would like to see more young women get the opportunity of that education. Sincerely, Matt Leary 765 Moreno Ave, Palo Alto 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Kathy Burch <kburch777@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 31, 2021 9:49 AM To:Council, City Subject:Registering my disappointment with you CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. City Council members, It is with deep disappointment that I write to you yet again. Your unwillingness to make a decision regarding Castilleja's status is not only disappointing, it is a clear message that you are not doing your job, which is to MAKE A DECISION. I was shocked to read Councilman Burt's statement in today's Mercury News article that "the school should enroll more students from Palo Alto to stop people from coming from other areas." Wow. You really believe that Palo Alto parents do not drive their daughters to school??? You really believe that providing a unique educational opportunity for middle and upper school girls across the Bay Area is a bad thing??? Again, I am shocked and deeply dismayed by your refusal to simply make a decision. Say yes, say no, but for heaven's sake, DO. YOUR. JOB. Kathy Burch 777 Marion Avenue Palo Alto 2 Baumb, Nelly From:chuck jagoda <chuckjagoda1@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 31, 2021 3:17 AM To:Aram James Cc:Palo Alto Free Press; Jethroe Moore; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; William Armaline; Raj Jayadev; Richard Konda; Walter Wilson; Derek Grasty; Roxana Marachi; Micael 'mica' Estremera; Elizabeth Kamya; Angelica Cortez; Kyle Dacallos; Virginia Groce-Roberts; Raven Malone; Ray F. Montgomery; Khalid White; Robert Salonga; Rebecca Eisenberg; Roberta Ahlquist; Jeff Moore; Richard Konda; Council, City; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; city.council@menlopark.org; GRP-City Council; Anna Griffin; Jonsen, Robert; Binder, Andrew; Shikada, Ed; Eduardo Guilarte; Cecilia; Donald Mendoza; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Steven D. Lee; Human Relations Commission; Kaloma Smith; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Pat Burt; Josh Becker; Charisse Domingo; Stump, Molly; Molly; Bill Johnson; Gennady Sheyner; Greg Tanaka; Greer Stone; cindy.chavez@bos.sccgov.org; Joe Simitian; supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org; Sean James; Perron, Zachary; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Tanner, Rachael; Miguel; Bains, Paul; mark weiss; michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com; Michele; yolanda; Patrice Ventresca; Curtis Smolar; Blanca Bosquez; Sandy Perry-HCA Subject:Re: Meeting Request Regarding K9 use CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. A few comments to others interested in the issue of police anti-citizen attacks, specifically those involving dog damage. First and simplest solution: officer financed self-indemnification policies before hiring. Not only will instances of discussion fall off immediately, but IF there are any "unfortunate incidences" as Mayor Tom Du Bois describes Enberg's maliciously directed dog mauling of Senor Alejo, they will be insured for. Secondly, is no one concerned with mental health for police officers? Is there anyone so naive as to assume that all police, just by the virtue of being hired and empowered to carry a badge, lots of weaponry, and the knowledge that they can dispense harm, punishment, or any degree of violence and be pretty darned sure they'll survive the incident and stay a police officer long enough to accumulate a string of violent outlets--does any of that guarantee perfect mental health? Let me disabuse you of that false assumption: police have every tick, quirk, fear, obsession, addiction, personality disorder, and prejudice you've ever met or heard of. Some officers have long records of violent attacks that they've been able to leave behind and go on to another police job without any worry of his past offenses being considered. "Recreational rousting" is when the cop is agitated, bored, angry, or sees himself as being treated disrespectfully. He/she has to roust a harmless sleepy person and then can let the person go on about their business and she/he can walk away feeling potent and in charge. Sometimes the cause of the racing blood pressure before he's even holstered his coffee and sped to the scene is because of a call of an "officer down." Cops may come to work already scared, coffeed up, on guard, on defense, on the attack. Or they may get any of those ways because of taunts from a drunken, homeless, cursing guy they know. It may not take much to set a cop off. He may feel a strong need to protect or bump off a fellow officer. What you won't find cops doing with guns and violence is giving up either one. They are American, after all! When Australia had a (ONE) mass shooting several years ago, they all came together and gave up their guns. Why? Because the lives of their fellow Aussies meant more to them than macho pride and the security that insecure men feel they get from having a gun at hand. All kinds of people in all kinds of countries all over the world do just fine without the wild worship we Americans have for the gun. We really think it means something important. More important than the lives of our children, people of faith, and those we see as different. 3 Please count me amongst you-- dog/police violence opponents. It's quite unAmerican, unjust, and racist. None of the "unfortunate incidents" being discussed have "happened" to people on the City Council or develop land or who look like they could fit in either category. No, police, no matter how impelled they are to employ some of their weaponry, manage never to do it to owners of property or who have white skin or who might have connections to get CASTLE-e-ja to avoid troublesome laws and regulations. I recommend strongly having an immediate working group to consider and have public and public-involved discussions of the place of the police and how to protect citizens from. Chuck Jagoda On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 9:37 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: 3/30/2021 Hi Palo Alto Free Press: Your comments: Beautiful! Clear and to the point! If Rosen was prosecuting bad cops on a routine basis ...like he prosecutes bad community members ....cops would be forced to discontinue their history of violence, murder and racism. When a prosecutor fails to demand equal justice for cops he is complicit in their murder, violence and racism. Jeff Rosen is a very smart man ...and knows what u say and what I say ...to be the truth ....not hyperbole or empty rhetoric. He really needs to act on the oath he took: to uphold the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic.....cops who kill torture and maul our community members with impunity....are no more and no less than domestic terrorists....who must be punished and taken off our streets. Aram Sent from my iPhone On Mar 30, 2021, at 9:09 PM, Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com> wrote: Mr. Moore, Very well articulated including the referenced case law! However, your final paragraph encapsulated the essence of what should occur first... “There is an urgent need to root out and to identify the departmental deficiencies that allowed these officers to remain on the force in the first place.” The person identified, and responsible, for the departmental deficiencies that have allowed these officers to remain on the force....is none other then Jeff Rosen..... 4 Sincerely, Palo Alto Free Press Sent from my iPad On Mar 30, 2021, at 12:22 PM, Jethroe Moore <moore2j@att.net> wrote: There is an urgent need to root out and to identify the departmental deficiencies that allowed these officers to remain on the force in the first place. ‐‐ Chuck 5 Baumb, Nelly From:Jo Ann Mandinach <joann@needtoknow.com> Sent:Tuesday, March 30, 2021 11:45 AM To:Council, City; City Mgr; Stone, Greer; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Rita Vrhel; Cormack, Alison; Filseth, Eric (Internal); DuBois, Tom Cc:Dave Price Subject:Casti Meeting Last Night with 1999 traffic study numbers? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello. A group of friends watched the 3/29 City Council meeting in awe. It's an understatement to say we were shocked at a few things you might want to consider. 1) Last night no one mentioned The impact of Casti construction on Embarcadero traffic and/or the impact of the possible closure of Churchill Ave. but it could be incorporated into a revised motion as a condition of approval. One would think traffic studies would be conducted re Embarcadero -- which is often jammed now -- with and without the closure of Churchill. These 2 projects may be separate but their effect on all citizens trying to get around town is inseparable. 2) When questioned about traffic demand, city staff cited 1999 traffic studies. Palo Alto has changed drastically in the last 2 decades. For perspective, here's some numbers I pulled together in 10 minutes. Updated traffic studies reflecting increased population and increased commuter traffic preceding a decision might also be included in the motion as a condition of approval. Google went public in 2004 with 3000 employees. 1998 (total) employees 1,907 2004 3,000 6 2011 32;000 2019 118,890 2020 135,000 Facebook went public in 2012 with 4,619 employees Interactive chart of Facebook (FB) annual worldwide employee count from 2009 to 2020. (A powerful graphic worth 1,000 words) https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/FB/facebook/number-of- employees Facebook total number of employees in 2020 was 58,604, a 30.4% increase from 2019. Facebook total number of employees in 2019 was 44,942, a 26.29% increase from 2018. Facebook total number of employees in 2018 was 35,587, a 41.75% increase from 2017. Facebook total number of employees in 2017 was 25,105, a 47.26% increase from 2016. (The number of contractors at Google and Facebook now outnumber full- time employees. There are monthly announcements of their latest building project with literally 1M sq ft for many creating 10,000 more jobs and thus more traffic. Lather, rinse, repeat.) 3) I didn't hear any mention of shuttles last night. Requiring most students to take the shuttle could have saved us interminable discussions about parking structures, basements, artificial turf, etc. and moved this project along years ago. 4) This whole process has cost taxpayers a fortune. Mr. Burt was on the right track in trying to get some revenue out of Casti but his requests were too modest. Perhaps Casti could bear the entire cost of implementing an RPP in their neighborhood since they've made such a program necessary 7 instead of shifting more of the burden onto PA taxpayers who get no benefit from this expansion? Most sincerely, Jo Ann Mandinach Middlefield Road Palo Alto, CA 94301 8 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 11:24 PM To:Cormack, Alison; Greer Stone; Greg Tanaka; Filseth, Eric (Internal); DuBois, Tom; Council, City; Kou, Lydia; Shikada, Ed; Rebecca Eisenberg Subject:Re: This isn’t about what Lait wants but what council is going to require —-staff trying to wear you down ...No Garage Castillega rep like Nanci Kaufman arrogant and scuffing at all of u CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 29, 2021, at 11:17 PM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Sent from my iPhone 9 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 10:28 PM To:Council, City; Dave Price; Greer Stone; Rebecca Eisenberg; Greg Tanaka; Kou, Lydia; Shikada, Ed; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stump, Molly Subject:Re: If I was picking a jury —here I don’t need unanimity —just 4 brave folks of my 7 person jury.... to just say No to Castillega. Here are the 4 jurors I would select and my alternate. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ How about all off site parking for this rich institution????? Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 29, 2021, at 10:21 PM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: > > Please don’t let unelected staff lead u around by the nose... >>> >>> The staff is attempting to manipulate all of u ...the staff sounds like they work for Castillega...... this is BS ...hang in there my Jury >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Just say NO to the expansion .....why empower a rich institution that flaunts the rules to set their own rules. What example does that set for the students at Castillega ...one set of rules for the rich another for the rest of us? >>>>> >>>>> I only need 4 jurors to say No. if I was selecting a jury it would be mayor Tom, Greer Stone, Greg Tanaka and Pat Burt. I only worry that even my best 4 jurors on this issue could succumb to the extraordinary power and undue influence of Castillega. >>>>> >>>>> I would absolutely bounce Alison Cormack —from my jury as a person totally in the pocket of Castillega. >>>>> >>>>> I would also bounce Eric ....he will provide a very powerful intellectual analysis—on both sides of the issue(very impressive) but will ultimately go with the rich and powerful. >>>>> >>>>> Lydia Kou stays on the jury as my wild card...just can’t quite tell where she will ultimately come down. >>>>> >>>>> What does Castillega give back to the taxpayers of Palo Alto? Ask yourself what are we really getting from the this rich institution? >>>>> >>>>> Ok, my jury —‐don’t fold to Castillega—‐absent some real measurable benefits to the people of Palo Alto....which I believe can’t occur with the current arrogant and condescending leadership at Castillega....think Nanci Kaufman as an example. >>>>> >>>>> We need real benefits that are measurable—and Castillega’s leadership must show more integrity and accountability before we give Castillega any of the special treatment they are requesting. >>>>> 10 >>>>> >>>>> Aram >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 11 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 10:26 PM To:Pat Burt; Greer Stone; Greer Stone; Greg Tanaka; Council, City; Stump, Molly; Rebecca Eisenberg; Dave Price; DuBois, Tom; Shikada, Ed; Greer Stone; Kou, Lydia; Filseth, Eric (Internal) Subject:Lait sounds like he works for Castillega CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Sent from my iPhone 12 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 10:20 PM To:Council, City; Dave Price; Greer Stone; Rebecca Eisenberg Subject:If I was picking a jury —here I don’t need unanimity —just 4 brave folks of my 7 person jury.... to just say No to Castillega. Here are the 4 jurors I would select and my alternate. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ What? This guy can’t support more students from EPA —don’t cave —‐no garage either .this staff works for Castillega > > The staff is attempting to manipulate all of u ...the staff sounds like they work for Castillega...... this is BS ...hang in there my Jury >> >> >>> >>> Just say NO to the expansion .....why empower a rich institution that flaunts the rules to set their own rules. What example does that set for the students at Castillega ...one set of rules for the rich another for the rest of us? >>> >>> I only need 4 jurors to say No. if I was selecting a jury it would be mayor Tom, Greer Stone, Greg Tanaka and Pat Burt. I only worry that even my best 4 jurors on this issue could succumb to the extraordinary power and undue influence of Castillega. >>> >>> I would absolutely bounce Alison Cormack —from my jury as a person totally in the pocket of Castillega. >>> >>> I would also bounce Eric ....he will provide a very powerful intellectual analysis—on both sides of the issue(very impressive) but will ultimately go with the rich and powerful. >>> >>> Lydia Kou stays on the jury as my wild card...just can’t quite tell where she will ultimately come down. >>> >>> What does Castillega give back to the taxpayers of Palo Alto? Ask yourself what are we really getting from the this rich institution? >>> >>> Ok, my jury —‐don’t fold to Castillega—‐absent some real measurable benefits to the people of Palo Alto....which I believe can’t occur with the current arrogant and condescending leadership at Castillega....think Nanci Kaufman as an example. >>> >>> We need real benefits that are measurable—and Castillega’s leadership must show more integrity and accountability before we give Castillega any of the special treatment they are requesting. >>> >>> >>> Aram >>> >>> >>> 13 Baumb, Nelly From:John Kelley <jkelley@399innovation.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 8:33 PM To:Council, City Cc:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Cormack, Alison; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Stone, Greer; Tanaka, Greg Subject:PA-PACC- I continue to urge you to approve the Castilleja Project, especially to advance gender equity --- Fwd: PA-PACC-I urge you to approve the Castilleja Project Attachments:PA-PACC-letter to CPA re Castilleja - 2021-03-29 w attachment.pdf; PA-PACC-letter to CPA re Castilleja - 2021-03-08.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Via Email: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Honorable Tom DuBois, Mayor Honorable Pat Burt, Vice Mayor Honorable City Council Members City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto CA 94301 Re: March 29, 2021, Special Meeting,[1] Agenda Item 3, Continued Public Hearing/Quasi‐Judicial Regarding 1310 Bryant Street (Castilleja)… (ID # 11180)[2] ‐‐‐ I continue to urge you to approve the Castilleja Project, especially to advance gender equity Dear Mayor DuBois, Vice Mayor Burt, and City Council Members, As you continue your further deliberations this evening, I write for two reasons: first, to express again my support for the Castilleja Project as described in my letter dated March 8, 2021, a copy of which is attached; second, to join in the comments expressed by Roger McCarthy, Ph.D., both in his March 3, 2021 email to the City Council[3] and in his comments to the City Council at the March 8th public hearing.[4] Dr. McCarthy demonstrated that City Council’s consideration of the Castilleja Project is part of a far broader national conversation concerning the education of young women: Our national largely coeducational system has been failing to educate our young female secondary school students for STEM careers at a staggering scale for generations. The product of this national disgrace is found everywhere in our society. Just 16.5% of our engineers are women.[1] Just 24% of our computing jobs are held by women, and that percentage is expected SHRINK to 22% by 2025.[2] Our national proportion of women doctors, only 36%, is pathetic and embarrassing compared to virtually EVERY industrialized country in the world.[3] And our slow progress to cure this problem is equally embarrassing,…. (Public Comments, at p. 54/120, footnotes omitted.) 14 As Dr. McCarthy pointed out, “[w]e can’t cure the nation’s shortcomings, but we can certainly begin to address our own…. Solving the gender imbalance in tech is far more important to all of us than heritage tree roots and traffic.” Id. at pgs. 54‐55/120 (emphasis added). Palo Alto can and should do its part now. The more our community takes pride in helping to create Silicon Valley, the more it must also assume responsibility for addressing the Valley’s shortcomings and correcting its outright failures. Approving the Castilleja Project ‐‐‐ swiftly and without imposing unrealistic or burdensome conditions ‐‐‐ will not only benefit Palo Alto itself but will also voice a strong statement to the entire country to help advance gender equity in STEM, education, and leadership. Respectfully submitted, John Kelley Attachment [1] See the agenda for the Meeting of the City Council: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80449 [2] See the Staff Report, “Summary Title: Castilleja” (“Staff Report”): https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80441 [3] See the “Public Comment” compilation from the March 8, 2021 Special Meeting (“Public Comments”) at p. 54/120: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80548 [4] See the video recording from the March 8, 2021 Special Meeting, beginning at approximately 4:07/7:01: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0RojQJeppA Begin forwarded message: From: John Kelley <jkelley@399innovation.com> Subject: PA‐PACC‐I urge you to approve the Castilleja Project Date: March 8, 2021 at 8:07:13 PM PST To: Palo Alto City Council <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org> Via Email: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Honorable Tom DuBois, Mayor Honorable Pat Burt, Vice Mayor Honorable City Council Members City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto CA 94301 15 Re: March 8, 2021, Special Meeting,[1] Agenda Item 7, Public Hearing/Quasi‐Judicial Regarding 1310 Bryant Street (Castilleja)… (ID # 11180)[2] ‐‐‐ I urge you to approve the Castilleja Project Dear Mayor DuBois, Vice Mayor Burt, and City Council Members, I urge you to approve the Castilleja Project, as detailed in part 2(b) of the “Recommendation” section of the Staff Report, based on the City Staff’s analysis and code interpretations. Staff Report at pgs. 1‐2. As numerous other members of the public have noted, it is particularly important to allow Castilleja to increase its enrollment, modernize its campus while maintaining its current footprint, and build underground parking. For over a century, Castilleja has been a vital Palo Alto institution. Over that time period, and particularly in recent decades, the world and education have changed considerably. To support a broader and more advanced curriculum, exemplary educational institutions such as Castilleja need to reach “critical mass” and to have the benefit of modern facilities. The underground parking facility, as well as Castilleja’s successful traffic demand management program, will help to maintain the residential character of the neighborhood. In reading public comments, I have been particularly impressed by the multiple neighbors who have spoken out in support of Castilleja’s proposals. Like them, I believe that City Staff, the PTC, and other City Boards have struck an appropriate balance, and that the City Council should embrace and support the Castilleja Project. There are two other important reasons why the Castilleja Project should be approved. For decades, Palo Alto has made environmental progress one of the City’s most important goals, but recently Palo Alto’s progress towards achieving its