HomeMy Public PortalAbout20180409plCC 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: 4/9/2018
Document dates: 3/21/2018 – 3/28/2018
Set 1
Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet
reproduction in a given week.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:05 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Jeralyn Moran <jeralyn.moran@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, March 26, 2018 1:02 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Stanford Research Park TMA review this evening - please push for a mid-day
Marguerite shuttle to Cal. Ave.
Dear Mayor Kniss & Council Members,
Lunchgoers from Stanford Research Park on weekdays are a portion of the California
Ave. parking issue; a Marguerite shuttle service at this time would bring associated
traffic relief. This could be another item in the set of traffic/parking solutions already in
the works.
Please support this addition to the SRP TMA - it is a cost effective step in the near term,
and one more reason to justify re-directing Palo Alto City's funds away from an
expensive new parking garage that our City will regret in the longer term.
Sincerely,
Jeralyn Moran 1062 Los Robles Ave.
Palo Alto, CA 94306 --
jeralyn.moran@gmail.com
..... the Time for Climate Action Is Now.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:51 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Art Liberman <art_liberman@yahoo.com>
Sent:Thursday, March 22, 2018 7:35 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Upgrade the systems for speakers who address the Council
On the subject of the proposed update to the Council Chamber Audio/Visual/Broadcast system that is
on the Agenda for the March 26th Council Meeting, I would like to suggest that some attention be
paid to improving the system serving those residents and others who publicly address the Council during Council meetings.
In particular, some attention is needed to facilitating their use of visual materials - whether they be
photos, powerpoint presentations or videos. Attention to this is long overdue. In past appearances
before the Council when I needed to employ materials of this sort, I found the Council's system support for such actions woefully inadequate. I would have to find the person (if possible - usually only after a staff person would point this person out to me) from the IT department, presumably
working overtime but who was generally to be found wandering around the Council Chamber or
chatting with someone in the rear, and then ask that person to upload my presentation or my visuals
onto the computer next to the staff table, and then would have find that person again when my time can to speak to open my presentation so that it would be visible on the display. Sounds like a way to discourage some resident participation and involvement in Council proceedings...and it was.
I hope you require some improvement to this system be incorporated into an update to the Council
serving audio/visual/broadcast system so that speakers themselves can upload, and control the display of materials, including displaying photos or other materials they have on their mobile phones, when appearing before the Council.
Arthur Liberman
Chimalus Drive
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:21 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:roycsnyder@comcast.net
Sent:Thursday, March 22, 2018 8:38 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Eichler Design Guidelines - Opposed to Adoption
I oppose the adoption by the City Council of Palo Alto, of the Proposed Eichler Design
Guidelines
I am a homeowner in Palo Alto. We have lived in our Eichler on Thomas Drive (Royal
Manor) since1976. In it’s original configuration on the property and floor plan, our
home did not conform to the proposed guidelines (front fencing, view from street, etc.)
We have remodeled three times. As a result, our new front driveway and walk, installed
new front and side windows, over-the-roof repaired piping, raised roof line, and
probably other features, do not conform to the proposed “guidelines”.
There have been a number of anecdotal comments to the effect that many of the two
thousand odd Eichlers in Palo Alto do not now conform to the proposed guidelines. I
did a quick, informal survey of the homes on the 3300-3400 block of Thomas Drive
(Royal Manor). Of the 26 homes on the block, only 7 (23%) appear to conform to the
proposed guidelines. The other 19 were non-conforming with many homes having
multiple non-conforming features.
Adoption of these guidelines as a formal City of Palo Alto document – when it is known
that as many as three-quarters of the existing structures may not conform – is simply
poor public policy and governance. It will erode the credibility of past and certainly
future City guides, codes, ordinances, etc.
I recommend that the City Council refer these guideline back to the Historic Resource
Board. Let the Board adopt them as a truly voluntary Eichler guide for those who may
wish to use them.
However, in no circumstances should these guidelines be incorporated, by reference
or any other manner, into any formal City planning or permit approval process, i.e, into
any of the proposed Four Tier Code Options.
The City Council needs to focus directly and courageously on the privacy issues
(Single Story Overlay and Accessory Dwelling Units) being raised by residents, and not
cloud the issue with formal adoption of such out-of-date/out-of-style measures as these
Eichler Design Guidelines.
Roy Snyder
Thomas Drive
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 4:45 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Megan Yahya <marjoon@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, March 23, 2018 12:49 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Eichler; Hobart Sze; Malati Raghunath; Sudhir Rao; Unmesh Vartak; Venkat Dokiparthi;
siamack sanaie
Subject:Eichler Guideline meeting in PAUSD Spring break - Reschedule please!
Dear Coucil Members
The meeting to review Eichler Guidelines is scheduled exactly at the time of Palo Alto School district Spring
break which means a lot of us are out of town at that time.
Please reschedule it otherwise the crowd who will be there will only be senior residents with no children whose opinions usually greatly differs from the folks with children.
Thanks
Megan
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:05 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Richard Willits <rwillits@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, March 26, 2018 11:25 AM
To:Council, City
Cc:French, Amy; Gitelman, Hillary
Subject:Eichler Guidelines
Congratulations to Amy French and her team for creating an artful, progressive set of guidelines for Eichler
development.
As the guidelines outline, there still is a need for tract‐wide regulation of second‐story building to avoid destruction of
the privacy so difficult to avoid in Eichler neighborhoods. For those tracts with existing SSOs, ACCs and historic
designations, these guidelines are a helpful adjunct. For those without, the need for sensitive regulation is still needed.
While we maintain our classic tools to control second story development, the opportunity is now to develop a new,
better tool to bring our neighborhoods to consensus about allowing any particular home to go two‐story. This could by
the creating of Eichler Zones, by fixing the SSO application process, by making the IR process open to all neighbors
affected instead of just the nearest neighbors, or some other mechanism of your choice.
At both of the large public meetings held during the guidelines drafting process, roughly 90% of Eichler owners in
attendance clearly felt that privacy is the largest priority for city regulation. This is reflected by the many comments
throughout the document. However there is no regulation implied in this document.
Now is the time to address this elephant‐in‐the‐room to protect our Eichler neighborhoods not yet covered by SSOs.
Richard Willits
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:04 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:abby boyd <abby650@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 27, 2018 9:28 PM
To:Council, City; Abby Boyd
Subject:Eichler Guidelines and the Single Story Overlay
From the meeting I went to, and page 114 of the draft guidelines, it seems that if the guidelines become
codified the next step CAN be a change in the Single Story Overlay, that would incude the ability to make
some homes two story in a "Single Story Overlay" if the lot met some as yet undecided requirements. I don't
want to fight this all over again. I want the Single Story Overlay unchanged, and not nullified by codified
"Eichler Guidelines" The lot directly behind mine is twice the size of mine, and a single story overlay would
loom over my house, which is at the end of a cul-de-sac. And don't tell me to plant trees, I have had to take
down trees because of the power lines in my back yard. I like the Eichler Guidelines as guideline and many
places have guidelines codified ino requirements, like Santa Fe with adobes , but I fear eventually the Single
Story Overlay is at risk in Palo Alto.
Abby Boyd
3998 Bibbits Dr. Palo Alto, CA 94303
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 12:46 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:michael nierenberg <nierenberg@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, March 28, 2018 10:59 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Eichler Guideline meeting during spring break!
Dear Council members,
This is an important meeting. I was recently made aware (not having young children anymore) that this meeting is during spring break when many young families are away. Many of them have contacted me about being away and unable to attend. I fear you will be getting a skewed sample of
opinions at the meeting since it appears to me that the older individuals seem more in favor of the
Guidelines. Cancelling the meeting or postponing it is a problem since a lot of effort on your part (and
mine) has gone into publicizing the meeting. Would you consider a second meeting at a more appropriate time? A topic this important certainly could stand being on the agenda twice.
Thank you in advance for your consideration.
Respectfully, Michael A. Nierenberg, M.D.
_____________________________________________________This e-mail message and any
attachment(s) transmitted with it are intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. This
message may be privileged and/or confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not
review, copy or distribute this message. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message.Thank you...
Marilyn Gottlieb-Roberts
m427@bellsouth.net
305-323-9242
https://vimeo.com/74456758 (Dormition, Real time video, 10 min, 2002.)
www.durabletale.com (Preliminary work for a 2017 artist book, 2010.)
Synopsis Resume
current 2018
Education
1998-2002 Doctoral studies, Comparative Sociology & Cultural Anthropology, Florida International University,
Miami FL
1977 MFA (Painting & Drawing) University of Miami, Coral Gables FL
1975 BA (Painting & Literature) Goddard College, Plainfield VT
Selected teaching experience; painting, drawing, art history
1980-2006 Professor, Department of Art & Philosophy, Wolfson Campus Miami-Dade College, Miami FL (Ret.
2006). Reference: Dr. Haig David-West (haigdavidwest@yahoo.com), Independent Scholar, France.
2000-2002 Fulbright Scholar, University of Jos, Plateau State, Nigeria
1994 Visiting Artist, Master Class, Learning from Performers Program, Office of the Arts, Harvard
University, Cambridge MA
Selected publications
2017 A Durable Tale presented at cultural astronomy conference “Road to the Stars” presented by INSAP
x, Oxford XI, SEAC 25th, Santiago de Campostela, Spain.
2017 A Durable Tale [an artist book], Miami: [NAME] Publications, 2017.
2015 Gottlieb-Roberts, M. “Stars on Local Time: A Personal Almanac.” In Inspiration of Astronomical
Phenomena VIII: City of Stars, Proceedings of a Conference held at American Museum of Natural
History, July 2013, edited by Brian Patrick Abbott. San Francisco: Astronomical Society of the Pacific,
2006-2015 Featured lecturer, National annual orientation for Foreign Fulbright Scholars, Council for the
International Exchange of Scholars.
2014 “Stars on Local Time: A Personal Almanac” shelved in reference library, Dr. E.C. Krupp, Director,
Griffith Observatory, Mt. Wilson, Los Angeles CA
2010 “A Durable Tale” installation and lecture, Curated by University of Wales, Lampeter. INSAP VII, Bath
Royal Science and Literature Institute, Bath, England
2006 Co-Producer, “Kwagh-hir”, video documentary filmed in Nigeria. Director, Ddirector Charles Recher.
2002 Editorial review of Story by Harold Scheub, for Africa Today, the African Studies Journal of the
Indiana University Press.
2000 Lead Paper, International Conference of the National Association of [Nigerian] Women Academics
(NAWACS), Abuja, Nigeria.
1998 “Fulani Astral Traditions and the Epic of Gilgamesh; A Comparative Study”, Sub-Saharan Literature
panel, African Studies Association Annual Meeting, Chicago IL
1998 Site Ethnographer, Internationalizing New Work in the Performing Arts, pub. Ford Foundation, New
England Foundation for the Arts
1995 Illustrations, Deftere Ledde E Pudi [Atlas of Fulani Traditional Botany], Fary Silaat Ka, ARED Press,
Dakar, Senegal
1991 SE Portrait 1980-1989, collaboration with Bruce Posner
1983 Light Ambulant catalogue, artistic collaboration with Cesar Trasobares
Selected artistic activity
2014 “Therapist,” Sanatorium installation, Pablo Reyes, Art Basel, Inaugural Exhibition of ICA |\/| MIAMI.
2013 “A Personal Almanac” installation. Curated Dr. Lynn Gamwell, for Eighth International Conference
on the Inspiration of Astronomical Phenomena (INSAP VIII) “City of Stars.” Hayden Planetarium,
American Museum of Science and Natural History, NYC
2013 “Memory Is Our Most Important Product” solo installation. Curated Lou Anne Colodny. Under the
Bridge Gallery, North Miami FL
2011 “Teen Moon” collaboration with Patti Hernandez and Domingo Castillo (The End) & Nineties Teen
band; and “Xerox Oracle” performance installation. Curated Denise Delgado. Enter the Nineties
exhibit, Main Library Gallery, Miami Dade Public Library, Miami FL
1980-2010 GATHERING EVIDENCE A 30-year’s quest of oral star almanacs in SE U.S. & West Africa.
2000-2010 SE PORTRAIT third and final decade, selected activities
2009 “BIG DOG w/hunter” for Dog Tales. Curated, Barbara Young. Main Library Gallery group exhibit.
Miami Dade Public Library, Miami FL
2008 “Dormition” Curated, David Audet and Judith Robertson. Festival of the Moving Image,
Hillsborough Community College, Ybor City FL.
2004 “Dormition” Curated, Judith Robertson and Dimitry Chamy. TRANSMISSION Mobile Video Collective
for Art Basil, Miami FL
2003 “Ask Them” Curated, David Audet. Festival of the Moving Image, Hillsborough Community College,
Ybor City FL.
“Measured Response” Curated, James Herring. SPACE, Thinking Outside the Sphere group exhibit,
Miami Museum of Science and Planetarium, Miami FL
2002 “Enduring Miami” Curated, Elizabeth Hall. Flarb 2, Aqua Hotel group exhibit for Art Basel, Miami
Beach FL
“Long Shot in the Dark” Curated, Bob Chambers. The No Show group exhibit. Fredric Schnitzer
Gallery, Miami FL
2000-2002 Fulbright Scholars Program/Council for the International Exchange of Scholars. Teaching/Research
appointment, University of Jos, Nigeria.
1990-2002 A SOUTHEAST PORTRAIT second decade, selected activities
West African star lore, field research
1996 Niger Delta, Republic of Mali: Bella, Bozo, & Fulani villages & nomadic encampments
1995 Senegal & Republic of Mali: Wolof, Serer, Bambara, Dogon, and Fulani villages & nomadic
encampments
Performance installations
1999 “Luna Launch” Collaborative performances curated, Steve Stamphile and Gustavo Matamoros.
Cultural Plaza Sculpture Court, Historical Museum of South Florida, Miami FL
1998 “Vulture Moon” Curated, Mary Luft. Ambrosino Gallery group exhibit, Miami FL
1997 “Handy Shadows” Curated, Charles Recher. Art Center South Florida group exhibit, Miami Beach FL
1994 “Ivy Moon” Curated, Bruce Posner. Carpenter Center for the Arts, solo performance, Harvard
University, Cambridge MA
“Moving Illumination” Curated, Cesar Trasobares. Ground Level group exhibit, Miami Beach FL
“Naughty Medusa, Gorgon-in-the-Moon” Curated, Gala Committee. Gala Opening, Art Miami,
Miami Beach FL
1993 “Planetarium Playhouse” Curated, Cesar Trasobares. 40th Annual Art Festival Atlanta, Atlanta GA
“Planetarium Moon” Curated, Bonnie Clearwater. Museum of Art group exhibit, Fort Lauderdale FL
“Planetarium Labyrinth” Curated, Bonnie Clearwater. Museum of Contemporary Art (MoCA) group
exhibit, Miami FL
1992 “1.5 Planetarium” Curated, Yvonne Muranushi. Muranushi-Lederman Project, NYC
“Planetarium Wall” Curated Roly ChangBarrerro. Frances Wolfson Gallery group exhibit, Miami
Dade College, Miami FL
1991 “Counting Change” Curated, Don Chauncey. Alliance for Media Arts solo installation, Miami Beach
1980-1990 A SOUTHEAST PORTRAIT first decade, selected activities
Residencies and performance installations
1988-1999 CLEAN BREAK Mobius (Boston MA), Birmingham Museum of Art (Birmingham AL), New Music
America 10th Anniversary Festival (Miami FL), Columbus Museum of Art (Columbus GA),
Contemporary Art Center (New Orleans LA)
1984-1987 GATHERING EVIDENCE Exit Art (NYC), The Currier Gallery of Art (Manchester NH), The Clocktower
(NYC), Real Art Ways (Hartford CT), AVA Gallery (Hanover NH), XXIV Cartagena Film Festival
(Cartagena, Colombia), Nexus (Atlanta GA), center Gallery (Chapel Hill NC), 200 East Gallery
(Knoxville TN), Moon Gallery (Rome GA)
1983 LIGHT AMBULANT Prep for SE Portrait culminates in this collaborative installation, Frances Wolfson
Gallery and the campus 6-story Atrium, Miami Dade College, Miami FL
1983 The Treasure Trail, curated Cesar Trasobares, Miami-Dade County Art in Public Places
Selected editorial reviews of artistic activity, appearing in:
Journals: Art & Auction, Harvard Magazine, High Performance, Image Film and Video, Art Papers,
Independent Spirit, Marquee
Newspapers: The New York Times, The Boston Globe, Atlanta Journal/Constitution, Cleveland Plain Dealer,
Manchester NH Union Leader, The Hartford Courant, Columbus GA Ledger-Inquirer, The Durham
Sun, The Tampa Tribune, The Chapel Hill Newspaper, El Universal Actualidad (Colombia), The Miami
Herald, The Miami News, Fort Lauderdale News, Orlando Sentinel
Selected awards
2017 Bas Fisher Initiative Project Award (Knight Foundation regrant), Miami FL
2017 Miami-Dade County Dept. of Cultural Affairs, Artist Access grant
2011 “A Durable Tale,” Joan Mitchell Foundation grantee, Atlantic Center for the Arts residency. Curated
Alexis Rockman. New Smyrna Beach FL
2007 Miami-Dade County Dept. of Cultural Affairs, Artist Access grant
2006 Miami-Dade County Dept. of Cultural Affairs, Artist Access grant
2000-2002 Fulbright Scholar Program, Teaching-Research Award, Nigeria. Council for International Exchange of
Scholars.
1996 National Endowment for the Arts (regional regrant), New Forms Florida Artists Fellowship
1993 R.W. Greenfield Endowed Teaching Chair, Miami Dade College
1993 National Endowment for the Arts (regional regrant), Gathering Evidence
1989 The Henry Luce Foundation (institutional regrant), Gathering Evidence
1988 State of FL Division of Cultural Affairs, program grant, Gathering Evidence
Selected professional activities 2006-2011 Executive Board, Interdisciplinary Sound Arts Workshop (iSAW), South Florida Composer’s Alliance 2006 Academic Reviewer, Janson’s History of Art, The Western Tradition, 7th Edition (Pearson/Prentice Hall) 2004-2005 Selected participant, National Science Foundation Math and Art Workshop, University of Indiana and Franklin and Marshall College, Harrisburg PA. 2000-2008 Panelist, International Cultural Exchange Grants Panel. Miami-Dade County Dept. of Cultural Affairs 1996-2012 Preliminary Adjudicator, National Foundation for Advancement in the Arts Annual Awards 2002 Referee, African Studies Review, the African Studies Association Journal 2000-2002 Referee, NAWACS Journal, annual publication of the National Association of [Nigerian] Women Academics 1999, 2000 Panelist, Individual Artist Fellowships, Interdisciplinary Panel, State of Florida Division of Cultural Affairs 1999 Education & Exhibitions Committee, Bass Museum of Art, Miami Beach FL 1998, 1999 Panelist, City of Miami Beach Cultural Arts Council program grants, Miami Beach FL 1998 Panelist, Interdisciplinary/Multidisciplinary Program Awards Panel, State of Florida Division of Cultural Affairs 1997 Panelist, Art in Public Places Panel for Penalver Center commission, State of Florida Division of Cultural Affairs 1997 Panelist, Art in Public Places Panel for Reeves Center commission, State of Florida Division of Cultural Affairs 1983-1986 Director, Miami Waves Film & Performance Festival, Miami Dade College, Miami FL
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:53 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:noreply@send-email.org
Sent:Thursday, March 22, 2018 2:03 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:A Palo Alto Case Study on Pension Liability
Dear Palo Alto Mayor and Council Members, A Palo Alto Case Study on Why Pensions are Broke(n): Our
library director is ~2 years from retirement age. Our City Manager gives her "occasional office hours" (direct
quote reported from staff) and a big salary bump to ALSO direct CSD for the next 18 months. I can only guess what the retirement delta is for that extra sinecure before retirement. A non-aggressive estimate gives a PV
annuity value of around $0.8-1.0 mil. Maybe less if she's vested < 30 years, but still. This is likely a CMO
attempt to fix a short-term budget gap by holding out on replacing the CSD director. But how myopic can we
be? This move only makes sense when you have one foot out the door and it's someone else's money. Also, can
"occasional office hours" run our CSD? Do the council and citizens have no say in a big management structure change like this? Thought you might like to know. Maybe there's time to fix? Please consider asking the CMO
to reorg and save our children another big chunk of pension liability. A Concerned Citizen March 22, 2018
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:05 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Marcus Jamison <mjamison@pausd.org>
Sent:Wednesday, March 28, 2018 7:23 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:A Thank you, Shout Out (and 1 Suggestion) about the Arastradero/Charleston
improvements
Dear Palo Alto Council Members
Wow! Simply wow! It is absolutely clear that a lot of work and consideration has gone into the Arastradero/Charleston
project, and I want to thank you guys immensely!
I graduated with a Bachelor’s in Urban Studies, a Minor is Architecture and a Master’s in Mathematical Education all from
Stanford, and I am currently a math teacher at Gunn living in the Arbol Real Community on Charleston and El Camino. I bike to
work 98% of the time (some days I just can’t with the rain) and drive on Arastradero to get to 280 North and Charleston to get
to the 101. This is the road that I bike and drive on the most.
Everything has been really thoughtful, from having a continuous bike lane from the JCCish area past Foothill, to using the
detection cameras instead of the coils to detect cars and cyclist, to the “punch outs” (I don’t know what to call them) when
approaching Middlefield to put cyclist in the right position to allow a smoother transition for people making a right. And now
there are more right turn only lanes for cars too.
