Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20171030plCC3701-32 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: 10/30/2017 Document dates: 10/11/2017 – 10/18/2017 Set 3/3 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 | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Sandi Spector <sandis01@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 10:43 PM To:Council, City Subject:Fwd: Update: Verizon's proposed cell towers We are in favor of Cell towers Sandra & Jerome Spector 2332 South Ct Palo Alto, CA 94301 Begin forwarded message: From: Francesca <dfkautz@pacbell.net> Date: October 17, 2017 at 1:26:40 AM GMT+2 To: David Backer <dbacker@pacbell.net>, Linda Selden <edselden@comcast.net>, Leah Schoolnik <leahjsch@yahoo.com>, Annette Crouch-Baker <ann9748@att.net>, Sandra Spector <sandis01@yahoo.com>, ablumen@aol.com, Frances Lim <flim712@comcast.net>, Linda Collier <lindawcollier2013@gmail..com>, Andy Martin <andy@mymartin.com> Subject: Update: Verizon's proposed cell towers Dear Friends, You are probably all aware of Verizon’s plan to install cell towers in Palo Alto's residential neighborhoods, such as Louis Road, Loma Verde, Ross Road, Colorado Ave., South Court, El Verano Ave., Middlefield, etc., but just in case you’re not, below is some interesting information, a map and some photos. The good news is that Governor Brown vetoed SB649, the legislation that would have stripped municipalities of the right to control what goes on property owned by the city (for example, cell towers in front of our homes). I hope you’ll help get the word out to your friends & neighbors—and write to City Council  (City.Council@cityofpaloalto.org) and tell them to say “no” to Verizon’s plan to install cell towers in  residential neighborhoods! Best, Francesca Begin forwarded message: From: "Jeanne Fleming" <jfleming@metricus.net> Subject: Update: Verizon's proposed cell towers Date: October 1, 2017 at 12:54:56 PM PDT City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 2 To: <JFLEMING@METRICUS.NET>, "'Jerry Fan'" <jerry.fan@gmail.com>, "'Jyotsna Nimkar'" <jnimkar@gmail.com> Dear Neighbor,     Thank you for your email letting City Hall know that you're concerned about the cell  towers Verizon proposes to install in Palo Alto's residential neighborhoods.      We are a group of your neighbors, a group which wants Palo Alto to do what many  other California cities are doing, namely:  keep the cell phone industry's ugly, noisy,  radiation‐emitting equipment away from people's homes.    Where things now stand is that four City Council members‐‐Lydia Kou, Greg Tanaka,  Adrian Fine and Tom DuBois‐‐have kindly agreed to call for the cell tower issue to be  added to Council's agenda (it takes three to  ensure an item is added).  This is a crucial  first step toward taking the decision‐making out of the hands of unelected city  administrators, who are showing no interest in saying "no" to Verizon, and putting it  into the hands of our elected representatives.    This happened only because of the emails you and others wrote to the city.  It is these  emails that persuaded Lydia, Greg, Adrian and Tom that City Council should be directly  involved in the issue of cell towers in residential neighborhoods.       If you would like more information about what's going on, or if you would like to help,  please contact us (our email addresses are below).  Also, if you would like to sign our  petition to City Council, and we hope you will, please contact Kay Sabin  (ksabes@aol.com).     One final thing:  You may have received an email from Asst. City Manager Ed Shikada in  response to your email.  As you no doubt noticed, Mr. Shikada's email was vague and  dealt mostly with bureaucratic procedure.  It also was completely  misleading.  Specifically, it implied that Palo Alto lacks the authority to keep cell towers  out of residential neighborhoods.  But the fact is, keeping them out is exactly what other  sophisticated California cities such as Berkeley, Piedmont, Irvine and Palos Verdes are  doing, and Palo Alto can as well.  All it takes is the political will to do so, which is why we  are urging our elected representatives on City Council to take the action necessary to  protect our neighborhoods.    Sincerely,  Jeanne Fleming (jfleming@metricus.net)  Jerry Fan (jerry.fan@gmail.com)  Jyo Nimkar (jnimkar@gmail.com)  Dear Neighbors,     Verizon held an Open House Thursday for residents of the neighborhoods included in the latest “cluster” of cell towers the company is proposing. Kay, Jyo and Jeanne attended, and here is some of what we learned or confirmed:    City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 3 1. According to Verizon, the principal purpose of the towers it wants to install in our neighborhoods is to provide better service to people driving through in their cars, not to people in their homes.     2. Verizon has a strong economic incentive to switch from the industrial-scale towers on commercial or industrial buildings to so-called “small cell nodes” located on sidewalk strips, specifically: The company pays between $4,000- $5,000 per month to rent tower space on a commercial or industrial building, but only $270 per year—per year!—to rent tower space on a Palo Alto utility pole. Even taking into account the fact that it takes four or five of the “small” towers to deliver the same coverage as an industrial-scale one, the “small” towers are still an order of magnitude cheaper. Plus the city (i.e., we taxpayers), not Verizon, would be liable if, say, a utility pole with a cell tower fell on your house in, say, an earthquake (Verizon would be liable if a pole it installed on a building fell over). In short, cell towers in residential neighborhoods are great for Verizon’s bottom line, but not so great for the people who live in those neighborhoods.    3. The radius of coverage for a sidewalk strip cell tower was quoted to one of us as “500-1,000 feet” and to another of us as “about ¼ mile”—i.e., 1,320 feet. This is why Verizon is seeking to install so many towers, and why they will surely seek to install even more as they market more services to their customers. Plus there are the towers AT&T and T-Mobile say they need. As one resident recently said, “Palo Alto won’t be a city, it will be an antenna farm.”     4. One of the Verizon representatives acknowledged that they can install a shoe-box size piece of equipment in the homes of customers who complain about poor service, equipment that, as we understand it, leverages the customer’s wifi to provide much better service, and that generally solves any in-home service problem.    5. How small are the so-called “small cell nodes” Verizon wants to install? Each one consists of roughly 200lbs of equipment on the pole and some include another 500lbs of equipment in a cabinet on the sidewalk strip next to the pole. Verizon could put most of this noisy, ugly equipment underground, where it would be completely out of sight. But they’re unwilling to do this, one of their people said, “unless Palo Alto forces us to do it because they’re undergrounding your utilities.”    6. As you know, the firefighters union sought and obtained an exemption for firehouses from the provisions of SB649—this is the bill that would allow the telecom industry to install cell towers on public property unfettered by city ordinances. The firefighters gave as their reason concerns about the health consequences of long-term exposure to cell tower radiation since they live and work in those firehouses for days at a time. We asked Verizon’s Mary Diesch to comment, and she said “I think this is just the firehouses wanting to get more rent for the towers at firehouses. I’ve installed 100s of cell towers at firehouses. That’s all this is—an attempt to get more money.” We will be interested to know what the firefighters union has to say in response.  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 4 From: Atkinson, Rebecca Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:06 AM To: 'Francesca' Subject: RE: 250 Hamilton AV Proposed Development Project - 17PLN-00169     Hello Francesca Kautz,  Good morning.  Thank you for your email.  The proposed locations are on poles that are only in the right‐of‐way (not on private  property).  You can find more information on the proposed project by reviewing the files for 17PLN‐ 00169 in our permit tracking system.  I’ve included the steps to access the files below.   There is a non‐live mock site of the proposed equipment on a pole near the Palo Alto Art  Center (adjacent to 1350 Newell) – the City allowed this non‐live mock site at this  location in order for members of the public to see an example of what the applicant is  proposing to install.   I’ll send you a photo of it under separate email.   Otherwise, the detailed project description and detailed project plans contain much  more information.  Please let me know if you have any follow‐up questions for staff about application  analysis and processing.  The applicant, Mary Diesch, is also requesting contact from members of the public if  they have any questions or concerns about the project.  Regards,  Rebecca             Rebecca Atkinson, PMP, AICP, LEED Green Associate | Planner | P&CE Department 250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301 T: 650.329.2596 | F: 650.329.2154 |E:rebecca.atkinson@cityofpaloalto.org     Online Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code  Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped        Steps to Access Information on Formal Application 17PLN‐00169 Vinculums/Verizon  Small Cell Wireless Communication Facility Deployment project :  1.            Go to: https://paloalto.buildingeye.com/planning  2.            Search for “250 Hamilton” and open the records for by clicking on the  green/blue dots  3.            On the right hand side, scroll down to the information for the  application 17PLN‐00169, find the “more details” button, and click  4.            On this new webpage, use the “Records Info” drop down menu and select  “Attachments”  5.            You will now be able to click on the direct links for the project plans and  detailed project description.      Applicant Contact Information: Mary Diesch | Vinculums Services | Site Acquisition  Manager, Small Cells | office +1‐415‐730‐3700 | mdiesch@vinculums.com  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 5    Application Number: 17PLN‐00169    Submittal Date: 05/23/2017    Project Address: 250 HAMILTON AV    Planner: REBECCA ATKINSON‐650‐329‐2596; Rebecca.Atkinson@CityofPaloAlto.org    Project Description: Request by Mary Diesch of Vinculums, on behalf of GTE Mobilnet  dba Verizon Wireless, for a Tier 3 Wireless Communication Facility Permit Application,  as prescribed in PAMC 18.42.110, for the deployment of small cell wireless  communication equipment on utility poles and streetlights in the public right of way.  The proposed 18 small cell node locations in this application, cluster 1 of 6, located  within the Mid‐Town, Palo Verde, and South of Mid‐Town neighborhoods, are  considered a cluster of nodes within the proposed overall deployment of 92 small cell  locations throughout the city. The project plans provide information on three  equipment configurations proposed for this application. Configurations utilized at each  site contain some or all of the following equipment: 1 antenna, 3 radios, 0‐1 pole or  ground mounted emergency battery backup cabinet units, 1‐2 electrical disconnect  boxes, associated conduit, and fiber/power would be provided from above on the pole  via an aerial drop. For further background information, please refer to the  Vinculums/Verizon project website (improveyourwireless.com/paloalto/), the City’s  website (aca.accela.com/paloalto/ search under the project file number 17PLN 00169),  and the 2016 Master License Agreement process  (cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/52893).  Snapshot of Proposed Pole List and Map:     Cluster 1 Pole List ‐  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 6      City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 7    Weblinks to May 18 Architectural Review Board agenda and the staff report for  the 17PLN‐00033 Preliminary Architectural Review ‐ Vinculums/Verizon Small Cell  Wireless Communication Facility Deployment project:   May 18, 2017 Architectural Review Board Agenda  ‐ http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/57843  Staff Report for Preliminary Architectural Review of Vinculums/Verizon Small  Cell Wireless Communication Facility Deployment Project  ‐ http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/57840  City’s Architectural Review Board Webpage  ‐ http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/architectural.asp  Video of the Vinculums/Verizon Small Cell Wireless Communication Facility  Deployment project May 18, 2017 Architectural Review Board discussion  ‐ http://midpenmedia.org/architectural‐review‐board‐62/    ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Francesca [mailto:dfkautz@pacbell..net]   Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 6:07 PM  To: Atkinson, Rebecca  Subject: 250 Hamilton AV Proposed Development Project     Dear Rebecca Atkinson,     We do not have a telephone pole in our backyard at 3324 South Court, but there is one  in our neighbor’s yard and I’m wondering what the cell nodes are going to look like and  whether their unsightliness will affect us. Please clarify and send me some pictures.     City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 8 Thank you,     Francesca Kautz  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 9 City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 10 City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:48 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Willy Lai <willyhlai@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 17, 2017 10:42 AM To:Council, City Cc:Ann Lai Subject:Governor Brown’s veto of SB649 and implications for the city of Palo Alto Dear City Council, As you may know, Governor Brown has vetoed SF649. As a follow up to this, we'd like to ask that you hold your own hearings on the issue of cell towers in residential neighborhoods and schools. In addition, we'd like to request that you use every means possible to keep cell towers out of residential neighborhoods and schools. If needed, we'd also like to request that the city passes new, tough ordinances that accomplish this goal. Best, Willy Lai and Ann Lai City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:42 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Dulce Pasillas <Dulce.Pasillas@eProdesse.com> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 6:01 PM To:Council, City; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Fine, Adrian; Kou, Lydia; Kniss, Liz (internal); Holman, Karen; Scharff, Gregory (internal); Tanaka, Greg; Wolbach, Cory Subject:Letter to Oppose Rent Control in Palo Alto Attachments:2017_10_16_Oppose Rent Control_Palo Alto.pdf Dear Council Members,    Please see the attached letter for your review.    Contact me directly with questions.    Thank you for your consideration.    Best Regards,    Dulce    Dulce J. Pasillas CA. BRE License # 01775380  Property Manager  Prodesse Property Group  Dulce.Pasillas@eprodesse.com  Tel: (408) 614‐6065  Fax: (650) 578‐9009        Visit our rental portal at http://residential.eprodesse.com      City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:41 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Paul B Goldstein <marmot@stanford.edu> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 5:06 PM To:Council, City Subject:Mini Cell Towers on Utility Poles Honorable members of Palo Alto City Council,    Governor Brown has vetoed SB649 which is a good thing, and means that CPA can now regulate cell phone minitowers  on our utility poles. I live at on Emerson Street quite near an ATT tower on Lincoln Ave near the Emerson Street  intersection. The tower emits a constant low noise. There is enough noise in our neighborhood without this additional  noise.    I urge you to hold hearings on where to locate these towers. I appreciate having better cell coverage, but there are  definitely downsides to this equipment and the City should stipulate conditions on any lease. There are aesthetic and  noise concerns.    Respectfully    Paul Goldstein  Emerson Street  Palo Alto, CA    City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/16/2017 8:41 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Francesca <dfkautz@pacbell.net> Sent:Sunday, October 15, 2017 11:42 PM To:Council, City Subject:No to Verizon's plan to install cell towers in Palo Alto's residential neighborhoods! Dear City Council, Please do what other California cities are doing, such as Berkeley, Piedmont, Irvine and Palo Verdes, and keep the cell phone industry’s ugly, noisy, radiation-emitting equipment away from people’s homes. I have e-mailed Governor Brown to ask him to veto SB649 which strips municipalities of the right to control what goes on property owned by the city (for example, cell towers in front of our homes) and am hoping that the Palo Alto City Council will also decide not to allow Verizon to make our neighborhoods uglier, in an effort to provide better service to people in their cars. I have seen photos of the cell nodes Verizon wants to install and they are ugly. I have heard that the city (we taxpayers), not Verizon, would be liable if a utility pole, with its cell tower on it, were to fall on a house during an earthquake, for example. Verizon should put these cell towers in places that don’t impact people’s homes and/or underground. Verizon should not be saving/making money at our expense. Thank you, Francesca Kautz City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:41 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Ligia Harrington <harrington.ligia@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 5:19 PM To:Council, City Subject:Please keep cell towers out of Palo Alto Dear City Council members, My family and I are very happy that Governor Brown vetoed bill SB649. We have recently purchased an outrageously expensive house in Old Palo Alto and are paying hefty taxes to live here. We have specifically researched and selected a house that doesn't neighbor immediate cell towers, as we are concerned with the radiation emitted by these towers and the health of our family (as well as the resale of our property). Please make sure that you do diligence that is entrusted to you by the residents of Palo Alto to: 1) to hold your own hearings on the issue of cell towers in residential neighborhoods 2) to direct city staff to use every possible tool to keep cell towers out 3) to, if needed, pass tough, new ordinances to accomplish that goal. Thank you in advance. Ligia Harrington 151 Seale Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/13/2017 4:58 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Deborah Goldeen <palamino@pacbell.net> Sent:Friday, October 13, 2017 11:13 AM To:Council, City Subject:Pools, Street Sweeping Stop the outsourcing, please.    Mountain View pools are open, Palo Alto’s are not.  Why?  Mountain View cares and they are actually monitoring  current air quality on an hourly basis.    Street sweepin?  Haha!  Have any of you actually watched them?  They are doing a terrible job.  They don’t even try.    And you want to out source animal services.    There are other ways to fix this problem.    Deb Goldeen, 2130 Birch St., 94306, 321‐7375  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@right-thing.net> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 8:18 PM To:'Jeffrey S. Glenn'; Council, City Cc:Orit.Glenn@ucsf.edu Subject:RE: cell towers in residential neighborhoods Thank you for writing to City Council!    ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Jeffrey S. Glenn [mailto:jsglenn@stanford.edu]   Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 7:53 PM  To: City.Council@cityofpaloalto.org  Cc: Orit.Glenn@ucsf.edu  Subject: cell towers in residential neighborhoods    Dear City Council,  We were pleased to note Governor Brown’s veto of SB649.  I urge you and the City of Palo Alto to now:   1)  hold your own hearings on the issue of cell towers in residential neighborhoods;   2) direct city staff to use every possible tool to keep cell towers out; and   3)  if needed, pass tough, new ordinances to accomplish that goal.    Sincerely,  Jeffrey and Orit Glenn        Jeffrey S. Glenn, M.D., Ph.D.    Associate Professor of Medicine and Microbiology & Immunology    Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology    Director, Center for Hepatitis and Liver Tissue Engineering    Stanford University School of Medicine    CCSR Building, Rm. 3115A    269 Campus Drive    Stanford, CA 94305‐5171    U.S.A.    email:jeffrey.glenn@stanford.edu    tel (office): (650)725‐3373  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 2   tel (lab):     (650)498‐7419    fax:            (650)723‐3032    pager:        (650)723‐8222; ID# 23080                  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:47 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Robert Lum <outrageouslums@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 17, 2017 10:45 AM To:Council, City Subject:Re: keep cell towers out of Palo Alto’s residential neighborhoods Dear City Council, Governor Brown has vetoed SB649. Now it is up to you to: 1) hold your own hearings on the issue of cell towers in residential neighborhoods; 2) direct city staff to use every possible tool to keep cell towers out; 3) if needed, pass tough, new ordinances to accomplish that goal. We do not need additional cellular towers, increasing noise and additional radiation. We need to improve our surroundings by reducing overhead wires and towers, not build more of them! The city can can keep cell towers out of Palo Alto’s residential neighborhoods. Robert Lum, Barron Park resident On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 8:20 AM, Anne <annelum@gmail.com> wrote: Dear City Council, Governor Brown has vetoed SB649. Now it is up to you to: 1) hold your own hearings on the issue of cell towers in residential neighborhoods; 2) direct city staff to use every possible tool to keep cell towers out; and 3) if needed, pass tough, new ordinances to accomplish that goal. The city can can keep cell towers out of Palo Alto’s residential neighborhoods. Anne Lum, Barron Park resident Sent from my iPad City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:43 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Keene, James Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 6:18 PM To:Francesca Cc:Council, City Subject:Re: No to Verizon cell towers in residential neighborhoods Ms. Kautz, On behalf of Council and staff, thank you for your email. The City was very active in opposing SB 649 and we all are very glad the Governor vetoed the bill at the last moment. That said, I want to assure you that the staff will do our job. I don’t know how our statements regarding the limitations placed upon the City’s authority by State and Federal regulations and rulings has been somehow converted into inferences that we will not do our job. We have only stated the facts of our situation. Within the law, we can pursue whatever our Council and community desire. If the City had the authority to overrule the law as set by higher levels of government that would be a different matter. But that is not the case. I’d appreciate your help, if you are so inclined or able, to help accurately and fairly represent the City staff’s statements, including mine, to other concerned neighbors. To date, we have only stated the real limitations that have been placed on cities. Those are fewer than if SB 649 had passed. But it would be misleading and in fact dishonest of staff if we did not acknowledge that limitations do exist. Thanks for your concern about your neighborhood and City and taking the time to write. Respectfully, Jim James Keene City Manager Palo Alto, California Sent from my iPhone On Oct 16, 2017, at 5:47 PM, Francesca <dfkautz@pacbell.net> wrote: Dear City Council, Governor Brown just vetoed SB649, so please do everything you can to keep cell towers out of Palo Alto’s residential neighborhoods: 1. Hold your own hearings on the issue of cell towers in residential neighborhoods. 2. Direct City Staff to use every possible tool to keep cell towers out. 3. If needed, pass tough new ordinances to accomplish this goal. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:43 PM 2 We are counting on the City Staff to do their jobs, including the City Manager. Thank you, Francesca Kautz City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/13/2017 4:56 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Keene, James Sent:Thursday, October 12, 2017 2:05 PM To:Rita Vrhel; Council, City Cc:Keith, Claudia; Nickel, Eric; Watson, Ron; Dueker, Kenneth; Shikada, Ed; De Geus, Robert; Flaherty, Michelle Subject:Re: Wildfires Rita: Most of this would be no surprise to you. But here is information our Office of Emergency Services is providing. As you probably know, the City has Fire Fighters and Police Officers who have deployed to assist. We are looking at potential building inspector assistance. There are a number of ways community members in the Palo Alto area can assist the stricken areas by donating money or volunteering time (either in the impacted area or elsewhere). The Red Cross has an online portal here: https://www.redcross.org/sso/vc0?resume=/idp/oOdrn/resumeSAML20/idp/SSO.ping&spentity=http://pingone. com/d5b109be-ce0e-4a23-b2ea- 171a180ac2a5&arcPartnerId=VC0&forgotPwdResume=https%3A%2F%2Fvolunteerconnection.redcross.org%2F%3Fnd%3Dlogin%26sso_save_state%3D1281471804%26t%3DQtmsDi06NM4qEY29vHeEUNXj8Wcx6rIp Qh2A0H5X&_requestid=606751 Salvation Army: https://disaster.salvationarmyusa.org/ Team Rubicon (recovery-focused organization): https://teamrubiconusa.org/join-the-team/ There are of course numerous other charities and service organizations involved, including some creative approaches: https://www.fastcompany.com/40479325/how-to-help-napa-fire-victims-8-things-you-can-do-for-californias- wine-country-right-now Finally, we want everyone in Palo Alto to review steps to be prepared for all hazards: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/preparedness James Keene City Manager Palo Alto, California _____________________________ From: Rita Vrhel <ritavrhel@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 1:46 PM Subject: Wildfires To: Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>, Keene, James <james.keene@cityofpaloalto.org> Hello.. I have been contacted by a few residents who are wanting to make donations to the fire victims.. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/13/2017 4:56 PM 2 Has Palo Alto set anything in motion????? I hope the City makes and assistance plans public and encourages generosity. I am happy to help.... please advise.. thank you Rita C. Vrhel, RN, BSN, CCM Medical Case Management Phone: 650-325-2298 Fax: 650-326-9451 City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:40 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Felix Lo <flo@ndmgmt.com> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 4:40 PM To:Council, City; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Fine, Adrian; Kou, Lydia; Kniss, Liz (internal); Holman, Karen; Scharff, Gregory (internal); Tanaka, Greg; Wolbach, Cory Subject:Wish to Vote No on Rent Control Mayor Scharff and City Council, As a property owner who is deeply concerned with the rent control proposal that you are considering on October 16th, I am writing to ask you to vote no on it. In my years of experience in multifamily housing, I have witnessed firsthand the negative impact that rent control has upon a community. The City of Palo Alto should be prioritizing meeting the housing demands of its residents as opposed to regulating prices. It's important to look at the facts when considering a policy as impactful as rent control. In the past three years, only 44 apartments were built in the city and since 2014, rents have increased on average of less than 10% per year. The proposal of Councilmembers Holman, DuBois, and Kou memo doesn’t consider the negative impacts of rent control. It doesn’t consider the higher crime rates of cities with rent control, the decline in maintenance from the decrease in operating income, or the added expense and administration the city needs as evidenced by the City of Mountain View that recently determined that it will cost approximately $2-milion per year to operate their rent control program. I suggest the formation of an ad-hoc committee made up of housing providers, developers, and community stakeholders to evaluate how to address increasing the supply of housing which is the only real solution to addressing our local and regional housing challenges. Sincerely, Property Owner Felix Lo  New Dragon Management LLC  Main – (650) 941‐1078  Fax – (650) 917‐0978  Broker Lic. #01811267  flo@ndmgmt.com    City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:40 PM 2 Carnahan, David From:J. Robert Taylor <btaylor@taylorproperties.com> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 4:59 PM To:Council, City Subject:Rent Control Proposal Council,    I am opposed to using any resources to investigate a rent control ordinance in Palo Alto.  Such ordinances fail to address  the core issue of a huge jobs vs. housing imbalance.  The council needs to develop strategies to address faster approvals  of housing developments of all kinds including – affordable housing and market rate housing.   Where feasible height  restrictions should be modified to encourage affordable housing.  Palo Alto has allowed increased density in the past  (101 Alma) and such residential development provide a significant community resource for housing needed.    El Camino  Real is the idea location for such development.    Sincerely,    Bob Taylor  480 Marlowe St.  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:40 PM 3 Carnahan, David From:Emily Hung <emilyhung1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 5:18 PM To:Council, City; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Fine, Adrian; Kou, Lydia; Kniss, Liz (internal); Holman, Karen; Scharff, Gregory (internal); Tanaka, Greg; Wolbach, Cory Subject:opposition to rent control proposal Mayor Scharff and City Council,     As a property owner who is deeply concerned with the rent control proposal that you are considering on October 16th, I  am writing to ask you to vote no on it. I have witnessed firsthand the negative impact that rent control has upon a  community.      It's important to look at the facts when considering a policy as impactful as rent control. In the past three years, only 44  apartments were built in the city and since 2014, rents have increased on average of less than 10% per year.     The proposal of Councilmembers Holman, DuBois, and Kou memo doesn't consider the negative impacts of rent control.  It doesn't consider the higher crime rates of cities with rent control, the decline in maintenance from the decrease in  operating income, or the added expense and administration the city needs as evidenced by the City of Mountain View  that recently determined that it will cost approximately $2‐million per year to operate their rent control program.     I suggest the formation of an ad‐hoc committee made up of community stakeholders to evaluate how to address our  local and regional housing challenges.     Sincerely,     Emily Hung  Palo Alto Home Owner        City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:40 PM 4 Carnahan, David From:Umang Sanchorawala <usanchor@apr.com> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 5:41 PM To:Council, City Subject:No to rent control   Mayor Scharff and City Council, As a property owner who is deeply concerned with the rent control proposal that you are considering on October 16th, I am writing to ask you to vote no on it. In my years of experience in multifamily housing, I have witnessed firsthand the negative impact that rent control has upon a community. The City of Palo Alto should be prioritizing meeting the housing demands of its residents as opposed to regulating prices. It's important to look at the facts when considering a policy as impactful as rent control. In the past three years, only 44 apartments were built in the city and since 2014, rents have increased on average of less than 10% per year. The proposal of Councilmembers Holman, DuBois, and Kou memo doesn’t consider the negative impacts of rent control. It doesn’t consider the higher crime rates of cities with rent control, the decline in maintenance from the decrease in operating income, or the added expense and administration the city needs as evidenced by the City of Mountain View that recently determined that it will cost approximately $2-milion per year to operate their rent control program. I suggest the formation of an ad-hoc committee made up of housing providers, developers, and community stakeholders to evaluate how to address increasing the supply of housing which is the only real solution to addressing our local and regional housing challenges. Sincerely, K. Shah  Property owner in Palo Alto   City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:40 PM 5 Carnahan, David From:Alicia Chu <alicia.y.chu@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 5:45 PM To:Council, City; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Fine, Adrian; Kou, Lydia; Kniss, Liz (internal); Holman, Karen; Scharff, Gregory (internal); Tanaka, Greg; Wolbach, Cory Subject:opposition to rent control proposal Mayor Scharff and City Council,    As a property owner who is deeply concerned with the rent control proposal that you are considering on October 16th, I  am writing to ask you to vote no on it. I have witnessed firsthand the negative impact that rent control has upon a  community.     It's important to look at the facts when considering a policy as impactful as rent control. In the past three years, only 44  apartments were built in the city and since 2014, rents have increased on average of less than 10% per year.    The proposal of Councilmembers Holman, DuBois, and Kou memo doesn't consider the negative impacts of rent control.  It doesn't consider the higher crime rates of cities with rent control, the decline in maintenance from the decrease in  operating income, or the added expense and administration the city needs as evidenced by the City of Mountain View  that recently determined that it will cost approximately $2‐million per year to operate their rent control program.    I suggest the formation of an ad‐hoc committee made up of community stakeholders to evaluate how to address our  local and regional housing challenges.    Sincerely,    Alicia Chu  Palo Alto Home Owner    City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:40 PM 6 Carnahan, David From:Tirumala Ranganath <ranguranganath@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 6:10 PM To:Council, City Subject:Renter protections Respected City Council Members, I am writing to request all of your support for The Colleagues Memo put forward by Councilmembers Holman, Dubois and Kuo to strengthen renter protection for Palo Alto residents. I support the all of the in points that have been proposed in the memo. Without thse protections, it is a matter of time before all of the moderate and low income renters will be pushed out of our town. The result will of course be what I would politely call (Bantustans), the creation of far off communities where low income people who work here will have to live. Clearly this is not an outcome anyone in the city council would like to see. Please, do everything you can to address the issues pointed out in the said memo - for fairness and benefit of our community of residents. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Ranganth City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:40 PM 7 Carnahan, David From:Yen-Kuang Chen <ykchen@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 10:10 PM To:Council, City; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Fine, Adrian; Kou, Lydia; Kniss, Liz (internal); Holman, Karen; Scharff, Gregory (internal); Tanaka, Greg; Wolbach, Cory Subject:Oppose Rent Control Mayor Scharff and City Council, As a homeowner who is deeply concerned with the rent control proposal that you are considering on October 16th, I am writing to ask you to vote no on it. I have witnessed firsthand the negative impact that rent control has upon a community. The City of Palo Alto should be prioritizing meeting the housing demands of its residents as opposed to regulating prices. It's important to look at the facts when considering a policy as impactful as rent control. In the past three years, only 44 apartments were built in the city and since 2014, rents have increased on average of less than 10% per year. The proposal of Councilmembers Holman, DuBois, and Kou memo doesn’t consider the negative impacts of rent control. It doesn’t consider the higher crime rates of cities with rent control, the decline in maintenance from the decrease in operating income, or the added expense and administration the city needs as evidenced by the City of Mountain View that recently determined that it will cost approximately $2-million per year to operate their rent control program. Sincerely, Yen-Kuang Chen Palo Alto homeowner City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:40 PM 8 Carnahan, David From:kevin guibara <kevinguibara@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 17, 2017 1:24 PM To:Fine, Adrian; Kou, Lydia; Council, City; Wolbach, Cory; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Scharff, Gregory (internal); Tanaka, Greg; Holman, Karen; Kniss, Liz (internal); DuBois, Tom Subject:Rent Control Dear City Council, Thank you for your efforts last night. I believe the affordable housing crisis is still the most pressing issue facing Palo Alto over the past 5 years and over the next 10 years. We need to set the foundation to solve the problem 10 years from now. I think we need to have a study session similar to last night but focused on establishing the scope of the problem, how many housing units Palo Alto needs to add and other incentives needed to boost the needed housing units. We also need to answer the hard questions about where we are going to put all of the housing units that we need. Please do not let last nights positive discussion go to waste and please continue to work to lay the foundation to solve this problem. Sincerely, Kevin Guibara On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:48 AM kevin guibara <kevinguibara@gmail.com> wrote: Kevin Guibara 405 Kipling St #4 Palo Alto CA Dear City Council, Rent control makes apartment living worse. It requires landlords to keep undesirable tenants that can degrade the quality of living for an entire apartment complex. Rent control measures do not solve the housing crisis. Building more housing units solves the housing crisis. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:40 PM 9 If the rent increases year over year in Palo Alto, then Palo Alto did not build enough housing units to keep up with demand. Rent control does not solve this problem, building new units does. Instead of studying rent control, the city council should study how they can build 100,000 new housing units over the next 10 years and where Palo Alto can put these units. This is the size and scope required to stop the affordability crisis. Sincerely, Kevin Guibara -- Sincerely, Kevin Guibara Millennium Flats www.millenniumflats.com 1400 Marsten Road Suite G Burlingame, CA 94010 650-678-4859 City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:40 PM 10 Carnahan, David From:Li Song, CFA <li.song.cfa@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:01 PM To:Council, City Subject:Re: NO on any non market based rent proposal or policy Dear council members, Thank you for voting down the rent control proposal last night! As a resident and a voter, I am proud to be represented by the 6 NO votes! Regards Li Arroyo Ct. 94306 Sent from my iPhone On Oct 15, 2017, at 9:09 PM, Li Song, CFA <li.song.cfa@gmail.com> wrote: Dear council members, My name is Li Song and I am a resident of the city. I have the following comments on the colleagues memo on the renter protection program. That program is a form of rent control and I am against it for the following reasons. I urge you to vote “No” on it. 1. In a market economy prices are the results of supply and demand. Conversely, they also play a crucial role in determining how much of each resource get demanded and supplied. Rents, like prices, function the same way. 2. When rents are controlled and kept below their fair level determined by the market, people tend to demand more of rental homes/apartments. 3. For instance, some families which could live comfortably in 2 bedroom apartments, may want 3, or even more bedroom apartments now, under the controlled, low rents level. Some people who used to live in Mountain View, may now decide to move to PA, also due to the below market rents. 4. On the supply side, when the rent level is controlled while other cost of maintaining a property (mortgage, tax, repairs) are still market based and rising, landlords may choose to withdraw their rental units or the apartments from the market, resulting a decline of total rental units in the city with rent control laws. E.g. In 1976, the city of Toronto implemented its rent control laws. By 1979, 23% of the rental units were withdrawn from the market. After rent control was introduced in Berkeley in the early 80s, the number of private rental housing units declined by 31% in five years. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:40 PM 11 5. #3 and #4 combined cause significant imbalance between the demand and the supply of rental units. The social and political implications are that renters often petition to local politicians demanding more housing. By now, it’s not hard to tell a normal functioning market economy has been distorted or even hijacked by rent control laws. 6. Rent control is well-known to cause the deterioration of living conditions of rent controlled units. Two main reasons: a) landlords don’t need to put in much efforts in the upkeeping of their properties as they would have no problem finding the next tenants. There is a long list of people waiting for them. b) controlled rents drove down the landlords’ income, which drains their budget for maintenance and repairs. 7. Another impact of rent control is the aging of the total pool of apartments/rental homes. A survey conducted by the city of San Francisco a few years ago found that 75% of the rent controlled apartment buildings are over 50 years old, and 44% are even 70 years old. Reports of rat and roach infestations are also much higher in rent controlled apartments in general. 8. Black market or under the table transactions often spike under rent control. Due to the long waiting list, landlords or apartment leasing managers now have the discretionary power of who gets an unit and when. Giving bribes to leasing managers to move a prospective tenant up the list happens far more often under rent control. A colleague of mine, J, who lives in an rent controlled apartment in SF, confirmed that this practice is an open secret among renters. 9. At various council meetings where rent control initiatives are debated, a common hand played by the RC supporters is that rent control law help those elderly residents who have lived in the city for decades, and it would be unjust for them to be forced out by high rents. Setting aside the merits or demerits of this argument, have the RC supporters given any consideration to other elderly residents who have been on the waiting list for a long time? Have they given any consideration to other elderly residents who are suffering in rats/roaches infested rent controlled apartments (due to #6)? 10. Another point to make is that rent control programs DO NOT control rents. As a matter of fact, since the RC laws in NYC and SF don’t apply to luxury apartments above a certain price level, developers smartly focused on building projects above those price points. The result is that the average rent levels of both cities are artificially pushed higher by those higher priced units. Not lower. 11. One of the peculiar problems of RC is that it only protects people who are inside looking out, and totally ignored people who are outside looking in. The result is that people with rent control units don’t want to give up their units unless it’s absolutely necessary. A former colleague of mine, P, moved to Beijing over 10 years ago. But for all these years, he keeps his rent controlled apartment in SF, so that he can use it when he is visiting family/friends in the bay area, once a year. He sure knows that once he gives up his unit, he will have to wait for a long, long time to find another rent controlled unit at that price level. Data showed that the % of renters who have been in the same apartment for over 20 years in NYC is twice that of the national average. The lower the turnover of those units, the longer the wait for prospective tenants. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:40 PM 12 12. A high profile example is former US congressman Charles Ranglel from NYC. Voters were outraged when the media broke the story that he kept 4 rent control units in NYC. Why would he do that? The rents are so cheap that he might as well keep them, just in case. Had congressman Rangel even given any consideration to his voters who were on the waiting list? You decide. 13. Rent control removes a very important free-market element: tenant’s self-ration. Because the rents are low, tenants have no or limited incentives to economize their rent arrangements, such as bringing in a roommate to share the rent, etc. The US censes conducted a bit over 10 years ago showed that 49% of the rent controlled apartments in SF were occupied by only one person. That number was 44% in NYC. This is a clear sign of a waste of precious resources that have more efficient uses. 14. Digging even deeper, the aforementioned examples are all ex post, since they have happened so we have knowledge of them. The bigger loss to the society is those transactions would have happened BUT didn’t happen, due to rent control. Under RC, many landlords have perfectly vacant rooms to rent out but choose not to; at the same time, many prospective tenants on the waiting list would be more than happy to pay extra if they could find a room. What a waste on both fronts! Those “good intentions” RC supporters either fail to recognize this point or choose to look the other way. 15. Since the word Rent Control sometimes has a negative connotation, as it should, many cities have chosen to sugarcoat it when the pass RC laws. E.g. It’s dubbed as Rent Stabilization Program, a much better sounding moniker to sell to voters! However, regardless how is called, it’s rent control and its economic impacts to the community are still the same and toxic! Final words: the most effective way to evaluate the merits or demerits of government programs or laws is NOT what their stated goals are; instead, it’s WHAT INCENTIVES THEY CREATE… Regards, Li Song Arroyo Ct, 94306 Sent from my iPhone City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:41 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Edouard Lafargue <edouard@lafargue.name> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 5:25 PM To:Council, City Subject:SB 649 Vetoed Dear members of the City Council, You are probably aware of our governor's veto of SB649 this week-end. This means in particular that Palo Alto will retain its power of decision in the current project Verizon has to deploy small cells in our city. https://www.gov.ca.gov/docs/Sb_649_Veto_Message_2017.pdf As you already know, those towers were acknowledged by Verizon as both not destined to the use of residents, but to through-traffic users, and they also see installing those antennas on utility poles as a way to shift liability to the city in case of earthquake, where the 100+ lbs of gear they are planning to install on utility poles causes them to fail and fall on people/property... I hope you will take these elements into consideration in the discussions you are having with Verizon. Our neighborhood actually still uses power poles and we would rather see the city invest in burying power and utility lines like it has done in other neighborhoods, rather than install additional hardware on top of the poles! Many thanks for reading for far, Best regards, Ed City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:45 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Annette Rahn <bno21@aol.com> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 7:22 PM To:Council, City Subject:SB649 Regarding SB649:    Please hold your own hearings on the issue of cell towers.    Please use every tool to keep cell towers out of Palo Alto.    Please pass appropriate ordinances to keep cell towers out of a Palo Alto.    Thank you.    Annette Rahn  590 Santa Rita  Palo Alto      City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:46 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Mary Thomas <mj_thomas_2000@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 8:12 PM To:Council, City Subject:SB649 Dear Council Members,    Please note that our governor has handed cities the authority to make decisions regarding whether or not to install cell  phone towers in our cities.    I urge you to hold open meetings to discuss this topic.  We citizens wish to have our elected officials step up to the plate  to support our desire of maintaining our beautiful and healthy neighborhoods.    Mary Thomas    Sent from my iPhone    City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/16/2017 3:51 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Linda M. Saunders <linda.saunders@stanford.edu> Sent:Monday, October 16, 2017 3:40 PM To:Linda M. Saunders Cc:editor@paweekly.com; news@padailypost.com; editor@almanacnews.com; Lisa Lapin; news@stanforddaily.com; Katherine Chesley; Donna Lovell; Scott B. Stocker; laurie.friedman@stanford.edu; usafetypcore@stanford.edu; Mark C Lawrence; doc_coordinators@lists.stanford.edu; orouke@stanford.edu; stanfordstaffers@stanford.edu; Jo-Ann Cuevas; Bob Wheeler; cardinalatwork; hrcommunications@stanford.edu; moconnell@pausd.org; Police; Clerk, City; City Mgr; Council, City; Dueker, Kenneth; Perron, Zachary; Minshall, Suzan; policechief@menlopark.org; police@losaltosca.gov; vgeenlew@pausd.org; vlao@pausd.org; Msanchezlopexz@pausd.org; board@ctra.org; stanfordwestapartment@stanford.edu; lucy.wicks@stanford.edu; Lawrence M Gibbs; Robert L. Carpenter; lowell.price@stanford.edu; Norman W Robinson; bbond@stanforfdhealthcare.org; lharwood@stanfordhealthcare.org; kaharris@stanfordhealthcare.org; lancel@slac.stanford.edu; kmchan@slac.stanford.edu; afreeberg@slac.stanford.edu; mjhorton@slac.stanford.edu; ytang@slac.stanford.edu Subject:2017 Stanford AlertSU Test Announcement - Please Distribute Widely Stanford AlertSU Test Announcement ‐ Please Distribute Widely    On Thursday, October 19, between noon‐12:30 pm, Stanford University will conduct its annual test of the campus  AlertSU system. Alert messages will be sent via text message and email to the Stanford community.     