Sustainability and Climate Action Plan has slowed considerably. The City needs to embrace a broader and bolder set of climate initiatives. The Castilleja Project should be one of them. The imperative of overcoming catastrophic global warming is inextricably linked to the mission of educating young women, and, in recent years, young women have emerged as some of the most dedicated, skilled, and articulate climate leaders. Castilleja has repeatedly demonstrated its abilities not only to enhance the knowledge and thoughtfulness of young women but also to assist them in extending their leadership skills. By supporting the Castilleja Project, Palo Alto will be contributing in unique and important ways to addressing the challenges of global warming. Finally, let us recognize that Castilleja has much to teach our community as well as its students. Castilleja has demonstrated its own institutional leadership in drastically reducing traffic since 2013; it has accomplished far more than many other local institutions. Its Traffic Demand Management program has reduced daily car trips by more than 30%. Castilleja has also shown how to increase pedestrian and bicycle travel significantly and how to dramatically expand transit and shuttle transportation. The success that Castilleja has enjoyed in reducing traffic is as instructive as it is commendable. Castilleja should serve as a model for other institutions in the immediate vicinity ‐‐‐ including Walter Hays Elementary School, the new Palo Alto Junior Museum and Zoo, the Palo Alto Art Center, Rinconada Library, Palo Alto High School, and even Town & Country Village. Castilleja will undoubtedly achieve even more in the future to reduce local traffic, and the entire City can learn from its progress. Castilleja has contributed greatly to Palo Alto for more than a century. Approving the Castilleja Project will help ensure that it continues to benefit Palo Alto in the future. Respectfully submitted, John Kelley 16 [1] See the agenda for the Meeting of the City Council: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80449 [2] See the Staff Report, “Summary Title: Castilleja” (“Staff Report”): https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80441 John Kelley 555 Bryant St., No. 714 Palo Alto, CA 94301 jkelley@399innovation.com (650) 444-2237 March 29, 2021 Via Email: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Honorable Tom DuBois, Mayor Honorable Pat Burt, Vice Mayor Honorable City Council Members City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto CA 94301 Re: March 29, 2021, Special Meeting,1 Agenda Item 3, Continued Public Hearing/Quasi-Judicial Regarding 1310 Bryant Street (Castilleja)… (ID # 11180)2 --- I continue to urge you to approve the Castilleja Project, especially to advance gender equity Dear Mayor DuBois, Vice Mayor Burt, and City Council Members, As you continue your further deliberations this evening, I write for two reasons: first, to express again my support for the Castilleja Project as described in my letter dated March 8, 2021, a copy of which is attached; second, to join in the comments expressed by Roger McCarthy, Ph.D., both in his March 3, 2021 email to the City Council3 and in his comments to the City Council at the March 8th public hearing.4 Dr. McCarthy demonstrated that City Council’s consideration of the Castilleja Project is part of a far broader national conversation concerning the education of young women: Our national largely coeducational system has been failing to educate our young female secondary school students for STEM careers at a staggering scale for generations. The product of this national disgrace is found everywhere in our society. Just 16.5% of our engineers are women.[1] Just 24% of our computing jobs are held by women, and that percentage is expected SHRINK to 22% by 2025.[2] Our national proportion of women doctors, only 36%, is pathetic and embarrassing compared to virtually EVERY industrialized country in the world.[3] And our slow progress to cure this problem is equally embarrassing,…. (Public Comments, at p. 54/120, footnotes omitted.) As Dr. McCarthy pointed out, “[w]e can’t cure the nation’s shortcomings, but we can certainly begin to address our own…. Solving the gender imbalance in tech is far more important to all of us than heritage tree roots and traffic.” Id. at pgs. 54-55/120 (emphasis added). 1 See the agenda for the Meeting of the City Council: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80449 2 See the Staff Report, “Summary Title: Castilleja” (“Staff Report”): https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80441 3 See the “Public Comment” compilation from the March 8, 2021 Special Meeting (“Public Comments”) at p. 54/120: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80548 4 See the video recording from the March 8, 2021 Special Meeting, beginning at approximately 4:07/7:01: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0RojQJeppA 2 Palo Alto can and should do its part now. The more our community takes pride in helping to create Silicon Valley, the more it must also assume responsibility for addressing the Valley’s shortcomings and correcting its outright failures. Approving the Castilleja Project --- swiftly and without imposing unrealistic or burdensome conditions --- will not only benefit Palo Alto itself but will also voice a strong statement to the entire country to help advance gender equity in STEM, education, and leadership. Respectfully submitted, John Kelley Attachment John Kelley 555 Bryant St., No. 714 Palo Alto, CA 94301 jkelley@399innovation.com (650) 444-2237 March 8, 2021 Via Email: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Honorable Tom DuBois, Mayor Honorable Pat Burt, Vice Mayor Honorable City Council Members City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto CA 94301 Re: March 8, 2021, Special Meeting,1 Agenda Item 7, Public Hearing/Quasi-Judicial Regarding 1310 Bryant Street (Castilleja)… (ID # 11180)2 --- I urge you to approve the Castilleja Project Dear Mayor DuBois, Vice Mayor Burt, and City Council Members, I urge you to approve the Castilleja Project, as detailed in part 2(b) of the “Recommendation” section of the Staff Report, based on the City Staff’s analysis and code interpretations. Staff Report at pgs. 1-2. As numerous other members of the public have noted, it is particularly important to allow Castilleja to increase its enrollment, modernize its campus while maintaining its current footprint, and build underground parking. For over a century, Castilleja has been a vital Palo Alto institution. Over that time period, and particularly in recent decades, the world and education have changed considerably. To support a broader and more advanced curriculum, exemplary educational institutions such as Castilleja need to reach “critical mass” and to have the benefit of modern facilities. The underground parking facility, as well as Castilleja’s successful traffic demand management program, will help to maintain the residential character of the neighborhood. In reading public comments, I have been particularly impressed by the multiple neighbors who have spoken out in support of Castilleja’s proposals. Like them, I believe that City Staff, the PTC, and other City Boards have struck an appropriate balance, and that the City Council should embrace and support the Castilleja Project. There are two other important reasons why the Castilleja Project should be approved. For decades, Palo Alto has made environmental progress one of the City’s most important goals, but recently Palo Alto’s progress towards achieving its Sustainability and Climate Action Plan has slowed considerably. The City needs to embrace a broader and bolder set of climate initiatives. The Castilleja Project should be one of them. The imperative of overcoming catastrophic global warming is inextricably linked to the mission of educating young women, and, in recent years, young women have emerged as some of the most dedicated, skilled, and articulate climate leaders. Castilleja has repeatedly demonstrated its abilities not only to enhance the knowledge and thoughtfulness of young women but also to assist them in extending their leadership skills. By supporting the Castilleja Project, Palo Alto will be contributing in unique and important ways to addressing the challenges of global warming. 1 See the agenda for the Meeting of the City Council: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80449 2 See the Staff Report, “Summary Title: Castilleja” (“Staff Report”): https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80441 2 Finally, let us recognize that Castilleja has much to teach our community as well as its students. Castilleja has demonstrated its own institutional leadership in drastically reducing traffic since 2013; it has accomplished far more than many other local institutions. Its Traffic Demand Management program has reduced daily car trips by more than 30%. Castilleja has also shown how to increase pedestrian and bicycle travel significantly and how to dramatically expand transit and shuttle transportation. The success that Castilleja has enjoyed in reducing traffic is as instructive as it is commendable. Castilleja should serve as a model for other institutions in the immediate vicinity --- including Walter Hays Elementary School, the new Palo Alto Junior Museum and Zoo, the Palo Alto Art Center, Rinconada Library, Palo Alto High School, and even Town & Country Village. Castilleja will undoubtedly achieve even more in the future to reduce local traffic, and the entire City can learn from its progress. Castilleja has contributed greatly to Palo Alto for more than a century. Approving the Castilleja Project will help ensure that it continues to benefit Palo Alto in the future. Respectfully submitted, John Kelley 17 Baumb, Nelly From:Bruce McLeod <mcleod.bruce@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 5:29 PM To:Cormack, Alison; Burt, Patrick; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Stone, Greer; DuBois, Tom; Tanaka, Greg; Council, City Subject:Re: 1310 Bryant Street - Castilleja parking requirements CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Re: Error in previous letter referencing parking requirements. I inadvertently credited the referenced school parking requirements to the UBC where in fact, they are from the City of Folsom building requirements. They do still highlight the inadequacy of Palo Alto Muni Code section 18.52.40 in protecting adjacent neighborhoods from school impacts and unregulated street parking. In reference to the minimum off‐street parking for schools, every other non‐residential use in the section refers ro seating capacity or floor area, either of which would probably more accurately reflect usage, especially in grades 11 and 12. Finally, nowhere in the plans is there any indication of which areas are "teaching stations?" Is each gym one station or many? Is Spieker field similarly one station or more? Do small meeting rooms count as teaching stations ‐ as an educator, I certainly use these spaces for teaching. We would appreciate some clarity from teh Planning Staff on this matter. Thank you, Bruce McLeod 650‐465‐2908 On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 3:19 PM Bruce McLeod <mcleod.bruce@gmail.com> wrote: City of Palo Alto March 26, 2021 City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: 1310 Bryant Street; Castilleja Expansion Project UBC Parking Requirements The California Building Code (2019) defines off-street parking requirements for schools in Chapter 17 Section 57. The applicable sections below seem fairly clear – and under code, the school does not come close to providing the number of off-street parking spaces required. (Indeed, the school currently does not meet the code requirements. Is the Council prepared to exacerbate the current non-compliance?) 18 Below is the applicable UBC code section and calculations based on Castilleja’s current and proposed plans. 17.57.040 Off-street parking requirements Educational Facilities. 27. Schools: High schools shall provide the greater of the following: At least one parking space for each employee and one parking space for every three students in the eleventh and twelfth grades, OR At least one parking space for every three seats in the main auditorium or stadium, whichever is the greater Current Castilleja off‐street parking: Employees: There are 140 employees in the Castilleja staff directory. That’s 140 required parking spaces for staff. Students: With the currently allowed 415 students equally distributed over 7 grades (59+ each grade ) there are roughly 118 juniors and seniors; one space for every three is 39 required parking spaces for students o Total = 140 plus 39 = 179 required on‐site parking spaces Existing site has only 86 off‐street spaces (48% of the requirement) Proposed Castilleja enrollment of 540 with no increase in employees: Employees: There are still 140 employees. 140 required spaces. Students: At enrollment of 540 with all new enrollment (125) going to high school there are roughly 243 juniors and seniors, or 81 required spaces for students. o Total = 140 + 81 = 221 Proposed plans including the garage only provide 104 off‐street spaces (47%of the requirement). Event Parking: Castilleja’s large events occur not in a stadium or auditorium but in the Circle. Under the proposed plan a large event like graduation could include graduates (120), faculty, staff and administrators (80‐100) school support staff (20‐30), guests (300), and outside service (30+) ‐ easily at least 570 people requiring 190 parking spaces, well above the designated parking spaces even with parking on Speiker Field. Where do these extra 80‐120 cars park each day, not to mention the overflow from large events? Unlike any other school in Palo Alto, public or private, they park on the surrounding neighborhood streets. It is clear that both the UBC requirements and the California Department of Education (CDE) site design recommendations both understand the need for schools to provide adequate off‐street parking for their staff, students and visitors. Why should Castilleja be otherwise enabled? The City Council should recognize that applying a parking standard based on teaching stations is insufficient, woefully inadequate, and in clear conflict with Building Code requirements as well as the CDE guidelines. This 19 minimal standard encourages overdevelopment and overuse of this 6.1 acre site and should not be allowed for a Conditional Use in an R‐1 neighborhood. Given Castilleja’s inability to self‐park onsite, the Council should condition the CUP to require a significantly more extensive shuttling program and mandate that all gatherings in excess of 100 attendees need to be held off‐site, outside this R‐1 neighborhood. As currently configured, the lack of off‐street parking and its proposed increase (30+% more un‐parked cars) constitute a significant impact on the neighborhood with no adequate mitigation and should be reason not to make the findings to certify the EIR or approve the project. Thank you for your time and consideration, Bruce McLeod 1404 Bryant Street Palo Alto Bruce McLeod 650‐465‐2908 20 Baumb, Nelly From:Lesley King <lesleykinghome@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 5:10 PM To:Council, City Subject:Please approve Castilleja plan with underground parking CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Palo Alto City Council, I am a neighbor of Castilleja and I support Castilleja’s proposal because it benefits the city of Palo Alto and the neighborhood we share. First, as a neighbor, I ask that you please approve the underground parking. This was an idea that came from neighbors and I agree with it. I know we have some precedent like Kol Emeth and I feel that this is another example of the underground parking being best for the residential neighborhood AND the school. Next, as a voter, I hope you will follow the guidance in the EIR and the comprehensive plan to approve underground parking. I strongly believe that Castilleja benefits Palo Alto in many many ways and is bending over backwards to make their renovations work for as many people as they can. I am a neighbor of the school, and I support this project and I want underground parking. I am looking forward to feeling that my voice has been heard and my opinions are being valued in the next meeting. Sincerely, Lesley King ‐‐ Lesley King "My work with the poor and the incarcerated has persuaded me that the opposite of poverty is not wealth; the opposite of poverty is justice. " - Bryan Stevenson, Just Mercy 21 Baumb, Nelly From:ellen flamen <eflamen@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 5:10 PM To:Kou, Lydia Cc:Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; pat.burk@cityofpaloalto.org; Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Castilleja's new CUP and masterplan CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello City Council Members, Thank you for your service and for keeping Palo Alto the wonderful place it is. I have lived here with my husband since 1990. Both of our daughters grew up here and attended Castilleja. We hope you will agree to move forward with the new CUP and masterplan as we believe that Palo Alto will be improved by: Increasing the tree canopy by adding over a hundred new trees, establishing strict consequences for non-compliance, increasing green space and educating more young women who are motivated to make a difference in Palo Alto and beyond. Thank your for your time. All my best, Ellen Flamen 740 Center Drive 22 Baumb, Nelly From:holzemer/hernandez <holz@sonic.net> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 4:39 PM To:Council, City Subject:Limit Castilleja Expansion CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, I encourage to seriously consider how your decisions tonight on the Castilleja Expansion project will not only affect a single neighborhood, but our entire City. It's time to limit Castilleja's expansion. I think everyone is in agreement that the school has a right to modernize and improve its facilities. No one is against "women's education", as some Castilleja supporters might suggest. However, what the neighbors, especially those that live next or close by, have endured to date and potentially what they might have to live with if the school gets its way, is simply not acceptable. Simple truths ‐‐ an underground garage is a still a "garage" and not a basement. There is no need for a underground garage, period. Also, limit any enrollment growth of the school ‐‐ if the school can slowly show they can handle more students in very small increments without producing harm to the surrounding neighbors, then ok. But, give them specific targets on which to meet those requirements. Limit the tremendous amount of the school 'events' that the neighbors have faced for many years. To say, 90 is a "compromise" is ridiculous. After school events of over 50 folks (not including sports activities or graduation) should be mainly off campus. Fund‐raising events should not interfere with neighborhood "peace" and "quiet". Have the school seriously consider a "shuttle" system to bring students in to the school ‐‐ if not have them consider a "satellite campus" idea as other schools have done. Lastly, remember the residents first and foremost and the impacts that the school has made on their lives and quality of life. That should be most important. Sincerely, Terry Holzemer 2581 Park Blvd. #Y211 Palo Alto, CA 94306 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Allen Akin <akin@arden.org> Sent:Tuesday, March 30, 2021 5:14 PM To:Council, City Cc:cnsbuchanan@yahoo.com; jguislin@gmail.com Subject:April 5th 2021 Council Meeting, Consent Calendar Item 4 (Traffic Data Collection Contract) CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Council, Pneumatic‐tube systems are simple and well‐understood, but trying to get a big picture of traffic from them is a little like listening to the blind men describe the elephant. These systems are limited to measuring a modest number of streets or intersections at any given time, and the results lack context. For example, they can tell how many vehicles pass a given point, but not where they came from or where they went. To me, this sort of information seems essential for measuring cut‐through and diversion traffic [1], which in turn is essential for planning things like grade separations and commercial‐district street closures. Did Staff consider other options? Last September I spent some time investigating one of them, StreetLight Data's "Insight" product. It can measure a large number of locations all during the same period of time. You don't have to specify all the measurement locations in advance. It has historical data going back several years before the pandemic, so you can perform retrospective studies if you need to see how things are changing. It can measure vehicle speeds as well as volumes. It has path‐tracing ability, so you can determine not only how many vehicles pass a given point but their origins and destinations. I don't know what StreetLight's pricing would be for the City of Palo Alto, but for small projects Insight seems surprisingly affordable. I was quoted $10K, allowing an unlimited number of studies over one year involving a set of 50 measurement zones. It would be interesting to know if there's an opportunity to save money compared to the proposed contract. I'm aware of one shortcoming of StreetLight's product, and that's inaccuracy for low‐volume streets. To deal with this, it provides a calibration mechanism. A user can upload past or present data to adjust Insight's underlying statistical model for accuracy. Of course we have such data from past studies performed by the City and even by residents. Note that the proposed pneumatic‐tube system is subject to this sort of validation, too; see the provisions in the contract, page 15 of Exhibit A. We should work to determine the data required to make fully‐informed decisions about the traffic problems we'll face in the near future. If there's a pressing need to settle for less, it would be good for everyone to understand it. Perhaps this contract isn't ready for the consent calendar. Would Staff be willing to speak to the questions of whether the proposed system will provide all the data that we need, and if there might be an alternative that is functionally preferable or more cost‐effective? Regards, Allen Akin 2 [1] Please see Comp Plan Policy T‐4.2.1 (page 89) which requires periodic traffic measurement in residential areas (not just major intersections) to prioritize traffic calming measures; and T‐4.3 (page 90) which requires proactive improvements to reduce bypass traffic. 