Oh, and the traffic signal guy (pardon my French) was the shit! He took a lot heat from people pissed that Caltrans and the
County won’t coordinate with the city to allow non‐stop flow, or a cyclist who was pissed off about the Wilkie intersection.
However, he remained calm, brushed it aside and continued giving wonderful information. That was very cool and very
impressive!
So to everybody working on this, job well done!
Ok, now just one thing, in the week day mornings between 7:40ish and 8:20ish (I don’t know the exact times, but if you talked
to the school traffic stop sign holder he could give more accurate times) cars get so backed up going SW on Arastradero, that
people going NW(from Mountain View) on El Camino cannot make a left turn into Arastradero, cars continuing straight are
stuck at the light, and often impatient drivers block end up blocking oncoming traffic of El Camino.
As of yet, there does not seem to be a fix to this problem. Other than there being excess amount of cars going to Terman,
Gunn, Tesla, VM ware, SAP, the VA etc…)(okay let’s be honest tech bros aren’t usually up that early) the two main things that
can be causing this back up is 1) the light at Maybell and 2)the lighted pedestrian crossing at Clemo Ave. The light a Maybell
seems to be set to slow Southwest traffic along Arastradero, where the first car must stop, or slow down significantly before
the light turns green. The crosswalk at Clemo is certainly used by Juana Briones, Terman and Gunn students during this time
interval.
Currently what I believe happens is when a student pushes the crosswalk button, the cars stop to let the children and/or
parents cross the road, then a few seconds later that Maybell light senses that no one is coming, so that when cars can start
driving again passing the Clemo crosswalk, they usually have then stop again at Maybell before continuing on to Terman.
So, I am wondering if a few things are possible
1. Could the Clemo Crosswalk be semi‐on demand? For example when a pedestrian pushes to cross, there is a
countdown that is generated that calculates the most optimal time for the pedestrian to cross, as to not to lead to a
back up that spills into the El Camino intersection?
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:05 AM
2
2. Could the setting on Maybell be changed during these peak hours to allow greater flow through?
3. Could there be sensors on the SW bound lanes right after the El Camino intersection to detect that there are stopped
cars, so to help determine when cars need to be “pushed” through to not impede on the El Camino intersection
Thank you so much!
Marcus Jamison
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:04 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Nicolas Stier <nicostier@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 27, 2018 10:30 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Ben@bikesiliconvalley.org
Subject:bike corridors and infrastructure
Dear Representative,
My children and I commute by bike to school and work every day. I appreciate all the efforts the city
has made and will continue to do in this respect.
Just some pieces of feedback below, but in general I'd love for you to continue working to encourage
more transportation that is eco-friendly, safe, and reduces congestion.
In particular, all of us ride along portions of Middlefield Ave (between midtown and the schools Paly,
Jordan, and Walter Hays). Right now some parts are not very bike friendly and there is no option to take bike roads such as Bryant or Ross. For example, between midtown and Jordan I see children
riding along the sidewalk all the time because the street has no space. Hopefully this can be
improved to increase the safety of our children.
The other concerning aspect is the integration with the region. There is the bike overpass on 101 close to Oregon, but then the bike trail has been closed in EPA for a long time. This forces riders in
unsafe streets and there is no bike overpass before Menlo and that's far away.
Thanks for your attention.
Best wishes,
Nicolas
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:58 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Winter Dellenbach <winterdell@earthlink.net>
Sent:Tuesday, March 27, 2018 3:44 PM
Subject:Buena Vista item of interest - Delores Huerta on TV tonight
Dear Friends of Buena Vista - I want to give you a last minute heads-up on an opportunity to see the Oscar nominated documentary, Delores, on the life of Delores Huerta.
It is on TONIGHT, Tuesday, Channel 9 (KQED/PBS) at 9PM (Independent Lens). The documentary is about 2 hours in length - I saw it at the Guild Theater in Menlo Park last
year - it is excellent, deeply inspiring, showing historical footage of California migrant workers
before the Union, their struggle, her personal life with its ups and downs, and the moving
triumph of her being awarded the Medal of Freedom by Pres. Obama. Every organizer
everywhere has and can learn from her, especially women, especially Latina women.
As you may know, Huerta was co-founder of the United Farmworkers Union with Caesar Chavez
and a life long activist who is still organizing. My husband, I, and Erika Escalante were fortunate to see her recently at Stanford where she talked about her Foundation that trains community organizers in the central valley. Erika remarked afterwards that the resident's effort at Buena Vista was exactly in the mold of Huerta's organizing model.
Note: At 8PM tonight is an hour long documentary on feminist leader, Wilma Mankiller - the first
woman who was elected to lead the Cherokee Nation. She died a few years ago.
Finally - I will be writing you again in the next day or two on another matter, so please watch for a
second email from me.
Winter Dellenbach
Friends of Buena Vista
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:01 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:William M. Conlon <bill@conlon.org>
Sent:Tuesday, March 27, 2018 4:46 PM
To:Library, Pa
Cc:Council, City
Subject:Change in terms of service
I would like to express my objection to recent changes at the City of Palo Alto Library.
The library has entered into a contract with a Canadian company, BiblioCommons, to provide services related to the
library's collections. Unfortunately, this is not merely a back‐office function in support of the library, but directly
impacts the users of the library.
Notably, it is no longer possible to request that an item be placed on hold, unless the individual creates an account with
Biblio. There may be other services that are similarly affected, such as inter‐library loans.
Now, individuals must either sign up with BiblioCommons, accepting their terms of service that include arbitration in
Toronto, Canada, or ask a librarian to place a hold on the item. This is true both for online remote access to the library
collection and in‐person physical access in the library building. Presumably, the librarian will enter the individual's
information into the BiblioCommons system when placing the hold.
It seems to me that:
* this is an extra and unnecessary burden on both users and librarians;
* this will increase risk of leakage of private information, as the BiblioCommons privacy terms plainly state that "Lists of
your current loans, due dates, outstanding fees, etc. may be loaded from your library record during your sessions
online." Even if this information is not stored in a user account by BiblioCommons, it may be intercepted in transit, or
may persist in log files on remote servers.
* the City should not require users to sign up with a private third party to receive taxpayer funded services
* it is unreasonable that citizens of Palo Alto would subordinate their rights under California and US law to a private
third party
* it is unreasonable that citizens of Palo Alto should be forced to accept an arbitration clause in a foreign country in
order to use taxpayer provided services.
I would ask the library director to allow holds to be placed using just the library card bar code and PIN, as before,
without requiring the establishment of an account with BiblioCommons.
Thank you.
Bill Conlon
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 4:44 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, March 23, 2018 10:01 AM
To:paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; chuckjagoda1@gmail.com; Council, City;
cbolanos@smcgov.org; swagstaffe@smcgov.org; Jonsen, Robert;
wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com; HRC; stevendlee@alumni.duke.edu;
gkirby@redwoodcity.org; Cullen, Charles; Binder, Andrew; griffinam@sbcglobal.net;
citycouncil@menlopark.org
Subject:Civilian oversight for Santa Clara County sheriff’s office
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/03/20/santa‐clara‐county‐approves‐civilian‐oversight‐for‐sheriffs‐office‐
jails/amp/
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:57 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Vik Kuttappan <vik.kuttappan@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, March 21, 2018 12:41 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Dangerous intersection at East Meadow and Ross Road
Dear City Council,
The intersection at East Meadow and Ross Road is dangerous. The implementation at the intersection of East
Meadow and Ross Road measures 64 feet from the northeast corner to the southwest corner. The minimum recommended ICD for a single-lane roundabout is more than 50% bigger at 105 feet. As I also
pointed out, the bike lane ends abruptly into a sharp curb and by all guidance should slowly taper into a rolled
curb.
Quoting from the California Highway Design Manual - Roundabouts Section (2015).pdf p. 400-37 In some locations, it may not be practical to build a single lane roundabout that will operate for 10 years. Geometric
constraints and other conflicts may preclude widening to the ultimate configuration. In such cases, other
intersection configurations or control strategies addressed in Index 401.5 may need to be considered p 400-38
The inscribed circle diameter for a single lane roundabout generally ranges between 105 feet to 150 feet to
accommodate the California Legal design vehicle and 130 feet to 180 feet to accommodate the STAA design vehicle (George's note: STAA design vehicle = largest firetruck spec of 48 feet).
Roundabouts: An Informational Guide Second Edition p 1-12, Exhibit 1-9 - clearly states that a Mini-
Roundabout has an ICD of between 45-90 feet (a roundabout has a minimum ICD of 90-feet). - clearly states
that a Mini-Roundabout has a fully traversable island and splitters p 1-12, Exhibit 1-10 shows a diagram of what SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT p 1-13, Exhibit 1-11 shows a picture of what SHOULD HAVE BEEN
BUILT p 1-13 In retrofit applications, mini-roundabouts are relatively inexpensive because they typically
require minimal additional pavement at the intersecting roads and minor widening at the corner curbs. They are
mostly recommended when there is insufficient right-of-way to accommodate the design vehicle with a
traditional single-lane roundabout. Because they are small, mini-roundabouts are perceived as pedestrian-friendly with short crossing distances and very low vehicle speeds on approaches and exits.
A fully traversable central island is provided to accommodate large vehicles and serves one of the
distinguishing features of a mini-roundabout. The miniroundabout is designed to accommodate passenger cars
without requiring them to traverse over the central island. The overall design of a mini-roundabout should align vehicles at entry to guide drivers to the intended path and minimize running over of the central island to the
extent possible. pp. 2-17,18 Where bicycle lanes or shoulders are used on approach roadways, they should be
terminated in advance of roundabouts to merge cyclists into traffic for appropriate circulation with other
vehicles. In addition, bicycle lanes should not be located within the circulatory roadway of roundabouts as this
would suggest that bicyclists should ride at the outer edge of the circulatory roadway, which can increase crashes with cyclists and both entering and exiting motor vehicles. Because some cyclists may not feel
comfortable traversing some roundabouts in the same manner as other vehicles, bicycle ramps can be provided
to allow access to the sidewalk or a shared use path at the roundabout.
Bicycle ramps at roundabouts have the potential to be confused as pedestrian ramps, particularly for pedestrians who are blind or who have low vision. Therefore, bicycle ramps should be reserved for those situations where
the roundabout complexity or design speed may result in less comfort for some bicyclists. Ramps should not
normally be used at urban single-lane roundabouts. More details about bicycle design treatments at roundabouts
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:57 AM
2
can be found in Chapter 6. p 6-72 Where bicycle lanes or shoulders are used on approach roadways, they should
be terminated in advance of roundabouts. The full-width bicycle lane should normally end at least 100 ft (30 m)
before the edge of the circulatory roadway.
Terminating the bike lane helps remind cyclists that they need to merge. An appropriate taper should be
provided to narrow the sum of the travel lane and bike lane widths down to the appropriate width necessary to
achieve desired motor vehicle speeds on the roundabout approach. The taper should end prior to the crosswalk
at the roundabout to achieve the shortest possible pedestrian crossing distance. A taper rate of 7:1 is recommended to accommodate a design speed of 20 mph (30 km/h), which is appropriate for bicyclists and
motor vehicles approaching the roundabout. To taper a 5 ft to 6 ft (1.4 m to 1.8 m) wide bicycle lane, a 40 ft
(12.2 m) taper is recommended.
The bicycle lane line should be dotted for 50 to 200 ft (15 m to 60 m) prior to the beginning of the taper and dropped entirely through the taper itself. A longer dotted line gives advance notice to cyclists that they need to
merge, providing more room for them to achieve this maneuver and find an appropriate gap in traffic. Where
traffic design guidelines are not followed, an engineer should provide detailed explanations for such variances --
this is a matter of public safety, not an art project. I would like to know what regulations you refer to when you
write "engineering judgement is always permitted in the field of roadway design"? If an engineer uses bad judgment to design a dangerous traffic obstacle, who is responsible for remedying the dangerous obstacle? Can
you provide any justification for the as-built design in this intersection? Can anyone?
But first -- STOP DIGGING HOLES until we sort this out.
The correct design will likely be cheaper and easier to implement than what Laurentiu Dusciuc designed (if, as
Josh said Friday, he is the engineer who "sealed" this design). The intersection at East Meadow and Ross could
be retrofit
ted to be completely traversable (or mountable), and the bulbouts can be removed and curbs can be rolled.
Getting this one right is really important if you are going to replicate it ten more times around the city in coming years.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 4:45 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:OCA Silicon Valley <ocasiliconvalley@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, March 23, 2018 3:13 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:gilbertswong@gmail.com; kkosai@ocanational.org; masonraymondfong@gmail.com
Subject:Fwd: Letter Supporting the Renaming of the Middle School after Fred Yamamoto of the
442nd US Army
Attachments:OCA Silicon Valley - Letter regarding Fred Yamamoto Renaming 3.23.18.pdf
Greetings to the Honorable Members of the Palo Alto City Council,
As an FYI, below is a message that OCA Silicon Valley has sent to the Palo Alto Unified School District with
regards to the renaming process of two of their middle schools. Should you all have any questions, please let us
know.
Thank you all very much for your public service, and we look forward to working together in the future.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: OCA Silicon Valley <ocasiliconvalley@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 3:07 PM Subject: Letter Supporting the Renaming of the Middle School after Fred Yamamoto of the 442nd US Army
To: kdauber@pausd.org, jdibrienza@pausd.org, mcaswell@pausd.org, tcollins@pausd.org,
tgodfrey@pausd.org, khendricks@pausd.org, board@pausd.org
Cc: gilbertswong@gmail.com, masonraymondfong@gmail.com, kkosai@ocanational.org
Greetings to Interim Superintendent Hendricks and Honorable Members of the Palo Alto Unified School
District Board of Education,
Attached you will find a letter from OCA Silicon Valley, the Valley's premier Civil Rights advocacy
organization for the Asian & Pacific-Islander (API) American community, advocating in support of renaming one your Middle Schools after Fred Yamamoto. We stand in solidarity with the various chapters of the Japanese
American Citizens League (JACL) that have also sent letters advocating in support of the renaming after Fred
Yamamoto.
We will also send this letter to the Palo Alto City Council. Should any of you have any questions, please respond to this email individually along with those cc'd on the email, and we would be happy to engage in a
discussion.
Thank you all very much for your public service, and we look forward to hearing back from you.
Sincerely,
--
Gilbert S. Wong, President
& Mason R. Fong, Executive Vice President
OCA Silicon Valley
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:53 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:George Jaquette <jaquette@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, March 26, 2018 9:05 PM
To:Council, City; Mello, Joshuah; De Geus, Robert
Subject:Fwd: This afternoon at the Ross-Meadow Traffic circle
Our kids reported multiple safety violations at the construction sites on East Meadow and Ross Road, and on
Mayfield (which should have been the detour route). No flaggers, a scraper / grader backing up without any
visibility (so they could have driven over a kid on a bike).
Our kids said they rode between the cones set up to keep cars out, and skirted construction equipment.
Saving money the wrong way, the city awarded the contract to a company (Granite Construction) that bid 30%
of the amount that the lone competitor (O'Grady) bid. Poor choice, poor results.
STOP THE MADNESS.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Date: Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 4:53 PM
Subject: This afternoon at the Ross-Meadow Traffic circle
To:
***** Granite or the City or PAPD need to put traffic enforcement and more flaggers at this intersection ASAP. They
should beef it up during the school commute times.
Crazy scene this afternoon. My older son arrived home from Gunn at 2:45 and said Ross is a mess of construction and the circle is blocked and torn up. I biked down to check it out. Photos below of the area.
Granite has outsourced traffic/flagging to BATS. BATS claimed to have 6 guys for the whole thing, but I only
saw 1 overworked man at the circle and one on Ross north of Meadow. Meadow was physically blocked to
auto traffic on the right lane between Grove and Arbutus. Cars were supposed to go around to Talisman which was also torn up w/no flaggers.
The kids dealt with it - some walking and some off-roading through the torn up street. That said, I am very
concerned that the skip loader and large grader Zamboni kept on working - including backing up - without
missing a beat. The other Granite guys w/shovels had their backs to the whole thing. All it would have taken is one rogue kid to cross mid-street instead of ride on the sidewalk like the others.
As I was biking home at 3:30, a super from Granite and a white truck from the city were just arriving. Possibly
someone called to say another crazy parent was out taking photos.
3:12 - The Circle flagger is focused on directing auto traffic on Ross to go straight through the eastern half of the circle. I’ve mentioned twice that kids on bikes are coming in packs and the trucks ought to
stop working for a few minutes. Kids bike on south sidewalk. A few who will turn on Ross move over to
the north sidewalk.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:53 AM
2
3:13 - The Skip Loader finally stopped working after I spoke up again and took more photos. The
Zamboni truck continued to move forward and backward. No way he could see a kid on a bike behind him. The Granite guys with shovels do nothing.
3:13 - The kid on corner may have fallen due to uneven pavement. I did not see.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:53 AM
3
Kids continuing down ross, saw this about two driveways north of Meadow. Flagger told me to ride on
the sidewalk, but the thing was still moving so I stopped.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:53 AM
4
The large grader kept on working and the flagger went to help the confused kid. When he came back to
talk w/me the grader crushed a construction sign in front of him.
--
George Jaquette
email: jaquette@gmail.com
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:52 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Grant <grant@sagephotoworks.com>
Sent:Thursday, March 22, 2018 4:23 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:In support of CoolBlock
Council Members,
I am writing to express my support for CoolBlock’s request for matching funding. As a former CoolBlock leader, trained
CERT, Captain for the emergency response Trailer 4 team, and a member of ARES, the amateur radio emergency services
group that supports our OES, I have experience working with various groups in Palo Alto concerned with helping
neighbors and changing behavior. They all add value to our community, but CoolBlock has particular strengths that
maximize its effectiveness and can even multiply the effect of other groups.
CoolBlock's unique structure brings people together every two weeks for five months to work together on lowering their
carbon footprint, using resources wisely, becoming disaster‐ready and appreciating their neighbors/neighborhood. This
format is crucial in that it helps build trust between the people of the neighborhood and develops a commitment to
act.
CoolBlock is collaborative and adds value to other groups. It brings representatives from the Genie Program, Zero Waste
and the ESV program to CoolBlock meetings to share their missions and answer questions. CoolBlock will definitely
increase interest in other volunteer groups within the City.
CoolBlock adds great value to Palo Alto. We shouldn’t miss this opportunity to be an early adopter of a program that
has what it takes to become a nationwide effort to help us all be better stewards of our planet and more involved in our
neighborhoods.
Thank you for your attention,
A Grant Elliot
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:01 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Nick Briggs <nicholas.h.briggs@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 27, 2018 4:22 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:In support of roundabout at Ross/East Meadow
Dear City Council ‐‐
I would like to express my support for the roundabout and other treatments of Ross Road between East Meadow and
Loma Verde.
I rode my bicycle along that route today and it was exactly as my experience with roundabouts in other countries led me
to expect, which is that it is far better than 4‐way stops, and slows the fastest traffic somewhat.
I wish you had constructed roundabouts at Ross/Ames and Ross/Loma Verde to replace the 4‐way stops ‐‐ I hope that
you will consider this at some time in the future.
I believe, however, that you will need an education program because so many Palo Alto residents apparently have not
encountered roundabouts before. Perhaps you could start with an insert in the Utilities bills for a few months, and also
provide educational materials to the schools whose students are likely to ride through the area.
Yours sincerely,
Nick Briggs
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:55 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Finn Mennuti <fimennuti19@palyvoice.com>
Sent:Wednesday, March 21, 2018 6:21 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Interview regarding Marijuana Regulations
Dear members of the Palo Alto city council,
My name is Finn Mennuti, and I am the features editor for the Paly Voice.
I am interested in conducting a filmed interview of a member of the city council about the direction the council intends
to head regarding marijuana dispensaries in Palo Alto, and why.
Please feel free to email me if you have any questions or concerns.
Thank you for your consideration,
Finn Mennuti
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:52 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:JLS PTA <jlsptaemail@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, March 22, 2018 2:33 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:JLS PTA letter of support: Charleston-Arastradero Plan
Attachments:JLS signed letter 2018.pdf
Dear Palo Alto City Council Members,
Attached is the JLS PTA letter of support for the Charleston-Arastradero Plan. A hardcopy has also been
mailed. Sincerely,
Lili Nova-Roessig
President, JLS Middle School PTA
.PTA.
every child. one voice.®
Jl Stanford Middle School PTA
March 19, 2015
Dear City Council and Planning & Transportation Commissioners,
JLS Middle School attendance boundaries extend to neighborhoods south of
Charleston/Arastradero. Half of JLS students bicycle to school. We don't have a current
count of students who walk to JLS, but we know that many do. Many students who
commute to JLS must travel along or across some portion of this City of Palo Alto School
Commute Corridor. The JLS PTA actively encourages alternative commutes, so we
consider the safety of this corridor to be a very high priority.
JLS Middle School PTA Traffic Safety representatives and administrators have
participated in the Charleston/Arastradero Stakeholders group and the City School
Traffic Safety committee, providing comment and support for the
Charleston/ Arastradero Plan over the past decade as the project has evolved.
We ask you to approve the recommended Concept Plan Lines for the permanent
hardscape improvements to the street. Paint striping was adequate for a restriping trial
of road operations and it provided some safety improvements. We are glad the striping
plan was approved in 2012. It is time to put the hardscape improvements in place that
will deliver the majority of safety benefits to all users. These plans provide planted
medians, intersection and signal improvements, bulb-outs, multi-use paths, buffered
bicycle lanes, and other built enhancements. The project is a key component of the
south Palo Alto bike boulevard network as envisioned in the City of Palo Alto Bicycle &
Pedestrian Transportation Plan. It will safely connect PAUSD corridor schools to
thousands of community residences and after-school destinations.