The test will also include activation of the outdoor warning system, which will sound an audible tone for approximately  60 seconds followed by a verbal message from each of the 7 sirens at various campus locations. The sirens will be  audible throughout the campus and may also be heard in parts of the surrounding communities including Palo Alto,  Menlo Park and Los Altos.    Also being tested is Cisco VoIP speaker phones.  VoIP speaker phones are found in many of the academic and office  buildings throughout campus. If you have a Cisco phone in your area, the alertsu message will broadcast from the  speaker phone and a banner message will appear in the display.      If this were a real emergency, you would be asked to follow the specific instructions in the alert message. Other  avenues, which might be used to inform the community about critical incidents, include:      Stanford’s emergency website: http://emergency.stanford.edu   Department of Public Safety website: https://police.stanford.edu   KZSU 90.1 FM   Univeristy emergency information hotlines: 650‐725‐5555 and 844‐253‐7878 (844‐AlertSU)    Upon receipt of an AlertSU message, notify others in your immediate vicinity to ensure they are also aware of the  situation and the recommended safety precautions.      For more information about the AlertSU system, please visit the AlertSU FAQ page at:  https://police.stanford.edu/alertsu‐faq.html.      City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/16/2017 3:51 PM 2 Evacuation procedures and how to respond to other emergencies can be found in the Safety, Security, and Fire Report  2017 and the Stanford University Emergency Response Guidelines.    Thank you for your cooperation.    Stanford Department of Public Safety  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/11/2017 4:24 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:LWV of Palo Alto <lwvpaoffice@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 11, 2017 12:59 PM Subject:The November Palo Alto VOTER Attachments:November 2017 VOTER.pdf The Palo Alto VOTER  The November 2017 issue is attached as a PDF. Please save this to your desktop and enjoy! On the front page: Join us for Lunch with the League: Conversation on Housing Wednesday, November 15 , Noon - 1:15 pm Lucie Stern Community Center and PCC Join us for the screening of: The Raising of America: Early Childhood and the Future of Our Nation Tuesday, October 17, 6:30 - 8:30 pm. PAUSD Boardroom Immigration Today: A Conversation with Ali Noorani andEvelyn Rengal-Medina moderated by Raj Mathai Wednesday, October 18, 7:30 pm Congregation Beth Am -- League of Women Voters of Palo Alto 3921 E. Bayshore Road, Suite 209 Palo Alto, CA 94303 (650) 903-0600 LWVPA !4 November, 2017 State: Are you receiving Action Alerts from the state League? If not, please sign up here: https://lwvc.org/take-action . Five bills endorsed by LWVC have been signed by Gov. Brown. Three bills seek to ease the affordable housing shortage; SB 54, the California Values Act, would preserve immigrant families by limiting state and local cooperation with immigration authorities ; and the Disclose Act shines a light on money in politics. Affordable Housing. In an attempt to address the state- wide affordable housing crisis, SB 2 imposes a fee of $75-225 on real estate transactions to create a permanent fund for building homeless and below market housing for low-income Californians. It is anticipated that the new fees will generate some $250 million annually to replace funds previously made available through Redevelopment Agencies. SB 3 will place on the November 2018 ballot a $4 billion housing bond measure. $1 billion of the bond money would be available to fund Cal-Vet loans. SB 35 attempts to make enforceable the regional housing allocations assigned to cities. Prior to SB 35, cities had to plan for affordable housing but were not obligated to actually build any units. If a city, such as Palo Alto, which has built only 38% of its regional housing allocation, denied an affordable housing project which met certain objective standards, the developer could seek a court order allowing the development. Immigration. The California Values Act, endorsed by LWVC, will prevent state or local agencies (including police, sheriff departments, and schools) from assisting federal immigration authorities in deportation efforts. The bill would prevent local officials from using money or staff to investigate, question, hold or arrest people for immigration violations. Exceptions are made for people who have been convicted of certain serious felonies within the last 15 years and those for whom a federal probable cause warrant has been issued. Dark Money. The California Disclose Act attempts to shine a light on dark money by forcing disclosure of the true identities of ballot measure backers. Currently, the identities of organizations spending money on political ads for candidates or ballot measures can be kept secret by forming entities operating under names which hide the economic interests of the funders. The Disclose Act would require political ads to identify their top three funders. Currently, the Supreme Court’s Citizens’ United ruling that spending money on a political cause is entitled to free speech protection has unleashed vast amounts of secret spending on candidates and issues. The Disclose Act is an attempt to bring transparency to this spending so voters will be better informed. Voters would learn who is trying to influence their decisions and why. Local: Affordable Housing. We created a local Action Alert for members to contact Palo Alto City Council voicing their individual support for the LWVPA Board’s position on a 61-unit low-income housing project proposed by Palo Alto Housing for El Camino Real and Wilton Avenue in Palo Alto. Our board approved a letter to City Council requesting that regulatory obstacles to making the project economically viable be removed. An Action Alert request to members included a copy of the Board’s letter with suggested individual language. As the city has not yet acted on the project, members wanting to encourage the city to remove regulatory obstacles to this 61-unit project can still send an email as an individual to the City Council: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org. Update: City staff has this month drafted a proposed affordable housing overlay on the current zone, potentially relaxing the existing zoning limits and permitting this project. Health Insurance. We successfully lobbied the LWVC to endorse a CHILDREN NOW letter supporting reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, a federal program running out of money on September 30. The lobbying effort was undertaken at the request of our Education Committee, which noticed that the LWVC had not signed the CHILDREN NOW letter. LWVC thanked our League for bringing this issue to their attention, saying we were the state League’s “eyes and ears.” Responding to changes in federal programs affecting health is a priority of LWVC. Immigration. We have begun planning for the October 18 Ali Noorani and Evelyn Rangel-Medina LWVPA-Beth Am sponsored talk on immigration at Beth Am at 7:30 pm. Look for immigration background postings on LWV Palo Alto’s website in advance of the event. WaterFix. The State League is opposed to the proposed WaterFix project, which would build twin tunnels under the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in an effort to ensure water supply to areas south of the delta, including Santa Clara County but especially Southern California and the Central Valley. The $16 billion project needs to be approved by local water districts which will ultimately foot the bill for the project. LWV Santa Clara County Council has voted to send a letter to the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) Board asking them to vote against the WaterFix project. County Council has also requested our League to send an Action Alert to our members asking them as individuals to send a message to our SCVWD board representative, Gary Kremens, to oppose WaterFix. The League argues that water conservation and other water saving methods are a better use for $16 billion, and that we need 21st century solutions to ensure an adequate water supply. You can read the LWVC’s position here. Look for an Action Alert this month on this issue. Advocacy Report by Lisa Ratner City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/16/2017 8:42 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Sylvia Gartner <sgartner@ix.netcom.com> Sent:Saturday, October 14, 2017 2:34 PM To:Shikada, Ed; Council, City Subject:This is the Award Winning Play we DIDN'T get to see in Palo Alto     From: SF Mime Troupe [mailto:info@sfmt.org] Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 10:03 AM To: sgartner@ix.netcom.com Subject: SF Mime Troupe play "WALLS" nominated for Outstanding World Premiere Musical! Having trouble viewing this email? Click here Dear Friends, We know we are living in bizarre times when the President of the United States seems to be in a personal war with: North Korea, healthcare, Freedom of the Press, NATO, Iran, Women, Black People, the Democrats, the Republicans, California, Puerto Rico, the Secretary of State, Democracy, and the National Football League. And this in addition to his life-long struggle against justice, ethics, the truth, and not being a double-dealing plutocratic gangster. He must be exhausted. Lies? Greed? Ineptitude? While the President celebrates these qualities the Mime Troupe will continue to disrespectfully disagree, and in these insane times continue to use our stage to inform, activate, entertain, comfort the afflicted, afflict the comfortable, and speak Truth to Power. And while Donald Trump will spend this Halloween dressing up as the world's premiere Egomaniacal Twitteriffic Demagogue (you know, his regular clothes) we at the Troupe will be readying our costumes for our next takedown of everything he represents! City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/16/2017 8:42 AM 2 In Solidarity, The San Francisco Mime Troupe WALLS nominated for "Outstanding World Premiere Musical" by Theatre Bay Area Awards! Congratulations: Michael Gene Sullivan, Michael Bello, Piero Infante Type/Caste nominated for "Outstanding Solo Production" at Brava Theater Center, written and performed by Rotimi Agbabiaka Michael Gene Sullivan nominated for "Outstanding Featured Actor in a Play" for Black Odyssey at California Shakespeare Theatre Rotimi Agbabiaka nominated for "Outstanding Featured Actor in a Play" for Bootycandy at Brava Theater Center Review a list of all the nominations! SUBHUMAN - True Tales from Beneath the Sea Ed Holmes will perform his one-man show SUBHUMAN - True Tales from Beneath the Sea at our home base! The show is about his days as a mechanic City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/16/2017 8:42 AM 3 aboard a diesel submarine in the 60's and has been performed in VFW halls, bars, and small theaters from here to Maine. Come see Ed in his story-telling element! What: SUBHUMAN Where: SF Mime Troupe Studio, 855 Treat Ave, SF When: Saturday, October 21 @ 8.00pm / Doors open at 7.30pm Ticket info: FREE but must RSVP to info@sfmt.org Save the Date Join us at the Mime Troupe Studio on Saturday, December 2, from 5-10p as collective member, Lisa Hori-Garcia curates an evening of politics, art and performances as part of Mission Arts Performance Project: MAPP. For more information check the MAPP website in November. Come stand up for immigrants, refugees, and marginalized folks ensnared by the criminal injustice system who are inside the Bay Area's regional ICE detention center at Contra Costa's county jail. Show your support for the families visiting loved ones inside. Now is the time to fight the right wing's racist, xenophobic, anti- Muslim, ableist, transphobic, homophobic, misogynist ramp up of authoritarian policing, detention, and deportation practices-if not now, when? Let Our People Go is a youth-and-elder-friendly action that opposes the immoral detentions, deportations, and mass incarceration in our Bay Area communities with a one-hour program integrating activist updates, music, art, poetry, storytelling, and representation from different faith communities (including faithful and faithless humanists). Accessible site, easy parking, bathrooms available in the visitors waiting room. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/16/2017 8:42 AM 4 Please join them at upcoming Sunday protests: November 12th and December 10th. Bring your voices, stories, percussion, signs, songs, art, kids, and friends! We are always seeking performers and speakers. Contact organizers. Troupe Merchandise Holiday Sale! We are having a $5 OFF SALE on selected items: Woman's Polo Shirts = NOW $30 Men's Polo Shirts = NOW $30 Unisex Grey Long Sleeves = JUST $25 Unisex Navy Blue Long Sleeves = JUST $25 Kid's White Bucket Hat (one left!) = NOW $17 Infant White & Navy Bucket Hats = ONLY $13 Visit our website and Order online today OR let us know if you want to stop by to pick up your merchandise in-person and save on shipping! For an in-person shopping visit, email Karen to set up a time. The Mime Troupe needs YOU to bring our community together! We were on the barricades in the 1960s, part of a coalition of regular folks who came together to oppose racism, sexism, war, and corporate greed. Today we are witnessing the erosion of many of the victories won by that movement but the never-silent San Francisco Mime Troupe has always believed in the power of the people united. As we enter a critical election year, we must do our part to foster a movement of working people of all genders, races, incomes, and sexual orientations. And so we are opening our doors and inviting our community in to help us best utilize art's power to envision and demand a better future. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/16/2017 8:42 AM 5 We'll need some help to accomplish this goal and so we are looking to create a long term relationship with someone who has experience in community organizing and who would like to help us create opportunities for more community dialogue. This would be a volunteer position and our ideal candidate is someone who is familiar with the Mime Troupe and who is connected to the local activist community. A self-starter with great people skills who can help us with:  programming events at the Troupe and off-site  networking with other organizations  inter-community dialogue  attending story meetings to develop our summer show  generating discussion topics for community events  researching our summer show topics and connecting us to community experts on the issues We are looking for someone who can start this fall and assist us through next summer. If interested please send an email to engage@sfmt.org. We look forward to connecting with you. Curious about what other Mime Troupe artists are working on? Rotimi Agbabiaka, Ed Holmes, Velina Brown, Lisa Hori-Garcia, Keiko Shimosato Carreiro, Kevin Rolston, Eugenie Chan, Joyful Raven, Joel Fadness, and MORE! Click here to find out! DONATE today to keep the Troupe trouping on! SF Mime Troupe is a 501c3 nonprofit organization, tax ID 94-1602975. All contributions are tax deductible to the extent allowable by law. Pledge to donate yearly or monthly: Make a single donation: City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/16/2017 8:42 AM 6 We also accept checks made out to SFMT. Mail to: 855 Treat Ave, SF, CA 94110 San Francisco Mime Troupe, 855 Treat Ave, San Francisco, CA 94110 SafeUnsubscribe™ sgartner@ix.netcom.com Forward this email | Update Profile | About our service provider Sent by info@sfmt.org in collaboration with Try it free today City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/13/2017 4:57 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, October 12, 2017 5:41 AM To:Keene, James; Scharff, Greg Cc:Council, City; Stump, Molly; Keith, Claudia; Carnahan, David Subject:Tweet by Palo Alto Free Press on Twitter Please release your travel (T/E) reports....and make them available on-line for public review.... Palo Alto Free Press (@PAFreePress) 10/11/17, 4:25 PM @bylineMiranda @PaloAltoCityMgr @vallastaden2017 @cityofpaloalto @GregScharff @PaloAltoNtwks Release your T/E report @PaloAltoCityMgr First class, business, economy + Hotel accommodations Your current salary + bennies 500K #PaloAlto pic.twitter.com/MlFlpzX3vq Mark Petersen-Perez Editor: Palo Alto Free Press Ticuantepe, Nicaragua Central America Download the Twitter app Sent from my iPad City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/17/2017 3:47 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Chunming Niu <chunming_niu@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:40 AM To:Council, City Subject:Wireless tower Dear council members: In light of Governor Browns veto of 649, we are writing to ask the city council to review and stop current plan to build small cell antenna on utility poles in our city. We are living at the corner of Loma Verde and Kipling. We already have an antenna across street on the Kipling side of the street. Now proposal to build another one on the side of Loma Verde is post on a pole just a few yards away form one of my bed room by another company. By federal law, tower companys suppose to share antenna resourses. Why two towers around one house? How could city approve this? What is our city's regulation to say about this? I hope someone can answer us. Chunming Niu and Milan Yin Residents of 450 Loma Verde Ave., Palo Alto City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/11/2017 4:23 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Arlene Goetze <photowrite67@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 11, 2017 1:05 PM To:dave.cortese@bos.sccgov.org; Sara Cody Subject:WSJ: How Smart Phones Hijack our Minds An educational email from Arlene Goetze;, No Toxins for Children, photowrite67@yahoo.com, 10/10/17 How Smart Phones Hijack Our Minds by Nicholas Carr, Wall Street Journal, Sat. October 7, 2017 Our devices have an unprecedented grip on our attention, and research suggests that as we grow more depend on them, our intellects weaken. Highlights of the Article above: * Apple says you use your phone 80 times a day, 30,000 times a year. * Smart phone is repository of self, recording and dispensing words, scounds, images that define what we think. * Cell phones breed anxiety, control our attention, thinking and behavior. * Using a smartphone causes distractions that reduces concentration which impedes reasoning and performance. * When cell phones buzz, one's focus gets sloppy, whether or not they answer. Their blood pressure spikes, pulse quickens and problem-solving skills decline. (2015, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication) * The more a person depends on the phone, the greater they suffer a cognitive penalty. (UCSI studies) * People make more errors when the phone is in sight, than out of sight. * U.of Arkansas found students who did NOT bring phones to class, scored a full point higher than those who did. * People's knowledge and understanding may dwindle as gadgets grant easier access to online data stores. * The Information Age makes people think they know more than ever before even though they may know even less. * Data is memory without history. Reasoning is constricted which sacrifices one's ability to turn info into knowledge. Smarter Phones, Weaker Minds. Read the lengthy article on the web for info on the studies and scientists giving the above research: "How Smart Phones Hijack our Minds" Nicholas Carr is author of The Shallows and Utopia Is Creepy among other books. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/11/2017 4:23 PM 2 Please share with others on your email lists, Facebook, etc. 18 countries are limiting/banning WiFi in schools/libraries for children. U.S. is #19. 1. Is Wi-Fi Safe for Children?Beware of Health Risks: Removal of ... www.safeinschool.org/2011/01/wi-fi-is-removed-from... Removal of Wi-Fi from Schools and Libraries in Canada and Other Countries ... (Wi-Fi) Children’s Exposure to Microwave Radiation - A letter to the Sooke School Board; October 1, 2017 To Members of the Palo Alto City Council: CITY OF PALO ALTO. CA CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 17 OCT I 8 PH 12: 4 I Letter and Packet delivered to City Clerk, 250 Hamilton Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Difficulties obtaining parking permits for the businesses in the Evergreen Mayfield area as part of the Pilot Program of the Preferred Residential Parking Program Please Distribute to City Council Members Dear: Tom Dubois, Erick Filset, Adrian Fine, Karen Holman, Liz Kniss, Lydia Kou, Greg Scharff, Gregg Tanaka, and Cory Wolbach As employees of retail and personal services businesses at 1795 El Camino Real, we protest and take strong issue with the difficulties all of us have faced in trying to obtain parking permits for low income staff. Out of the 10 employees at this one location, only one of us was able to obtain a parking permit. As an example of the time and effort expended by our staff in trying to obtain the required permit for the current quarter, we attach exhibit A which documents the email communications and time it has taken to comply with the city's pilot program. As you can see this has detracted from our normal work, resulting in loss productivity from our employers and our primary job responsibilities. This program has become burdensome and created further financial hardships on all of us as we work for business which serve the people and community of Palo Alto. We do not understand why we are being penalized from equal access to the public streets in and around our place of work. We have been good neighbors to the residents in the neighborhood and park only in legally available spots, we do not leave trash, make noise or detract from the environment for the past 9 years. Now, we are being faced with additional parking fees and citations. We have been restricted to even get a parking pass with a response from the City as "SORRY, WE ARE SOLD OUT OF PERMITS", forcing us to park further away from our place of work. In addition we find it hard to park along El Camino Real because of all of the campers and RVs that park overnight and have become an eye sore along the once beautiful El Camino corridor. We feel compelled to share with you the extra burdens this system has placed on us. We know that our employers are also working to protest this program which we feel unfairly discriminates against us for equal access to public streets. Your program should not be subsidized by low income workers to favor the homeowners who represent the upper 1% of wealth in the United States. Many of us commute from San Jose and the East Bay and at least two of us are able to take public transportation to our work but as you know there are times when we need to drive. There is already enough stress with long commutes and our regular work schedules to be bothered by an additional burden of citations for parking and the inability to even obtain a parking permit for our area. We sincerely hope the Council rescinds the pilot parking program or at least provide the necessary permits for us as we need our jobs. Signatures of 10 Employees at 1795 EL Camino Real, Louise, Monika, James, Orlando, Caren, Wendy, Lisa, Kimberly, Robert, Peter ~--L ~ ~wno, 4r !J-,Jj,,,,,ldh---fCL ~ 'r ~ ~- ')/28/2017 M Gmail Need Assistance on Parking Portal 1 message Louise Just <louisejust@gmail.com> To: jayoung@spplus.com Bee: monikastoneskin@gmail.com Hello Jared, Gmail -Need Assistance on Parking Portal ~1~YYOF PALO ALTO ~onika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> CLERK'S OFFICE 'H 12: l, I Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:22 PM This is Louise Just, and we spoke on the phone Wednesday regarding signing up for a parking permit in Zone A. After I attached my pay stub, and a letter from my employer, it took me to another page which read that no permits are available for my permit type at this time. Can you please tell me what this means? Is this basically stating that I have to await your email confirming my documentation? Please let me know what I have everything required. I am attaching a screen shot of the message I that it gave me. Thank you, Louise Just 408-781-8745 0 ~ .......... tN~*""""'.....,,"' ..... boNo~ ........... .... i;a.,,_....,, ............... "."'