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 5:45 PM To:Council, City Subject:Fwd: Posters on a telephone pole CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Dubois, Vice Mayor Burt & Council Members, I believe that this organization has crossed the line. You, the city council, need to take stock of this kind of aggressive attitude. When the country is reeling from the murders in Atlanta and Denver it is insensitive to say the least to post these posters in any neighborhood. Children walk by these posters on College Avenue. You must ask yourselves why is the YIMBY supported peninsula for everyone organization resorting to base tactics? Beyond the pale. Ann Lafargue Balin Begin forwarded message: From: Andrew Fetter <andrewfetter@hotmail.com> Subject: Posters on a telephone pole Date: March 25, 2021 at 4:19:16 PM PDT To: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Cc: Andrew Fetter <andrewfetter@hotmail.com> FYI. Someone saw these and called Peninsula for Everyone and asked them to take down and they said they would... It looks like they were made by https://peninsulaforeveryone.org/ 2 3 Baumb, Nelly From:David Squarer <squarer@att.net> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 3:06 PM To:Perron, Zachary Cc:City Mgr; DuBois, Tom; Council, City Subject:Re: Long Overdue parked vehicles on Colorado Ave at Greer Park Dear Mr. Perron, Thank you for your detailed reply of March 25, 2021. I was unaware of the action taken by the Palo Alto Police Department in response to my e-mail of February 23, 2021. I have read the description of the program as well as the article on “parking issues on El Camino Real: A complex Community Issue”. Considering that the City of Palo Alto receives between 1000 and 1500 complaints annually on parked vehicles and that the City has a law which states that no vehicle shall be parked on a public roadway for more than 72 consecutive hours without driving at least one-half mile (10.36.030(a) Palo Alto Municipal Code), may I suggest that the City of Palo Alto revisit this Municipal Code. For example, the code could require to move the vehicle every 36 hours and drive at least 10 miles. Additionally, posting signs on streets where vehicles are parked, such as: “vehicles are prohibited from parking longer than 72 consecutive hours” could serve as a deterrent. In parallel, the City and County could expand by several folds the Safe Parking Program, by allocating appropriate camp sites. I believe that if the City of Palo Alto does not address this issue in a more urgent manner, the City could not avoid homeless scenes similar to San Francisco or Los Angeles. Thank you for your attention and action, David Squarer 1078 Colorado Place, Palo Alto On Thursday, March 25, 2021, 04:21:53 PM EDT, Perron, Zachary <zachary.perron@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: Good afternoon Mr. Squarer, My name is Zach Perron, and I work for the Palo Alto Police Department, where part of my responsibilities include overseeing our parking enforcement program. I am responding to your message from Sunday afternoon on behalf of City Manager Ed Shikada. Thank you for writing the City with your concerns surrounding what has been going on in your neighborhood. We appreciate hearing from you. Please allow me to share with you what the Police Department has done in response to your concerns. First, though, some background information on the Palo Alto Municipal Code may be beneficial. If you already are aware of this information, forgive me. The Palo Alto Municipal Code outlines a legal procedure we must follow in order to cite or tow a vehicle that has been reported as being parked in place for a long period of time. In short, our personnel have to “mark” the vehicle with a tow warning sheet, then return 72 hours later to check to see if the vehicle has moved at least ½ mile. If it hasn’t, it is subject to a citation and/or tow (the Palo Alto Municipal Code states that no vehicle can park on a public roadway for more than 72 hours without driving at least ½ mile). 4 When you sent your initial e-mail to the Police Department back on February 23 reporting nine vehicles that had been parked on the block for “several months,” we sent our Community Service Officers out to the location on February 25. They placed the tow warning sheet on all nine of the vehicles you reported. They returned on March 1 (their next duty day after the 72-hour period had expired) to cite/tow any violators, and found that four of the vehicles had left, four other vehicles had driven the requisite distance and returned to park in a different location on the same block (this is legal, under the Municipal Code), and one vehicle (a small storage trailer) remained unmoved. Our Community Service Officers towed that small storage trailer away on March 1 as a result. I apologize if no City staff members communicated that information to you at the time; I’m assuming that did not happen since you wrote the Mayor on Sunday that the Police Department had not taken any action. In response to your message on March 21, we again sent our Community Service Officers out on Monday, March 22. They placed the tow warning sheet on three RVs and two buses that were parked on the block. They also returned on March 23, and spoke with the owner of the two buses. He told them he would be moving out of the area later that afternoon. On today’s date (72 hours after placing the tow warnings), they returned and found that all five of the vehicles were no longer present. I personally drove out there myself this morning and can confirm they were gone. Moving forward, should these (or other) vehicles return and be suspected of violating the 72-hour parking ordinance, I would encourage you and your neighbors to use one of our two existing means for receiving these complaints and addressing them: you can report suspected violations to our Abandoned Vehicle Hotline at 650-329-2258 (this is not answered by staff; rather, you leave a message with all the information), or you can fill out the online form here on our website. Our Community Service Officers receive these complaints every business day, and set out to place tow warnings on any vehicles reported as being in violation to start the 72-hour clock in motion. Pre-COVID, our personnel would respond to 1,000 to 1,500 such complaints annually throughout Palo Alto. If you’re interested in more detail on the various services that the City is offering to people living in their vehicles (like the Safe Parking Program), as well as details about our enforcement of the 72-hour parking ordinance along El Camino Real (where many vehicles congregate), the City published an article about it here. With regards to any life-safety issue that you or your neighbors may observe associated with any of the vehicles parked in your neighborhood, you are welcome to call the Police Department any time. The number to our 24-hour dispatch center is 650-329-2413, or, of course, 9-1-1 works too if it is an emergency. Should you have any follow-up questions or concerns, please feel free to reach out to me directly (I’m in the office Mondays through Thursdays). Thank you, and enjoy the end of your week, Zach Zach Perron Captain, Investigative Services Division Palo Alto Police Department (650) 329‐2115 | zachary.perron@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org | www.papd.org From: David Squarer <squarer@att.net> Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2021 2:10 PM To: DuBois, Tom <Tom.DuBois@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Cormack, Alison <Alison.Cormack@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Filseth, Eric (Internal) <Eric.Filseth@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Kou, Lydia <Lydia.Kou@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Tanaka, Greg <Greg.Tanaka@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; City Mgr <CityMgr@cityofpaloalto.org>; Police <pd@cityofpaloalto.org> Subject: Long Overdue parked vehicles on Colorado Ave at Greer Park CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. 5 March 21, 2021 Mr. Tom DuBois Mayor City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Honorable Mayor DuBois and City of Palo Alto Council members: I am writing to request your help in alleviating a serious health and safety issue that has persisted for a prolonged period of time (many months) at Colorado Avenue, Palo Alto, next to Greer Park, between Colorado Place and Simkins Ct and West Bayshore Rd. This section of Colorado Ave has been used as a camp site, without appropriate sanitary conditions and with the potential to infect with COVID-19, and harm nearby residents at Colorado Place and Simkins Ct. In spite of repeated requests to the City of Palo Alto by residents of Colorado Place to remove these camping vehicles, no action has been taken. This is particularly disturbing and unsafe during a pandemic. The absence of a toilette and running water amplifies the hazard posed by these campers. This unsafe condition does not exist in down town Palo Alto. If the City of Palo Alto wishes to support these campers, it could designate an area within Palo Alto that could accommodate such campers and provide for appropriate sanitary conditions including toilette, showers, and food. Attached are several photos taken during the past couple of weeks that show the parked vehicles as well as a letter I sent on February 23, 2021 to the Palo Alto Police Department. The attached letter lists the license plates of nine vehicle parked on Colorado Ave. I have additional photos showing the license plates of the parked vehicles. I implore you and would greatly appreciate if you could take a concrete action to remove these campers from Colorado Ave as soon as possible. In addition to ticketing and towing away these vehicles, the City of Palo Alto could for example post a sign stating “vehicles prohibited from parking longer than 3 consecutive nights”, or “overnight sleeping in parked vehicles is prohibited”, etc. Thank you, David Squarer 1078 Colorado Place Palo Alto, CA 94303 squarer@att.net Tel. 239-431-7773 6 Baumb, Nelly From:Rolando Anthony Cardenas <RolandoACardenas@msn.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 2:46 PM To:Council, City Subject:Support our City Mayors CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Executive Order 911 We need to support all our city mayors in every city in the USA and in other countries. We need to set up a process to allow them to help their constituents without waiting for funding from other sources. In this time of pandemics many mayors were helpless to do anything except wait for our government to offer them support. This has to stop. We need to empower all our city mayors when they are in office and when they are out of office so they can continue supporting all the people that helped them get elected. We believe by starting a trust fund of $10,000,000.00 for each City Mayor in every city that we can begin this process of giving more power to our local leaders do more good in the communities that elected them to serve. Join our effort to empower our local leaders succeed in their endeavors. Click on Link Below National Trust Fund For City Mayors 7 Or go To www.GoFundMe.com and search for “National Trust Fund For City Mayors” 8 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 1:10 PM To:Rebecca Eisenberg; Jonsen, Robert; chuckjagoda1@gmail.com; Human Relations Commission; Joe Simitian; Planning Commission; Roberta Ahlquist; Greer Stone; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com; ParkRec Commission; Scheff, Lisa; Kou, Lydia; DuBois, Tom; Binder, Andrew; Tanner, Rachael; Raj; chuck jagoda; Charisse Domingo; Kaloma Smith; Jeff Moore; Jeff Rosen; Sunita de Tourreil; griffinam@sbcglobal.net; mark weiss; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; wintergery@earthlink.net; city.council@menlopark.org; Perron, Zachary; Cecilia Taylor; Council, City; Greg Tanaka; David Angel; David Moss; Stump, Molly; Molly.ONeal@pdo.sccgov.org Subject:With Rebecca Eisenberg’s permission I am sending out her piece (see below) ....Fire Agent Enberg - directed to DA Jeff Rosen -published in today’s Daily Post March 25, 2021 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ 9 Sent from my iPhone 10 Baumb, Nelly From:Louie Lujan <llujan@governmentbrands.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 11:07 AM To:Council, City Subject:Municipal Demos | City Councils CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Councilmember Stone, NCourt provides payment processing solutions for cities like yours. We also provide solutions for: Public engagement; Revenue collection; Online dispute resolution; SaaS reporting & data analytics; Digital document management; Citizen request management (CRM); Public works & code enforcement software; Economic development data & statistics Public voice, txt, and email outreach; GIS. We would like to offer a virtual demo for your department heads. Please forward to your staff. We are scheduling virtual demos and would love to include you and your city. Thank you! Regards, Louie Lujan | Regional Sales Manager C: 626.824.8658 | llujan@governmentbrands.com LinkedIn | www.ncourt.com 11 Baumb, Nelly From:Arlene Goetze <photowrite67@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, March 30, 2021 3:00 PM To:Sara Cody Subject:Get Healthy after a Vaccine CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. 1. What to do if you got injuries from a V-Vaccine Please PRINT AND SAVE......AND SHARE WITH OTHERS. 2. Recent stats on vaccine injuries 3. Get Tested before Vaccinating 1. What to Do if You Got the Vaccine and Are Having Problems-- one part of ''Why Covid 19 Testing is a Farce'' from Dr. Mercola Newsletter, March 2 If you got the vaccine t, you may be able to address your symptoms using the same strategies you'd use to treat actual SARS-CoV-2 infection. Below, I'll summarize some of the strategies you can use both to prevent COVID-19 and address any side effects you may encounter from the vaccine. • Eat a "clean," ideally organic diet. Avoid processed foods of all kinds, especially vegetable oils, (corn, soy, canola, margarine)as they are loaded with damaging omega-6 linoleic acid that wrecks your mitochondrial function. Linoleic acid has been shown to increase mortality from COVID-19. • Consider nutritional ketosis and time-restricted eating, both of which will help you optimize your metabolic machinery and mitochondrial function. • Implement a detoxification program to get rid of heavy metals and glyphosate. This is important as these toxins contribute to inflammation. To improve detoxification, I recommend activating your natural glutathione production with molecular hydrogen tablets. A simple way to block glyphosate uptake is to take glycine. • Maintain a neutral pH to improve the resiliency of your immune system. You want your pH to be right around 7, which you can measure with an inexpensive urine strip. The lower your pH, the more acidic you are. A simple way to raise your pH if it's too acidic (and most people are) is to take one-fourth teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) or potassium bicarbonate in water a few times a day. Nutritional supplementation can also be helpful. Among the most important are: Vitamin D — Vitamin D supplements are readily available and one of the least expensive supplements on the market. All things considered, that anyone can do to minimize their risk of COVID-19 and other infections, and can strengthen your immune system in a matter of a few weeks. N-acetylcysteine (NAC) — NAC is a precursor to reduced glutathione, which appears to play a crucial role in COVID-19. According to one literature analysis,31 glutathione deficiency may actually be associated with COVID-19 severity, leading the author 12 to conclude that NAC may be useful both for its prevention and treatment. Zinc — Zinc plays a very important role in your immune system's ability to ward off viral infections. Like vitamin D, zinc helps regulate your immune function — and a combination of zinc with a zinc ionophore, like hydroxychloroquine or quercetin, was in 2010 shown to inhibit SARS coronavirus in vitro. In cell culture, it also blocked viral replication within minutes.33Importantly, zinc deficiency has been shown to impair immune function. Melatonin — Boosts immune function in a variety of ways and helps quell inflammation. Melatonin may also prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection by recharging glutathione35 and enhancing vitamin D synthesis, among other things. Vitamin C — A number of studies have shown vitamin C can be very helpful in the treatment of viral illnesses, sepsis and ARDS,36 all of which are applicable to COVID-19. I ts basic properties include anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, antioxidant, antithrombotic and antiviral activities. At high doses, it actually acts as an antiviral drug, actively inactivating viruses. Vitamin C also works synergistically with quercetin.37 (TAke 1000 mg vit C at least 3/4 times a day Quercetin — A powerful immune booster and broad-spectrum antiviral, quercetin was initially found to provide broad-spectrum protection against SARS coronavirus in the aftermath of the 2003 SARS epidemic, and evidence suggests it may be useful for the prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 as well. B vitamins — B vitamins can also influence several COVID-19-specific disease processes, including viral replication and invasion, cytokine storm induction, adaptive immunity and hypercoagulability. Type 1 interferon — Type 1 interferon prevents viral replication and helps degrade the RNA. It's available in spray form that you can spray directly into your throat, your nose. Mikovits recommends taking a couple of sprays per day prophylactically, and more if you have a cough, fever or headache. Report All COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects Last but not least, if you or someone you love have received a COVID-19 gene therapy "vaccine" and are experiencing side effects, help raise public awareness of these problems by reporting it. The Children's Health Defense is calling on all who have suffered a side effect from a COVID-19 vaccine to do three things:42 1. If you live in the U.S., file a report on VAERS 2. Report the injury on VaxxTracker.com, which is a nongovernmental adverse event tracker (you can file anonymously if you like) 3. Report the injury on the CHD website COVID-19 Vaccine Reactions • Children's Health Defense For the whole article, go to Mercola Newsletter March 2 or enter title on website Condensed and forwarded by Arlene Goetze ---------------------- 2. Vaccine Injuries From VAERS (CDC) of March 19 44,606 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines, including 2,050 deaths and 7,095 serious injuries between Dec. 14, --March 19, 2021. (3 mo. time) in the U.S., 118.3 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of 3/19. 13 Last week’s VAERS data included 55% of anaphylaxis reports were attributed to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, 45% to Moderna and 1% to the J&Jvaccine, which started March 2. The J&J vaccine contains polysorbate 80, known to trigger allergic reactions. The Moderna and Pfizer vaccines contain polyethylene glycol (PEG), also known to trigger anaphylactic reactions. March 19-- 321 pregnant women had 97 reports of miscarriage/ premature birth. None of the COVID vaccines approved for Emergency Use have been confirmed safe or effective for pregnant women. * 535 cases of Bell’s Palsy. Of those, 64% of cases were reported after Pfizer- BioNTech vaccinations — Three cases of Bell’s Palsy were with J&J’s vaccine (about 1%). Physicians sound alarm about need for pre-screening 3. Get Tested before vaccinating Dr. Hooman Noorchashm, cardiothoracic surgeonsays where a .05% may die with virus, says we are vaccinating people who are already infected. He told public health officials are making a “dramatic error” by promoting a “one-size-fits-all” COVID vaccination program: He is promoting a screening campaign that consists of “PCR or Rapid Antigen test to determine if there is an active infection and an IgG antibody test that would determine a past infection. If either of these tests are positive, vaccination ought to be delayed for a minimum of 3 – 6 months,” . “But even then, blood IgG levels should guide whether or not a person gets vaccinated.” ---------------------------------------------- Articles below from March 28 Mercola Newsletter Why Mass COVID-19 Vaccination Must End Now This vaccinology expert, who has worked with the Gates Foundation, is raising the alarm over the mass vaccination rollout. He argues that current actions could pressure SARS- CoV-2 to become a killer virus that would return in much larger waves and threaten previously resistant people. READ MORE 14 Is the Johnson & Johnson Vaccine Morally Compromised? The Archdiocese of New Orleans is warning Catholics to avoid the Johnson & Johnson vaccine because of its use of abortion- derived cell lines. Is it any more 'morally compromised' than the other mRNA COVID-19 vaccines? READ MORE Leaked Data Warns About mRNA Vaccine Problems Either leaked or hacked, documents show issues arose in November, 2020 about mRNA vaccine quality assurance, specifically critical RNA instability. More recently, warnings are being issued about the lipid nanoparticle component of the mRNA vaccines, responsible for many of their side effects. READ MORE Why the Worst COVID Vaccine Effects Are Ahead of Us Looking at early statistics, I have no doubt that the number of deaths caused by the COVID-19 vaccines will exceed the number of actual deaths from COVID-19. What disturbs me most is while COVID-19 kills already unhealthy individuals, the vaccines are killing the healthy. READ MORE 15 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 11:17 PM To:Cormack, Alison; Greer Stone; Greg Tanaka; Filseth, Eric (Internal); DuBois, Tom; Council, City; Kou, Lydia; Shikada, Ed; Rebecca Eisenberg Subject:This isn’t about what Lait wants but what council is going to policy why CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Sent from my iPhone 16 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 10:43 PM To:Minor, Beth; Council, City; Rebecca Eisenberg; Greer Stone; Kou, Lydia; DuBois, Tom; Cormack, Alison; Stump, Molly; Greg