We look forward to a safer street environment for all road users-people who drive,
people who bike, and people who walk, including JLS students.
Thank you for City of Palo Alto's partnership in creating safer routes to school.
Barbara Best
President, JL Stanford Middle School PTA
PTR
cucrychild.011cvoice. -
February 24, 2017
Ms. Celeste Fiore
Valley Transportation Authority Program.ming & Grants
3331 North First Street
San Jose, CA 95134
Dear Ms. Fiore,
Please support the City of Palo Alto grant application for Charleston/ Arastradero
Adaptive Traffic Signal Timing.
JLS Middle School attendance boundaries extend to neighborhoods south of
Charleston/ Arastradero Road. More than half of JLS students (on average,
581/ school day) bicycle to school. We don't have a current count of students who
walk to JLS, but we know that many do. Many students who commute to JLS must
travel along or across some portion of Charleston/ Arastradero. The JLS PTA
actively encourages alternative commutes, so we consider the safety of this corri-
dor to be a very high priority.
Active traffic signal management supports safe and efficient roadways. The Adap-
tive Traffic Signal Timing on Charleston/ Arastradero will improve traffic opera-
tions by improving travel times, reducing congestion, and reducing idling, espe-
cially during the morning peak hour when crosstown commuter traffic and school
commute traffic converges, creating severe congestion. Traffic signal enhancements
will minimize the number of drivers slowing down suddenly, which also causes
pollution. In turn, air quality around our schools and in Palo Alto will be
improved.
Adaptive traffic signal timing would enable completion of the transformation of
this school commute corridor that carries nearly 20,000 car trips per day and many
hundreds of students on foot and on bicycles to nearby schools, including JLS.
Please approve the City of Palo Alto application for funding. We look forward to a
safer, more sustainable, and more efficient street environment for all road users,
including JLS Middle School students.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
~~
Julia Jacobsen
President, JLS Middle School PTA
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:00 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Hong Quan <hong@karmicbikes.com>
Sent:Saturday, March 24, 2018 9:36 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Keep the Bike/Ped Plan
Dear City Council Members,
As a 5 year resident of Adobe Meadow, and the Founder of Karmic Bikes (based in Palo Alto), I would like to voice my strong support for sustainable, safe streets for all and full funding for the following three projects:
Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Plan
Phase 2 of the Neighborhood Traffic Safety and Bike/Pedestrian Plan
Adobe Creek Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge over Hwy 101
We need to fully fund and implement all three projects to create a strong, cohesive transportation network that
provides reliable, efficient and safe choices for all users: pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. All three projects
are part of our 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan, and align with key goals and policies from two
recently approved Council Plans the: 2017 Comprehensive Plan, 2017 Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (SCAP). Investment in active transportation and safe streets for all is one of the best ways to improve the
mobility of our residents (young and not-so-young) and help reduce congestion in our city.
My kids and I ride these streets and paths on a daily basis. Our sense of community and love for Palo Alto
depends on the way bikes are integrated into the city. Please stick to the plan.
Cheers,
Hong Quan
Louis Road
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:54 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Sea <paloaltolife@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, March 22, 2018 5:45 AM
To:evansa@vmware.com; betsy@vmware.com; Holman, Karen (external); Council, City;
ctraboard@googlegroups.com; Seelam Reddy; Sea; alafargue@mac.com;
madjensen@sbcglobal.net; schmitta@pacbell.net; estolee@gmail.com;
rstolee@gmail.com; Keene, James; fbalin@gmail.com; mikez@siliconvalleybuilder.com;
ESNoble@directv.com; lkou@apr.com; vicki@vickiforassembly.com;
sylvie_tif@yahoo.com; Espinosa, Sid; mdianda@dailynewsgroup.com;
60m@cbsnews.com; letters@nytimes.com; letters@paweekly.com
Subject:Maryland Governor wants have Plan re#MeToo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czGXjMMi‐_g&sns=em
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:54 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Laura Agigian <lmagigian@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, March 26, 2018 11:47 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:My Son Was Hit on Ross Road
Dear Council Members,
Below is a copy of the post I made recently on next-door. I hope it will take this accident into account when deciding which direction to go in the matter of the “traffic coming“ project on ice road. The project is created so
much fear and angst among parents in the Midtown and surrounding areas; please consider cutting your losses
and take those “squeeze points” out ASAP before we have a loss of life.
Thanks for your consideration.
Laura Michele Agigian
(650) 600-4271
______________________________
Laura Agigian,
Midtown · 3d ago
Hit and Run Driver on Ross Road
We may have our first "I told you so" regarding these dangerous road-blocks/"squeeze points" on Ross Road...
On Monday morning, my 11 year old son was riding his bike on Ross Road when he was side-swiped by a
moving car, which knocked him to the ground. The driver did not stop. As I had told him he must do, he rode
onto the sidewalk to avoid "the squeeze." This was northbound, just before Matadero Creek, at 8:00 AM, on his
way to Ohlone, probably just past Wintergreen.
He was coming back onto the street when a car came up behind him. My son had probably rode a little too far
out into the street, and the car probably drove a little too close to the sidewalk. As the front of the car passed, it
startled my son, who fell into the car as it was moving. He was knocked to the ground with his bike. The driver
did not stop. No one else was around to see the accident or help my son.
There are two possibilities: either the driver did not notice that s/he hit my son (talking on the phone??) or
intentionally drove away. Either way the driver was highly negligent and at fault. Although my son was sore
and in shock, he rode his bike home (just around the corner from the incident). Luckily for him, I am staying
home from work, due to an injury of my own(!). He was shaken up, and his left shoulder, arm, elbow and side
were very sore.
Miraculously, there were no broken bones or cuts or scrapes. (He had a well-fitting helmet on, which he said
also hit the ground.) His bike seems okay, too. I gave him ice-packs and arnica all day Monday and Tuesday.
He missed two days of school to recover. Despite my son's protests, I called the Palo Alto police, who sent an
officer over to talk to him and make a hit-and-run report.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:54 AM
2
I am so angry and frustrated- having my kids hit by a car is my worst fear as a parent. It really is a miracle that
he was not seriously injured. There is no chance of finding the driver, as my son did not notice anything
whatsoever about the car or the driver.
So now what? I feel like making a big sign that reads, "A Hit-and-Run Driver Hit my Son Here" and posting it
at that location. I would do it, except my son would be mortified. I am open to advise, or help, or ideas. Since I
am home recovering from a concussion, myself, I do not have the wherewithal to put energy and time into this.
But this is EXTREMELY SERIOUS.
I felt it was important for you, my Midtown neighbors, to know what happened. If anyone wants to use this
incident to help push the petition along to get those damn things removed, I will gladly support you. I can't
believe it was my son that got hit first. If this does not get fixed, it WILL happen again to someone else's child,
and the outcome will likely be worse.
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:58 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Wayne Martin <wmartin46@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 27, 2018 2:08 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Palo Alto Opposing California's "Sanctuary Laws"
The US has functioned effectively as a Republic since the adoption of its Constitution in 1787 in large part because of the
"Rule of Law" within a hierarchy where Federal law supersedes State law and State law supersedes local municipal
law. This disallows States from picking-and-choosing which national laws they will enforce within each jurisdiction.
California’s Constitution, however, authorizes citizens to adopt “charters” which can, in many cases, exempt their local governments from illegal, or over-arching legislation from Sacramento. Palo Alto has been a “Charter City” since 1909—and has the power to declare itself exempt from laws it does not feel benefit its residents.
The declaration of “Sanctuary State” by the handful of “progressive” legislators in Sacramento has outlawed some cooperation between government employees with Federal immigration officials. Further, it has outlawed private businesses from cooperating with Federal immigration enforcement.
The pending legal action initiated by the Department of Justice against these so-called “sanctuary laws” may take
years to resolve. However, the City of Palo Alto has the power under its Charter to declare itself not subject to these
anti-Federal laws—allowing its police officers to cooperate with Federal emigration authorities to remove criminals
from our city.
The Palo Alto City Council has a rare opportunity to stand up against the “progressive” lunacy emanating from
Sacramento be using its Charter power to declare the City and its residents free to protect their homes, families
and community honor by exempting Palo Alto from Sacramento’s policy of “sanctuary”.
The City could pass a resolution condemning the so-called “Sanctuary” laws, and it could join with the Federal
Government’s lawsuit against these laws.
Will the Council have the courage to do the right thing, and stand up against Sacramento in order to oppose the quickly unravelling of the “Rule of Law” and the public’s trust in its most important institutions?
Wayne Martin
Palo Alto
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:20 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, March 23, 2018 8:01 AM
To:James Aram; HRC
Cc:michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com; stephen.connolly@oirgroup.com; Perron, Zachary;
Binder, Andrew; Jonsen, Robert; Council, City
Subject:Palo Alto Police Auditor - Screenshot 2018-03-23 at 7.53.11 AM
The one policy change put in place was the “pat down” policy WE suggested to which WE received ZERO credit! Why,
Gennaco is critical and biased towards minority journalists and will go as fas as not returning any media calls concerning
his auditing / reports but, will return media calls from other news reporting agency’s
Sent from my iPad
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:56 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:redress.of.grievance@gmail.com
Sent:Tuesday, March 27, 2018 11:48 AM
To:HRC
Cc:Binder, Andrew; James Aram; acisneros@CApublicrecordslaw.com; Jonsen, Robert;
Dave Price; allison@padailypost.com; sdremann@paweekly.com;
swebby@da.sccgov.org; Stump, Molly; Council, City; Keith, Claudia;
cindy.chavez@bos.sccgov.org; swagstaffe@smcgov.org; gsheyner@paweekly.com;
Gary.Goodman@pdo.sccgov.org; Keene, James; Bullerjahn, Rich; Reifschneider, James;
Watson, Ron; Perron, Zachary; jrosen@da.sccgov.org; Jay Boyarsky;
stephen.connolly@oirgroup.com; molly.o'neal@pdo.sccgov.org;
michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com
Subject:PAPD Children’s Theater Scandal - XIV. The Decision to Close the Investigation and
Release a Redacted Investigative Report
Attachments:CMR_271_09.pdf
Re: Body-Worn Camera (Draft)
This report provides an excellent backdrop watershed of information which exemplifies now the police can, will
and do anything in terms, of releasing investigative reports redacted or otherwise. Even against, even against
DA recommendation.
For these and other past PAPD mishaps involving #MAV video’s, it is imperative that a tight policy governing
the public release of Body-Worn video to the general public be enforced, enforced to reflect Transparency and
Accountability which is non-existent in it’s present draft form.
We strongly suggest that the current Palo Alto Police Auditors be removed from and have any input into the development of any new Body-Worn policy be it, in draft form or otherwise.
Mr. Genanco has proven to be **negligent in his responsibilities to the community of Palo Alto whom he
serves.
By not coming before Palo Alto city council to discuss his audit reporting as required in his contract with the
city of Palo Alto and more importantly, its citizens.
We recommend an ***independent body of retired criminal defense attorneys review, develop the privacy,
(California Public Records Act) for criminal, and defense recommendations on how this Body-Worn camera policy best serves the general public
Mark Petersen-Petersen
Editor: Palo Alto Free Press
Ticuantepe, Nicaragua
** California State Bar complaint is warranted of the grounds of Moral Turpitude
*** Independent Body does not equal to DA’s office. DA’s are only an extension of the Palo Alto Police
Department and serves to prosecute rather than look for exculpatory evidence or innocence.
Sent from my iPad
INDEPENDENT POLICE
AUDITOR'S REVIEW OF THE PAPD
CHILDREN'S THEATRE CRIMINAL
INVESTIGATION
May,2009
Prepared by Michael Gennaco
OIRGroup
323-890-5425
www.laoir.com
INTRODUCTION
On June 18, 2007 the Children's Theatre ("CT") in Palo Alto was burglarized.
Officers from the Palo Alto Police Department responded and began a criminal
investigation into the burglary. As with any other burglary investigation, the employees of
the Theater were asked to identify missing items. Several days later, PAPD was informed
that pursuant to an investigation being conducted by another law enforcement agency,
traveler's checks made out to employees of the Children's Theatre had been recovered.
Eventually, additional traveler's checks were located and presented to PAPD from another
source.
The traveler's checks that were located had not been reported by the CT employees
as missing from the burglary. As a result, suspicions were raised about actions of certain of
the CT employees. As a result, the tenor of the Police Department's investigation
transformed from a routine burglary investigation to suspicions of fraud and
embezzlement on behalf of certain CT employees. A detective was assigned full time to the
investigation to attempt to determine whether financial crimes had been committed by any
of the suspected CT employees.
As a result of the PAPD investigator's initial investigation, search warrants were
eventually applied for and obtained for CT offices, residences of certain CT employees, and
storage lockers maintained by the CT. In addition, judicial authority was also obtained to
search lockers maintained by the Friends of the Theatre, a non-profit group formed to
support the CT. After the search warrants were obtained and as the search warrants for
the CT were being executed, the targeted CT employees were visited at work and asked to
travel to the police station for interviews. In the meantime, PAPD personnel were assigned
to search the remaining targeted locations. In order to effectuate the search of the CT, the
theatre was closed.
At that time, the investigation drew significant attention from the citizens of Palo
Alto and local media. As the investigation proceeded, questions and concerns were raised
by the community about the nature of the investigation. The investigation eventually
concluded with a public announcement that no criminal charges would be filed against the
targeted CT employees. At the same time, a redacted version of the lengthy investigative
report was voluntarily released by PAPD. Rather than resolve issues, the closing of the
criminal case and the release of the report only served to heighten concern about the
criminal investigation itself. As a result, your Council requested that the Independent
Police Auditor conduct a review of the investigation to assess the decisions made by PAPD
officials as the investigation progressed and offer any recommendations for reforms to
address issues arising out of that assessment. Please consider this report as the IPA
response to that request.
1
DISCUSSION
I. IPA's Assessment Protocol
It was not the intent of IPA to "re investigate" the investigation in any formal sense.
However, in order to ascertain the thoughts, theories, and steps of the investigation, it
became important to talk with those involved or connected with the investigation. In the
same way, targets of the investigation and actual and potential witnesses to the
investigation had important perspectives to provide on these salient issues. Finally, it was
critical to review the investigative report and related materials in order to address issues
that arose after the investigation became overt. During this analysis, the IPA was able to
gain the cooperation of each of these important sources of information save one.
Unfortunately, the former and now retired Detective Supervisor assigned to lead the
criminal investigation for P APD declined to speak with the IPA regarding his mindset and
investigative decision making. While that individual's participation in this process would
certainly have provided another important perspective, the cooperation from PAPD and
City officials as well as those directly and indirectly impacted by the criminal investigation
provided the IPA inquiry a wealth of information and perspectives from which to asses~ the
matter.
II. Answers to Questions Presented
The following questions were presented to the IPA for consideration:
Question 1: Based on the information initially presented, was it appropriate to
initially proceed with a criminal investigation?
Answer 1: Perhaps, but for the reasons delineated below, better alternatives
existed that could have eventually obviated the need for a criminal investigation.
Moreover, as detailed below, the Department may not have been appropriately equipped to
conduct a criminal investigation of the sort envisioned.
Question 2: Did the conduct of the criminal investigation follow accepted
practices?
Answer 2: The conduct of the criminal investigation was lacking in several
dimensions as detailed below.
Question 3: Were internal and public communications accurate and consistent
with the evidence obtained and accepted practices?
Answer 3: The decision about what information to release and when to release it
deserves to be revisited for future occurrences.
2
The review also requested recommendations for reforms which are included at the end of
this document. To further flesh out the answers to the questions presented above, it is
important to discuss relevant aspects of investigative decision making as the matter
progressed.
III. The Decision by PAPD to Pursue an Embezzlement Investigation
Certainly, PAPD's initial response to the burglary of the CT was appropriate and
professional. Moreover, when additional information was received about the recovered
traveler's checks, additional inquiry was appropriate about whether irregularities were
being undertaken by employees of the CT. While the failure to report the missing traveler's
checks to the responding burglary investigators could have been a simple failure to
remember to report them, a more sinister interpretation could have been, and clearly was
formulated by PAPD personnel. This interpretation was buttressed by the admittedly
"strange accounting" practices for expense reimbursement in place for CT employees. As a
result of these suspicions, the focus of the criminal investigation shifted from one of
commercial burglary to one of financial embezzlement. When the investigative focus '
shifted, a detective supervisor took over responsibility of the investigation. At that time,
some efforts were made to develop a "paper trail" through requests for documents from
City officials and financial institutions. However, most of the resource dedication at this
juncture of the investigation consisted of interviews with various city officials and other
individuals familiar with City procedures and the financial workings of the CT.
The point at which suspicion began to shift from that of a commercial burglary to a
potential embezzlement investigation was a pivotal moment in the case. At that point, the
Department was faced with various options besides the path taken, namely, the decision to
move ahead on its own with a criminal embezzlement investigation:
• The Department could have recommended that an independent audit be conducted
of the CT's "strange accounting" practices, reimbursement requests, contracts,
dealings with the Friends, and other assorted monetary dealings.
• The Department could have considered referring the matter to an outside agency.
• The Department could have requested an early consult with the District Attorney's
Office.
In retrospect, either of these options, or a combination thereof, may have been the
road better taken. If the Department had worked with City leaders to request an
independent audit, a disciplined professional group could have been tasked to identify
irregularities. A methodical paper trail could have been developed by persons trained,
experienced, and equipped to "follow the money" and then assess how the CT accounted for
3
its expenses, requests for resources and reimbursements, as well as any evidence of undue
financial gain. Once such an audit was completed, the information elicited from that
assessment could then have been used to revisit whether a criminal investigation was
warranted, and if so, what the scope of that investigation should be. Alternatively, the
audit's results could have indicated that a criminal investigation was not appropriate but
that CT financial practices were in need of clear reform and/or that the audit results
suggested potential violations of City policy indicating an internal administrative
investigation was necessary.
The only real potential disadvantage of conducting an audit of this sort was that it
could "tip off' those involved in potential criminal wrongdoing. While there is certainly a
likelihood that those guilty of criminal activity might be placed on guard with any overt
financial review, it is much more difficult to cover the tracks of financial crimes cases than
other crimes. The paper trail is difficult to erase, particularly in these days of computer
databases and electronic storage and any real effort to destroy evidence often places the
perpetrator in peril of being caught not for the crime itself but for the criminal "cover up".
In addition, if there is any concern about records being destroyed during an audit,
protective mechanisms can be devised to lessen the likelihood of such occurring. Finally,
those suspected of criminal activity can be interviewed before the audit is begun, "locking
them in" to statements before they are aware of the suspicions against them.
The hand off to an outside agency also has inherent advantages over continued local
control. First, an outside agency may have more expertise and resources at its behest. It is
undisputed that the resources eventually dedicated by PAPD to this investigation placed a
significant strain on the Department's other law enforcement responsibilities. Second, an
outside agency will not be potentially subject to attacks from the community of partiality,
i.e., that the "iconic" status of the CT and its managers caused PAPD to either pursue that
icon with too much or too little zeal. An outside agency is better insulated from both
ongoing and subsequent criticism that the local law enforcement agency may suffer, i.e.,
that a local law enforcement agency cannot be impartial in determining the appropriate
degree of investigative energy to be deployed because of its closeness to the situation and
the persons and organizations targeted for investigation. In fact, when PAPD determined
to continue on with the case, it clearly did recognize from the outset that it was
investigating an organization and individuals which were seen by many as pillars of the
community. That recognition raised concern from PAPD managers that a tepid
investigation might be viewed as an unwillingness to investigate robustly those entities and
may have resulted in conscious or subconscious overcompensation regarding the vigor
with which the investigation was conducted. In any event, outside agencies are certainly
more immune from charges of partiality, either in favor or against the subjects of potential
criminal activity.
4
For financial crimes cases, early and frequent discussion with the prosecuting
agency is a desirable and important feature. White collar crimes are usually complex and
unique and discussion with the prosecutorial entity regarding the necessary evidence and
potential defenses is a discussion that should be had early on in the life of an investigation.
In this case, PAPD eventually did bring the District Attorney's Office into a substantive
discussion but by then much investigative work had already been conducted.1 As a result,
the ability for the District Attorney to meaningfully counsel PAPD regarding the strength of
the evidence, the potential existence of significant defenses, and appropriate investigative
strategies was significantly diminished.
In sum, while PAPD cannot be faulted for its decision to proceed with a criminal
investigation based on the information initially available, it is mindful for future cases to be
aware that other options exist. That being said, the decision for PAPD to move forward
with a criminal investigation was not in and of itself inappropriate. It is quite likely that the
decision not to proceed with a criminal investigation would also have subjected the
Department to criticism, as it has regarding recent alleged acts of City employees in
another department that were not investigated criminally. Nonetheless, and as explained
further below, the execution of the criminal investigation was problematic in several
regards.