-~'"·- ....,. ............................. .,., ... , .._.R~ ,, ... ,,.....,..,,..,.,..,.. ·~ 90oitll~-----llMMD!lruaat~ U6W~Htlla1W,_. .. - Screen Shot 2017-03-3.0at10.14.56 PM.png 46K "~-~-· -"-~· --- • 91281201"7 M Gmail Road Block Again on Portal 6 messages Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> To: jayoung@spplus.com Cc: Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> Bee: Monika <monikamford@comcast.net> Hi Jared, Gmail -Road Block Again on Portal Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 5:29 PM I have hit a road block with Monika Stone's login to the parking portal. It said no address found, just as it did when I created mine that you so kindly helped me with. Can you please take a look at Monika Stone's account, referencing email monikastoneskin@gmail.com, and let me know first thing on Monday morning? Thanks so much, Louise, for Monika Monika Stone Skin 1795 El Camino Real, #200 Palo Alto, Ca 94306 (650) 462-0602 monikastoneskin@gmail.com monikastoneskin.com Jarrod Young <jayoung@spplus.com> To: Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 1 :41 PM I was able to change the information for her so that she is able to go in and make purchases. However i set her up for a regular employee account. I wasnt sure if she was eligible for a discounted permit. If you wanted that permit i would need the proof of that with a recent paystub. Jarrod Young Assistant Manager -$+ 001 J•;11 "'lf.. Sr ,m<J-. ~Standard' .~centtar m&iliii" ~-Paitdng l/t;: Parting ,..._ • 91281201'7 p. 650-440-807 4 email:jayoung@spplus.com I www.spplus.com 250 Hamilton Ave. First Floor, Palo Alto, CA. 94301 [Quoted text hidden] Gmail -Road Block Again on Portal Legal Notice: This message is intended for the addressee(s) only and, unless expressly stated otherwise, is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not an addressee, (i) please inform the sender immediately and permanently delete and destroy the original and any copies or printouts of this message, and (ii) be advised that any disclosure, copying or use of the information in this message is unauthorized and may be unlawful. Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> To: Jarrod Young <jayoung@spplus.com> Hi Jarrod, I just want to be clear that she is a business owner. Just curious as to why you thought she would be best set-up as an employee? Thanks, Louise (Quoted text hidden] Jarrod Young <jayoung@spplus.com> To: Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> Im sorry. I didnt say correctly. So there are three different classifications that we can put you in as a employee. Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 2:14 PM Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:47 PM There is a discounted permit for those who make under $50,000 a year. The second are those who make over $50,000 a year and also employer accounts. I can put her in an employer account if you would like, there she can purchase up to 10 permits for her employees for a year or 6 months? Would you like me to change it Jarrod Young Assistant Manager ~· Out PArungB<.ln<l\ ~~rcr »))~ Im p:650-440-8074 email:jayoung@spplus.com I www.spplus.com 250 Hamilton Ave. First Floor, Palo Alto, CA. 94301 [Quoted text hidden) (Quoted text hidden] Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 10:57 AM • 9/28/20r7 Gmail -Road Block Again on Portal To: Jarrod Young <jayoung@spplus.com> Hi Jerrod, I'm a bit confused. Is there any way you can call me? I'm am actually Louise Just, which you and I have been speaking. I'm also the assistant for Monika, of Monika Stone Skin, the owner of the business here at 1795 El Camino Real, Suite 200. Part of my confusion is that this is the first time I have heard of the employer account, with the ability to purchase up to 10 permits. So we are also wondering still if each of us still have to sign up employees. If possible, please call me here at the business line 462-0602, or my cell phone if you do not reach me as I have some errands to do 408-781-8745. Thank you, Louise [Quoted text hidden] Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 9:58 AM To: paloaltopermits@spplus.com, Jarrod Young <jayoung@spplus.com> Hello Palo Alto Permits, or Jarrod, Please respond to my inquiry below. We need to know ASAP. Thank you, Louise [Quoted text hidden) 9/28/2017 Gmail -RPP Account/Verification Request M Gmail Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> RPP Account/Verification Request 1 message Hur, Mark <Mark.Hur@cityofpaloalto.org> To: "Young, Jarrod" <jayoung@spplus.com>, Matthew Mcsorley <mmcsorley@spplus.com>, Ricardo Robles <rrobles@spplus.com> Cc: "monikastoneskin@gmail.com" <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> SP+, Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:00 PM Can you please follow up with Ms. Stone and her account(s) regarding employee RPP permits? She had reached out earlier today with no success. You can also reach her at 650-462-0602. Thank you, • CllY OF PALO ALTO Mark Hur I Parking Operations Lead Planning & Community Environment -Transportation 250 Hamilton Avenue I Palo Alto, CA 94301 Ph: (650) 329-2453 I E: Mark.Hur@CityofPaloAlto.org Use Palo Alto 311 to report items you'd like the City to fix. Download the app or click here to make a service request. Please think of the environment before printing this email -Thank you! .. .(" 9/28/2Ql7 Gmail -IMPORTANT: Parking Info for Staff at PPS and MSS M Gmail Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> IMPORTANT: Parking Info for Staff at PPS and MSS 12 messages Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:01 PM To: Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com>, Monika <monikamford@comcast.net>, Theresa Joseph <theresajoseph26@gmail.com>, Louise Just <louisejust@gmail.com>, jam es newman <newman_md@hotmail.com>, Melba Herrera <melbicris88@gmail.com>, kimberly@premierplasticsurgery.com, "windy@premireplasticsurgery.com" <windy@premireplasticsurgery.com>, "caren@premierplasticsurgery.com" <caren@premierplasticsurgery.com>, lisaliberty@gmail.com, kwrightelb@comcast.net, drornafisher@gmail.com, jdudas@hotmail.com, peterttsun@yahoo.com Hello Staff, I've spoken to the contact person Jared, who happens to be a third party handling the parking permits for the City of Palo Alto. It's very important that you create an account first, ASAP to get into the system and get verified. Do Not Forget your User Name and Password. The verification process can take up to 4 days. Part of this verification will be a pay stub including the address here. If we do not have a pay stub with the address, they will accept a letter from the business. This will have to be attached via PDF on the form we fill out. We are located in Zone A. After the verification process, we will each be sent an email. Keep this email handy, then on April 9th, you go into the link, and log into your account to purchase the parking permit. Link to the Registration Form: https://cityofpaloalto.t2hosted.com/Account/Portal Instructional "How To Purchase" Powerpoint: http://paloalto. parkinggu ide. com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/2017 -03-13 _Presentation_Evergreen RPPEmployeePermitPurchaseGu ideFI NAL. pdf If you have any questions, it's best to email Jared Young at jayoung@spplus.com, or phone him 650-440-8074. He said we can even email him to let him know that we have completed our registration form. Thank you, Louise Monika Stone Skin 1795 El Camino Real, #200 Palo Alto, Ca 94306 (650) 462-0602 monikastoneskin@gmail.com monikastoneskin.com ·lt'C- 9/28/20.17 Gmail -IMPORTANT: Parking Info for Staff at PPS and MSS Mail Delivery Subsystem <mailer-daemon@googlemail.com> Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:01 PM To: monikastoneskin@gmail.com ? • Address not found Your message wasn't delivered to windy@premireplasticsurgery.com because the domain premireplasticsurgery.com couldn't be found. Check for typos or unnecessary spaces and try again. The response from the remote server was: DNS Error: 32865028 DNS type 'mx' lookup of premireplasticsurgery.com responded with code NXDOMAIN Domain name not found: premireplasticsurgery.com Final-Recipient: rfc822; windy@premireplasticsurgery.com Action: failed Status: 4.0.0 · -· _ Diagnostic-Code: smtp; DNS Error: 32865028 DNS type 'mx' lookup of premireplasticsurgery.com responded with code NXDOMAIN Domain name not found: premireplasticsurgery.com Last-Attempt-Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 14:01:17 -0700 (PDT) ----Forwarded message -------- From: Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> To: Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com>, Monika <monikamford@comcast.net>, Theresa Joseph <theresajoseph26@gmail.com>, Louise Just <louisejust@gmail.com>, james newman <newman_md@hotmail.com>, Melba Herrera <melbicris88@gmail.com>, kimberly@premierplasticsurgery.com, "windy@premireplasticsurgery.com" <windy@premireplasticsurgery.com>, "caren@premierplasticsurgery.com" <caren@premierplasticsurgery.com>, lisaliberty@gmail.com, kwrightelb@comcast.net, drornafisher@gmail.com, jdudas@hotmail.com, peterttsun@yahoo.com Cc: Bee: 9/28/2017 Date: Wed, 29 Mar201714:01:15-0700 Subject: IMPORTANT: Parking Info for Staff at PPS and MSS Hello Staff, Gmail - IMPORTANT: Parking Info for Staff at PPS and MSS I've spoken to the contact person Jared, who happens to be a third party handling the parking permits for the City of Palo Alto. It's very important that you create an account first, ASAP to get into the system and get verified. Do Not Forget your User Name and Password. The verification process can take up to 4 days. Part of this verification will be a pay stub including the address here. If we do not have a pay stub with the address, they will accept a letter from the business. This will have to be attached via PDF on the form we fill out. We are located in Zone A. After the verification process, we will each be sent an email. Keep this email handy, then on April 9th, you go into the link, and log into your account to purchase the parking permit. Link to the Registration Form: https://cityofpaloalto.t2hosted.com/Account/Portal Instructional "How To Purchase" Powerpoint: http://paloalto.parkingguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2017 /03/2017 -03-13 _Presentation_Evergreen RPPEmployeePermitPurchaseGu ideFI NAL.pdf If you have any questions, it's best to email Jared Young atjayoung@spplus.com, or phone him 650-440-8074. He said we.can even email him to let him know that we have completed our registration form. Thank you, Louise Monika Stone Skin 1795 El Camino Real, #200 Palo Alto, Ca 94306 •• .A· (650) 462-0602 monikastoneskin@gmail.com <font c ---Message truncated --- Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> To: lisaliberty1@gmail.com, windy@premierplasticsurgery.com (Quoted text hidden] Monika Stone Skin <monikastoneskin@gmail.com> To: lando_landito@yahoo.com [Quoted text hidden) Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:04 PM Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 4:24 PM Mayor Scharff and City Council, CITY OF PALO ALTO. CA CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 17 OCT 18 AH !: It l Thursday, October 12, 2017 As a property owner who is deeply concerned with the rent control proposal that you are considering on October 16th, I am writing to ask you to vote no on it. In my years of experience in multifamily housing, I have witnessed firsthand the negative impact that rent control has upon a community. The City of Palo Alto should be prioritizing meeting the housing demands of its residents as opposed to regulating prices. It's important to look at the facts when considering a policy as impactful as rent control. In the past three years, only 44 apartments were built in the city and since 2014, rents have increased on average of less than 10% per year. The proposal of Councilmembers Holman, DuBois, and Kou memo doesn't consider the negative impacts of rent control. It doesn't consider the higher crime rates of cities with rent control, the decline in maintenance from the decrease in operating income, or the added expense and administration the city needs as evidenced by the City of Mountain View that recently determined that it will cost approximately $2-milion per year to operate their rent control program. I suggest the formation of an ad-hoc committee made up of housing providers, developers, and community stakeholders to evaluate how to address increasing the supply of housing which is the only real solution to addressing our local and regional housing challenges. Janna Lund Rodgers Property Owner 861 University Ave 875 University Ave Amendments Amended By Incident Incident# Status Incident Type Station Address City, State ZipCode Location Mutual Aid Alarm Date/Time Anival Date/Time Cleared Date/Time Shift Alanns District Action Taken I Action Taken2· Property Use Resources Unit:B Unit Type Dispatch Date/Time Enroute Date/Time AtTival Date/Time Cleared Date1Time Unit Report By Action Taken! Priority Arrival From Quarters Narrative 2017 Fire Incident Report [ ] Placed Before Meeting [ ~ed at Meetin~ 2017 Closed Battalion Chief 2017 321 -EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury RD CA I -Str~~t address N -None 09/30/2017 12:50:23 09/30/201712:53:52 09/30/2017 13:43:01 Provide advanced life support (ALS) Transport person 342 - Chief officer car 09/30/2017 12:54:36 09/30/2017 12:54:49 0913012017 12:55 :24 09/30/201713:10:07 Battalion Chief 931 -Cancelled after Arrival Code 3 Yes office B was dispatched to this incident at 12:54 hours. I arrived on scene at 2017- Page I of 3 Incident Report: 2017-0007478-000 Unit: B 12:55 hours. The response of this unit was cancelled upon tmival. I remained on scene until E and RM departed the scene, and then returned to quarters. Personnel (1) -Unit: B. Personnel Battalion Chief Unit: E Unit Type 11 -Engine Dispatch Dateffime 09/30/2017 12:50:23 Enroute Dateffime 09/30/2017 12:51 :23 AtTival Daterfime 09/30/2017 12:53:53 Cleared Date/Time 09/30/2017 13:27:34 Unit Report By Firefighter/Paramedic Action Taken I 33 -Provide advanced life support (ALS) Priority An-ival Code 3 From Qua1ters Yes Nam1tive At l 2:50 hours on Saturday, September 30, 2017 r C Shift), we responded to an EMS call. E the first unit to an-ive, was on scene at 12:53 hours (Code 3). The last unit cleared the scene at 13:43 hours. The incident occurred at The p1imary station for this aaaress 1s J8 E responded for a medical call. Upon arrival we assessed and treated a patient who was having a done. Rivi arrived on scene and assisted with patient care until patient care was transferred to them for further treatment and transport to the hospital. Personnel (3) -Unit: E - Personnel Captain Personnel Engineer Personnel Firefighter Unit: R.'\J Unit Type 70 -Medical & rescue unit, other Dispatch Date/Time 0913012017 12:50:23 Enroute Date/Time 09/30/2017 12:50:24 Arrival Date/Time 09/30/2017 12:54:58 Cleared Date/Time 09/30/2017 13:43:01 2017· 12017 Page 2 of J Incident Report: 2017-0007478-000 Unit: RtV) Unit Rep01t By Action Taken! Action Taken2 Priority Enroute Priority Anival Enroute Facility Date/Time Ptiority Enroute Facility Arrived Date/Time Pri01ity Arrival Facility From QuaLters Narrative Personnel (3) -Unit: Rt'\'i Personnel Personnel Personnel 12017 201 Captain 33 -Provide advanced life support (ALS) 34 -Transport person Code 3 Code 3 09/30/2017 13:08:47 Code 3 09/30/2017 13:13:55 CodeJ No At 12:50 hours on Saturday, September 30, 2017 CC-Shift), we responded to an EMS call. E , the first unit to aii-ive, was on scene at l 2:53 hours (Code 3 ). The last unit c I eared the scene at l3 :43 hours. The incident occurred at . 1l1e primary station for tliis tuvl arrived on scene of a office to find E and , _already insiae. R.ivl. , crew treated the patient, with assistarirP from E crew, then subsequently transported the patient code 3 to . For further information regarding this incident, please reter to Ri\tl PCR. 201 - 298 - 356 - 2017· Captain Engineer Firefighter Page 3 of3 Bob lfoover East Palo Alto Junior Golf Prog COUNCJL MEETING 1rJf!.u I 1 '1 [ ] Placed Before Meeting ~ceived at Meeting 2/1/17 The Bob Hoover East Palo Alto Junior Golf Program believes strongly that minority youth can develop responsible life-values through learning the game of golf. We have a 25-year course record of helping young people learn the fun of golf, and find the rewards of good academic performance and of a peer-group who enjoy meeting high expectations with their friends. Every day we emphasize to the boys and girls in our program that success in life depends on positive behaviors and educational success. The alternative of just getting by in school, or being tempted by alcohol and drugs, is not the path to happiness and a meaningful life. Golf Program Principles: Becoming productive adults: Today's young people have the smarts to succeed, but many lack the life-skills and role-models which provide a positive growing environment so that they can take control of their lives. Positive structure: EPA Junior Golf provides a positive structure for teens and pre-teens to grow and learn, a positive and confident peer group, and helpful adult and teen role-models. Golf teaches values: We emphasize the importance of educational success to life success. We use the game of golf to motivate and to train youth to become better human beings, successful students, and family members. Personal characteristics: We help boys and girls to develop their own sense of values and personal character - the characteristics that we all want our children to possess: honesty, courtesy, discipline, respect, patience, a desire to learn and perform. Leaming and playing golf allows youth to learn these values without adult lecturing and preaching. Communit Partners & Su orters: Providing course access, equipment, instruction, shoes/balls/etc., golf course play-cards, golf-camp scholarships, financial support, practice-range access and discounts, and tournament planning -all through our generous partners: Pa{o 11.fro 'Munic!J'a{ <jofJ Course and its <jofJ C{u6 'Brad Lazares, tlie course Pro, and fiis aofJ-slioy staff Stanford 'Univ. <jofJ Proaram, Conrad 'Ray &'Caroline O'Connor Tlie City ef Pa{o 11.fro Los 11.fros Country C{u6 and its <jofJ Proaram, 'Brian 'Jn.lister '.East Pafo 11.lto Po[ice 1:>eyartment '.East Pa{o 11.fro Police ?lctivities Leaaue, Tracy 'Mercer %mua[ Tournament 11.dvisors &' Committee, 1:>ave 'Beronio Golf Program Structure (ages 6-18): Golf skills: Beginners non-playing: Basic lessons and introduction to the game Beginners playing: Swing coaching, teaming the rules, early course play, etiquette Intermediate: Full course play, practice sessions, coaching, a few tournaments during summer Advanced: More coaching, up to ten tournaments per year, act as rote-models within the program Life skills: Personal development through positive peer-group activities and values: Group bonding: Recreation: bowling, movies, cookouts, skating, etc. Educational: visit museums, aquariums, parks, college tours. Social: movies, ball-games, dinners, friendships. Leadership: One-on-one counseling: personal growth chats over lunch or after games -about goal-setting, academic progress, behavior, family values, relationships. Small group sessions: values, financial literacy, educational goals, dress, golf rules, "180 Degrees". Community service projects, task assignments, act as spokespersons and coaches. Educational: Academic advising on classes and schedules. Monitor progress; report-card parties provide gentle peer pressure. College-preparedness coaching re. applications, financial aid, to-do lists. Help with school challenges, relationships, behavior. Note: Life-skills development is what sets our program apart from USGA's First Tee. October 16, 2017 Dear Palo Alto City Council Members, Peninsula Peace and Justice Center 305 N. California Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 www.PeaceandJustice.org (650) 326-8837 COU.//IL 'EETING Io ltf I 7 [ J,,.Placed B 1 efore Meeting [ll"f Received at Meeting We are writing in support of the Colleagues Memo from Council Members DuBois, Holman and Kou regarding strengthening renter protections. We believe that rent stabilization would provide renters with more predictable and fair rent increases and that just cause eviction is long overdue. Renters shouldn't have to live month-to-month or even year-to-year in fear of sudden changes to their housing status. We would urge you to adopt an even stronger ordinance than that recommended by the Colleagues Memo. Renter protections should be extended to ALL renters in the city, not just to those who live in buildings of "5 or more housing units." There is no justification for offering protections only to a limited segment of the local population. In addition to acting on the Colleagues Memo, we strongly urge you to instruct Palo Alto's lobbyist in Sacramento to work toward the repeal of the Costa-Hawkins Act so that units built after 1995 (now exempt under this state law) will also be covered by these commonsense measures. We believe tenant protections are more than just the right thing to do on behalf of renters. This is good policy for cities that want to maintain their sense of community at a time when the cost of housing has become untenable for owners and renters. Sincerely, NAME marcia b. laris Monique Kane Kristina Smith Enid Pearson Barbara Ann Dawson PALO ALTO ADDRESS 3065 middlefield road 3101 663 Wildwood Lane 1144 Cedar Street 1019 Forest ct 773E Meadow Drive Michael and lzvara Predmore 81 Peter Coutts Circle Laura Chiu gail thompson Martha Beinin 775 Talisman Court 1517 edgewood dr. 89 Peter Coutts Circle PERSONAL COMMENT I believe this would be a step in the right direction. Thank you my son is working so hard to raise his child in the city he was born and raised in. It shouldn't be this hard Carol Brouillet Adele Jessup Richard N Clark Daniela Starling Anne Husty Kip Husty Heidi L. Stauffer Angela Evans Michael J. Alexander Shelly Gordon Linda Faste Karen Schreiber 4060 Verdosa Drive 733 Northampton Drive 1074 Moreno Ave 773 East Meadow drive 922 Bautista Ct. 922 Bautista Ct. 1020 Colorado Avenue 357 Everett Ave 3391 Saint Michael Dr. 4250 El Camino Real, A104 90 Peter Coutts Circle Stanford 183 Creekside Drive We have been renting our home for 27 years; my youngest son was born in this house. We have seen housing prices increase about ten times in value while we have been living here. My husband has worked at Google for over a decade, but if we lose our current home, we would probably not be able to afford a similar home in Palo Alto, but would be obliged to move elsewhere. There should be some protection for people who have rented and lived here for decades; at the moment, there is none. I am grateful that our sons were able to graduate from high school while we were living here; our greatest fear was trying to relocate anywhere before the kids finished their schooling and I'm sure that many youger parents share those fears. We need renter protections and more housing now! Palo Alto, while recognized as a progressive, inclusive, protective city, is caught in a sphere of economic exclusion for many people of diverse financial backgrounds. This ordinance will help even the playing field. Jennifer Gaskin Melanie Liu Barbara Boissevain Glenda Jones Tracy Ballard-Tai Chris Lundin Federica Armstrong Rebecca Van Dyck Minako H. Sano Jeanne Stivers Sean Holman caroleann eittreim June Cancell Mary Tan Fong Jonelle Preisser Charlotte Ryan Paul Seaver Sarah Creighton Brauman Creighton Joyce Beattie Jennifer Prokhorov 701 E. Charleston Road 2003 Edgewood Drive 2579 Park Blvd. Unit X202 1074 Moreno Ave. 390 East Charleston Road, Palo Alto 2756 Ross Road 1920 Bryant St. Palo Alto CA 94301 1528 College Ave. 3112 South Court 2732 Ross Rd 357 Everett Ave 1975ivylane 365 Colorado Avenue 3290 Louis Rd 425 Grant Ave., #30 Palo Alto 94306 3924 Louis Road 3638 Bryant Street 271 Creekside Dr 271 Creekside Dr 455 E. Charleston Rd., Palo Alto, CA 94306 3492 Murdoch Ct As a mother of two middle school aged kids, it's heart breaking that I can't ensure my kids that we can stay here for them to finish high school. Last year my rent was increased by $450. That's simply heartless just greed. I support renter protections for ALL renters and including ALL units. As a longtime Palo Alto resident I am very pleased that the council is taking up this issue! Please do everything you can to keep Palo Alto as a livable city for ordinary good people. This is long overdue. For too long landlords have been able to raise rents to astronomical levels. Something must be done. Please It's crucial for our Community to not just price rents at "what the market will bear", but to provide livability for those who work, nourish and provide for us in this town. Palo Alto shouldn't just go to the highest bidder. Peter Broadwell carmen Rodwell Paul Bundy 2325 Cornell Street 3946 nelson dr 143 Park Avenue Barbara Dawson-25 yr home 2729 Byron St owner, now renter Elisabeth L Sherman Peter Herreshoff Marcia Beiley Laris Robert Litwiller Larry Chinn Fernanda Garber Mary A. O'Connor Thomas Wasow Michael & lzvara Predmore Linda Lopez Otero 4307 Miranda Ave 4180 Oak Hill Ave 3065 Middlefield Road 643 Coleridge Ave 800 E Charleston Rd Apt 6 3272 Clifton Ct 850 Webster Street, Palo Alto 758 Barron Ave. 81 Peter Coutts Circle 410 Sheridan Ave., #111, Palo Alto, CA 94306 As a small time landlord I rent out a converted garage and know the temptation to raise rents. But having been renters in the past also know that that path leads to discontent. Please do what you can to ease the discontent in all our futures. I am now paying an exorbitant price for rent.. Want to stay, but cannot afford much more. Move up to the mountains? Not likely as they have gone up in flames. I volunteer in the Hotel de Zink homeless shelter when it is housed at the UU Church each Sept, and I have heard many times from our guests that they were forced into homelessness