Tanaka; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Shikada, Ed; Stump, Molly; Kou, Lydia Subject:Why is Cormack against more student from EPA -why not protect all trees —she is so biased needs to be removed from the jury now CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Sent from my iPhone 17 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 10:31 PM To:Council, City Subject:We need public benefits ....why not call it that for the tax payers CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Sent from my iPhone 18 Baumb, Nelly From:Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 3:33 PM To:Shikada, Ed; Lait, Jonathan; Council, City; Minor, Beth; Greg Tanaka; Greer Stone; Alison Cormack; Tom DuBois; DuBois, Tom; Cormack, Alison; Kou, Lydia; Lydia Kou; Tanaka, Greg; Stone, Greer; Filseth, Eric (external); Filseth, Eric (Internal); Pat Burt; Burt, Patrick; Human Relations Commission; Planning Commission Subject:Missing category: Error in Housing Element Working Group Chart CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi all: I am hoping that you can make a correction to the housing element committee applicant chart available here: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80745 When I filled out my application for the housing element workgroup, I selected SPECIAL NEEDS as one of my categories. More than anything, this category perhaps has informed my experience with most public services, as this has been something I, like other special needs parents, cannot avoid. I have a child on the autistic spectrum, and as a parent of an autistic child, I have spent years advocating on behalf of her and other neurologically diverse individuals in education, employment, housing, and other life activities. Most of the world ‐ and certainly most of housing ‐ is not built with the needs of the neurologically diverse community in mind. Failure to take reasonable accommodations to serve autistic people can result in great hardship and distress for the impacted neurologically diverse individuals. This is a point of view that is rarely represented in city planning, even though a surprisingly large percentage of people in our community has a neurological difference. This housing element committee is a rare opportunity to serve the needs of a community that includes my 18 year old child, whom I love and cherish. I would be very grateful if you could correct the chart at https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80745 to reflect that I am a special needs parent of an autistic young adult. I greatly appreciate your consideration of my candidacy to this impactful committee. Thank you, Rebecca Eisenberg Rebecca L. Eisenberg Esq. www.linkedin.com/in/eisenberg www.winwithrebecca.com rebecca@winwithrebecca.com 415-235-8078 19 Baumb, Nelly From:Nadia Naik <nadianaik@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 1:50 PM To:Council, City Cc:Bhatia, Ripon; Kamhi, Philip; Shikada, Ed Subject:More flexible federal rail and transit infrastructure funding expected CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. FYI This may have implications for grade separation funding ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Green Caltrain <donotreply@wordpress.com> Date: Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 8:25 AM Subject: [New post] More flexible federal rail and transit infrastructure funding expected To: <nadianaik@gmail.com> alevin posted: " Rail projects to be funded by the Biden administration’s infrastructure package in the works won’t need to be “shovel‐ready”, but can be funded even if they are in an earlier stage of planning and design, according presenters at recent Dumbarton Corridor" New post on Green Caltrain To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. More flexible federal rail and transit infrastructure funding expected by alevin Rail projects to be funded by the Biden administration’s infrastructure package in the works won’t need to be “shovel-ready”, but can be funded even if they are in an earlier stage of planning and design, according presenters at recent Dumbarton Corridor updates meetings. Under the Obama Administration’s stimulus bill in 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, projects needed to be “shovel-ready” to be funded, with completed environmental review and a high level of engineering design. Also, Congress is reported to be restoring “earmarks”, the practice of allowing members of Congress to negotiate to include projects in their districts. Regions that make an effort to work with influential members of congress have an opportunity to get projects funded. These changes mean that Bay Area projects have a much greater likelihood of getting funding under the Biden administration. This could benefit the Caltrain corridor and network investments such as the 20 Downtown Extension connecting Caltrain to the Salesforce terminal, the Dumbarton corridor, grade separations, and more. The less restrictive eligibility criteria could also pose risks. Projects could be funded that are not well- planned and well-designed, resulting in high costs to build, and a system that is poorly connected at the end of the day. For these reasons, it will be important to follow and weigh in on projects in the works, because there’s a decent chance they may happen. Also, we’ll keep you posted on initiatives to improve regional rail and transit network planning and project delivery, to increase the likelihood of high quality cost-effective projects. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. alevin | March 29, 2021 at 8:24 am | URL: https://wp.me/pZ1Wi‐Yl Comment See all comments Unsubscribe to no longer receive posts from Green Caltrain. Change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: https://www.greencaltrain.com/2021/03/more-flexible-federal-rail-and-transit-infrastructure-funding-expected/ 21 Baumb, Nelly From:Pc User <pc77user@aol.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 1:24 PM To:BBC ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; Council, City; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY Subject:Latinos With Trump on Instagram: “🆘They’re still coming 🆘PEARSALL, Texas — Video sent to KENS 5 NEWS shows dozens of migrants pouring out of a trailer in Frio County. The…” CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ A truck with the lettering of Oak Trucking from Laredo, Texas has been videographed unloading over 100 illegal aliens into the supposedly unsuspecting town of Pearsall, Texas. That company has how many trucks (57) and who paid for them (the Cartels ?). Is this the hidden infrastructure of the human trafficking crime wave that has been going on for decades ? It’s about time somebody posted a video of it !! https://www.instagram.com/p/CM8e2pRFxfD/ Best Regards, & Stay Healthy, Wealthy & Wise. RJS 22 Baumb, Nelly From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sent:Sunday, March 28, 2021 5:29 PM To:Loran Harding; alumnipresident@stanford.edu; antonia.tinoco@hsr.ca.gov; David Balakian; fred beyerlein; bballpod; beachrides; Leodies Buchanan; boardmembers; bearwithme1016@att.net; Council, City; Chris Field; Cathy Lewis; Doug Vagim; dennisbalakian; Dan Richard; Daniel Zack; david pomaville; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; eappel@stanford.edu; Steven Feinstein; fmerlo@wildelectric.net; grinellelake@yahoo.com; Gabriel.Ramirez@fresno.gov; huidentalsanmateo; Joel Stiner; jerry ruopoli; kfsndesk; kwalsh@kmaxtv.com; Mark Kreutzer; leager; lalws4@gmail.com; margaret-sasaki@live.com; midge@thebarretts.com; mthibodeaux@electriclaboratories.com; newsdesk; news@fresnobee.com; nick yovino; russ@topperjewelers.com; Steve Wayte; Mark Standriff; tsheehan; terry; vallesR1969@att.net; sanchezphilip21@gmail.com Subject:Fwd: Photo of winches used to pull USS Oklahoma upright at Pearl Harbor, 3-8-43 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 4:04 PM Subject: Fwd: Photo of winches used to pull USS Oklahoma upright at Pearl Harbor, 3‐8‐43 To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 4:01 PM Subject: Fwd: Photo of winches used to pull USS Oklahoma upright at Pearl Harbor, 3‐8‐43 To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 3:52 PM Subject: Fwd: Photo of winches used to pull USS Oklahoma upright at Pearl Harbor, 3‐8‐43 To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 2:42 PM 23 Subject: Fwd: Photo of winches used to pull USS Oklahoma upright at Pearl Harbor, 3‐8‐43 To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 2:36 PM Subject: Photo of winches used to pull USS Oklahoma upright at Pearl Harbor, 3‐8‐43 To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sunday, March 28, 2021 5:22 PM PDT To all‐ Here you see the huge winches used to pull upright the capsized USS Oklahoma at Pearl Harbor in 1943. Note here two men in the photo which indicates the size of the winches. Recommend enlarging this photo 400% on your computer. This says they also used tackle anchors to pull the ship up, whatever those are. NH 63915 USS Oklahoma (BB‐37) (navy.mil) Here we see the winches, the concrete foundations for the winches and the control room to operate the winches at Pearl Harbor. Second and third row of photos: Fly in the winches, have the foundations for them built quickly, attach cables to the stern of the ship. Should not take too long to do. nhhc photos USS Oklahoma salvage winches ‐ Google Search Also scroll down to row 15 to "Site of the Oklahoma winches" for a photo of them. I believe that winches such as these, mounted on the west bank of the Suez Canal, could pull on the stern of the ship there and pull the ship free. First swing the stern out into the canal. They are trying to do that now by having tug boats push on the port side of the stern. (Juan Browne said as of 11 AM PDT today they have gotten the stern off the bank and back into the water). See, the ship can pivot on the bow some. Have its screws run full in reverse while pulling on the stern using the winches. Mount the winches on the west bank and directly behind the stern once it is out in the canal a little. All assuming that the ship could withstand that force structurally. Mr. Brown shows in a graphic a dredger along the port side of the bow of the stuck ship and it is dredging forward underwater and chewing away at the material the ship piled up when it went aground. He says they don't know what will happen as that produces more stresses on the ship. Don't want it to break in half. Maybe my idea of pulling straight back on the stern is also a good ‐ better? ‐ idea. ? L. William Harding Fresno, Ca. 24 Baumb, Nelly From:Rupesh Shah <shahme383@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, March 28, 2021 2:17 PM To:Chad Leo from Palo Alto City Councilmember Tanaka's Office Cc:Council, City Subject:Re: Complaint Hi Chad Thank you. Yes I am available today between 3:45 and 4:00. Thank you On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 10:50 AM Chad Leo from Palo Alto City Councilmember Tanaka's Office <Councilmember.Tanaka.Office@gregtanaka.org> wrote: Dear Rupesh, My name is Chad, and I am a legislative aide for Councilman Tanaka. Thank you for reaching out. I invite you to come speak with Councilman Tanaka directly about this topic during his office hours, which are held every Sunday between 2 PM and 4 PM. Sorry for the late notice, but do you have time to schedule a brief 15‐minute meeting today (3/28) between 3:45PM and 4:00PM? Office hours are currently held online via Zoom meeting. Please let me know within two days if you are willing to attend, and I can send you a calendar invite containing details such as the Zoom link and date. If you have any further questions, please feel free to let me know! Best, Chad Leo Legislative Aide Office of Councilmember Tanaka Chad | Legislative Aide Palo Alto City Council Member Tanaka's Office On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 5:02 PM, Rupesh Shah <shahme383@gmail.com> wrote: CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council I am filing a complaint about Vive Palo Alto. I live in the townhouses along San Antonio next to the JCC. Vive is across the street. Every Friday evening and Sunday morning to afternoon, they put on a rock concert and host loud parties. Even with my windows closed and doors closed, it sounds like they are playing in my backyard. I have asked the Police 25 Dept to ask them to lower their volume several times over the last few months. They do it for an hour and then continue as usual. Other neighbors have also complained to the police department. Lt Philip was the last one to review this complaint Please advise how to proceed. I will not be forced to listen to rock concerts and loud parties every week from the comfort of my home when I am trying to work and live a peaceful life. Rupesh Shah (650) 862 5283 26 Baumb, Nelly From:Anna Griffin <griffinam@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Sunday, March 28, 2021 1:21 PM To:Rosen, Jeff; Jeff Moore; Richard Konda; Raj Jayadev; Dave Price; Council, City; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; city.council@menlopark.org; GRP-City Council; Roberta Ahlquist; Jonsen, Robert; Binder, Andrew; Shikada, Ed; Eduardo Guilarte; Taylor, Cecilia; Donald Mendoza; Palo Alto Free Press; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Steven D. Lee; Human Relations Commission; Kaloma Smith; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Pat Burt; Josh Becker; chuck jagoda; Charisse Domingo; Stump, Molly; O'Neal, Molly; Bill Johnson; Gennady Sheyner; Greg Tanaka; Greer Stone; cindy.chavez@bos.sccgov.org; Joe Simitian; supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org; Sean James; Perron, Zachary; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Tanner, Rachael; Rebecca Eisenberg; Rodriguez, Miguel; Bains, Paul; mark weiss; michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com; Michele; yolanda; Patrice Ventresca; Aram James; Anna Griffin Subject:Human Rights CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. 3-28-2021 To: DA Jeff Rosen, Law enforcement officials shall at all times respect, and protect human dignity, maintain and uphold the human rights of all persons, by serving the community and by protecting all persons against illegal acts. The illegal act PAPD Nick Enberg, inflicted on Mr. Joel Alejo, was definitely a violation of the 8th Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment "Swift Justice" without a trial. With that being said, it is very repulsion that you are not filing criminal charges again against PAPD agent Nick Enberg, the canine handler who released a vicious dog on a sleeping innocent man just like the Jim Crow law enforcement official who did so when I was growing up as a young black woman in segregated Vicksburg, Mississippi--the terror of these vicious dogs being unleashed on innocent black people in the community never leaves my mind, my soul, my fear-Post Traumatic Syndrome. Canines can't put handcuffs on human beings. Please DA Rosen, file charges against PAPD agent Nick Enberg. No one is above the law. Anna Griffin "An injustice anywhere, is a threat to justice everywhere" Rev., Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. 27 On Monday, March 22, 2021, 10:13:28 PM PDT, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: 3/22/21 To: Elected District Attorney Jeff Rosen, Palo Alto City Council, Mountain View City Council, and all members of our community From: Aram James Please read the two excellent letters to the editor in today’s (Monday March 22, 2021) Daily Post, Opinion section page 9. Each letter poignantly describes the vicious canine attack on Joel Domingo Alejo: Police dog attack 1, by Ethan Young, Stanford Police Dog attack 2, by Kazuo Yoshimoto, Mountain View 28 Both letters make exceedingly powerful arguments that Palo Alto Police officer/agent Nick Enberg, the alleged canine handler in Joel Allejo canine attack, used well beyond excessive force (both letters) and in particular the letter, Police dog attack 1, by Ethan Young, makes an extremely powerful case for our elected District Attorney, Jeff Rosen, to file criminal charges against the alleged canine handler, Palo Alto Police Officer/Agent Nick Enberg. I’m asking members of the public as well as all members of the Palo Alto and Mountain View city councils, to review the tapes in this matter, all nine thus far released. And then, to take action to call or write Mr. Rosen asking him to file felony charges for assault with a deadly weapon or attempted murder in the Joel Domingo Alejo case. Similar police initiated canine attacks, across this country, have resulted in very serious injuries and even death. See in this regard, the yearlong 12 part series titled: Mauled: When police dogs are weapons, by the Marshall Project, in collaboration with other media outlets. The series is eye opening to say the least. Aram James https://www.themarshallproject.org/2020/10/15/mauled-when-police-dogs-are- weapons 29 Baumb, Nelly From:Talk2 Otto <talkaccount@yahoo.com> Sent:Sunday, March 28, 2021 3:32 AM To:Council, City Subject:Useful land that is currently occupied by Alma CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. By moving 3-miles of Alma Street underneath the train viaduct (from San Antonio to Embarcadero), Palo Alto will gain about 1.25 million square feet (29 acres) of new usable, buildable land. Because the train structure is already 50 feet tall (30 foot viaduct and 20 feet of electrification), you could allow 8-10 story buildings adjacent to the train+automobile corridor. Potential for city-owned affordable housing surrounded by large amounts of park space with a 3-mile bike corridor between the buildings and the train. 30 Baumb, Nelly From:Talk2 Otto <talkaccount@yahoo.com> Sent:Sunday, March 28, 2021 2:05 AM To:Council, City Subject:Run Alma under the Train Viaduct CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Run Alma Street underneath the elevated train (viaduct) from San Antonio to Embarcadero with the California stop located ON the viaduct structure so that the train never descends to street level for the entire 3-mile length. Build parks and affordable housing on the land that currently is Alma. 31 Baumb, Nelly From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sent:Saturday, March 27, 2021 8:20 PM To:alumnipresident@stanford.edu; antonia.tinoco@hsr.ca.gov; David Balakian; fred beyerlein; bballpod; beachrides; Leodies Buchanan; boardmembers; bearwithme1016@att.net; Council, City; Cathy Lewis; dennisbalakian; Daniel Zack; Dan Richard; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; eappel@stanford.edu; grinellelake@yahoo.com; huidentalsanmateo; Joel Stiner; jerry ruopoli; kfsndesk; kwalsh@kmaxtv.com; Mark Kreutzer; leager; lalws4@gmail.com; margaret-sasaki@live.com; midge@thebarretts.com; newsdesk; news@fresnobee.com; russ@topperjewelers.com; Steve Wayte; tsheehan; vallesR1969@att.net Subject:Fwd: Simulation of how ship plowed into east bank of Suez canal. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 4:49 PM Subject: Fwd: Simulation of how ship plowed into east bank of Suez canal. To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>, Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 4:45 PM Subject: Simulation of how ship plowed into east bank of Suez canal. To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Saturday, March 27, 2021 To all‐ No idea how accurate this simulation is. Can't believe the ship was moving that fast: Simulation of EVER GIVEN Accident in Suez Canal 2021 in 3D by FleetMon ‐ YouTube And the expert in Capetown said when she plowed into the east bank, she may have piled up 20 or 30 thousand tons of sand with her bow. She is impaled in that now, so just pulling on her bow from the west side of the canal won't free her. They have to dredge all of that out first to liberate the bow. Then cables pulled by powerful winches on the west side of the canal might move her‐ provided that she could stand that structurally‐ my suggestion. You don't want to pull her apart! See what they did to right the USS Oklahoma at Pearl Harbor. One comment I saw said she is already leaking and taking on water in forward compartments. 32 One good suggestion somebody put in: build coffer dams north and south of her across the canal. How deep can it be? Then pump water into the resulting "pool" with her in it, and she can float. No lack of water to pump in. They dug and blasted huge tunnels into the rock on either side of the site of Hoover Dam, diverted the fast flowing Colorado R. into those tunnels with coffer dams, and built the dam with the river flowing around the site in the tunnels. Tunnels still there, of course. They operated trucks in the tunnels while building them and men got sick from the CO. So with the coffer dam idea, you'd be doing what happens to ships in the locks of the Panama Canal. One issue with the coffer dam idea is that the banks of the canal are not a lot higher than the level of the water in the canal. So, you would have to extend the coffer dams not just across the canal, but also down along the banks of the canal on either side of the ship, i.e. parallel to the canal. With sufficiently high coffer dams across the canal north and south of the ship, and on either bank of the canal, you could pump enough water in there to re‐float the ship. L. William Harding Fresno, Ca. 33 Baumb, Nelly From:CalMod@caltrain.com Sent:Saturday, March 27, 2021 6:23 PM To:Martin J Sommer; CalMod@caltrain.com Cc:Board (@caltrain.com); Council, City; Pat Burt Subject:RE: University Ave Beige Pole Color CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Martin, Yes, I will work to get this information from the project team. Best, Brent From: Martin J Sommer [mailto:martin@sommer.net] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 2:15 PM To: CalMod@caltrain.com Cc: Board (@caltrain.com) <BoardCaltrain@samtrans.com>; city.council@cityofpaloalto.org; Pat Burt <pat@patburt.org> Subject: Re: University Ave Beige Pole Color ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders. Hi Brent, I am still working on this issue. When we talked via phone, you offered to look into why the tall single poles were used at the University Ave station, vs two shorter poles on the side, with or without a crossbar. The Cal Ave station, uses two shorter poles, placed right on the platform. Can you please answer that for me? Thanks, Martin On 1/13/21 9:58 AM, Martin J Sommer wrote: Hi Brent, Thanks for talking this morning. Yes, please try to put a number on repainting the top half of one or more poles at the University Ave station. Once we have this number, I will reach out to the City Of Palo Alto, for potential funding sources. 