IV. The Assignment of the Investigation to a Detective with No Apparent
Formal Financial Crimes Training
By opting not to avail itself of these alternative paths, the Department was left to its
own devices, resources, and abilities to pursue the investigation. In this case, a veteran
police detective supervisor assigned himself to the case, with his supervisors' approval, and
was largely responsible for the shape and path of the investigation. Unfortunately, while
this individual had a wealth of experience and detective work in other criminal arenas, his
experience in working financial crimes case was not nearly as robust. Even more
importantly, this individual who quarterbacked the investigation may not have received
any formal financial crimes training in his years as a police officer. For financial crimes in
particular, training in how to conduct such investigations is critical. The assignment of an
officer to investigate this complex financial case with no significant formal training in the
1 While there was at least one telephone conversation about the matter with other District Attorney
representatives earlier on in the investigation, the understanding from this review was that the first substantive
meet to consider the state of the evidence with a representative of the District Attorney's Governmental Integrity
Unit occurred in November of 2007, after the investigation had been well underway. It should also be noted that
the investigative report reflects a telephone conversation between the lead PAPD investigator and a
representative in the District Attorney's Office. While the report reflects support from the DA representative for a
eriminal investigation it also recommends conducting an audit, a recommendation apparently not carried forward
by the investigator.
5
area was an unfortunate decision that likely worked to the disadvantage of the resulting
investigation.
V. The Import of Interviews of City Employee Witnesses
As the criminal investigation progressed, numerous City employees were
interviewed in an effort to divine City policies regarding reimbursement procedures,
approval requirements for contracts, how excess property was to be handled, and the like.
While there is no evidence of dissembling by those witnesses, the focus on "appropriate"
procedures did not sufficiently consider what procedures and processes had been "de
facto" tolerated over years and years of operation. In other words, the investigation failed
to sufficiently pursue and assess how City officials had been aware of, allowed, and
endorsed procedures that may have been against the letter of City policy but were both
implicitly and explicitly authorized for years.
For example, one focus of the criminal investigation was the allowance by CT
managers of the Friends to sell costumes that had been created with City funds. The
criminal investigators interviewed City officials and learned that in order to conduct such a
transaction, the CT managers would have needed to obtain authorization for the
transaction at the highest levels of City governance. However, the investigation also
learned that the decision to begin a costume sale did not originate from the current CT
managers and targets of the criminal investigation. Most importantly, the investigation
also learned that the costume sales had been occurring openly and with at least implicit
authorization for years, a fact fatal to any successful criminal prosecution. The failure to
recognize the import of this information was a significant shortcoming of the investigation.
This recognition failure also appears in the investigative report prepared in this
matter. For example, the report discusses an incident in which a City employee allegedly
discovered a "misappropriation" by the CT Director at which time he informed the Director
to cease the activity but she did not do so. The witness further indicated that he then
requested an audit be conducted of CT operations but that because of a friendship with the
Director, the audit did not occur. The report however, fails to recognize the import of this
exchange. If "misappropriation" is in fact going on and the City indeed became aware yet
took no action to learn more about the actions, an embezzlement criminal action cannot
survive years later.
Later in the report, a witness is reputed to have told the investigator that the CT
Director admitted that she was aware of policy but failed to follow it. The witness further
indicated, according to the report, the Director failed to follow the policy, her supervisor
failed to follow the policy, and the staff of the witness failed to follow the policy. Again, the
import of this statement is apparently not recognized by the investigator. The unchecked
policy violations that immediate supervisors and other City staff became aware of and
6
chose to do nothing about provide a strong defense to the CT Director with regard to
potential criminal charges.
From a review of the evidence, it appears that with regard to every other allegation
of criminality, the City's awareness, authorization, and/or tolerance of the actions of CT
managers was devastating to any viable criminal prosecution of the acts being investigated.
In other words, the City's awareness, toleration, and endorsement of the various financial
undertakings by CT authorities provided a complete defense to the criminal charges being
considered. The failure of the investigation to fully understand the import of this potential
defense and learn the depth of any such authorization over the years is a fatal flaw.
VI. The Search of the Children's Theater, Personal Residences, and Interview
of CT Officials
After the interviews of the City officials and other witnesses had been undertaken and
some financial documents had been collected, the investigation proceeded to another
phase. At this point, affidavits were prepared by the investigative team requesting judicial
authority to search the CT office, residences of CT officials, lockers of the CT and CT
officials, and lockers maintained by the Friends. While the application for the search
warrants was approved by the judge, there is some question about the appropriateness of
the affidavits. The affidavits only contain evidence indicative of guilt and do not iterate the
potential defenses of prior authorization exemplified in the proceeding section. In
addition, it was learned during this review that rather than seek counsel and authorization
from the Deputy District Attorney of the Government Integrity Unit who had been
previously consulted, the affidavits were apparently presented for review to a Deputy
District Attorney unfamiliar with the investigation. As a result, the sifting mechanism role
often assumed by the District Attorney's Office was compromised as a result of the initial
consulting Deputy District Attorney not having the opportunity to review the search
warrant applications.
Once the search authorization was obtained, a plan was devised that while the
search of the numerous locations was underway, the subjects of the criminal investigation
would be interviewed. It has been suggested that in order to ensure that the CT employees
would be found at work, recommendations from persons outside the Police Department
that the search of the CT be conducted while the theatre programs were on hiatus were not
accepted. In any event, while there were apparent attempts to conduct the search at the CT
in a way to shield children participants from the law enforcement activity, the success of
these efforts is still open to considerable debate.
As the search and interview operation progressed, it became apparent that the plan
to interview all CT subject employees and all of the search locations was impracticable. As
a result, padlocks were placed on several of the search sites and they were searched several
7
·• ' ..
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:49 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Roberta Ahlquist <finnroberta@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, March 26, 2018 2:42 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Last set of photos
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:49 AM
2
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:35 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Roberta Ahlquist <finnroberta@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, March 26, 2018 2:40 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Pictures 4 of 11
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:35 AM
2
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:43 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Roberta Ahlquist <finnroberta@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, March 26, 2018 2:41 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Pictures 5-8 of 11
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:43 AM
2
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:57 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Sharon Elliot <saelliot7@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, March 21, 2018 12:38 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please Fund Coolblock
Dear City Council Members,
I’m writing to ask you vote to fund the expansion of CoolBlock. As a former CoolBlock leader and BPC, a current NPC, CERT, Zero Waste Leader and VP of Adobe Meadow Neighborhood Association, I have had
experience with several groups in Palo Alto concerned with helping neighbors and changing behavior. They all
add value to our community, and I’ve found that CoolBlock has particular strengths that maximize its
effectiveness and even multiply the effect of other groups.
CoolBlock's unique structure brings people together every two weeks for five months to work together on
lowering their carbon footprint, using resources wisely, becoming disaster-ready and appreciating their
neighbors/neighborhood. This format is a crucial piece that helps people build trust and commit to act. The
other groups I’m familiar with don’t offer this level of support and encouragement.
CoolBlock is collaborative and adds value to other groups. It brings representatives from the Genie Program,
Zero Waste and the ESV program to CoolBlock meetings to share their missions and answer
questions. CoolBlock will definitely increase interest in other volunteer groups in the City.
CoolBlock adds great value to Palo Alto. We shouldn’t miss this opportunity to be an early adopter of a program that has what it takes to become a nationwide effort to help us all be better stewards of our planet and
more involved in our neighborhoods.
Sharon Elliot
Adobe Meadow NPC VP AMNA
We're all in this together
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:58 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Pat Marriott <patmarriott@sbcglobal.net>
Sent:Wednesday, March 28, 2018 10:57 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:RE: $2M too much!
It would be worthwhile for you to read what happened last time the city did a vanity project:
http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2014/07/11/editorial‐project‐creep‐at‐city‐hall
Uploaded: Fri, Jul 11, 2014, 9:29 am
Editorial: Project creep at City Hall
$4.5 million lobby 'refurbishment' tough to swallow
…. Like the minor home‐remodeling project that keeps expanding beyond the intended scope and sends costs soaring, the
city staff quietly turned this relatively minor renovation into a major and complex project …
… It is a great example of how a lot of money can get spent with little, if any, public scrutiny, and how years of prioritizing
and lamenting about needed infrastructure projects can be bypassed by a simple budget amendment placed on a
consent agenda.
… its approval undermines the city's credibility as it wrestles to find funding for projects that are more important than
this one.
From: Pat Marriott [mailto:patmarriott@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 10:48 AM
To: City Council (city.council@cityofpaloalto.org)
Subject: $2M too much!
Council Members,
Councilman Tanaka is correct (and backed up his opinion with his vote!). This is yet another vanity project for the city
and a shameful way to spend $2M when there are greater needs.
It was bad enough when the city spent $4.3M for all sorts of posh (unnecessary) amenities back in 2014.
I’ll bet if the money came out of your own pockets, you’d go to Best Buy and get a much better deal.
Pat Marriott
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:00 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Ganesh Venkitachalam <venkitac@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, March 24, 2018 7:38 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Re: dangerous roundabout on Ross Road & E. Meadow drive
Hello,
There's a new roundabout on Ross & E. Meadow. The problem is, it's WAY too large. It blocks the road. Also, at the actual intersection, there is *zero* room for bikes. I like the idea of roundabouts, but this one is just an
accident waiting to happen. Blocking the road like this and not having room for bikes is just wrong.
Can you please break this up and fix it?
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:53 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, March 22, 2018 7:45 AM
To:Aram James
Cc:chuckjagoda1@gmail.com; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com;
gkirby@redwoodcity.org; dcbertini@menlopark.org; Jonsen, Robert; Council, City;
council@redwoodcity.org; Cullen, Charles; editor@paloaltofreepress.com; Doug Fort;
HRC; stevendlee@alumni.duke.edu; swagstaffe@smcgov.org; myraw@smcba.org;
Binder, Andrew; jrosen@da.sccgov.org; michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com; Kan, Michael;
bos@smcgov.org; molly.o'neal@pdo.sccgov.org; donald.larkin@morganhill.ca.gov;
Kilpatrick, Brad; Lee, Craig; hayden@yourcriminaldefender.com; Stump, Molly; Keene,
James; edwinfrey@hotmail.com; Lum, Patty; Wagner, April; Bonilla, Robert;
swebby@da.sccgov.org; jaythor@well.com; Bullerjahn, Rich; Reifschneider, James;
citycouncil@menlopark.org
Subject:Re: Promotions not punishment for lying cops
Look no further than the Palo Alto Police Department. April Wagner in the now infamous Ciampi case in which she was found guilty of using an unconstitutional ruse. Just another form of lying... Use of false pretense
leading to probable cause under lying conditions
“Judge sharply criticizes 'tainted' police actions in tricking Joseph Anthony Ciampi
to exit his van, leading to a fight and double Taser incident’
https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2008/12/17/assault-on-an-officer-charges-dismissed-in-palo-alto-taser-
case
April Wagner an agent at the time rose to the level of lieutenant presently...Also
found to have passed along confidential phone call records.
https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2010/10/20/palo-alto-officer-taped-released-private-call
This individual should be striped of badge and weapon and decertified to serve anywhere... included in this:
Ron Watson, Patty Lum, Robert Bonilla, Daniel Ryan stripped of pension.
The Palo Alto Police Department has a very long pervasive list / record of acts of deceit. It’s ingrained in their present day culture...with full support from James Keene and council...
The most comprehensive report available on this subject which I have read time and time again. The City Of
New York - Commission Report July 7, 1994 Milton Mollen Chair
The culture of lying remains unchanged as this current article exposes....And it does not have to be this way...
Cognitive behaviors can be changes by eliminating the special laws that protect police. Namely, Police Officers
Special Bill of Rights
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:53 AM
2
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers%27_Bill_of_Rights
Mark Petersen-Perez
Editor: Palo Alto Free Press
Ticuantepe, Nicaragua 🇳🇮
Sent from my iPad On Mar 21, 2018, at 9:40 PM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/nyregion/new-york-police-perjury-
promotions.html?referer=https://www.google.com/
Shared via the Google app
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:24 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Rohit Relan <rohitrelan7@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, March 24, 2018 10:10 PM
To:Rohit Relan; CACI-Inquiry@doj.ca.gov; stateinfo@state.ca.gov
Cc:Police; environmentalcrime@interpol.int; inspector@unhcr.org; Council, City;
mjr@stanford.edu; Office of the President; Board Operations; Press@usdoj.gov;
elizabeth.wareing@seattle.gov; epwashington@europarl.europa.eu; OTP
InformationDesk; president.juncker@ec.europa.eu; recruitment@opcw.org;
miroslav.lajcak@un.org; publishing@echr.coe.int; juan-
carlos.gonzalez@curia.europa.eu; annuaire.interinstitutionnel@consilium.europa.eu;
cristina.lambotte@europarl.europa.eu; mail@bundestag.de; de-mail@bundestag.de-
mail.de; WEBMESTRE@assemblee-nationale.fr; inquiries@un.org;
holocaustremembrance@un.org; info@parl.gc.ca; speakers.office@parliament.govt.nz;
U.S. Senator Rand Paul; Press_Harris@harris.senate.gov; KlinckMV2@state.gov; San
Francisco Asylum; info.berlin@dfat.gov.au; Paulino, Tom (Feinstein);
Chesna_Foord@feinstein.senate.gov
Subject:Re: Rohit Relan
I am being repeatedly prevented from contacted Attorney General California
CACI-Inquiry@doj.ca.gov.
stateinfo@state.ca.gov
Rohit Relan
25 March 2018
On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Rohit Relan <rohitrelan7@gmail.com> wrote:
Rohit Relan
Palo Alto CA
25 March 2018
To:
Palo Alto Police Attorney General California Attorney General United States
City Council Palo Alto
Stanford University President and Trustees Board of Supervisors Santa Clara County Members US Senate Canadian Australian New Zealand parliaments
Secretaries State Defense DHS Treasury Commerce
Seattle Police
CC: Director and Board Interpol
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:24 AM
2
Director and Board Environmental Crime Interpol
Director and Board Cyber Crime Interpol
Inspector General UNHCR
Members European Parliament
Members German Parliament
Members French Parliament European Court of Human Rights
International Criminal Court
European Court of Justice
Members European Council
Members European Commission
Representatives Members States OPCW
Representatives Member States General Assembly UN
Representatives Member States UN Security Council
Director UN Holocaust Program
Re: Palo Alto Police Report Number: 17-324-0028; the United Kingdom, its parliament, security services; the United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and their parliaments and security services and individuals named below, for the period April 29, 2015 to January 10, 2018:
Members US Senate Canadian New Zealand Australian Parliaments
Secretaries DHS State Defense Treasury Commerce Previous two Secretaries DHS Director and previous director FBI Sheriff's Department Santa Clara County
Stanford Department of Public Safety
M. Warner, R. Paul, K. Harris, R. Blumenthal, D. Feinstein J. Trudeau; P. Twyford; D. Cameron; B. Obama; D. Trump
Theresa May
Recipients:
The above complaint is outstanding with no response since fall 2017. I need this matter resolved, and escalated
to Interpol.
The matter started with my publishing research publicly in December 2014, then conducting more research at Stanford in 2015, while my alma mater was instructing on my research. I was on campus April 2015 till early
2016; during this time I was subjected to harassment and police criminality by the Stanford Department of
Public Safety and the Sheriff's deputies at Stanford, including entrapment and entrapment-based arrest.
That matter evolved into refusal of service by Palo Alto Police, ignoring of my matters by the police, FBI and secretary DHS; and since spring 2016, has become 24 hour biological/chemical/radiological attacks resulting
in accidents, broken bones, surgery, removal of face, eye and body hair, contusions, bruises, and permanent
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:24 AM
3
biological damage to skin, eyes and bones; what else is transpiring, I am uncertain as yet, but it includes
thousands of electric shocks a day, radiation, externally induced convulsions and muscle spasms and
contusions, all of which stop when I go to the hospital emergency room.
There has been a celebration from the Financial Times, and the Wall Street Journal, "we are going to adjust the
dials and switches on our systems in order to vary the amount of biological damage we are going to inflict."
Palo Alto Police has refused service starting summer 2016, and then winter 2016, and then in 2017. The first event was a threat by a white male "I'm going to break your other leg," the second event was a gym shirt that
was moved from its location inside my residence; the third event was a bicycle that was moved from the
courtyard to the driveway; the next event was a pair of scissors that arrived inside the front door of my
residence spring 2017. These events happened during the last and current presidencies. The secretary DHS
ignored this matter in writing the starting spring 2017, and then again each time since then.
The previous head of state of the US has discussed 42 "dog days over," 22 "not out yet," "bonus" and "sing,
unburied sing." This person has celebrated damaged dual color hair at the same time. The current head of state
of the US has been associated with "22 delete" twice, Palo Alto Police was made aware of it. This person has
discussed growth of hair on the neck recently. D. Feinstein has sent out a hate-inspired Christmas card winter 2015, that was also referred to police.
The FBI ignored my matter since spring/summer 2016.
The parliaments of New Zealand, Australia and the Canadians ignored and/or celebrated this matter since summer 2017; and have been informed, sometimes daily, sometimes several times a day since that time.
I first communicated with the person leading the UK in summer 2017, after which, this person used my
research on two occasions, one to solve a terrorism problem in this person's country, one to make a threat
against her own head of state. I offered my services; and to return to that country despite the criminality by the security agencies; I asked that the surveillance be brought within the bounds of legality and
decorum. Following that, the attacks were increased in nature, type; and so were their celebrations. I have
already communicated to the court system of that country that I cannot return to that country based on these
events.
This person has authorized a campaign of biological/chemical/radiological/suspected nuclear attacks starting
August 2017; there were other biological attacks in spring 2016, including a forced bike accident where I was
pushed off the bike, resulting in broken bones and surgery; and then removal of 70% of the hair on my head in
fall 2017.
This person has authorized several times daily biological attacks including faeces, urine and semen.
This person has authorized 16 intentional infections; each one repeated twice; alluded to by the media of that
country.
This person has authorized theft of cash, property, damage to property, including third party property, theft of
medications, including contact lens, and damage to medications.
This person has authorized including 1000 electric shocks a day into a human being, at the rate of one a
second; radiation at levels requiring hospital ER visits; bruises, contusions and body damage; and convulsions caused by external forces.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:24 AM
4
This person has authorized damage to the Seattle airports/Air Alaska/Wells Fargo/Twitter/Facebook/MSN.
This person has alluded to "22 die/dog/black/disappear/die/stamp out/burn you down; 42 disappear."
This person has alluded to gays in that country disappear in prison.
This person has alluded to Chinese disappear.
This person has authorized damage to hospital property, including medical systems at Stanford University.
This person has authorized damage to Stanford ER hospital property at the precise moment that the Emergency
Room staff are recommending "immediate voluntary self-hospitalization to get a safe space."
This person has authorized simultaneous biological damage to hair and genitals as retaliation for "taking out the crown jewels," or more precisely, for whisteblowing that country as an anti-Semite and fraudster.
This person has made an empty threat against this person's country's head of state.
This person has authorized immediate and permanent biological damage to the body part I show publicly, each time I put a picture of myself on the internet.
This person has authorized immediate further permanent biological damage to the body part I show publicly,
each time I put a picture of the initial damage on the internet.
This person has authorized immediate and permanent biological damage each time I engage online with any
media firm, in any matter, in probably the most severe case of media envy in history.
This country has been told many times, including EU countries, to keep its activities within the bounds of
legality and decorum.
This person has authorized switching off biological/chemical/radiological/suspected nuclear damage
systems, from the offices of the security services of these five countries, each time I present myself at a
hospital or medical facility.
This person has authorized the celebration of each electric shock, radiation and
convulsion/spasm/biological attack with the follow-on attack of another electric shock, radiation and
convulsion/spasm so that I am biologically, chemically, radiologically/nuclearly attacked twice the amount;
and twice at a time. That is two electric shocks, two hits of radiation and two of unknown hits each time.
This person has authorized the security services of this country to have a "conversation" with myself, each
conversation involving one electric shock, one radiological hit/biological hit/unknown hit; each
conversation being "f**k yourself, f**k off and die, you dog, ni**er, you Pa*i; f**k yourself - with same,
similar and additional racial, sexual curses; each such conversation when there is a person of such or
similar profile in my vicinity; so that an electric shock is delivered to my body so that my eye attention is
moved to the direction of the said person.
This person has authorized that country's security services to give electric shocks, radiation and other
biological damage each time I look at pictures of the damage on my body.
This person has threatened to burn down the embassy of another country during parliamentary proceedings.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:24 AM
5
This person has authorized its security agencies to convey threats of permanent disease, including blindness,
complete removal of every body hair, permanent irreparable damage to reproductive organs, disappearance and
death, almost daily online, and in person.
This person has been accused of fraud, deception, misrepresentation during parliamentary proceedings.
This person has been accused of condoning child abuse.
This person has solicited cash for conducting regular government business.
This person has been accused of sanctioning and celebrating illegal activities by its security services when
"people are suspected of joining terrorist" organizations - while this person has used my research.
This person has a publicly recorded reputation of open hate of blacks, Americans, minorities and foreigners
going back years.
The media of the country of this person has discussed castration and removal of hair more than once on the
home pages of the Financial Times, Reuters, and BBC. This damage has been celebrated by the Wall Street Journal, Radio New Zealand, the government funded entity of New Zealand, New Zealand Herald, the Sydney
Morning Herald, Toronto Star and Globe and Mail, sometimes almost daily. Some US media firms are even
drawing very accurate pictures of my symptoms; without my ever have had any engagement with these firms;
or described my symptoms in sufficient detail.
This person has been hissed, booed and cursed repeatedly during London Pride in Hyde Park.
The previous prime minister of this country has discussed disappear/dog/black die/eradicate/banned/stamp out
publicly.
The head of state of this country has celebrated biological attacks with the same intended result of removal of
every hair from my body, disease, disappearance and death publicly, using similar visual imagery as this
person did on June 22 2017, "other UK buildings are combustible."
This person has publicly celebrated and taunted the biological chemical and suspected radiological/nuclear
attacks ("this country needs more female spies").