when their rents were raised significantly. Many hold jobs and still can't afford housing here. Rents have risen more than inflation and more than wages have risen. Allowing unreasonable greed is not in the best interest of our city, in addition to being inhumane. Carol Lamont Stephanie Klein Jessica Brodt Roberta Ahlquist Maria Paz Haro Joyce Beattie Charles Robert Karish kip husty Enid Pearson Patti Schaffer George R. Chippendale Caroleann Eittreim 618 Kingsley Avenue 135 Heather Lane 819 Altaire Walk 636 Webster St 70 Pearce Mitchell Place. Stanford.CA 94305 455 E. Charleston Rd., Palo Alto, CA 94306 1699 Middlefield Road 922 bautista ct. 3345 Stockton Pl 2241 Santa Ana St., Palo Alto 1975 Ivy Lane, Palo Alto 1019 Please take action to prevent the unnecessary displacement of our neighbors and to stabilize our community in the face of this horrible housing crisis that is a result of the failure of our Palo Alto City Council to adequately plan for a jobs-housing balance. We need the city to ACT to support our renters absentee landlords are sucking life out of the community Look at what has happened and will happen when a family can't pay the rent and can't find a new place. They are on the street, the police are called, the police call Child Protectjve Service, the children are split up into foster homes and the mother is left to fend for herself. How horrible is that. Mary Gallagher Samina Sundas Marcia Laris David Page Arthur McGarr Roberta Ahlquist Linda Henigin Michael P Predmore Maxine Tucker Carol Uyeno Adolfo Lopez Otero judith spirn 753 Alma St. 120 Park Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94306 3065 Middlefield Road 3115 Avalon Ct 3666 La Calle Ct., Palo Alto 94306 636 Webster St 2046 EDGEWOOD DR 81 Peter Coutts Circle 2052 Edgewood Dr. 840 Fielding Drive 410 Sheridan Ave., #111, Palo Alto, CA 94306 558 forest ave Strengthening renter protections provides a means to limit soaring rents, bridle landlord greed, and decrease homelessness caused by evictions. In addition, I envision the possibility of practical housing options--not new construction--such as motel/hotel conversions to intentional, shared-equity communities,, more cottage clusters not less, employer-financed, shared-equity employee housing, and second and third story construction on existing commercial properties such as the Aquarius Theatre and Town and Country shopping center. Thank you for the opportunity to express these comments. We need to make sure that we have diverse community members in Palo Alto and it can happen when we will have affordable housing. Very glad you are addressing issues for renters. Our workers in the city are a large number of tenants who need renter protection and are reticent to speak out for fear of retaliation! Let's help them! We need to make this town affordable for people who work at less than stellar incomes!! Gary Breitbard Missy Cresap Joy Apple 740 San Jude Ave 1227 Byron Street 2004 Edgewood Drive My renter friends are all being forced out of Palo Alto Dear Palo Alto City Council Members, We are writing in support of the Colleagues Memo from Council Members DuBois, Holman and Kou regarding strengthening renter protections. We believe that rent stabilization would provide renters with more predictable and fair rent increases and that just cause eviction is long overdue. Renters shouldn't have to live month-to-month or even year-to-year in fear of sudden changes to their housing status. We would urge you to adopt an even stronger ordinance than that recommended by the Colleagues Memo. Renter protections should be extended to ALL renters in the city, not just to those who live in buildings of "5 or more housing units." There is no justification for offering protections only to a limited segment of the local population. In addition to acting on the Colleagues Memo, we strongly urge you to instruct Palo Alto's lobbyist in Sacramento to work toward the repeal of the Costa-Hawkins Act so that units built after 1995 (now exempt under this state law) will also be covered by these commonsense measures. We believe tenant protections are more than just the right thing to do on behalf of renters. This is good policy for cities that want to maintain their sense of community at a time when the cost of housing has become untenable for owners and renters. Please print neatly! FULL NAME PALO ALTO ADDRESS EMAIL ADDRESS Please return ASAP to: Peninsula Peace and Justice Center, 305 N. California Avenue, Palo Alto 94301 Peninsula Peace and Justice Center II www.PeaceAndJ\.org II www.Facebook.com/penln.pjc '-VV;;;1~7;7---- [ ] Placed Before Meeting :Ri!feivfeat ~ . 17 Good evening Mr Mayor, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Council and members of the public. I am Cherri II Spencer, a resident of Palo Alto for the past 43 years and coordinator of the DISARM/Peace Committee of the Palo Alto branch of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, which we call WILPF for short. Our branch has been working on peace and justice issues for the past 95 years. I wrote to you on 30th May and addressed you at your council meeting on 5th June on the topic of Palo Alto no longer belonging to Mayors for Peace (Mf P}. Since then I have met with Mayor Scharff and he told me he stopped our city's membership in Mayors for Peace in 2013 without consulting with the council. I'm here to bring your attention to several other things, pertinent to Mayors for Peace, that have happened since mid-June and to ask you, the City Council, to consider over-riding the Mayor's unilateral decision to stop Palo Alto's membership in MfP. The mission of Mayors for Peace is to raise public awareness around the world regarding the need to abolish nuclear weapons, not unilaterally, but as 122 nations who signed the United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons on July th, intend, that every one of the nine countries owning these awful weapons of mass destruction dismantles them and the world ends up with none. Last month Mayor Scharff visited three sister cities in Europe, I have established that Heidelberg, Germany, which he visited to sign a new sistership and Enschede, in the Netherlands, an existing sister city the Mayor visited, ARE members of Mayors for Peace, furthermore the Mexican city of Oaxaca, which has been our sister city for 54 years and which the Mayor intends to visit later this month is also a member of Mayors for Peace. In all 4 of our 7 sister cities are members of Mayors for Peace, the 4th being Tsuchiura in Japan. I find it a source of embarrassment, and I hope you do too, that these sister cities are members of Mayors for Peace and we are not. On the 26th June the US Conference of Mayors, meeting in Miami Beach, Florida, which I think our Mayor did not attend, passed, unanimously, for the lih year in a row, a peace resolution : "Calling on President Trump to Lower Nuclear Tensions, Prioritize Diplomacy and Redirect Nuclear Weapons Spending to meet Human Needs and Address Environmental Challenges". Lastly, on October 5th the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, a coalition of 450 organizations of which WILPF, who I represent here, is an active member. I & my fellow Palo Atans (raise your hands please) urge the council to arrange to re-join the Mayors for Peace as soon as possible. Thank-you for your attention to this request. Further information on Mayors for Peace The members of Mayors for Peace are cities (not just mayors); currently it has 7,439 member cities in 162 countries, including 211 cities in the USA, of which 32 are in California, amongst those 32 cities are Berkeley, Carmel-by-the-Sea, Fairfax, Los Angeles, Oakland, Sacramento, San Francisco and Santa Cruz. But not Palo Alto. So Mayors for Peace organizes a significant grassroots effort to urge governments towards a world free of nuclear weapons. There are over 15,000 nuclear weapons in the world today, owned by nine nations; about 3, 700 of them are deployed, ready to be delivered, by the USA and Russia. Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) can deliver multiple bombs after travelling through the sky for thousands of miles; the latest Russian "Sarmat" missile carries 12 bombs equivalent to 40 megatons in it. The Russian media boasted that the Sarmat is more accurate than its predecessors, and is "capable of wiping out parts of the Earth the size of Texas or France." That means just one ICBM could wipe out all of northern California! A city's annual membership fee for belonging to Mayors for Peace is 20,000 yen= IV $20. Please write to me at this email address if you'd like more information on Mayors for Peace or nuclear disarmament in general: Cherrill.m.spencer@gmail.com Thankyou. Cherrill Spencer, Los Robles Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94306 '; COUNC~ MEETING Tom Thompson, MBA :, /r,I a? /1. 7 650_678_0252 "~ [ ] Placed Before ~teeting .·-. [~atMeeting talltom@rwthompsonproperties.co 1 October 16, 2017 The paradox of Rent Control: "Helping" ••• by making it worse. Two local examples of how Rent/Eviction/Relocation Controls make our housing shortage worse. East Palo Alto: a) East Palo Alto became the "Murder Capital of the World" in 1992 and remains dangerous. Why? Gang members and drug dealers are nearly impossible to remove with Rent/Eviction/Relocation Controls. b) There are about 30% fewer rental units in East Palo Alto now than In 1984 when Rent/Eviction/Relocation Controls were implemented. Apartments were demolished because over time maintenance costs far exceeded rents after Rent/Eviction/Relocation Controls were implemented. J' And the same thing happened to over 330,000 apartments in New York City. A third of a million apartments demolished, due to rent control. San Francisco: a) There are 36,000+ vacant rental units In San Francisco (census data attached). That's 15% of rentals that owners refuse to even rent, all because of Rent/Eviction/Relocation Controls in San Francisco. b) We could instantly solve our Silicon Valley housing shortage overnight by adding 36,000+ rentals ... by ending rent control in San Francisco. Rent/Eviction/Relocation Controls are failed gimmicks. Paradoxically, they are universally proven to be serious failures that make housing shortages worse. Don't let emotions override common sense. There is a common sense solution to the shortage ... more housing near jobs and transportation corridors. Tom Thompson 10/13/2017 Bay Area Census -San Francisco City and County t'tBay Area Census e ••• •AB11G• . .,, .. Home I Contact Tra nsportation I Historical Data Maps I Links I FAQ San Francisco City and County Decennial Census data 1860-1940 I 1950-1960 I 1970-1990 I 2000-2010 In excel: 1860-2010 TOTAL POPULATION In households In group quarters RACE White Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some other race Two or more races HISPANIC OR LATINO AND RACE Hispanic or Latino (of any race) Not Hispanic or Latino White Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Some other race Census2000 776,733 100.0% 756,976 97.5% 19,757 2.5% 385,728 49.7% 60,515 7.8% 3,458 0.4% 239,565 30.8% 3,844 0.5% 50,365 6.5% 33,255 4.3% 109,504 14.1% 667,229 85.9% 338,909 43.6% 58,791 7.6% 2,020 0.3% 238,173 30.7% 3,602 0.5% 2,580 0.3% http://;Nww.bayareacensus.ca.gov/counties/SanFranciscoCounly.htm Census 2010 805,235 100.0% 780,971 97 .0% 24,264 3.0% 390,387 48.5% 48,870 6.1% 4,024 0.5% 267,915 33.3% 3,359 0.4% 53,021 6.6% 37,659 4.7% 121,774 15.1% 683,461 84.9% 337,451 41.9% 46,781 5.8% 1,828 0.2% 265,700 33.0% 3,128 0.4% 2,494 0.3% 2006-2010 ACS* 789,172 100.0% 10/13/2017 Bay Area Census -San Francisco City and County Two or more races 23,154 3.0% 26,079 3.2% en ;:- SEX -c Cl m Male 394,828 50.8% 408,462 50.7% c .. ! J Female 381,905 49.2% 396,773 49.3% .. Ga c en 5 .e AGE ~ ! Under 5 years 31,633 4.1% 35,203 4.4% ~ s 5 to 17 years 81,169 10.4% 72,321 9.0% = ; 18 to 64 years 557,820 71.8% 587,869 73.0% • 0 ·-... 65 years and over 106, 111 13.7% 109,842 13.6% II J!! Median age 36.5 x 38.5 x en J! !! HOUSEHOLDS -" .. Total households 329,700 100.0% 345,811 100.0% .. E ~ Family households 145,186 44.0% 151,029 43.7% iw a ~i Families with children under 54,707 16.0% 55,212 16.0% 18 ~ .c co ~ Average household size 2.30 x 2.26 x ... "" Average family size 3.22 x 3.11 x HOUSING OCCUPANCY Total housing units 346,527 100.0% 376,942 100.0% 372,560 100.0% Occupied housing units 329,700 95.1% 345,811 91.7% 335,956 90.2% Owner-occupied housing 115,391 35.0% 123,646 35.8% 126,028 37.5% units Renter-occueied housing 214,309 65.0% 222,165 64.2% 209,928 62.5% ynits Vacant housing units 16,827 4.9% 31,131 8.3% ~6604 9.8% - 1 unit, detached housing 62,653 18.1% 64,999 17.4% Median value owner occupied 396,400 x 785,200 x unit (dollars) Median gross rent (dollars) 928 x 1,328 x PLACE OF BIRTH BY CITIZENSHIP STATUS Native 491, 192 63.2% 508,110 64.4% Foreign born 285,541 36.8% 281,062 35.6% Naturalized citizen 163,426 21.0% 173,639 22.0% Not a citizen 12~.115 15.7% 107,423 13.6% -- The Math: INCOME AND POVERTY IN 361604 EmDtv Units = 14.85 % Vacant rentals http:l/www.bayareacensus.ca.j:IOV/counties/SanFrancis1. __ ~~-'~32 Total Rentals (owners refuse to rent) 2 2017 OFFICERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS Merri A. Baldwin President Malcolm A. Heinicke President-Elect Doris Cheng Treasurer Stuart C. Plunkett Secretary Marvin K. Anderson David A. Carrillo Sigrid Irias Colin T. Kemp Karen Kimmey Carolyn M. Lee Mary McNamara Peter C. Meier Theodore B. Miller Ann N. Nguyen Danielle Ochs Natalie Pierce Vidhya Prabhakaran Jennifer Redmond Charlene (Chuck) Shimada William F. Tarantino David J. Tsai Sharon L. Woo BARRISTERS CLUB OFFICERS Adam I. Kaplan President Drew Amoroso President-Elect Natascha Ryan Fastabend Treasurer John-Paul S. Deol Secretary THE BAR ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO COUNCIL M ETING /d/i&I/ Date: To: From: Re: September 18, 2017 The San Francisco Police Commission [ ] ~ed Before Meeting f"'JReceived at Meeting Chief William Scott, San Francisco Police Department The Bar Association of San Francisco (BASF) Supplemental Memorandum in Support of the BASF's Recommendation Against Allowing Electronic Control Weapons (ECWs)1 formerly known as T ASERS® to be Adopted at this Time. The Bar Association of San Francisco (BASF) and its membership of nearly 8,000 individuals urge members of the San Francisco Police Commission (Commission) to not approve the use ofECWs for all of the reasons set forth in the BASF's Recommendation and Memorandum dated June 20, 2016 (attached) and for the additional reasons supported by new research and findings as set forth in this Memorandum. Executive Summary We thank the Commission for completing the considerable work undertaken on the new Use of Force and Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) policies, both of which were finalized and approved by the Commission on December 21, 2016. As with any new policy, following Commission approval, the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) was tasked with first designing a curriculum for training followed by a process of implementation; we are informed that at least one- quarter of the SFPD's force has completed the 2-day training on the new use of force policy and de-escalation. Many officers have also completed the CIT 40- hour training and while the SFPD is making good progress on training officers on the new policies, it is very clear that considerable time will be needed before the department is able to fully train and thereafter integrate the new policies and protocols. Further, as described in more detail below, at this time, we have no EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND GENERAL COUNSEL 1 Taser International, now known as Axon Enterprise, as well as the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) name this weapon as such; it is weapon. The SFPD continues to reference this weapon as a Controlled Energy Device (CED) and it should be named and described as an Electronic Control Weapon -ECW (PERF), or a Conducted Electrical Weapon -CEW (TASER®/Axon Enterprise) or a Conducted Energy Weapon -CEW (International Association of Chiefs of Police). BASF uses the term ECW or Yolanda M. Jackson T ASER® herein. The Bar Association of San Francisco • 301 Battery Street, Third Floor • San Francisco, CA 94111-3203 Tel (415) 982-1600 • Fax (415) 477-2388 • www.sfbar.org mm THE BAR ASSOCIATION OF ~,I~ ... SAN FRANCISCO BASF Recommendation September 18, 2017 Page 2 way of analyzing or measuring the impact of efforts at community policing and/or these new policies.2 Our June 20, 2016 Recommendation and Memorandum included extensive research supporting the BASF's position against allowing ECWs and that research is not repeated here; instead we take this opportunity to underscore the importance of awaiting any decision on this weapon given important new developments: (1) On May 19, 2017 Taser International/Axon updated "TASER Hand.held CEW Warnings" with product advisories that were unavailable to the Commission and the BASF when the weapon was last considered (the "Warnings" are attached); (2) A series of investigative reports by Reuters released over the last several weeks highlights and documents additional dangers, risks and deaths attending this weapon, the weapon's lack of efficacy and the shifting of liability from T ASER® to officers, departments and cities; (3) The lack of ANY independent studies on the safety and efficacy of the new generation of ECW s -the X2 or X26P -the only weapons currently available for purchase by the SFPD; (4) The lack of a cost/benefit analysis which should be considered by this Commission to better determine priorities for the SFPD (a partial cost/benefit analysis is attached to the Memorandum that follows) and finally; (5) The SFPD has not yet implemented critical recommendations outlined by the BASF in the June 20, 2016 Memorandum which should precede any discussion of ECWs, and although the department is currently addressing the DOJ/COPS recommendations issued in their October 2016 report, many critical recommendations should be accomplished prior to any discussion of ECWs. Some of the more critical priorities of the department include: (a) The SFPD has yet to institute comprehensive data collection and analysis which can be tied to disproportionate impact of use of force on race, risk management and early warning systems that include analysis by outside experts; (b) The SFPD has yet to complete and integrate all training on the new Use of Force and CIT policies so critical to 21st Century policing; (c) The SFPD has yet to identify and secure the assistance of outside academics needed to partner with the SFPD to "evaluate the circumstances that give rise to deadly force, particularly those circumstances involving persons of color (DOJ Recommendation 1.1 ); and z The DOJ/COPS report concurred with this conclusion. "The SFPD does not collect data around community policing nor measure success within community policing functions and programs." Finding 46. THE BAR ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO BASF Recommendation September 18, 2017 Page 3 (c) Neither the SFPD nor the Commission have given serious consideration to inaugurating an ECW program only after a genuine "pilot program" has been designed, implemented and found satisfactory by an independent expert. Finally, the BASF's Recommendation and its June 20, 2016 Memorandum, were premised on a Departmental Bulletin issued to the Special Operations Bureau which sought to arm approximately 5% of the force with ECWs, namely those: "officers assigned to the Tactical Company or the Specialist Team after having successfully completed the Department's Crises Intervention Team (CIT) training and all other required department-approved CED training. "3 The current proposal and draft policy contemplate that ALL sworn officers be armed with this weapon. Given the BASF's previous reservations about arming even 5% of our most trained officers with ECWs, this current proposal is far more worrisome than the one under consideration one year ago. We are well aware of the DOJ/COPS' Recommendations 16.1 and 16.24 but we are also aware that the DOJ/COPS did not consider our June 20, 2016 Memorandum when they reached their conclusions. Therefore BASF has concluded, for all the reasons set forth in this Memorandum and supporting documents that this weapon should not be used in San Francisco at this time. Respectfully Submitted, Merri Baldwin President, Bar Association of San Francisco 3 See: http://san !Tanciscopolice.org/sites/default/files/Documents/PoliceCommission/AgendaDocumenls/SFP D- CED-S ccial-0 erations-Burcau-Ordcr-053016-version I. di' 4 On October 12, 2016 the United States Department of Justice issued 272 Recommendations, of which only two pertain to ECWs: that the SFPD and the Commission, working with all key stakeholders and community members, should make an informed decision based on expectations, sentiment, and information from top experts in the country and to strongly consider deploying ECWs. THE BAR ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO BASF Recommendation September 18, 201 7 Page4 Supplemental Memorandum in Support of the BASF's Recommendation Against Allowing ECWs to be Used by San Francisco at This Time. Introduction As noted in BASF's June 20, 2016 Memorandum, the SFPD's need for transparency and healing with the community is best addressed by de-escalation, implementation of CIT (Crisis Intervention Teams) rapport-building communication, and time and distance in place of confrontation. These principles comprise the heart of the new DGO 5.01 and the Recommendations in the DOJ/COPS report.5 ECWs can alienate community members and undennine public confidence in a police agency and some agencies have stopped using them with no increase in injuries to officers or the public. 6 Although some officers and members of the public firmly believe "a Taser is better than a gun"; this belief is premised on spurious marketing by Taser International/ Axon because an ECW is not a substitute for a gun. 7In fact, the only independent statistically-significant study documenting whether ECWs reduce officer-involved shootings reached the opposite conclusion. As documented in our prior Memorandum, the 2009 UCSF study found that fatal shootings by police increased significantly following adoption of ECWs, especially in the first year. 8 5 Notably, the Executive Summary of the DOJ/COPS reported the following: "The people of San Francisco are among the voices calling for urgency in police reform and building trust between law enforcement agencies and communities. A series of incidents involving the SFPD has raised questions about the department's use of force practices, accountability, and oversight of its practices. These incidents include the following: • In 2015, the SFPD was involved in six fatal officer-involved shootings; • In a 20 I 0 criminal investigation, a series of racist, sexist, and homophobic text messages was found to have been shared among a group of SFPD officers. The public was not infonned about this issue until February 2014; and • In a similar incident made public in early 2016, prosecutors investigating an alleged sexual assault involving an SFPD officer discovered a series of racist and homophobic texts shared among the accused officer, his supervisor, and several additional SFPD officers in 2015. These events have placed the city in the national spotlight regarding policing practices and opened a public and passionate conversation concerning the SFPD's community engagement, transparency, and accountability. As the Final Report of the President's Task Force on 21st Century Policing notes, trust is the key to the stability of our communities, the integrity of our criminal justice system, and the safe and effective delivery of policing services." https://ric-zai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w08 I 8-pub.pdf, pages 1-2. 6 Following the Braidwood Commission's Report, ECW use in British Columbia dropped by 87% with no evidence that risks or injuries increased for officers or the community. The Chief of the Warren Michigan Police Department dropped all use ofT ASE Rs® and found no increase in injuries to officers or members of the public. "Killing Them Safely" by Nick Beradini, 2016. 