34 Best regards, Martin On 12/22/20 7:49 PM, Martin J Sommer wrote: +cc: Pat Bert Brent, please take a look at the attached photo. I don't think this is what the City, nor the design engineers, had in mind. Please tell me, how I can help correct this situation. Thank you, Martin On 11/25/20 10:05 AM, martin@sommer.net wrote: Hi Brent, Perhaps your new funding source obtained on Nov 3rd can help this situation. Can you please look into this, and let me know? The visual impacts you are creating, are not good. Thank you, Martin -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net http://www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." On 2020-11-25 09:50, CalMod@caltrain.com wrote: Hi Martin, Unfortunately, the project budget does not accommodate camouflaging of the poles. Caltrain worked with Cities and regulatory agencies to mitigate the impacts of the infrastructure through the Project's Environmental Impact Report in 2014. Thanks, Brent Tietjen, Government and Community Relations Officer SamTrans | Caltrain | TA 35 1250 San Carlos Ave. San Carlos, CA 94070-1306 tietjenb@samtrans.com From: martin@sommer.net [mailto:martin@sommer.net] Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 1:55 PM To: CalMod@caltrain.com Cc: Board (@caltrain.com) <BoardCaltrain@samtrans.com>; city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Subject: Re: University Ave Beige Pole Color Thanks Brent, What about the idea of camouflaging the upper part of the poles, similar to what is done with cell towers? For some reason, these poles have been created with an extremely hard industrial look. This is nothing like, the esthetics put into other electrified rails systems throughout the world. Martin -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net http://www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." On 2020-11-13 10:09, CalMod@caltrain.com wrote: Hi Martin, Thank you again for contacting Caltrain on this question. As Jim previously mentioned, the selection of the pole color was done in coordination with the City of Palo Alto and the Historic Resources Board and Architectural Review Board in 2019. These color selections are final and poles cannot be replaced or painted a different color after installation. Thanks, Brent Tietjen, Government and Community Relations Officer SamTrans | Caltrain | TA 1250 San Carlos Ave. San Carlos, CA 94070-1306 tietjenb@samtrans.com 36 From: martin@sommer.net [mailto:martin@sommer.net] Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 10:20 AM To: CalMod@caltrain.com; Board (@caltrain.com) <BoardCaltrain@samtrans.com> Cc: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Subject: Re: University Ave Beige Pole Color Dear Caltrain Board, The more beige poles that go up at University Ave station, the more unsightly it becomes. At ground level, you might think the beige color matches the station, but from the view of local buildings, you are completely destroying the view of our Santa Cruz Mountains, and local green vegetation on Stanford campus. Can you please look into a way to fix this? Perhaps, painting any height above 10 feet, to be the standard forest green? Telecom poles can be camouflaged, the same applies here. Please look in to it, and let me know some options. Thank you, Martin -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net http://www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." On 2020-09-30 12:05, calmod@caltrain.com wrote: Dear Martin, Thank you for contacting Caltrain Electrification. The selection of the beige color was done in coordination with the City of Palo Alto and is a common color for poles located near stations. Most poles are a neutral chrome color along the project area but in some cases, such as near stations, Caltrain staff worked with local cities to identify pole colors that aligned with certain station areas. Once the poles have been procured and placed, we are not able to change the colors of those poles. Thank you again for reaching out to us. Best, 37 The Caltrain Team On 2020-09-25T10:17:50-07:00, Martin J Sommer <martin@sommer.net> wrote: Good morning, Please see the attached picture, of a beige pole placed last night. This creates a real eye sore!! Questions: 1) Why are you using a beige color vs the std forest green (that blends with the trees), and 2) can these beige poles please be painted forest green, before electrification occurs? I know that this is a "big ask". Thank you, Martin -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net <mailto:martin@sommer.net>www.linkedin.com/in/martins ommer <http://www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer> "Turn technical vision into reality." -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." -- 38 Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." 39 Baumb, Nelly From:Chad Leo from Palo Alto City Councilmember Tanaka's Office <Councilmember.Tanaka.Office@gregtanaka.org> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 11:46 AM To:asdellaporta@gmail.com; Council, City Subject:Re: Parks in Palo Alto Dear Angela, My name is Chad, and I am a legislative aide for Councilman Tanaka. Thank you for reaching out. I invite you to come speak with Councilman Tanaka directly about this topic during his office hours, which are held every Sunday between 2 PM and 4 PM. We are meeting with a gentleman who would like to discuss recreation. Do you have time to schedule a brief 15‐minute meeting this Sunday, March 28th between 3:30 and 3:45 PM PST? Office hours are currently held online via Zoom meeting. Please let me know within two days if you are willing to attend, and I can send you a calendar invite containing details such as the Zoom link and date. If you have any further questions, please feel free to let me know! Best, Chad Leo Legislative Aide Office of Councilmember Tanaka Chad | Legislative Aide Palo Alto City Council Member Tanaka's Office On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 10:24 PM, Angela Dellaporta <asdellaporta@gmail.com> wrote: CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, Palo Alto is well known for its high quality of living, and for its beautiful parks. Even in parts of the city where residents’ homes sit in large, park-like gardens, Palo Alto’s public parks welcome everyone to gather, relax, listen to music, and play together. While an urgent need for housing is driving the city to waive its development standards in order to approve the construction of dense, multi-family buildings in the North Ventura area, little attention is being paid to the park acreage necessary for these new residents. I think you will agree that residents of Palo Alto should enjoy at least as much recreation space as a resident of San Francisco has. 40 Residents of San Francisco live in a city which provides 4.22 acres of public park/1000residents. Every resident of SF lives within a 10 minute walk of a public park. Can the same be said about Palo Alto at this time? While Palo Alto’s Comp Plan recommends 4 acres/1000 residents (that’s just a bit less than what SF provides), at this time Palo Alto only provides 2.67 acres/ 1000 acres. If thousands of new residents come to live in the south end of Palo Alto, including the Ventura neighborhood, the need for acres of new public park land will become even more acute than it is now. I support the addition of new housing in Palo Alto, but it must be accompanied by a commensurate commitment to public park acreage in the city — and there are indeed ways to pay for that park land. I do not believe that Palo Alto residents would support the practice of crowding its less wealthy citizens into small areas that provide substandard public park space for people who have little or no private garden space. Thank you, Angela Dellaporta 41 Baumb, Nelly From:Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 11:32 AM To:Council, City Subject:Fwd: Your friend has shared a San Francisco Chronicle link with you: CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Dubois, Vice Mayor Burt & City Council Members, Please take the time to read this article published in today’s San Francisco Chronicle. Stanford demolished three buildings in research park to create much needed housing for junior faculty across from the College Terrace neighborhood. I ask that you work with Stanford to examine the research park for appropriate sites for housing. I know that this has been on your radar but needs serious action. Respectfully yours, Ann Lafargue Balin Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Your friend has shared a San Francisco Chronicle link with you: Date: March 26, 2021 at 11:18:33 AM PDT To: Ann Lafargue Balin <alafargue@mac.com> S.F. has nearly 16 million square feet of vacant office space. Why can't it become housing? https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/S‐F‐has‐nearly‐16‐million‐square‐feet‐of‐vacant‐ 16051240.php?utm_campaign=CMS%20Sharing%20Tools%20(Premium)&utm_source=share‐by‐ email&utm_medium=email In some cases, converting old buildings can be more expensive than building a new project... This message was sent via San Francisco Chronicle 42 Baumb, Nelly From:Silicon Valley Community Foundation <info@siliconvalleycf.org> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 10:05 AM To:Council, City Subject:The Obama Foundation and SVCF event featuring Obama Foundation President, Valerie Jarrett, April 20 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. 650.450.5400 @ info@siliconvalleycf.org To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Blog | COVID-19 | Racial Justice You are invited to join us for a discussion between SVCF President and CEO Nicole Taylor and The Obama Foundation President Valerie Jarrett on Tuesday, April 20, from 1 to 2 p.m. Pacific time. Also joining the conversation: Webinar INVESTING IN A NEW GENERATION OF POWER-BUILDING LEADERS April 20, 2021 1 to 2 p.m. Pacific time Register Now 43 Shari Davis, The Obama Foundation Fellow and Executive Director of the Participatory Budgeting Project Poncho Guevara, Executive Director of Sacred Heart Community Service, which serves Santa Clara County Together we will explore how leaders are building on progress made in 2020, and how philanthropy can contribute to the power-building work happening now across the nation. Register Now › Featured Speakers To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Valerie Jarrett PRESIDENT OF THE OBAMA FOUNDATION To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Nicole Taylor PRESIDENT AND CEO OF SILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Shari Davis THE OBAMA FOUNDATION FELLOW AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING PROJECT To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Poncho Guevara EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF SACRED HEART COMMUNITY SERVICE As the past year has proved, inequality can have tragic consequences: more than 500,000 Americans killed by COVID-19, dismal economic aid for those facing the most challenges, and rising police brutality. Too often, people without a voice in civic life – low-income individuals from communities of color or undocumented immigrants – disproportionately shoulder these consequences, reminding us of the racial inequities and injustices throughout our country’s systems. 2020 also gave us glimpses of hope and change. The events of last year galvanized new leaders – predominantly young people of color operating with limited resources – to organize and challenge the systems that do not work for their communities. Silicon Valley Community Foundation and The Obama Foundation are committed to investing in this new generation of leaders who are building power to reimagine their communities. 44 Register Now › To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. How can we build power among Silicon Valley residents who don’t have it? The idea of power and how to build it for those who historically have not had it is becoming central to all of Silicon Valley Community Foundation’s grantmaking initiatives. READ MORE To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Address 2440 West El Camino Real Suite 300 Mountain View, CA 94040 About Silicon Valley Community Foundation is a community catalyst for change. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Copyright © 2021 Silicon Valley Community Foundation View in browser | Unsubscribe 45 Baumb, Nelly From:Laurel Tremaine <pearlp2003@yahoo.com> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 12:30 AM To:City Mgr; City Attorney; Council, City Subject:REMOVE "ABOLISH ICE" SIGN ON GOVERNMENT PROPERTY CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Please remove the "Abolish ICE" sign on Embarcadero Road (behind the Art Center). Should political statements be posted on government property? Is that legal? 46 Baumb, Nelly From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 10:39 PM To:Loran Harding; alumnipresident@stanford.edu; antonia.tinoco@hsr.ca.gov; David Balakian; bballpod; fred beyerlein; beachrides; boardmembers; Leodies Buchanan; bearwithme1016@att.net; Council, City; Chris Field; Cathy Lewis; Steven Feinstein; fmerlo@wildelectric.net; francis.collins@nih.gov; grinellelake@yahoo.com; George.Rutherford@ucsf.edu; Gabriel.Ramirez@fresno.gov; huidentalsanmateo; hennessy; Irv Weissman; Joel Stiner; jerry ruopoli; kfsndesk; kwalsh@kmaxtv.com; Mark Kreutzer; leager; lalws4@gmail.com; margaret-sasaki@live.com; Mark Standriff; Mayor; midge@thebarretts.com; mthibodeaux@electriclaboratories.com; newsdesk; news@fresnobee.com; nick yovino; david pomaville; Dan Richard; russ@topperjewelers.com; Steve Wayte; tsheehan; terry; Doug Vagim; vallesR1969@att.net; Daniel Zack; dennisbalakian; eappel@stanford.edu Subject:Fwd: John Campbell. Global increases due to new variants. UK wining, EU not. US ? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 10:01 PM Subject: Fwd: John Campbell. Global increases due to new variants. UK wining, EU not. US ? To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 9:33 PM Subject: Fwd: John Campbell. Global increases due to new variants. UK wining, EU not. US ? To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 4:35 PM Subject: Fwd: John Campbell. Global increases due to new variants. UK wining, EU not. US ? To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 4:27 PM 47 Subject: John Campbell. Global increases due to new variants. UK wining, EU not. US ? To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Thursday, March 25, 2021 To all‐ Dr. John Campbell in UK. Excellent as usual. The new variants are causing an increase in new cases and deaths globally. In the EU, the variants are outrunning the vaccines. In the UK, the vaccines are ahead. In the U.S.‐ Not clear. Update ‐ YouTube Again, he does not say one word about the FDA senselessly and murderously keeping 30 MILLION doses of the Oxford‐Astrazeneca vaccine off the U.S. market. The EU and the UK are fighting each other, almost, to get and inject as many doses of that same vaccine as they can!! I am convinced that someone in authority at No. 10 contacted Dr. Campbell and told him not to discuss that outrage by U.S. authorities. It may even have been someone in very great authority at No. 10. Do not expose and hold up for opprobrium the U.S. government, even when they richly deserve it. Besides, it is Americans they are killing, not Brits, except for a few expats. Here is a piece from today re the virtual meeting today of the European countries, including the UK, discussing vaccine supplies, who got what, possible export ban by the EU to the UK, and so on. They are really embroiled and they all want as much Oxford‐Azn vaccine as they can get and now. And they see Biden refusing to release 30 million doses to the American people. What must they think? They think we have a screw‐ball for President. EU leaders hold talks to discuss Covid vaccine supplies – BBC News ‐ YouTube Tonight, Thurs. night, Gov. Newsom is heard on KCBS‐SF AM 740 saying that by April 1, any Californian over 50 can get a shot. Then we hear from the man running the vaccination program in Santa Clara County, in the SF Bay Area‐ ‐ county where I grew up. He said "We currently give shots to anyone over 65. We looked and we have 400,000 people between 50 and 65, and we have 58,000 doses of vaccine. So how on April 1 do we give an additional 400,000 people shots?" We don't have enough vaccine. They added that some pharmacies are getting vaccine directly from the feds, so that helps. If the sleazy Biden administration released those 30 million doses they are holding up, that would be a God‐ send to many places in the U.S. Congress has a duty to impeach Biden for murder. Millions of doses are the Oxford‐AZN vaccine have now been used in the UK and in the EU. The UK started injecting it on Jan. 4, 2021. Hundreds of thousands of shots per day of the Oxford vaccine in the UK alone. No issues. AZN completed this week its unnecessary but required trials involving 30,000 people in the U.S., Chile and Peru, and announced that the results are wonderful. In APRIL (!!) the company will submit its data to the FDA's advisory panel. They will pour over the data for weeks!!!!!! and then maybe conclude that the Oxford vaccine is safe and grant an EUA for it in the U.S. Just unbelieveable. What next, another Viet Nam? L. William Harding Fresno, Ca. 48 Baumb, Nelly From:Hargis, Nicholas <Nicholas.Hargis@mail.house.gov> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 5:34 PM To:Council, City; DuBois, Tom; Cormack, Alison; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg Cc:Ramzanali, Asad Subject:Deadline extended until April 12th at 5 PM Pacific for Community Project Funding applications CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Council, Happy Thursday, I hope everyone is doing well. The deadline for Community Project Funding (CPF) applications has been extended until April 12th at 5 PM Pacific. To submit a project to Congresswoman Eshoo, use this link to fill out her online form: https://forms.gle/gH4zdB5nuTpz7CQ29. If you or the City have any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out to Asad Ramzanali, cc’d here. Best regards, Nicholas From: Hargis, Nicholas Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 6:49 PM To: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org; tom.dubois@cityofpaloalto.org; Alison.Cormack@cityofpaloalto.org; eric.filseth@cityofpaloalto.org; Lydia.Kou@cityofpaloalto.org; greg.tanaka@cityofpaloalto.org Cc: Ramzanali, Asad <Asad.Ramzanali@mail.house.gov> Subject: Letter from Congresswoman Eshoo Good afternoon Mayor DuBois and Council, Happy Monday, I hope you’re well. Attached please find a letter from Congresswoman Eshoo and an informational packet about Community Project Funding (CPF). To submit a project to the Congresswoman, use this link to fill out her online form: https://forms.gle/gH4zdB5nuTpz7CQ29. If you or the City have any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out to Asad Ramzanali, cc’d here. Best regards, Nicholas Nicholas C. Hargis Field Representative Congresswoman Anna Eshoo 698 Emerson Street Palo Alto, California 94301 Click here to sign up for Rep. Eshoo’s Weekly Newsletter 50 Baumb, Nelly From:Barbara Ann Hazlett <bthazlett@aol.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 1:56 PM To:Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed Subject:Churchill Ave - Rail Crossing - XCAP Report CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Palo Alto City Council: Thank you for the work that the XCAP has done and the time that concerned citizens have given to the Connecting Palo Alto matter. I was heartened that Council, in its study session on Tuesday, acknowledged that the Churchill Ave. closure recommendation is very problematic. These are some of my thoughts in reviewing the XCAP's voluminous report. Introductory Paragraph: There should have been an introductory paragraph at the beginning of the report regarding the dramatic change in circumstances that renders the underlying data, studies and recommendations obsolete. To ignore this is inexcusable and destructive. The COVID pandemic has created a paradigm shift with virtual space being swapped for physical space and dense housing being swapped for suburban and rural alternatives. The consequences are the plummeting of the use of mass transit and plummeting demand for dense housing along the rail lines. This report does not reflect the potent realty of these material and permanent changes. Areas for future study: Leave Churchill open at grade. This option was never taken off of the table by Council and it needs to be reinstated. Churchill will function as it always has, as an important East and West conduit. Build an underpass for peds & bicyclists. Nobody loses their home, hundreds of millions of dollars are saved, neighborhoods remain intact, pedestrians and bikes have a safe way to cross. More robust signage and technical advancements in signaling can be installed at the tracks. Advanced algorithms and software are enabling railroads to harness massive amounts of data which is greatly enhancing safety. XCAP Composition Problem: This is a depleted and biased committee. The author of the 'Majority Position on Churchill' owns a home and lives nearest the rail on Churchill as does another member of XCAP. That's 22% of the committee. Their true intentions are for ChurchillAve. to be closed to traffic, regardless of impact to other neighborhoods, and not to solve an at-grade crossing issue. They made their views very clear at the outset of this process and in no way pivoted to represent a more educated or thoughtful point of view. There was no representation on the committee from the Embarcadero corridor, University South, Southgate or Professorville neighborhoods, the neighborhoods that will be most impacted by this recommendation. This is an astounding conflict of interest. I also note, that the most articulate, informed member of the Committee, its Chair, was a dissenter regarding Churchill Ave. closure. The City Council has been elected to provide reasoned and equitable decisions for our town. This compels you to place rail crossing decisions on hold until more robust, factual studies can be done, given the serious change in circumstances, and when the future/plans of Caltrain are much clearer. Best Regards, Barbara Hazlett 51 Baumb, Nelly From:Kerry Yarkin <kya.ohlone@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 11:24 AM To:Council, City Subject:XCAP Study Session 3/23/21 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. 