Advance warnings were given about these attacks on the home page of the BBC, Financial Times, and Reuters
repeatedly, including removal of every hair from my body, radiation, intentional infection of disease,
disappearance followed by death starting 2016.
The parliaments of New Zealand and Canada have had public celebrations of this matter along the lines of
"Twyford: how to stay zen during biological attack," and "Trudeau: reproduce yourselves, Asians," and
"Twyford: why don't you reproduce yourself."
These attacks and permanent biological damage have been alluded to as "pranks." [A visit to a medical facility
in that country will immediately reveal that infecting human beings intentionally with diseases is part of the
paradigm, including the entire spectrum, public (NHS) and private facilities, irrespective of; to the extent that
many people living in that country prefer to travel to other countries, including for routine medical treatment.
Biological/chemical/radiological/suspected nuclear attacks are "pranks."]
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:24 AM
6
This county has been alluded to as maggots eating into live humans; and snakes maggotting into humans; I
have not even visited a UK web site since last August, a public discussion or allusion to my work or related (or
even unrelated) events anywhere and by anyone around the globe results in a biological attack by these five countries.
This country has been referred to and alluded to as snakes and a dustbin.
Stanford Hospital and Palo Alto medical staff have described these people as "sick," "animals," "not human," "are these human?" "have you called the police?" "you are lucky you have some hair left."
Each time I have communicated with the parliaments of these countries, including appeals to end the
attacks, the attacks are increased. I have disengaged from this country since August 2017, including not
even visiting any of their web sites, which is a reason for an attack itself.
All of this material has been recorded to the police and the parliaments and public officials of this country at
least once, and sometimes repeatedly.
I have an open inquiry into this country with the European Parliament winter 2015, REF GEDA A(2015)01779.
This person has authorized sending falsified, incomplete and inaccurate reports of the biological attacks to the
four countries that it does and shares "surveillance" and intelligence with; according to allusions via email by
Mark Warner (senator Connecticut); Feintein and Blumenthal were previously made aware of the attacks and have ignored it.
I have had the status of US asylum seeker since spring 2015, my application with DHS is pending.
All of the materials you require are already with Palo Alto Police; I have communicated repeatedly with the institutions listed here on this matter.
Rohit Relan
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:55 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:George Jaquette <jaquette@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, March 21, 2018 8:26 PM
To:Mello, Joshuah
Cc:De Geus, Robert; Council, City
Subject:Re: Ross Rd Bike Boulevard
Josh-
At the risk of confirming that I have more free time than most people, I bothered to try to deconstruct
your email.
Your claim that East Meadow and Ross Road are not "National Network, Terminal Access routes, California
Legal routes, or Legal KPRA Advisory routes" is readily contradicted by the fact that a fire department is one
block away and East Meadow is a bus route. Those are STAA vehicles who must travel on East
Meadow. This intersection is a problem for STAA vehicles. No design guidelines anywhere support
what was built.
The central island is a Neighborhood Traffic Circle. Applicable and relevant for low-volume, very wide
intersections (without the other treatments). There are three in the area, NOTHING like the
intersection of East Meadow and Ross Road.
The bulbouts ... just aren't any part of a roundabout. They are meant for mid-street traffic calming.
They are a PROBLEM in a roundabout.
The raised islands ... are suggested when a roundabout is bigger than 120 feet. Definitely not
suggested or advised for a mini-roundabout, where all islands should be traversable.
The intersection as designed is a collection of traffic calming measures that collectively create a traffic
hazard, wildly in violation of all design guidelines for a mini-roundabout.
This is NOT an argument about how to pronounce "potato" or "tomato" -- lives are at stake every
morning. The longer you delay the removal of these traffic impediments, the angrier I get.
750 people have signed the petition to STOP digging holes and building non-conforming mini-
roundabouts. Are you about to tell me that Moreno and Amarillo are not "National Network, Terminal
Access routes, California Legal routes, or Legal KPRA Advisory routes"? You suggest that some category of road in Palo
Alto is outside of national, world‐wide design guidelines for mini‐roundabouts, and I disagree. These are the roads that
our children bike on every day.
The difference between winning and losing the last city council race was 800 votes. I plan to get to
2000 signatures on the petition to stop digging holes in the coming months, and November the
reckoning will happen.
I think you are responsible for this design, Josh -- you managed Chris (who had no engineering
experience) who managed Alta Design (where you used to work). This design is so ridiculous that
you are reduced to declaring that major commute routes are not (and I quote): National Network,
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:55 AM
2
Terminal Access routes, California Legal routes, or Legal KPRA Advisory routes. Despite the fact that they are bus routes
and fire department service roads. Really?
How is the fire department supposed to reach houses on Ross Road? Should VTA Route 88L re‐route to avoid East
Meadow Road? I am afraid that despite your claims, STAA vehicles travel down East Meadow at 7:49am every school
day and those buses have to travel on these roads. They hit the curb every morning. I have it on video if you doubt me.
Are you suggesting that East Meadow is a cowpath? I cannot come up with any possible explanation for your email. I am
honestly open to being proven wrong, but sending me a chart that confirms everything I have said is a bad strategy.
George
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 4:56 PM, George Jaquette <jaquette@gmail.com> wrote:
Josh-
In this chart, do you agree that a 64-foot ICD is a mini-roundabout (and NOT a roundabout)?
Mind-roundabouts are defined as those with ICD < 90 feet, and they should have completely traversable / mountable islands and splitters.
Are you open to having a national expert from the FHWA weigh in on the design? If you can share the
engineering analysis that resulted in this design (with him, if you are not willing to share it with me) that will
go a long way towards addressing my concerns.
It seems to me that the city does not have an expert on staff who has read the relevant guidelines, or we would
not have this non-conforming design (it would have been reviewed and rejected). Further, it seems to me that
we have created a dangerous non-conforming intersection and that we should move with haste to remove the
obstructions that have been built.
So, do you agree that the intersection of East Meadow and Ross Road is a mini-roundabout? and if so, do you
agree that by definition the islands should be traversable?
George
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Mello, Joshuah <Joshuah.Mello@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote:
Mr. Jaquette:
Thank you for your response. The minimum inscribed circle diameters that you cite below apply to roadways on the
National Network, Terminal Access routes, California Legal routes, or Legal KPRA Advisory routes. Neither Ross Road
nor East Meadow Drive are on these networks. The applicable inscribed circle diameter range is shown in the table
below in row one. It is our opinion that the roundabout at Ross Rd and E Meadow Dr meets these guidelines.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:55 AM
3
Regards,
JOSHUAH D. MELLO, AICP
Chief Transportation Official
PLANNING & COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
Transportation
Joshuah.Mello@CityofPaloAlto.org
office: 650.329.2520 fax: 650.329.2154
Use Palo Alto 311 to report items you’d like the City to fix. Download the app or click here to make a service request.
From: George Jaquette [mailto:jaquette@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 4:19 PM
To: Mello, Joshuah <Joshuah.Mello@CityofPaloAlto.org>; De Geus, Robert <Robert.DeGeus@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Cc: Gaines, Chantal <Chantal.Gaines@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Shikada, Ed <Ed.Shikada@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Subject: Re: Ross Rd Bike Boulevard
Josh-
Thanks for sending the attachments. As I indicated last week when we met, the FHWA guidelines are the same as the NCHRP guidelines and this mini-roundabout does not adhere to the guidelines -- it does not even
remotely follow the guidelines. As we discussed, the implementation at the intersection of East Meadow
and Ross Road measures 64 feet from the northeast corner to the southwest corner. The minimum
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:55 AM
4
recommended ICD for a single-lane roundabout is more than 50% bigger at 105 feet. As I also pointed out,
the bike lane ends abruptly into a sharp curb and by all guidance should slowly taper into a rolled curb.
Quoting from your documents:
California Highway Design Manual - Roundabouts Section (2015).pdf
p. 400-37
In some locations, it may not be practical to build a single lane roundabout that will operate for 10
years. Geometric constraints and other conflicts may preclude widening to the ultimate configuration. In such cases, other intersection configurations or control strategies addressed in Index
401.5 may need to be considered
p 400-38
The inscribed circle diameter for a single lane roundabout generally ranges between 105 feet to 150 feet to accommodate the California Legal design vehicle and 130 feet to 180 feet to accommodate the STAA design vehicle (George's note: STAA design vehicle = largest firetruck spec of 48 feet).
Roundabouts: An Informational Guide Second Edition
p 1-12, Exhibit 1-9
- clearly states that a Mini-Roundabout has an ICD of between 45-90 feet (a roundabout has a minimum ICD of 90-feet).
- clearly states that a Mini-Roundabout has a fully traversable island and splitters
p 1-12, Exhibit 1-10 shows a diagram of what SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT
p 1-13, Exhibit 1-11 shows a picture of what SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT
p 1-13
In retrofit applications, mini-roundabouts are relatively inexpensive because they typically require
minimal additional pavement at the intersecting roads and minor widening at the corner curbs.
They are mostly recommended when there is insufficient right-of-way to accommodate the design
vehicle with a traditional single-lane roundabout. Because they are small, mini-roundabouts are perceived as pedestrian-friendly with short crossing distances and very low vehicle speeds on
approaches and exits. A fully traversable central island is provided to accommodate large vehicles and
serves one of the distinguishing features of a mini-roundabout. The miniroundabout is designed to
accommodate passenger cars without requiring them to traverse over the central island. The overall
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:55 AM
5
design of a mini-roundabout should align vehicles at entry to guide drivers to the intended path and
minimize running over of the central island to the extent possible.
pp. 2-17,18
Where bicycle lanes or shoulders are used on approach roadways, they should be terminated in
advance of roundabouts to merge cyclists into traffic for appropriate circulation with other vehicles.
In addition, bicycle lanes should not be located within the circulatory roadway of roundabouts as this
would suggest that bicyclists should ride at the outer edge of the circulatory roadway, which can
increase crashes with cyclists and both entering and exiting motor vehicles. Because some cyclists may not feel comfortable traversing some roundabouts in the same manner as other vehicles, bicycle ramps
can be provided to allow access to the sidewalk or a shared use path at the roundabout. Bicycle ramps at
roundabouts have the potential to be confused as pedestrian ramps, particularly for pedestrians who are
blind or who have low vision. Therefore, bicycle ramps should be reserved for those situations where
the roundabout complexity or design speed may result in less comfort for some bicyclists. Ramps
should not normally be used at urban single-lane roundabouts. More details about bicycle design
treatments at roundabouts can be found in Chapter 6.
p 6-72
Where bicycle lanes or shoulders are used on approach roadways, they should be terminated in advance
of roundabouts. The full-width bicycle lane should normally end at least 100 ft (30 m) before the edge of the circulatory roadway. Terminating the bike lane helps remind cyclists that they need to
merge. An appropriate taper should be provided to narrow the sum of the travel lane and bike lane
widths down to the appropriate width necessary to achieve desired motor vehicle speeds on the
roundabout approach. The taper should end prior to the crosswalk at the roundabout to achieve the
shortest possible pedestrian crossing distance. A taper rate of 7:1 is recommended to accommodate a design speed of 20 mph (30 km/h), which is appropriate for bicyclists and motor vehicles approaching
the roundabout. To taper a 5 ft to 6 ft (1.4 m to 1.8 m) wide bicycle lane, a 40 ft (12.2 m) taper is
recommended. The bicycle lane line should be dotted for 50 to 200 ft (15 m to 60 m) prior to the
beginning of the taper and dropped entirely through the taper itself. A longer dotted line gives advance
notice to cyclists that they need to merge, providing more room for them to achieve this maneuver and find an appropriate gap in traffic.
Where traffic design guidelines are not followed, an engineer should provide detailed explanations for
such variances -- this is a matter of public safety, not an art project. I would like to know what regulations you refer to when you write "engineering judgement is always permitted in the field of roadway design"? If an engineer uses bad judgment to design a dangerous traffic obstacle, who is
responsible for remedying the dangerous obstacle? Can you provide any justification for the as-built
design in this intersection? Can anyone?
Rob, I'll repeat what I wrote in my first email exchange with you -- I really believe that the City of Palo Alto
should HALT the project completely until someone can explain the reasons for these gross violations of all
published guidelines. I have forwarded you contact information for an expert at the FHWA who has offered
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:55 AM
6
to provide his guidance for free, and I really think we need to get an expert in here before someone gets hurt.
But first -- STOP DIGGING HOLES until we sort this out.
The correct design will likely be cheaper and easier to implement than what Laurentiu Dusciuc designed (if,
as Josh said Friday, he is the engineer who "sealed" this design). The intersection at East Meadow and Ross
could be retrofitted to be completely traversable (or mountable), and the bulbouts can be removed and curbs
can be rolled. Getting this one right is really important if you are going to replicate it ten more times around
the city in coming years.
Thanks-
George
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:43 AM, Mello, Joshuah <Joshuah.Mello@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: >
> Mr. Jaquette:
>
> Thank you for coming in to meet with us last week. I really appreciate the thought that you have put into
this issue. I also fully understand what is driving you in your campaign, as I have two small children myself. >
> I promised you a few follow-up items at the meeting. The list of the items and their current status is below:
>
>
> Provide you with collision data in the vicinity of Ross Rd and E Meadow Dr for the period between January 1, 2018 and March 17, 2018. We already have data from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2017. Status: We
have requested data from the Police Department.
> Provide you with traffic volume data for the intersection of Ross Rd and E Meadow Dr. Status: We are
assembling the data.
> Provide you with the relevant design guidance for roundabouts in Palo Alto. Status: Attached you will find the roundabout section of the California Highway Design Manual and the NCHRP document that the manual
references. It is our opinion that the roundabout at Ross Rd and E Meadow Dr meets these guidelines,
however engineering judgement is always permitted in the field of roadway design.
> Have the Safe Routes to School team reach out to you and your daughter regarding the development of a
roundabout education curriculum for third and eighth graders. Status: The Safe Routes to School team will be reaching out to you and your daughter shortly.
> Monitor impacts to Louis Rd in adjacent to Palo Verde Elementary School. Status: The Safe Routes to
School team will continue to coordinate with the school administration and PTA leadership.
>
> > Regards,
>
> JOSHUAH D. MELLO, AICP
> Chief Transportation Official
> PLANNING & COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT > Transportation
> Joshuah.Mello@CityofPaloAlto.org
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:55 AM
7
> office: 650.329.2520 fax: 650.329.2154
>
> Use Palo Alto 311 to report items you’d like the City to fix. Download the app or click here to make a service request.
>
>
> -----Original Appointment-----
> From: De Geus, Robert > Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2018 1:49 PM
> To: De Geus, Robert; Gaines, Chantal; Mello, Joshuah; George Jaquette
> Subject: Ross Rd Bike Boulevard
> When: Friday, March 16, 2018 9:00 AM-10:00 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada).
> Where: 7th Floor Conf Room >
>
>
>
> >
> Danille Rice
>
> Office of the City Manager
> > D: 650.329.2229
>
>
>
> From: George Jaquette [mailto:jaquette@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, March 05, 2018 6:48 PM
> To: De Geus, Robert
> Subject: Re: Ross Rd Bike Boulevard
>
> >
> Rob-
>
> Sounds great, I would love to share our experience and hear more about the goals. My personal objective is
to stop further work, as the current phase has created a very dangerous situation at the intersection of East Meadow and Ross Road. 552 people (to date) agree with me.
>
>
>
> I'll look forward to hearing from Judy, and also to meeting with you soon. >
>
> George
>
> >
>
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:55 AM
8
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 4:25 PM, De Geus, Robert <Robert.DeGeus@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote:
> > Good afternoon George,
>
> My name is Rob de Geus I work for the City of Palo Alto. I understand that you have a petition to stop the
bike boulevard project on Ross Rd. I would like to schedule a meeting with you to listen to your concerns and
I also hope we may be able to share more about what the project is intending to accomplish overtime, in relation to the City-wide bike and pedestrian plan. I hope you will be open to this as I am very interested in
hearing more resident feedback about this project. I will ask my assistant Judy Ng to find a day and time that
works for us.
>
> Thank you, > Rob
>
>
>
> Rob de Geus >
> Deputy City Manager
>
> 250 Hamilton Ave | Palo Alto, CA 94301
> > D: 650.463.4951 | F: 650.321.5612 | E: Robert.deGeus@cityofpaloalto.org
>
>
>
> “Engaging Individuals and Families to Create a Strong and Healthy Community” >
>
>
> --
> > George Jaquette
> email: jaquette@gmail.com
>
>
--
George Jaquette email: jaquette@gmail.com
--
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:55 AM
9
George Jaquette
email: jaquette@gmail.com
-- George Jaquette
email: jaquette@gmail.com
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:03 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:k jm <kjm1445@yahoo.com>
Sent:Sunday, March 25, 2018 2:59 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Re Ross Road
Attachments:datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png; datauri-file.png;
datauri-file.png
From Nextdoor - Many comments re Ross Road
It is official - the intersection at East Meadow and Ross Road is dangerous
Cut and pasted from my exchange with Josh Mello just now... Josh- Thanks for sending the attachments. As I
indicated last week when we met, the FHWA guidelines are the same as the NCHRP guidelines and this mini-
roundabout does not adhere to the guidelines -- it does not even remotely follow the guidelines. As we discussed,
the implementation at the intersection of East Meadow and Ross Road measures 64 feet from the northeast corner
to the southwest corner. The minimum recommended ICD for a single-lane roundabout is more than 50% bigger at
105 feet. As I also pointed out, the bike lane ends abruptly into a sharp curb and by all guidance should slowly taper
into a rolled curb. Quoting from your documents: California Highway Design Manual - Roundabouts Section
(2015).pdf p. 400-37 In some locations, it may not be practical to build a single lane roundabout that will operate for
10 years. Geometric constraints and other conflicts may preclude widening to the ultimate configuration. In such
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:03 PM
2
cases, other intersection configurations or control strategies addressed in Index 401.5 may need to be considered p
400-38 The inscribed circle diameter for a single lane roundabout generally ranges between 105 feet to 150 feet to
accommodate the California Legal design vehicle and 130 feet to 180 feet to accommodate the STAA design
vehicle (George's note: STAA design vehicle = largest firetruck spec of 48 feet). Roundabouts: An Informational
Guide Second Edition p 1-12, Exhibit 1-9 - clearly states that a Mini-Roundabout has an ICD of between 45-90 feet
(a roundabout has a minimum ICD of 90-feet). - clearly states that a Mini-Roundabout has a fully traversable island
and splitters p 1-12, Exhibit 1-10 shows a diagram of what SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT p 1-13, Exhibit 1-11 shows
a picture of what SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT p 1-13 In retrofit applications, mini-roundabouts are relatively
inexpensive because they typically require minimal additional pavement at the intersecting roads and minor
widening at the corner curbs. They are mostly recommended when there is insufficient right-of-way to accommodate
the design vehicle with a traditional single-lane roundabout. Because they are small, mini-roundabouts are
perceived as pedestrian-friendly with short crossing distances and very low vehicle speeds on approaches and
exits. A fully traversable central island is provided to accommodate large vehicles and serves one of the
distinguishing features of a mini-roundabout. The miniroundabout is designed to accommodate passenger cars
without requiring them to traverse over the central island. The overall design of a mini-roundabout should align
vehicles at entry to guide drivers to the intended path and minimize running over of the central island to the extent
possible. pp. 2-17,18 Where bicycle lanes or shoulders are used on approach roadways, they should be terminated
in advance of roundabouts to merge cyclists into traffic for appropriate circulation with other vehicles. In addition,
bicycle lanes should not be located within the circulatory roadway of roundabouts as this would suggest that
bicyclists should ride at the outer edge of the circulatory roadway, which can increase crashes with cyclists and both
entering and exiting motor vehicles. Because some cyclists may not feel comfortable traversing some roundabouts
in the same manner as other vehicles, bicycle ramps can be provided to allow access to the sidewalk or a shared
use path at the roundabout. Bicycle ramps at roundabouts have the potential to be confused as pedestrian ramps,
particularly for pedestrians who are blind or who have low vision. Therefore, bicycle ramps should be reserved for
those situations where the roundabout complexity or design speed may result in less comfort for some bicyclists.
Ramps should not normally be used at urban single-lane roundabouts. More details about bicycle design treatments
at roundabouts can be found in Chapter 6. p 6-72 Where bicycle lanes or shoulders are used on approach
roadways, they should be terminated in advance of roundabouts. The full-width bicycle lane should normally end at
least 100 ft (30 m) before the edge of the circulatory roadway. Terminating the bike lane helps remind cyclists that
they need to merge. An appropriate taper should be provided to narrow the sum of the travel lane and bike lane
widths down to the appropriate width necessary to achieve desired motor vehicle speeds on the roundabout
approach. The taper should end prior to the crosswalk at the roundabout to achieve the shortest possible pedestrian
crossing distance. A taper rate of 7:1 is recommended to accommodate a design speed of 20 mph (30 km/h), which
is appropriate for bicyclists and motor vehicles approaching the roundabout. To taper a 5 ft to 6 ft (1.4 m to 1.8 m)
wide bicycle lane, a 40 ft (12.2 m) taper is recommended. The bicycle lane line should be dotted for 50 to 200 ft (15
m to 60 m) prior to the beginning of the taper and dropped entirely through the taper itself. A longer dotted line gives
advance notice to cyclists that they need to merge, providing more room for them to achieve this maneuver and find
an appropriate gap in traffic. Where traffic design guidelines are not followed, an engineer should provide detailed
explanations for such variances -- this is a matter of public safety, not an art project. I would like to know what
regulations you refer to when you write "engineering judgement is always permitted in the field of roadway design"?
If an engineer uses bad judgment to design a dangerous traffic obstacle, who is responsible for remedying the
dangerous obstacle? Can you provide any justification for the as-built design in this intersection? Can anyone? Rob,
I'll repeat what I wrote in my first email exchange with you -- I really believe that the City of Palo Alto should HALT
the project completely until someone can explain the reasons for these gross violations of all published guidelines. I
have forwarded you contact information for an expert at the FHWA who has offered to provide his guidance for free,
and I really think we need to get an expert in here before someone gets hurt. But first -- STOP DIGGING HOLES
until we sort this out. The correct design will likely be cheaper and easier to implement than what Laurentiu Dusciuc
designed (if, as Josh said Friday, he is the engineer who "sealed" this design). The intersection at East Meadow and
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:03 PM
3
Ross could be retrofitted to be completely traversable (or mountable), and the bulbouts can be removed and curbs
can be rolled. Getting this one right is really important if you are going to replicate it ten more times around the city
in coming years. Thanks- George----------
George, I agree with you on the east meadow/ Ross circle. It is not safe for anyon e and esp. Not students. I am
grateful that you took the initiative to follow through. I am very concerned about the safety of the circle in our
intersection. If the city follows through through with this plan, they will be held responsible for accidents. And all
other circles. Just because you hire expensive outside consultants doesn't mean it is a great idea for your
community. It is unfortunate that this entire design was approved.
----------
This will be a real test of the city council. Do they have the courage to admit they made a mistake and stop the
expansion of this project. I hope they do.
---------
Thanks for sharing! I always felt there was something wrong with this roundabout but didn't know what it was and I
was trying to avoid it by either driving on Luis Rd. or Fabian Dr. to get to Middlefield or Charleston. Who is going to
fix it? What do we need to do?
--------
Any chance the City Council has noticed the Change.org petition to remove the roundabout has reached 750
signatures as of 3/21/18? https://www.change.org/p/city-council-cityofpaloalto-org-stop-the-traffic-calming-
implementation-on-ross-road-in-palo-alto
-------
George, you are my hero! Thank you so much for fighting the good fight for the rest of us Midtown residents who are
stuck with this ghastly plan. I had heard they were waiting to see how the first phase went before they went all the
way down Ross, but now I believe they're plowing ahead!
-------------------------------------
I drive there at least twice a week... it's tough to turn... cars nearly pile up. I have no idea why this silly little
roundabout was built there in the first place. Stop signs at all corners is all that is needed to promote safety. The
new design is downright dangerous for pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers, especially of larger vehicles.
----------------------------------------
I am curious to know what misinformation you think has been posted here? You actually are mistaken in your claim
that roundabouts reduce accidents. They reduce SERIOUS accidents, but tend to increase the number of accidents
in an intersection. Here's facts: Mountain View built a legal roundabout at Castro and California before February
2013. It topped one person’s ten worst things for the year: https://www.mv-voice.com/square/2013/02/09/the-best-
and-the-worst-of-mountain-view-small-sample Bicycle accidents have increased every year since 2012.
https://www.mv-voice.com/news/2016/08/08/bike-collisions-on-the-rise-in-mountain-view “The report shows that the
city has experienced a steady increase in pedestrian and bike-related collisions since 2012.” When do you plan to
have a mini-roundabout with a circle diameter of 64-feet installed in Greenmeadow? Our children have to ride
through this intersection (East Meadow and Ross) on their way to and from school, and the sharp curbs forcing
bikes into traffic in a six-foot chute are just plain dangerous and non-conforming. Rather than celebrating this
intersection before it is completed, let's stop building ten more like it while we bike through a construction zone with
no finish line in sight. I have heard of four accidents since this mini-roundabout was started, including kids and
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:03 PM
4
adults being forced off of their bikes by cars. I understand that there were two serious collisions in the previous five
years (2012-2017), both involving two cars. This is a bad tradeoff. --------------
There is no mini-roundabout on Bryant, and it has functioned really well as a bike boulevard. Simply blocking
through-traffic is wonderfully effective at diverting cars off of a road (or section of a road). If that was the goal, Ross
Road could have been "calmed" between East Meadow and Louis simply by putting four orange barrels of gravel
across the street at the YMCA (between the two driveways). $200, which I have said in another post I would donate
if asked. Unfortunately, we (the people of Palo Alto) have ruined effective bike lanes on East Meadow, sacrificing
them to the "calming" of Ross Road. A major feeder to three schools with almost four thousand students... a bus
route.. and one block away from a fire department... East Meadow did NOT need this mini-roundabout, and it is
dangerous. All traffic safety studies about roundabouts cite national standard roundabouts (typically 130-foot in
diameter); NONE measure the dangerous impact of a 64-foot diameter neighborhood traffic circle (mini-roundabouts
have completely traversable islands, so this intersection is NOT even a mini-roundabout). Last, I did not say you
Penny were celebrating. I'll use the same indirection that you choose ... "some writers are celebrating...". No one
has suggested the things that you say "people are saying" -- that's your fake news. People have said that drivers
are engaging in dangerous and illegal behavior, by driving through the slots and not allowing bikes to merge. The
three-hump design on Ross is supposed to enable emergency vehicles like ambulances to speed down the center;
unfortunately, every Range Rover driver has the same option available. Kids are endangered every school day in
this intersection. We can wait for the contractor to finish the lines, and striping, and signage ... but it does not
conform to national standards. Not even remotely. So pretending that education and reflectors are going to help,
when kids are being pushed into traffic against all design guidelines (6 feet to merge instead of 100 feet... really?) is
just wishful thinking. A child on a bicycle is likely to get hurt -- remember, this implementation ignores national safety
standards and no one can explain why we ignored national guidelines. That child's parents are likely to sue the city
and Alta Design. The city will finally choose to close this intersection while it is deconstructed, and kids will be forced
through Ramos Park and the library. I would say it is inevitable, but the kids in Palo Alto continue to impress me and
they will find a way around this mini-roundabout. I don't know what the buses and fire trucks will do when the
intersection is closed, though. Go to the intersection at 7:45am on a sunny day, and count the bikes. Nationally, this
is something we should celebrate (more kids on bikes than almost anywhere in the US). This is definitely a bad
location for a mini-roundabout experiment.
-----------------------------------
My belief is that whoever designed the roundabout/traffic circle in such a small space had little concern for bicyclists
and emergency (fire) vehicles. If people were speeding through that intersection, all that was needed was to station a police car hidden from view somewhere in the vicinity, and after a few summons were issued, people would become more conscious of the signage (i.e., word of mouth is powerful) and make certain to stop. Instead, children are now placed in danger, and there will be hindrances for fire vehicles to respond efficiently in an emergency. With all the problems facing the city of Palo Alto, this diversion to traffic has been an utter waste of money that could have been used to: (1) help low-income families and seniors; (2) support the animal shelter; and (3) at the very least, consult neighbors, especially families with school-age children, in the vicinity of the roundabout when that (silly) project was still on the drawing table. There was very little foresight and consideration exercised in this
travesty. One child has already been struck and hurt... what more will it take?
---------------------
My understanding based on one conversation with the responsible city officials is that they think a 15-foot traffic lane
is sufficient (regardless of the design vehicle), and the islands are going to be as large as necessary to enforce that
15-foot chokepoint. So, if you have less than 90 feet corner-to-corner (which is likely the case in all of Palo Alto), the
neighborhood traffic circle with bulbouts is likely to be out of national specifications (non-conforming). If you have ninety-feet, you'll get a sixty-foot raised center island. If you have sixty-four-feet, as we do in our intersection, you'll get a 34-foot raised island. I would LOVE to have the city's designs for these traffic "enhancements" available for review somewhere, but unfortunately I cannot even get the "as-built" design for the intersection at East Meadow and Ross Road. I am not sure at this point that there *is* an engineering design document. I have asked for it, and have not received it. Be afraid. Be very afraid. It does seem that the people who are most enthusiastic about this Ross Road project don't actually have to bike through it. I have counted two Ross Road residents in favor (on NextDoor),
but nearly everyone else I have met agrees that these changes are dangerous. Walk the distance between your
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:03 PM
5
exiting sidewalks and ask the city to explain what they are building in your intersection. Many of us are really disappointed with what was built at East Meadow and Ross Road, and it is up to you and your neighborhood to ensure the same thing doesn't happen at Ross and Moreno or at Louis and Ross. One more fact to offer: Granite
Construction bid $350,123 for traffic control; the sole competitor, O'Grady Paving, Inc, bid $1,000,000 -- a major
distinction in the total price. My experience so far with Granite Construction is the *absence* of traffic control, where
we have to drive around a truck blocking a lane into a blind intersection. A city official encouraged me to call in these
violations, so I am passing along that encouragement -- when you find Granite Construction blocking a sidewalk or
forcing you to change lanes without a flagman, call AND email Josh Mello. Joshua Mello, Chief Transportation
Official, City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2520,
Joshuah.Mello@CityofPaloAlto.org ----------------------------- I just see people struggling around that traffic circle the three or so times a week I go that way. There was also a child injured there. -------------------------------------- Thank you! The picture I have been looking for is linked within that document (page 2 here is Ross and East
Meadow): https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/61861 It does not contain dimensions though,
so to really understand this design one needs access to Sheet D-2, Sheet D-4, etc. as referenced in the notes. The
traversable islands (or aprons) in roundabouts are typically rubber, not eight-inch river rocks embedded in concrete.
The people who have asked "what is coming to my intersection" may find the drawings conceptually helpful, but (for
example) the drawing for Moreno and Ross does not contain measurements or dimensions -- it refers to Sheet L-2
and Sheet CD-1. The answer to Masuma's question really depends on the inscribed circular diameter of this design,
and I can't find that information at this site (or at least I am unable to figure it out). My kids say that a promotional video for roundabouts was shown at JLS Middle School. I note the irony of citing national studies on the safety of roundabouts, and then building a mini-roundabout that does not conform to national standards (hence making those studies inapplicable). Many of us (776 and counting) believe that the bike lanes we had were better than the neighborhood traffic circle we now have, with bike lanes suddenly ending in a sharp curb. Circular traffic flow does not mean this intersection is safe for bikers, especially young and inexperienced bikers. Until someone can produce data that shows this is an improvement (either higher throughput or greater safety), we really should not build another raised island in Palo Alto where space does not enable conforming to national and CA DOT specifications.
-----
Thanks for cogently setting people straight. I ride my bicycle on Ross Road again today as I always do. The bullout
leading into the traffic circle is ridiculous. It forces you to go against your natural turn into the circle. You essentially
need to veer left and then quickly right to get into the diminutive traffic circle. I used to ride motocross and this is
somewhat challenging and dangerous for me. Now picture these necessary maneuvers with cars when a large
group of students are rushing off to school talking and laughing... until one of them is hurt!
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:52 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Shalini Kamala <shalini.pk@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, March 22, 2018 4:30 PM
To:Raj Shetty; Council, City
Subject:Re: Ross Road/Meadow Dr intersection
Hello Raj,
It is very kind of you to get back to me. May I suggest changing the venue of April 22nd meeting to this controversial intersection - Ross Rd & Meadow Dr ? It will be quite easy for every one - those who support the
changes & those who don't - to see for themselves, make a united decision on the spot. Bring your cars/bikes,
try taking a left turn at this intersection. Or try crossing as a pedestrian too.
We all agree that safety is our foremost priority - however the way it is implemented right now is an engineering disaster. The workers seem to have abandoned this spot, there are all these construction warning
posts lying around - tossed around by cars passing by. A few weeks back, a child on bike was about to fall down
, while he was trying to pedal through the unfinished gravel track. What a mess!
Why aren't the rest of the city council members responding? Is Greg Tanaka the only council member working on this issue ?
Thanks,
Shalini
On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 11:13 AM, Raj Shetty <raj.shetty@gregtanaka.org> wrote:
Dear Ms. Kamala,
My name is Raj and I am a legislative aide for Councilman Tanaka. Thank you very much for reaching out to the council.
The council has received multiple emails regarding Ross Road Bicycle Improvements. For that reason, Councilman Tanaka has decided to host a meeting with multiple constituents on the issue at his office hours. Will you be able to make it on Sunday, April 22nd from 12:00pm to 1:00pm? The meeting will be held at Councilman Tanaka’s office, located at 3630 El Camino Real, Palo Alto, CA.
If you would like to attend, please confirm your attendance with me. You are welcome to invite others interested in the topic, and it would be well appreciated if they could confirm their attendance with me as well.
If you are unable to attend the meeting, we will be broadcasting the discussion on our Facebook Page. From there, viewers will be able to watch the discussion live, and ask questions by commenting on the video.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to let me know.
Best, Raj
Raj Shetty | Legislative Aide
Palo Alto City Council Member Tanaka’s Office
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:52 AM
2
W: www.GregTanaka.org | D: 650.503.4329 | E: raj.shetty@gregtanaka.org
Please think of the environment before printing this email – Thank you.
This message contains information that may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee, you may not use, copy or
disclose the message or any information contained in the message. If you received the message in error, please notify the sender
and delete the message. Views I state are my own and may not represent those of the full Council.
On Mar 11, 2018, at 3:05 PM, Maximilian Goetz <max.goetz@gregtanaka.org> wrote:
Maximilian Goetz | Legislative Aide
Palo Alto City Council Member Tanaka’s Office
W: www.GregTanaka.org | D: (650) 665-9734 | E: max.goetz@gregtanaka.org
Please think of the environment before printing this email – Thank you.
This message contains information that may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee, you may not use, copy or disclose the message or any information contained in
the message. If you received the message in error, please notify the sender and delete
the message. Views I state are my own and may not represent those of this Office or the full
Council. Begin forwarded message:
From: Maximilian Goetz <max.goetz@gregtanaka.org>
Date: March 2, 2018 at 11:21:22 PM PST To: Ezra Kohrman <ezra.kohrman@gregtanaka.org> Subject: Fwd: Ross Road/Meadow Dr intersection
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Shalini Kamala <shalini.pk@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 8:41 AM Subject: Ross Road/Meadow Dr intersection To: "Council, City" <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>
Dear council members,
I live on Evergreen Dr, very close to Ross Rd/Meadow Dr intersection where a roundabout is being constructed right now. I understand that there is nothing
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:52 AM
3
wrong about a roundabout, it increases safety for everyone - cars, bikes and
pedestrians. However the size of the roundabout in this intersection is huge! It is
very difficult to maneuver through in this intersection - especially for bikers. If you are driving in a car, and want to take a left at this intersection, it is very
difficult to keep track of bikers/pedestrians while you are trying to drive through
without hitting the roundabout and other cars.
There is a lot of bike traffic in this part - kids biking to JLS. There is quite a lot of pedestrian traffic too. There is a preschool right at this intersection. The
changes introduced do not seem safe to anyone.
I request you to kindly look into this matter urgently. Obviously the whole thing
was done with good intentions - to increase our safety, however the execution went wrong.
--Shalini
--
Maximilian Goetz | Legislative Aide
Palo Alto City Council Member Tanaka’s Office W: www.GregTanaka.org | D: 650.665.9734 | E: max.goetz@gregtanaka.org
Please think of the environment before printing this email – Thank you.
This message contains information that may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the address
may not use, copy or disclose the message or any information contained in the message. If you received
message in error, please notify the sender and delete the message. Views I state are my own and may norepresent those of this Office or the full Council.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:01 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Sent:Tuesday, March 27, 2018 4:13 PM
To:Loran Harding; dennisbalakian; David Balakian; Dan Richard; Doug Vagim; Daniel Zack;
kfsndesk; newsdesk; rosenheim@kpix.cbs.com; Mayor; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov;
paul.caprioglio; Cathy Lewis; beachrides; bearwithme1016@att.net; Mark Kreutzer;
Mark Standriff; info@superide1.com; midge@thebarretts.com; Council, City
Subject:Re: Tesla fire and fire department at accident scene
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 3:58 PM, Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
Tues. March 27, 2018
To all- Tesla Model X hit the divider on southbound 101 in Mt. View, Ca. and caught fire, Friday, March 23, 2018. Fire dept. called Tesla to come deal with the batteries. Driver died.
http://abc7news.com/automotive/fire-chief-tesla-crash-shows-electric-car-fires-could-strain-department-
resources/3266061/?sf185578839=1
If the car had had Ionic Materials Corp. lithium metal batteries, probably no fire from the batteries.
See Search for the Super Battery on Nova at the midway point. About year and a half ago. You will be impressed by what they have. Solid polymer electrolyte instead of liquid electrolyte which can vaporize and
catch fire. The solid electrolyte is far more resistant to catching fire.
See www.ionicmaterials.com
Until Tesla et. al. are using safer batteries, many more fire depts. should get special training on how
to deal with a burning electric vehicle.
I asked at the Tesla store in the Stanford Shopping Center in Nov. 2017 what happens to the batts.
in a collision of a Tesla, and they told me the car has fire extinguishing equipment on board.
LH
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:52 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:k jm <kjm1445@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, March 28, 2018 10:36 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Ross Road - just one of the many email threads from nextdoor
A few weeks ago, driving slowly south on Ross & turning west onto Meadow, I heard a crunch & stopped to see what had happened. My right rear hubcap was badly scraped: I had not made a tight turn. Just ahead of me on Meadow, a man was leaving his car to inspect a similar gash; he also did not know what or why he hit the curb. At
home, I told my husband about it; he scoffed. Next day he did the same thing. (We are careful, safe drivers.) Last
week, same place, same event: a car drove fast into the roundabout behind me, almost rear-ended me. New gash
on same hubcap. I have never had problems with traffic circles before. Subsequently, I've heard that the dimensions
and design of this circle are truly inadequate and probably have destroyed a lot of hubcaps. How many Council
members and traffic planners ever bothered to test out this idiotic design?
-------------------------
Alexander Hamilton was offered sage advice. Talk less, listen more (four of the last five posts are yours).
A lot of parents are really concerned
that their children are in danger in these new concrete traps.
Read this: https://nextdoor.com/news_feed/?post=79148564 You as an adult are enjoying the smooth fresh feel of
asphalt with "Bike Boulevard" emblazoned on it. We parents are watching our 8-year-olds forced into traffic by a
sharp corner where their bike lane ends. What worked for decades (bike lanes on East Meadow) has been
destroyed by new concrete. Do you understand that? I am really happy for you that your bike ride (or commute) is
smoother -- can you try to wrap your head around others in our community who feel that their children are
threatened every day now when they are pushed into traffic? Yes, these changes pose a real and dire danger to our
children. If you don't see it or understand that, read the thread above again. The raised island violates every design
guideline for a mini-roundabout, and the fire department wrote that they had to drive through at considerably reduced speed (one onlooker said 3 mph). Look for the other Ross Road threads on NextDoor, it is clear that
you are assuming things that are not true (the fire department is looking at routes to avoid the intersection).
792 people in Palo Alto think these changes are dangerous. Of course you are welcome to share your happiness with the City Council, and that only makes it more important that we 792 people share our displeasure with our elected officials. $8.7 million committed, one 11-year-old child struck by a car so far as a result.
https://www.change.org/p/city-council-cityofpaloalto-org-stop-the-traffic-calming-implementation-on-ross-road-in-palo-alto
Ok -- I thought that posts could be made visible to all Palo Alto (and I am not in the same neighborhood as the
poster). Weird! But here it is: Hit and Run Driver on Ross Road *Below is a copy of my post to my Midtown
neighbors from three days ago. A neighbor requested that I also share this with the Palo Verde neighborhood, which also uses Ross Road frequently. (cutting and pasting it into a new post was the only way I could find to share it with you, so I apologize to the Midtown folks for the double posting.) We may have our first “I told you so” regarding these dangerous road-blocks/“squeeze points” on Ross Road... On
Monday morning, my 11 year old son was riding his bike on Ross Road when he was side-swiped by a
moving car, which knocked him to the ground. The driver did not stop. As I had told him he must do, he rode onto the sidewalk to avoid "the squeeze." This was northbound, just before Matadero Creek, at 8:00 AM, on his way
to Ohlone, probably just past Wintergreen. He was coming back onto the street when a car came up behind him. My
son had probably rode a little too far out into the street, and the car probably drove a little too close to the sidewalk.
As the front of the car passed, it startled my son, who fell into the car as it was moving. He was knocked to the
ground with his bike. The driver did not stop. No one else was around to see the accident or help my son. There
are two possibilities: either the driver did not notice that s/he hit my son (talking on the phone??) or intentionally
drove away. Either way the driver was highly negligent and at fault. Although my son was sore and in shock, he rode
his bike home (just around the corner from the incident). Luckily for him, I am staying home from work, due to an
injury of my own(!). He was shaken up, and his left shoulder, arm, elbow and side were very sore. Miraculously, there were no broken bones or cuts or scrapes. (He had a well-fitting helmet on, which he said also hit the ground.) His bike seems okay, too. I gave him ice-packs and arnica all day Monday and Tuesday. He missed two days of
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:52 AM
2
school to recover. Despite my son's protests, I called the Palo Alto police, who sent an officer over to talk to
him and make a hit-and-run report. I was so angry and frustrated- having my kids hit by a car is my worst fear as a parent. It really is a miracle that he was not seriously injured. There is no chance of finding the driver, as my son
did not notice anything whatsoever about the car or the driver. So now what? I feel like making a big sign that reads,
"A Hit-and-Run Driver Hit my Son Here" and posting it at that location. I would do it, except my son would be
mortified. I am open to advise, or help, or ideas. Since I am home recovering from a concussion, myself, I do not
have the wherewithal to put energy and time into this. But this is EXTREMELY SERIOUS. I felt it was important for
you, my Midtown neighbors, to know what happened. If anyone wants to use this incident to help push the petition
along to get those damn things removed, I will gladly support you. I can't believe it was my son that got hit first. If
this does not get fixed, it WILL happen again to someone else's child, and the outcome will likely be worse.
I have never seen this type of "traffic barriers" any where in the valley. It is designed to be dangerous and hurt
people. We should ask who came up this design and who are the reviewers/supporters.
Well, that was detailed, but, interesting. The main point to me is that ROSS WAS a very peaceful and quiet street. And, there is no way the driver did not know they had hit one of our children the other day. He was hurt. He was knocked completely down. WE are supposed to watch out for our children. Drivers are often excused now that our traffic division is gone.
Today was one more day down the rabbit hole in Alice in Wonderland. Granite Construction tore up the intersection at East Meadow and Ross, blocking all through traffic (again, 1200 kids). They also seized the day (no rain) to block Mayfield between Middlefield and Ross Road for their next phase, so there was NO EFFECTIVE ROUTE TO SCHOOL from our part of Palo Alto (perhaps 1/5 of the students) to Fair Meadow Elementary, to JLS Middle School,
and to Gunn High School. Whoever is doing this to our children has a sick sense of humor -- the nearest through
street (from east to west) is Ames, which requires a vehicle to drive in front of Palo Verde Elementary on Louis
Road, or to drive up Ross Road. Bikes would then have to cross Middlefield (four lanes) and travel through side
streets to rejoin Meadow. The paving / grinding vehicle operated by Granite Construction "ate" a construction sign,
and backed up without any flagman over areas that bikes were trying to get through. Kids "squeezed through" the
cones meant to block cars, and they were completely exposed to construction dangers. I thought the unfinished
construction zone was bad, but blocking all roads to get to school just seems ... cruel. I notified Josh Mello, as he asked me to do, and I got his auto-reply that he is on spring break. Joy. Celebrate. WHAT A (choice word deleted) disaster. The clowns are running the circus.
I've watched cars whip around that roundabout, accelerating as they go, and then take off down Ross towards the YMCA at speeds that look suspiciously higher than 25 MPH ... I certainly wouldn't want to be on a bike just in front of them ... no matter what guidelines are met, I fail to see how it's safe at all, let alone safer than a traditional four-way stop.
Perhaps Palo Alto needs to get an outside planning firm (not one Mr Mello worked for) to review the plans before we continue ... and put all these differing opinions to rest. With all the money we waste on things in Palo Alto this would seem like a good solution ... and not add much to the $9 million project cost.
It is great that there is a group dedicated to making it easier to bike in Palo Alto. It is my firm belief that this
intersection does the opposite -- it is more dangerous to bike through now than it was before. For a major feeder to
several schools, East Meadow was (is) a terrible choice for these bulbouts forcing children into traffic.
Can you help put a name to this anonymous individual (the smart professional): "with dimensions adapted by smart,
professional traffic engineers for our mini-roundabouts. " No one working at Alta Design or the city of Palo Alto is
willing to defend what has been done. Anyone stepping forward would be the people who will be named in the
lawsuit, so you can see what that is a "TBD" in the org chart. Chris moved on, and Josh is now invisible. Laurentiu
lives in Seattle now... who did this to us?
Difficult to drive at roundabout, not to mention those Fire Trucks with very high speed from East Meadow Station. I
doubt if they can make it to the Ross Road and YMCA neighborhood on a emergency call. Stop sign works much
better for fire trucks. We don't really need it. Just a waste of money.
Try driving around it in a long mini van. It's annoying. The roundabout is ridiculously small. Not a good spot for a
roundabout. The Stanford/Park. Blvd roundabout is perfect and more realistic. This one is absurd.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:56 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:michael nierenberg <nierenberg@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, March 21, 2018 2:50 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:ROSS ROAD ... CONCERNS FROM AN AVID BICYCLIST
Dear City Council Members,
I am an avid bicyclist. I bicycle around Palo Alto and nearby areas every day; about 4000 miles a
year. I am obviously very interested in bicycle safety. In addition I live next to Ross Road and bicycle it every day. Again, I would like to see it as safe as possible. Unfortunately I do not see the current changes to Ross Road as improving safety; in fact, I think just the opposite. The changes to Ross
Road force bicyclists (many of whom are young inexperienced children biking to school) and cars into
close proximity. The traffic circle at Ross and East Meadow is too narrow and as noted below** does
not conform to accepted safety standards. We who live in the area are just waiting for the first major bicycle/auto collision. Despite the credentials of the planners, many of us feel the road design is flawed. Look at the thread “Slower is not always better…” on NextDoor.com and see how many
people are concerned and upset. I have never seen this many responses to a topic. And then look at
the thread: “It is official – the intersection at East Meadow and Ross Road is dangerous” (quoted
below with very cogent specifics about the flawed design). I would ask that you please re-evaluate what is going on with future plans for road modification and readdress Ross Road as well. I realize time and money have already been invested, and people like Mr. Mello have a stake in seeing their
plan through. But please, do not wait for an accident to get everyone who is involved willing to admit
that there is a problem and a need to reassess.
Thank you for your time and kind attention. Please continue to read the note from Mr. Jaquette below.
Respectfully,
Michael A. Nierenberg, M.D.
** From George Jaquette on NextDoor.com after communication with Mr. Josh Mello (reproduced with Mr. Jaquette’s permission). This is an excellent, in depth assessment of the traffic circle on Ross. There are many other cogent assessments on NextDoor.com by others as well regarding different
aspects of the Ross Road changes.
“Josh-
Thanks for sending the attachments. As I indicated last week when we met, the FHWA guidelines are
the same as the NCHRP guidelines and this mini-roundabout does not adhere to the guidelines -- it
does not even remotely follow the guidelines. As we discussed, the implementation at the intersection
of East Meadow and Ross Road measures 64 feet from the northeast corner to the southwest corner.
The minimum recommended ICD for a single-lane roundabout is more than 50% bigger at 105 feet.
As I also pointed out, the bike lane ends abruptly into a sharp curb and by all guidance should slowly
taper into a rolled curb.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:56 AM
2
Quoting from your documents:
California Highway Design Manual - Roundabouts Section (2015).pdf
p. 400-37
In some locations, it may not be practical to build a single lane roundabout that will operate for 10
years. Geometric constraints and other conflicts may preclude widening to the ultimate configuration.
In such cases, other intersection configurations or control strategies addressed in Index 401.5 may
need to be considered
p 400-38
The inscribed circle diameter for a single lane roundabout generally ranges between 105 feet to 150
feet to accommodate the California Legal design vehicle and 130 feet to 180 feet to accommodate
the STAA design vehicle (George's note: STAA design vehicle = largest firetruck spec of 48 feet).
Roundabouts: An Informational Guide Second Edition
p 1-12, Exhibit 1-9
- clearly states that a Mini-Roundabout has an ICD of between 45-90 feet (a roundabout has a
minimum ICD of 90-feet).
- clearly states that a Mini-Roundabout has a fully traversable island and splitters
p 1-12, Exhibit 1-10 shows a diagram of what SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT
p 1-13, Exhibit 1-11 shows a picture of what SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT
p 1-13
In retrofit applications, mini-roundabouts are relatively inexpensive because they typically require
minimal additional pavement at the intersecting roads and minor widening at the corner curbs. They
are mostly recommended when there is insufficient right-of-way to accommodate the design vehicle
with a traditional single-lane roundabout. Because they are small, mini-roundabouts are perceived as
pedestrian-friendly with short crossing distances and very low vehicle speeds on approaches and
exits. A fully traversable central island is provided to accommodate large vehicles and serves one of
the distinguishing features of a mini-roundabout. The miniroundabout is designed to accommodate
passenger cars without requiring them to traverse over the central island. The overall design of a
mini-roundabout should align vehicles at entry to guide drivers to the intended path and minimize
running over of the central island to the extent possible.
pp. 2-17,18
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:56 AM
3
Where bicycle lanes or shoulders are used on approach roadways, they should be terminated in
advance of roundabouts to merge cyclists into traffic for appropriate circulation with other vehicles. In
addition, bicycle lanes should not be located within the circulatory roadway of roundabouts as this
would suggest that bicyclists should ride at the outer edge of the circulatory roadway, which can
increase crashes with cyclists and both entering and exiting motor vehicles. Because some cyclists
may not feel comfortable traversing some roundabouts in the same manner as other vehicles, bicycle
ramps can be provided to allow access to the sidewalk or a shared use path at the roundabout.
Bicycle ramps at roundabouts have the potential to be confused as pedestrian ramps, particularly for
pedestrians who are blind or who have low vision. Therefore, bicycle ramps should be reserved for
those situations where the roundabout complexity or design speed may result in less comfort for
some bicyclists. Ramps should not normally be used at urban single-lane roundabouts. More details
about bicycle design treatments at roundabouts can be found in Chapter 6.
p 6-72
Where bicycle lanes or shoulders are used on approach roadways, they should be terminated in
advance of roundabouts. The full-width bicycle lane should normally end at least 100 ft (30 m) before
the edge of the circulatory roadway. Terminating the bike lane helps remind cyclists that they need to
merge. An appropriate taper should be provided to narrow the sum of the travel lane and bike lane
widths down to the appropriate width necessary to achieve desired motor vehicle speeds on the
roundabout approach. The taper should end prior to the crosswalk at the roundabout to achieve the
shortest possible pedestrian crossing distance. A taper rate of 7:1 is recommended to accommodate
a design speed of 20 mph (30 km/h), which is appropriate for bicyclists and motor vehicles
approaching the roundabout. To taper a 5 ft to 6 ft (1.4 m to 1.8 m) wide bicycle lane, a 40 ft (12.2 m)
taper is recommended. The bicycle lane line should be dotted for 50 to 200 ft (15 m to 60 m) prior to
the beginning of the taper and dropped entirely through the taper itself. A longer dotted line gives
advance notice to cyclists that they need to merge, providing more room for them to achieve this
maneuver and find an appropriate gap in traffic.
Where traffic design guidelines are not followed, an engineer should provide detailed explanations for
such variances -- this is a matter of public safety, not an art project. I would like to know what
regulations you refer to when you write "engineering judgement is always permitted in the field of
roadway design"? If an engineer uses bad judgment to design a dangerous traffic obstacle, who is
responsible for remedying the dangerous obstacle? Can you provide any justification for the as-built
design in this intersection? Can anyone?
Rob, I'll repeat what I wrote in my first email exchange with you -- I really believe that the City of Palo
Alto should HALT the project completely until someone can explain the reasons for these gross
violations of all published guidelines. I have forwarded you contact information for an expert at the
FHWA who has offered to provide his guidance for free, and I really think we need to get an expert in
here before someone gets hurt. But first -- STOP DIGGING HOLES until we sort this out.
The correct design will likely be cheaper and easier to implement than what Laurentiu Dusciuc
designed (if, as Josh said Friday, he is the engineer who "sealed" this design). The intersection at
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:56 AM
4
East Meadow and Ross could be retrofitted to be completely traversable (or mountable), and the
bulbouts can be removed and curbs can be rolled. Getting this one right is really important if you are
going to replicate it ten more times around the city in coming years.
Thanks-
George “
_____________________________________________________This e-mail message and any
attachment(s) transmitted with it are intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. This
message may be privileged and/or confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not
review, copy or distribute this message. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message.Thank you...
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:49 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Erica Waxer <ewaxer@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, March 26, 2018 5:03 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Ross Road “Improvements”
To whom it may concern:
I have lived in Palo Alto and have been a member of the Ross Road YMCA for many years - the “improvements” to Ross road have been terrible- especially the traffic circle at meadow and Ross which is
confusing because it has both stop signs and a traffic circle is too wide and has no space for bicycles .... the
wide planter boxes ok ross make driving much less safe. Why not Just speed bumps? Like they had north of
Loma Verde?
Erica
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:06 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Gregory Gerard <ggerard@mac.com>
Sent:Monday, March 26, 2018 9:54 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Ross road and east meadow
What a disaster. I’ve driven that intersection and have, at 10‐15 mph, cornered my car at the roundabout.
I just saw a bus, either deliberately or by accident, going down Ross and having problems with that intersection as.
At the ymca, I saw a car stuck with its rear in the air because she couldn’t see the edges.
You can’t see the contours of the roundabout either.
When are the stop sign going away? What’s the point of a roundabout if there are stop signs?
Regards,
Greg
231 Manzanita Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94306
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:01 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:jweitzman <jweitzman@mac.com>
Sent:Sunday, March 25, 2018 2:41 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Ross Road bike boulevard
Just a note of support for the bike boulevard plan. I participated in all of the community workshops, and it is gratifying to
see the work being completed. I live on Ross and traffic is already slowing in response to the new features. There has
been a lot of complaining in the usual online forums, but you should trust that there is broad support in the
neighborhood.
Jeff Weitzman
Ross Road
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:00 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Tom Neier <neiertom@yahoo.com>
Sent:Sunday, March 25, 2018 11:21 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Ross Road Bike Project
We've lived on Ross Road, near East Meadow, since 1977 and we are pleased with the
bike boulevard project. Road Road from East Meadow towards the Y has always been
a speed way. We tried to get speed bumps put in twelve years ago but could not get the votes we needed. So.. it is pleasing to see what is happening now.
I think given time people will get used to the new configuration, including the roundabout.
Tom Neier
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:49 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Horst Simon <hdsimon@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, March 26, 2018 5:01 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Ross Road "improvement"
Dear City Council,
I am resident on Coastland Drive in Midtown Paolo Alto and want you to know that I find that the Ross Road
construction project is ill‐conceived, poorly designed, utterly useless, and also dangerous project. I just received a survey
about various way to raise additional funds for the City through an increased tax assessment. As long as simply stupid
projects such as Ross Road are funded with $8M I see no reason to support new funds for the City. Spend what you
have more wisely. I can add to this the useless sidewalk along Oregon Expressway behind my backyard that costed $4M,
and I can tell for sure: nobody walks there. Or the new Mitchell Park Library Building that is nice to have now, but it was
terribly mismanaged and was way behind schedule and over budget. Or the Ross Rd/Oregon Expressway intersection
remodeling that protects turns that nobody who lives there ever makes (another $2M or so). Stop foolish traffic projects
and put the money where it makes sense. Learn how to manage projects with realistic budgets.
Horst Simon
731 Coastland Drive
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:03 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Lynn Ware <drware@itsinc.net>
Sent:Tuesday, March 27, 2018 8:56 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Eben Kermit
Subject:Ross Road roundabouts and bulb outs
Dear Palo Alto City Council members,
I am a resident near Ross Road and I am very concerned about the roundabouts
and bulb outs being built in the neighborhood.
While I appreciate the desire to be a “bike friendly” Palo Alto, the design of these
structures makes it difficult for both bikes and cars to share the round as they
appear too narrow. We have many children riding their bikes to school and I am
afraid the cars will win out!
In addition, about a week ago, I stood and watched a fire truck trying to make a
right turn at the corner of Ross Road and East Meadow and IT COULD NOT CLEAR
the turn. I am convinced these structures will slow emergency vehicles.
Could you please post whatever feasibility/safety studies were done to approve
this project and let me know where to access them?
To me, it’s lots of accidents and law suits for the city, waiting to happen. Looks like
a waste of taxpayer (i.e. MY) money, not only for the construction, but for the
settlements that the city will have to make when a child becomes disabled or
killed.
Lynn
Dr. B. Lynn Ware
3596 Louis Rd.
Palo Alto, CA 94303
C: 650‐207‐2713
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:50 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:eugene kvitko <ekvitko@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, March 26, 2018 5:09 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Ross Road Traffic Calming Measure
Hello,
I would like to express my support for the implemented Traffic Calming Measures on Ross Road.
Everyone seems to consider themselves a victim these days. But why concerns were not raised when the project was
going through the public reviews and discussions, or even before the work started? Obviously this was not a priority for a
lot of people then.
Eugene Kvitko
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:05 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Irena Smith <smithirena@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, March 25, 2018 10:39 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Ross Road traffic calming measures
Dear Members of the City Council,
As a long-time resident of midtown (I live between Ross and Louis Rd. just north of Loma Verde) and the parent of a high-schooler who regularly rides her bike in the area, I have been increasingly alarmed by the
modifications that I have seen being made to Ross Rd. I regularly walk the stretch of Ross between Loma Verde
and Mayview on my way to the Mitchell Park Library and Charleston Shopping Center (and have for the past
19+ years), and what I have seen over the past six months has been, frankly, appalling. As a pedestrian, I have
found myself pushed into traffic by construction that has shut down sidewalks on either side of the street; I have seen bicyclists, particularly young children, swerving from sidewalk to street and back again in an effort to
avoid the narrow choke points; traffic congestion, near-misses, and misunderstandings between bicyclists and
cars, cars and cars, and cars and pedestrians have become a matter of routine.
I find it difficult to understand how the narrowing of the street and creating choke points where bikes and cars are expected to share an untenably narrow lane helps anyone's safety. My daughter has complained about
difficulty navigating a previously easily navigable street, and I have not heard a single positive thing about the
new changes from any of my friends or neighbors in the area. Moreover, I would like to understand why
residents in the immediate vicinity were not consulted about the implementation of street modifications that
have caused an enormous amount of daily disruption and, I'm assuming, cost millions of dollars to install. I do not remember receiving any notices in the mail or via email letting me know that the street modifications were
under discussion or that resident feedback was being solicited.
I would like to understand the City Council's plan of action with regard to these modifications, particularly
plans for ensuring the safety of all those who use Ross Road on a daily basis. For the moment, bicyclist, pedestrian, and driver safety —and clear communication with concerned residents— seems to be quite low on
the council's agenda.
Best wishes,
Irena Smith 3101 Stelling Ct.
Palo Alto 94303
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:01 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Avery Wang <avery@rault-wang.com>
Sent:Sunday, March 25, 2018 12:44 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Ross Road traffic construction, proposed tax
Dear City Council,
I am a resident on Ross Rd.
I am highly disappointed in the design and implementation of traffic calming on my street. I had expressed my
opinion in favor of the general idea of more traffic calming in my area of Ross Rd. I had in mind some more
speed bumps. But I am concerned about what is in the process of being built.
What we have is an underlying theory that squeezing bikes and drivers together makes things safer. Already I am hearing reports on NextDoor.com about accidents and close calls involving kids as a result of having to
navigate through traffic constrictions. I’m sure you’re receiving many comments along those lines.
Also, there is discussion that the designs of the roundabouts are very out of compliance with national standards.
Also, it is astonishing how much money has been allocated to this project. This brings me to the new tax
proposal to raise funds to close a $56M. In Palo Alto Online,
"As rising construction costs continue to imperil Palo Alto's infrastructure plans, city officials are
preparing to ask the voters for help.
The city is considering putting a tax measure on the November ballot as part of a strategy to
close the $56 million gap in the council's infrastructure plan."
I am going to oppose the proposed tax because I do not believe the city has acted wisely with respect to
spending taxpayer money on traffic calming projects. Thank you for your attention.
-Avery Wang
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:04 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:babamarilyn@gmail.com
Sent:Sunday, March 25, 2018 9:09 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Ross Road Traffic Project
Dear Council Members,
As a regular driver on East Meadow Dr. and Ross Road going to and from the Y, I have been very concerned about the
eclectic mix of strange and different traffic barriers the City project has installed. It is indeed disconcerting to drive
among these—running a gauntlet and certainly worrying about how planners could ever believe that these would create
a safe route to and from school for our Palo Alto children. The traffic circle is almost un‐navigable for cars and leaves
way too little space for the many delivery trucks that must use it daily. It is the most peculiar and improbable
roundabout I have ever encountered. Way too small space for ordinary traffic needs‐seems very non‐conforming space‐
wise. Some drivers are choosing to enter going the wrong way so they can avoid going 3/4 of the way around.
Additionally, I believe the City will never maintain the plantings in the medians or bump outs. They will become ugly
eyesores inflicted upon the public, in addition to being dangerous barriers. I ask of you that you all drive over there and
see this expensive dangerous folly of a project for yourselves and call a time out before more elements are added. This
all needs reconsideration.
Marilyn Bauriedel
South Court
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 9:56 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Ildiko Ran <ildikoran@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 27, 2018 12:07 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Ross Road traffic
Dear City Council,
I am writing in concern about the dangerousness of the new developments on Ross Road. The street has become
dangerous to drive and bike on. I rather have my middle schooler bike on Middlefield towards her middle school, JLS, as Ross road is unpredictably dangerous. It has become a road to avoid and I fear for our kids who
will be hit or will fall on those obstacles. I hope you can revisit the idea and maybe change the plans.
Thank you!
Ildiko Ran
resident at 739 Sutter Ave, Palo Alto
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:01 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Winnie Doty <windoty@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 27, 2018 4:27 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Ross Road
When I first moved to Palo Alto in 1953 the best part was no curbs for bicycling and rollerskating. Now you have added
poorly marked curbouts, signs, trees and rocks. Can’t believe this is safer for bicyclists or for us senior drivers.
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:07 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Stephanie Munoz <stephanie@dslextreme.com>
Sent:Monday, March 26, 2018 1:08 AM
To:editor@paweekly.com
Cc:Planning Commission; gsheyner@paweekly.com; Court Skinner; chuck jagoda; Ruth
Chippendale; Council, City; roberta ahlquist; M. Gallagher
Subject:senior affordable housing
Weekly:
The PA Weekly's excellent overview of the affordable housing mentioned, but did not dwell on a public relations strategy similar to what we saw in the presidential election: the party which has been
more in tune with the aspirations of the voters, instead of focussing on what needed to be done, was
content to blame the opposing party for all the ills of mankind. Thus, the Palo Alto Housing
Corporation which has had an outstanding record of great projects completed, instead of asking "How
can we tweak the PC to use this gorgeous land for affordable housing?"kept insisting that the Maybell failure was the fault of NIMBY neighbors who didn't appreciate poor seniors, but in public meeting
after public meeting, those neighbors insisted that their objection was to the 25 starter castles inside a
Trojan Horse of senior housing, and their pleas fell on deaf ears. Their rebellion succeeded because
of a widespread feeling that PC, although in itself a reasonable idea, invariably ended up with much
extra profit and little public benefit. There was also revulsion against the hypocrisy of claiming to be on the side of the angels for advocating 60 units of affordable housing, while, less than a mile away,
the city was planning to destroy 100 units of affordable housing, which antedated the city's takeover
of Barron Park and had been put in place by the poor owners' unaided efforts, no city help, no
government subsidy. It was also supremely tactless to propose adding mansions in which the
Mommy and Daddy each have cars, the butler has a car, the upstairs maid and downstairs maid have cars, the nanny has a car, and the teenagers have motorcycles, in the very year in which Arastradero
Road, after having been widened to accommodate Industrial Park traffic--in fact, Barron Park was
acquired so that it could be widened--was then narrowed and the surplus traffic dumped on Maybell.
But the concept of mixed use could have been applied in a different way. Three different community organizations, all extremely popular, and all benefitting seniors, had recently been or were about to
be evicted from longtime locations and had no place to go: the Betty Wright Swim group, a YMCA
catering to seniors, and La Comida subsidized nutrition program, which was particularly suitable as a
partner for lowest income seniors because it makes it possible for even the poorest to eat. Day care
and Senior day care would have been welcome neighbors, also, and no extra traffic at all sent to Maybell. Best of all, one of the partner uses could have been the existing orchard, the last orchard in
Palo Alto, which could have been a passive park, one to be looked at rather than played in, perhaps
as a memorial to Palo Alto veterans and pioneers. Although that particular opportunity has been lost,
the concept of sharing a property with parkk or park-like open space is still possible.
The planned residential space could have been divided in a senior specific manner, that is, as a
residential hotel with shared amenities: instead of 60 600 square foot apartments,three times as
many 200 square ft bedroom suites with common amenities: pool, hot tub, computer room, workshop,
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:07 PM
2
renting for $600/month (because the social security and SSI minimum is $900.) with optional
basement storage for an additional fee. Of the low income seniors needing housing, more than half
don't drive or don't have cars,so it should be relatively easy to fill an inexpensive building without garage space. but having 200 or 300 seniors would permit a van to take residents to the train or bus, so they wouldn't have to be right on the transit corridor. Not having cars is an important concept; it
takes only a moment's reflection to realize that much of the complaint about density isn't the number
of persons, many of whom stay at home all day, but rather the number of cars, which compete for
free on-street parking with the neighbors. Only one modification of the typical city codes is necessary, the limitation on number of units, which,
by the way, has been removed in the recent controversial State housing reform code. There is a
reason for this limitation; it is the appearance of wealth and spaciousness, and this attention to
appearance is quite useful because if these hotel units are accepted by the more prosperous, and they certainly could be, because of the convenience, many seniors could and would sell their homes or rent them out to families, increasing the housing stock, and young workers newly arrived in town
without families, those who are athletic enough to ride bicycles to work, could also take advantage of
small, affordable housing in a building with shared amenities. Couples could be accommodated by
being assigned two adjacent modules. There's no reason these units couldn't be placed above public buildings such as libraries and hospitals also, especially since it's appropriate that public buildings be
larger, taller and more imposing that private ones.
By adding permltted height to affordable housing buildings, and only affordable housing buildings,
enough density could be permitted that a developer/owner/landlord could make a reasonable profit, saving the government housing subsidy, which is sure to be in short supply under the present
administration, for families in residential neighborhoods. If investors found this housing too unusual,
another group of small investors--the ones who buy T bills, could be offered the opportunity to
advance small, no interest loans,for the financing, with the proviso that their money could be returned
at any time, and these investors would be given the first opportunity to rent the units. Once the land cost and building cost were amortized, the investors would be given modest interest.
Stephanie Munoz 101 Alma, apt. 701, Palo Alto 94301 650 248-1842
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:04 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Suman Gupta <sumang00@hotmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, March 25, 2018 4:41 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Strong Concerns re Ross Road Traffic Calming Measures
Dear Palo Alto City Council Members,
My name is Suman Gupta and I have lived on Moreno Avenue in Midtown Palo Alto for nearly twenty years. During this
time, my three kids have used Ross Road and neighboring streets extensively to commute to school (JLS) and elsewhere
in the city. I am writing to express my deep concerns with the traffic calming measures that have been put in place thus
far along Ross Road. In a nutshell, I think the design is poor and is not having the intended impact of making the roads
safer for bikers and pedestrians. The traffic circle at Ross Road and East Meadow is especially concerning. The scale of
this traffic circle and the build out of the curbs at each corner are making it difficult for large cars or numerous bikers to
safely traverse around the circle. I have witness numerous incidents of bottleneck effects and kids getting confused and
frightened by riding in the middle of the road with cars following behind them. I have seen kids fall.
Please do NOT continue with the changes you are making until impact analysis has been completed on the changes
made thus far. It would be a waste of resources and money to find that the design did not bear out, and thus result in
costly removal of the bulb outs, traffic circles and other changes that have been made.
Please at least HALT the project underway at Moreno Avenue and Ross Road. Based on the markings and cuts that have
been made into these roads at this intersection, it appears that an even larger traffic circle, along with a median at each
intersection are in the works. The scale of the traffic circle appears too large for this circle.
Instead, please put in additional speed bumps along Ross Road between Oregon Expwy and Moreno Avenue, as well as
speed bumps on Moreno Ave between Louis Road and Ross Road. They will help.
Please, please, stop this project. Numerous neighbors have similarly shared their concerns on NextDoor. We are
beginning to understand that our concerns through this platform are not reaching the City Council. Hopefully, most of
these residents will write messages to you directly as I am doing now. The number of letters you have received thus far
do NOT reflect the level of concern and frustration we are feeling.
Furthermore, a petition is being circulated against these changes with nearly 800 signatures and counting. Please take
that as a sign that we are not happy with these changes, and our feelings come from worry for the safety of all the kids
in the neighborhood.
Personally, I support the goal you are trying to reach. However, the design that is being implemented does not.
Sincerley,
Suman Gupta
Moreno Ave, Palo Alto 94303
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:55 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Robert Ryan <ryan317@mac.com>
Sent:Wednesday, March 21, 2018 4:03 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:To: PA City Council re: bicycle and other traffic upgrades
Hi. I’m a longtime resident of Palo Alto (33 years and counting) and an avid bicyclist. I’m passing along the
following, which is copied from Next Door, the online community service.
I’ve no idea if any of this is applicable to the current upgrades underway on Ross Road and throughout the city.
However, I would be most interested in knowing whether the city has responded to this critique and whether the
concerns raised are valid or not.
Thanks in advance for your response. It’s much appreciated.
Bob Ryan 317 Tennyson Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
e-mail: ryan317@mac.com
phone: 650.325.2249 mobile: 650.796.5159
George Jaquette, Palo Verde
It is official - the intersection at East Meadow and Ross Road is dangerous
Cut and pasted from my exchange with Josh Mello just now...
Josh- Thanks for sending the attachments. As I indicated last week when we met, the FHWA guidelines are the
same as the NCHRP guidelines and this mini-roundabout does not adhere to the guidelines -- it does not even
remotely follow the guidelines. As we discussed, the implementation at the intersection of East Meadow and Ross
Road measures 64 feet from the northeast corner to the southwest corner. The minimum recommended ICD for a
single-lane roundabout is more than 50% bigger at 105 feet. As I also pointed out, the bike lane ends abruptly into a
sharp curb and by all guidance should slowly taper into a rolled curb. Quoting from your documents: California
Highway Design Manual - Roundabouts Section (2015).pdf p. 400-37 In some locations, it may not be practical to
build a single lane roundabout that will operate for 10 years. Geometric constraints and other conflicts may preclude
widening to the ultimate configuration. In such cases, other intersection configurations or control strategies
addressed in Index 401.5 may need to be considered p 400-38 The inscribed circle diameter for a single lane
roundabout generally ranges between 105 feet to 150 feet to accommodate the California Legal design vehicle and
130 feet to 180 feet to accommodate the STAA design vehicle (George's note: STAA design vehicle = largest
firetruck spec of 48 feet). Roundabouts: An Informational Guide Second Edition p 1-12, Exhibit 1-9 - clearly states
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:55 AM
2
that a Mini-Roundabout has an ICD of between 45-90 feet (a roundabout has a minimum ICD of 90-feet). - clearly
states that a Mini-Roundabout has a fully traversable island and splitters p 1-12, Exhibit 1-10 shows a diagram of
what SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT p 1-13, Exhibit 1-11 shows a picture of what SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT p 1-
13 In retrofit applications, mini-roundabouts are relatively inexpensive because they typically require minimal
additional pavement at the intersecting roads and minor widening at the corner curbs. They are mostly
recommended when there is insufficient right-of-way to accommodate the design vehicle with a traditional single-
lane roundabout. Because they are small, mini-roundabouts are perceived as pedestrian-friendly with short crossing
distances and very low vehicle speeds on approaches and exits. A fully traversable central island is provided to
accommodate large vehicles and serves one of the distinguishing features of a mini-roundabout. The
miniroundabout is designed to accommodate passenger cars without requiring them to traverse over the central
island. The overall design of a mini-roundabout should align vehicles at entry to guide drivers to the intended path
and minimize running over of the central island to the extent possible. pp. 2-17,18 Where bicycle lanes or shoulders
are used on approach roadways, they should be terminated in advance of roundabouts to merge cyclists into traffic
for appropriate circulation with other vehicles. In addition, bicycle lanes should not be located within the circulatory
roadway of roundabouts as this would suggest that bicyclists should ride at the outer edge of the circulatory
roadway, which can increase crashes with cyclists and both entering and exiting motor vehicles. Because some
cyclists may not feel comfortable traversing some roundabouts in the same manner as other vehicles, bicycle ramps
can be provided to allow access to the sidewalk or a shared use path at the roundabout. Bicycle ramps at
roundabouts have the potential to be confused as pedestrian ramps, particularly for pedestrians who are blind or
who have low vision. Therefore, bicycle ramps should be reserved for those situations where the roundabout
complexity or design speed may result in less comfort for some bicyclists. Ramps should not normally be used at
urban single-lane roundabouts. More details about bicycle design treatments at roundabouts can be found in
Chapter 6. p 6-72 Where bicycle lanes or shoulders are used on approach roadways, they should be terminated in
advance of roundabouts. The full-width bicycle lane should normally end at least 100 ft (30 m) before the edge of
the circulatory roadway. Terminating the bike lane helps remind cyclists that they need to merge. An appropriate
taper should be provided to narrow the sum of the travel lane and bike lane widths down to the appropriate width
necessary to achieve desired motor vehicle speeds on the roundabout approach. The taper should end prior to the
crosswalk at the roundabout to achieve the shortest possible pedestrian crossing distance. A taper rate of 7:1 is
recommended to accommodate a design speed of 20 mph (30 km/h), which is appropriate for bicyclists and motor
vehicles approaching the roundabout. To taper a 5 ft to 6 ft (1.4 m to 1.8 m) wide bicycle lane, a 40 ft (12.2 m) taper
is recommended. The bicycle lane line should be dotted for 50 to 200 ft (15 m to 60 m) prior to the beginning of the
taper and dropped entirely through the taper itself. A longer dotted line gives advance notice to cyclists that they
need to merge, providing more room for them to achieve this maneuver and find an appropriate gap in traffic. Where
traffic design guidelines are not followed, an engineer should provide detailed explanations for such variances -- this
is a matter of public safety, not an art project. I would like to know what regulations you refer to when you write
"engineering judgement is always permitted in the field of roadway design"? If an engineer uses bad judgment to
design a dangerous traffic obstacle, who is responsible for remedying the dangerous obstacle? Can you provide any
justification for the as-built design in this intersection? Can anyone? Rob, I'll repeat what I wrote in my first email
exchange with you -- I really believe that the City of Palo Alto should HALT the project completely until someone can
explain the reasons for these gross violations of all published guidelines. I have forwarded you contact information
for an expert at the FHWA who has offered to provide his guidance for free, and I really think we need to get an
expert in here before someone gets hurt. But first -- STOP DIGGING HOLES until we sort this out. The correct
design will likely be cheaper and easier to implement than what Laurentiu Dusciuc designed (if, as Josh said Friday,
he is the engineer who "sealed" this design). The intersection at East Meadow and Ross could be retrofitted to be
completely traversable (or mountable), and the bulbouts can be removed and curbs can be rolled. Getting this one
right is really important if you are going to replicate it ten more times around the city in coming years. Thanks-
George
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 10:03 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Dale Anderson <bouncyballblue@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 27, 2018 8:44 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:"Traffic Calming" on Ross Rd
On the subject of "Bike Boulevards"
My family and I, residents of Ross Rd, are horrified and enraged by the absolutely reckless and misguided "improvements" made on Ross Rd. Making the street narrower so that cars go slower and have to avoid bikes is
the warped logic that making the street more dangerous will make it safer. Ross Rd was perfectly safe and has
been for the past twenty years I've lived here. As a kid, I felt safe biking and my parents didn't worry about me
getting hit by a car in a squeeze point. There was a vocal minority which will always complain that cars go too
fast but the majority of residents were perfectly satisfied with our nice wide street. Speedbumps alone would have slowed traffic fine! I've already witnessed cars drive over the bulbouts by accident, and several cars have
gotten stuck in the muddy bulbout outside the YMCA. One of our neighbors says a car hit her biking child.
Another biker nearly collided with my walking father when they veered on to the sidewalk to avoid a squeeze
point. Get your head out of your fallible "studies" and look at the actual situation! The road needs to be made
with realistic expectations, that drivers will be distracted and go too fast and kids will bike on the sidewalk and ignore stop signs. This optimistically naive waste of money is going to lead to someone being injured or killed,
and the ensuing lawsuit will be spectacular.
Dale Anderson
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/26/2018 1:04 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Deborah Goldeen <palamino@pacbell.net>
Sent:Sunday, March 25, 2018 3:14 PM
To:joshua.mello@cityofpaloalto.org
Cc:Council, City; Transportation
Subject:Traffic Circle at Park and Stanford
There is now now stop sign or significant impedence on Park Blvd. between El Camino and California Ave. That’s seven
blocks. You think people haven’t figured it out as a cut through around El Camino? You think they don’t drive it at 35 to
40 mph? I walk my dog every day to and from that park and watch cars fly through that intersection on a regular basis.
Now that the stop sign is gone, there are even bicycles that almost run me down!
Also, vehicles turning right from Standford on to Park no longer have to slow down. Talk about hazard for pedestrians!
That’s a major crossing into the park.
How about just put back the stop signs on Stanford and on Park “south”bound. Please?
Deb Goldeen
2130 Birch St., 06, 321‐7375
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/23/2018 8:51 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Martha <marthalg@sonic.net>
Sent:Thursday, March 22, 2018 4:30 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:train crossings
Dear City Council,
We were very disappointed to learn of the chosen options for the crossings at Meadow and
Charleston. Please, please do not close these streets to traffic. We use both of them every day to get to places like Mitchell Park Library, Piazza grocery store, and Abilities United which our son attends. Bicycle only crossing would not help us at all. We live in Barron Park which does not have any
amenities like grocery stores or libraries plus Palo Alto does not run cross town buses to our
neighborhood. I know we aren't the only people in Barron Park to use these crossings, for instance I
see many of our neighbors at Piazza and Mitchell Park Library.
We think you should reconsider the trench option. It might be expensive, perhaps the high speed money would help, but there would be opportunities to open more crossings plus deaden the sound
of the trains.
Sitting on your hands and not doing anything is not an option either. As it is now the lines are long at
both crossings when the commute starts in the mornings and evenings.
Please don't divide our city anymore than it already is. The option you choose is forever and will impact our city for years to come.
Thank you,
Martha & Paul Gregory
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 3/28/2018 12:46 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Nerissa Wong-VanHaren <nerissaw@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, March 28, 2018 11:33 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:urgent issue
Dear Mayor and City Councilpersons
I hope you have taken note of this recent incident in Atlanta and are taking precautions in regards to our city utilities and government. I imagine we would be considered a plum target due to our silicon valley centrality
and perceived wealth.
https://nyti.ms/2Gi2ROO
A Concerned Citizen
POLICY & SERVICES COMMITTEE-TENTATIVE AGENDA
To be scheduled and potential P&S agenda items I
1. Council Referral -P&S to review revised language, options, and implications
associated with modifications to seismic compliance in the City's Municipal Code
2. Review economic analysis regarding the housing inclusionary program
3. Auditors Quarterly Report (AUD)
4. Audit status updates
5. Review and Acceptance of Fire Department Emergency Medical Services Future
Needs Assessment
6. City Policy and Procedures annual update
Informational Items
• ERP Replacement update
• Senior Programs update
• Fiber to the premises update
• Track Watch update
• Homeless Services including safe parking update
BOARD MEETING DATE: March 12, 2018
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING
and
PUBLIC HEARING
and
FOR ACTION
Resolution No. 18-14 Developer Impact Fee Adjustment
.. BAGKGROUND INFORMATION: By state law, school districts are authorized to ·ass~s developer impact fees to offset the cost of providing facilities for students
resulting from new development. Previously, the maximum allowable developer impact
fee ~as $3.48 per square foot for residential development and $0.56 per square foot for
comtllercial/industrial development. The maximum fee is allocated two-thirds for the
elementary districts and one-third for MVLA.
I' I ,
. Eff~tive January 24, 2018, the maximum allowable fee increased to $3.79 per square
· foot for residential development and $0.61 for commercial/industrial development, of
which the MVLA share is $1.26 for residential and $0.20 for commercial/industrial.
The 2014 revised MVLA impact fee justification study establishes that, based on the
expected cost of providing facilities for students resulting from new development, the
District is justified in charging fees up to $1.35 per square foot for residential
development and up to $0.60 per square foot on a sliding scale for
commercial/industrial development.
Currently, MVLA developer impact fees are $1.16 for residential and $0.19 for most
commercial/industrial development. Revenue for the 2016-17 fiscal year was
$1,627,515. The revenue fees in recent years have been used for debt service on
certificates of participation, the proceeds of which were used to construct additional
classrooms and classroom support space.
REPORT/PROPOSAL: This resolution increases the residential fee to $1.26 per square
foot. The commercial/industrial fee will increase to $0.20 per square foot. A Notice of
Public Hearing was published in the Mountain View Voice on March 2nd and March gth
and in the Los Altos Town Crier on February 29th and March 7th. This increase will
become effective on April 11, 2018, sixty days after Board approval.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The increase in revenue will assist the Capital Facilities Fund
(25) to meet its future expenditure obligations.
SUPERINTENDENT'S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Trustees adopts
Resolution No. 18-14, Developer Impact Fee Adjustment, increasing the developer
impact fee on residential development from $1.16 per square foot to $1.26 per square
foot and the commercial development fee from $0 .19 per square foot to $0.20 per
square foot.
., .,
J. The fees imposed on commercial or industrial development bear a reasonable
relationship and are limited to the needs of the community for schools and are
reasonably related and limited to the need for school facilities caused by the
development;
K. The fees will be collected for school facilities for which an account has been
established and funds appropriated and for which the district has adopted a
construction schedule and/or to reimburse the District for expenditures previously
made.
3. Amount of Fee. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Board hereby increases the
previously levied fee to the amount of $1.26 per square foot for assessable space for
new residential construction and for residential reconstruction to the extent of the
resulting increase in assessable areas; and to the amount of $0.20 per square foot for
new commercial or industrial construction
4. Fee Adjustments and Limitation. The fees adjusted herewith shall be subject to the
following:
A. The amount of the District's fees as authorized by Education Code section 17620
shall be reviewed every two years to determine if a fee increase according to the
adjustment for inflation set forth in the statewide cost index for Class B construction
as determined by the State Allocation Board is justified.
B. Any development project for which a final map was approved and ~onstruction had
commenced on or before September 1, 1986, is subject only to the fee, charge,
dedication or other form of requirement in existence on that date and applicable to
the project.
C. The term "development project" as used herein is as defined by section 17620 (a) (2)
of the Education Code.
5. Additional Mitigation Methods The policies set forth in this Resolution are not exclusive
and the Board reserves the authority to undertake other or additional methods to
finance school facilities including but not limited to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities
Act of 1982 (Government Code section 53311, et seq.) and other such funding
mechanisms. This Board reserves the authority to substitute the dedication of land or
other property or other form of requirement in lieu of the fees levied by way of this
Resolution at its discretion, so long as the reasonable value of land to be dedicated
does not exceed the maximum fee amounts contained herein or modified pursuant
hereto.
6. Implementation For residential, commercial or industrial projects within the District, the
Superintendent, or the Superintendent's designee, is authorized to issue Certificates of
Compliance upon the payment of any fee levied under the authority of this Resolution.
7. California Environmental Quality Act The Board hereby finds that the implementation of
Developer Fees is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).