7 Use of Force experts agree that ECWs are not used in situations justifying the use of a firearm. An ECW is an intermediate use of force option; a firearm is a deadly force option and when faced with deadly force, officers will use a firearm, never an ECW. See: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/taser-vs-gun-why-police-choose- tlcadly-forcc-dcspitc-non-11656461 8 See Page 8 of Memorandum attached to BASF's June 20, 2016 Recommendation citing the 2009 UCSF study which found: "The rate of in-custody sudden death increased 6.4-fold (95% confidence interval 3.2-12.8, p = 0.006) and the rate of firearm death increased 2.3-fold (95% confidence interval 1.3-4.0, p = 0.003) in the in the first full year after THE BAR ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO BASF Recommendation September 18, 2017 Page 5 Since June 2016, members of the BASF's Criminal Justice Task Force have continued to provide critical legal, medical and factual research to guide this Commission and the public about the risks of implementing this weapon at this time for the SFPD. Both the Commission and the public have the benefit of research that continued to unfold in the last year. Unlike the vast majority of law enforcement agencies using ECWs, the SFPD has never invested in this weapon. Most departments entered into contracts with Taser International in the early 2000s. The weapon was clearly marketed as an alternative to lethal force and the company assured departments that the weapon was life-saving. It is important to note that neither the manufacturer, nor the weapon is overseen by federal or state regulatory agencies in California and the number of deaths and/or injuries are not tracked by any governmental agency. Over the years, and in response to deaths and injuries, the corporation has been sued under a products' liability theory prompting a three-part response from Taser International. Each facet of the company's defensive strategy should be carefully considered by this Commission: (1) Taser International/Axon has increased the number of Warnings against use, thereby (2) shifting liability to police departments and cities and (3) developed the new generation of weapons -the X2 and X26P -the only model available for purchase by the SFPD. The first three parts of this Memorandum address the Warnings and recent investigative findings by Reuters about the weapon, followed by what we know -and don't know -about the X2 and X26P. Thereafter, the Memorandum addresses a cost/benefit analysis. Finally, this Memorandum assesses whether the SFPD has implemented any of BASF's earlier Recommendations or the DOJ/COPS recommendations that are prerequisites to a responsible rollout of a new, dangerous weapon. 1. The Warnings Attached to this Memorandum are the "TASER Handheld CEW Warnings" published by the manufacturer on May 19, 2017. The company states that the warnings are intended to "reduce the likelihood that CEW use will cause death or serious injury."9 Taser deployment compared with the average rate in the 5 years before deployment. In years 2 to 5 after deployment, rates of the 2 events decreased to pre-deployment levels. We observed no significant change in the rate of serious Ols after Taser deployment. In conclusion, although considered by some a safer alternative to firearms, Taser deployment was associated with a substantial increase in in-custody sudden deaths in the early deployment period, with no decrease in firearm deaths or serious Ols." (Byron K. Lee, et al, Relation ofTaser (Electrical Stun Gun) Deployment to Increase in In-Custody Sudden Deaths [Nov. 2009]) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ 19268749 9 While the proposed policy advanced by Commissioner Melara and SFPD is not the focus of this Memorandum, it is of worthy note that these Warnings are not set forth in the proposed policy. They should be, not only because they provide a minimal level of warnings about the limitations of these weapons, but also because omitting them reinforces the manufacturer's efforts to escape liability that is instead imposed on local agencies. .. THE BAR ASSOCIATION Of ,,.~ SAN FRANCISCO BASF Recommendation September 18, 2017 Page 6 Notably, the Warnings also advise that "significant differences exist between different TASER CEW models"10 but do not offer further detail on the warnings unique to particular models except to advise that the weapon may fail. The Warnings include a symbol which in tum notifies law enforcement of hazardous situations to avoid that could result in death or serious injury; many of the warnings are included in the list below but the full list is attached: · • Cumulative Effects: "[R]epeated, prolonged or continuous CEW application may contribute to cumulative exhaustion, stress, cardiac, physiologic, metabolic, respiratory and associated medical risks which could increase the risk of death or serious injury." o Susceptible individuals include: • The elderly, • Those with: • heart conditions, • asthma or other pulmonary conditions; • People suffering from: • excited delirium, • profound agitation, • severe exhaustion, • drug intoxication or • chronic drug abuse and/or • over-exertion from physical struggle. o Officers are warned to minimize the number and duration of CEW exposure and "consider alternative control measure in conjunction with or separate from the CEW" if deployment is ineffective in incapacitating a subject or achieving compliance. (Emphasis added) 11 • The Company now warns that the weapon can cause "Cardiac Capture," a condition they denied was possible previously. For this reason, officers are instructed to avoid aiming at the frontal chest area. 12 10 Page I, paragraph I of Warnings. 11 Unfortunately because the optimal distance for effective deployment is 7-15 feet, once the ECW fails, and especially if the target becomes more agitated, the officer too often resorts to lethal force as the officer can no longer create the time and distance needed for safety. As reported on page 6 of BAS F's June 20, 2016 Memorandum, LAPD reported nearly 25% of those shot by officers were wounded or killed during encounters in which officers said they tried to use a TASER® without success. Thus, ECWs, though heavily marketed as tools designed to minimize force, often have the reverse effect, and create the "need" for lethal force. This helps to explain the 2009 UCSF finding that the incidence of fatal shootings tends to rise after introduction of ECWs. 12 The chest is exactly the right target area for firearm use, so under stress, this warning may be very difficult to heed. Moreover, as the target and the officer are both in motion, the chest area will be difficult to avoid. -~ THE BAR ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO • Officers are also warned not to target: o Face o Eyes o Head o Throat o Chest area o Breast o Groin o Genitals o Known pre-existing injury areas. BASF Recommendation September 18, 201 7 Page 7 • The weapon in probe-deployment mode can cause muscle contractions that may result in injury, including bone fractures, • High Risk Populations include those who are: o Pregnant o Elderly o Low-body-mass index o Small child • Secondary Injuries are to be avoided whenever possible because it is known that loss of control resulting from weapon use may "result injuries due to a fall or other uncontrolled movement;" the company warns further that loss of control can have several causes, including: o Repetitive stimuli can induce seizure in some people which may result in death or serious injury and risks increase for those with epilepsy, seizure history; other seizure precipitating factors include emotional stress and physical exertion; o Some may faint; o The weapon may also cause loss of control from muscle contraction, incapacitation or startle response; o Falling can result from incapacitation and therefore a whole host of surfaces are to be avoided according to one of the Warnings. (One need not fall far: in June 2017, the city of Chicago agreed to pay $9.5 million to settle a federal lawsuit filed by a man who was severely injured when a police officer jolted him with a Taser and he fell and hit his head on the pavement. 13) • The Warnings contain a long list of eye injuries, including permanent vision loss that may be associated with injury from the TASER® probe, electrode and electrode discharge as well as the LASER sighting aid. THE BAR ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO BASF Recommendation September 18, 201 7 Page 8 • Of significant note on page 6 of the W amings, T ASER® warns that the CEW or cartridge may fail to fire or operate. 14 Given the length and breadth of the current W amings, the potential usefulness of the weapon has diminished over the years as the risks and dangers are acknowledged by the manufacturer. 2. Reuters Investigative Reports Well-documented research undertaken by a group of investigative reporters for Reuters was released last month in a series of reports: "Shock Tactics" including "The Toll", "The Warnings" and "The Experts." 15 The series is far too long to summarize in this Memorandum, but it has become clear to BASF that the data presented in its June 2016 Memorandum underreported the scale of the dangers as well as the number of T ASER®-related deaths by as much as half. Deaths In our June 2016 Memorandum, we noted Amnesty International's estimate as 550 deaths since 2001. Later and subsequent to the issuance of our Memorandum, Amnesty raised the estimate to 700. Reuters has now documented 1005 incidents in which people died after police stunned them with T ASERS®. Excluded from the I 005 incidents are deaths resulting from a firearm following use of a T ASER®.16 In more than 400 of these deaths, T ASERS® were the only form of force used by the police; the rest involved both TASERS® and other forms of force. Most of the casualties were among the most vulnerable populations. The Reuters report further notes that because "no govenunent agency tracks fatalities in police incidents where Tasers are used [and because] [a]utopsies are not public in some states, [and because] ... coroners and medical examiners use varying standards to assess a Taser's role in a death," "the probability of dying from a Taser shock in a police encounter may be incalculable." 17 14 Failing to operate is different from efficacy. As expert witness Mike Leonesio reported to this Commission on June 21, 2017, 15-20% simply fail to fire and the officer has no way of knowing that the weapon is not operational. Efficacy refers to a failure to secure compliance through the use of the weapon. As noted on page 6 or BASF's Memorandum in support of the June 20, 2016 Recommendation against TASERs, LAPD reports the weapon fails to be effective 4 7% of deployments. i; lmps://www.reutcrs.com/invcslii.rnlcs/section/usa-taser/ 16 "Among the cases Reuters opted not to include were those in which a person was shot with a firearm after being stunned by a Taser." https://www.rc utcrs.com/invcstigatcs/spccial-report:/usa-taser-911 'llaniclc-Lhc-toll 17 httns://www.reuters.com/i n vest i gates/sect ion/usa-taser/ THE BAR ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO BASF Recommendation September 18, 2017 Page 9 ECW Use on Individuals with Mental Health Problems Confounding police work, Reuters reports is the increase in calls for police response to individuals in mental health crisis. Taser International warned in 2013 to avoid shocking someone "who is actually or perceived to be mentally ill;" Police Executive Research Forum warns against using TASERS® on "persons in medical/mental crisis." As Reuters reports, it is extremely difficult for the officer to determine, like so many of the conditions included in the Warnings, who meets the mental illness criteria. One quarter of those who died in TASER® related incidents were suffering from a mental health breakdown or neurological disorder. In 9 of every 10 incidents, the deceased was unarmed. More than 100 of the fatal encounters began with a 911 call for help during a medical emergency .18 As noted in the BAS F's June 2016 Memorandum, "it is preferable to make every effort to utilize these non-lethal methods [de-escalation, crisis intervention, rapport-building communication and community policing] prior to implementing use of a potentially lethal weapon." Lawsuits Reuters identified and reviewed 442 wrongful death lawsuits in which TASERS® were a factor that may have caused death. In 120 of the 442 cases (27%) TASERS® were the only form of force; in the remaining 322, the T ASERS® were a factor in the police force used. 366 of the lawsuits concluded, and 232 resulted in judgments for the plaintiffs. Reuters was able to determine the payouts in only 193 cases totaling $1 72 million paid by cities and their insurers. This total does not include the cases in which settlements remained confidential or were unavailable. Officers interviewed by Reuters expressed concern with the ever-increasing number of "Warnings" by TASER®. As one T ASER® instructor noted, his role as a police instructor required not only that he teach officers how to use the weapon, but that he alert them each time T ASER's® warnings evolved, in some cases, multiple times a year. But as some officers honestly admit, there are now so many warnings, "If I read and abided by every single warning, I would not Tase anyone." 19 Increase in Lawsuits and Warnings Results in Decrease in Use Therefore the cities and departments that have invested in T ASERS® are now subject to abiding by the warnings or risking lawsuits. San Francisco has the opportunity to consider these warnings prior to investing the City's scarce dollars. 19 (Emphasis added.) https://www.reutcrs.com/invcstigate special-repon/usa-tascr-legal/ .. THE BAR ASSOCIATION Of ~~ SAN FRANCISCO BASF Recommendation September 18, 2017 Page 10 The Courts are also weighing in with stricter guidelines on ECW use. The 4th Circuit in Estate of Armstrong v. Village of Pinehurst, et.al., 810 F. 3rd 892 (4th Cir 2016) found that deploying a T ASER® is a "serious use of force" and T ASERS® are proportional force only when deployed in response to a situation in which a reasonable officer would perceive some "immediate danger." When considering rolling out ECWs to the SFPD, the Commission should be advised that the weapon, likely because of the increase in lawsuits and warnings, are used with less and less frequency by departments. For example, Reuters reports that in the five states covered by the recent 4th Circuit's ruling -North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, Maryland and Virginia, police departments are scaling back on use. "In Baltimore, police used TASERS® 47 percent fewer times last year than in 2015 ... Deployments fell 65 percent in Virginia Beach; 60 percent in Greensboro, North Carolina; 55 percent in Charleston, South Carolina; and 52 percent in Huntington, West Virginia. Norfolk, Virginia, saw deployments plunge 95 percent." 20 The section to follow addresses further limitations and problems associated with the new generation of weapons, the X-2 and X-26P. 3. The Lack of ANY Independent Studies on the Safety and Efficacy of the X2 or X26P -the Only Weapons Currently Available for Purchase by the SFPD Further Supports the Recommendation Against Adopting the Weapon at this Time. Nearly all of the documents before the Commission center on the X26, a model no longer available for purchase. Most of the lawsuits involved this model and the experts who testified before the Commission on June 21, 2017 suggested the new model was designed to reduce the number of lawsuits. However, what is currently known about the new model? TASER® swapped out its X26, with a maximum charge of 125 microcoulombs of electricity, for the X2 model, which has 63 microcoulombs. Expe1t Mike Leonesio, who owns and operates Leonesio Consulting, the only independent ECW-cxclusive laboratory in the country,21 and who is also an expert on use of force and police policy, testified before the Commission on June 21, 2016 that this new generation of weapon has not undergone ANY testing. To BASF's knowledge, there are no reports and certainly no independent studies on the risks or relative efficacy of the X2 or X26P. Further, as detailed in the attached cost analysis, this generation of weapon is more expensive than the last: $1800 - $2000 is the individual purchase price, which does not include the substantial costs associated with training, oversight, maintenance or storage of data. This will be a very costly experiment for San Francisco. The BASF therefore strongly urges the Commission to await testing of this 20 htt s://www.rculers.com/in vestigales/spec ial-report/usa-luser-le!:!a II 21 htt :i/lconesio.cum/ Stop Tasers from Being Introduced to Our Ja Coalition for Justice and Accountability -SV De-Bug -July 7, 2017 Editor's Note: [ ] Placed Before Meeting ~ceived at Meeting The Santa Clara County Sheriff is proposing to armjail correctional officers with Tasers. Aram James and Richard Konda explain why the proposal may have lethal consequences. The Santa Clara County Sheriff has proposed that Tasers be introduced in our jails. Tasers are a deadly weapon and are almost always used on unarmed people and should be banned. As the San Jose Mercury News editorial on May 19, 2017 stated, "The Board of Supervisors should take special note of the risk of Taser use on people who are mentally ill, because a stun gun shock that may just temporarily disable a healthy person may be lethal to someone who is taking medication. A 2015 study found that nearly 50% of the inmates in the County's main jail and Elwood facility in Milpitas have a mental illness, and an estimated 650 inmates receive some kind of psychotropic drug on a daily basis." Not only are individuals with mental health concerns and prescription drug users more vulnerable to the lethal risk of Tasers, but also individuals with heart issues and other physical limitations are equally vulnerable. We believe 21st Century Policing (a Department of Justice framework on how to improve police and community relations) is moving away from the notion that more weapons means more safety for officers, prison guards and those incarcerated. 21st Century Policing alternatives embrace, among other progressive reforms, crisis intervention training, rapport building and de-escalation skill building, all of which run contrary to the use of deadly Tasers. The costs of Tasers, their initial purchase, replacement and repair, training and litigation expenses can run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars each year for the County. For the time period 2015-2016, the San Jose Police Department spent $319,368 for the purchase of Tasers. On July 12, 2013, the City of San Jose lost a lawsuit involving the death of Steve Salinas, who died as a result of the San Jose Police deploying Tasers. A federal jury returned a verdict of $1,000,000 in damages to the Salinas Family. We believe that any monies proposed for the purchase of Tasers should instead be spent on treatment for inmates, and to convert our jails from violent caged facilities to places of compassion and humanity. According to Truth not Tasers, an organization that monitors Taser use in North America, more then 1,000 deaths have resulted from the use of Tasers by law enforcement. Even members of law enforcement have recognized the lethal nature of Tasers. Former Newark, California Police Chief Ray Samuels, in making a decision not to purchase Tasers said the following, "What scared me about the weapon is that you can deploy it absolutely within the manufacturer's recommendation and there is still the possibility of an unintended reaction. I can't imagine a worse circumstance than to have a death attributed to a Taser in a situation that didn'tjustify deadly force. It's not a risk I'm willing to take." In the past, law enforcement officers (trainees) were encouraged to submit to a Taser blast under very controlled circumstances, with spotters on a mat, with eye goggles, and limiting the Taser blast to an area on the back below the neck. The leading law enforcement think tank, the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) has said, "Agencies should be aware that exposure to ECW (Taser) application during training could result in injury to personnel and is not recommended." Many law enforcement agencies who formerly allowed their officers to voluntarily be exposed to Taser blasts during training exercises, have ended such a practice because of serious and career ending injuries to healthy officers, and subsequent lawsuits filed by these same injured officers. If Tasers are considered too dangerous to use on healthy officers during very tightly controlled training exercises, then certainly Tasers are not safe to use on inmates who suffer from a wide variety of mental and physical conditions that make them particularly vulnerable to injury and death from a Taser blast. The Sheriffs position that policy can be drafted to ensure that Tasers can be safely used on unarmed inmates, doesn't match the reality of the unpredictable and lethal nature of Tasers, and the fact that when used on unarmed individuals Tasers are an inherently dangerous weapon. In other words, you can't create a safe policy for the use of an inherently unsafe weapon (Tasers) when used on unarmed individuals, any more then you can create a safe policy for inmates who wish to smoke an inherently dangerous product like cigarettes. Given the recent guilty verdicts of three Santa Clara County Correctional Officers in the brutal murder of Michael Tyree, and all of the other problems and controversies surrounding inmate abuse in our County Jails, the last thing we need to do is introduce Tasers into our jails. About the Authors: Richard Kanda is the Executive Director of the Asian Law Alliance and the Chairperson of the Coalition for Justice and Accountability. Aram James is a retired Santa Clara County Deputy Public Defender, a member of the Coalition for Justice and Accountability and a co-founder of the Albert Cobarrubias Justice Project. Illustration by Adrian Avila 'T'_~.'\.~ J :,, ..... ~ ~ ~ ' .. ,N. ~.,.,,,. ~ ja~ ... .. :· --·v,"''•When ......... ~,_~ women thrive, all of society benefits." -Kofi Annan ··w11e11 women thri\1e., all of society • l1enefits.'' -Kofi Annan ·©Castilleja RETURN ADDRESS: I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and moderniz~JtiCT I campus because ... ccvJ; ;,,, ~ -la-,, ~~~1 w1~ a.;mC< u'.,, }-~<(' k/d~ ~ CC£.1.;V1 (/ hwn ~ -j>J..-w <11 loi. . "' 1'.RLJ_ ~ -mvt-t- ~ ·JL/'(,fbV I . -f\fr. Da"l.'.id Storr TbeCoNature 170 Pecora \II/a"" Q.~;!f-..'"1fstf, nservancy ._A; .;.·-'11......_· '-~"'"" ___ ... Menlo Park. C.~94 -74 5 POllTCARP AM 8: 32 Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 170CT 13 AH ':35 Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 RETURN ADDRESS: ~~___.!_~~-~/-4":~inV'it-R~tG1fit· :if)-.:.~ M.) ~s~ Sou..Ar, c.r ''P"f¥fflrA CITY CLEHK'S OFFIC 17 OCT 13 AH ': 35 Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 £ d I Community Plan Stan or 2018 General Use Permit COUN~IL ME.E11NG 1efJ&/1/ ~efor~ Meeting Stanford Unive lty, .......... datMeeting is preparing for its future. A truly remarkable partnership has existed between Stanford University and its neighbors for more than 125 years. We have grown and prospered together. Now, Stanford is preparing for its future, again, in partnership with the Silicon Valley community. The 2018 General Use Permit is based upon planning for the university's needs over approximately the next 20 years. STANFORD: A RESIDENTIAL UNIVERSITY Stanford has from its earliest days been a residential university. For students and faculty, living on campus enhances learning and research by fostering collaboration and community. One of the distinctive features of Stanford's proposal is that it sets a goal of building new housing on pace with the building of new academic space. That goal, which has been achieved under the existing 2000 General Use Permit, provides for additional on-campus housing as academic facilities expand. GENERATING NEW KNOWLEDGE Knowledge is continually expanding, and entirely new fields of research are proliferating. As academic fields evolve, new facilities will be needed. And, as in the previous General Use Permit, Stanford's plans are mindful of the critical issues of housing, transportation and sustainability. Numerous existing academic programs are housed in aging facilities that do not meet today's operational needs and must be upgraded or, in many cases, replaced. ACCOMMODATING UNFORESEEN OPPORTUNITIES The General Use Permit's flexibility to accommodate unexpected, emerging opportunities has allowed the university to produce some of its most exciting innovations, such as the Stanford Energy Systems Innovations and the Anderson Collection. · FACTS ABOUT THE GENERAL USE PERMIT WHAT IS A GENERAL USE PERMIT? A General Use Permit describes the land uses that are allowed at Stanford, and establishes conditions of approval to minimize adverse effects on the surrounding community. Stanford has been operating under the current General Use Permit issued by Santa Clara County in 2000. The General Use Permit does not approve specific buildings but rather provides the regulations governing Stanford's growth and development. WHY IS STANFORD APPLYING FOR AN UPDATED GENERAL USE PERMIT? Stanford has constructed most of the academic space and housing authorized under the 2000 General Use Permit. The university is seeking an updated General Use Permit that would last to approximately 2035. WHAT IS STANFORD ASKING FOR? Stanford is asking for approval of 3,150 net new on- campus housing units/beds for students, faculty and staff, strengthening the residential foundation of Stanford's academic community while helping address the significant regional challenges in housing affordability and availability. It also is seeking approval for up to 2.275 million net new square feet of academic and support space to keep Stanford's teaching and research at the forefront as new academic fields develop. HOW MUCH GROWTH IS THAT? The growth in academic and support space will be an average of 135,000 square feet per year. For reference, the Bing Concert Hall is roughly 78,000 square feet, laboratory buildings range between 100,000 to 200,000 square feet, and a student recreation center is approximately 75,000 square feet. CURRENT AND PROPOSED GROWTH ~-----CUMULAnVEAFTER 2000GUP -----~ 2018 PROPOSAL SQUARE FEE.Tor ACADEMIC MJD ACADEMIC SUPPORT FACILITIES 10 255M 2 275M tJUMBER OF STUDENT BEDS 1~,300 ,MIO SQUARE FEET OF STUDEIH HOUSH;G 6 638M FACULTY STAFF urms 937 WHAT OTHER FEATURES ARE INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT? Stanford proposes to continue operating under the 2000 Stanford Community Plan, which establishes the framework for land use at Stanford-including an Academic Growth Boundary that separates the core campus from the foothills. Transportation strategies will continue to meet the goal of no net new automobile commute trips to and from the campus at peak commute times. Stanford would also contribute an estimated $56 million to affordable housing projects in the surrounding region. WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS? A Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR} issued by Santa Clara County finds that, with mitigation, the proposed General Use Permit will not have adverse effects on most environmental resources. For example, air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions associated with campus operations are expected to decrease overtime, despite population and building growth. It identifies potential impacts in three areas that could be significant and unavoidable. These include increased construction noise on a temporary basis, the possibility that future construction could necessitate replacement of a historic building and traffic congestion impacts. The DEIR also conservatively assumes that Stanford will not expand its transportation demand management programs- even though the university is committed to doing so-because the environmental impact report must consider the potential worst-case scenario. As a result, the report concludes that full build out under the General Use Permit would result in a number of traffic impacts at nearby intersections and on nearby freeway segments. The report recognizes that these impacts can be mitigated through achievement of the standard of no net new automobile trips during the peak commute times. The report also identifies ways that Stanford could support physical improvements to address some of these effects. The report also assesses the average vehicle miles traveled by Stanford workers and residents compared to others in the region. It finds that population growth at Stanford would actually reduce the Bay Area's average number of vehicle miles traveled on a per-capita basis. Because Stanford workers and residents travel by car far less than others in the Bay Area, Stanford is an appropriate location for growth within the region. A Commitment to Community Stanford's commitment to an open and diverse community conversation is an essential element in the consideration of the proposed 2018 General Use Permit. The County's environmental review process involves extensive consultation with our neighbors and community partners. A public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Report is open until December4, 2017. The General Use Permit application as a whole will be the subject of continued public meetings in 2018. More information about our application is available at gup.stanford.edu, or send an email to Stanford2018GUP@stanford.edu with comments or questions. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES THURSDAY OCTOBER 19 Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian will hold a public meeting on the General Use Permit application. 6 to 8 p.m. at Palo Alto City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto THURSDAY NOVEMBER30 The county Planning Commission will hold a public meeting to accept oral comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report. 7 to 9 p.m. at the Palo Alto Arts Center Auditorium, 1313 Newell Road, Palo Alto Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report may be submitted in writing to David Rader, Santa Clara County Senior Planner, at david.rader@pln.sccgov.org. PUBLIC JURISDICTIONS Several neighboringjurisdictions will be hosting meetings on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, including: Palo Alto Los Altos Hills Menlo Park East Palo Alto Mountain View Check your local jurisdiction's website for the meeting schedule. 0 0 l 0 0 L J 0 -1 " Cit~ of J'alo )llto The Honorable City Council City of Palo Alto Members of the Council: CALIFORNIA 94 :3 0 I The Ad Hoc Architectural Design Review Committee was appointed by the City Council in May, ·1971, to address itself to the following charge: "to formulate appropriate environmental design review controls, standards and procedures, and to conduct open meetings for the purpose of inviting public par- ticipation and comments on such design review criteria, standards and procedures and proposals for the estab- lishment of a permanent architectural design review team.11 Since its organization in June, 1971, the Ad Hoc Architectural Review Com- mittee (referred to as Ad Hoc Committee) has held 16 public meetings, three of which were scheduled exclusively as public forums. To encourage public participation, the 11 Palo Alto Times 11.was enlisted to give coverage to the subject of design review and our meetings as a means of providing a public forum on the subject. The Planning Department Staff created two automatic slide shows which were positioned in the City's libraries and in the Council chambers. The slides were selected to illustrate, without commentary, the present character of Palo Alto's varied physical environment. A memorandum (appendixed hereto) outlining the committee's considerations and in- vfting the public's participation in our meetings was distributed to the public as a handout in conjunction with the slide shows. The memor- andum was also mailed to organizations in Palo Alto which would be con- cerned with design review. At the public forums, commentary on these inquiries and other areas of concern was received from a broad spectrum of organizations and individuals. This commentary is summarized in Section X and is set out in detail in the Appendix. During the course of the other meetings, the Ad Hoc Committee has: A. Explored the concept of design review and how it has been implemented in other communities; I-1 0 0 ''l J 0 u 0 D 0 0 0 Q 0 D B. Identified the elements of consideration for design review of a City's physical environment; C. Assessed the character of Palo Alto's geographic/functional areas; D. Identified those areas of Palo Alto which are of the greatest concern to the public and to the committee, and discussed their relative priorities for instituting the design review process; E. Summarized the means of design review now utilized in Palo Alto; F. Explored alternative means of providing design review; G. Explored alternatives to the design review process; H. Differentiated between those broad principles of design review, which are termed policy standards and are general enough to be considered enduring, and those which are termed guidelines or criteria, that are relative to the present conditions of the environment and will change from time to time; and I. Discussed alternative procedures by which design review might be ad- ministered in Palo Alto. The Ad Hoc Committee recommends to the City Council that Palo Alto establish a design review ordinance. The purposes of such an ordinance and the procedure it establishes should be positive, should be aimed towards im- proving the quality of design and the general standards of the living en- vironment, and should attempt neither to stifle creative design nor impose an overall uniform theme, or style, of architectural design on the City. Design review of both new and remodeled construction should be in the context of consideration of the impact on adjacent and neighboring properties and should be consistent with the Comprehensive General Plan. It is recommended that the Council make certain policy decisions as suggested in Section II, "Recommendations, 11 and as discussed in more detail in Section V, "Policy Decisions.11 It is further recommended that the Council establish five basic goals for the design of buildings and adopt thirteen policy standards for design review (see Section VIII). These policy standards should be fair, clear, broad and flexible. They would be the basis for the development of specific guidelines for each area under design review, and together with a growing body of experience, should serve as an understandable precedent to guide both the applicant and the reviewer. I-2 0 0 0 0 [J D 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Areas already subject to control (C and D suffix zones, P-C zones, Use Permits and Variances) should be the first to be included in the design review process. As experience is gained, as more involved decisions are made and as comprehensive studies of special areas are completed, other areas may be added to the design review process in accordance with the proposed multiple priority system (see Section VI). Design review should be carried out by an Architectural Design Review Com- mittee (referred to as Review Committee) .. It should be comprehensive in considering all elements of a proposed building or group of buildings which are visible or audible from any adjacent or nearby property. The procedures of a Review Committee must be informal, efficient and effective. The review should occur very early in the planning of a pro- ject to encourage applicants to discuss their proposals and enable them to receive official guidance from the City on what is expected when it is still easy and economical to make alterations. A minimal fee and sub- mittal requirement would also encourage early dialogue with applicants. The membership of the Review Committee should be voluntary and consist of three design professionals serving three-year staggered terms. Members should be appointed by the Council. If the Council feels that the Review Committee should be expanded to include representatives of the general public who have design experience and competence, the total membership of the Committee should be limited to five. The Review Committee should report directly to the Planning Director or Zoning Administrator in order to facilitate informal discussions with the applicant, to simplify revision-making and to ensure adequate communica- tion between the Review Committee and the Planning Commission and the Council through staff reports. It is anticipated that this recommended procedure would assist the Commission and the Council by removing routine matters from their agendas, and at the same time assure the applicants of satisfactory review and appeal procedures. The Staff, particularly Mr. Walter Bliss of the Planning Department, has provided inavaluable assistance 1n making available to the Committee its own experience and the experiences of other communities, which are documented and on file. Further, the Staff's advice on procedural matters and the clerical assistance provided have been essential to our progress. in the discussion of design review and the documentation of our work. I-3 0 0 D - 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 It is the Ad Hoc Committee's hope that this report will be of assistance to the City Council in further discussions of the design review process and its possible implementation in Palo Alto. We trust that it is a full answer to the charge. Respectfully submitted, AD HOC ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE Mr. Peter Sabin, Chairman Mr. Rodney Heft, Vice Chairman Mrs. Mary Gordon Mrs. Frances Brenner Mr. Walter Stromquist I-4 0 0 r j D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 I. II. AD HOC ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY INDEX COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS III. EXISTING SITUATIONS Brief descriptions of the generally separate geographic areas of Palo Alto, a summarization of the Zoning Ordinance and its controls over the physical appearance of the City, and discus- sion of forces other than design control which affect archi- tectural design. IV. PHILOSOPHY AND PURPOSES A discussion of the basic philqsophy and purposes of design review as they apply to Palo Alto. V. POLICY DECISIONS An outline and discussion of basic policy decisions to be made by the Council prerequisite to the establishment of the design review process. VI. AREAS OF GREATEST CONCERN A categorized listing of Palo Alto's areas showing the varying degrees of need for the implementation of design review with recommended multip;Ie priority system. VII. ELEMENTS OF DESIGN REVIEW . A descriptive outline of the elements of a proposed puilding or development that are weighed in the design review process. VIII. POLICY STANDARDS The qualitative standards by which a proposed building or de- velopment would be reviewed under a design review process. r IX. DESIGN REVIEW PROCEDURES The legislative and statutory procedures by which the design review pro~ess might function, membership of the Review Com- mittee, establishment of design review, consideration of worklqads imposed on the Review 'Committee, Staff, Planning Commission and Council, and the requirements for applicants. I-5 X. PUBLIC RESPONSE A paraphrased summary of the public's commentary organized in accordance with the committee's memorandum of concerns and questions relating to design review in Palo Alto. APPENDIX A. Committee memorandum and questionnaire. B. Public response verbatim from minutes. C. Statistics on numbers of building permits, applications for P-C developments, use permits and variances. D. Chart of Design Review Procedures. E. Current Zoning map for Palo Alto. I-6 0 n 0 n n LI n 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 D D 0 0 [J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II. RECOMMENDATIONS This section sets forth the Ad Hoc Committee's reconunendations to the City Council. The discussion of the alternatives leading up to them are included in the following six sections. (Major recommendations are in capital letters.) THE AD HOC COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS A DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS BE INSTITUTED IN PALO ALTO AND AN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE BE ESTABLISHED TO ADMINISTER IT. PHILOSOPHY (Section IV) The Ad Hoc Committee feels that should the City Council make the funda- mental decision to establish a design review process in Palo Alto, the purposes of the process should be: ACCEPTABLE PURPOSES 1. TO IMPROVE THE GENERAL STANDARDS OF THE LIVING ENVIRONMENT; 2. TO ESTABLISH CHARACTER OR SCALE; 3. TO IMPROVE PARTICULAR AREAS OF THE ENVIRONMENT; 4. TO IMPROVE INDIVIDUAL POOR DESIGNS; 5. TO AUGMENT THE CONTROLS NOW OR NORMALLY INCLUDED IN ORDINANCES RELATED TO BUILDINGS; 6. TO IMPROVE THE DESIGN REVIEW FUNCTIONS NOW EXISTING; 7. TO ESTABLISH FUNCTIONAL CRITERIA; 8. TO ESTABLISH AESTHETIC REVIEW; and 9. TO ESTABLISH STYLES FOR DESIGN IN SPECIFIC AREAS. The Ad Hoc Committee feels the following are unacceptable purposes: UNACCEPTABLE PURPOSES 1. TO PROVIDE A FREER HAND FOR THE CITY TO USE REGULATORY POWERS; 2. TO PROVIDE FOR MORE LANDSCAPING, PER SE; 3. TO PROVIDE FOR MORE CONSISTENT (LESS INDIVIDUAL) KINDS OF ARCHITECTURE; and 4. TO ESTABLISH STYLES FOR DESIGN FOR THE CITY AS A WHOLE. II-1 The Ad Hoc Committee feels that the diversity of Palo Alto should not be arbitrarily upset into a new 11 theme 11 • Instead, the basic purpose of design review should be the improvement of the design of new and remodelled con- struction, especially in the context of the impact on the adjacent and neighboring properties and in relation to the Comprehensive General Plan. Design review should not stifle creative development nor be used for political purposes. POLICY DECISIONS -GENERAL {Section V) In establishing a design review process, the City Council will have to make some fundamental policy decisions. The Ad Hoc Committee has raised some basic questions related to these decisions, discussed them in Section V and answered them throughout the body of this report in making its recommenda- tions. The questions and the Committee's responses are briefly listed below. 1. Is architectural design to be governed primarily by negative design control (regulatory) or by positive design control {inducements)? PRIMARILY BY POSITIVE CONTROL. 2. Is the architectural character of the City to be subject to architectural review? YES, IN GENERAL TERMS OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE GOALS FOR DESIGN STATED IN SECTION VI I I. BUT NO "ARCHITECTURAL STYLE" SHOULD BE EN- FORCED. 3. Are certain areas of the City to be subject to architectural review? WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SINGLY-DEVELOPED, SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX RESI- DENCES, BUILDINGS IN ALL AREAS OF THE CITY WILL BE SUBJECT TO ARCH- ITECTURAL REVIEW . EVEN THESE SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX RESIDENCES MAY BE REVIEWED IF THEY ARE LOCATED IN SPECIAL AREAS DESIGNATED FOR HISTORICAL PRESERVATION OR IN AREAS DETERMINED TO HAVE A CERTAIN ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER . INCLUSION IN THE REVIEW PROCESS WILL BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH A MULTIPLE-PRIORITY SYSTEM, WITH THE DEGREE OF AUTHORITY AND REVIEW TAILORED TO THE CITY'S OBJECTIVES IN EACH CATEGORY . 4. How shall architectural standards be established? THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD ADOPT BASIC GOALS AND POLICY STANDARDS WITH THE REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPING GUIDELINES AND PRECEDENTS FOR EACH CATEGORY OR ZONE SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE COUNCIL AND REVISION TO REFLECT CHANGES IN THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN. II-2 0 0 0 0 0 u a 0 0 0 n a a 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 Q 0 0 J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 5. Is the City willing to increase legislative or administrative burdens? IMPLEMENTATION OF DESIGN REVIEW WILL REQUIRE INCREASED ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGISLATIVE BURDENS. EACH AREA OR CATEGORY AND THE DEGREE OF REVIEW TO BE IMPOSED SHOULD BE SPECIFICALLY STUDIED BY THE STAFF. EXPANSION OF THE REVIEW PROCESS OVER NEW AREAS SHOULD PROCEED DE- LIBERATELY IN ACCORD WITH ESTABLISHED PRIORITIES TO ENABLE THE STAFF TO BETTER PREDICT TIME AND LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS AND TO PERMIT THE REVIEW COMMITTEE TO FUNCTION EFFECTIVELY WITH A FEW PROJECTS AT A TIME. 6. What is the program for establishing design controls, i.e. which areas or zones need attention first, second, third, etc.? AREAS NOW RECEIVING SOME FORM OF DESIGN REVIEW SHOULD BE FIRST WITH OTHERS FOLLOWING ON THE BASIS OF A MULTIPLE PRIORITY SYSTEM AS DETAILED IN SECTION VI . AREAS OF GREATEST CONCERN (Section VI) The Ad Hoc Committee recommends that the various geographical and zoning areas be grouped into five categories, depending on when and how they should be included in the design review process. Within each category the areas are in the order of their priority for inclusion of the process. It is recommended that areas already subject to controls be the first to be in- cluded in the design review process, and ·those which take the most study or the most involved decisions be included later on. Attention should be given to the degrees of authority r.equired in the various areas. CATEGORIES OF AREAS CATEGORY 1 INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING CURRENTLY CONTROLLED AREAS: 1. D SUFFIX ZONES 2. P-C ZONES 3. USE PERMITS 4. VARIANCES 5. CIVIC CENTER DISTRICT (C SUFFIX ZONES) CATEGORY 2 INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING GENERAL AREAS OR ZONES: 1. MUNICIPAL FACILITIES 2. OTHER GOVERNMENTAL FACILITIES 3. TRANSITIONAL USE 4. MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (INDIVIDUAL VS. GENERALIZED AREAS) 5. M ZONES NOT UNDER D SUFFIX 6. STANFORD UNIVERSITY II-3 I Open 8pace ~lement 'If tJ.ie Palo c:Alto {jeneral Plan D D 0 r 0 D D ·o D RESOLUTION NO. __ 4728 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO MAKING NUMEROUS AMENDMENTS TO THE OPEN SPACE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN AS CERTIFIED TO THE CITY COUNCIL BY RESOLUTION NO. 164 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTED ON MARCH 14, 1973 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palo Alto has duly prepared and recommended for adoption certain additions and amendments to the Open Space Element of the General Plan of the City of Palo Alto, and the Planning Commission, after having held a public hearing on such proposed amendments on February 14, 1973, and March 14, 1973, pursuant to the provisions of Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 19.04.080, has certified such additions and amendments to the City Council recommending their incorporation into the Open Space Element of the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has also held a public hearing on the adoption of such additions and amendments, pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 19.04.080 on April 23, 1973, notice of the time and place of which was published and given in the manner pro- vided by law; NOW., THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Al to does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The Open Space Element of the General Plan, adopted by the City Council in Resolution No. 4585, hereby is amended in part to read as indicated in the descriptive materials, true copies of which are attached hereto: 1. Descriptive matter being page 19 through page 23, marked Exhibit "A" (replacing page 19 and page 20 and relating to the Baylands and the Open Space Action Programs) • 2. Descriptive matter being pages B-4, B-5, and B~7 (replacing pages B-4, B-5, and B-7 and relating to the Baylands) and a map entitled "BAYLANDS PLANT ZONES," dated February 10, -1- 1973, numbered page B-19 (adding a map designating plant zones for the Baylands), marked Exhibit "B". 3. Descriptive matter being page E-1 through page E-7 (adding an appendix on detailed goals and policies for the Baylands) and page F-1 (adding an appendix on map definitions for the Open Space Plan), marked Exhibit "C". 4. A map entitled "THE OPEN SPACE PLAN," which will be dated April 23, 1973, which will be placed at the end of the Open Space Element of the General Plan, and which·will be marked Exhibit "D" (replacing the two maps entitled "OPEN SPACE LANDS: URBAN LANDS AND BAYLANDS" and "OPEN SPACE LANDS: FOOTHILLS," following the present page 20), a presentation map of which was approved by the City Council on April 23, 1973. SECTION 2. Said Open Space Element of the General Plan of the City of Palo Alto shall be endorsed to show that the maps and descriptive materials contained therein have been so amended by the City Council of the City of Palo Alto. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: April 23, 1973 AYES: Beahrs, Berwald, Clark, Comstock, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Seman NOES: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: /s/ Ann J. Tanner city Clerk APPROVED: /s/ G. A. Sipel City Manager APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: /s/ Naphtali H. Knox Director or PTann1ng APPROVED AS TO FORM: /s/ M. D. Norek Assistant City Attorney APPROVED: /s I Kirke W. Comstock Mayor -2- D 0 0 0 D 0 0 a D 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 J 0 0 0 0 D D 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 u 0 RESOLUTION NO. 164 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDING NUMEROUS AMENDMENTS TO THE OPEN SPACE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, upon the recommendation of the Planning Commission of the City of Palo Alto, the City Council of the City of Palo Alto on April 17, 1972, did amend the General Plan of the City of Palo Alto in Resolution No. 4585 by adding an Open Space Element to the General Plan: and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palo Alto has further studied said Open Space Element since April 17, 1972: and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that various parts of the Open Space Element have become obsolete and that changed con- ditions require additions and amendments to said Open Space Element: and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on numerous proposed additions and amendments to the Open Space Element of the General Plan on February 14, 1973, and March 14, 1973, pursuant to the provisions of Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 19.04.080, notice of the time and place of which was published and given in the manner provided by law: NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission recommends that the Open Space Element of the General Plan, adopted by the City Council in Resolution No. 4585, be amended in part to read as indicated in the descriptive materials, true copies of which ~re attached hereto: 1. Descriptive matter being page 19 through page 23, marked Exhibit "A" (replacing page 19 and page 20 and relating to the Baylands and the Open Space Action Programs) . -1- 2. Descriptive matter being pages B-4, B-5, and B-7 (replacing pages B-4, B-5, and B-7 and relating to the Baylands) and a map entitled "BAYLANDS PLANT ZONES," dated February 10, 1973, numbered page B-19 (adding a map designating plant zones for the Baylands), marked Exhibit "B". 3. Descriptive matter being page E-1 through page E-7 (adding an appendix on detailed goals and policies for the Baylands) and page F-1 (adding an appendix on map definitions for the Open Space Plan), marked Exhibit "C". 4. A map entitled "THE OPEN SPACE PLAN," which will be dated April 23, 1973, which will be placed at the end of the Open Space Element of the General Plan, and which will be marked Exhibit "D" (replacing the two maps entitled "OPEN SPACE LANDS: URBAN LANDS AND BAYLANDS" and "OPEN SPACE LANDS: FOOTHILLS," following the present page 20)' a presentation map of which was approved with revisions by the ~lanning Commission on March 14, 1973. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission recommends that said Open Space Element of the General Plan of the City of Palo Alto be endorsed to show that the maps and descriptive materials contained therein have been so amended by the City Council of the City of Palo Alto. ADOPTED this 14th day of March, 1973, by the Planning Commission of the City of Palo Alto by the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Cody, Gordon, Powers, Steinberg. NOES: None. ABSENT: Klein, Rack. /s/ Mary Gordon Chairman of the Planning Commission D· 0 D 0 0 0 0 D a a 0 D 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 J D 0 0 D 0 J 0 RESOLUTION NO. 4727 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO MAKING AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN AS CERTIFIED TO THE CITY COUNCIL BY RESOLUTION NO. 163 OF THE I PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTED ON MARCH 14, 1973, BY DELETING THE BAYLANDS DEVELOPMENT PLAN (THREE-FINGER LAKE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palo Alto has duly prepared and recommended for adoption certain amendments to the General Plan of the City of Palo Alto, and the Planning Commission, after having held a public hearing on such proposed amendments on February 14, 1973, and March 14, 1973, pursuant to the provisions of Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 19.04.080, has certified such amendments to the City council recommending their incorporation into the General Plan~ and WHEREAS, the City council has also held a public hearing on the adoption of such amendments, pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 19.04.080 on April 23, 1973, notice of the time and place of which was published and given in the manner provided by law; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The General Plan of the City of Palo Alto adopted by the City Council by Resolution No. 3616 and amended by Resolution Nos. 3709, 3713, 3839, 3855, 4017, 4302, 4457, and 4585 is hereby further amended by rescinding said Resolution No. 4017 and making the following changes in the General Plan: 1. The deletion of the Three-Finger Lake Plan by removing pages 47, 47a, 47b, 47c, 47d, 47e, 47f, and 48 and by deleting the paragraph entitled "City-Wide Facilities" from page 63. -1- 2. The removal of the map entitled "BAYLANDS PLAN-4A-" following page 47a. SECTION 2. Said General Plan of the City of Palo Alto, in- eluding the General Plan Map, shall be endorsed to show that the maps and descriptive materials contained therein have been so amended by the City Council of the City of Palo Alto. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: April 23, 1973 AYES: Beahrs, Berwald, Clark, Comstock, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Seman NOES: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: Isl Ann J. Tanner city clerk APPROVED: Isl G. A. Sipel City Manager APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Isl Naphtali H. Knox Director of Planning APPROVED AS TO FORM: Isl M. D. Norek Assistant City Attorney APPROVED: /s/ Kirke W. Comstock Mayor -2- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 l 0 [J ~1 ] 0 0 0 D 0 0 D u j J RESOLUTION NO. 163 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDING AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN BY DELETING THE BAYLANDS DEVELOPMENT PLAN (THREE-FINGER LAKE) WHEREAS, upon the recommendation of the Planning Conunission of the City of Palo Alto, the Council of the City of Palo Alto on August 7, 1967, did amend the General Plan of the City of Palo Alto by Resolution No. 4017 to adopt the Three-Finger Lake Plan for the Baylands of the City of Palo Alto; and WHEREAS, the Planning Conunission of the City of Palo Alto has further studied the Baylands area of the City of Palo Alto since 1967; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the purpose, ecological impact, and probable cost of the Three-Finger Lake Plan, the Planning Conunission finds that the Three-Finger Lake Plan is unnecessary to the primary flood protection purpose of the Palo Alto flood basin and that it is inconsistent with the goals of maintaining natural ecological processes in the Baylands and preserving the Baylands as a wildlife preserve; and WHEREAS, the Planning Conunission further finds that the Palo Alto flood basin still will be usable for a variety of recreational and educational purposes compatible with the purposes of flood control and wildlife preservation without the Three-Finger Lake Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed deletion of the Three-Finger Lake Plan from the General Plan on February 14, 1973, and March 14, 1973, pursuant to the provisions of Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 19.04.080, notice of the time and place of which was published and given in the manner provided by law; -1- NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission recommends that the General Plan of the City of Palo Alto, adopted by the City Council by Resolution No. 3616 and amended by Resolutions Nos. 3709, 3713, 3839, 3855, 4017, 4302, 4457, and 4585, be further amended by rescinding said Resolution No. 4017 and making the following changes in the General Plan: 1. The deletion of the Three-Finger Lake Plan by removing pages 47, 47a, 47b, 47c, 47d, 47e, 47f, and 48 and by deleting the paragraph entitled "City-Wide Facilities" from page 63. 2. The removal of the map entitled "BAYLANDS PLAN-4A-" following page 47a. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission recommends that said General Plan of the City of Palo Alto, including the General Plan Map, be endorsed to show that the maps and descriptive materials contained therein have been so amended by the City Council of the City of Palo Alto. ADOPTED this 14th day of March, 1973, by the Planning Commission of the City of Palo Alto by the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Cody, Gordon, Powers, Steinberg. NOES: None. ABSENT: Klein, Rack. /s/ Mary Gordon Chairman of the Planning Commission -2- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 a a 0 D 0 D 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. 4585 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN BY THE ADDITION OF AN OPEN SPACE ELEMENT AS CERTIFIED TO THE CITY COUNCIL BY RESOLUTION NO. 140 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTED ON APRIL 5, 1972 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palo Alto has duly prepared and recommended for adootion an addition to the General Plan of the City of Palo Alto, and the Planning Commission, after holding a public hearing on such proposed addition on April 5, 1972, pursuant to the provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Section 19.04.080, had certified such addition to the City Council recommending incorooration of an open space element into the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has also held a public hearing on the adoption of such amendment, pursuant to Section 19.04.080 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, on April 17, 1972 , notice of time and place of which was published and given in the manner provided by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt said addition, certified and reported on by the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, tihe Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The General Plan of the City of Palo Alto adopted by the City Couhcil by Resolution No. 3616 and amended by Resolutions Nos. 3709, 3713, 3839, 3855, 4017, 4~302, and 4457 is hereby further amended to read as indicated in the following descriptive material, true copies of which are attached hereto, entitled, "Open Space Element of the Palo Alto General Plan" dated March 28, 1972. - 1 - OBJECTIVES DGwnto;n '' f!)r Poopl• Our d<Mntowrt, t,,,.. Untvrr..Hy AVP.nue Btr.inets Diltrict, u!rvas 1111ny functjons It h 1 COIJ'll!'f't tal 1hop:pli'\t) 11nd \'1rvfu~ di\tr'tct. an ~loynrrit, profe·.,~lonal JJ1d offtc(' di•trh:t, 1 ti0vtnrn'l!nt11.1 1n1J c.orrnumtcaticm:; d1-.trtct. 1 cultural •nd tO&ftrt•lnrir.nt- diH<l<t, • nol9nbo1;1ood convr.nlencr !.l10iJpl~g cllttrlcl, •nd • ~olrl dlHrl<t lhorefor~, our "°"ntllWn h, •nd ·.h•wld t'" lor Pt<PI• lbe poop le th1l l Iv~ In tnr t=-edht11t Ol'e.&J~ u1e pcoo1e ttat "o" 111 t,,. .,._.,, end thtt f'#OPlf' thlt vhtt tt-i-4'f"l!• for tlH! var~ou::; t)CC'ido; and 5trv1tt""..· whlct1 t t provtck-' ftatu~v,.r, th• err11 n tt h d••~loped pr,,..er1l, • conf!!ct botw°"" all thr.• ri<!ODle tl1d lM 1Ull11"Clbllo, wit!; It; nohe, flJlrr.$, phyq" 1 prr.ttnr.r &rd v '\Ull d!Hr~, t :or lhli COhfl1ct dl,,fntshM, the Pl•asure •"•' • tJl'fort of th1· pcdMtrhn Any ll!JbHc •fforts nad• In l"\lrovt the ~1MntOo1n district ,hould be 1dd,...,cd •o rM11,.~foo of ,,, .. <Wlat•rfllll• •ffact• of lrofftc and •haul~ ••.h•nto roe podestrfon ti:uc hi order to md(' tt',t cSCMnto,.,n ahtrtrt .-C!Qrt' delinb1l'I onvlroment for a11 tt1to:c p.eoplc1. Ori.tr: th~y Inn~ t;11,1r u1·)., o~r.yc. lus aM<I t>usei n1· w-'Hr. 1nlo tht!r d1Ur1c.t, f.hev AJ1t uu~ t,e Dt.'i1Mtrl.m Spit:r.i wfthln th• dU#f'\town dh.trht ~d if :tiey ire to ll~q,.r. to ~pt"N.! rnor~ tiO!t!', to orutne on"' purfOS" l"lr ~rrtir~a wt th 1not11rr In dalmUJWn, to ••turn •g•ln -· in \llOrt, t.o <•Jqy trln~ In '"r dnwntawn dt1trlct, then IL I~ <•Inly o' !)r.Jhoi.td1ns tnat lhr_y 1nll •nJO)I It. A ll'.l!Or obj~ctlvo. tll~n. h to •• Ulblhh Ill 1ttr0<llvo, ucltlng llJld ""'"Jrablt t'1aract.r "1tlch wtll ca."111nt• • hlqn d~Oror of 1-sth•qc quality wllh a urotqht fonwil fun<tlonal utlllly ~hich will rn<.aur•g~ peoplt to uu 1nd •nJa.v th• f•tllltle> end furlllr~. to ~··e•te • hl~hly clulroble phys!C41 •nvlrn11<1enr In wfl1th ~•llfll• "IY llv~. wor·I,, ~11op. rnh•. ~nu pl~ One of th• obJtctlvea of this propeul h to u$• tht! 11lott•d budget of S975,0ll0 to the b~t .. !v1nt1u•. Thr ccnceot• Ind rl-nts have 11~ .. fo1.,.Jlltl!d with lhh UPl'•""°H In "Ind. llolur&lty, mire •Ould be don• on • larq<r buf.IJet, ltn an• >'loller nne, but IM 11!~tn c rlurlt 11011> Is nu l.M proll0$ed ~udoet be•n uud tr su<h 1 Wfl/ ll to b1meflt the whole dlJlfnlown dl>trlct, to(,. .. ,~ tho 9fr•tMt .ruual imtuct PQ!.>ltle. to"'"~' IM dcwntDWn • d"'lrobl• Pl•ce to return 1.0 for •"Y ntmOtr or rr.l~I. to cre•u-the grertoit utf1tt)' 11nd conventrnctt, e\.o~ci1l l;t lo lllr pedHtrhn, but •ho tho rotort" lnd bu• rld~r? Glvrn th• conflicting 9oah Ind eon1tr1ittt, •• f.el th•y hove Dt>t1111t<1•t •dvanOqto~ly op'1"1lrd lllF, e1~rt r"'!J.or AOd th1• txltl ph~1n~ (>( •Ire Of th~ elt'"•nts f'll<f llfllt d•tllf•d '1t1nq and c.on~truct1or1 dr'1't1lr.1Ji, olld bfd e"-tlr,.te) HCllfi::•Y(tt', tho conc•o1·~ 1;n!l rl'li>lh'9' 1rPQrt.anc;c. plu.1n9. 1111(f i:.:P\ar.lctnr of tbe el£'.!:e•\t""I. 1tt-•. lf'Arlv \ t.rted 'Ind It h upon Uth buh th~t 1 fudl)li'.e"t ~hallld b• "'l:\dr- An (lf>jH~.lve I• to tncrtn< lhn l••rl ot nlyllt 11,.,, tlluMln•t•cw In 01dor to r1'ctucr tha m ... ib11Hy of tr1ff"c lt"ddent!;. 1'1rrca~e ll'I'=' de~nin of ut11~.v of t'lt ocdetf.1 Arid rm:ouriqe lllOrt: 1rthtty "'nd u:.o O'f tttr dowr.•own dhtr1ct in fhf' ~vmttr19 P11hl'• .afet.Y ~hould hn Nloto'11,,_d •1111 lrprovt<J to any caH ""' •nd l~''l•• ffro t1ydrtnU tn nt."W location~ •nd rt'Dl1(e·~cnt'" fn tho 1Jthi:r loution·. t..tid r:-ort' fin• thni~ bOXt'S wl I I 1d1t to tncrca-:od fitc p1·ot~ttion lhtttil! •• 1 i be r..-edf'd anyway. bu~ c.sn hr 1;oordlo•ted wttn tht" tOtttl bt"ilut•nutlon 1r--,n1ve~rrt,; Anothor obJcctlv• Of the l1'1provcrcn~ prOQfl.'1 .. to cope With the• traffic 104d ond rft«tuc.., thr hi~h 1cc1Qot· rot@ on IJ~1ven.t~,. AvellUt' tn c rro~onatily ~•fr. al"tti CirdN·ly rnannc" ~fety, r.onrnhnce and i;;or'm-~ for both Ot!th!0.trt11ns Md t1ritorht-. t1111 t•fl lmp'~•d ~y tll" tm~roved lt~ht1n], tne lnc,..,ued storaqo, t.J04<1ty of thr ornposrd parld"!J 91r19to. Ind th~ oro_pmrd •ddft~tOS. IP\11 ~r1t'lotncrr11'"t to the peodt"Strt~n rpur Ont Olhor obJe<th" lo thn b'•utHic1tlon r.l•n"ln1 h ti,., tlll! or""' ud ol-nu h~ made of nanC:~r·r.tt yet durd>te fllattr1th 111d 1n '.iuth .11 way at to retSutr the IPA•ntcoantP of both the eleqnt'i .end 1re•S to the lowest ,·ea:.on.bte 1~vels co:uhtent w~L~ cur ston4ard~ <.f !ldine:o> CONCEPTS In order to carry out these main objectives of a more pleasant and useful pedestrian environment, and at the same til'IO handle the necessary traffic in the district and facilitate access to the dfstrict1s functions, several concepts have evolved. The first concept is that there should be a unifying treatment over the whole district which will identify it 1s the University Avenue Busfnl!Ss District, the city's downtown, This treatment will be distinctive and unique and will create a high degree of "fH gibflity" for the downtown. People will retain the image, rem..Oer it, and return Because there would be four structures, one on each corner at every intersection, they would create a Jll7"erful sense of definition of the intersection space and its importance for pedestrians and motorists. Modified structures would be on the four corners of each intersection of Hamilton and Lytton within the downtown district. They would have everything up to the traffic signal, but not the street lights on top. The same basic theme and quality would thus be restated on all the comers of the downtown district. In addition to having the 11>0d1fied multi-purpose structures on each of the four corners at intersections other than University Avenue, some benches, planters and sculpture aho would be located at these intersections . This would reinforce the "imagfbility" of the downtown as a district, and further serve to identify the district clearly. ff ft is a pleasant .....,ry. One of the main concepts is that of the enhancenoent and greater utilization of the The second concept is that unique and well designed elements such as Hreet and traffic light standards, benches, planters, etc., gathered mainly at the corners of each intersection would create the greatest visual impact for the given expenditure considered, and would have the most utility to the pedestrian while aiding the motorist, and would suppl..,ent the basic landscaping and lighting treatment over the entire district. One of the most unique concepts is that of combining a number of required functional objects usually designed as independent, unrelated and visually Incompatible elements into a unified, simple but handso"" structure which would supply both the pedestrian and motorist with essential knowledge and fulfill the needs each requires. Usually the street lights, traffic signals, street signs, traffic signs, waste baskets and drinking fountains are designed separately and stand separately, or some have been attached haphazardly as afterthoughts to others, and the result is visual clutter and informational confusion. Yet, all are either absolute necessities or highly desirable at downtown intersections. Our concept, then, is to simplify and to unify these necessary objects within one structure. intersections on University Avenue. Space which is now the unutilfzed part of the street would be added to the sfd.,,.alk as pedestrian zones. An area approximately eight to ten feet would be added beyond the existing curb, varying 10 to 40 feet back from the corner and extend! ng up to and arround the corner and then about 10 to 40 feet along the adjacent curbline. The variations will be flexible enough to take into account each specific and unique comer situation. This would be doM at all four corners of the intersection, significantly adding to the area available to pedestrians, and utilizing those portions of the street which are most under-utilized by vehicles. Between 30 and 70 parking spaces would be removed due to this expansion of the pedestrian space at the comers, but this would be 1nOre than 10ade up for in the proposed parking garage. It would be at these widened comer areas of each block where benches on walls, planters, pools, fountains, kiosks and directories, sculpture, bike racks, drinking fountains, wastebaskets, newsstands, phone booths, etc., can be located. This is where pedestrians n11st waft for lights, buses and friends, n11st make decisions and directional changes, 111Jst cross strategic pedestrian paths and all the vehicular traffic. It is lik.,,.lse where peoplewatching is best, where there is enough hustle and bustle to feel involved in the life of the City, but where one is securely out of the streoms of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. People wtll stop to rest from their shopping and errands ff pleasant, well- maintafned places are provided, they may even linger here and remain in the downtown to shop and enjoy it, rather than driving away, adding to the noon rush hour. )> ., , r -f )> < z ., , -0 0 )> ., , r m r 0 0 " 0 A concept was developed to fmpll!ll1ent the traffic and parking objectives which contain several rellted '1!asures. First, a restrfpfng program has already taken place. On University, Lytton and Hu flton Avenues, an exclusive left turn lane has been added at all Intersections where ft fs possible to make 1 left turn. Traffic counts taken since the restrfpfng show that this has reduced the travel time 15 to 20X, particularly on University Avenue, due to the smoother flow of traffic. As part of the beautification program, a planted median would be construct1d on University Avenue. It would be no wider than the left turn lane fs now, and a left turn storage bay for 1t least three cars would be provided at e1ch possible left turn. Therefore, traffic flow on University Avenue would remain essentially fn fts present Improved stlte. Secondly, of course, 1ddftfon1l off-street parking would be provided by the Bryant Street Street Garage, supph••ontfng the existing off-street parking. Short te"' metered parking would still be m1fntafned on all the streets where ft now fs, Including University Avenue. In this concept, University Avenue wfll become an easier and more convenient shopping access street, providing direct access to stores and parking for the shorter one or two errand trips of shopp1rs or business visitors, whfle continuing to carry the traffic. Lytton and H1mflton wfll continue, as the local clrcuh tfon streets, to provide good access to the off-street parking lots and garages, will also provide metered parking IS now, and will continue to be the best streets for t roversfng the downtown district. An Important concept fs to seek out and use all the presently under-utflfzed public areas fn the downtown district. If and where there are further opportunities to expand the pedestrian space, these locations should be used as plazas, vest-pocket parks and other landscaped spaces. Adaptebflfty fs 1 key concept, also. Wh1tever fs done should not preclude 1ddftfonal changes from being made or prevent other el0111ents fnm being added to those now being proposed. In other words, 01ore benches, planters and pools, etc., may be added at a liter date which would be c.,,,patfble to these being proposed. And, the street and traffic lfght structures would be capable of Incorporating more accessories IS the n•ed arose. For Instance, existing trees would ......,fn where desired by tenants and owners and new ones likewise planted only where desired. Trees can be very opaque or very transparent. Where existing trees hide property fdentfffcatfon, they may be pruned to grow higher. If an op1que tree •fght obscure the property fdentfflcatfon, a more transparent tree can be utfllzed, or a low tree or a ti ll but slender tree, or no tree at all but perh1ps a low or 010dfum height planter. The s1me would be true of planters, of p1vfng, of benches, of fountains and pools. Each can be adapted to the unique dimensions and requirements of any corner situation. Each corner wfll be looked at fn detafl to detennfne exactly what can be accanmodated, what would be appropriate, and how large the pedestrian space should be N de. The character of the Intersections would be one of openness, of heightened but controlled activity due to the focal nature of an Intersection, directing pedestrians and vehicles through ft from sever1l directions, and due to the need for an ubobstructed view to see the fnfomatfon necessary at each Intersection, resulting fn the absence of trees and planting as one 1ppro1ches the corner. This would contr1st to the relative Intimacy of the treelfned streets leading up to these Intersections. On ~lversfty, with fts landscaped ,...dfan, this sense of Intimacy would be even further enhanced and the contrast more apparent between Intersection and straet segment. Of course, the benches, pools and planters would act to tfe the two spatial treatments together, for the planting would definitely end at the bench and pool areas, and the brick p1vfng would sfgn1l the beginning of the more open and active f ntersactfons. ELEMENTS Jntll!rsections A typical intersection on University Avenue would have brick paving added to the edges of the four corners. The four light structures wfth all its accessories, would stand on each corner. The elfments on one corner would be complerented by those on adjacent corners. Together, they would provide all of the functional requirements and amenities proposed in this design concept. Together, they might include two or three planters. three or four benches on walls, a pool or fountain, a ki osk, a bicycle rack. a sculpture, newspaper racks, a telephone booth or two, a ma.fl box, ffre hydrant and fire alann box. Paving The paving would be a non-skid brick or paving block which would iMpart a rich, wann color and texture to the sidewalk surface. It would not crack or be drab as concrete often is 1 and it would be easier to re1TJ0Ve and replace, if the need arises. Benches Benches would be of sturdy weather-proofed wood, but would be ooore c11Dfortable and elegant than concrete benches. They would be attached to a tapered concrete wall 1 about three and a half feet high and would, therefore, be protected from traffic. The wall could becD!lle the side of a planter or could be freestanding. The benches would be capable of following any curvature in the wall, giving them a flowing yet stable built-in appearance. Trees It is proposed that there be a variety of trees used, in order to fulfill a variety of functions. They will add a diversity of colors, fo ms, and textures to the downtown district. Some will be orna,,.ntals, sor.e will be shade trees. Some might be deciduous, while most would keep their leaves year round. --------------~ -------· ------------------;:::.~~ ------=---. ----~--A ,~....::=:-:-_:.::::-;:::. _;:;:-:--.. ---~ ----::::--·---------------------------~---~---------~ --------·---~ ---__ :. ::::------::=::-----::--------· . ..---,_.-:.:.:..--·=---------------· ~ -::::..---_ _, -,..~ -- ~ ~ __..-. ___...--: ---.---/ ..... .-;.::_,,..;::.~ ;;;;~/C .· Lighting The totll streot lighting on University Avenue rust serve two groups. ped•Hrians and r.ootorists. At the corners would be the set of unique structurl!!s. prov1d1nq riore than u ple light. Betw .. n corners, two kinds of lighting would be utilized. To obtain the lighting level ca11mmsur1to with traffic safecy, larg'r 1nd higher lights would be used; while s11aller ones would be intersp•rsed between them to relete to the speed and scale of the pedestrian 1nd light up the sidewalks shaded fl'lll'I the street lamps by the boulevard trt'es . The quality or color of light is also i1111ortant. The standard mercury vapor i..,arts an unpleasant bluish-green cast to a person's co~lexion, even though it is 1n efficient lamp in te""' of delivering foot-candles ind its longer lffe. For purposes of making the downtown a ..,re pleasant place to be in the evening, it is proposed that some other light source be used which i11111arts a wamer, flesh colored cast to the complexi on. It '"1Y be a high-pressure sodium vapor l .. p, a color corrected mercury v1por, an inc1ndes1nt limp, or smo combination of these, but the end result will be a 11uch moro comfortable and 1ppealing atmosphere and will not only •positive, but a pleaunt eh..ent giving identity to the business district. For University Avenue, the unique light structure would have sOITle festive street lighting at the top. H.xt, about half way down would be the traffic signals, below that an illtmoinated street name sign on each of the four sides. Below that would be the directional and infonutfonol signs needed by vehicles. Down 1t the base of the 25' to 30' structure would be either a drinking fountain or a waste basket, probably two of each, on opposite corners, so that all pedestrians crossing the str•et •ight pass one waste basket and one drinking fountain. Thirty foot poles with six to eight foot ~ast •IT'S ind large output l..,ps would be used on all the streets but University Avenue. On University Avenue a smaller light, llllre in scale with the pedestrian, will be used. It would be only about 10 feet high and would occur every 40 to 50 feet, and 1lso on the planted median itself. In addition, ft would be used in between the hrger street ligll ts on all other streets in the district. It would be, therefore, a co"stant el.,.ont over the entire downtown and would serve, along wi th the planting, to unify and give distinction ard identify to the district.