3/25/2021 Comments and concerns about last night’s XCAP Study Session I came away from listening to last night’s study session unclear about CC acceptance of the XCAP findings and report . All Council Members praised and congratulated the Committee and their hundreds of hours of meetings to come up with the 153 page report, only to spend most of the meeting discussing criticism from some members of the public .These various community members had been heard many, many times before in the XCAP meetings. A study session to me , means doing a deep dive into the decisions and voting to accept or not accept the XCAP report. The 6 to 3 recommendation Churchill closure + mitigations versus the minority opinion did not get a fair hearing by CC. The CC should have met only with XCAP Members to do their study session. So, before even listening to the public, Council Members did not understand the reasoning and traffic analysis which was the basis for deciding Churchill closure + mitigations. As 1 member of the public who attended many of the XCAP Meetings I feel the XCAP Chairperson (while in the minority) was able to monopolize and bring up so many variables to make most of the findings murky and unclear. At one point last night, Larry Klein was questioned about the reasoning for the Majority Position (p. 55). The Churchill closure +mitigations lists 5 key reasons for the recommendation to close Churchill. The 5 reasons are not ranked by importance. Most of the XCAP members who I heard throughout the XCAP process would probably rank #5 Safer experience for bicycle and pedestrians , as their highest concern. These 5 reasons are based on the data, traffic analysis, AECOM consultant knowledge were not even given the time to present last night. It seems that CC spent over$ 200,000I(not sure of exact figure) for expert analysis which now needs to be redone?? In terms of bicycle and pedestrian safety at this intersection, I have observed the bike congestion to/from Paly with incredulousness at the near daily accidents happening or just waiting to happen. This has been going on for years! I did run into Tom DuBois about 2-3 years ago on Churchill right after a car accident with bikes, cars, peds all converging from many directions onto 1 lane, because the other lane was blocked due to an accident on the 100 block of Churchill. This is probably not in 52 any accident data, no injuries, only car damage and 10’s of bicyclists and peds forced into extremely UNSAFE conditions. Where is the accident data? I tried many times to get this info. from the police Dept. with no success! Shouldn’t our police traffic dept. present their data? I am a parent with high school age twins facing some serious emotional problems. I feel very strongly about safety and closing this UNSAFE intersection. Those of you who have had children attend Paly and have been here since 2009 are familiar with the 2 suicide clusters---2009 and 2015. While we encourage all school age children and teens to ride their bikes to school, we have not lived up to our end of the bargain --- making their routes safe without having to compete with motor vehicles. In closing, Ellen Fletcher had the courage to spearhead Bryant Street as a bike street which was light years ahead of other cities at the time. Now is the time to build on her vision and make a priority for bikes/peds to ride or walk to Paly and other schools safely over the convenience of motor vehicles. Best regards, Kerry Yarkin 53 Baumb, Nelly From:David Wu <dwwuorcl@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 24, 2021 10:10 PM To:Council, City Subject:FW: Appointment RE: Water bill problem and relief application 30054146 as attached in PDF CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear Honorable: I am forwarding my email communications with City of Palo Alto Utilities and hoping you can address my billing dispute and the wrong practices of City water utility operation. I am disputing a $2000+ water bill from the utility. As I stated in my initial email, which is at the very bottom of this forwarded email, I really appreciate the city council reinstate the leak relief program. Meanwhile I have to point out the City Utility did not heed on their own service protocol and cost us up to 80% of the billed amount. Instead of notifying us about a leakage ASAP, or just generating a bill as usual, they sent workers to study abnormal high water usage for weeks without notifying us. I got the previous normal billing email notification on Nov/21/2020, 3 days after the meter read day. I did not get the next bill notification until Jan/9/2021, which showed this high water usage of 18ccf. Actually I found and plugged my leak one day earlier (as explained in my initial email). Had they just done as the previous cycle, turned up the bill and notification on Dec/21/2020, I would have to deal with just $300~$400 water bill, instead of the bill on 192CCF consumption for the subsequent service period of Dec/18/2020‐Jan/19/2021. Now I think the utility might have kept us in the dark intentionally, because by doing so 1. Whatever they did or tempered (sorry, this is the word I have to use to catch your eyes) could have been done without being challenged by us right on the spot. In the initial email my questions about the discrepancy between my leakage calculation and billed amount and also on billing anomaly are not groundless, but not really answered in the past weeks by Utility customer support. 2 higher water bill actually plays to the utility's benefits. Even with the gracious leak relief program, an ELIGIBLE customer currently gets half of tier one rate ($6.66) relieved, i.e. $3,33, yet billed on tier two rate ($10.07) for leakage, so charged at $6.74/CCF, still higher than an average household rate of tier one. So after offering good‐will, the utility still profits on every wasted CCF of water. It is another incentive for the utility worker not to follow the public policy and its own protocol to inform customer ASAP and save resources. How about for customer not eligible for relief and billed at $10.07/CCF. I really appreciate your reviewing my concerns and presiding on this matter. Palo Altan since 1992 David Wu Cell phone 6505209796 54 ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: UTL‐Customer Service [mailto:UtilitiesCustomerService@CityofPaloAlto.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 6:02 PM To: David Wu Cc: Guerra, Emily Subject: RE: Appointment RE: Water bill problem and relief application 30054146 as attached in PDF Dear David Wu, We do not remove the water meter to perform a flow test; we look at the test dial to see if it is moving. We replace our water meters periodically for maintenance. The reason for this is that they can run slow after a while and not register all the consumption. We do not notify the customers when we replace our meters. We have given you our water leak credit in accordance with our Rules and Regulations. It is also stated in our Rules and Regulations that It is the customer's responsibility to maintain their water lines and water systems. I don't see what else we are able do for you in this regard. Thank you, Michael Dehlinger Utilities Customer Service 250 Hamilton Avenue, 2nd Floor | Palo Alto, CA 94301 P: 650.329.2161 F: 650.321.2786 E: michael.dehlinger@cityofpaloalto.org Please think of the environment before printing this email ‐ Thank you! To access or create your utilities account online, go to our website https://myutilitiesaccount.cityofpaloalto.org ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: David Wu <dwwuorcl@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 1:57 PM To: 'David Wu' <dwwuorcl@yahoo.com>; UTL‐Customer Service <UtilitiesCustomerService@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Guerra, Emily <Emily.Guerra@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: Appointment RE: Water bill problem and relief application 30054146 as attached in PDF CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ My main concern is the big discrepancy between the reading 192 CCF used (of my main disputed service period Dec/18/2020‐Jan/19/2021) and my calculation on the 84.7 CCF of wasted water. 55 Instead of generating the bill on time or notifying us about water leakage for service period Nov/20/2020 to Dec/17/2020 (for 18 CCF used as compared to my 4.56CCF 3‐year average), you have workers study our water meter and flow for almost a month. What did you do? Did the study itself inadvertently cause the meter to register a number not reflecting the actual usage? By talking to you folk last Friday, March/5, I knew you changed our water meter back in 2017, also without our knowledge (must be during the December/2017‐January/2018 service period evidenced by the meter readings gap on utility bills). My impression is this time you also have to remove the meter for water flow test. So any thought? ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: David Wu [mailto:dwwuorcl@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2021 2:33 PM To: 'UTL‐Customer Service' Subject: Appointment RE: Water bill problem and relief application 30054146 as attached in PDF Is there some way I can meet you in person to go over the adjustment and my concerns (like what kind of test/investigation were done during the billing delay of 2020December‐2021Januaray and why 2017December‐ 2018Januaury the water meter reading also showed anomaly). ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: UTL‐Customer Service [mailto:UtilitiesCustomerService@CityofPaloAlto.org] Sent: Monday, February 22, 2021 12:09 PM To: David Wu Subject: RE: Water bill problem and relief application 30054146 as attached in PDF Dear David Wu, Thank you for your email. We will issue a water leak adjustment for a credit of $713.29. You should see the credit on your next bill. Thank you, Michael Dehlinger Utilities Customer Service 250 Hamilton Avenue, 2nd Floor | Palo Alto, CA 94301 P: 650.329.2161 F: 650.321.2786 E: michael.dehlinger@cityofpaloalto.org Please think of the environment before printing this email ‐ Thank you! To access or create your utilities account online, go to our website https://myutilitiesaccount.cityofpaloalto.org ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: David Wu <dwwuorcl@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 10:27 AM 56 To: UTL‐Customer Service <UtilitiesCustomerService@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: Water bill problem and relief application 30054146 as attached in PDF CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear Palo Alto Utilities, First I humbly request that you reduce the recent astronomical and unrealistic water bill presented to us , as it does not reflect our actual water usage. I suspect that the meter dial was moved forward when you came to investigate our water flow. We've been Palo Alto residents and Palo Alto Utilities customers since 1992 and are grateful for the utility services all the years, but we believe that this time there's an operational anomaly on the meter to be addressed. I have seen the water meter dials been adjusted by city utility before. The latest was also during Holiday season, in December 2017 ‐ January 2018 service period. That time the readings got adjusted without indicating leaking cost to us so I did not bother to contact the utility customer service. This time, there was indeed a leak due to a broken toilet fill valve, but the level on the bill is improbably high. I did an estimation on water consumption due to the leak: Duration 22 Days: The fill valve apparently was broken before Dec/18/2020, the first day of service period (the bill for prior service period already shows elevated 18CCF), but I shut it off on Jan/8, that is at most 22 days). Worst possible leak rate 2 gpm from the following observations. a. 1.9 gpm is what I observed the flow rate that my standard size 42 gallon tub filled up while taking shower. By google search, I figured the shower head/faucet must be at typically quoted 2.0gpm. b. I had never opened the supply line knob all the way up to feed the toilet tank and definitely I did not see the water gushing from the broken valve as much as the pouring from the shower head. The calculation is then as follows: 2gpm * 60minutes * 24hours *22days = 63660 gallons / 748.052 = 84.70 CCF However, on the Dec/18/2020‐Jan/19/2021 bill, it shows 192CCF used, a shocking almost $2000 bill. That is why I suspect the meter was also manually/accidentally adjusted as happened during December 2017 ‐ January 2018 service period. Secondly I urge you to notify your customers of water usage anomalies as early as possible. You saw an anomaly in our water usage and sent someone to investigate, but didn't ever notify us. I knew you did an excellent job monitoring and notifying customers about natural gas leak in real time. You may not equipped to do so for water, but you should be able to do so as early as you read the meter or in the latest the first day your worker came back to study the meter and flow. Alternatively probably I can read the meter myself and send the result to you since I will read my water meter frequently from now anyway? In the following, I have a timeline descriptions to further my story for your reference: As retirees with limited income, we watch out our bills and payments carefully, in fear of incurring unexpected expenses or penalties due to late or underpayments. Actually since early December, I have logged on the Palo Alto utilities web 57 site frequently because I found out our auto payment did not go through while you had a system maintenance over the Dec/12/2020 weekend. * On the due date DEC/14/20, I manually made the payment and watching out for the next bill/payment cycle. * On Jan/8/2020, as I worried about the unreliable auto payment and possibly missing the utility bill I began to log on myCPAU portal almost daily and was able to catch the new bill fresh , the day before I received the notification email. When I read the water used was 18 CCF, I immediately looked around our property and found the culprit quickly on the same day: In our detached storage room's toilet tank, the cap of the fill valve had been blown off. After I shut off the supply to the toilet tank, I continued watching our water meter for days and pretty sure this was the only leaking source in our house. * On Jan/9/2021, I received The "MyCPAU Bill Generation" email for the service period Nov/20/2020 to Dec/17/2020. Following the past pattern the latest day to receive this notification email should have been around Christmas. * On Jan/21/2021, since I noticed that on the water meter the registered number 37xxx greatly differ from the last reading 179A on the bill so I called customer support about the right way to read the meter or the way converting meter reading to billed number. I talked to the first line customer rep and then Ms. Roylene Chand. Roylene told me the billing delay on our account was not due to seasonal business slow down but because you noticed high water consumption and had been doing testing and even as we spoke the test was not completed. She kindly told me about the current water bill relief program and emailed me the form for bill adjustment application 30054146. * On Jan/28/2021, you generated a shocking bill showing almost two thousand dollars for 192CCF used for the service period Dec/18/2020 to Jan/19/2021. We have been Palo Alto residents since 1992 and are grateful that the utility company has a leak relief program back in place . Last time we had a water bill problem was during 2008‐2009 in our prior home at 3663 Bryant Street. That was caused by a insidious pin hole pipe leak due to nail/pipe contact corrosion. At that time we were told Palo Alto did away with water leak relief adjustment which we knew of soon after we moved here. Regardless of relief from you or not, these are learned lessons for me : I should have watched our water meter as closely as I did for the bill generation/payment. Meanwhile I am writing this up hoping you can look into the issues (unexplained reading and consumption discrepancy, water leak monitoring and notification) and adjust the bill fairly. We really really appreciate your helps. Your customer, David Wu 6505209796 (Cell Phone) 58 Baumb, Nelly From:Terùn Pizza <info@terunpizza.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 24, 2021 9:10 PM To:Apple, Kara; Shikada, Ed; Council, City Subject:Super car Day Cal Ave CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi all We were wondering on how complicated would it be to allow about 10 Supercars to be parked on the empty spaces of California Ave for 1 full day, like a Saturday. It could also become something that would showcase different things in the future . Just a thought to make Cal Ave evon more fun :) Hope you are all well! Thank you for all you do Franco and Maico Campilongo 59 Baumb, Nelly From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sent:Wednesday, March 24, 2021 8:40 PM To:Loran Harding; alumnipresident@stanford.edu; antonia.tinoco@hsr.ca.gov; David Balakian; bballpod; fred beyerlein; beachrides; Leodies Buchanan; boardmembers; bearwithme1016@att.net; Council, City; Chris Field; Cathy Lewis; dennisbalakian; Doug Vagim; Daniel Zack; Dan Richard; david pomaville; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; eappel@stanford.edu; Steven Feinstein; francis.collins@nih.gov; fmerlo@wildelectric.net; grinellelake@yahoo.com; George.Rutherford@ucsf.edu; Gabriel.Ramirez@fresno.gov; huidentalsanmateo; hennessy; Irv Weissman; Joel Stiner; jerry ruopoli; Mark Kreutzer; kwalsh@kmaxtv.com; kfsndesk; leager; lalws4 @gmail.com; margaret-sasaki@live.com; Mayor; mthibodeaux@electriclaboratories.com; Mark Standriff; midge@thebarretts.com; newsdesk; news@fresnobee.com; nick yovino; russ@topperjewelers.com; Steve Wayte; tsheehan; terry; vallesR1969@att.net; sanchezphilip21 @gmail.com Subject:Fwd: Merkel et. al. back off of shut down in D.land over Easter. Dr. says trouble ahead CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐o From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 5:22 PM Subject: Fwd: Merkel et. al. back off of shut down in D.land over Easter. Dr. says trouble ahead To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 5:04 PM Subject: Merkel et. al. back off of shut down in D.land over Easter. Dr. says trouble ahead To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Wed. March 24, 2021 To all‐ Indecisive Germans! They back off of an Easter lockdown in the face of a third wave of Covid. A Dr. here says that will produce more cases for sure. Angela Merkel backtracks on Easter lockdown after uproar | DW News ‐ YouTube Note first words out of her mouth: "Eine Fehler...." A mistake must be acknowedged... Eine "Fehler" (pron. fay ler )‐ a mistake, sure does sound a lot like our word "failure" doesn't it? 60 Note the female reporter. Absolutely fluent (fliesend) auf Inglish, as good as most native speakers of Inglish!. And better than a lot, as you all know. Wonder if she didn't go to school in the U.S. or UK for 10 years. Ihr Inglish ist so gut wie unsere. Nicht eine Fehler. But the Germans really learn English, so maybe she learned it there. One tiny flaw at 2:27. I think she said "while in substance..." I think she reports to DW from England, and so that total emersion would certainly help. The doctor is almost as good as a native English speaker, drops an article here and there, but you know exactly what he is saying. Ask the average well‐educated American how good his German is. Wie gut ist sein Deutsch? Lacherlich, ist die Antwort. Yesterday, Tuesday, March 23, 2021, Boris Johnson held a news conference on the one year anniversary of the complete lockdown in the UK. Easy to find it on YouTube. Next to him stood his Chief Medical Officer, Prof. Chris Whitty. He said the following, which we do not hear in the U.S. I guess the British consider their people capable of accepting the truth, even when it is not good news. Here is what Prof. Whitty said: "We will have Covid for the foreseeable future". Can it be eradicated? "No. Only one big disease organism has been eradicated so far: smallpox." "This (Covid) will become a circulating virus". So that sounds like we'll get a Covid shot every autumn. L. William Harding Fresno, Ca. 61 Baumb, Nelly From:Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 24, 2021 4:07 PM To:Rosen, Jeff Cc:Roberta Ahlquist; Aram James; Jeff Moore; Richard Konda; Raj Jayadev; Council, City; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; city.council@menlopark.org; GRP-City Council; Anna Griffin; Jonsen, Robert; Binder, Andrew; Shikada, Ed; Eduardo Guilarte; Taylor, Cecilia; Donald Mendoza; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Steven D. Lee; Human Relations Commission; Kaloma Smith; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Pat Burt; Josh Becker; chuck jagoda; Charisse Domingo; Stump, Molly; O'Neal, Molly; Bill Johnson; Gennady Sheyner; Greg Tanaka; Greer Stone; cindy.chavez@bos.sccgov.org; Joe Simitian; supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org; Sean James; Perron, Zachary; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Tanner, Rachael; Rodriguez, Miguel; Bains, Paul; mark weiss; michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com; Michele; yolanda; Patrice Ventresca; Palo Alto Free Press; Curtis Smolar Subject:Re: Time for our District Attorney, Jeff Rosen, to file charges in the Joel D. Alejo case CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mr. Rosen, I join the many other voices in demanding that you prosecute Enberg and his fellow officers to the fullest extent of the law. These officers should be behind bars, not armed with weapons and free to terrorize the streets. Our community has been set siege upon by an armed police force that has been allowed to attack innocent individuals without oversight or consequence. Due to this lack of oversight or consequence, our neighbors, family members, visitors, and friends lack basic safety in their and our homes. It is intolerable that we have to live with the rational fear of an unprovoked deadly attack like the one experienced by Mr. Alejo last June. As a mother, wife, daughter, sister, colleague, and friend, I should not have to experience fear for the safety of my loved ones at the hands of a police force that is violently out of control. Exactly whom can we call for help, when it is the Police from