HomeMy Public PortalAbout20170501plCC4701-32
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: 5/1/2017
Document dates: 4/12/2017 – 4/19/2017
Set 4 of 4
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 | 4/18/2017 3:30 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Ted Davids <tdavids@sonic.net>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:26 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:ADU ordinance pulled from consent calendar and rescheduled.
I live in Palo Alto in the Downtown North neighborhood and I want the ADU Ordinance pulled from the Consent Calendar and rescheduled after staff or the PTC have analyzed the ordinance. Thank you W T Davids 475 Everett Ave.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:13 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Larry Jones <john.x.wyclif@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 8:02 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:ADU Ordinance
The ADU Ordinance needs much more time for discussion! We live in a democracy where the voice of the people should be heard.
Larry
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:13 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Emily Jaquette <ebreuner@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 7:51 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Adu postpone
Dear Council,
I ask you as members of the City Council to vote tonight to remove the ADU issue from the consent calendar so that it can be fully discussed and debated at a later date. The current ordinance does not take into consideration specific issues
related to Eichler homes, especially the ones in a flood zone. Please give this extremely important issue a chance for discussion among the Council and among the community before
allowing it to pass without additional comment. Thank you.
Emily Jaquette 3375 Kenneth dr
Palo Alto ca
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:18 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Regina Smith <reginaabsmith@gmail.com> on behalf of Regina Smith
<reginasmith@talktalk.net>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:22 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:ADU tonight
Please remove the ADU issue from the consent calendar tonight in order to allow future reasoned discussion on this
important item.
Thank you.
Regina Smith
( Owner, 3407 Janice Way, Palo Alto)
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:25 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Ruchita Parat <ruchita@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:07 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:ADU
Hello,
I have been palo alto Homeowner since 1993. I was shocked to hear that the ADU was being passed
without much PUBLIC REVIEW. I would like a public review and LOT MORE THOUGHT put into the proposal.
THanks
Ruchita Parat 4177 Hubbartt Dr
Palo Alto
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:15 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Bryna Chang <brynachang@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:31 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:ADUs
Dear Palo Alto City Council,
I cannot make it to tonight's meeting as my husband will not be home tonight and I must stay home to care for
my 9 and 11 year boys, but I did want to let you know that I think the revisions made to the ADU ordinance were hasty and I ask that you please pull the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance from the Consent Calendar
and reschedule it after staff or PTC review of the effects of the changes made by Adrian Fine and Cory
Wolboch.
I am a long-time resident of Palo Alto and grew up attending Palo Alto Schools since Kindergarten. Now I am
raising my own family here. To be clear, I support having more ADUs, but not in this way!!
If only 6 feet of setback is required then there should absolutely be individual review! I also am concerned about parking implications and limiting the use of ADUs. I am concerned about unenforceable rules leading to
airbnb rentals and ADUs being rented out as office space, creating more traffic and parking problems. Finally I
am concerned about making sure that the additional wear and tear on city infrastructure created by occupants of
ADUs is somehow offset by revenue. Those occupants will use parks, streets, city resources. How do we make
sure they are also paying for those services through property tax, the way other residents are?
Sincerely,
Bryna Chang
3338 Waverley St.
Brevity brought to you by iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:18 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Alison McNall <a_mcnall@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:19 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:ADUs
I want to let the council know that we are both in support of more ADUs being built in Palo Alto. It will
diversify our population and let people of less income stay here.
Alison McNall
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:27 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Faramarz Bahmani <faramarzb@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:40 PM
To:Council, City
Dear Respectful Council Members,
My name is Faramarz Bahmani and I live at 1235 Lincoln Ave.
I would like to ask you to pull the proposed relaxed ADU ordinance from the consent calendar and reschedule it
after it has gone through the staff analysis.
I believe these proposed ADU rules create fertile grounds for Airbnb to invade our neighborhoods. Lack of
oversight over ADUs in addition to lack of city enforcement of Airbnb in a city that is highly desirable produces
a bad outcome for the long‐term well being of the community.
Here is an example. In October of 2016, one tenant in a neighborhood community of ours had the “clever”
idea of renting a 3 bedroom house (a house he did not own) to 14 Airbnb users at a time. This tenant had no
vested interest in Palo Alto, this was just his opportunity to use Aribnb and make money.
And what was even more egregious was that this tenant thought he was doing the community a favor by
creating more affordable housing. Cramming 4‐6 people per bedroom, creating unsanitary conditions,
problems with neighbors, fire hazards, parking issues, foot traffic, a number of other problems, so that this
tenant could get a cut of the $14,000 a month off of this 3‐bedroom house, does not sound to me like he
intended to do anyone any good but himself.
Now, similarly, with the relaxed ADU rules, I believe that that there are a number of developers behind this
idea that have the intention of making money and who don’t care less about what happens to the rest of us in
terms of our neighborhoods, families, safety and property values.
Sincerely,
Faramarz Bahmani
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:30 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:missycresap@yahoo.com
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:26 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Lorrie Castellano
Subject:ADUs
I SUPPORT ADUs‼
I'm a lifelong resident of Palo Alto, a former home owner, and now renting a small cottage...which I can barely afford.
I don't want to live in a college town without students.
I don't want to live in any town without young people.
I don't want to live in a town without seniors......ME.
Respectfully,
Missy Cresap
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:38 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Brian . <brianevans@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:21 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:ADUs
Hello. We have lived in Palo Alto since 2006 and love it. I have heard some rumors about major changes to
zoning policies which, if true, could dramatically alter the face of our neighborhoods. These sound extremely
controversial and I absolutely do not think they should be voted on until the city has had much more time to digest and debate the changes. Please pull the ADU item from the Consent Calendar ... it is not appropriate to
make critical and major change rashly. Much better to move slowly than to ramrod things through. If there is
silence on this issue it may be that your citizens have not been fully informed.
Thank you,
Brian Evans Palo Alto resident
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:44 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Allen Akin <akin@arden.org>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:11 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:ADUs
As I read the Staff reports, this decision has the potential to completely redefine residential areas throughout Palo Alto.
At least 60% of standard lots have enough FAR available to build an ADU.
Including substandard lots would increase this, though I have found no Staff analysis that helps me understand how
much.
I thought the original PTC report was thoughtful and useful. I'd like to see the same for the new ADU rules, as well as
the follow‐up analyses for things like parking previously requested by the PTC. May I also suggest a simple map of the
City, with each ADU‐eligible lot marked with a small red dot? That would give all of us a simple visual way to understand
how neighborhoods would be affected.
Please remove the ADU ordinance from the consent calendar, and refer it to Staff and/or the PTC for analysis.
Best regards,
Allen Akin
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:05 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Larry and Zongqi Alton <lalton@pacbell.net>
Sent:Tuesday, April 18, 2017 11:37 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:back to the drawing board and provide the dining room the seniors need!
Dear Council members,
How can a remodel of the senior center leave out an appropriate dining room? Let's go
back to the drawing board and provide the dining room the seniors need!
Larry Alton
650-387-6814
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:15 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:HEATHER MACDONALD <hmacdonald@me.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:32 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Moitra, Chitra
Subject:City Council meeting April 17
Dear Council, I am writing to ask the members of the City Council to vote tonight to remove the ADU issue from the consent calendarso that it can be fully discussed and debated at a later date. The current ordinance does not take into consideration specific issues related to Eichler homes, especially the ones in a flood zone. Please give this extremely important issue a chance for discussion among the Council and among the community before allowing it to pass without additional comment. Thank you, Heather Macdonald 3469 Janice Way, Palo Alto
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:07 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Jennifer Landesmann <jlandesmann@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, April 13, 2017 11:47 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Daily Post articles about PAO and SFO
Dear Council,
You may have seen two recent articles in The Daily Post about jet noise complaints.
The first article yesterday was a front page headline using the complaints of one family to suggest that Palo Alto
Airport does not have a problem with noise; or that noise is not a problem to the communities it is a neighbor to.
The second Post story, today, suggested that the surge in SFO complaints is due to a "rise in mobile apps" and
mentioned that "many of the complaints were made by the same people."
You would think your constituents are irrationally complaining. Or was it just the old shaming tactic, that Palo
Altans complain too much.
These articles could easily be seen as Airport PR undermining the people and environment seriously impacted by jet pollution.
I would like to suggest that you and the City could provide some perspective to this picture. Perhaps you can
write a Memo about this topic. How impacted Palo Alto citizens are by jet noise, document the pattern in
complaints, and come up with ideas about how this topic can be addressed better, and not left at just ridiculing complainants.
Among the items which surfaced as a result of these articles, which you may want to consider are the following:
1. SFO Airport PR Doug Yakel noted that "updates on air routes from the FAA" has resulted in a "more focused pattern of traffic due to greater precision of the route." This is true, BUT
Per FAA testimony during the Select Committee, the precision trails are aborted 50% of the time. The other
50% of traffic is vectored. Ask Portola Valley, - they are not under any precision route, but are hammered by
vectoring (and have huge complaints given their small population). Your constituents are hammered by both.
2. Because of the precision routes (which work only 50% of the time), the planes get bunched together and
because of the less safe environment with bunched up jets they lowered the altitudes. Altitudes were lowered for
all routes, precision, non-precision.
Net net: You have "on trail" traffic, vectored traffic, all traffic at LOWER altitudes. Mr. Yakel forgot to
mention the lower altitudes.
The current configuration amounts to punching one on the left side (low altitude Precision Based Navigation routes) with 50% of
traffic; then punching the right side (low altitude vectoring) with the other 50%. Blows being done differently doesn't change the fact that it's
the same body being pummeled. As you know, Palo Alto gets these two punches, with 60% of SFO arrivals transiting over Palo Alto
residential neighborhoods. Yet SFO's noise monitors end in Redwood City! It's easy to ridicule complaints with no real data.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:07 AM
2
Vectoring is not dispersion, and certainly low altitude vectoring does not alleviate anything just because it's off trail. Complaints will come from the frequency of intrusions, the number of jets and because of how loud these intrusions are from the low altitudes.
The folks who complain are experiencing these impacts, and these are all measurable.
3. Freytag provided a historical assessment which documents the rise in noise at levels in Palo Alto considered
"significant" even by FAA standards, an increase of +5 dB for community DNL between 45 dB and 60 dB, Please refer to
the Freytag historical assessment report and noise maps which show the rise in noise infusions. An increase in 5
db in DNL is massive. The World Health Organization considers 55 dnl the threshold of acceptable noise
(before it becomes a health hazard). This is something to defend Palo Alto against, noise which is hazardous to the health of citizens.
4. You know from direct testimonies how this is affecting your constituents. And you may be aware that for
every complainant, there are many more impacted. Please don't forget the children and elderly who cannot
complain.
5. Nobody likes to complain. It is a stress factor. Reaching for the darn app is hell. I hate it, its' been three years
on this task to get some truth to the situation (being our own noise monitors), yet here we are dealing with the
Airport PR machines, artists at this game of undermining, negating, and ridiculing complaints.
6. The East Palo Alto community to whom PAO is a neighbor do not complain for a variety of reasons - from working
long hours to not having the information about how to; or they consider complaints are futile. This does not mean that they (and all the schools near PAO) are not impacted by jet noise and air pollution.
7. Airspace changes have been done without thorough Environmental analysis, and without notice to communities impacted. State of the art analysis tools exist to evaluate impacts (this is as true for PAO as the commercial airports) and these have yet to be used more effectively.
8. Unlike the old days when the airports and FAA could say "planes have to fly somewhere," in recent years, modernization and
our tax dollars have provided just the right tools and methods to have jets take better routes, by design. Environmentally
conscious design is possible. Especially with jet routes because the FAA has databases of every airplane that is flown,
which airline, departing and arriving airport, altitude at any spot along its route, speed at each point. Imagine if you had this data
for cars.
By the way, the FAA's AEDT tool can analyze vectoring impacts as well. Largely because Air Traffic Control ends up vectoring over the same areas all the time. This may be there real reason that "the same" people complain. Not because we all know
how to use the app. Palo Alto can lead on a higher standard of information, and a specific Council Memo about the topic of jet noise complaints (and the corresponding facts behind the complaints) would be very helpful. As an airport owner, this
community also has a higher responsibility to lead reasonable discussions about these topics.
The game of "it's just a few" or "it's the same people" needs to stop. You can make a difference. Thank you for all you do,
Jennifer
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:10 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Rohit Relan <rohitrelan7@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 18, 2017 10:37 AM
To:Paulino, Tom (Feinstein); Chesna_Foord@feinstein.senate.gov; mjr@stanford.edu; Office
of the President; Board Operations; Council, City
Attachments:DHSletter1.pdf
Please see attached.
Rohit Relan
Rohit Relan
1818 Emerson Street
Palo Alto CA 94301
April 18 2017
To:
The Secretary
The Department of Homeland Security
Washington DC 20528
Re:
My application for asylum
Mr. Secretary:
I write with reference to my application for asylum.
As a start, as a direct result of the events of the past two years, I no longer choose to care to
count or recall the number of times your previous head of state and parliamentary body have
availed themselves of my works of knowledge.
If you are not already aware, there is more than one nation, and several people and institutions
of the highest responsibility, leadership and visibility in your nation, that have a very dim view of
the events of the past two years.
Since my arrival into your nation, the number of threats by the United Kingdom has increased
from three to eleven, not including personal visits by the representatives of that nation. These
threats have ranged from “banning, hoaxing, weeding out, stamping out, killing, disappearing,
pushing over the cliff, stitching up, getting imprisoned, death via drugs, gagging.” All have been
carried on the home pages of that nation’s flagship publishers and broadcasters. The online and
electronic harassment has reached a crescendo, including efforts to prevent me securing
employment, on Stanford’s campus. The personal visits have been designed to intimidate and
harass, on Stanford’s campus, and off campus to sexually taunt, insult and humiliate.
Matching these threats, is triumphant celebratory police criminality, racism, homophobia,
xenophobia, deception, fraud and entrapment by the Sheriff’s Department of the County of
Santa Clara on the Stanford University campus, while the office of the President was aware at
all times of my physical presence on campus, while the Department of History was instructing
on the knowledge I created in History 96, and while your head of state was repeatedly availing
himself of my works. That Stanford University has the largest number of rapes in any university
in your nation, and has previously on at least one occasion being accused of condoning anti-
American espionage for cash, should come as no surprise.
That I have no response to the complaint filed may come as a surprise to you.
Subsequently, there has been refusal of service by Palo Alto police on a number of events, and
in one event, based on income and residence status.
The concept of personal safety and asylum in your nation has now almost become a paradox.
I now wish to depart your nation and ask that your agency process my application
urgently and immediately. Since I am as yet unsure of my future plans, I would prefer that my
application is processed so that I do not have apply for advance parole before leaving your
nation, and then have to rely on returning to your nation to complete the process.
I also have personal reasons for needing to depart. The near absolute majority of the
homosexual community of your nation is either currently HIV+ or in celebration of disease.
Since the creation of new drugs designed to prevent HIV infection, I am afraid only your nation
records an increase in HIV infection. The near absolute majority of New York, San Francisco
and Los Angeles is HIV+, and the situation is being misrepresented or obfuscated. The HIV/
AIDS crisis in your nation is higher currently than it was at the height of the AIDS crisis. The
situation was identical when I was resident in New York in 2006-2008. A very simple statistic will
make you realize the gravity of this matter. Among those homosexuals who self identify and self
report themselves as HIV- and are taking the medication regimen exactly as prescribed, only
four sexual encounters may result in HIV infection and ten encounters will certainly result in HIV
infection.
I need to depart your nation immediately and urgently. If I return, it will be only for short
professional visits.
I have already informed both your Senators I will retain my British passport irrespective of the
outcome of the application, based on the police events of the past two years.
I will not, under any circumstances whatsoever, abandon or withdraw my application.
Doing so would be yielding to the criminality, racism, xenophobia and homophobia of your
nation and its police; doing so would compound my personal security situation in all nations
around the globe. Your nation has already gone out of its way and done much to jeopardize my
personal security, including a visit to a jail based on police criminality, forcible job loss, false
handcuffing in daylight on a university campus, insulting dead parents (which it now appears is
a national paradigm, not just a police phenomenon); events outside your nation pertaining to my
personal security in future may therefore become directly related to, and predicated upon, the
events of the past two years.
You may already be aware through my works, that when it comes to anti-Americanism, in your
case real, and in my case, honorary, through my various associations with your nation, the
United Kingdom has limitless desire, willingness and appetite.
If you are inclined to view the contents and tone of this communication as anti-American, then
you must desist. It is a reflection of the management of these matters by your nation, its institutions and citizens
since my arrival in 2015. It is a reflection of my personal threshold for the circumstances in your
nation.
Rohit Relan
CC:
The President and Trustees of Stanford University
The Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara
The Mayor and City Council of Palo Alto
Senators Blumenthal and Feinstein
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 8:36 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Maggie Betsock/Norman Abt <bongos@jps.net>
Sent:Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:01 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Downtown Parking Changes
As a longtime Menlo Park resident who shops, eats and has doctors in downtown Palo Alto, don't go to paid
parking. Why are you even considering it? I drive a little electric, am a senior citizen and have financially
supported downtown Palo Alto merchants for over 20 years. All I have read so suggests there are easier solutions
to the problems mentioned. Your arguments for the switch are weak at best. Do I smell greed and anti-car
prejudices as the true motivators? You don't even know what you will do with the money the fees
generate. KISS. Rethink. Think about the quickly-fading positive reputation Palo Alto has.
Trump and his cohorts need our attention right now. This proposed parking idea of yours is petty. Don't you
have better things to focus on?????? Please re-check your priorities.
M.Betsock
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:12 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Deborah Goldeen <palamino@pacbell.net>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 11:20 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Endurance
Despite what I, or anyone else, think of you all, you all must be commended for enduring those interminable meetings
and still doing a half way decent job. I couldn’t make it all the way through a single one without being hauled off in a
straight jacket.
Deb Goldeen, 2130 Birch St., 06, 321‐7375
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:12 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:stanley karabats <stanleykarabats@yahoo.com>
Sent:Thursday, April 13, 2017 1:23 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Fw: Palo Alto Police - Long History of Misconduct - Stanley Karabats
On Thursday, April 13, 2017 12:48 PM, stanley karabats <stanleykarabats@yahoo.com> wrote:
Please add to the list the gang rape in the high school parking lot and the total lack of police action because of students involved with that group. We could do a who's who there. Turn on the television , green financial page to giant avocados and so on. Please mention to Walt Hewlett how stupid that we are here and where is the little boy ?
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:12 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:stanley karabats <stanleykarabats@yahoo.com>
Sent:Thursday, April 13, 2017 1:22 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Fw: Subject: January 19, 1994 Police Misconduct and cover-up. Reason: Donald
Trump is President
On Friday, March 17, 2017 2:21 AM, stanley karabats <stanleykarabats@yahoo.com> wrote:
While working as Regional Auditor Golden State Sanwa Bank in 1980-1982 and during an audit of the
new San Jose Data Center I discovered a multi-billion dollar "Kite' by several major Japan Trade
Companies done with the assistance of Sanwa and Mitsubishi Banking Officials. Special FBI Agent C
Drew Empy notified the Japanese of the discovery. Special FBI Agent Donald "Keith" Barry, then in charge of the San Jose Office was also involved in
the investigation.
A fine was paid and the public informed "Banking Irregularities". (Flint)
At the same time Special FBI Agent Donald Hale (See FBI Agent Don Hale - 1982 - CIA/Rock Cocaine San Francisco) was investigation Norwin Meneses. I became involved and spent time with
Don while tracing $250,000.00 taken from the Main Vault of Golden State Sanwa Bank and traced to
New York City to a group of young black men, by a vault teller claiming a bomb had been placed on
him. In 1989 Don testified before a Senate Committee and spoke how he/they had been sold out
internally while trying to stop the drugs from entering the country. (Black)
FBI Agents claim the actions of the Palo Alto Police Department on above mentioned date was not
any action taken by them and altering of police records and related doctor and hospital reports we not
done by/for them.
Special FBI Agent Jim Hilverda (1982 Rifkin $10,000,000.00 diamonds with Alex out of Crocker) had
me send the records ( I had obtained police, hospital, doctor's and AMERICAN AMBULANCE
DIVERS Vaugh and Hofeman's records) directly to Duval Patrick (On July 17, 1996) then United
States Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. I ask Jim and other Agents to try to
obtain Officer Baldwins original report. The State Certification (located nude) per officer report and related obtained info shows what happened. I was fully dressed and other officers there later told my
x-wife. The reason is the only question. Death of two homeless people ? Psychiatric Medication is
not a joke . When I objected to being medicated I was told I would be forced and an injection would
be no fun. Later I was told the medication I was given for two years was the worst thing that could
happen as it was not the right family of drugs. I thought of the two suicides. Grave indifference to human life - second degree murder. I wonder if their families knew of the long history of police
misconduct and falsification of reports. (Hewlett)
The FBI reply "Sounds like a personal problem." and in my drugged condition I let it go. Big mistake
now to be addressed .
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:12 AM
2
I will be publicly naming several agents involved in cases I have worked which include (1973) United
States National Bank of San Diego (closed 66 branches in 1973) Arnold Smith often called Richard
Nixon's money man. Beef boycott 1973 ?
4
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:10 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Larry and Zongqi Alton <lalton@pacbell.net>
Sent:Thursday, April 13, 2017 1:29 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Fw: the vote on storm drains improvement
Larry Alton
On Thursday, April 13, 2017 1:06 PM, Larry and Zongqi Alton <lalton@pacbell.net> wrote:
I am a property owner.
Please correct this error.
Larry Alton
On Thursday, April 13, 2017 12:29 PM, "Minor, Beth" <Beth.Minor@CityofPaloAlto.org> wrote:
Hi,
This ballot was for property owners only as they are the ones that pay this assessment. The list of property owners we received came from the Santa Clara County Assessors Office.
Thanks,
B-
Beth D. Minor | City Clerk | City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue| Palo Alto, CA 94301 T: 650- 329-2379 E: beth.minor@cityofpaloalto.org
City Clerks Rock and Rule
From: Larry and Zongqi Alton [mailto:lalton@pacbell.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2017 12:11 PM
To: Council, City
Subject: the vote on storm drains improvement
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:10 AM
2
Dear Council members,
Many people did not receive a ballot on this vote. This is very strange and there needs to be another vote on this matter. Best Wishes,
Larry Alton
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 8:52 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Sent:Sunday, April 16, 2017 12:28 PM
To:firstvp@fresnopoa.org; Mayor; CityManager; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov;
paul.caprioglio; Doug Vagim; beachrides; mthibodeaux@electriclaboratories.com; terry;
Dan Richard; President; robert.andersen; jboren; bmcewen; rosenheim@kpix.cbs.com;
dwalters; Mark Standriff; Joel Stiner; Council, City; dennisbalakian; David Balakian; Tranil
Thomas; steve.hogg; kfsndesk; newsdesk; bretthedrick
Subject:Fwd: Fwd: Cadillac in 2018 will have Supercruise. Ford hybrid police pursuit cruiser
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 12:51 AM Subject: Fwd: Fwd: Cadillac in 2018 will have Supercruise. Ford hybrid police pursuit cruiser
To: Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>, kfsndesk <kfsndesk@abc.com>, newsdesk <newsdesk@cbs47.tv>,
rosenheim@kpix.cbs.com, jboren <jboren@fresnobee.com>, bmcewen <bmcewen@fresnobee.com>, dwalters
<dwalters@sacbee.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 12:40 AM Subject: Re: Fwd: Cadillac in 2018 will have Supercruise. Ford hybrid police pursuit cruiser To: dennisbalakian <dennisbalakian@sbcglobal.net>, David Balakian <davidbalakian@sbcglobal.net>, Mayor
<mayor@fresno.gov>, CityManager <citymanager@fresno.gov>, Mark Standriff
<mark.standriff@fresno.gov>, esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov, "paul.caprioglio" <paul.caprioglio@fresno.gov>,
nick yovino <npyovino@gmail.com>, mthibodeaux@electriclaboratories.com, beachrides <beachrides@sbcglobal.net>, Tranil Thomas <soulja92y@hotmail.com>, Dan Richard <danrichard@mac.com>, Daniel Zack <daniel.zack@fresno.gov>, President <President@whitehouse.gov>
Thanks, Doug. Happy Easter.
LH
Just saw a good piece on DW News. They sold 500,000 E bikes in Germany last year. Small motor you can
hardly see at front axel. The batteries etc. are in the part just below the handlebars, above the fork. They
showed City of Munster very bike friendly, and also Copenhagen which is VERY bike friendly. You remember those old films from the 50's showing thousands of bikes in Amsterdam.
A little rail at traffic lights so you can put your foot on it and relax. Also very wide bike lanes since vehicles
scare bike riders. Also, public tire pumps and angled trash barrels so you can toss stuff in as you ride past. The
E bike is now well advanced. Helps on long trips or going uphill. They said the realization has dawned that the bike is the solution to traffic jams in cities.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 8:52 AM
2
LH
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 12:29 AM, Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:33 PM
Subject: Re: Fwd: Cadillac in 2018 will have Supercruise. Ford hybrid police pursuit cruiser To: "Harding, Loran" <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Loran, FYI:
GM Announces Plan to Add 1,100 Autonomous Tech Jobs in California
http://m.industryweek.com/workforce/gm-announces-plan-add-1100-autonomous-tech-jobs-california
Happy Easter,
D
-----------------------------------
On Apr 14, 2017 1:21 PM, "Loran Harding" <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 12:59 PM
Subject: Cadillac in 2018 will have Supercruise. Ford hybrid police pursuit cruiser
To: bretthedrick <bretthedrick@hedrickschevy.com>, Gary Turgeon <garyt@michaelautomotive.com>
Friday, April 14, 2017
Interesting re (1) Cadillac Supercruise system and (2) the Ford police responder hybrid:
https://arstechnica.co.uk/cars/2017/04/best-cars-new-york-auto-show-2017/
Supercruise will be offered on the 2018 Cadillac CT6 and then likely spread to other GM offerings. That
big, blue (or white) vehicle shown is the Cadillac CT6. I thought it was a Rolls-Royce or Bentley at first. GM's styling is first rate now.
The Ford police hybrid will save police depts. $4,000 per year in fuel costs. It will cost a little more, but
police depts. will make that back in the first year in fuel savings, the article says. The electric feature will be
in play instead of the car burning gas while it idles, it says, and they do idle a lot when on a call. I'm surprised that it is an avg. 4.9 hours of idling in an 8 hour shift. A hybrid police cruiser that just sits there, not burning
gas, but is on and ready to drive during a call, is one it took them long enough to think of.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:00 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Sent:Saturday, April 15, 2017 11:01 AM
To:Dan Richard; President; Mayor; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; paul.caprioglio; Mark
Standriff; Steven Feinstein; popoff; richard.wenzel; robert.andersen; beachrides; David
Balakian; bmcewen; dennisbalakian; Council, City; Doug Vagim; Paul Dictos; Daniel
Zack; dwalters; david.valenstein; firstvp@fresnopoa.org; Raymond Rivas; Gary Turgeon;
Joel Stiner; kfsndesk; leager; scott.mozier; mthibodeaux@electriclaboratories.com;
newsletter@tesla.com; newsdesk; nick yovino; rosenheim@kpix.cbs.com; Steve Wayte;
Tranil Thomas
Subject:Fwd: The economics of electric charging stations
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:53 AM
Subject: Fwd: The economics of electric charging stations
To: bretthedrick <bretthedrick@hedrickschevy.com>
Mr. Hedrick- I think GM would find this interesting. Please forward it up to them.
Thank you.
L. William Harding
Fresno, Ca.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:48 AM
Subject: Fwd: The economics of electric charging stations
To: mmt4@pge.com
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM
Subject: The economics of electric charging stations To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Saturday, April 15, 2017 Mr. Mark Torres, PG&E
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:00 AM
2
Mr. Torres- Please forward this to Mr. Stavropoulos, the new President of PG&E Company as of March 1,
2017. I read that PG&E is planning to install many EV charging stations- thousands of them in California- and
this article re the economics of that may prove interesting to him:
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4062292-ev-charging-networks-taken-
expensive?auth_param=5cp2b:1cf27sd:62354de5b3332152181505431a14b68f&uprof=44
Even with lots of numbers, the economics of this still seem to be controversial. If it just cannot make economic sense for any private entity to install and operate charging stations, maybe the federal government should step in, stop providing a free military defense for all of Europe, Japan, S. Korea, et. al., so that they can
all live the good life, the rich life, and start subsidizing the installation and operation of EV charging stations in
the United States.
The comments following this article are interesting too, some having been posted by people who seem knowledgeable about the topic.
I'll now forward this to Mr. Brett Hedrick of Hedrick's Chevrolet in Clovis, Ca. and request that he forward it
up to GM. I'll try to forward it to the President and to Governor Brown too.
Thank you.
Mr. Loran W. Harding
Fresno, Ca.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:05 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Nancy Lewis <nlewisart@comcast.net>
Sent:Tuesday, April 18, 2017 2:11 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:granny units
City Council,
I am writing to request that the granny unit ordinance be pulled from the consent calendar and be scheduled for a FUTURE public discussion at a city council meeting.
Unbelievable that you would even think of passing this without public discussion!!
Nancy Lewis
667 Kendall Ave
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/19/2017 8:12 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Charlene Liao <xcliao@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 18, 2017 7:23 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Charlene Liao; City Mgr; Shikada, Ed; Arthur Keller
Subject:Help! Parking is a serious issue with (or without) ADU
Dear City Council Members,
I spoke at yesterday's Council meeting requesting your considerations of parking
requirement for ADUs and JADUs.
Could you please help with the current situation that could only get worse with the
approved ADU ordinates? My immediate neighbor has 7 cars for a single family
household. They have taken tenants but we do not know how many. Their garage has
long been converted to living space. Their parked cars are affecting the full use of the
easement. Could the city code enforcement department please come to pay a visit to
them? How many tenants are they allowed in a household?
I look forward to your intervening and setting a precedent for future neighborhood
dispute resolution associated with the ADUs and JADUs. Thank you in
advance.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/19/2017 8:12 AM
3
Charlene Liao
3751 Middlefield Road
Palo Alto, CA 94303
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:14 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Apolak Borthakur <apolak_borthakur@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 6:04 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Homeowners vs renters
City council ‐ it seems pretty clear that most homeowners prefer to avoid building new offices and homes as those
would compound Palo Alto's existing traffic and parking woes. Whereas renters or residents of other cities prefer more
housing, so that they can get into Palo Alto. They don't care as much about the implications to parking and congestion. I
hope you give priority to existing home owners. They pay significant property taxes that the renters don't pay. Also as
our representatives, I think it is fair to expect you to avoid deteriorate the quality of life here.
Regards,
Apolak.
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 8:56 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Mani Varadarajan <manimani@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 8:52 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Incessant jet noise
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing to complain about the increasing and incessant jet noise I hear when I am at home.
We live on Dana Ave in Palo Alto near Duveneck School. We have lived here for nearly 9 years now and the
problem has gotten much worse in the last few months.
The noise starts in the morning and lasts as late as 11 PM at night. At times I can hear a flight every 3 minutes. It is affecting ordinary activities -- conversation, reading, TV, prayer, meditation.
I understand there's been a lot of activity on this issue, but I really don't know where we are with respect to a
resolution.
Can you please help -- it is really unbearable.
Sincerely,
Mani Varadarajan
1524 Dana Ave
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:23 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:jw <januszwide@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:15 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Moitra, Chitra
Subject:j. wideman 04-17-17 Urgentt! RE: Monday, April 17 at 6pm Council City Meeting
Dear Council, I ask you as members of the City Council to vote tonight to remove the ADU issue from the consent calendar so that it can be fully discussed and debated at a later date. The current ordinance does not take into consideration specific issues related to Eichler homes, especially the ones in a flood zone. Please give this extremely important issue a chance for discussion among the Council and among the community before allowing it to pass without additional comment. Thank you. Janusxz Wi9deman 3406 Thomas Dr Palo Alto, CA 94303
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:01 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Bill Blodgett <billhps@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, April 14, 2017 9:10 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Gitelman, Hillary; Davina Brown; Van Der Zwaag, Minka
Subject:La Comida Senior Nutrition Program Needs Your Help
FROM: Bill Blodgett, Board President, La Comida Senior Nutrition Program
TO: Palo Alto City Council
Cc: Hillary Gitelman, Planning and Community Environment Director
Minka van der Zwaag, Office of Human Services
La Comida, the senior nutrition center for Palo Alto, needs help. We need help in finding a new
operating location and may also need help funding the use of the new facility.
La Comida has been serving lunch meals to seniors in the Avenidas site at 450 Bryant Street since
1978. We currently serve about 160 lunches per day, 250 weekdays per year. In addition to providing a
freshly prepared hot lunch, La Comida is an important social experience for our seniors.
Avenidas is remodeling and rebuilding the site. The rebuilding is on the site of the La Comida dining
room. It will be torn down and a three story building will be constructed on the La Comida footprint. As
a result La Comida must leave the Avenidas space by September 1. The potential future dining space in
Avenidas was reduced from an occupancy level of 140 to 79‐90, making it unsuitable for La Comida’s long
term needs, since we are serving approximately 160 patrons per day and up to 220 on holiday
celebration days. We have been looking for a new space with no success. We have had some interest, but
no solid agreement as yet and the move‐out date is only four months away!
La Comida is currently in discussion with a site in south Palo Alto which has a number of advantages but
has a maximum capacity of only 100. We are actively exploring the short term and long term use of that
space in the absence of any identified alternative, are hopeful of success, but we have not yet been able to
complete an agreement with the potential landlord.
As we look for another site, we have also encountered a secondary but potentially significant financial
challenge. Our monthly use rate for the kitchen and dining room at the city owned site has been $1285
per month, which covers the maintenance, utilities, and other expenses associated with the dining room
and kitchen use, paid to Avenidas. This is obviously dramatically below market rates in Palo Alto and
lower than use rates we are likely to find from any other organization, non‐profit or otherwise, that might
be willing to let us use their facility. The low facility usage cost has in part enabled La Comida to operate
within the funding provided by Santa Clara County and the City of Palo Alto HSRAP program. Without
additional funding, La Comida may not be able to maintain a sustainable budget in a non‐city owned
facility.
Request for Help
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:01 AM
2
La Comida has to be out of our current location by August 31st , 2017. We do not have a place to move to;
either to cook and serve meals in or to serve catered meals on an interim basis.
Our immediate need is clear: we need help securing a location, preferably in a city owned facility
with a reasonable rent. Our operation in the Avenidas facility must end on August 31. If a city
owned facility is not possible, then we need help finding another short and /or long term
location. We’ve been actively looking for a number of months with no success as yet. Although we
are talking with the potential location mentioned above, no agreement has been reached and the
time available for reaching an agreement is becoming very short. Several churches have also
looked promising but for a variety of reasons, none have been able to commit to a 5 day per week
lunch program Locating a space is the immediate need , however more financial support may
also be required.
The need of the seniors, especially low and moderate income seniors, in our community is real and
growing. We will need your help if we are to continue providing this nutritional and social support to
them.
On behalf of La Comida and the Palo Alto seniors we serve, thank you in advance for your help!
Addendum
A Brief History of La Comida in Palo Alto
For those that may not be familiar with how La Comida came to be in Palo Alto, we have included a short
narrative below.
• 1971 The Rotary Club of Palo Alto did a yearlong survey in Palo Alto to find a service
project. They found a need for nutritious lunches for seniors.
• February 1972 Rotary incorporated La Comida to serve lunches. At that time the state of
California was offering three year declining grants for nutrition programs. Rotary applied for and got a
grant from the state. La Comida was set up in the All Saints Episcopal Church. The meals were cooked at
the Sequoias and delivered by the Red Cross. La Comida served lunch three days a week.
• 1974 The federal government enacted the Senior Nutrition Lunch Program. The funds were
dispersed to the counties. Santa Clara and its Department of Social Services decided to apply for
funds. They came to La Comida and asked us to be the first county lunch program. We were to provide
five meals each week.
• Then La Comida started to cook at All Saints. We provided five meals a week and social
services. Rotary members and their wives continued to provide support.
• 1978 The Senior Coordinating Council was leased the current Avenidas building to coordinate
activities for seniors for $1.00 per year. Dr. David Mitchell, president of the council and Phil Conway, the
executive director came to La Comida and asked us to be collocated with them. Rotary built and
dedicated the dining room to La Comida. La Comida solicited the County of Santa Clara to build and equip
the kitchen for La Comida and they did. The kitchen and dining room were BUILT without city funds.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:01 AM
3
• 1997/1998 The Sr. Coordinating Council’s name was changed to Avenidas. From the time we
collocated in 1978, we have enjoyed a positive, collaborative relationship with Avenidas. La Comida
brings over 150 people in the door each day for a nutritious meal and socialization. This represents
about 40% of the people who use the facility each day.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:25 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Mary Anne Deierlein <mdeierlein@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:04 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:No on ADU's
Our family discussed these units the past week. We do not support these units for many reasons.
First, these units are not a sensible way to increase the housing we need. Build more units along the transit corridors
and leave our established neighborhoods as they are‐fairly well designed, quiet and manageable.
Second, these units would change the privacy, nature and design of our neighborhoods, add more cars on the street,
would create more chaos than calm devaluing our property and neighborhood connections and security.
We live in a historically designated neighborhood, Greenmeadow where design, layout and lot size has been carefully
designed, and our backyard privacy protected as our houses are all glass re‐ facing our small back yards.
Third, no study/research has been done regarding the increase in neighborhood traffic, safety, enrollment in schools,
additional car congestion on our streets. How about utilities, garbage/sewage, etc?
Fourth, there is no assurance that family members or "grannies" will actually live in the units, nor are there provisions
regarding Airbnb rentals, etc.
Sincerely,
Mary Anne Deierlein
318 Parkside Dr
Palo Alto 94306
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 1:55 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Paul <pegrego@sonic.net>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 1:55 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Parking Meters
Dear city council members,
Please do not install parking meters, or other paid parking downtown.
If you want to kill off what is left of downtown retail, charging for parking is the way to do it. There are many other
retail locations with free parking in the surrounding cities (including downtown locations), the Stanford Shopping Center,
and big box stores.
I remember when Palo Alto removed parking meters. The meters did not serve their purpose, and it cost more to
maintain them than the revenue they produced. They were removed for a good reason!
A better approach would be to have up to three hours of free parking on downtown streets from 8AM to 6PM, one time
per car, per day, with no color zones. This can be enforced by having license plate scanners on the parking enforcement
vehicles, and having them cruise along all the downtown streets a few times per hour. For the sake of privacy all data
except for cars which overstayed the limit would be deleted at the end of each day.
Regards,
Paul Gregory
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:09 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Hsinya Shen <hsinyashen@yahoo.com>
Sent:Thursday, April 13, 2017 2:06 PM
To:Planning Commission; Council, City
Subject:*PETITION TO ENFORCE 415 STUDENT ENROLLMENT COMPLIANCE*
HISTORY:
1971 Castillejahad 200 students.During the past 45 years, there has been
22 different yearsin which Castilleja increased enrollment.15 of those years were illegal increases in which the city did not enforce the
Conditional Use Permit (CUP).Castillejahas violated the Conditional Use Permit for 15 consecutive years.Beginning this September it will be in
violation for 16 consecutive years.The City Council has done nothing to enforce themaximum enrollment of 415 students.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
Current enrollment is 23 students over the approved 415students.City
Council, by not enforcing the CUP,is making a mockery of the CUP process.City Council by failing to enforceits' own approved CUPis
pitting neighbors and Castilleja against each other.
It is time for City Councilto enforcethe 415 student CUP for the next 15 years, to make up for the lost 15 years in which the school violated the
CUP.We Palo Alto citizens are 100% supportive of the current CUP, which allows for 415 students.We instruct City Council to enforce the
currentCUP , allowing for 415 students for the next 15 years.
Sincerely Yours,
Hsinya Shen
510 Tennyson Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94301
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:09 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Larry and Zongqi Alton <lalton@pacbell.net>
Sent:Thursday, April 13, 2017 2:05 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please check the comments on this news article for evidence of ballot errors and
omissions
Dear council members.
Please check the comments on this news article for evidence of ballot errors and
omissions.
We need another vote on this important issue.
Best Wishes,
Larry Alton
Palo Alto voters approve stormwater fee increase
Palo Alto voters approve stormwater fee
increase
By Gennady Sheyner
Palo Alto's bid to raise stormwater fees to fund 13 projects cruised to
victory Wednesday, with nearly two-t...
Larry Alton
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:25 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Scott Van Duyne <scott.vanduyne@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:02 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please postpone the ADU business from Consent Calendar
Dear Mayor Scharff and Councilmembers,
I have only just heard about proposed changes to the ADU zoning in Palo Alto. I do not fully understand the impact, and have not had time to discuss it with my neighbors or in the public forum.
I appreciate the need to relax the rules but believe that the present proposal has not been adequately reviewed publicly. Please pull this item from consent and set it for a date in the future. I believe Palo Alto residents would like an opportunity to review and discuss before a decision is made. Best regards and thank you for your service,
Scott Van Duyne
369 Margarita Ave
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:26 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Richard Willits <rwillits@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:54 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please pull ADU (#4) from consent
Dear Council,
Please vote tonight to remove the ADU issue from the consent calendar so that it can be fully discussed and debated at a later date. The current ordinance does not take into consideration specific issues related to Eichler homes.
Please your fellow citizens ample time to discuss the new changes in front of the PTC. Thank you.
Richard Willits Royal Manor Eichler Tract
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:14 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Andy Escovedo <andy.escovedo@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:58 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please Remove ADU from Consent Calendar
Dear Council,
I ask you as members of the City Council to vote tonight to remove the ADU issue from the consent calendar
so that it can be fully discussed and debated at a later date. The current ordinance does not take into consideration specific issues related to Eichler homes, especially the ones in a flood zone.
Please give this extremely important issue a chance for discussion among the Council and among the
community before allowing it to pass without additional comment.
Thank you.
Andrew Escovedo 3478 Kenneth Drive
Palo Alto 94303
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:26 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Faramarz Bahmani <faramarzb@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:51 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please reschedule the proposed relaxed ADU ordinance
Dear Respectful Council Members,
My name is Faramarz Bahmani and I live at 1235 Lincoln Ave. I would like to ask you to pull the proposed relaxed ADU ordinance from the consent calendar and reschedule it
after it has gone through the staff analysis.
I believe these proposed ADU rules create fertile grounds for Airbnb to invade our neighborhoods. Lack of
oversight over ADUs in addition to lack of city enforcement of Airbnb in a city that is highly desirable produces
a bad outcome for the long‐term well being of the community.
Here is an example. In October of 2016, one tenant in a neighborhood community of ours had the “clever”
idea of renting a 3 bedroom house (a house he did not own) to 14 Airbnb users at a time. This tenant had no
vested interest in Palo Alto, this was just his opportunity to use Aribnb and make money.
And what was even more egregious was that this tenant thought he was doing the community a favor by
creating more affordable housing. Cramming 4‐6 people per bedroom, creating unsanitary conditions,
problems with neighbors, fire hazards, parking issues, foot traffic, a number of other problems, so that this
tenant could get a cut of the $14,000 a month off of this 3‐bedroom house, does not sound to me like he
intended to do anyone any good but himself.
Now, similarly, with the relaxed ADU rules, I believe that that there are a number of developers behind this
idea that have the intention of making money and who don’t care less about what happens to the rest of us in
terms of our neighborhoods, families, safety and property values.
Sincerely,
Faramarz Bahmani
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:22 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:A.C. Johnston <ac.johnston@me.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 1:35 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please support the ADU Ordinance motion tonight!
Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice-Mayor Kniss and City Council Members,
I will not be able to attend the City Council meeting tonight, but I would like to write in support of the ADU Ordinance motion as voted on and approved on Mar 6, 2017. Please do not pull this from the consent
calendar tonight.
Housing is a basic need. Finding ways to expand housing options (like ADUs and JADUs) for our community
members is an economic, environmental, social justice and humanitarian issue. ADU's/granny units/secondary dwellings can help our entire community. This ordinance will help homeowners, our seniors who would like to
age in place or downsize but remain in the community, young millenials starting out, and families who rent to
find reasonable housing solutions that can make a meaningful difference in our community. Above all, this ordinance is a sensible and effective way to continue nurturing the vibrant and diverse community already here
in Palo Alto.
In particular, I support the following motions made on March 6, 2017:
1. Require no more than 6-ft side and rear setback for ADUs;
2. Allow an additional 175 sq-ft of FAR for an ADU, but not for a two-story ADU; 3. Allow an additional 50 sq-ft of FAR for a JADU;
4. Increase the maximum size of attached ADUs to 600 sq-ft;
5. Remove Lot Coverage requirements for ADUs on properties that are no smaller than 10% smaller than standard lot sizes;
6. Limit ADUs to 17-ft high and single-story in Single Story Overlay (SSO) neighborhoods, even if the main house is a grandfathered 2-story house;
7. Remove design review and requirements;
8. Remove door orientation requirements for ADUs; 9. ADUs to have the same parking requirements as JADUs;
10. Remove requirements for covered parking on properties with an ADU or JADU; and
11. Allow required replacement parking on an existing driveway within the front setback.
Sincerely,
A.C. Johnston
325 Channing Ave. #301
Palo Alto, CA 94301 ac.johnston@me.com
650.823.5561
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:10 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Susan Phillips Moskowitz <susan@mrsmoskowitz.com>
Sent:Thursday, April 13, 2017 1:14 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please vote NO on Castilleja remodeling
I have lived in Old Palo Alto for 41 years. The traffic has increased in the last 4 years. PLEASE keep the neighborhood
like it is. Please VOTE No on any more building or remodeling at Castilleja. If they want to expand let them purchase
another location like Keys School did.
Susan Phillips Moskowitz
susan@mrsmoskowitz.com
Founder & CEO Mrs. Moskowitz’s Munchies LLC
650‐275‐2510
www.mrsmoskowitzsmunchies.com
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:11 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:kyu@acsarchitects.com on behalf of Kyu Young Kim <kyuyoungkim@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 18, 2017 10:33 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Re: ADU Support Letter
Dear Members of the Council,
Thank you for stretching your political patience (yet again) last night regarding ADUs. I wish I could
have attended last night's meeting but I had to attend to my 20 month old son as my wife is taking
evening classes in San Francisco.
I wanted respond to Council Member Filseth's using my previous email to send perhaps an unfair
message to the public. The motion was in no way drafted by Palo Alto Forward – to say that, in my
humble opinion, was an insult to the other council members who actually drafted it. I was simply
using the views of PAF to condense my own personal message of support of ADUs, in addition to the
personal message that I wrote in my email which was hardly mentioned.
Your continued hard work and strenuous commitment to our City is all too under-appreciated. Thank
you for meeting long extended hours, along with city staff, and working towards a more unified Palo
Alto.
Respectfully,
Kyu Kim
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Kyu Young Kim <kyuyoungkim@gmail.com> wrote:
The following text is contained in the attached letter for the members of the city council:
--
Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice Mayor Kniss and Honorable Council Members,
I am writing to you today to voice support for the ADU (Accessory Dwelling Unit) Ordinance with the
amendments that will be presented by Palo Alto Forward.
I have been lucky enough to grow up in Palo Alto, and am only fortunate enough to continue living in the
Midtown neighborhood at my parents’ property with my wife and 19-month-old son because we built a new
ADU.
Many other property owners are not as lucky as my family with the current ADU regulations, but I encourage
you to adopt the new ADU Ordinance so that those in similar situations can move back to Palo Alto, and so
that larger families can continue living together on one property.
In closing, I would like to reiterate that the housing problem in Palo Alto can be greatly and efficiently reduced
with the adoption of the new ADU Ordinance.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:11 PM
2
Sincerely,
Kyu Young Kim
1128/1130 Oregon Avenue
--
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:13 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Peter Macdonald <psmacdonald@mac.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 6:16 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:RE: ADU vote
Dear Council,
Please vote to remove the ADU issue from the consent calendar so that it can be discussed at a later date. The current ordinance does not take into consideration issues affecting many homes in Palo Alto.
This issue deserves more discussion among the Council and Palo Alto residents before it is passed.
Thank you.
Peter Macdonald psmacdonald@mac.com
3469 Janice Way
Palo Alto, CA 94303
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/19/2017 10:57 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Todd Collins <tcollins@pausd.org>
Sent:Wednesday, April 19, 2017 10:54 AM
To:Melissa Caswell; 'Stefan Rosner'
Cc:julaine_rosner@yahoo.com; SaferCommutePTA@yahoogroups.com; Penny Ellson; Safe
Routes; Council, City; board; Mello, Joshuah; Kamhi, Philip
Subject:Re: Congratulations SRTS Partner Stefan Rosner!
Great news! Congratulations!
From: Melissa Caswell
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 10:37:37 AM
To: 'Stefan Rosner'
Cc: julaine_rosner@yahoo.com; SaferCommutePTA@yahoogroups.com; Penny Ellson; 'Safe Routes'; 'Council, City';
board; 'Mello, Joshuah'; 'Kamhi, Philip'
Subject: Re: Congratulations SRTS Partner Stefan Rosner!
Congratulations Stephan!
From: Penny Ellson <pellson@pacbell.net>
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 9:35 AM
To: SaferCommutePTA@yahoogroups.com; 'Safe Routes'; 'Council, City'; board; 'Mello, Joshuah'; 'Kamhi, Philip'
Cc: julaine_rosner@yahoo.com; 'Stefan Rosner'
Subject: Congratulations SRTS Partner Stefan Rosner!
Safe Routes to School Partners,
I am excited to inform you that Palo Alto Safe Routes to School Veteran Stefan Rosner has received
the Santa Clara County Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition 2017 Bike Commuter of the Year Award! Check it out:
https://bikesiliconvalley.org/btwd/bcoy/
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/19/2017 10:57 AM
2
Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Bike Commuter of the Year - Silicon Valley
Bicycle Coalition
bikesiliconvalley.org
2017 Bike Commuter of the Year! Know a dedicated bike
commuter who pedals to work regularly? Know someone
who inspires others to commute to work by bicycle?
Some of you who have been working with us for a while know that Stefan has been a longstanding
standout supporter of our PTA Traffic Safety leadership efforts at Escondido, City School Traffic
Safety Committee and supporting our work at Terman and Gunn. You may not know that he is a dedicated bike commuter to his day job at NASA.
Please congratulate our energetic and devoted partner Stefan Rosner who sets an example for us all
by choosing active, healthy, sustainable commutes almost every day. This photo shows the foot-
powered “school bus” Stefan used to get his kids to Escondido for many years. Ride on, Stefan!!
Penny
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/19/2017 1:17 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Peter Phillips <pkphillips@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, April 19, 2017 11:09 AM
To:Penny Ellson
Cc:Safer Commute PTA; Safe Routes; Council, City; board; Mello, Joshuah; Kamhi, Philip;
julaine_rosner@yahoo.com; Stefan Rosner
Subject:Re: [SaferCommutePTA] Congratulations SRTS Partner Stefan Rosner!
Way to go Stefan!!!
- Peter
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 9:35 AM, 'Penny Ellson' pellson@pacbell.net [SaferCommutePTA]
<SaferCommutePTA-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Safe Routes to School Partners,
I am excited to inform you that Palo Alto Safe Routes to School Veteran Stefan Rosner has received
the Santa Clara County Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition 2017 Bike Commuter of the Year Award!
Check it out:
https://bikesiliconvalley.org/btwd/bcoy/
Some of you who have been working with us for a while know that Stefan has been a longstanding
standout supporter of our PTA Traffic Safety leadership efforts at Escondido, City School Traffic
Safety Committee and supporting our work at Terman and Gunn. You may not know that he is a
dedicated bike commuter to his day job at NASA.
Please congratulate our energetic and devoted partner Stefan Rosner who sets an example for us all
by choosing active, healthy, sustainable commutes almost every day. This photo shows the foot-
powered “school bus” Stefan used to get his kids to Escondido for many years.
Ride on, Stefan!!
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/19/2017 1:17 PM
2
Penny
__._,_.___
Posted by: "Penny Ellson" <pellson@pacbell.net>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group •Start a New Topic •Messages in this topic (1)
Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Have you tried the highest rated email app?
With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you
waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.
Please note: if you want to reply to the group, use Reply All.
VISIT YOUR GROUP
Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Yahoo! Groups • Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
__,_._,___
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:06 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Liz Kniss <lizkniss@earthlink.net>
Sent:Tuesday, April 18, 2017 11:01 AM
To:Geri
Cc:Council, City
Subject:Re: GREAT MEETING !
> On Apr 17, 2017, at 10:10 PM, Geri <geri@thegrid.net> wrote:
>
> Thank you!
> Geri Mcgilvray
>
>
> EVERYDAY SAFETY AND WALKABILITY, midtown, etc.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:05 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Gitelman, Hillary
Sent:Friday, April 14, 2017 12:23 PM
To:marysylvester@comcast.net
Cc:French, Amy; Keene, James; City Attorney; Planning Commission; Council, City
Subject:RE: Request for Extension on EIR Scoping Letter
Ms. Sylvester,
While there is nothing untoward or “prejudicial” about the City’s scoping process as you suggest, the City Manager has
asked that we extend the comment period two weeks until the close of business on Friday, April 28.
I will ask staff to update the website accordingly and it would be a great help if you could help us spread the word.
Many thanks,
Hillary
Hillary Gitelman | Planning Director | P&CE Department
250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301
T: 650.329.2321 |E: hillary.gitelman@cityofpaloalto.org
Please think of the environment before printing this email – Thank you!
From: marysylvester@comcast.net [mailto:marysylvester@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2017 9:17 PM
To: Gitelman, Hillary
Cc: French, Amy; Keene, James; City Attorney; Planning Commission; Council, City
Subject: Re: Request for Extension on EIR Scoping Letter April 13, 2017
Dear Ms. Gitelman,
I have received your denial of my April 7th request for a two-week extension on the public comment period for the Castilleja Expansion Plan. As you read in my correspondence, I had originally
requested this extension because of the late submittal of documents by Castilleja School, two days
after the established Scoping deadline of April 15th for public comments. I believe such a denial
violates CEQA’s intent to engage public stakeholders in a full and robust manner as to decisions affecting their environment.
Initially while the application process runs “parallel” to the Environmental Impact Review (EIR)
process, the public is nevertheless held to the established EIR Scoping deadline of April 15th for
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:05 AM
2
comments if we want them to have legal bearing. Many neighbors are not interested in submitting
“informal” comments on the project as you suggest if they do not carry the weight of law behind them.
It is unclear why when Castilleja’s expansion project will have such far-reaching environmental consequences to an R-1 neighborhood, necessitating an EIR, the City is not establishing reasonable
deadlines for the public review process? Once documents have been filed by the applicant it would
then seem appropriate to set a deadline for the public comment period, not before knowing when
such potentially crucial documents are in hand. I find the City’s current Scoping process prejudicial to neighbors of Castilleja School who are
expending significant sums of time and money on legal fees and experts whose consultation may
become null and void once new documents are submitted by the school, now projected for two days
after the comment period. The precedent that could be established by the City in allowing Castilleja to submit documents after established deadlines for the public and not thereby providing a reasonable extension period for the the community to review and comment on such documents sends
a very chilling message to residents about their First Amendment rights in matters directly affecting
their well-being. As Castilleja has been working with their architect for several years along with a
group of specialists in various related fields on the expansion project, it is truly puzzling why such documents could not have been made available to the public earlier allowing a reasonable review and
comment period.
In regard to your statement about delays to date in the Scoping process, for purposes of clarification,
I would like to state that the delay in the Scoping Session from February 6th to March 8th was made by the City because of the Mayor’s State of the City Address and the written comment period changed from March 15th to April 15th again because of a decision by the City not a request from the
neighborhood.
As final Scoping comments are due by Saturday, April 15th, I look forward to a response from you by the end of the working day tomorrow.
Sincerely,
Mary Sylvester
From: "Hillary Gitelman" <Hillary.Gitelman@CityofPaloAlto.org>
To: "MARYSYLVESTER" <marysylvester@comcast.net>, "Amy French"
<Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Cc: "James Keene" <James.Keene@CityofPaloAlto.org>, "City Attorney"
<city.attorney@CityofPaloAlto.org>, "Planning Commission"
<Planning.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org>
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 11:45:30 AM
Subject: RE: Request for Extension on EIR Scoping Letter
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:05 AM
3
Ms. Sylvester:
Thanks for your email request. Amy is out of the office today, so I thought I would jump in and respond.
The EIR process runs in parallel to the application process and it is quite typical for an application to become more
detailed and to evolve somewhat during the EIR process. (In fact, we like it when proposals are adjusted in response to
community input and environmental review!) We encourage you to submit comments about the scope of the
environmental analysis by the deadline of April 15 based on what you currently know about the school’s proposal. The
comment period has already been extended well beyond the required 30‐day period and you will have other
opportunities during the review process to provide additional comments. Additional formal opportunities for public
comment will include the comment period on a Draft EIR as well as noticed public hearings on the application(s) at some
point in the future. Also, informal comments and questions about the process and the proposal can always be sent to
staff by email. This project has generated lots of such communications, and we endeavor to respond as time permits.
Thanks for your interest in this project,
Hillary
Hillary Gitelman | Planning Director | P&CE Department
250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301
T: 650.329.2321 |E: hillary.gitelman@cityofpaloalto.org
Please think of the environment before printing this email – Thank you!
From: marysylvester@comcast.net [mailto:marysylvester@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 10:43 AM
To: French, Amy
Cc: Gitelman, Hillary; Keene, James; City Attorney; Planning Commission
Subject: Request for Extension on EIR Scoping Letter
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:05 AM
4
Dear Ms. French,
I am writing on behalf of a group of neighbors, including myself, who reside in the immediate vicinity of Castilleja School. We are requesting at least a two-week extension on the Scoping Letter of the
Environmental Impact Report from the date Castilleja submits a complete application for their CUP
and Expansion Plan, whether that be from April 17th as indicated by the school or later. We, as
immediate neighbors of Castilleja School who will be significantly impacted by this proposed Expansion Plan and possible new CUP, will need time to review the new documentation submitted by the school and may need to seek additional expert consultation as well as legal advice.
The public, including Castilleja School, has known for over 30 days that April 15th is the deadline for
Scoping comments. It is perplexing why the school believes it is acceptable to submit highly relevant documents for the approval process 2 days after the closing date for public comments. And it causes further questioning of the City's impartiality in this matter by allowing this delayed submittal and not
thereby immediately extending as a matter of course the public comment period?
I look forward to your prompt response.
Appreciatively,
Mary E. Sylvester
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:14 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Mark Hastings <mark@mark-hastings.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:53 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Remove ADU issue from consent calendar
Dear Council,
I ask you as members of the City Council to vote tonight to remove the ADU issue from the consent calendar
so that it can be fully discussed and debated at a later date. The current ordinance does not take into consideration specific issues related to Eichler homes, especially the ones in a flood zone.
Please give this extremely important issue a chance for discussion among the Council and among the
community before allowing it to pass without additional comment.
Thank you,
Mark Hastings
3316 Kenneth Drive
Palo Alto, CA, 94303
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:18 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Deborah Minowitz, MFT <dminowitz@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:27 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Moitra, Chitra
Subject:Remove the ADU issue from the consent calendar
Dear Council,
I ask you as members of the City Council to vote tonight to remove the ADU issue from the
consent calendar so that it can be fully discussed and debated at a later date. The current ordinance does not take into consideration specific issues related to Eichler homes, especially the ones in a
flood zone.
Please give this extremely important issue a chance for discussion among the Council and among the
community before allowing it to pass without additional comment.
Thank you,
Deborah Minowitz
3381 Thomas Drive
Palo Alto, CA 94303
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:38 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Jane Stocklin <j_stocklin@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:21 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Request to pull an item from the agenda
I am requesting that the Walbach/Fine secondary building provision be pulled from tonight's agenda and scheduled for a public
discussion at a future City Council meeting. The suggested changes need to be carefully considered and that has not happened.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:15 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:RA <altrisa@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:39 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Moitra, Chitra
Subject:Rules governing ADUs
Dear Council,
I ask you as members of the City Council to vote tonight to remove the ADU issue from the consent calendarso that it can be fully discussed and debated at a later date. The current ordinance does not take into consideration specific issues related to Eichler homes, especially the ones in a flood zone.
Please give this extremely important issue a chance for discussion among the Council and among the
community before allowing it to pass without additional comment.
Thank you.
Kurosu Altaf 3477 Thomas Dr Palo Alto, CA 94303
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:44 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Cindy Tomooka-Chun <cindytomooka@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:29 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Second Dwelling Units for Consent Calendar - Objection
Members of the City Council and President of the Council;
I am writing to advise you of my objection to the approval of the ordinance to allow second dwelling units on any lot on single
family residential neighborhoods including undersized lots.
At the State of City Address on February 8, Mayor Scharff said, "Twenty years from now, your single‐family neighborhood will
look like it does right now.” https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2017/02/08/2017‐state‐of‐the‐city‐address
With these changes, our single family residential neighborhoods could become neighborhoods of duplexes or mixed
housing.
This approval winds up creating dangerous housing conditions for the property owner, the adjacent properties, the
neighborhoods and traffic. This item must be pulled and the potential effects of these proposals analyzed for public
discussion in the future.
As I understand, the legislation does not provide protections for Eichler homes. A 14‐foot tall second dwelling unit can be
placed 6 feet from the rear lot line overlooking your backyard and looking into adjacent homes.
There is no design review allowed, not even for accessory dwelling units on the second floor. This means no Individual
Review for these additions looking into adjacent bedrooms and bathrooms.
No covered parking is required for any lot with an accessory dwelling unit anywhere in Palo Alto.
Garages can be replaced by a dwelling unit, with the driveway counting as the replacement parking.
Second dwelling units would be allowed on undersized lots that are common in College Terrace and Ventura Neighborhoods,
including single family residential (R‐1) and R2 and RMD lots that are now too small for a second dwelling unit.
Although rental of an accessory dwelling unit for periods of less than 30 days is not allowed, Palo Alto does not have a way to
enforce that rule. There is no general AirBNB ordinance. This requires additional governmental regulation and enforcement
and there is no budget nor comprehensive plan to do so.
Furthermore, the implementation of such a plan may be in violation of the EIR requirements because of its drastic impact
throughout the neighborhoods.
I respectfully request that the ADU ordinance must be pulled from the consent calendar and rescheduled for public
discussion with a staff analysis of the impacts.
Cindy Tomooka‐Chun
Palo Alto Orchards
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:44 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Ken Novak <krnovak@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:16 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Slow down the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance
I live in Palo Alto in the Duveneck neighborhood and I want the ADU Ordinance pulled from the Consent
Calendar and rescheduled after staff or the PTC have analyzed the ordinance.
I have just learned about the need for an Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance to bring Palo Alto's rules up to the
state's requirements. The ordinance as amended at the end of the last council meeting goes too far, making many
changes beyond the state requirements. Please schedule a more thoughtful review process, with more public
input, so that we can balance the value of accessory dwellings with the preservation of our neighborhoods'
characters. Done right, the ordinance can enhance our community; done wrong, it can ruin it.
I may have more comments later on the merits of the ordinance itself. Thanks for your consideration,
Ken Novak
krnovak@gmail.com 1644 Channing Ave,
Palo Alto, CA
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 8:51 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Annie Bedichek <uwgzqhrkmmuslbb@ujoin.co>
Sent:Sunday, April 16, 2017 5:01 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Support 60 New Homes in Palo Alto
From: abedichek1@gmail.com <Annie Bedichek>
Message:
Dear Mayor Burt, Vice Mayor Scharff and City Council Members,
I write to you today to support the 60 unit housing project proposed by Windy Hill Property Ventures at 2755 El Camino Real. In the midst of a severe housing shortage and crisis, these 30 studios and 30 one-bedrooms will provide much
needed housing in our community.
Smaller units, like studios and one-bedrooms, fulfill a need in our community for housing for small households. The
location is perfect for housing, offering easy access to shops, banks, cafes, restaurants and other services near the California Avenue corridor. The project is adjacent to a number of jobs, which can reduce inbound commuting - which
makes up ⅔ of our city’s existing GHG emissions, and will help our city achieve our Sustainability/Climate Action Plan goal of 80% GHG reductions by 2030. This location has easy access to a range of transportation options, including VTA 22/522, the Cal Ave CalTrain station, and Bike Share stations. In an era of car sharing (ZipCar) ride sharing (Lyft/Uber), fewer people own cars and require parking spaces, and with greater bicycle infrastructure (secure storage and repair stations) and a strong, enforceable TDM package, the 45 proposed parking spaces (0.75 parking spaces/unit) should be able to meet the parking needs of all
future occupants.
The affordability component could be strengthened - by allowing, for example, city employees and teachers first preference. This could help those who are already working in Palo Alto to live here and be a stronger part of our
community (and reduce long commute trips!)
We need to prioritize housing projects like this and find ways to make them work, not stop them at the drawing board.
Please move forward with a zoning change for the site, and a micro-housing overlay to increase the allowable density limit on commercial sites to allow these homes to be constructed in our community.
Annie Bedichek
Palo Alto
California
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:26 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Barbara Shufro <barbarashufro@hotmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:45 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Support for more study of ADU Ordinance
Dear City Council Members,
Please pull the ADU ordinance from the consent calendar, and allow and consider public comments on this
important issue. Thank you,
Barbara Shufro
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:44 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Amoy Walker <huxoqvrkqiwwxqm@ujoin.co>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 10:25 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Support Mar 6 Direction for ADUs!
From: amoywalker@gmail.com <Amoy Walker>
Message:
Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice-Mayor Kniss and City Council Members,
I would like to write in support of the ADU Ordinance motion as voted on and approved on Mar 6, 2017. Please do not pull this
from the consent calendar on Monday April 17, 2017. Housing is a basic need. Finding ways to expand housing options (like
ADUs and JADUs) for our community members is an economic, environmental, social justice and humanitarian issue. ADU's/granny units/secondary dwellings are something that can help our entire community. Through this ordinance, we can help homeowners, our aging community, young millenials starting out, and even families who rent, to find a feasible and timely housing solution that can make a meaningful difference in our community, all with one small policy/ordinance change. Above all, it enables us to continue nurturing the vibrant and diverse community already here in the city we call home, Palo Alto.
In particular, I support the following motions made on March 6, 2017: a. Require no more than 6-ft side and rear setback for ADUs;
b. Allow ADUs on all residential lot sizes;
c. Allow an additional 175 sq-ft of FAR for an ADU, but not for a two-story ADU;
d. Allow an additional 50 sq-ft of FAR for a JADU;
e. Increase the maximum size of attached ADUs to 600 sq-ft;
f. Remove Lot Coverage requirements for ADUs on properties that are no smaller than 10% smaller than standard lot sizes; g. Limit ADUs to 17-ft high and single-story in Single Story Overlay (SSO) neighborhoods, even if the main house is a grandfathered 2-story house; h. Remove design review and requirements; i. Remove door orientation requirements for ADUs; j. ADUs to have the same parking requirements as JADUs; and k. Remove requirements for covered parking on properties with an ADU or JADU; and
l. Allow required replacement parking on an existing driveway within the front setback
Sincerley
Amoy Walker
Palo Alto
California
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:44 PM
2
Carnahan, David
From:Rujuta Shah <zgtitkcbirniamn@ujoin.co>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 8:32 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Support Mar 6 Direction for ADUs!
From: rujuta2@gmail.com <Rujuta Shah>
Message:
Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice-Mayor Kniss and City Council Members,
I would like to write in support of the ADU Ordinance motion as voted on and approved on Mar 6, 2017. Please do not pull this
from the consent calendar on Monday April 17, 2017. Housing is a basic need. Finding ways to expand housing options (like
ADUs and JADUs) for our community members is an economic, environmental, social justice and humanitarian issue. ADU's/granny units/secondary dwellings are something that can help our entire community. Through this ordinance, we can help homeowners, our aging community, young millenials starting out, and even families who rent, to find a feasible and timely housing solution that can make a meaningful difference in our community, all with one small policy/ordinance change. Above all, it enables us to continue nurturing the vibrant and diverse community already here in the city we call home, Palo Alto.
In particular, I support the following motions made on March 6, 2017: a. Require no more than 6-ft side and rear setback for ADUs;
b. Allow ADUs on all residential lot sizes;
c. Allow an additional 175 sq-ft of FAR for an ADU, but not for a two-story ADU;
d. Allow an additional 50 sq-ft of FAR for a JADU;
e. Increase the maximum size of attached ADUs to 600 sq-ft;
f. Remove Lot Coverage requirements for ADUs on properties that are no smaller than 10% smaller than standard lot sizes; g. Limit ADUs to 17-ft high and single-story in Single Story Overlay (SSO) neighborhoods, even if the main house is a grandfathered 2-story house; h. Remove design review and requirements; i. Remove door orientation requirements for ADUs; j. ADUs to have the same parking requirements as JADUs; and k. Remove requirements for covered parking on properties with an ADU or JADU; and
l. Allow required replacement parking on an existing driveway within the front setback
Sincerley
Rujuta Shah
Palo Alto
California
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:44 PM
3
Carnahan, David
From:Vandana Varanasi <leyindujftmzgyi@ujoin.co>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 7:31 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Support Mar 6 Direction for ADUs!
From: aroravandu2@gmail.com <Vandana Varanasi>
Message:
Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice-Mayor Kniss and City Council Members,
I would like to write in support of the ADU Ordinance motion as voted on and approved on Mar 6, 2017. Please do not pull this
from the consent calendar on Monday April 17, 2017. Housing is a basic need. Finding ways to expand housing options (like
ADUs and JADUs) for our community members is an economic, environmental, social justice and humanitarian issue. ADU's/granny units/secondary dwellings are something that can help our entire community. Through this ordinance, we can help homeowners, our aging community, young millenials starting out, and even families who rent, to find a feasible and timely housing solution that can make a meaningful difference in our community, all with one small policy/ordinance change. Above all, it enables us to continue nurturing the vibrant and diverse community already here in the city we call home, Palo Alto.
In particular, I support the following motions made on March 6, 2017: a. Require no more than 6-ft side and rear setback for ADUs;
b. Allow ADUs on all residential lot sizes;
c. Allow an additional 175 sq-ft of FAR for an ADU, but not for a two-story ADU;
d. Allow an additional 50 sq-ft of FAR for a JADU;
e. Increase the maximum size of attached ADUs to 600 sq-ft;
f. Remove Lot Coverage requirements for ADUs on properties that are no smaller than 10% smaller than standard lot sizes; g. Limit ADUs to 17-ft high and single-story in Single Story Overlay (SSO) neighborhoods, even if the main house is a grandfathered 2-story house; h. Remove design review and requirements; i. Remove door orientation requirements for ADUs; j. ADUs to have the same parking requirements as JADUs; and k. Remove requirements for covered parking on properties with an ADU or JADU; and
l. Allow required replacement parking on an existing driveway within the front setback
Sincerley
Vandana Varanasi
Palo Alto
California
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:44 PM
4
Carnahan, David
From:Derek Gurney <agwlcegzkkncodf@ujoin.co>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:50 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Support Mar 6 Direction for ADUs!
From: derek.gurney@gmail.com <Derek Gurney>
Message:
Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice-Mayor Kniss and City Council Members,
I would like to write in support of the ADU Ordinance motion as voted on and approved on Mar 6, 2017. Please do not pull this
from the consent calendar on Monday April 17, 2017. Housing is a basic need. Finding ways to expand housing options (like
ADUs and JADUs) for our community members is an economic, environmental, social justice and humanitarian issue. ADU's/granny units/secondary dwellings are something that can help our entire community. Through this ordinance, we can help homeowners, our aging community, young millenials starting out, and even families who rent, to find a feasible and timely housing solution that can make a meaningful difference in our community, all with one small policy/ordinance change. Above all, it enables us to continue nurturing the vibrant and diverse community already here in the city we call home, Palo Alto.
In particular, I support the following motions made on March 6, 2017: a. Require no more than 6-ft side and rear setback for ADUs;
b. Allow ADUs on all residential lot sizes;
c. Allow an additional 175 sq-ft of FAR for an ADU, but not for a two-story ADU;
d. Allow an additional 50 sq-ft of FAR for a JADU;
e. Increase the maximum size of attached ADUs to 600 sq-ft;
f. Remove Lot Coverage requirements for ADUs on properties that are no smaller than 10% smaller than standard lot sizes; g. Limit ADUs to 17-ft high and single-story in Single Story Overlay (SSO) neighborhoods, even if the main house is a grandfathered 2-story house; h. Remove design review and requirements; i. Remove door orientation requirements for ADUs; j. ADUs to have the same parking requirements as JADUs; and k. Remove requirements for covered parking on properties with an ADU or JADU; and
l. Allow required replacement parking on an existing driveway within the front setback
Sincerley
Derek Gurney
Palo Alto
California
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:44 PM
5
Carnahan, David
From:Mary Jane Marcus <eiktaervqcfldwh@ujoin.co>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:11 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Support Mar 6 Direction for ADUs!
From: maryjane.marcus@gmail.com <Mary Jane Marcus>
Message:
Adding more small housing options through accessory dwellings is one of the easiest ways to keep some economic diversity throughout the neighborhoods and increase our housing stock so my dear friends who live
here have a chance of staying. We would convert a room to a studio apartment if this succeeds.
Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice-Mayor Kniss and City Council Members,
I would like to write in support of the ADU Ordinance motion as voted on and approved on Mar 6, 2017. Please do not pull this from the consent calendar on Monday April 17, 2017. Housing is a basic need. Finding ways to expand housing options (like
ADUs and JADUs) for our community members is an economic, environmental, social justice and humanitarian
issue. ADU's/granny units/secondary dwellings are something that can help our entire community. Through this ordinance, we
can help homeowners, our aging community, young millenials starting out, and even families who rent, to find a feasible and
timely housing solution that can make a meaningful difference in our community, all with one small policy/ordinance
change. Above all, it enables us to continue nurturing the vibrant and diverse community already here in the city we call home,
Palo Alto.
In particular, I support the following motions made on March 6, 2017: a. Require no more than 6-ft side and rear setback for ADUs; b. Allow ADUs on all residential lot sizes; c. Allow an additional 175 sq-ft of FAR for an ADU, but not for a two-story ADU; d. Allow an additional 50 sq-ft of FAR for a JADU; e. Increase the maximum size of attached ADUs to 600 sq-ft;
f. Remove Lot Coverage requirements for ADUs on properties that are no smaller than 10% smaller than standard lot
sizes;
g. Limit ADUs to 17-ft high and single-story in Single Story Overlay (SSO) neighborhoods, even if the main house is a
grandfathered 2-story house;
h. Remove design review and requirements;
i. Remove door orientation requirements for ADUs; j. ADUs to have the same parking requirements as JADUs; and k. Remove requirements for covered parking on properties with an ADU or JADU; and l. Allow required replacement parking on an existing driveway within the front setback Sincerley
Mary Jane Marcus
Palo Alto
California
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:44 PM
6
Carnahan, David
From:Amy Rao <lnrylepewfosiqi@ujoin.co>
Sent:Tuesday, April 18, 2017 10:20 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Support Mar 6 Direction for ADUs!
From: amyr@iarchive.com <Amy Rao>
Message:
this is about creating space to take care of the older generation more than anthing. I hope when my kids are my age they might opt to have me life with them if there is room. Welcome to how the rest of the world respects
their elders. We need to do better and creating a few more small living spaces in our community is about what
kind of people we are at our hearts.
Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice-Mayor Kniss and City Council Members,
I would like to write in support of the ADU Ordinance motion as voted on and approved on Mar 6, 2017. Please do not pull this
from the consent calendar on Monday April 17, 2017. Housing is a basic need. Finding ways to expand housing options (like
ADUs and JADUs) for our community members is an economic, environmental, social justice and humanitarian
issue. ADU's/granny units/secondary dwellings are something that can help our entire community. Through this ordinance, we
can help homeowners, our aging community, young millenials starting out, and even families who rent, to find a feasible and timely housing solution that can make a meaningful difference in our community, all with one small policy/ordinance change. Above all, it enables us to continue nurturing the vibrant and diverse community already here in the city we call home, Palo Alto.
In particular, I support the following motions made on March 6, 2017: a. Require no more than 6-ft side and rear setback for ADUs; b. Allow ADUs on all residential lot sizes; c. Allow an additional 175 sq-ft of FAR for an ADU, but not for a two-story ADU;
d. Allow an additional 50 sq-ft of FAR for a JADU;
e. Increase the maximum size of attached ADUs to 600 sq-ft;
f. Remove Lot Coverage requirements for ADUs on properties that are no smaller than 10% smaller than standard lot
sizes;
g. Limit ADUs to 17-ft high and single-story in Single Story Overlay (SSO) neighborhoods, even if the main house is a grandfathered 2-story house; h. Remove design review and requirements; i. Remove door orientation requirements for ADUs; j. ADUs to have the same parking requirements as JADUs; and k. Remove requirements for covered parking on properties with an ADU or JADU; and l. Allow required replacement parking on an existing driveway within the front setback Sincerley
Amy Rao
Palo Alto
California
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/19/2017 8:14 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:chuck jagoda <chuckjagoda1@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 18, 2017 10:12 PM
To:citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Board Operations; Ky Le; Dolci Robert; Board;
dprice@padailypost.com; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; William Safford
Cc:Sandy Perry-HCA; Raga Neela Ayyagari; Sneha Saroja Ayyagari; Stop the Ban Google
Discussion Group; Christine Guthman; Chris Richardson;
city.council@cityofmenlopark.org; Council, City; Burns, Dennis; Jen Hoey Padgett;
Michelle Ogburn; Admir Garic; Blanca Bosquez; Dave Cortese; Housing 1000; Kelcy
Fleming
Subject:Taking sides
Esteemed Members of the San Jose City Council,
You are now considering a vote on eviction and tenants rights tonight.
We are in the midst of the greatest transfer of wealth EVER from poor to rich. Those in power in
Congress cut food stamps AND taxes for the rich. Are you on the side of attempts to re-equalize the
balance between those who own resources and those who work for them? Or do you think the rich
need to become even richer and avoiding "wasting" money on elders and children (who "aren't
productive")-- as Trump's budget director has decreed-- is the way to go?
You may not control Trump's budget or Congress' legislation, but you DO have a fairly large voice in
the fate of the poorest among us in the City whose welfare you are entrusted with: those who are
getting evicted from their housing so it can be gentrified and make more money for the building
owners, at the expense of extant housing for the working poor.
Is that what you were taught growing up? Who were your religious heroes who did that? Is that what
Jesus did? Did Moses do that? Did Mohammed preach against the poor? Did Buddha? Did Gandhi?
YOU make a big difference in your vote tonight and in many other votes on other nights.
What do you choose to do-- take a stand for or against the needs of the poor? Make it even harder for
poor people to house and feed their children? Or will you exercise the compassion I know you possess.
There are such things as morality and justice and people don't remember it fondly when you neglect--
or worse yet-- work against them.
Please make the moral, justice-seeking choice.
Vote in favor of support and protection for the poor.
Don't let landlords evict tenants until and unless those poor people are settled in similar and
affordable replacement housing.
THAT is what your religious leaders would have done.
Thank you,
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:58 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Maria Cristina Urruela <murruela@stanford.edu>
Sent:Tuesday, April 18, 2017 3:57 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:thank you
Dear Council Members,
Just a quick thank you for listening to so many of us all last night and for all your hard work.
I am very happy that the ADU ordinance passed and look forward to a more diverse, vibrant City of Palo
Alto. As I have said innumerable times on the neighborhood list, I am confident that we can work out the
difficulties that might arise.
¡Muchas gracias!
All the best,
Maria Cristina
(2074 Sandalwood Ct.)
María Cristina Urruela, PhD
Lecturer in Spanish
650 725‐8657, 260/242 (Pigott Hall)
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:26 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Joan Holtzman <jholtzman@igc.org>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 4:47 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:urge you to pull accessory dwelling units from the consent calendar tonight
I have lived in Palo Alto for many years and agree that we need to have more flexible rules allowing ADUs in our city.
However, the language used by Wolback‐Fine on March 7 makes certain changes to the ordinance that has not been
open to public discussion or, as I understand it, reviewed staff and/or by the City's Planning Commission. This is an
important issue that will affect Palo Alto permanently; it should not be rammed through without due consideration of
what the impacts will be for various neighborhoods. As a member of an Eichler ACC, I am completely in the dark about
how the proposed Wolback‐Fine changes would affect our role and the functions we are supposed to serve.
I wish it were possible to attend tonight’s meeting but unfortunately I can’t. For this reason, I am urging you in this
email to pull the ADU item from the consent calendar and reschedule for a later time, after a closer analysis and more
public discussion has taken place.
Respectfully,
Joan Holtzman
4139 Wilkie Way
Palo Alto, CA 94306
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/18/2017 3:25 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Alex Ross <alexr@stanford.edu>
Sent:Monday, April 17, 2017 5:04 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Vote on ADU changes
Dear Palo Alto City Council,
It is getting to be an uphill battle to preserve one's privacy in an Eichler with floor to ceiling windows facing the
backyard. Even in districts with the single‐story restriction, it's difficult because the single‐story height
allowed in new construction in Palo Alto is far higher than the 15‐17‐ft height of a typical Eichler. An ADU
within 6 feet of one's back fence will make this situation even more difficult, unless allowable fence height is
increased.
This item really merits a lot more time for discussion and should not be voted up or down tonight.
Respectfully,
Alex Ross
4175 Wilkie Way
Palo Alto 94306
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 4/17/2017 9:02 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:D Martell <dmpaloalto@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, April 14, 2017 7:28 PM
To:Nickel, Eric; Watson, Ron; Scharff, Gregory (internal); Council, City
Cc:Bill Johnson; Dave Price
Subject:Where's the Party?
Palo Alto Birthdays for APRIL 16:
- City of Palo Alto
- Palo Alto Fire Department
- Palo Alto Police Department
- Danielle Martell | Palo Alto City Council Candidate, 2016 & 2005
11. Ananya Dad (zip code: 94306)
12. Andrea Fraume (zip code: 95136)
13. Angelina Hadley (zip code: 94546)
14. Adrian Avalos (zip code: 94306)
15. Arielle Diamond (zip code: 94115)
16. Alberto Roman (zip code: 95116)
None!
17. Asher Kohn (zip code: 94301)
18. Carol Liu (zip code: 94303)
19. Wiiiiam Cane (zip code: 94301)
20. Barbara Saxton (zip code: 94043)
21. Brinley Bowes (zip code: 94024)
22. Beatrix Cashmore (zip code: 94303)
23. An anonymous signer (zip code: 94002)
clean water is needed by all.
DEFUND the pipeline.
24. Rebecca Levin (zip code: 94061-3444)
25. Lori Hart Benlnger (zip code: 95124)
Seattle, Washington has done it. Davis, California has done it. I am asking the same of San Jose as
well! Please stop supporting banks that fund environmentally horrendous projects for private
enterprises.
26. Benoit Dupln (zip code: 94087)
27. Betty Romo (zip code: 95137)
28. davld bezanson (zip code: 94066)
One of the funding banks is Wells Fargo. I will soon be closing out au of my accounts there and taking
my biz down the street to a more conscientious bank.
29. Ashutosh (zip code: 95123)
30. Biii Hiiton (zip code: 94087)
31. Kris Morrella (zip code: 95135)
Do what is right!
32. Bob Jung (zip code: 94024)
33. bonny parke (zip code: 94306)
34. Daune Turner (zip code: 94401)
35. An anonymous signer (zip code: 60625)
36. Brian Haberly (zip code: 95112)
37. Brittany M~Gee (zip code: 16925)
38. Betty McNamara (zip code: 94306)
39. Byanca Franco (zip code: 95122)
LIFELINES OVER PIPELINES
40. Margaret Bernadette Castor (zip code: 94028)
I grew up along the Missouri river. Let's not destroy the natural resources there, and ignore the native
tribes sacred grounds.
41. Carol Uyeno (zip code: 94303)
42. Patrick Cashmore (zip code: 94303)
43. Catherine Christen (zip code: 94303)
44. An anonymous signer (zip code: 95123)
45. carol wardley (zip code: DAB 1 PN)
Native people's deserve clean water and appreciation of their beliefs
4~. Chris Maukonen (zip code: 44125)
47. Chasity Salvador (zip code: 94309)
48. Chelsey Flesher (zip code: 93955)
49. Cheryl McGovern (zip code: 95112)
50. Chris Bedford (zip code: 94043)
#NODAPL (please)
51. Claire Amkraut (zip code: 94303)
52. Concetta Ferrell (zip code: 95008)
53. Cornelia Lorentzen (zip code: 94612)
54. Laura Cortes (zip code: 95207)
55. Patti Berryhill (zip code: 94025)
56. Judy Cowling (zip code: 48198)
57. Cristina Reynoso (zip code: 95126)
58. Davena Gentry (zip code: 94301)
59. David Jones (zip code: 94002)
Our children are watching
60. Dolna Smith (zip code: 95812)
61 . Donna Booth (zip code: 94040)
62. Desiree Dockter (zip code: 94303)
63. francesca kautz (zip code: 94306)
Respect Native American Rights and Mother Nature.
64. Dave Vick (zip code: 95030)
65. Diana Giiiespie (zip code: 94110)
66. Diane Farrar (zip code: 94306)
67. Dina Gllholy (zip code: Ox16 1za)
68. Debbie Mytels (zip code: 94303)
69. Elaine Dodd (zip code: 94301)
70. Barbara Doll (zip code: 95035)
71. Dorothy Fadlman (zip code: 94025)
72. Donna Ploppl (zip code: 94306)
73. Dr. Marla Michael (zip code: 94523)
We must all come together in a higher consciousness to protect Grandmother Earth for the next
seven generations. We implore you to think about all the children and the future. Please send a clear
message that your money be used in an appropriate way and not support fossil fuels or anything that
will put our Grandmother Earth in anymore jeopardy. We are the LAkota/Navajo Elder in this photo in
the front. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach to to us.
74. David Sprowls (zip code: 95014)
75. dan walls (zip code: 94305)
76. Eva Baker (zip code: 94080)
77. Edith Eddy (zip code: 94301)
Sending oil through the Dakota Access Pipeline is culturally abhorrent, environmentally harmful and
morally repugnant.
78. Elizabeth Russell (zip code: 94303)
79. Eleanor G Vick (zip code: 95030)
80. Erin Angell (zip code: 95011)
81. steve elttrelm (zip code: 94303)
we all need to step up in this fight against the fossil fuel industry which is shortchanging my
grandchildren's future
82. M Morales (zip code: 94104)
83. llzzl Vessel (zip code: 83864)
84. David Elliston (zip code: 94002)
85. Robert Bojorquez (zip code: 95122)
86. Esther Nlgenda (zip code: 94303)
87. Susan Erikson (zip code: 95828)
Protect the water!
88. Erin Salter (zip code: 95117)
89. Mimi Spreadbury (zip code: 95116)
90. Federica Armstrong (zip code: 94301)
91. John Daniels (zip code: 94965)
92. Gerhard Zwanzig (zip code: D-04109)
I will help the DAKOTA Nation.
93. gail thompson (zip code: 94303)
94. Geordie Zapalac (zip code: 95050)
Climate change is now a crisis with positive feedback to global warming already in full play. We need
to change our energy system, leave the oil in the ground, and protect the rights of the Standing Rock
Sioux Tribe and countless other communities who are forced to subsidize fossil fuel consumption by
giving up their own clean air and water.
95. Gerald Gras (zip code: 94306)
96. Nora Ghandour (zip code: 94070)
97. Ginger Harmon (zip code: 94028)
98. Gladis Xlloj (zip code: 94309)
99. Gordon Gibbs (zip code: 94301)
100. Daniel Southwick (zip code: 94087)
101. Forest Peterson (zip code: 91789)
102. Greg Pennington (zip code: 94109)
103. Gregory Stevens (zip code: 94301)
104. Fred Morrison (zip code: 94544)
105. Mark Grossman (zip code: 94301)
106. susan hall (zip code: 94025)
107. hannah waleh (zip code: 94301)
108. Victor (zip code: 95127)
Don't poison the future away
109. Heara Shukla (zip code: 94303)
11 o. Heather Hyde (zip code: 95050)
111. Gary Shamsholan (zip code: 95014)
112. Antonio Ruiz (zip code: 94303)
113. Shirley Ingalls (zip code: 94043)
114. Chris Jacobi (zip code: 94303)
115. Jacob Tonkel (zip code: 95128)
116. Jason LI (zip code: 94309)
117. Jasmine Wong (zip code: 95051)
118. Jennifer Hetterly (zip code: 94303)
119. Joseph Donlach (zip code: 94306)
120. Jeb Eddy (zip code: 94301)
121. Jeffrey Heckler (zip code: 94306}
122. Jeralyn Moran (zip code: 94306)
Palo Alto is a leader in Environmental Stewardship -other cities are watching us -divesting is the
right thing to do!
123. Abhljlg Bhattacharya (zip code: 94025)
124. Jacob Stepetln (zip code: 94309)
125. Johannes Muenzel (zip code: 94301)
It's time for Palo Alto to stand in solidarity with the Native American community against an industry
built on greed and on contempt for human and animal lives. Divest now!
· 126. Joe Schnelder (zip code: 94014)
127. Joyce Martha (zip code: 94301)
128. Joan Piaget (zip code: 94028-7767)
129. James Wong (zip code: 94303)
130. Judith Turner (zip code: 95112)
Please, put the the environment first.
131. Juanluis Heredia (zip code: 95122)
God is love.
132. Kristina Smith (zip code: 94301)
133. Judith Ocken (zip code: 94306)
134. Juliet Chu (zip code: 94306)
135. June Cancell (zip code: 94306)
136. John Zhao (zip code: 95014)
137. Kathy Voss-Jensen (zip code: 94061)
The City of Palo Alto should do the right thing and work to divest from companies that promote fossil
fuels. We as a nation need to REDUCE our use of fossil fuels through conservation and renewable
energy. NO to the fossil fuel industry!
138. Kacey Carpenter (zip code: 94940)
139. karanti shergill (zip code: 2024)
140. Karin Meyer (zip code: 94301)
141. Katherine Magid (zip code: 94303)
142. kathy richmond (zip code: 951122029)
143. Ken Koh (zip code: 94024)
144. Keegan Livermore (zip code: 94309)
145. Kelly Kloeker (zip code: 94087)
146. Ken Dickman (zip code: 94086)
147. Kiana Brown (zip code: 94301)
148. Cory Klnservlk (zip code: 84302)
149. Kirsten Struve (zip code: 94303)
150. Margarita Merz (zip code: 94303)
151. Mary Takahashi (zip code: 94204)
152. Kristi Iverson (zip code: 94087)
153. Kurtis Wu (zip code: 94108)
154. Michael Kutllek (zip code: 951122368)
155. Lloyd Affholter (zip code: 94103)
156. Evellln Cervenkova (zip code: 04209)
157. Laurence Albet (zip code: 94305)
158. Lisa Altieri (zip code: 94306)
159. Elan Rogers (zip code: 94062)
160. Laura Galvan (zip code: 95008)
NODAPL
161. Caroline Yacoub (zip code: 94085)
162. An anonymous signer (zip code: 94002)
163. Linda Glave (zip code: 94061)
J)e,.~ ,M,.~0r-Sc~i"'.c::f, Wee. /l"A~ot' \::nis.s, """ rww""~.s of """e ~ Co"'*"c.il,
~ l'\ame, i~ tJicole Mot\t1)jt> I "~c:I l r~sen~ s:\icon v~t\141-#DM-e (.SV(i>lfz>me).
I apolo~(i!e. +h._t-l w~ LU\~'-~ h s;t,..~ ~n>"Oh ~a!> ~~~ ~efi~'1 +o
<J.e.lc'IB" Mt C.OfttwteN\-r; tn pct"Son' at\' I "--pe ~0\4. will W\s~.t c:;(cc.e.p'°:}
v.~ wr ... ~n O>tli\"'le"-rs r"0"n:t'~ I~ Ll o~ -hn.l~hn ~encl.,...
111,('8 rs sMfl_1 SMppoc-1-..foi" .+he · ,;-ac,.re"'-'ul -proolCAcrfion tf AD~s
rt> tontAllj' s~lt W\t.fe, a~4' ..fl/~n na.-f;ol'\al\~f" \.-\ ~ J!1Aj Ar~"' 1 we °'r~ P"r+-
1
0 ~ " d\vQr~-.. coa ft-Hon Jttl:I( b~ -I-he. s-..y ~ CCM-tnc)(~
whr"" fn""'4J.e.s ~ A~~P, c.nkt' .n...-~-h-V-t L..Mto< Lise IC'~:ioL·.,~,
O\i'tef\1't.lr Al\iAt'lc,e-1 SP'-'R, 1'h1. Te'"e.r C.t.n-tef' .for ~'"~ ht"\OY"4'\.+;6.,_ /
4nd Tr-AnsPotrV\· ""fh1·s. bn»"cl NnA~ oF-oY"~'\t\i~ons h~ve c.~-e.
t--~~~e.t" -n ~cAppot"~ A-OlAs "'t~'4se. ~~~ av-e ~ _sM~~-f.-~"-1 -to
~<Jar~~ o~Y hok..Si""~ n.-et.L~ ~nM:1k 1\,41(.(et\ k"S•-1 1 ~~ ~n
h•lp ~~ creAt.-e ih"""si'fe. co~""&A."\-lie.s, wi'"' l'DotM -fo.--~~,.,~ seninrs,
~o"''\~ "''11-eniAls, a~tl koM~o~s NNi. ~~ ali'4e. ci.S.i~.s h.ke.
Mo\Anbi" Vi-ew, .s""~ose, AM ~tAwood c.·ry hAve ~'""'":1 ~Of\-e ..foruJt:.lni
..t•+k M~"5&A.~S h t~.se At><A retJ&.e(41\Hbns, ""411 w~ u~e °j"u. -h JD -In~ SAme.
w,, s"ppo'+ t\\~ niott o"' ~ th"r y.J~e "f P"'"<e.l ~~ "' ~on~ ,.,f!
1-he. Cot.\nc;;I of\ M'lr"' -=I-, ~ t>Jc .et\c.o~~e. ~ f& "'dlopt
-\-ktlM ton•~h+, 11~ thts hP"4~it\,j is 1.4roe.tt\~ nt4oleo(.
1-3\C,Ol~ J')<N\ttJ~O 1
S'I €) hoV\'\e.,.,
°"po<~ ;+j 1t> ~~ik i"P-'-+·
'
COUNCIL ME~G t/ .!-/ 7·-/_ /
[ ] Pl Before Meeting
·f ~ed at Meeting
Petition for Sensible Regulation of Second Dwelling Units
-~·
' ..
We support allowing second dwelling units (also called Accessory Dwelling Units or ADUs
and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units or JADUs) in single-family residential neighborhoods
according to California State Law (SB 1069, AB 2299, and AB 2406).
We know that Councilmembers Wolbach and Fine made a motion on March 7, 2017 to
greatly expand where and how second dwelling units can go. This motion was made after
public comment period in the meeting was over, so the public had no opportunity to hear
the motion before giving comment at that meeting. The revised ordinance is on the
Consent Calendar for April 17, 2017 for a vote without any discussion. The Staff Report
accompanying the revised ordinance does not include any analysis of the effects of the
changes to the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance.
We demand that the item be pulled from the Consent Calendar and be rescheduled to be
heard at a Council meeting only after staff or Planning and Transportation Commission
has had an opportunity to analyze these changes.
Petition Signer Comments:
As an Eichler owner living next to someone with a spacious back yard, I am concerned that this
change could impinge could impinge on my privacy. I am also concerned for the many
other Eichler owners in the city.
Added traffic has to be address properly and completely!
ADU are good but needs some study for additional requirements
All future building need to be approved after careful consideration of the impact of the structure.
Allowing these second units to exist in neighborhoods that are already crowded with small lots
and streets is outrageous. The fact that this ordinance is being voted on without public
input is similar to what's happening in the Trump administration. I though Palo Alto was
better than that. I guess not.
An outrageous breach of protocol with permanent negative impacts on our residents. Wolbach
and Fine are clearly beholden to developers.
Arthur is right on point with this effort. This clearly needs wider circulation to the community ...
when they come to understand the impacts of this measure on residential neighborhoods
... and the individuals who live in these neighborhoods ... I believe that this ADU
legislation will not have community support.
"As a concerned citizen who has seen so much traffic and parking issues that the City of Palo
Alto struggles with I cannot understand how they can throw extra housing into the mix.
Lately I've been seeing how many items have been pushed through City Council without
proper review and public comment. This issue especially will have major effects on the
City of Palo Alto and needs to have much more stringent review. The impacts of these
changes need to be carefully studied. Once we are down this path, it will be very hard to
go back! We need to see that the City of Palo Alto can create sensible rules, provide a
solid infrastructure of parking codes, and ability to enforce codes until the lack of
April 17, 2017 Petition for Sensible Regulation of Second Dwelling Units Page 1of6
' •
housing can be addressed. Please bring this back to the drawing board and make sure all
the rules and mitigations make sense and will be enforceable!"
'
1As a member of an Eichler ACC, I am concerned about how this revised ordinance would affect
our committee's role and functions"
"As a Palo Alto citizen, I am outraged that such important ordinances are voted on with little
opportunity for citizen input. This is most definitely not a transparent or fair way to
govern a city. In addition, I disagree with the proposed ordinance. In addition. I disagree
with holding citizen meetings on major religious holidays when few people can attend.''
City Council please take this off the consent calendar
How about we look before we leap?
111 am already a victim of my next door neighbor's Illegal Air BnB conversion, and the resulting
intrusion has had a considerable negative impact on my life. Without a means to enforce
the short tern1 rental restriction, the proposed ordinance will simply turn my
neighborhood into one big hotel. This in tum will further the erosion of the quality of life
in our city. At some point, we must accept the fact that by definition, growth is
unsustainable in an environment with limited resources. We are already beyond capacity
for many of these resources. We come to tern1s with this fact instead of continuing to
make the problem worse.11
I am deeply concerned how councilmen Wolbach and Fine introduced amendments after
amendments in the late hours of the meeting when few were present to hear. Is this how
our city should be run? Without transparency?
J am out of town and have sent an email to City Council.
I am out of town and have sent an email to City Council.
I am particularly opposed to the lack of parking restrictions.
"I am really concerned about the potential abuse of ADU by neighbors who build them, without
the affected parties having any way to protest or appeal other than confronting those
neighbors directly. Already my neighbor has allowed so many people to live in their
house (rented or not) that you can see 4-5 cars parked alongside the private easement
driveway along the length of our property line. The ADU will make the situation worse
and negatively affect our quality of life even more than the current situation has already.''
"I believe there is no need to rush. It is safer to plan more diligently making sure we as residents
will not regret anything after these units are erected. Rules and regulations must be set up
to make sure every segment of our community will benefit from the construction of these
dwellings. They will not create more noise, chaos, shortage of street parking and others.
I am just asking for more time to look into this by the council.11
111 bought into palo alto because it had a neighborhood feel. with ADU the complete character of
palo alto will change. I vehemently oppose this measure.
and the underhanded way it was put before the council.11
I gave my comments for someone else to read -have a class that night
I have reservations about ADUs in general
I request to not rush a decision at the 04/17/2017 meeting. There are too many unanswered
questions and the Fine/Wolbach is lacking public transparency and discussion
I strongly oppose ADUs. They worsen congestion problems in Palo Alto
"I want the ADU voted on by Palo Alto Residents, not the City Council. This will have dramatic
impact to our neighborhoods and community and should not be jurisdiction for the City
Council to make a decision unilaterally. We need to delay this vote.11
April 17, 2017 Petition for Sensible Regulation of Second Dwelling Units Page 2of6
..
r •
I'm really against this new provision of ADU's. We already have homes in R-1 Districts that are
overwhelmed by the zoning laws which give new 2-story homes priority over existing
homes and homeowners. Pleas respect the rights of R-1 property owners who live and
help sustain our Community!
If we're going to have a more aggressive ADU program (as proposed by Councilmembers
Wolbach and Fine) let's at least discuss it. Sneaking in these changes after the close of
public comment is not OK.
"Judging from the questions asked at the March 7 city council meeting, many members of the
Council were not very familiar with the new state law or the additions proposed by staff.
Rushed decisions made in the middle of the night are not likely to be good decisions. 11
Last fall we fought our neighbor at 1245 Lincoln who planned to rent his house to 14 people (4-6
bunk bed per room) on an AirBnB operation. Gladly with the help of neighbors the owner
changed his mind but I can not imagine the neighborhood in which every house has a
ADU being rented to strangers on a nightly basis. We moved to Palo Alto to raise a
family and enjoy its great school district not to cash in on the housing boom.
On March 7 the city council was still learning about the new state law and the staff's proposals
for for ADUs and JADUs in Palo Alto. They need more time to think about the effects
and to speak with constituents be fore they can make a decent decision.
"Palo Alto needs off-street parking as a requirement of ANY added density, including ADU's.
Setbacks must be maintained to preserve neighbor's privacy. If the 111130 day min. rental""
is intended to comfort those fearing private motels in RI neighborhoods, then staff and
Council need to specify how that requirement will be enforced. City follow-thru on code
enforcement is already poor.11
Please preserve the character of our neighborhoods and do not authorize this huge change to our
residential neighborhoods without a comprehensive analysis and really listening to what
the residents want.
Please pull the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance from the Consent Calendar as there needs to
be more public input about an ordinance that will potentially mean major changes to our
neighborhoods
Please refer this item to PPC for more public input.
Please wait until staff and public can have input on this subject.
Public comment before the proposal is changed amounts to no public comment
"Pull the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance for April 17, 2017"
remove this item for Consent Calendar & Reschedule & provide Guidelines
Reschedule vote until more information!
See letter I wrote
"Shame on Fine and Wohlbach, and shame on Mayor Scharff (who said in ten years residential
neighborhoods would look the same as today) for attempting to change Rt to R2 without
public comment and without evaluating the effects. If these are the people looking for
higher office we are in trouble. 11
Shameful your trying to pass this and not inform the public before a vote
"The ADU I JADU motion vote on by the City Council on March 7, 2017 goes far beyond state
law requirements as well as city staff recommendations -so much so it represents a
material change that has not had benefit of staff or PTC analysis or public comment.
Therefore it should be pulled from pending April 17 City Council Consent Calendar and
April 17, 2017 Petition for Sensible Regulation of Second Dwelling Units Page 3of6
be subject to a staff of PTC analysis and recommendations followed by public comment
before proceeding to a final vote."
"The ADU I JADU motion vote on by the City Council on March 7, 2017 should be pulled from
pending April 17 City Council Consent Calendar and be subject to a staff of PTC analysis
and recommendations followed by public comment before proceeding to a final vote."
The City Council is crazy
The current Ordinance will min our residential neighborhoods. Let's all work together for
reasonable housing.
The lot sizes in the Green Meadow neighborhood are very small and close together.
The matter needs to be taken off consent and set for full review by the PTC and Council
"There has to be a Jot size requirement, and set back requirement. If we wanted to live in a more
congested area, we would have bought a condo."
"There is almost zero possibility that the amendment will produce beneficial results, and ample
room for unintended and troublesome outcomes"
"There should not be blanket approval for such Dwelling Units. Each should be considered on a
case by case basis and have strict, clearly defined regulations:'
"This is a manuver to put something through the City Council without sufficient
time for both the city staff and the residents to vet the issue with all its remifications."
This is an outrageous misuse of the Consent Calendar!
"This is not a smart solution to provide affordable housing in PA. The impact of infrastructure -
roads, parking, traffic congestion, school enrollment -aJI must be scrutinized and planned
for in advance. When analyzing the affordable housing crisis in PA one must analyze the
factors that contribute to sky high prices of real estate including the developer and real
estate industry itself, possible refonu of both, and the trickle down effects lobbying has
on our residential real estate market."
This item should be removed from the April 17th Calendar until the public has an opportunity to
discuss the pros & cons of such a drastic change without any regulations.
This must be pulled so that it can be analyzed. Shan1e on the abuse of process to try to push
through changes without public scrutiny and consent
"This proposal for ADUs is quite unbelievable. No concern for maintaining residential housing
zoning, concern for parking problems (which have been a major issue already for many
parts of Palo Alto and .no concern for the impact on neighbors or even an opportunity to
appeal concerns and issues."
"This type of change is ridiculous without public comment. IT will greatly change the makeup of
the neighborhoods and make it impossible to find "11nonual1111 single-famtly dwellings
without the worry of a stranger Jiving in your back yard. This will increase on-street
parking and traffic in the already-congested neighborhoods."
This type of high-handedness that destroys our quality of life and our property values is
absolutely outrageous.
Too much too soon. Needs more thoughtful consideration.
"Trying to stuff ADU's on small lots will tum neighbor against neighbor and seriously degrade
the quality~ privacy, and parking in our SFH neighborhoods."
We must slow this decision until more public comment has been allowed.
"We need a mixture of housing, including ADU's. However, like all fonns of housing, there
should be some specific limitations and restrictions. Council needs to ensure that the
April 17, 2017 Petition for Sensible Regulation of Second Dwelling Units Page 4of6
..
quality of life that Palo Altans want is maintained and whole R-1 neighborhoods are not
destroyed by too many ADU's. Where are the safeguards to protect R-1 neighborhoods."
We strongly urge you to pull this issue from the consent calendar since changes have been made.
"While we need to add more housing options in Palo Alto, we also need to ensure these are
planned, and with sufficient privacy and parking."
"Why no analysis of the effects of the Wolbach Fine changes? Please pull the ADU ordinance.
Don't pass it without input from the community. I've lived in Palo Alto since 1957' have
seen many changes, and this would be one of the worst."
"Without off street parking provision by lot, any additional density will degrade neighbourhoods.
""Granny"" units, with separate entrances, should be be integrated into existing housing
and stand alone new dwellings should not create defacto subdivision of existing lots."
Signed by
AV Sinha Brian & Susan Dudley Andersen
Adam Norton Anuskewicz Edith Miller
Ailsa Ludvik Bruce E Crocler Elaine Meyer
Alan Polish CG Oltrogge Elise Singer
Alice Stiebel Carl Thomsen Elissa Ouyang
Allen Akin Carol Scott Ellin Klor
Amy Berson Carolyn Godfrey Elliott Sopkin
Amy Christel Charlene Liao Emily Kruger
Andrew Cromarty Cheryl Goodwin Enid Pearson, former PA
Ann Kelly Cheryl Lilienstein Councilmember
Ann M. Robinson Cheryl Nafzgar Esther Nigenda
Anne Aronson Christian Pease Eugene and Zita
Anne Gregory Christine Stafford Zukowsky
Anne M. Rosenthal Christy Telch Faramarz Bahmani
Annette Glanckopf Chuck Karish Florence LaRiviere
Annette Ross D.Michael Griffin Frank Ingle
Apolak Borthakur Dan DeCarnp Gerald August
Arthur Keller Daniel Flees Ginny White
Ashok Srinivasan Dave Keller Graciela Spivak
Ashwinee Khaladkar David Adams Graig McHendrie
Barbara Adams David Clementson Gunter Steinbach
Barbara Cooley David Fudenberg Hal Prince
Barbara Hing David Keefer Hamilton Hitchings
Barbara Kirsch David Kwoh Harini
Barbara Kurth Deanne Shute Helyn MacLean
barbara sater Deborah Wwxler Ingeborg Crozier
Bayard S. Holmes Deep Bhattacharjee Iris Korol
Becky Epstein Diane Finkelstein Irv Brenner
Ben Lerner Diane Gibeau James C Poppy
Beth Rosenthal Donna Pioppi Jane and Bill Stocklin
Bette hirsch Dorothy Bender Jane Meier
Betty Jo Chang Dorothy Dewing Janet Dafoe
Bob Moss Douglas B Moran Janet Gardiner
April 17, 2017 Petition for Sensible Regulation of Second Dwelling Units Page 5of6
··~
Janis Murphy Margo Davis Robin Wright
Jatin Parekh Marilyn Bauriedel Roger Petersen
Jay Whaley MarkNadim Rohini Chakravarthy
Jean Tooker Stephens Marty Keller Ronald Chun
Jeanne Moulton Mary Anne Baker Rosalind and Roger Route
Jeff Chung Mary Gallagher Roy Stehle
Jeff Greenfield Mary Jo Colton Ruchita Parat
Jennifer Hetterly Mary Rodocker Ruth Keefer
Jennifer Salwitz Mary Sylvester Ruthellen Dickinson
Jessica Yang Maryann Hinden Sabra Chartrand
Jim Colton Masha] Khan Sallie Whaley
Jo Ann Mandinach Meiling Yeh Sara Khan
Joan Holtzman Melanie Mahtani Shannon R. McEntee
Joan Larrabee Melissa Leary Sharon Chin
Joan Rudloff Michele Moran Sheri Funnan
Joan Sakaldasis Mike Cobb Sherry Listgarten
Joan Willingham Nancy Hamilton Sherwood Chang
Joanne Koltnow Nancy Steinbach Shihui Zhao
John Guislin Neilson Buchanan Shirley Finfrock
John Haeger Nelson Ng SK Ganapathi
John Patrick Slattery 1l1 Nita Ganapathi Stephanie Grossman
John Salwitz Nommn Beamer Stephen Bisset
John Wiese Oliver Miao Stepheny McGraw
Joseph Baldwin Parag Patel steven rosenberg
Joseph Hirsch Patricia Jones Sudeshna raha
Julie Spengler Patrick Toland Sue Dinwiddie
K Moreau Patty Harris Sunay Tripathi
Karen Machado Paul Gregory Susan Iannucci
Karen Porter Paul Machado Sylvia Gartner
Karen Schreiber Penny Proctor T.R. Ranganath
Karen White Peter rosenthal Taruna arora
Katherine Peter ziebelman Terry Holzemer
Katie Renati Preston Carter Thomas Rindfleisch
Keith & Atsuko Bennett Radhi Dhall Tia Millman
Ken Novak rebecca Patton Tim Lindholm
Kerry Y arkin Rebecca Sanders Tim Perkins
Kimberley Wong Rebecca Thompson Todd Collins
LaDoris H. Cordell Ree Dufresne Ulfar Erlingsson
Laszlo Tokes Richard & Jeanne Placone Venky Karnam
Lenore Cymes Richard Stiebel Vered Shemtov
Lester Ezrati Richard Stolee Verna Graham
Lieve Moortgat Richard Willits WDavids
Lorinda Reichert Rita Ousterhout William D. Ross
Lucy Morton rita vrhel Wolfgang Dueregger
M Kilcline Robert Feiner
marcia croft Robert Phillips
April 17, 2017 Petition for Sensible Regulation of Second Dwelling Units Page 6of6