whom we need protection? I urge you to watch the videos released (after undue amounts of effort) by the MVPD (as well as the inexcusably low‐ quality single video released by the PAPD). In these videos you will see a group of police officers led by Nick Enberg order their police dog to attack an innocent man sleeping peacefully in his family's property. Notably, the officers arrived at the property visibly excited to set their dog on a victim, shouting "F Yeah!" Only after commanding the dog to "DURSH! DURSH!" (which means "Bite Bite!" in Czeck, the language with which the dog was trained), and only after that dog *did* DURSH, and only after Mr. Alejo was wailing in fear and pain, did Enberg or his crew begin to investigate the identity of the innocent man whom they already had caused great grievous bodily injury. It is your job to protect us from dangerous criminals such as the police officers shown in the released videos. I demand that you protect our community from Nick Enberg and his fellow officers, who performed these violent acts on camera for the world ‐ and, notably ‐ a jury to see for themselves without any room for doubt. Please feel free to call any time to discuss. I can be reached at your convenience at 415‐235‐8078. Sincerely, Rebecca Eisenberg 62 Rebecca L. Eisenberg Esq. www.linkedin.com/in/eisenberg www.winwithrebecca.com rebecca@winwithrebecca.com 415-235-8078 On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 6:46 PM Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com> wrote: PAPD Officer Charged with Unlawful Assault of Man He Was Arresting - Wayne Benitez, 62 https://www.sccgov.org/sites/da/newsroom/newsreleases/Pages/NRA2020/Benitez‐ .aspx DA Jeff Rosen said: “Peace officers who use more force than necessary hurt more than the person they are trying to arrest. They damage the deservedly excellent reputations of the vast majority of officers who work every shift to help people. And they strain the bonds with their communities who expect and deserve that police officers will protect and serve them fairly and professionally.” Mr. Rosen, please explain to your constituents why the Alejo case is different. Was not the force used “more force that necessary hurt more than the person they are trying to arrest.” Or are these just hollowed words? Editor: Palo Alto Free Press Sent from my iPad On Mar 23, 2021, at 12:56 PM, Roberta Ahlquist <roberta.ahlquist@sjsu.edu> wrote: Dear Friends, We support the request that Mr. Rosen file felony charges of assault with a deadly weapon in the Alejo case. Sincerely, Roberta Ahlquist Walter Bliss On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 10:13 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: 63 3/22/21 To: Elected District Attorney Jeff Rosen, Palo Alto City Council, Mountain View City Council, and all members of our community From: Aram James Please read the two excellent letters to the editor in today’s (Monday March 22, 2021) Daily Post, Opinion section page 9. Each letter poignantly describes the vicious canine attack on Joel Domingo Alejo: Police dog attack 1, by Ethan Young, Stanford Police Dog attack 2, by Kazuo Yoshimoto, Mountain View Both letters make exceedingly powerful arguments that Palo Alto Police officer/agent Nick Enberg, the alleged canine handler in Joel Allejo canine attack, used well beyond excessive force (both letters) and in particular the letter, Police dog attack 1, by Ethan Young, makes an extremely powerful case for our elected District Attorney, Jeff Rosen, to file criminal charges against the alleged canine handler, Palo Alto Police Officer/Agent Nick Enberg. I’m asking members of the public as well as all members of the Palo Alto and Mountain View city councils, to review the tapes in this matter, all nine thus far released. And then, to take action to call or write Mr. Rosen asking him to file felony charges for assault with a deadly weapon or attempted murder in the Joel Domingo Alejo case. Similar police initiated canine attacks, across this country, have resulted in very serious injuries and even death. See in this regard, the yearlong 12 part series titled: Mauled: When police dogs are weapons, by the 64 Marshall Project, in collaboration with other media outlets. The series is eye opening to say the least. Aram James https://www.themarshallproject.org/2020/10/15/mauled- when-police-dogs-are-weapons 65 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 24, 2021 3:58 PM To:Rebecca Eisenberg; Council, City; city.council@menlopark.org; city.council@menlopark.org; GRP-City Council; supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org; Human Relations Commission; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; chuck jagoda; Raj; Charisse Domingo; Anna Griffin; Lewis. james; Michele; Sean James; roberta.ahlquist@sjsu.edu; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com; Greer Stone; Raven Malone; DuBois, Tom; Jeff Moore; Jeff Rosen; Tanner, Rachael; Sunita de Tourreil; Kaloma Smith; Jonsen, Robert; Binder, Andrew; mark weiss; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; wintergery@earthlink.net; Joe Simitian; Greg Tanaka; Cecilia Taylor; David Angel; David Moss; Stump, Molly; Molly.ONeal@pdo.sccgov.org; Josh Becker Subject:Re: Evanston, Ill., leads the country with first reparations program for Black residents - The Washington Post—( Can Palo Alto, Redwood City, Mountain View, Menlo Park do the same? Note Evanston’s population is 75 thousand people). CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Rebecca, We are on the move now. With Evanston’s example it becomes increasingly difficult for Palo Alto and surrounding towns, Menlo Park, Mountain View, Redwood City, etc., to shut their eyes to the reparations issue. We need to, at a minimum: demand a public hearing on the reparations issue, demand that all local city councils take up the issue, an appoint reparations commissions and deal with the issue head on. A separate, appointed by community members, reparations commission, can be appointed, to render an independent judgement and final report on the issue. It is past time to have an open, thoughtful, intelligent and thorough conversation on this critical topic. Talk soon, Aram Sent from my iPhone On Mar 22, 2021, at 10:15 PM, Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> wrote: Thank you so much for your email!! I really appreciate it. Chuck's too. Your words mean a lot ‐‐ YOU mean a lot to me!! I just posted the Evanston article to Facebook and tagged you. I can't tell you how satisfying it feels that Evanston was the first! It validates much of the frustration I had with the unfair portrait of the Jewish community in Chicago and Illinois in the book _Warmth of Other Suns_, which I realize I should get over, but it's hard. Now we need to bring this to Palo Alto! (Not that we have not been trying!!) 66 With every day comes steps forward and steps back. With all of the steps, I am proud to be taking them with you! Best, Rebecca Rebecca L. Eisenberg Esq. www.linkedin.com/in/eisenberg www.winwithrebecca.com rebecca@winwithrebecca.com 415-235-8078 On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 9:46 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Very cool! Need Jewish support on progressive issues. See my email re u to chuck, the mayor etc....aram Sent from my iPhone On Mar 22, 2021, at 9:38 PM, Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> wrote: Sent just to you: Evanston, Illinois: home to Northwestern University, and one of the most Jewish cities in the USA. Go Evanston!! Rebecca L. Eisenberg Esq. www.linkedin.com/in/eisenberg www.winwithrebecca.com rebecca@winwithrebecca.com 415-235-8078 On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 7:38 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/evanston‐illinois‐ reparations/2021/03/22/6b5a308c‐8b2d‐11eb‐9423‐04079921c915_story.html Sent from my iPhone 67 Baumb, Nelly From:Pc User <pc77user@aol.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 24, 2021 12:42 PM To:BBC ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; Council, City; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY; BBC Westen | ONLY Subject:The Secret Speech of General Chi Haotian | Memory Hole Blog CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ BBC The Chinese General, who is in competition with Hitlers Master Race, and the Khazarian Mafias Self Chosenites, and the Blacks who claim to be the superior Egyptians from the stars, and various White Suprwmacists, and others around the world who claim to be better than everyone else, gave this speech sometime before 2003. He states quite plainly that the Chinese must murder everyone else in the world in order for them to survive, simply because they don’t seem to be able to keep their pants zipped up. This speech he gave is very long and detailed, and he could easily talk the arm off a statue, if you know what I mean. This is even more important today, since China has stationed 220 ships over a reef that is within earshot of the Philippines, like a vulture ready to swoop in !. They would have “no problem” with killing them all and taking over the islands for themselves. And they have their eyes on America, Australia, Europe, Africa, and any place that has terra firma under it. He talks about genociding the unwanted people with Ethno Centric Germs and Viruses. Does this explain why they have been accumulating the DNA of people all around the world ? Is this why they have a special relationship with Israel, who has the cutting edge technology of producing Ethno Centric pathogens ??? Please help to make this speech of his go viral.? The people of the world must know what the ChiComs have planned for them !!! Forward his speech to everyone you know !!! http://memoryholeblog.org/2021/02/06/the‐secret‐speech‐of‐general‐chi‐haotian/ Best Regards, & Stay Healthy, Wealthy & Wise. RJS 1 Baumb, Nelly From:pennyellson12@gmail.com Sent:Wednesday, March 31, 2021 12:14 PM To:Council, City Subject:FW: CalBike Report 🚲3/30/21: It's Time to Decriminalize Walking CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. From: CalBike <cbc@calbike.org> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2021 5:54 PM To: Penelope B Ellson <pellson@pacbell.net> Subject: CalBike Report ᢀᢁ 3/30/21: It's Time to Decriminalize Walking To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. CalBike Announces Bill to Decriminalize Jaywalking 2 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Jaywalking is arbitrarily enforced throughout California. Police disproportionately ticket Black Californians. To reform this unfair system, Assemblymember Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) — along with CalBike, California Walks, and Los Angeles Walks — has introduced AB 1238, The Freedom To Walk Act, which would decriminalize jaywalking. The Freedom To Walk Act promotes the fair and equitable use of roadways by: Legalizing crossings, when safe, outside of a marked or unmarked crosswalk or against a traffic light; Stopping the undue financial burden of jaywalking tickets on low-income people, whose fines can range to hundreds of dollars, if not more, because of added fees tacked on by the court, county, city, and others; Preventing police from using jaywalking as a pretext to stop Black Californians; and Ending the criminalization of people in disadvantaged communities that lack adequate pedestrian infrastructure. Read more about the Freedom to Walk Act. Sign the Freedom to Walk Petition >> 3 Cycling for Sustainable Cities - Essential Reference for Advocates To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. MIT Press has just published an important new book of scholarly research on bicycle trends, Cycling for Sustainable Cities. The book covers topics ranging from safe bicycle infrastructure to social justice considerations for bicycle planning to cycling in a variety of cities and countries around the globe. It is an essential volume, filled with actionable data, that will instantly become essential for bike planners and advocates. Find out how awesome the book is at a March 31 webinar. Register here. Read the full review >> 4 #ebikestories: Errands on an E-Bike My husband and I bought e-bikes and consequently got rid of our car (we still have a minivan for work and camping). I had long been a bike commuter, but my husband had not. Our e-bikes have allowed us to go further, faster & have replaced all but a very small number of trips. We've been working from home, so our trips are mostly short ones to the grocery store, hardware store, doctor, etc. We're saving money on insurance and gas while boosting our health & the health of the planet. It's been transformational! - Meghan Sahli-Wells (& Karim Sahli), Culver City To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. In our latest installment, riders shared the joy of doing errands with an e-bike. We bike up California's many hills with ease. We've also shared stories of commuters, parents riding with kids, and how e-bikes help us ride through illness or as we age. These #ebikestories demonstrate the value and importance of e-bikes. CalBike is working on a program to make e-bikes more affordable and put 10,000 new e-bikes on the street. Sign our petition to show your support. Read more #ebikestories >> 5 Can Your County Become a Bicycle Tourism Destination? 6 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 7 The California Bicycle Coalition and local leaders are planning big improvements to make bicycling safer, more fun, and to attract visitors for economic development. The project covers Alpine, Calaveras, Tuolumne, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus counties We need your help. We want to learn as much as we can about this area so that our proposals reflect the needs of the community and will lead to real change. Join the public workshop for your county. Learn about our draft proposals and tell us what you think so we can make them better. This is your opportunity to tell us about your cycling experiences in the targeted areas. You'll be able to present your ideas and identify needed road improvements based on your observations. If you can’t attend, send your ideas about priority improvements, attractions to highlight, or anything else, to rob@calbike.org. Workshop dates and times: Tuolumne County March 31, 2021, 12:00 pm https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZEpcO6hrjgqGt1HvMIAaJmEgKbPgBpmhkLX San Joaquin County March 31, 2021, 5:30 pm https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZMkc-qvrzgpH9F_4njHBnYED31YBzKZFdz0 Alpine County April 1, 2021, 5:30 pm https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZMtcuqpqT4qGtLSc1npG46K9smtABbEt25r Calaveras County April 2, 2021, 12:00 pm https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZcqdeypqzItH9YtRhQhX05d3vXEgokPCKKi Stanislaus County 8 April 8, 2021, 5:30 pm https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZ0kduuprzoiHdZ2rhrUAu8-ZIUWU4oqHDL2 More about tourism workshops >> You are receiving this email because you opted to receive information about the California Bicycle Coalition Our mailing address is: CalBike 1017 L St #288 Sacramento, CA 95814 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. Donate to CalBike >> To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Facebook Facebook To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Twitter Twitter To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Instagram Instagram To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Website Website To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office preventedownload of this picture from the Internet.Email Email View this email in your browser To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.AVG logo This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.com 9 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 31, 2021 11:00 AM To:paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; Fellissa Richard; alphonse9947@gmail.com; Donette; Rebecca Eisenberg; Council, City; Human Relations Commission; Sunita de Tourreil; Planning Commission; Sunita de Tourreil; ParkRec Commission; chuckjagoda1@gmail.com; Jeff Moore; Kaloma Smith; Jeff Rosen Subject:Meeting Request Regarding K9 use CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. With Permission of Anna Griffin I’m posting her open letter to District Attorney Jeff Rosen re the canine attack on Mr. Joel Alejo. 10 3/30/2021 Hi Palo Alto Free Press: Your comments: Beautiful! Clear and to the point! If Rosen was prosecuting bad cops on a routine basis ...like he prosecutes bad community members ....cops would be forced to discontinue their history of violence, murder and racism. When a prosecutor fails to demand equal justice for cops he is complicit in their murder, violence and racism. 11 Jeff Rosen is a very smart man ...and knows what u say and what I say ...to be the truth ....not hyperbole or empty rhetoric. He really needs to act on the oath he took: to uphold the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic.....cops who kill torture and maul our community members with impunity....are no more and no less than domestic terrorists....who must be punished and taken off our streets. Aram Sent from my iPhone On Mar 30, 2021, at 9:09 PM, Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com> wrote: Mr. Moore, Very well articulated including the referenced case law! However, your final paragraph encapsulated the essence of what should occur first... “There is an urgent need to root out and to identify the departmental deficiencies that allowed these officers to remain on the force in the first place.” The person identified, and responsible, for the departmental deficiencies that have allowed these officers to remain on the force....is none other then Jeff Rosen..... Sincerely, Palo Alto Free Press Sent from my iPad On Mar 30, 2021, at 12:22 PM, Jethroe Moore <moore2j@att.net> wrote: There is an urgent need to root out and to identify the departmental deficiencies that allowed these officers to remain on the force in the first place. 12 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 31, 2021 10:48 AM To:Jeff Rosen Cc:Jethroe Moore; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; William Armaline; Raj Jayadev; Richard Konda; Walter Wilson; Derek Grasty; Roxana Marachi; Micael 'mica' Estremera; Elizabeth Kamya; Angelica Cortez; Kyle Dacallos; Virginia Groce-Roberts; Raven Malone; Ray F. Montgomery; Khalid White; Robert Salonga; rebecca@winwithrebecca.com; Roberta Ahlquist; Jeff Moore; Richard Konda; Council, City; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; city.council@menlopark.org; GRP-City Council; Anna Griffin; Jonsen, Robert; Binder, Andrew; Shikada, Ed; Eduardo Guilarte; Cecilia; Donald Mendoza; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Steven D. Lee; Human Relations Commission; Kaloma Smith; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Pat Burt; Josh Becker; chuck jagoda; Charisse Domingo; Stump, Molly; Molly; Bill Johnson; Gennady Sheyner; Greg Tanaka; Greer Stone; cindy.chavez@bos.sccgov.org; Joe Simitian; supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org; Sean James; Perron, Zachary; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Tanner, Rachael; Miguel; Bains, Paul; mark weiss; michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com; Michele; yolanda; Patrice Ventresca; Curtis Smolar Subject:Re: Meeting Request Regarding K9 use CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. With Permission of Anna Griffin I’m posting her open letter to District Attorney Jeff Rosen re the canine attack on Mr. Joel Alejo. 14 3/30/2021 Hi Palo Alto Free Press: Your comments: Beautiful! Clear and to the point! If Rosen was prosecuting bad cops on a routine basis ...like he prosecutes bad community members ....cops would be forced to discontinue their history of violence, murder and racism. When a prosecutor fails to demand equal justice for cops he is complicit in their murder, violence and racism. Jeff Rosen is a very smart man ...and knows what u say and what I say ...to be the truth ....not hyperbole or empty rhetoric. He really needs to act on the oath he took: to uphold the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic.....cops who kill torture and maul our community members with impunity....are no more and no less than domestic terrorists....who must be punished and taken off our streets. Aram Sent from my iPhone On Mar 30, 2021, at 9:09 PM, Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com> wrote: Mr. Moore, Very well articulated including the referenced case law! However, your final paragraph encapsulated the essence of what should occur first... “There is an urgent need to root out and to identify the departmental deficiencies that allowed these officers to remain on the force in the first place.” The person identified, and responsible, for the departmental deficiencies that have allowed these officers to remain on the force....is none other then Jeff Rosen..... Sincerely, Palo Alto Free Press Sent from my iPad 15 On Mar 30, 2021, at 12:22 PM, Jethroe Moore <moore2j@att.net> wrote: There is an urgent need to root out and to identify the departmental deficiencies that allowed these officers to remain on the force in the first place. 16 Baumb, Nelly From:Jethroe Moore <moore2j@att.net> Sent:Tuesday, March 30, 2021 12:22 PM To:Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky Cc:William Armaline; Raj Jayadev; Richard Konda; <abjpd1@gmail.com>; Walter Wilson; Derek Grasty; Roxana Marachi; Micael 'mica' Estremera; Elizabeth Kamya; Angelica Cortez; Kyle Dacallos; Virginia Groce-Roberts; Raven Malone; Ray F. Montgomery; Khalid White; Robert Salonga; rebecca@winwithrebecca.com; Roberta Ahlquist; Jeff Moore; Richard Konda; Council, City; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; city.council@menlopark.org; GRP-City Council; Anna Griffin; Jonsen, Robert; Binder, Andrew; Shikada, Ed; Eduardo Guilarte; Cecilia; Donald Mendoza; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Steven D. Lee; Human Relations Commission; Kaloma Smith; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Pat Burt; Josh Becker; chuck jagoda; Charisse Domingo; Stump, Molly; Molly; Bill Johnson; Gennady Sheyner; Greg Tanaka; Greer Stone; cindy.chavez@bos.sccgov.org; Joe Simitian; supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org; Sean James; Perron, Zachary; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Tanner, Rachael; Miguel; Bains, Paul; mark weiss; michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com; Michele; yolanda; Patrice Ventresca; Palo Alto Free Press; Curtis Smolar Subject:Meeting Request Regarding K9 use CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Good afternoon, request a meeting with you to discuss why you refuse to press charges/fire the Palo Alto Police Officer Nick Enberg, and explain to us how this is not a prosecutable offense when this is the second time this officer has used his K9 to being harm to the communities of color. Regarding below. Currently, there are seven canine-specific cases that mandate giving suspects a warning prior to using a police K-9 as a potential use of force tool. Burrows v. City of Tulsa (10th Circuit), Trammel v. Thomason (11th Circuit), Sorchini v. City of Covina (9th Circuit), and Vathekan v. Prince George's County (MD, 4th Circuit) Court's findings and rulings pertaining to the K-9 announcement: It is clearly established that it is unreasonable for a police officer to fail to give a verbal warning before releasing police dog to seize someone. Furthermore Kuha v. City of Minnetonka (8th Circuit), Szabla v. City of Brooklyn Park (MN, 8th Circuit), and Rogers v. City of Kennewick (9th Circuit), Court's findings and rulings pertaining to the K-9 announcement: The court ruled that there was clearly established case law that failing to give a warning before releasing police dog to bite and hold is unreasonable. Palo Alto Police Officer Nick Enberg failed to announce the use of his dog on a sleeping man is clearly an act of aggression with intent to do harm, shined another light on the systemic failures of policing in Santa Clara County. There is an urgent need to root out and to identify the departmental deficiencies that allowed these officers to remain on the force in the first place. 17 Baumb, Nelly From:John Grecko <jgrecko00@yahoo.com> Sent:Sunday, March 28, 2021 11:11 PM To:Viviana.Becerra@asm.ca.gov; maheen.ahmed@asm.ca.gov Cc:info@aaci.org; info@aacre.org; yapaofficers@gmail.com; aparke@asianlawalliance.org; katherine@asianlawalliance.org; info@sanjosenaacp.org; moore2j@att.net; info@avnaacp.org; naacpla@sbcglobal.net; Council, City; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; rtran@ci.milpitas.ca.gov; echua@ci.milpitas.ca.gov; kdominguez@ci.milpitas.ca.gov; aphan@ci.milpitas.ca.gov; lstone@scu.edu; esteinman@scu.edu; ncip@scu.edu; ncip-media@scu.edu; marmstrong@scu.edu; pcain@scu.edu; mwflynn@scu.edu; mrussell@scu.edu; DLSloss@scu.edu; Richard.cohen@splcenter.org; Jim.knoepp@splceter.org; alonzobraggs@yahoo.com; david.gomez@sanjoseca.gov; cassidy.kohl@sanjoseca.gov; District2@sanjoseca.gov; christina.m.ramos@sanjoseca.gov; district4@sanjoseca.gov; Adan.Lupercio@Sanjoseca.gov; Angel.Madero@Sanjoseca.gov; Louansee.Moua@sanjoseca.gov; district7@sanjoseca.gov; nancy.le@sanjoseca.gov; Camryn.Heinkel@sanjoseca.gov; district10@sanjoseca.gov; Human Relations Commission Subject:Criminal Justice Reform AB 886 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Rob Bunta California Assemblyman and Attorney General Nominee Mr. Bunta, So long as those entrusted with the most authority to enforce the law allow their personal bias and prejudice to influence their decisions to deny equal protection of the law to some people some of the time, then all criminal justice reform is meaningless. 18 Dog Attack Video Alejo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_oX1W6T4Bc https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2021/03/17/video‐body‐cam‐footage‐shows‐police‐k9‐attack‐mount‐view‐man‐ sleeping‐on‐his‐own‐property/ Windshield Smash Video Alvarez https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtuIzpMohyA https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/questions‐surround‐palo‐alto‐police‐officers‐use‐of‐force/153019/ 19 Santa Clara county district attorney Jeff Rosen has stated he's not going to prosecute the officers who assaulted and battered Joel Domingo Alejo even though Rosen is prosecuting Sergeant Wayne benitez for assaulting and battering Alvarez. DA Rosen stated that former sgt. Benitez violated victim Gustavo Alvarez’s civil rights. If you place the videos of the Alvarez and the Alejo attacks side by side it's clear that the Alejo attack is 10 times more egregious in violating the law and the Constitution than the Alvarez attack. Even if the officers had encountered the actual suspect they were looking for its still excessive force according to the law and according to Rosen's own standard, which is proof that DA Rosen’s judgment is being influenced by his personal bias and prejudice. How does DA Rosen justify not prosecuting the officers in the dog mauling attack? 20 Alejo was not fleeing or resisting when the dog found him, in fact Alejo wasn't even moving and therefore not a threat to the dog or the officers and the dog was wagging his tail in a docile manner until the order to bite was given. 21 Alejo was not given an opportunity to obey any commands by the officer and did not threaten or resist or delay the officer in his official capacity yet the officer decided to attack him with a police dog without ever giving him an opportunity to comply with an order to surrender. If there was no police dog and the officer decided to start hitting the subject with a baton while the subject was still sleeping without giving any opportunity to surrender would you justify the initial strike by the police officer? The cop attacked a man who was sleeping, what is DA Rosen’s legal justification for not prosecuting the officer? At the very least the dog mauling is criminal negligence by attacking and causing harm to an unidentified target, the equivalent of firing a gun into a house hoping to hit a suspect even though there are other people in the house that could be hit who are not the suspect. California PC 149. 22 Every public officer who, under color of authority, without lawful necessity, assaults or beats any person, is punishable by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170, or by both that fine and imprisonment. (Amended by Stats. 2011, Ch. 15, Sec. 263. (AB 109) Effective April 4, 2011. Operative October 1, 2011, by Sec. 636 of Ch. 15, as amended by Stats. 2011, Ch. 39, Sec. 68.) https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN§ionNum=149. ARTICLE V EXECUTIVE [SECTION 1 - SEC. 14] ( Article 5 added Nov. 8, 1966, by Prop. 1‐a. Res.Ch. 139, 1966 1st Ex. Sess. ) SEC. 13. Subject to the powers and duties of the Governor, the Attorney General shall be the chief law officer of the State. It shall be the duty of the Attorney General to see that the laws of the State are uniformly and adequately enforced. The Attorney General shall have direct supervision over every district attorney and sheriff and over such other law enforcement officers as may be designated by law, in all matters pertaining to the duties of their respective offices, and may require any of said officers to make reports concerning the investigation, detection, prosecution, and punishment of crime in their respective jurisdictions as to the Attorney General may seem advisable. Whenever in the opinion of the Attorney General any law of the State is not being adequately enforced in any county, it shall be the duty of the Attorney General to prosecute any violations of law of which the superior court shall have jurisdiction, and in such cases the Attorney General shall have all the powers of a district attorney. When required by the public interest or directed by the Governor, the Attorney General shall assist any district attorney in the discharge of the duties of that office. (Sec. 13 amended Nov. 5, 1974, by Prop. 11. Res.Ch. 96, 1974.) https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CONS§ionNum=SEC.%201 3.&article=V 23 Rosen will not prosecute Benitez https://padailypost-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/padailypost.com/2020/06/14/da-wont-charge-ex-cop-in- videotaped- beating/amp/?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA%3D%3D#aoh=16161075544888&_ct=1616107565298&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fpadailypost.com%2F2020%2F06%2F14%2Fda-wont-charge-ex-cop-in-videotaped- beating%2F Rosen will prosecute Benitez https://padailypost-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/padailypost.com/2020/10/06/retired-palo-alto-police-sergeant-wayne-benitez-charged-with-assault/amp/?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA%3D%3D#aoh=16161083500911&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fpadailypost.com%2F2020%2F10%2F06%2Fretired-palo-alto-police-sergeant-wayne-benitez-charged-with-assault%2F 25 Baumb, Nelly From:Jethroe Moore <moore2j@att.net> Sent:Friday, March 26, 2021 10:04 AM To:Rebecca Eisenberg; Jonsen, Robert; Human Relations Commission; Joe Simitian; Planning Commission; Roberta Ahlquist; Greer Stone; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com; ParkRec Commission; Scheff, Lisa; Kou, Lydia; DuBois, Tom; Binder, Andrew; Tanner, Rachael; Raj; chuck jagoda; Charisse Domingo; Kaloma Smith; Jeff Moore; Jeff Rosen; Sunita de Tourreil; griffinam@sbcglobal.net; mark weiss; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; wintergery@earthlink.net; city.council@menlopark.org; Perron, Zachary; Cecilia Taylor; Council, City; Greg Tanaka; David Angel; David Moss; Stump, Molly; molly.oneal@pdo.sccgov.org; Cindy Chavez; jboyarsky@dao.sccgov.org Cc:Bob Nunez; William Armaline; James Staten; Nicole Gatlin; Roxana Marachi; Mulugeta Habtegabriel; Micael 'mica' Estremera; T Walk; Nydia Smith; Elizabeth Kamya; Kyle Dacallos; pastor@universityamez.com; Raven Malone Subject:.Fire Agent Enberg -directed to DA Jeff Rosen -published in today’s Daily Post March 25, 2021 Attachments:IMG_9267.jpg; Palo Alto Police officer Nick Enberg.doc CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. March 26, 2021 TO: DA Jeff Rosen West Wing, 70 West Hedding St. San Jose, CA 95110 FROM: Rev. Jethroe Moore II President, NAACP SJ/SV Re: Palo Alto Police officer Nick Enberg District Attorney Rosen: 26 The San Jose/Silicon Valley NAACP must express its concern regarding the Palo Alto Police officer Nick Enberg, the alleged canine handler in Joel Allejo canine attack, by the Palo Alto Police Department. We believe that now, more than ever it is imperative that the County of Santa Clara District Attorney Jeff Rosen be responsive to and condemn police brutality, and the excessive use of force by use of K9. It is time to put aside politics, the good ole boy connections, the opposition to change and restore some sibilance impartiality to this so-call investigation. Currently, there are seven canine-specific cases that mandate giving suspects a warning prior to using a police K-9 as a potential use of force tool. Burrows v. City of Tulsa (10th Circuit), Trammel v. Thomason (11th Circuit), Sorchini v. City of Covina (9th Circuit), and Vathekan v. Prince George's County (MD, 4th Circuit) Court's findings and rulings pertaining to the K-9 announcement: It is clearly established that it is unreasonable for a police officer to fail to give a verbal warning before releasing police dog to seize someone. Furthermore Kuha v. City of Minnetonka (8th Circuit), Szabla v. City of Brooklyn Park (MN, 8th Circuit), and Rogers v. City of Kennewick (9th Circuit), Court's findings and rulings pertaining to the K-9 announcement: The court ruled that there was clearly established case law that failing to give a warning before releasing police dog to bite and hold is unreasonable. Palo Alto Police Officer Nick Enberg failed to announce the use of his dog on a sleeping man is clearly an act of aggression with intent to do harm, shined another light on the systemic failures of policing in Santa Clara County. There is an urgent need to root out and to identify the departmental deficiencies that allowed these officers to remain on the force in the first place. To protect communities of color, the District Attorney office must rid their ranks of police officer to ensure the communities they serve that steps our being taken to ensure officers are being held accountable for engaging in any unlawful or unethical conduct. It is especially critical for District Attorneys to be forthright in their condemnation of violence and exhaustive in their investigations of officers who may have been involved in unnecessary use of force. Demand that District Attorney Jeff Rosen to appoint a criminal prosecutor with no conflicts of interest to investigate the incident involving K9 use in the City of Palo Alto California over the past 10 years. And that Palo Alto Police officer Nick Enberg, be fired. Sincerely Pastor Jethroe Moore II, President ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Moore, Jeff <moorej@esuhsd.org> 27 To: Pastor Jeff Moore <moore2j@att.net> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021, 08:29:52 AM PDT Subject: Fwd: With Rebecca Eisenberg’s permission I am sending out her piece (see below) ....Fire Agent Enberg -directed to DA Jeff Rosen -published in today’s Daily Post March 25, 2021 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Date: Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 1:09 PM Subject: With Rebecca Eisenberg’s permission I am sending out her piece (see below) ....Fire Agent Enberg -directed to DA Jeff Rosen -published in today’s Daily Post March 25, 2021 To: Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com>, Robert Jonsen <Robert.Jonsen@cityofpaloalto.org>, <hrc@cityofpaloalto.org>, Joe Simitian <Supervisor.Simitian@bos.sccgov.org>, <Planning.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org>, Roberta Ahlquist <roberta.ahlquist@sjsu.edu>, Greer Stone <gstone22@gmail.com>, <wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com>, ParkRec Commission <parkrec.commission@cityofpaloalto.org>, Lisa Scheff <lisa.scheff@cityofpaloalto.org>, Lydia Kou <Lydia.Kou@cityofpaloalto.org>, <tom.dubois@cityofpaloalto.org>, Andrew Binder <andrew.binder@cityofpaloalto.org>, Rachael Tanner <Rachael.Tanner@cityofpaloalto.org>, Raj <raj@siliconvalleydebug.org>, chuck jagoda <chuckjagoda1@gmail.com>, Charisse Domingo <charisse@siliconvalleydebug.org>, Kaloma Smith <pastor@universityamez.com>, Jeff Moore <moorej@esuhsd.org>, Jeff Rosen <jrosen@dao.sccgov.org>, Sunita de Tourreil <sunita@chocolatedividends.org>, <griffinam@sbcglobal.net>, mark weiss <earwopa@yahoo.com>, <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>, <wintergery@earthlink.net>, <city.council@menlopark.org>, Zachary Perron <zachary.perron@cityofpaloalto.org>, Cecilia Taylor <cmrstaylor@gmail.com>, <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>, Greg Tanaka <greg@gregtanaka.org>, David Angel <dangel@dao.sccgov.org>, David Moss <ssow111@gmail.com>, Molly Stump <molly.stump@cityofpaloalto.org>, <Molly.ONeal@pdo.sccgov.org> Sent from my iPhone March 26, 2021 TO: DA Jeff Rosen West Wing, 70 West Hedding St. San Jose, CA 95110 FROM: Rev. Jethroe Moore II President, NAACP SJ/SV Re: Palo Alto Police officer Nick Enberg District Attorney Rosen: The San Jose/Silicon Valley NAACP must express its concern regarding the Palo Alto Police officer Nick Enberg, the alleged canine handler in Joel Allejo canine attack, by the Palo Alto Police Department. We believe that now, more than ever it is imperative that the County of Santa Clara District Attorney Jeff Rosen be responsive to and condemn police brutality, and the excessive use of force by use of K9. It is time to put aside politics, the good ole boy connections, the opposition to change and restore some sibilance impartiality to this so-call investigation. Currently, there are seven canine-specific cases that mandate giving suspects a warning prior to using a police K-9 as a potential use of force tool. Burrows v. City of Tulsa (10th Circuit), Trammel v. Thomason (11th Circuit), Sorchini v. City of Covina (9th Circuit), and Vathekan v. Prince George's County (MD, 4th Circuit) Court's findings and rulings pertaining to the K-9 announcement: It is clearly established that it is unreasonable for a police officer to fail to give a verbal warning before releasing police dog to seize someone. Furthermore Kuha v. City of Minnetonka (8th Circuit), Szabla v. City of Brooklyn Park (MN, 8th Circuit), and Rogers v. City of Kennewick (9th Circuit), Court's findings and rulings pertaining to the K-9 announcement: The court ruled that there was clearly established case law that failing to give a warning before releasing police dog to bite and hold is unreasonable. Palo Alto Police Officer Nick Enberg failed to announce the use of his dog on a sleep man is clearly an act of aggression with intent to do harm, shined another light on the systemic failures of policing in Santa Clara County. There is an urgent need to root out and to identify the departmental deficiencies that allowed these officers to remain on the force in the first place. To protect communities of color, the District Attorney office must rid their ranks of police officer to ensure the communities they serve that steps our being taken to ensure officers are being held accountable for engaging in any unlawful or unethical conduct. It is especially critical for District Attorneys to be forthright in their condemnation of violence and exhaustive in their investigations of officers who may have been involved in unnecessary use of force. Demand that District Attorney Jeff Rosen to appoint a criminal prosecutor with no conflicts of interest to investigate the incident involving K9 use in the City of Palo Alto California over the past 10 years. And that Palo Alto Police officer Nick Enberg, be fired. Sincerely SAN JOSE/SILICON VALLEY BRANCH OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE 1313 North Milpitas Blvd Suite #163, Milpitas, CA 95035 Phone 408-991-4610 Pastor Jethroe Moore II, President Website: http://www.sanjosenaacp.org Email: sjnaacp@sanjosenaacp.org 1 Baumb, Nelly From:yehia rizk <yrizk@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 7:48 AM To:Council, City Cc:City Mgr Subject:Request for disclosure Attachments:cc5.pptx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Council Members; This is a follow up to my previous 1/19/2021 email (Council packet Feb.1, Set 2) regarding my concern about enforcing the new ordinance (#5507) on my pending ADU project. I am attaching a summary of the issues I have with the planning department. I can provide more details by email or I can also present a summary in a future council meeting via Zoom (if I can share my screen). Thanks. Dr. Yehia Rizk Duveneck-St. Francis resident Enforcing New Ordinance on Pending Projects? Yehia Rizk March,29, 2021 Timeline Date Action Outcome 2/10/2020 Showed a conceptual design of attached ADU to planning department and followed up with email confirmation Conceptual design confirms with setbacks and ordinance (#5489 ) 9/30 Submitted Project Plan (construction drawings, structure report, Title 24) to City website Project coordinator route the Project Plan for 30 Day review 12/04 Planning review completed and consolidated report posted on City Website (65 days processing time) Planning request that Project Plan be revised to comply with new city ordinance (#5507) which became effective on 11/26/2020 12/04 to 12/11 Email exchange with planning department inquiring why new ordinance is being applied to pending permits. Amy French effectively says “ Pending Projects must comply with new ordinance because City Council did not include the ‘pending project exemption clause’ used in previous (unnamed) ordinances”. 12/12 to 02/22/2021 Email to City Council requesting disclosure of previous ordinances with ‘pending project exemption clause’. City Manager asks Rachael Tanner to respond. Rachael Tanner could not find any previous ordinances with that exemption. Instead, she discloses two previous ordinances (#5406 , #5373) with a “completed project exemption clause” and offers a different interpretation (in contradiction with Amy French’s interpretation). Two contradicting rationale? Amy French explanation(12/11/2020) Rachael Tanner explanation (02/22/2021) (The ‘missing phrase’ rationale) (The ‘already grandfathered phrase’ rationale) Issues •My pending project; •Need a clear and credible explanation •Planning department; •Misuse of ‘interpretative authority’? •Violation of CA New ADU law •Max 60 days processing time •Accountability? 2 Baumb, Nelly From:Martin J Sommer <martin@sommer.net> Sent:Monday, March 29, 2021 9:28 AM To:CalMod@caltrain.com Cc:Board (@caltrain.com); Council, City; Pat Burt Subject:Re: University Ave Beige Pole Color Attachments:caltrainexteriorintegration01-750xx7087-3986-0-369.jpg CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Thanks Brent, appreciate you staying on this issue. In addition, please see the attached photo. This vision of Caltrain rolling into the University Ave station in Palo Alto, is one of the most widely distributed photos of the Caltrain Electrification Project. Notice: a) short poles, b) back color, and c) symmetric north and south cantilevers. What we received in Palo Alto, bears no resemblance to this? What went wrong, and can we please fix it? Martin On 3/27/21 6:22 PM, CalMod@caltrain.com wrote: Hi Martin, Yes, I will work to get this information from the project team. Best, Brent From: Martin J Sommer [mailto:martin@sommer.net] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 2:15 PM To: CalMod@caltrain.com Cc: Board (@caltrain.com) <BoardCaltrain@samtrans.com>; city.council@cityofpaloalto.org; Pat Burt <pat@patburt.org> Subject: Re: University Ave Beige Pole Color ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders. Hi Brent, I am still working on this issue. When we talked via phone, you offered to look into why the tall single poles were used at the University Ave station, vs two shorter poles on the side, with or without a crossbar. The Cal Ave station, uses two shorter poles, placed right on the platform. 3 Can you please answer that for me? Thanks, Martin On 1/13/21 9:58 AM, Martin J Sommer wrote: Hi Brent, Thanks for talking this morning. Yes, please try to put a number on repainting the top half of one or more poles at the University Ave station. Once we have this number, I will reach out to the City Of Palo Alto, for potential funding sources. Best regards, Martin On 12/22/20 7:49 PM, Martin J Sommer wrote: +cc: Pat Bert Brent, please take a look at the attached photo. I don't think this is what the City, nor the design engineers, had in mind. Please tell me, how I can help correct this situation. Thank you, Martin -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality."