Planning & Transportation Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening everyone. I call to order the March reporting in progress.

I call to order the March 11th, 2026 special joint meeting of the architectural review board and the planning and transportation commission. Uh a few notes before we begin. Um, we'll use a slightly modified process tonight. Um, for the action item, there will be a single staff presentation and a single public comment period. For questions and discussion, we'll take turns. Uh, ARB first and PTC second. Um, we don't have enough requests to speak lights for every board member and commissioner. So, Chair Chan and I will call on you in order, but uh please raise a hand if you have a question or comment um a followup that we should handle out of order. We expect and hope there will be some discussion between ARB and PTC members. So, Church, if I missed anything or is that covered?

No. Yeah, pretty good. I have heard a request that we introduce each other. Uh introduce ourselves. So, uh perhaps before the roll call, we can just run down the list and everyone uh say your name. Hi, I'm Carrie Templeton, a planning and transportation commissioner for about eight years now. Right. Kendra Rosenberg, ARB, um for about four or five years now. Hello, my name is Forest Peterson. I've been on the uh PTC for one year.

Madcock ARB about two three years something like that. Hi Yingi Chen with ARB in fourth year. Alan Aken PTC. This is almost the end of my third year. Brian Aang this is my well I'm finishing up my fifth year on the PTC. I am Martin Jojarth and this is the beginning of my first year uh on the ARB. Bart Hecman PTC 6 years.

Me too. ARB six years. David Hirsch. Thank you all. Mr. Cavetera, would you call the roles please? Uh yes. Uh Cherkin, uh first I'll be calling PTC's roll call. Uh, Chair Aken here. Uh, Vice Chair Chen here. Um, Chang, sorry about that. Vice Chair Chang. Uh, Commissioner Hecman here. Uh, Commissioner Peterson here. Uh, Commissioner Tippleton here. Commissioner G. Commissioner James. We have quorum noting Commissioner James and G are absent. Uh, now I'll do ARB's roll call. Uh, Chair Chen, present. Uh, Vice Chair Adcock, present. Board member Hirsch, present. Board member Joearth

present. Board member Rosenberg present. For the record we have ARB quorum. Thank you Mr. Deto. Assistant director Armor. Do we have any agenda changes tonight? No changes. Mr. Deo, do we have any request to comment on items not on tonight's agenda? Um through the chair. I've not received any public comment cards at this moment and I see no raise hands on Zoom. Thank you, Missur. May we have the city official reports?

Yes, absolutely. And thank you and uh welcome to you all. Uh thank you for joining us for this special joint meeting of the planning and transportation commission and the architectural review board. Uh next slide, please. I'm going to just do a quick look ahead at the next meeting for each of for the commission and the board. Uh in both cases, we're going to be conducting a study session to discuss the San Antonio Road area plan looking at the different components of the alternatives uh to direct and provide input for council consideration for the planning and transportation commission. On the 25th, we also expect to bring to you a draft ordinance uh in regards to the retail vitality that we are working on. Next slide. And then a look back at this week's council uh agenda items. There was uh planned to be a discussion of the implementation of Senate Bill uh 79, but that was postponed. And we had approval on consent of the dimminimus exception ordinance that the planning and transportation commission considered and recommended. There was also a pre-screening for a zoning code amendment in regards to TDR's transfer of development rights specifically uh applying to 51 and Cena Avenue. That was also complete. If a formal application is submitted, then we will take it through the normal zoning code amendment process. Next week, we do anticipate three different items that have been discussed by both the board and the commission. We will be reviewing they will be reviewing 2100 Gang Road, which

was a builder's remedy project uh recommended for approval. uh 4075 El Camino Way, a plan community amendment that had a um a number of different components as terms of the recommendation including um modification and reduction in the scope. Um it would take a while for me to describe all of the recommendation from the board and the commission. So I won't get into that now. Um but for context wanted to share those notes and the bird friendly design ordinance will also be there for consideration uh and potential adoption. And with that that is the end of the director's report but if you have any questions I am available. We do not have a report from the office of transportation this evening though we will have a representative available online to answer questions about the coverly project. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair Chen. Would you like to pull the board members to see if anyone has a question about the official reports? Sure. If anyone from the ARB have any questions to the staff at this moment? No. Good. BetC. Uh, do we know when SB79 will go to city council? A date has not yet been set. Thanks. Any other questions?

Then let us proceed to uh tonight's action item. Uh this is a recommendation to council on the adoption of the coverly conceptual master plan. May we have the staff presentation?

All right. Good evening, Chair Akin, Chair Shen, Vice Chair Chang, Vice Chair Adcock, and fellow commissioners and board members. Uh we are especially excited to be here tonight for the first ever joint PTC and ARB meeting. Thank you so much for having us. My name is Amanda Demel and I'm the assistant director for the community services department. I'm joined tonight by Kristen Okaine, director of community services. We also have Kari Kaufman from Rinken Consultants joining us virtually and she will be available to answer any questions you may have after the presentation regarding the SQA document. We also will be joined by Raphael Riyaz, a senior engineer from the office of transportation who will be available for questions at well as well. We're here tonight to present to you the final draft of the Cubly conceptual master plan and the draft initial study mitigated negative declaration for the Cubberly conceptual master plan and seek your recommendation for the city council to adopt this plan and seek a document in April. Next slide, please. First, starting with our work plan updates, we last visited the PTC on July 9th and the ARB on July 17th, which is denoted with the green stars on the left column of the slide in front of you. Since then, a great deal has occurred which we are excited to share with you this evening. In September, we hosted the third and final community meeting as well as presented to the parks and recreation commission. Then we presented a recap of the third community meeting and second poll outline to city council in October and then released poll two to the community in November. In December, we reviewed poll two results with city council, which very quickly prompted us to draft and release poll number three to the community in early January 2026. Most recently on February 9th, we reviewed the results of the third community poll as well as city council approved a letter of intent to enter into a public private partnership agreement with local theater company Theaterworks Silicon Valley to partner

on a twotheater complex development which we will share in more detail in the coming slides. That then brings us here to March 11th where we're looking forward to sharing with you this evening the final draft of the Cubberly conceptual master plan and SQA document. Next slide, please. As we look ahead to our upcoming project milestones, we've outlined the key dates anticipated as of now. On March 16th, we will release our fourth and final poll to the community. Then on March 24th, we will present this conceptual master plan and seek a document to the parks and recreation commission seeking their recommendation for council city council to adopt as well. On April 20th, we are scheduled to present this conceptual master plan and finalize document for city council consideration of adoption. In June, council approval to place a measure on the November ballot. Then in August is the deadline to submit final ballot language for the November 2026 election, which brings us to November 2026, the election and placement of a ballot measure. Next slide, please. Uh, go back one slide. There we go. Uh, we'd now like to present to you the final draft of the Cberly conceptual master plan. Attachment B in your packet links to the conceptual master plan document and the associated appendices. Next slide, please. The Cubly conceptual master plan represents a long-term guiding vision for the Cberly site. Development of the plan was created with input received during the community co-design process with multiple diverse stakeholder groups, building off the previous 2019 coverly concept plan. We'd like to emphasize that this is a conceptual plan and it serves as framework as one possibility for future development of a phased approach to site development that includes a combination of new construction and building renovations. The phased approach is intentional. It allows the site to be

developed over time as funding is secured and minimizes program program disruption during construction. Staff are concurrently exploring funding mechanisms um as available funding will ultimately influence the pace and scope of redevelopment. Potential funding mechanisms may include a combination of development fees, grants, philanthropy, a ballot measure, and community partners. Phase one includes a combination of new and renovated buildings, including a new recreation and wellness center, as well as a new performing arts center. It could also include programmable spaces for education, visual arts, flexible use space to serve changing community needs now and well into the future. Next slide, please. Now, looking at the current site, last time we visited each of you, we shared more about the history of the site. So, we're not going to go into great detail on the history and the background of the project. Uh, what we'd like to focus on tonight with our limited time is how the concept plan has evolved since then. Uh what we'll start with is a refresher of the current site uh in context. What is depicted on the current slide is the current is the CLY community center campus um as it exists now. On the right hand side in purple is the city's existing 8 acres that we currently own. On the left hand side in yellow is the seven acres we are currently negotiating to purchase from the school district. Together, it would create the 15 acres we have been master planning with the community and stakeholders. In the gray dashed areas, including the parking lot immediately to the left of the yellow area to be purchased. And along the top of the map are the 20.5 acres we anticipate to continue to lease from PAUSD, which includes two parking lots, athletic fields, and the track and field. Next slide, please. Now moving to what one option of a completed phase one could look like. We will review in the following slides the

stages of deconstruction and construction in this concept design. By the end of phase one, it would be a major milestone and could offer complete services for the Cubberly site. Targeted renovations or new construction could also be pursued independently of a full phase 1 implementation, providing new and revitalized indoor and outdoor spaces for the community. If and when phase one is completed, the city could choose to pause after construction or continue subsequent phases pending funding mechanisms available. Again, this is one potential conceptual plan for the site, all pending limit uh funding limitations and partner contributions. Next slide, please. This slide looks at phase one deconstruction and construction sequencing. While some programming will need to be relocated to temporary facilities for periods of time, the goal would be to continue as much existing programming as possible throughout the deconstruction and construction timeline for continuity of programming and to provide as little disruption to services as possible. Currently, PAUSD occupies multiple buildings on site either through their own programs or subleasases, including in the auditorium, A&B wings, and the I building. And if and when they vacate pending our purchase of the additional 7 acres, we would have new square footage available um for us to use during this transition period to move existing programming around the site. The upper right diagram zero is the existing site shown. Um all the current buildings are in brown. The lower right diagram 1.1 shows the first phase of proposed deconstruction in the area within the dashed red lines would be deconstructed first which includes the JK, LPH and U buildings. Next slide please. Diagram 1.2 2 in the upper left shows the first constructed buildings which would include the recreation and wellness center, the facilities and

emergency services area, a large flex room, a cafe, kitchen and concession area, a new outdoor pool, and the raised tennis courts over the existing outdoor parking lot. Diagram 1.3 in the bottom left shows the deconstruction scope area of A, B, M, and G wings and a portion of the Cly and portions of C and D wings. The upper right diagram 1.4 shows construction of a new performing arts education and flex space and education and enrichment building next to the recreation and wellness building. And then the construction of a twotheater performing arts complex which would include a new back of house and lobby space, renovations to the Cly and Pavilion. This would be in partnership with the theater works Silicon Valley. Lastly, the lower right diagram 1.5 shows renovation of the auditorium in the remainder of C and D wings as well as STV and F wings. Next slide, please. This slide illustrates what the site could look like at the excuse me at the completion of phase one. Again, this represents one conceptual design. As the project advances into the architectural phase, both the design and phasing may evolve in response to factors such as funding availability, community needs, and partner development timelines. Currently, the city has two public private partnerships committed to supporting development on the site. As briefly mentioned previously, the friends of the recreation and wellness center who had who are advancing plans for the indoor gymnasiums within the recreation and wellness center and most recently Theaterwork Silicon Valley which is exploring development of the two theater performing arts complex. As these partnerships continue to refine their scopes and work, they will help inform and influence the overall development and phasing of the Coverly site. Next slide, please. Now looking at a complete phase one from a programming perspective. This shows

phase one on campus by levels one, two, and three. Most buildings are one level, three buildings are two levels, and only one building is three levels. The new total of recreation and wellness space depicted in green is now 68,000 total square feet. Performing arts in pink totals 51,000 square feet. Education enrichment in purple 34,000 square feet. community services space in blue 36,250 square feet and visual arts and technology in red with 27,000 square feet. I'd like to note as well many of these categorizations can be fluid as many services we may offer on campus can fit into multiple categories. So there is flexibility and that is intentional to give us the most adaptability adaptability for future changing community needs. At this stage, the program categories were developed based on input from the community members and stakeholders, and they reflect space for current tenants on the campus while allowing for additional square footage to support new programs and services that can serve the broader community. The exact locations and future service providers would be determined in later phases as the project moves forward. Next slide, please. Zooming in now on the buildings in phase one. We want to highlight some of the features that could be offered. Longer descriptions and full details can be found in the master plan document and appendix. Currently, the recreation and wellness center is depicted as a two-story building that has space for four gymnasiums that could be used for a variety of sports, group exercise classes, and could also function as an emergency shelter as needed. The space could also be used for rentals and community events. The facility and emergency services area could support the entire campus's maintenance and facility needs and could include aspects such as vehicle parking, storage, facility, equipment, and more. The new tennis deck and parking structure would

have six elevated tennis courts which exist there now uh with the parking level now underneath the tennis courts. On this slide, I'd also like to highlight that as mentioned um previously, the city has the current partnership with the Friends of the Recreation and Wellness Center, the registered 501c3, whose purpose is to support fundraising in the advancement of the new indoor gymnasium space at the Cly site. The gymnasium component of the recreation and wellness center could not only look different in scope than what's depicted here, but also potentially move forward earlier than the rest of the adjacent buildings if the friends secure funding sooner than the broader project. Next slide, please. Attached to the recreation and wellness center, uh a large flexible space is designed that could operate similar to the current El Palo Alto room at Mitchell Park Community Center. It could host a diverse array of activities such as ballroom dance, performing arts functions, community meetings, weddings, parties, and other events. Uh it would be adjacent to the cafe, kitchen, concessions area that could have a commercial kitchen that could support these large um events that would be hosted in that space. Uh the kitchen could also be used for cooking classes and camps as well as used when the space may be deployed as an emergency shelter. The cafe is an area where community members could purchase light refreshments and graband go food. This is just one option of where the cafe could go. Alternative options could be in building I or elsewhere. Another cafe was planned during phase three, but this was to give an option sooner in development. The concessions area could serve snacks for events in the gym, pool, and athletic fields and could be a walk-up window on the south side of the building. The community pool here is envisioned to be a sixlane 25 meter pool to support meats and recreational community use. Next slide, please. The education and enrichment building concept is a two-story building designed to accommodate a variety of

configurations and uses such as classrooms, early childhood education, afterchool programs, lecture halls, adult education classes, administrative offices, and flexible youth space. Like many of the buildings in this plan, it is 70 ft wide, designed for easy configuration and reconfiguration to maximize flexibility and accommodate a wide array of uses in spatial configurations such as double loaded corridors. The three-story performing arts education flex building could be similar in use to the two-story education and enrichment building and has the third floor for flexible use. Building I, the brown building here on the slide, is one of the renovated concrete framed buildings. It could support flexible use and could accommodate future long-term tenants and rentable flex activities. Next slide, please. Here shows the performing arts area where the city and theaterwork Silicon Valley would partner to create a two theater complex that includes renovating the existing Cubly Theater and Pavilion and adding new construction. A letter of intent outlining this partnership was adopted by the city council on February 9th, 2026. While plans are still evolving and not yet finalized, the current vision includes upgrading the existing Cberly Theater to support continued community use. Improvements could include adding new restrooms, expanded lobby and back of house space, and enhanced accessibility and technology. The pavilion is envisioned to be renovated as the new 500 seat home for Theater Works Silicon Valley. Next slide, please. At the end of phase one, the last step would be to complete renovation of the existing buildings which would include new building systems, structural upgrades, finishes, roofing, etc. Community service functions could operate from the renovated auditorium, building C and D in addition to flexible

spaces on campus. Renovated buildings STV and F could support visual arts functions. Such uses could include flexible classroom space, studio space, maker space, and a gallery. Of course, building use can shift to meet program and community needs. Next slide, please. Outdoor program spaces are a central component of this project. Community input emphasized the importance of welcoming, inclusive, and flexible intergenerational gathering spaces that connect to the site's natural amenities. We want to quickly highlight a few of these spaces that could be implemented in phase one. First, the photos on the right showcase an urban forest and natural amenities. A major goal of this plan was to create more outdoor space for flexible events and connection to plants and the nature systems. This can promote early childhood education, multi-generational connection, multicultural sharing, and natural learning. Examples include implementing pollinator gardens, native plantings, natural play and picnic areas, outdoor classrooms, or sculpture gardens. Next slide, please. Another highly sought-after amenity is the outdoor amphitheater. It could be used to host a variety of events such as summer concerts, dance performances, and theater productions. The performing arts and visual arts and technology buildings form the two anchors for the cultural plaza. This could be used for arts fairs, dance performances, drumming circles, lunar new year celebrations, and other cultural programming and festivals. You'll also notice the buildings shown in the background of these eyele views. Uh at this stage, they represent general massing only, not architectural design. The conceptual master plan does not establish architectural style which would be determined in a future design phase with community input.

Next slide please. Okay, that was a highle overview of what phase one could potentially include depending on when and how funding is secured. Elements of the plan could be implemented in different sequences, scales, and scopes. The conceptual master plan also outlines phase two and three. While we recognize that these later phases are unlikely to be constructed in the near term due to the significant funding required, they are also included to reflect the broader long-term vision for the site. These phases also reflect the reflect and incorporate valuable input from our community members and stakeholders gathered throughout the engagement process. In addition, including the full site buildout within the conceptual master plan allows the city to complete the SQA analysis for the entire project area, assessing the potential environmental impacts of the full buildout. Completing this analysis now provides the city with greater flexibility in the future to advance additional phases when funding funding and opportunities become available as the SQA process is a significant and timeintensive undertaking. Next slide, please. So, with that being said, we'd like to briefly show the proposed sequencing for phases two and three. Phase two, shown on the left hand side, would focus on construction on the new visual arts and technology buildings, which could include maker space and workshop areas for hands-on projects as well as gallery space for city curated and community exhibitions and artist studios. Phase three would complete the community services section and provide a location for a new cafe and lounge gathering space along with new community service and flexible space. Flexible space is especially valuable as it provides the ability to adapt to changing program needs and future community priorities. Like much of the campus, this space is

designed to be futureproof, multi-purpose, and nimble. It could support staffled programs, rentals, office space, and potentially accommodate additional tenants. Next slide, please. This slide illustrates what the campus could look like if all three phases were ultimately completed utilizing this conceptual master plan. While this represents a long-term vision for the site, again, staff does not anticipate full buildout in the near-term future as it would require significant additional funding as pre previously stated. Next slide, please. Overall, this plan proposes to increase the amount of indoor space from the current 184,000 square ft to 232,250 ft after phase 1 and ultimately to 284,000 ft after phases 2 and three are completed. Outdoor space increases from 250,000 ft to 390,000 after phase 1 and to 415 thou 15,000 after phase 2 and three. Parking spaces increased from 520 stalls to 640 after phase 1 to 840 after phases 2 and three. A few examples of where square footage increases are notable include recreational space including gyms and programmable spaces for health and wellness, expanded theater and performing arts spaces with improved accessibility, visual art spaces for art programs, classes and exhibits for the community including a maker space and flexible spaces for city programming of classes and camps and rentals uh which currently just don't exist at the campus. Now lastly, the increased outdoor space provides more diverse uses such as events, performances, outdoor programs, and unstructured play and casual gathering spaces. Next slide, please. Uh looking now at the phase one walking

and biking plan. This plan prioritizes pedestrian and biking safety while increasing accessibility and convenience across access for vehicles. uh walking and biking paths have minimal intersection with cars and connect to the existing and future planned bike and pedestrian paths. The bike and pedestrian traffic has been designed for two use case scenarios. The first is for passing through the community center without stopping and second is for arriving at the center for an activity. There will also be both short-term and long-term bike parking on site. Next slide, please. And apologies to interrupt. Uh, it looks like the slides have gone down, so we're seeing you now instead of the slides on the screens. It just happened on the last. One moment, please. Thank you.

Thanks very much. Sorry to interrupt.

No, thank you for letting us know. All righty. And if we could go back to vehicular circulation, I think is where we're at. All right. Can you guys see that slide? Perfect. Thank you. Um, okay. So, now looking at phase one, vehicular circulation plan, car circulation and parking were major site considerations and included a great deal of stakeholder input, uh, and was actually revised multiple times throughout the process. Um, as you'll see on the diagram there, our passenger dropoff locations throughout the site as indicated with the dashed yellow lines. Uh surface parking is distributed around the site um around high demand use areas depicted with the blue shading and intentionally creates a loop throughout the site connecting the two perimeter access roads. A new parking lot was added to meet demand uh for parking at the end of phase 1. This is the parking lot located next to the Charleston Shopping Center and will add an additional 153 parking stalls. One aspect to note of significance to help with traffic patterns is first at the traffic s signal at the Montrose Avenue intersection. There is an an existing light and it's recommended to make a second exit lane coming out of the coverly campus. At the north access road, this plan recommends adding a traffic light at this access road as well as expansion with two exit lanes coming out of the Coverly Campus. Due to the additional traffic the future programs may generate, this plan also recommends evaluation of a center turn lane to Middlefield Road to serve both intersections. Uh, updated traffic studies would need to be conducted during the architectural phases of the project. Next slide, please. All right. In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act,

the city has prepared and released the draft initial study mitigated negative declaration ISM and D for the Cubly Conceptual Master Plan for 30-day public review and comment period of March 2nd through April 1st. This is a required document that assesses potential environmental impacts of the conceptual master plan and identifies measures to reduce these impacts. It is also required document that would allow for the city council to adopt a long-term plan for the site and enable the city to proceed with near-term improvements. Overall, five environmental resources were identified where impacts were found to be less than significant with mitigated mitigation incorporated. They are air quality, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, noise and transportation. Impacts for all other environmental resource areas were found to be either less than significant or no impact would occur. The full report can be reviewed on our project website or in person at the Mitchell Park Library, Downtown Library, or the Palo Alto Development Center. Comments can be sent directly to community services director Kristen O'Cane by email, physical mail, or by public comment. Um, here at the commission meetings, uh, you can also submit comments via a comment card on the project website. Next slide, please. All right. Uh, as we near the end of our presentation, um, I'd like to conclude by stepping back and reflecting on the broader vision and significance of the Cubberly conceptual master plan. This plan represents a shared long-term vision developed with the community to reimagine the future of the campus while respecting its history, existing partners, and creating opportunities to welcome new and exciting community partners. As stewards of this important

public space, the city has a responsibility to plan for Cberly in a fiscally responsible way, supporting current uses while creating opportunities that benefit the broader community. Given the scale of the project, the plan is intentionally phased and designed to evolve over time as funding allows with flexible and adaptable facilities that can respond to changing community needs. Cberly offers a rare opportunity to create a vibrant inclusive campus for the entire community and continued community partnerships will guide the project as it moves from conception to implementation. Importantly, this plan reflects the vision city council established at the outset of this effort on February 18th, 2025. And the community further refined at the first co-design meeting, which is to create a vibrant, beloved, and adaptable destination that promotes learning, interconnectivity, joy, and well-being where people of all cultures and generations belong. Staff believe this conceptual master plan successfully brings that vision to life. Next slide, please. Here are our anticipated next steps. After tonight, we will present the conceptual master plan and SQA document at the parks and recreation commission uh meeting on March 24th and seek their recommendation for council adoption. Then staff are scheduled to present the conceptual master plan and the completed SQA analysis uh document to the city council on April 20th um and seek council adoption. Next slide, please. So, tonight staff recommends that the PTC and ARB uh respectively consider the draft initial study mitigated negative declaration for the Cubly conceptual master plan and recommend that council adopt the master plan. Next slide, please. Uh that concludes our formal

presentation. So, we thank you for your time and your attention. Um, as we close, uh, we would like to just share that it's been an incredible privilege for us to be able to move this plan forward after many years of community conversations and efforts to envision the future of Cubberly. Uh, we'd also like to thank both the planning and transportation commission and the architectural review board um for your thoughtful comments and feedback when we met earlier this year or last year rather um that helped guide the development of this conceptual master plan. So, we appreciate your partnership in helping shape the future of this important campus. Um, and with that, we welcome your feedback and comments and discussion. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Demo. Um, Chair Chen, do you or uh anyone on the ARB have uh clarifying questions before public comment? Yeah, I assume everyone from ARB will have some kind of question. So, to keep it simple, we will just start from the left. If if you don't have any questions, you can just pass it. Board member Rosenberg, you want to start?

Thank you. Um I'll keep these very brief. Um there was commentary that the phases two and three will likely not be done at this time um simply because of financing. Uh what was sort of the analysis to make that come to that conclusion? And do you guys have rough budget numbers in n in mind for phase one funding setup? I don't need actual numbers or anything. just sort of a better understanding of how we got to that point that phase one is sort of immediate, phase two and three are way down the line.

Um yes, so we're still refining our cost estimate. So, how we reached the conclusion that phase one seems most realistic and we're okay with sharing phase one looks like it's we're still refining but between 300 and $400 million and that's what seems realistic for us to be able to achieve in the the near future um with um the mechanisms that we're exploring at this time. Um we're still refining the overall project cost for the full buildout, but it seems substantially larger than that. And so that's why we see it as like not a near-term option. Um, and so when we have a more precise number to share, we'll we'll announce that.

Great. And then it does seem, if I can just be so bold, it seems like phases two and three maybe combined would be similar to that amount. It looks like each one of those phases is a pretty notably smaller chunk than phase one. Phase one seems to capture the largest portion. Would that be accurate? Uh, I can't say with any certainty right now. I think what does help a lot with our phase one is that's where we have our public private partnerships um that are committing to uh helping develop the the site financially. Um so that's what's incorporated into our cost analysis. So at this time I don't think we have a number to share for two and three. Um and so I wouldn't even want to guess and throw something out there and be inaccurate.

Fair enough. All right. Thanks very much. That's it. I'll go next with some few um kind of a little bit of detail questions. Um I guess starting with uh you know you mentioned like a lot of this is dependent on le uh purchasing 7 acres of site from Paul's unified school district and the negotiation was ongoing. What's if can you share the status of that and I assume that has to be and what is the timeline for that relative to you know city council approval of this master plan which is on you know not fully city property obviously at this time and also the timeline with the ballot measure which I if I remember correctly is for the um funding for the purchase of that uh site correct Hi, good evening. Kristen Okaine, um, community services director. So, I'll try to take those pieces one by one. So, the first um I believe you asked is the status of the purchase.

So, the we already have a memorandum of understanding with the school district. We've negotiated a purchase price with them already um which is $65.5 million for the 7 acres and we are in the process of working on a purchase agreement with them that would come to the council later um this spring. Um and we don't have the funding mechanism secured yet for that purchase, but um that's what the council will be um continuing to discuss. Um, and if you could do do you have another question?

Um, yeah. How the the timeline of that purchase relative to the ballot measure, which I think you answered if that's going to the city council in the spring ahead of the June city council to put the ballot measure on the on the November ballot. Correct. So, that would be the timeline for the ballot measure. I might um ask our so the timeline for the purchase of the seven acres. Would you be able to address that?

Sure. So, uh the city and the school district envisioned in anou in the last few years that if um the city would consider going for a ballot measure to raise additional revenue through some kind of tax. solar sales tax, parcel tax, something like that. And as you may know, the city has been pulling for the uh the possibility of doing that this fall. Um should a uh ballot measure raise the required revenue, um then the city and the district planned to uh close on the purchase in July of 2027. So, uh, it would be put something on the ballot um by the probably by June. The election would be in November pending the outcome of the election. Uh, property sale could close in next July.

And for the record, you want to introduce yourself? Oh, sure. Uh, my name is Tim Shimizu and I'm an assistant city attorney.

Thank you. So, can I ask another question as well while it's my turn? Um, so about the boundary again like about the lease versus the purchase. I I forget which slide number, but you have the boundary of what will continue to remain leased versus what's getting purchased. And some of the phase one um work right up on the upper left corner of the plan like straddles that boundary. So, some of the phase one design and construction work is on a tiny bit of property that is not going to be purchased. Is that intentional?

Um, could you bring up the slideshow, please? Slide six. Thank you. You know, I had a similar question. So I wanted wonder if it wouldn't be a little different to uh ask uh what is the arrangement with the board of ed you know the uh relative to the lease uh to PaloAlto in particular to make sure that it's long enough to allow us to uh utilize all that space.

Well sure first I'd like to address um board adco's question. So, um, are you referring to an area? I'm not sure which area you're referring to. Yes. So, at the upper left gray area, which is the parking lot that will continue to be a leased property. Um, there's a tiny little triangle that comes down into the yellow.

And so, if you go to the I think it's on the next slide. Yeah, right there. Thank you. Kendra is always great with the U markups. Um, so if you go to the next slide, uh, I believe that's where the phase one um, plan shows. So, yep, right in that area. If I can find my that, uh, new work uh, with that walkway um, from the tennis deck parking garage is still in the little triangle of the lease property. Is that intentional to be that way?

Um, I don't know if it's intentional. We are still finalizing the purchase boundary. So, um we would it would either be addressed during that or it would be addressed when we're actually doing architectural designs.

Okay. Um so I'll go on to my next question about phase one uh which is um I guess I'm trying to understand the extent of phase one that is um determined um like for instance building U which is let me make my marker a little thicker. Building U existing which is about here is planned to be demolished which is kind of a finger building between the other buildings. Is that a set thing in this phase one? And is there a reason for that?

Sure. The reason for that would be to accommodate that um parking area to the right. um like a walkway to the parking area or cuz I think building U is in this green sliver have to pull up the existing. Yeah, I believe it makes space for what we're calling the shop or we'll just the shopping center parking lot. Sorry if I had my terminology wrong. Let me look at the right side. But yeah, U and H will be removed to make um a new parking lot for nearest to the recreation and wellness center.

So I think the U building actually comes further to the Yeah. Yeah. So that would be um maybe slide have a slide with um the buildings to be Yeah. So right here that Yeah. The U building seems to come a little bit closer to the roadway there. So that would be removed to accommodate that parking area. But I think this little bit stays, right? So the part that's by middlefield stays. A little piece in between remain gets removed and then the other side. Yeah, that's VB building. Uh-huh.

So that is intentional and a set part of this phase one to remove that piece. Excuse me. Could you repeat that? Um, is that a determined thing as part of phase one that it is you, right? Yeah. You is removed that V stays. Yeah. At this time V would get renovated. Um, U would be removed to make room for the parking lot. V is part of the renovated buildings. Okay.

I'd also like to say that again this is conceptual, so nothing is necessarily decided and firm in this. Um, so if there was a reason that we would need to adjust that, we could certainly do that later. Um, but that's intended to address um, access and parking. And if you want to go to the next slide, it shows a better kind of sequencing. Yeah. So that kind of shows you there um, after it happens, B will remain and be renovated. Yeah. in the full removal of you.

So, actually that's a good slide for my next question. Thank you. Um, so, uh, and as Kendra mentioned as well, it sounds like phases two and three is way down the line. Is that why I I don't know what the budget is, but obviously you're renovating pretty much all of the existing buildings in as part of phase one. That's a good significant amount of money that will be spent in renovating, right? And that's um I guess before this presentation, I was wondering like why are you guys renovating buildings that are going to be demolished, but it sounds like the phase 2 and three is it's not a good way to say it, but close to never and therefore renovating the existing buildings that are to be demolished in the future.

Yeah. The the reason being since we at this time don't feel we'd have enough money to do the whole project at one time and the buildings are reaching end of life, the renovation is is meant to be a bridge um so that they could continue to be used until that opportunity to do phases two or three um could occur because they're pretty dilapidated. Um you know, if we happen to have the opportunity where we get the funding mechanisms to do all three phases, that would be wonderful. Um but we're trying to balance, you know, the realities of um the money. Again, we're refining the cost. Um but that's that's the purpose is so we could focus on phase one completion and then make the rest of the buildings still usable and safe and do uh upgrades with uh the money that we could think we could do the I think it was upgrades, the new doors, new windows, electrical um with the remaining uh balance that we have. um to just be yeah like I said a bridge until phases two or three could happen.

So last question um on that is uh I do know those buildings are in pretty poor shape. So does that renovation include like you know seismic upgrades to bring them up to code. how like the amount of money that would be spent in trying to do the renovation is that you know 50% of cost of building new has that even or could potent you know be even more has that also being considered

yeah I think that's a great question I do believe that was analyzed and we're going to actually dig back into that too I think we're looking to do some more analysis um to and that's part of our refining of the cost with the renovations um before we would actually start doing any of them. And so we're going to be working um on that and that's part of overall when we said refining the cost. So not only new construction, but what it would take to renovate um and do and I have a a few more I think pieces of information on the renovations would be finishes, building systems, structural upgrades um which could include yeah HVAC, seismic seismic bracing, utilities, um roofing, envelope, windows and doors. So, um getting things up to safety standards um for all the participants that use those buildings. So,

thank you.

All right. Thank you. So, I have a I have question about the timeline for the construction and deconstruction. So after say after the council um adopted the plan and also the purchase is completed is there like a timeline for the future for phase one deconstruction con uh construction at this moment. Yes. So I believe if we tentatively mapped it out if we did land acquisition in 2027 with a successful ballot measure and possibly other funding mechanisms. I at this time we did some rough math of estimating timelines and I think it was uh no sooner than 2030 um was the last time we did some mapping uh with public works to get the appropriate like permitting um hiring of contractors uh and that type of work. Of course, we'd need to probably go back and refine that timeline. Um, but that was the estimated start time.

Thank you. And for the uh building sections, so uh is it so at the end of the phase one will there be like two major sections? One is let me see one is for the performing art oops doesn't work here. One is for the performing arts sector and the other is for the rest of the of them. Are are those buildings all connected or they are separated? They're detached from each other at the end of phase one. Uhhuh.

Uh they are not all connected. So at the moment um let's see a good slide that sort of depicts it for the new construction part.

Mhm. Maybe slide 21, please. Oh, sorry. That's not the end of phase one. The end of phase one would be slide 10, please. That maybe shows a better aerial. Uh so the wreck and wellness building uh is kind of one entity with those attached um adjacencies with like the large flex in the emergency services. So that's one building. Um and then the education enrichment uh is its own building and then the performing arts complex is connected with the back of house lobby. So there uh it's kind of hard to see in this one. We have another design in the master plan document where it gives you a above aerial where you can see the separations a little bit more clear that I didn't put in the presentation. Um but no, they're not all connected. Uh not in this not in this concept. Um of course we could add separations if we needed to.

Okay. Thank you. And another question is about can we go to slide number uh 24 I believe the vehicular circulation. So uh is it the purpose to have uh to have the the vehicular circulation all around the site to also serve as the the emergency access like fire lane.

Yes, that's correct. So I think the overall purpose was um to not try to mix vehicular and pedestrian and bike as much as possible. So vehic vehicular traffic is around the outside and that also will serve as service roads. Uh I believe there's a section in the master plan that has a specific map for service vehicles. There may be times for landscaping that they'll come into campus. There's a few roads that are designed to be extra wide where they might need to come in for landscaping or service some of the buildings. Uh otherwise, vehicular traffic is meant to stay on the exterior of the campus. Um as well as the service roads will still exist for emergency vehicles um along the playfields um which will also be for pedestrian um and bike traffic as well, which was something that came up at a lot of our community meetings. that will still exist but there will not be through access for cars. I know that was a major concern from community members. So that has not changed either.

Understand? And and there is a slide about like the increase number of indoor space and the parking stall increase. So if we can go to that slide. Does that number the the number of the parking stalls generally meet the building code requirement because we for the increased programming like the performing arts center the theater and also the classes all those indoor increased indoor space are they generally about

yeah we did a parking analysis with fear and pierce um and yes this is up to standards Okay, thank you board member George. Thank you for that presentation. This was a really nice presentation. Thank you. I have two questions. One is uh that ser that the road that goes around the perimeter is it one way or two way? Two-way.

Thank you. And my other question is um the disagreement with the theater uh works. Um can you can you tell us more about um like how many performances uh you know will be you know hosted in this pavilion? you said it's a 500 seat pavilion and like I I know sometimes theater works like when they perform in B or or you know Mountain View they have one or two performances a day you know for several weeks in a row like is the idea to move all these regional kind of performances from the other cities into Palo Alto and then there would be almost like a performance every single day. Um, so what cuz that that's going to impact uh traffic and parking etc. I just would like to understand a little bit more how that's going to look like.

Yeah, that's a great question. So they haven't given us um unless I'm mistaken, but I feel pretty confident that we haven't gotten to that level of detail on like a production schedule. Uh what I can tell you now since I manage their agreement at Lucy Stern Community Theater um is it is yeah not uncommon that they might have multiple performances in a day but there will be weeks and weeks of rehearsals. So we won't get into the situation where they will have something every day you know 365 days a year. Uh it will be something I'm sure that in our agreement when we do uh actually work on their contractual agreement that it'll be in cooperation with the campus and the rest of the activities because we do know if they're hosting performances with 500 seats. So the influx that it'll have to campus is a really great consideration. So they haven't submitted any terms yet to the city. I'm looking at Kristen because she sits in some of those negotiation meetings. Um but that will be something that we'll make sure to consider um their performance schedule. So,

thank you. And that was reflected in the parking analysis that we did um with Fair and Pierce as well to the earlier question. Um actually one uh one more question. The the kitchen area in the new um kind of there in the back. Is it do you have do you have in mind um like a publicly a uh open cafeteria similar to what we have in Mitchell Park or will that be just a kitchen space for the events?

Um I think it can be multi-use. So our cooking classes and camps are very popular. So we think it could be used for that and then as we mentioned it could be deployed if we have a shelter setup. So then it can be used for food services and then it could be rented out um if folks want to rent it out for events and then use in combination with um the event. So I think it can be all of the above um but but not uh a public restaurant similar to Mitchell Park,

not the well the ca maybe a cafe portion of it. Um the full service kitchen we imagine would be more of like the support and rental but we do yeah the cafe was something that was heavily requested. So there would be a portion that could be a cafe only in addition to the commercial kitchen.

Thank you. Um, so I'd like to go back to the question that I was kind of concerned about is this whole lease issue with the board of with the school. Uh, how how does that how's that going to be arranged so that whatever is built will be legitimate for its lifetime?

Yeah. So I think that the intention is not to build any structures like buildings on the leased area. So if you see that in the uh plan, thank you for pointing that out because that is something that we definitely want to make sure we're not doing unintentionally or signaling that. Um I think the current plan in general is to make sure that the lease covers um parking lots and some of the athletic fields. And so part of the reason the city, for example, is not intending to purchase that part, the parking lots or some of the athletic fields goes back to um the original deal um that the district and the city made uh in the last year or two where the city the school district agreed to sell 7 acres and the city and the school district worked on that footprint. And so that's the what you see today. So unfortunately the seven acres doesn't include enough acreage to include all of the parking lots in the fields. So to prioritize to be able to actually build um what you see in the master plan or some iteration of that um that was the area particular area that could maximize um the city's flexibility for building and the um to but to um maximize overall use of the space. So to make sure that there's parking and to make sure that the city and the school district still have access to these fields, the um the deal is is that prior to uh the city purchasing this property, the city and the school district envision renegotiating the existing lease to make sure that there's that continuity going forward so that operations are not interrupted because of say a break in the lease um or uh

unresolved terms. So the hope is that you'll marry the agreement with the school board to the time that the purchase is completed somehow. Yes. So um it's envisioned that before the purchase is closed, the city and the district would come to an agreement on the lease going forward. Yes. Yes. At least the agreement will be Yeah. Because like as you pointed out, it's it's that's very important. Yep.

Yes. So, Theater Works is planning on on continuing Lucy Stern with a relationship with Lucy Stern. Uh, my understanding is if they were to move over here to Coverly, they would no longer be at Lucy Stern. So, they're there now. Uh, but if they were to move over there, they wouldn't have both still.

Okay. Um, so there's a on the diagram there there seems to be a a difference between some of the drawing schemes and some some of the construction of the new new buildings. That is to say the diagonal used to come all the way out to Middlefield Road in the scheme that was originally is it continuing to come? Is that diagonal circulation still there or

at the end? At the end of phase three, it is. Uh the diagram you might be referencing is uh maybe just the end of phase one. It doesn't quite make it there. Um at the end of phase one, but at the end of phase three, it does still uh stretch all the way across campus. Okay. I wonder if uh you know if if you could describe what what that is going to serve that diagonal coming out to to uh have you did you keep that in your discussion at this point? Is it flexible also the prominade? Yeah.

Uh being completed or stopping at phase one? stopping at phase one possibly.

Uh yeah, it's definitely been discussed. I think there's been comments on um it staying or going and feeling maybe also incomplete at the end of phase one, you know, when its intention was to stretch all the way across campus. So I think we've heard comments um that people like it still at the end of phase one or again feels incomplete at the end of phase one. So um it provides the circulation for the pedestrians and the bikers. So that was some of the positives still um as well as some of the uh play and nature elements that folks had requested in the meetings are still within those spaces even though it doesn't stretch all the way across campus. So there was still some benefit from it even when it wasn't making the full connection. Um so that's why it's still in there now. Um and so yeah, it was left in there at this time as a a sequencing um to hopefully get to in the further phases.

It's a interesting idea, but the uh use of it seems a little bit strange. Uh so if it were extended to be some kind of a drop off area for people who don't want to enter the site but want to simply drop off I'm just putting that out for some consideration that was mentioned and I think there was a lot of feedback about people not wanting cars to enter the site at all even for a drop off and I so I believe that's why we did not consider that ultimately. Okay. Uh

um so early education I don't uh do you you what uh are you moving these it's scattered throughout the site? Have you planned all of the early education sites to to be able to be moved prior to the demolition of those areas? Uh currently we have um a few of our early education uh are located next to the T2 which is where the community services offices are located. Um so at the at the moment in phase one there is one building identified that they could be um put in one location and we specifically designed some safe drop zones for parents to be able to easily do pickup and drop off. Um again a lot of the uses for the buildings can be flexible. if we found there was a different building that worked. Um but at this time that's where we would put um some of the early as we've mentioned in the presentation early childhood was um noted in the education enrichment building there in between uh the performing arts and the wreck and wellness. Um so that's what was identified at this time but it could change but that's also how the drop off zones were identified as well. I I didn't notice that you've included anything for fauxpal in and so could you describe some of that?

Sure. Yeah, we didn't call out the tenants specifically. Um but they've been incorporated into these plans. So I think they're one that can fit into multiple categories as we discussed. So they can be flexible use, they can be education. So um they've definitely been a part of the plans and been participating in the meetings. So they have not been forgotten and are incorporated in these plans. Um the I've noticed in having visited the site quite often that much of the parking areas are vacant during some of the day, you know, and only used later in the day. So for example, the parking that the extensive parking that is at the playfields is pretty empty during most of the day, much of the day that the two areas that are closer to the middle field are the ones that are more filled. Has that been discussed with the transportation people and they have indicated that there are times when all of those would be used and you know is it significant amount of time?

Yes, I'll try to give a short answer. There's a detailed transportation analysis uh separate than SQUA in the master plan that uh outlines peak times. And so, especially near the fields, you're going to see after school hours and weekends is uh a lot of the heavy use near the fields cuz that's when kids are out of school um naturally. Uh and then on campus, it really will vary um because we do have like a multi-generational campus using Cubberly. So, we have adults, um older folks, child care. Um, so it'll fluctuate around campus more, but um, we did do the buildings by use type. So we'll you'll see the the peak times throughout the day vary, but I would say the short answer to the fields is going to be after school on weekends.

Um, so fire access. Yes. Has has it been considered and the fire department gotten into the discussion about that? Yes. Um, I think that that's it for me. Any further questions from the ARB BTC then? Uh, clarifying questions. Commissioner Templeton.

Thank you so much, Chair. Um, first of all, just I want to start off by saying thank you for this great presentation. and it certainly shows that a lot of um attention and care has been put in here since the last time we saw it. I know you've been working diligently to to incorporate feedback. So, thank you. And I'd also like to say thank you to the ARB because it's been a joy to hear a completely different perspective, right? It's very exciting and um just appreciate you and all the work you guys are doing. Um we're just doing clarifying questions. So, uh, I I hear the the the call for keeping it in scope. I do have a few clarifying questions. Um, and so I will just go through them. You feel free to be as brief as you like to be in terms of answering these. Um, first of all, you mentioned the pool is going to be 25 m. Um, can you tell me why that was the choice instead of the standard most desirable 50 m by 25 yards? I believe that was just what we the feedback we got from our community meetings. Um I think is the this the short answer was just the request we got from stakeholders. Can you be more specific? I mean was there somebody who does competition swimming that was included in that because I'm concerned that that would not be the choice of competition swimmers. Um I'll tell you this from my uh experience uh working with the competition swim teams in PaloAlto. we have to leave Palo Alto to find a pool that meets those requirements. So for any competitions that involve meters, we have to go over to Stanford or Foothill. Um so we just don't have that um inside the city. It would be really nice if we're going to build a whole new facility to make sure that we're um meeting the both competition standards. So if it's 50 m one way and 25 yards the other way, you could do both kinds of

competitions there. Um so that's just a clarifying question. I'll move on. Um, when you uh I really appreciated the question about what does it mean to renovate? Um, I appreciate you going through the list. One thing you did not mention was floor flooring upgrades. Um, and I just want to clarify would flooring upgrades be part of it. The context for that question is for dance studios. We have many performing arts um, dance taekwondo and other kinds of things that currently rent at Cberly. And there have been a lot of improvements in the last 50 years since those floors were put in in terms of safety that will improve the longevity of our dancers and our other um athletes that train there. So is there a chance that um renovations would include improving the flooring to modern standards?

Uh I feel confident it probably does. That's not a comprehensive list. And so that's something we can really the question we're trying to refine here is what are we recommending to council and how fluid is that once it once it goes to council and council approves it. So you're saying that potentially the um finishings uh for the renovations whatever that might be can be determined after council moves forward. Is that right? Yes. And then the spaces that have specialty flooring, we continue to work with them even if they get displaced to make sure they still have the things that they need to do their programs. So, we know some of them have like sprung floors and things like that.

You'd be amazed at the the amazing children we have um training in these studios and the things they've gone on to do. Um we need to just protect their longevity for um being able to continue to compete because we're seeing a lot of younger people get injuries, you know. So, we just that's something I want to um and that goes to the other point when you were talking about I don't know if you can bring up a slide or if it's worth it, but um to your um mission, you had like a list of things you want to accomplish. Um, and uh, you've mentioned it out loud, but I don't think I remembered seeing um, comments in the the list of goals around safety um, and uh, um, sustainability and generally the word modernizing isn't included. Uh, and I was just wondering is that a are those goals that are just not included in the list or is that the kind of thing you'd want feedback on? and we can discuss it later like we don't have to get into it now but is that the kind of are you interested in feedback on this or is that just something you set with the community meetings?

Uh yeah that is definitely one of our goals. Um it just yeah didn't make it onto this slide. So um but that is something that we've been communicating in our um meetings as well as in our polling.

That's what I think and and it certainly came across in your presentation. And the reason I want to make sure um as I'm thinking ahead to the ballot measure um is to make sure that you're conveying some of that in writing because um this is a pretty big uphill battle. So that's my last question then about the ballot measure. Um we have had a few questions around this. I apologize if you don't know just say it. But if you do know, can we get some clarity about whether the ballot measure um covers purchase only, purchase plus phase 1, purchase plus phase 1 through three, or is it something that's being approved for perpetuity, and then those other phases will come along when the money builds up enough for them?

Yeah, we don't know yet. We have poll four going out into the field, which will help inform that decision um because we don't know how much we'll be able to get yet from the ballot measure. So poll four will be our final poll um that will inform the placement of the ballot measure. But we don't we don't know what kind of thing we're going to be asking for in terms of if it's perpetual um funding or if it has a finite date involved.

So no, so those details are still up in the air. The council hasn't approved either way. Um, so I think the poll, um, I think council will discuss this those very some of those very details at their next full council meeting on in and toward end of April.

Thank you. Um so just to put this in context and why I'm asking is um we have to understand what you're expecting us to forward to council because we have no scoping at all whatsoever on you have phases but we don't know if this phase is going to be ti there's an implication in the presentation this phase through phase one purchase through phase one at least will be what we're recommending to forward to council because that's what they're going to ask for at least funding for. Is that what you're asking us to We We need to know what is the scope of what we're forwarding to council.

I I I'm just going to jump in with a a reminder that the funding is actually coming from multiple sources. And so, um I think the the goal that's being discussed is to find funding to be able to do phase one. So completely abstract funding from whether what we're recommending. So what we're doing in parallel here is consideration of a ballot measure to provide funding, negotiating um opportunities for funding through other sources and developing a master plan so that we've got a longer term vision for what Cberly will be because having that master plan will assist in things like requesting future grants um to fund it moving forward. But the goal is to be able to do phase one through those combinations of funding.

So really to rephrase, you want us to abstract the funding. You guys will figure that out, but we want to at least have a vision through phase one that we forward to council. We would like this uh to be a vision through phase three, but recognizing that the immediate improvements would be phase one with an asterisk that two and three may be imaginary. Correct. Okay. and that the funding is something that council will be deciding on. Okay, I All right, we have a scope. I will leave it at that. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Templeton. Um, quick interruption. Vice Chair Chang, did you

can I just follow up along that line since we're on that topic? So, as to what we're recommending to council, when we recommend a master plan, is it just sort of the blocks on the paper or does it include the phasing?

Like does the master like what exactly are we recommending when we recommend a master plan? Are we saying that and we agree that it should be done in this order and this is the delineation at each phase as documented in the presentation? What we're requesting is that you make a recommendation to council on the master plan document which there is phasing included in there but I'll give the example the phase one which includes a recreation wellness center. if we have our partner friends of the recreation wellness center who can immediately or close to immediately build perhaps a portion of that immediately we would want to take advantage of that. So, um, the phasing will have to be fluid as our funding is secured throughout the project, as we get more partner organizations who might be interested in um, contributing funding as impact fees um, you know, come in and help. So, we're really asking for recommendation on the master plan, but also the SQA analysis. and we did the full sequel analysis of the whole master plan so that we're ready to move forward with the project. We could do near-term improvements, but if we're able to get as, you know, through a certain phase, we already have the sequent documentation done.

Okay. So, that makes sense that the phases themselves both in terms of timing and the boundaries of the phases may be sort of fluid. Is that what you're saying? Okay, great. Then then related to that then what is not as fluid in a master plan with respect to a bond measure or taxes or so like what of what is in the master plan document is not fluid because I want to understand that we you know if we're if we're signing off or recommend recommending something specifically what is sort of immovable after after we recommend it? um the maximum size that it is. So, we wouldn't, you know, we're basing our analysis on a certain number of square footage, an increase in square footage, expected increase in visitors to the site at different times of day. So, we wouldn't um our limit would be to not exceed what we've included.

Thank you, Vice Chair, Commissioner Dr. Peterson. Any clarifying questions? Yes. Thank you, chair. So, being the sustainability engineer, I have some sustainability questions. Um, one of the the first questions is, is the is the project intended to be um net zero or anything like that? If you're familiar with the term,

I am unsure if it reaches full net zero. I'm pulling up our appendices where we do have um a section on the building systems and all of the factors that they use to mitigate uh impact. Um I'm not sure if you reviewed that part of it. Um the the different strategies that they're going to use. Um but I I don't remember reviewing that we ever get to net zero. Um, so the city has adopted various policies and procedures just to, you know, mitigate impact, but I I feel confident saying I don't remember us getting to net zero.

Okay. And is that something that we would want to recommend to council? Is that within our purview or is that something that they would handle separately? I'll jump in and and say that that kind of detail is likely something that would be part of the review of when we actually have the building designs. Um and so I think you know sharing that once you've got we're to the comment period um as a you know a thought to be considered in the future is great. It of course would need to be one of the things that's balanced with costs and other priorities.

Right. So then the the next question of course is is the project carbon neutral or is that even a is that an intention to try to have a carbon neutral master plan? I'll start but feel free to add. I I think in general as aligned with our sustainability plan, we do strive to do the best we can within certain limitations. In a case like this where we are reusing existing buildings, that has benefits um and drawbacks in terms of being able to reach some of those high standards.

Thank you. And then the next question is um the last time this came around I had asked about um the walkability to the local transit. There's a Cal Train station. I didn't see anything about uh walking access to the site in the master plan.

I'm going to jump in again but feel free to add. Um, I think that actually connects more with uh in terms of connections to the Cal Train station with the work that you'll be discussing um at your next meeting with the San Antonio Road area plan. We are having close conversations with the staff uh who work on both of these efforts, seeing as how this is going to be a a huge asset to those future residents and the uh mobility improvements that are part of that plane plan will be a huge asset to those who are coming at least from from that side of town into the Coverly community. you anticipated. My next question was, "How are you coordinating with the the master plan for the San Antonio uh corridor?" Um, I'm guessing that's the answer to that question.

We we've got staff it cross uh discussions between the two. And then Commissioner uh Templeton brought up the swimming pool. I don't know if you knew Foothill College, I don't know how many meetings they spent just on the swimming pool alone. And I think when I last paid attention, they were at over $30 million for a swimming pool. Um, is the swimming pool, is there any specification in there if the pool will be um gas heated, electric heated, heated by heat pumps? There's just a huge And then the heat pumps generate immense amounts of noise apparently.

Uh I don't believe we got to that level of detail in this plan. I know the city does have um uh plans right now to electrify uh cuz that's something we're talking about at our other pool. So I would imagine a similar conversation would happen. Um I don't know if you have either of you have any more to add, but I think that is the strategy of the city currently. Okay. I haven't heard about the noise though, so thanks for

at one point it became out they weren't going to able the pool would never heat up with the with the energy efficient heating system like in the lifetime of anybody in the room. there were there were just weird scenarios with energy efficient pools that they spent endless amount of time working on. So I just wanted to as soon as we're looking at a actual competition pool which is in high demand, there were some really big questions that came in with that and some of the local I'll leave it there. Um the last question I have is uh going back to the questions with the uh the traffic plan. I didn't see anything with the simulation showing that say you have two um theater events with say 500 participants that there's the egress from say the freeway or wherever people are coming from most likely to be able to get into that site and back out without creating an absolute gridlock.

Yeah, I don't think we have any modeling in the master plan. We did discuss it when we were doing the transportation analysis and that sometimes for large events like that or well one first just strategic scheduling that we don't have some sort of massive soccer tournament in a theater something happening at the same time. Uh but we also might need to look at off-site parking options too and either doing shuttling or busing is something that we talked about um for nearby locations um and maybe some other mitigation techniques for large events. That's uh you know something we'll note for future um to have some strategic planning around.

Okay. I'll leave any questions on parking um to one of the other commissioners because that's that ends up being an entirely detailed question by itself is off-site parking shuttling and credits and things like that for reduced parking use. Thank you. That's all I have.

Thank you, Commissioner Peterson. I'll strongly recommend for anyone who hasn't had a look at the appendices for the master plan to do so. Um they are very much worthwhile and uh as I'll talk about later the transportation analysis for the uh initial study is also good. Chang you have any further clarifying questions? Um, so related to the pool, because I agree with sort of the gist of what Commissioner Templeton was bringing up, is the pool size something that is set for the master plan or that's flexible. Okay, great. Um then I guess my question about funding is and also sort of the phasing that's related to it is what if we don't raise enough money to complete all of phase one? Um are the different pieces of it then meant to be sort of modular and functional? you know, like if with the 1.1 de um demolition and the 1.2 construction. So maybe we only have enough for that or only enough for the 1.3 and 1.4.

Yes, we could do that. Okay. Um also just I wanted to clarify my understanding to make sure that the we are essentially relying on leased land from PAUSD for the parking counts that we have. Correct. Some of them. Yes.

Okay. And have we verified with PAUSD that like what happens if PA USD ch changes its plans in the future? And like I I I heard loud and clear that we're not going to build any structures on that. But then what does that do to us? So, um, we have considered that we've been working closely with the school district on just ensuring, you know, as we're continuing this project. So, if we were at a point where they decided they wanted that parking area for to build a school or something, I don't know. Um, we would have to look for alternate parking. I mean, we'd have to shift our our gears a little bit and kind of reassess our parking situation.

Yeah. Okay. Um then also can you pull up your slide that shows sort of the different phases and the um the number of spaces for each phase because I'm trying to figure out where the additional spaces come from because when I look at the I think it's just me not understanding the plans um because when I look at phase two I didn't see any construction of additional parking and same thing for phase three. So if you could just explain that a little bit, that would be helpful. Underground. Okay. Yeah, that's what I thought. So that's underground.

That's also why it's so so expensive to do phase two and phase three because it's not just the above ground structures. Correct. It's a lot of it contributes to the cost. Yeah. The overwhelming feedback when we kind of sourced around the above ground parking structure was pretty overwhelmingly no one liked that idea. So

Okay. Um, and then, um, with respect to the outdoor amphitheater, can you just help me orient to the size of what that would be relative to say the bowl at Mitchell Park and the um, like children's theater hot dog some like how big is that little tri? It's a triangle also, right? That that is maybe we should pull that up because when it was labeled as the outdoor amphitheater, it was one of the 3D pictures rather than the above ground. So, I think the parking pictures with circulation actually show a pretty good bird's eye view of what that would be.

Yes. If we could go to slide seven, I think that gives a good aerial view. Um, so on this slide here, the amphitheater would be tucked in. So, kind of in the middle of your screen is the the brown square, which is the eye building. So the amphitheater is kind of where there's like two green bushes um that are a little bit darker green. So it's it can be configured around either side of the eyebuilding. And so that's why we kind of intentionally have that curved walkway right now so folks can lay down their chairs and blankets and we could have quite a bit of uh green space um and then power can be drawn from the eyebuilding um and we can set up a stage in that area. Um, one of our initial plans had it maybe bowling like uh the bowl at Mitchell Park, but then we wanted it to be something that when there wasn't an event going on um it could be flat and used for a variety of other purposes. So that's why it eventually became flat space. So then it could become really multi-purpose

and and then size-wise, how does it like I'm just trying to So the area um or the green area that would be the amphitheater and then all the way up to the sort of upper left where there's that circle. Um all of the green area enclosed in the buildings is about 2 acres. But how does that again like this is what I I had a hard time with the last time you guys were here. I don't know what that's like really large right compared to the say the circle the little depressed amphitheater at Mitchell Park. So this is

you know for me and anybody else who has trouble figuring out the relative size of things. Could you give me a sense of that? Maybe I need to look at an aerial view of Google. Yeah, I don't Yeah, I don't have Oh, go ahead. Care or Commissioner Templeton. Assuming that that pool is 25 meters, it looks like it's a little bit smaller than a football field. Okay. This grass, just if you look, you can stack three. Okay. Thank you. That's super helpful. That's it for me now. Thank you, Vice Chair Commissioner. I

I have a couple questions, but I'm really anxious to hear from the public, so I'm just going to hold them until after that. I will also hold my substantive comments until after public comment. I have only one clarification request which is for the document. Uh when you illustrate uh phase one complete the sub projects are all identified by number but at that point in the document the numbers have not been explained. So, it might be a good idea to put a reference to pages 56 and 57 as a footnote so that people know where those things are explained.

All right, then. Um, Mr. Toeta, how many requests to speak do we have?

Um, through the chair, I've received one request to speak at the moment, but I would like to invite if there's anyone on Zoom that would like to speak to this item to raise your hand. Um, with that being said, I would like to invite uh Penny E to the mic. Good evening. Um, my name is Penny Olsen and um, some of you have seen me up here before for Payback or Safe Roots to School or Green Meadow Community Association or Sarah Kagg. Um, tonight I'm just speaking as an individual. um but informed by all of those experiences. Um so I'm delighted to see continued project pro progress on coverly um which will be um increasingly important to our community as a community hub as the city plans for somewhere between 3,800 and 7,400 new units in the Sarap area. This is going to be an important place um for South Peloto and all of Peloto. Um I have just one comment and request. I really appreciated all your comments this evening and I've been checking things off. So um the bike ped facilities on the north and south boundaries of the property are unclear and I just want to ask staff to please clarify what we can expect to see um in these areas. They've basically said that we'll be able to continue to use the fire lanes and that they'll be protected from all motor vehicles except emergency vehicles up to the end of the fire lane. But what's not clear in the plans is what happens after that. right now. Um there people use kids um connect into Cubberly from the north and south ends

using those fire lanes and people also go to Charleston shopping center. This is an afterchool commute route. Kids go over there and they get snacks and stuff like that and we kind of prefer they do it that way rather than going through the parking lots, right? Um, so that is an important connection for student safety after school. Um, so we need to know that I'm looking at this new roundabout there and what I see is a a wonderful focus on motor vehicles, but I don't really see a good strong protected connection for kids and for anybody on bicycles and on foot. So, I would love to hear from staff um what they plan to offer in phase one, not later on, but phase one because this is an existing important bicycle pedestrian connection, both ends of the playing fields. So, it needs to go from Nelson Drive all the way to Middlefield. Um and with there's an opening to the Charleston Shopping Center there for those of you who might not be familiar. And then on the other side of campus, it connects to Greenell, but also it takes people all the way to the Montrose Middlefield intersection, which is a wonderful route to Aloney Elementary School for kids who live in our neighborhood and probably some kids, you know, who might be um going into Coverly, the other way, right, from Sarah uh in in the future and from the neighborhoods over there. So, I guess that's my primary question is what can we expect to see in phase one for bikes and peds? And I appreciated um I think it was uh Commissioner Aken who uh made the remark about the the central bike facility not connecting all the way through. Who was that? Oh, I'm sorry. Uh Commissioner Hirs said that. Anyway, thank you for that comment and I'd love to hear a little more about what's going to happen

in phase one with that. Thank you very much, Miss Alson. Do we have any other commenters? Uh the chair, we have not received any other requests to speak at this time. And I do want to apologize. Um it looks like our clock, our technology is not working today. No matter. I wanted to make sure everyone had plenty of time to be heard anyway. So, uh not an issue. All right. Uh if that concludes uh public comment, then I would like it like to bring it back to uh the ARB for the first round of discussion. Chair Chen, excuse me. Um pardon me, Commissioner Templeton.

Um did did we haven't heard from Commissioner Hecman yet, so I just wanted to remind you of that. U Thank you, uh Commissioner. This No, this is working fine. So, as as you suggested, chair, let's proceed. All right. Um, I don't want to be uh too hard-nosed about this. We can revise order when it makes sense. So, please don't please feel free to bring up uh interruptions if needed. I just misunderstood. I thought he said he wanted to wait until after public comment for his remarks, and I thought you agreed to it. Thank you, Georgia. Sure. So, board member Georgess, you want to say something?

Yeah. Um just um question to the to the board before we start this next session. Should we um set a a rule to limit everybody's time to a certain amount of minutes? We have tried this with the ARB once and I think that went really well and now there are so many people maybe that's a good idea would be a good idea maybe with exception for the two board members who have not had a chance to speak yet.

Um I will take the risk of speaking for the PTC. We typically do not place limits on commissioner comment time. Um if things do get out of hand then we can request um that comments be suspended and then come back around on the next round. But typically we haven't haven't found it necessary to place limits.

Yeah. Thank thank you for thinking about it to using our time efficiently. But I think for the first round, we can just open it up and see if we need it for the second round. So for the first round comments, so we will just start from the right. If board member Hirs, if you're ready to comment. Um, not really, but I'll give it a try. Um, Miss Ellson, yes. uh the original uh master planners had in mind that there would be some definite cross through to the shopping center and uh I just bring it up because uh I think the design team has done a very very good job here and uh it's quite quite an improvement from where we were when we were doing these study groups in the uh beginning of this project. um with a community that is you know you know I really don't I don't have anything major to say about the project at this point I I guess my biggest concern is that proximity somehow is an issue for me one is that the the junior the the younger school age children ought to be considered relative to the drop off very carefully because I know that you know the they're scattered in the site right now. So I'm I'm concerned because I I really don't recall exactly are they on the perimeter of of the or the preschool is that pretty much the perimeter of the site. Uh, one of the main child care is right off Middlefield um now and so a lot of the parents will either park

parallel on Middlefield. There's uh street parking um or pull into the lots and walk the kids in.

Okay. So, you know, that's that's a kind of an issue. It's an issue now because all of the parking is on the opposite side and they have a long way to go down that passage. And uh so my thought is that that uh really that's a priority for closeness to the parking and a possible drop off for them on the site as well. I I would say that's something to be considered is which what what aspects of the project here ought uh ought to have proximity. Uh and I think that that would be the prime one to consider. the older kids in the dance studios etc. they can certainly um walk the they're capable of dancing. I think they're capable of walking any distance within the site. Um I want to advise you about um basketball uh tennis andor pickle ball. Pickle ball by the way is very noisy. I I'm a member of the pickle board. And so I'm concerned about about that. You know, if you have pickle ball, also the tennis courts are as presently laid out in an east west direction rather than a north south and that's not an appropriate direction for tennis tennis play. I'm sure you get into that eventually. You know, it's diagrammatic at this at this stage. Um I I almost wonder if you're you have the capacity for uh the parking on the raised level. I mean under the raised level whether or not it's necessary to do that and also

whether you would consider the kind of end of the baseball fields as a place where you could re relocate. I know you're trying to pack all of the all of the athletic in one area, but to push it put it in a structure like that in the first place, it's going to be a relatively expensive structure, additional structure to have the raised uh tennis, pickle ball, whatever it is. And uh the end of the playground, present playground, is a kind of a waste. Uh, and I wonder if it would be possible to consider that. So, I'm just putting it out there. Um, I I think that the scheme is a is a terrific scheme, you know. Uh, I think it it really has a an arrangement into the center of the space that's really quite quite nice. I wonder if the the um smaller building that's kind of the square building within the site which is planned for I don't know what exactly there but it's part of the Could you describe that what what that is then again?

Um do you know what I Yeah. Is it the eye building in the middle of campus? the the brown one, the existing building, the sort of the square building. Yep. So, the eyebuilding um and we can pull up a slide if we need to. So, currently it's uh uh used by PAUSD. So, it'd be something that they would vacate when um hopefully we purchase the property. Um and so we would use it as one of our education or flex buildings that could be uh tenants um or used by rentals or programs. Um so, it would be one that we would plan to renovate.

Mhm. So it just seems to me that that the outer space is kind of stretched around the perimeter of that and the point of the that structure sort of faces out toward one of the corners faces out towards the open space and I I wonder if it wouldn't be possible just to consider that part of the open space because it would relative to what some other people were saying here is the the perimeter of the of the passage and the shape of it is kind of focused on that corner. And if it wasn't there, you'd have a much better open space with a possible stage, etc. There would be that would that would make the the space a better space in the middle.

Understood. I think I'll offer just one context uh back was to save costs. We tried to uh renovate the buildings we could and that one was found to be something that was substantial that could be renovated uh structurally uh and that's why it was considered to be saved.

Okay. Um again an idea to consider to improve the open space might might be uh you know that the community was very concerned about having a lot of green space and that would really make it a more major space within the middle. So like it I'd like that to be considered you know along the way. Um these are sort of my specific thoughts about it. I think that again faux if it's if it is moved and and relocated as you're planning then uh the circulation around that area would be improved as well. If you ever have tried to make it through the passageway that goes around the building there, the pavilion building, it's a torture scene, you know. So, you'll hope your traffic engineers look closely at the way you make that connection around to the parking lot. Uh that's that's it for the moment. You know, it's really going to be a nice scheme. And of course, I think the way in which you integrate all of the buildings as as a kind of a design effort is going we look forward to seeing what you come up with from that. to

Thank you, board member Hirs. Board member Joe,

thank you. Um, I have a few uh few comments. Um, first of all, um, in no particular order, um, I think it would be nice to make a cafeteria, uh, more, uh, central. I think right now it's kind of stuck uh you know stuck behind you know several other buildings. So you know if we are thinking about you know kids going to the shopping center for snacks or kids are you know finishing their dance class or you know people coming from the theater from an afternoon performance etc. I think a cafeteria more in a central location would be more um more accessible and findable. So I I I know these plants are um kind of visionary, but I think that would be my my feedback is uh you know, if you're trying to build a community like from a planning or architectural standpoint, I think it would be good to bring these kinds of common spaces where people tend to gravitate more to a more central location. Then um I noticed that uh the to drive uh you the that circle circular route goes through the parking lot. So I'm not 100% sure that's uh you know perfect solution. I I know it you know it kind of looks good on the plan and it helps you organize the space. Um but you know I just imagine uh you know hundreds of cars uh potentially thousands of cars you know every day if if there's a big if there's a a performance like driving through

that parking lot. Um um I think that's just just doesn't feel this just doesn't feel right. you know, there will also be a lot of um, you know, human traffic in that parking lot, you know, people getting to their cars, etc. Um, I think I'm I'm I just put it out there uh that I think that's not an ideal solution. Also, um, the tennis court is on top of this uh, parking structure. So I just have in my mind the tennis courts in in um Sato um you know with their tall fencing you know around

it's it's it's kind of an eyesore I mean it is an eyesore and I'm you know worried about the residents on Nelson you know drive the you know part of the community center is close to middlefield has huge uh trees But that backside, you know, doesn't. So, and that fencing will be exposed and the noise, you know, will be will carry even further because of the height. Um, so I think um, you know, considering an under, you know, ground garage in that area would would would help would also increase uh, the cost. Um, like I'm not sure whether there's a reasonable way of putting landscape screening because it's going to be so extremely tall from day one. Like for an oak tree to grow tall enough to screen it would take 10, 20, 30 years. Um I um I hear you in a fourth comment is about the parking like I hear about the parking study. Like those on the ARB know that um I'm not always trusting these parking studies. Like I'm uh just really concerned about you know 500 seat you know event. Um, in addition to everything else that's going on in the in the center, uh, tennis, there's a swimming pool, you know, there there's, you know, Saturday afternoon, you know, there might be not even a swim meet, but just regular um, you know, training session. It's just uh, you know, it just needs a lot of parking. Um and in phase one you know you you are adding some amount of parking to the existing but it's it's uh it's quite small.

So you know if the amount of parking we have is is adequate today you know once you have a swimming pool and 500 you know seats you know uh theater it's not going to be enough. Um a fifth comment is about the swimming pool. Yes, I I think there should be attention to the to the sizing and and uh you know the heating you know of that. I'm I'm also uh you know member in in in Rinkona pool have been for many years and um um I understand there's a is a a need for a swimming pool but um uh you know with with uh you know working with with the community the swimming community I think it would need to be really thought through what the correct sizing what are the requirements for you know dressing rooms and things like that. Um because I also think that the space that is allocated to some of these uh ancillary tanks you know next to the swimming pool at least on the you know on this plan that I see is not very large. Um so I'm just thinking now of the new pool in in Mountain View. there's a huge building next to that that pool and it's it's it's almost 100% utilized. So like I don't see that here. So are we building a pool that nobody will be able to use because the dressing rooms are inequality or there are no meeting rooms or storage rooms for pasta or you know things like that. Uh, number six, um, I'm not sure whether this is within the purview of the ARB, but I think remodeling existing, you know, buildings that are planned for later deconstruction.

um you know could be a good idea if it's a cosmetic thing like you just repaint or something but you enumerated so many very significant improvements such as structural HA uh earthquake retrofitting roofing envelope windows I mean almost feels like you're building a new building um I'm not sure whether that's the right decision from a taxpayer standpoint But um that's just a comment. And then um like number eight I think you know related to the general concern that many people you know uh here have is about the what are we what are we recommending to be approved. Um, I think the long-term lease for that parking space is really critical because, um, you know, that that that lease is kind of like a demo class word hanging over this, uh, this project. So I'm not sure you anybody can recommend this project if a year from now, two years from some amount of years from now, even 5 years or 10 years from now, we lose that parking uh parking space. So I think part of the recommendation should be some kind of a requirement for a long-term lease. Thank you.

All right. Thank you so much. Uh I will just keep down the road and um I I think this overall the master plan is quite successful and I like the diagonal concept and I think overall the the the circulation got lots of improvements compared to what we saw last time. And there are a couple of uh comments I'd like to make. One is to echo what PTC vice chair just mentioned uh about the priority like if we don't have enough funding for phase even for phase one then maybe we we should have a priority list on which one is to go first and which one goes last and also um I think uh since phase two and phase three would be really down the road like it's it will not be completed in the near future. So I think uh architecturally um we should have the new construction part and the renovation part have some dialogue conversation between these two parts so that it may it could it could be more architecturally and programming more uh cohesive instead of like two separate projects. And um also for the circulation I think u we already talked about the vehicular uh for the for the end users and also touch base a little bit on the bicycle and and the pedestrian circulation. But I think there are also a quite bit uh a lot we need to do with the service and daily maintenance like and also like the the back house services because we have the kitchen here. We have all those pool

facilities and also the gym. So those how to maintain it and where is the service road and also um to uh the concern that board member George just mentioned about like the to have the fire access across the parking garage. Maybe I'm not sure whether we can utilize the alleyway between the tenants court the garage and the gym. It seems like there is the the alleyway there. Maybe we could make it wider and make it as the higher access or or also service corridor there. And um for the Yeah. Uh I also have some concern on the construction cost of the renovation but I think you have already analyzes each of the existing building and run the numbers and feel it makes sense to do all those adjustment and keep it as this instead of tear down and build the new ones. So, I think overall it's it's quite nice and I just hope that the new and the old ones can have some dialogues between it. Thank you. Yeah, thank you for um a very thoughtful master plan, but I'm really disheartened about the later phases because I see that it's a complete master plan with all phases, but it looks like a plan waiting for the future if you just look at phase one, right? Your diagonal um prominade kind of chops off randomly, right? at

the end of phase one at the end of existing buildings. Um so I also have questions about you know the priority and pro like what part of this program that's just looking at phase one for instance what part of um that like it seems like there are sub phases within phase one right and it's both and there's several factors to it priority funding need per you know community needs. So I almost like I'm trying to picture a matrix of let's just say um the um education and enrichment portion um which I understand it's part of existing program that would get relocated but what is the funding source that makes that possible? because it it seems like things that are communitywise higher priority may have less funding source kind depending on where it's coming from. Like with theater works uh partnership, I'm hopeful that the theater portions of this will get done more likely than some of the higher community priority but less likely to be get funded kind of pieces. So I worry about the the kit of parts of this master plan being done in any kind of sequence that pairs up with you know the even your phasing in the master plan e even within phase one. Um so I am more confused than I was you know yesterday or day before reading the master plan knowing that the full it's really not a full master plan. It's a full dream and

phase one is likely in the near term. But if that's I also worry about even is phase one going to happen, right? And so it goes back to your question earlier about what are we approve what are we recommending for approval. So I would like some clarity on um more clarity on like what part of this master plan are we you know in written words approving? Is it the square footage of phase one construction and renovation? There's about 50,000 square ft of just renovation in phase one. Right. In today's dollars, it's somewhere uh based on my experience, if with seismic upgrades, it's almost like $800 a square foot or more. So that's I don't know like what is it $50 million that is going into renovation, right, in in phase one as part of funding. Don't quote me on number. I'm not a cost estimator. Um but so I worry about you know those are critical things that needs to happen as far as um you know all of like uh what you're putting in the existing buildings and so like in a jigsaw puzzle which part of these are likely to get funded in phase 1 A 1 B 1 C and how does all of that fall into place and I worry that because phase two and three seems quite unlikely. Is this a master plan that we're approving with um really the completion of phase one kind of leaves loose ends and more in the granular portion in phase one where you're um sorry I'm

looking at um the existing buildings that are um like between A and A and B stay and C and get partially cut off. Right. So, um, yeah. Could you Sorry, I'm just looking at my screen, but it would be good for everybody to look at. It's page nine of the master plan. Yep. So on the um deconstruction image on the lower left um the red dotted line shows A and B but and then next to that where the dotted line uh zigzags C and I think D as well gets partially cut off. So that's partial demolition of a building which can also come with you know mandatory seismic upgrades all kinds of things that can come with it. So I just worry that these demolitions might be more trouble than it's worth or sorry partial demolitions and renovations are are going to come with a lot of baggage that has not quite been thought through it feels like in this master plan. So again back to my comment of like I want to understand as a group what are we recommending for approval and I want to have real clarity on this is the part of master plan as we understand it that we're recommending for approval.

That makes sense

through the chairs. if I may jump in and just try and provide um a little bit of context that hopefully helps um for those future discussions and then once we get to a recommendation and invite my colleagues to add as well. Um I think this is one of the difficulties when we are looking at a conceptual master plan or an area plan where we don't have the precise design of the buildings or a guarantee of funding because having this master plan helps us get more funding, right? It's a chicken and egg kind of thing. And so my recommendation would be to thinking be thinking of it as this is our vision for what this community center can be and having that vision is a really important part of making it actually come to fruition eventually. As staff, we have tried to have some realistic expectations based on the history of this project. We want to help the city move forward with really highly needed improvements in a way that is realistic based on kind of what we're hearing about potential funding in a way that could get some things in the near term as we work towards the final vision. And so I think the final vision is really important and that should be really what you are recommending. You're saying this is what we want Cubard coverly to look like with a recognition that the exact layout you know the size of the pool. There are things like that that can be adjusted as we get into those details. But the total

size, the main components of the layout, the general kind of s site circulation, those are the kinds of things that if they changed, we'd have to relook at the squa review. And so those are the the components that were future designs would align with. And then the idea of this phasing allows us to do some of the improvements, move some components forward as we work for the funding of the other components. and acknowledging that and sharing the input that you have shared already tonight about the concerns and the things that you think are important to make sure that those buildings are seismically safe, that the flooring is appropriate for the uses, that we have appropriate access for um children coming to the schools that are on site. Though I will note that we actually have a wonderful 50% um mode share for for bikes and pedestrians to our schools um in PaloAlto and so a lot of those kids are going to be coming uh without adding more cars to the road. So I hope that that framing helps you understand yeah we we aren't getting into the details. We can't say exactly which components, but hearing from you the things that are the biggest concerns and the biggest priorities helps us continue to refine this and then develop those plans as we know what funding is available.

Board member Ros, good evening. Um, first of all, I want to thank all my fellow board members. uh bring up the tail end here. It's always a little double-edged sword here. Um I'd like to reiterate that I agree with primarily pretty much everything that my fellow board members have said. Um I'm going to try and keep my comments sort of focused on items that either haven't been covered or items that I think need minor amendments. um in in my mind um first of all also to the to the city staff uh this is a big undertaking and it's definitely one of those projects that we as architects we love to get lost in the details and it's tough at a project like this when we are you know the chicken and the egg you've got to get the funding to know the scope but you have to know the scope to get the funding so it's a little bit of that and keeping that in mind I just want to say hats off to you guys you have done a very thorough presentation appreciate the public outreach this is I mean coverly gem in this city and it can be so much more than what it is right now. So, I'm really looking forward to having this developed into something that's much more useful um much more community oriented and really just re-imbracing Cubly in a way that maybe it once was back in the 70s and ' 80s when I was a kid, but it has sort of not been in more recent years. So, I'm really looking forward to seeing this moving forward. So, with that big picture in mind, um I'm going to focus my comments there. Um I feel like also in one of the earlier iterations we did have more pedestrian analysis um when you guys actually came towards ARB we had really clear graphics of pedestrian pathing and bike pathing and things like that that I do feel were somewhat missed and so we had some public comment on that and I do want to reiterate how critically important that is especially for the kids. Um I didn't feel necessary to comment on it because I remember that we had talked about it previously and it was of high importance in previous conversations. So, just to really bump that back up to the top of the list. Um, I like the idea of the com

competition size swimming pool. I think the fact that people in Palo Alto have to leave Palo Alto to go find something is ridiculous. Um, on the same token, it'd be nice if there was a small pool for kids to splash around in. So, you know, there's all these wishes that people want and those have to be balanced with what we can afford with what's actually the priority of what's needed. Um, and I think that unfortunately that is one of those quote unquote details, right? While it is a major element of this site and while it is a major part of the planning, it is unfortunately a detail that will have to get sort of developed as we find out what the budget is, as we find out, you know, taking this one step at a time. But understanding that having that be a goal would be great, right? Marking that as something that would be good to have and would be good to strive towards and not just letting it go by the wayside. um just because oh we can't afford it let's cut it from the list right that's actually something that's of a priority um I also want to touch on the this is sort of a trickier one with the the concept that um board member Joe had mentioned with the traffic mitigation parking mitigation having multiple events slated at the same time this tends to be an operations issue um and it's something that I just don't know how to factor that into our recommendations to council other than to say that you know having some planning and making There's not a Theater Works performance of Hamilton and a soccer game that's going to be, you know, the end- all beall of whatever that regional tournament is and a swimming competition at the same time. That would be problematic. So, understanding that the operations of this facility will need to be well managed for the duration of it. But in um big picture, I think it's great. I think you guys are really taking steps in the right direction. Um yes, there are concerns. Yes, there are steps that need to be sort of finessed as we get down the road, but it is a difficult thing to take this one step at a time. Um, and that's what we have to do with a project this big. So, thank you very much. And to my fellow board members,

thank you for your comments and the commissioners, thank you as well. Anything else from the ARB before we begin uh the detail comment round from PTC? I think it's an appropriate time to take a break. So, uh, it is currently 8:17 by my watch. Shall we return at 8:30? No, I

Welcome back everyone. We're ready to resume. Uh we will begin with uh PTC comments and questions. And I would like to begin with Commissioner Hecman. Thank thank you chair. I am up uh so let me start with a my questions which are uh really uh brief just helping me understand the u the leasing arrangements. So I read in the staff report that most of the 27 acres that uh the city doesn't own are being leased from the school district. Um I heard reference uh in the staff report that um school district is using building I right now and I'm wondering what other what other parts of Cberly aren't we either owning or leasing currently.

So the 27 acres that we refer to is owned by the school district right and we lease some of that space. We used to lease all of it and the lease has been reduced. Um it was reduced during CO. So the school district um occupies the I building and the A and B um long buildings wings I guess um and the C building.

I'm trying to find the image here. Um and then they also have the auditorium which is they lease that to a tenant of their own. Um and then there's some other smaller buildings or rooms attached to buildings that they also have part of their lease.

Okay. All right. And then the vision here that city would uh buy the seven to add to their eight lease some part of the remaining um acreage including some parking as the tenant there. We we can, you know, we can improve access ways and and put on new asphalt if we want, right? And make sure that that um what we're leasing, we can improve that even though we're not going to we don't want to build structures on land we're leasing

to a degree. So, some of the plan evaluated like restriping maybe the parking lots, but yeah, you're right. we won't be able to construct or do construction, but we did say like, oh, you know, it might be nice to to um restripe the parking lots once we take over the lease. Um but yeah, re putting down new asphalt, we'd probably have to discuss that. I I don't know if they'd be opposed to it, but we could like put down new lines. Um but no construction.

Okay. All right. Um so those were my questions. So, I want to really start by thanking all of the members of the PaloAlto community who, you know, have have provided input to staff through numerous community meetings um uh over a period of years now. uh and to staff for sort of taking that input and along with the consultants taking the direction from the council, input from the board and PTC here tonight and from the PRC and melding all of that into what I think is a a a wonderful visionary document. Um I'm I u I'm excited by the prospect of this conceptual uh master plan. Um, as I was uh studying it in anticipation of this, I I got a little stuck on um a qu um the question that uh Vice Chair Chang ended up asking when I was looking at uh the the breadth of phase one and the nebulousness of the funding sources today and wonder and and when I think of phases, I'm I think of them I think the way most people do that u a phase is something you discreetly start and end and then you go to something else another phase and start and end it and I was concerned about there's a lot going on in phase one and what if all the money that would be needed for that isn't there and so I started to look through I I said well there's probably an answer to that somewhere in the master plan and so I started to um look through the master plan to look for that and I think I found it. Uh, are you able to pull up page 52 of the master plan?

Um, if if you can't let let me just read we're going to work we're going to work on bringing it up, but yeah.

Okay. Um uh I I think it's good for people to see it um because um it's it's useful in at least in my thinking of how to look at this master plan tonight in trying to form a recommendation. I'm just going to go ahead and read it that can be pulled up. It says um and so this is this is at the end of the description of phase one, the phasing overview. Um, it says, "This phasing plan is conceptual and flexible, showing just one example of the building sequence. Over the coming years, this phasing plan may be revised to better suit future needs, constraints, and funding opportunities." And I think that that is one of the most important sentence uh two sentences in a conceptual master plan because one of the things we have to do in a master plan, a conceptual master plan is set expectations. And what we don't want to happen is is an aspirational document turn into a source of frustration for the public when things don't happen the way they're shown here or in the time that is hinted at or in the order that's described here. And so I think to set expectations, this language, which is I'm going to call it buried on page 52, it needs to be more prominent. I think it should go in the preface, there's kind of some language that's a little similar in the second paragraph of the preface, but I think we need to do better. And then at the beginning of section four, the conceptual master plan, where we lay out these phases, and there's a summary on that page, uh I think that's on page 48 is the diagram. I think maybe it's 49. I think you got to put it there, too. Um, again, I I want people to understand when they look

at this that that this isn't the end product. This is the beginning of figuring out the end product. Um, and and really when I look at this master plan, to me, it's it's kind of akin to a design build 15% plan. It's it's kind of the bones. And we know as the plan progresses, it's going to change. It's going to be studied in more detail. And and I think a lot of the the angst that that I've heard tonight from uh fellow commissioners and board members is is there's no it there's a lack of clarity. But for me, I think that's okay if we understand and articulate correctly what this document is. Um, and so that's again why I think that language is important. And I thought there were some really interesting points made about the the notion of of developing priorities. Um, uh, and I'm not opposed to that, but I we we can't do it tonight. I think that's a very detailed um, uh, discussion that would really take a a session or two more to wrestle with. And I feel like we're on a pretty tight timeline to get a ballot measure in November. And so, and I don't personally think that it's worth sort of stopping that train for a year to set the priorities. I'm actually thinking that that depending upon how the funding sources gel through the ballot measure and and other partnerships there if we don't hit $365 million in funding, there's going to be a discussion of priorities of phase one. That's just going to naturally happen. Um and so and I'm comfortable with that.

Um so when I look at this um master plan I you know I try to understand it as a guideline for for you know a future vision rather than laying down the law. This is what will be. Um and I I just think that needs to be um made a little more clear in the document. Um I did want to spend just a minute on the concept of philanthropy. I mentioned this last time that the uh that this was before the PTC and and there were a couple of references to it in the the staff report. Um but I didn't get the sense from the staff report that that there would be any kind of sort of aggressive pursuit of this. My feeling is that there are we have PaloAlto residents who have extraordinary wealth and some of those residents have demonstrated extraordinary generosity nationally, internationally even and and those are people who who get to enjoy all of the benefits of living in PaloAlto, raising their families here. Um at least when you know we're not pestering them about their preference of compound living. Um, and those are people who who might be interested in an opportunity to contribute in a real way to to the gathering place for PaloAlto. And so I want to again encourage um um an actual process to figure out how that might how that might be pursued rather than just saying wouldn't it be nice if you know how can we approach those people and see if they might um want a building with their name on it or their

mother or father's name on it, whatever. Um because that could um solve some phase one funding issues or if we don't have phase one, it could accelerate phases two and three. So I'd ask that you look at that. Um, and so with those comments, I'm I'm really comfortable with this master plan, with maybe that emphasis that I talked about being worked on between here and ideally PRC, but at least council. Um, and I'm otherwise supportive of the staff recommendation. Thanks. Thank you, Commissioner. Vice Chair Chain go first.

I will be going last as usual. All right. Um, uh, my hats off to staff for taking pretty complex project, a very complex project with so many different points of view and boiling it down into this and thinking through. So, I mean, every time we've asked a question, pretty much you guys have had a response. So, it's pretty amazing. Um, thank you so much to the ARB for your comments. It's been really fun to listen to you and also agree with most of what you brought up. I think maybe all of what you brought up. Um, so my comments, um, when it gets to the time, I really do think a larger pool would make more sense. Um, just because with all the growth that we are going to have in South Palto as well as just the whole area, I think there will be a need to not have to go to Rinkanada to to to swim. Um, I let's see. The second thing I wanted to talk about is I'm pretty concerned about the parking because when I looked at the parking analysis, if if I found it in the appendex correctly, basically it said, you know, the our square footage is going to increase by x% and the parking is going to increase by more than an x% so it should be fine. But we've heard over and over tonight people talking about how hopefully this will be a much more usable space which I then interpret as a much more heavily used space. And so I'm not sure that that level of analysis is the right level of analysis. And in addition, um, because we're neighboring, and I think I brought this up last time when you guys came to the PTC, um, the our neighbor is the playing

field and whatever PIUSD may eventually have there. And even though the playing fields aren't part of the community center, let's say that use continues in perpetuity, um, when we add a heavily a more heavily used theater there, that might actually overlap with the times that the playing fields are also used. And what if lighting is added to the playing fields? And because we've heard so much about turf versus grass and how much we need the playing field and the population's growing and so I just think that um it's risky to be relying on a lease to for a substantial amount of our parking and I know that you don't have the answers to this but that's just something I would want to flag and I'm not sure like correct me if I'm wrong has there been additional parking study other than that analysis by hexacon that was sort of percentage based based

we did uh two parking studies. So, one through the master plan and then part of the SQA analysis, there was an additional parking study done through that. But the parking study done through SQA is more of the environmental impact, not necessarily as close of a look at the numbers that will be

actual uses. Correct. Because the the new space is going to be used differently than the current space. And so then, you know, there's got to be best practices out there for what it is. But I also think that the timing of some of those might actually be uh present some challenges. Um but it'll be a good problem to have. It means that people are using coverly in a in a new different way. Um my third comment oh and I do think sort of that interaction with whatever PA USD has. So, this is that's the challenge with the master plan and this is a vision, but I think PAUSD I'm not quite sure what their vision is for this site and I'm not sure that they know yet and that could dramatically um change like how traffic flows of people between the two sites, you know, like I I think I talked about how the JCC and um the the JCC and the uh retirement community like they flow together. You know, this we could have some sort of a similar relationship with PA USD that could be really beneficial, but then it'll change everything. Um all right. And then with respect to that diagonal prominade, I think it's strange as is and also maybe even strange in the ultimate vision because I thought we had had like maybe a drop off point there in the past, I can't remember, but right now the diagonal path feels like a path to nowhere sort of. Um, I understand the back end. connecting that neighborhood, but then it's ending in the middle of the block and so and it's really only meant for pedestrian and bike circulation, but then they've got to get to the to the

edges in the intersection. So, that whole thing just seems a little bit strange to me, but I know there's been a lot of community input into it. And if you want to respond to this at all to uh I mean, you're not wrong, right? We've heard that feedback. I think also part of, you know, I I gave a brief answer earlier, but part of it was to help with the future cost to when we eventually moved to phases two and three, so we wouldn't have to redevelop again. Um, you know, we would complete this in phase one and then hopefully quickly add on to it instead of, you know, having a whole different configuration in phase one. Um, and then, yeah, the priority of green space, you know, we've heard that loud and clear since day one. And so this ending at phase one, you know, brings that to the forefront as Kristen mentioned. It gives that 2 acres of green space. It, you know, halfway completes uh the ped and um bike paths. And so I think it was a way of just, you know, getting as close as we can in the first phase and then completing the second and third um as soon as we could. Okay. Last time you guys were here, I had asked for sort of use cases for that particular shape of green space because it is a lot of green space and I'm sure you guys got more thought more about it and also um got community feedback on it. So would you be willing to share what like what types of activities?

Yeah. So um we only shared a couple of the outdoor programming ideas. There's more in the master plan. So, uh, in addition to, you know, the outdoor amphitheater that we we showcased, um, there could be the outdoor classrooms. Uh, programs could come outside, outdoor education for children's classrooms. Uh, there could be some of the sculpture gardens, the play areas. Also, just like outdoor space for spontaneous activity or people just coming and having picnics and play. Um, so one of the ongoing themes from the community was just we want space just to come and be too. So, uh, some of it won't just have things that we put in program. It'll just be open space. Um, so those are just a few of the ideas, whether it's pollinator gardens, um, community gardens, things like that. Otherwise, it might just be green space or that urban forest that we talked about earlier, too.

Okay. Well, that'll come when it gets fully architected out. and you know um but I it still strikes me as a little bit like of a strange space for anything other than sort of well the amphitheater makes a lot of sense to me that that's very clear. It's the long prominade where other than it just being green space um I have a hard time seeing it being used programming without a lot of thought being put into how to create kind of spaces within a space. Anyhow, um let me keep going. Um I hardily, uh second Commissioner Hecman's comment about um figuring out a structured way to approach funding via philanthropy or you know joint public private joint ventures. Um and then also uh just wanted to highlight that I am in agreement with the um what Miss Elson, the public commenter, brought up about sort of the importance of maintaining an existing path and my the concern about having vehicular circulation there. Um so that's it and I too am supportive of the plan. It's great work. Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair, Commissioner Peterson. Thank you, chair. So, I just want to reiterate, I've heard several times about a um bike path walkability that the the overall plan isn't there. Uh that was kind of what I was getting to earlier. And I think waiting for the San Antonio corridor, it's it's going to be too late to be making these big decisions like the path to nowhere, which I know we we talked about it last time, too. uh it looks beautiful architecturally uh until you just realize um it it just doesn't go anywhere. And I think it's that big view of when you're taking um you know the twob block radius around the site and then drawing the the lines of where is everybody coming into the site and leaving the site. Not you know imagine there's no vehicles just walking and biking is where you get that bigger um vision. and we had pieces of that last time, but we don't see it this time. So, I think that's what you're hearing on that. But I also appreciate uh Commissioner uh Hchman uh pointing out that this is about getting a bond. So, you know, to keep that mindset of what what are we even, you know, what's our immediate objective? So with that, the next topic I did look in here on the um net zero and um turns out the reason why I couldn't find it is because it's it's called zero net in here. Um so you have some terminology drift in here. It looks like there's about four or five different authors, maybe three generations. Um it we have the 2030 plan is what I found for Pow Alto and that's really clear is the 2030 plan. It has some drift too on different websites, but I think if there's some comment in here, I think when this goes forward, anybody that sees that keyword, it's the 2030 plan, uh, net zero, carbon neutral. There was one paragraph in the appendix that was really nice. It talked about

the interreation between net zero and carbon neutral. Uh, carbon neutral a lot of times ends up being uh timber construction. And this would be beautiful if this was all timber construction somehow. um you know, lowcarbon uh concrete. I there's just all kinds of really cool approaches, all of it getting more expensive uh but also lowering the life cycle costs of the facility uh because it's got lower heating costs and things like that because it's been you know built with a better energy efficiency. Um but of course those are the things get value engineered back out of the project too. But the the point I want to make is when you boil plate that into the original plan that the plan is that this is a this is a in a this is a sustainable site. Even labeling it sustainability I think helps keep that message so that everybody that that sees the site knows this is sustainable PaloAlto. It's a demonstration of the 2030 plan. uh now it gives me a new vision and maybe that even gets more philanthropy because now you're investing in the future and and it's a demonstration site for the whole community of what kind of construction we want in Palo Alto. So I'll leave with that. Thank you. Good work. Also now that I you know I'm putting it all together you know it's this is all uh what 350 million

uh phase one will be uh we're estimating between 300 and 400 million. Yes. Including the land acquisition. Yeah. So, of course, this is a big project. Thank you. And can I ask a follow-up question? So, on page 20 of the master plan, we did have kind of a surrounding context that shows like the existing um you know, bike paths and bus stops. And so, in addition to that, is that what you think would be helpful to kind of scope out more? Does that get to your first comment and question? Page 20 and like closest uh Cal Train and bus routes. I think it would be great for us to understand what you think would be more helpful um to to map out. That would be great.

I see 20 here. It's got the the grocery store next door. Next one. Oh, I think flow paths is the key word. If there was an arrow just showing the flow through because it doesn't even show the diagonal as a flow path on here. I think that would be a starting point is is the first flow path that goes through the site would show the diagonal teeing right into um is that uh middle field and then just kind of like where do you go from there? I think stuff like that. Thank you. Is

that enough to work with? Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Commissioner Templeton.

Thank you, Chair. Um, thank you all for another great round of comments. I've really enjoyed this. I've taken a lot of notes. I'm going to go through them and we can only hope I can read my own handwriting at this point. Um, I will start with the parking lots. Um, if I were to rephrase what I I have heard here tonight is the existing parking lots are a very poor quality. Those of us who have to drive it multiple times a week to drop off and pick up our kids at Cberly hold our breath every time. Are we going to hit another pothole? What are we going What's going to happen this time? It is it uneven? Are we going to fall down when we're walking with our kid trying to hold their hand and make sure they don't fall down? Are we going to fall down? it's just really poor quality. So even if we are um leasing them, there is a desperate need for more than paint. So one of the things I would suggest as um and we can include this in our our motions. I'm told we're going to have two separate motions, but I'll walk through things I'd like to see in the motions and then we can figure it out. But um I'd really like us to be really specific about what our lease of those lots means and it should include safety improvements and that might be some repaving. It's been needed for many decades. So I don't think that we'll be satisfied as a city to build all this beautiful new stuff and then um fall and break our hands on the way into the pool or the tennis match. Right. So, um that would that would be something to specify. There were other ideas of things to specify. So, I would just generally say um part of our recommendation um will likely be to specify the the conditions of using using the parking lots that we're leasing from PAUSD as a bucket that you can bring back next time in more detail. Um, I really appreciated I think it was um board member Hersh's

comment about the tennis and pickle ball noise. I think it's funny because I've always um always thought tennis makes a lot of noise, but I I'm told tennis people uh notice more the noise of pickle ball. Uh nevertheless, if it's elevated, noise will carry further. Um, so the idea, um, there's one thing that's really exciting about the idea of having you have sunlight on your on your outdoor tennis ball courts that are coll-located with parking, but there's also the challenge of dealing with the noise because it will carry further. That is um, I hate to say probably a serious consideration. Um the court orientation comment. I don't know who made that comment, but uh wow, that's actually really an interesting problem. Um we have a lot of street orientation uh mishaps in PaloAlto. We have a lot of them that follow the ark of the sun. So there's times the year where you just looking straight into the sun when you're driving down some of our main arteries. Um I hope we don't build that into our our courts. So that's just a note. Um the eyebuilding. Oh my goodness. Um I agree with board member Hirsch that uh it would be I I have always thought that you meant to put a gazebo of that size and shape in that location. It never occurred to me that you would keep that horrendous building. Um, I would encourage you to think more broadly about how to make that space really usable since it will be fe a feature of focus for this outdoor amphitheater space. It really can be something much better and have you can have a bigger better vision there. Um um I uh about the location of the

concessions. I think is that perhaps what was meant about the cafeteria space or the kitchen? Um I really liked having it near the pool um and the sports center. I thought that was very centrally located. Um so I can imagine having parties uh at the pool and being able to use the kitchen. Um, I'm currently in the pool community that I'm a part of. Uh, we have that uh ability and it's really nice and I know a couple of others in in the city are similarly constructed. I think it'd be really nice to be able to do that whether you're at the pool or whether you're doing a tennis party or you know something else at the um recreation center. It'd be really nice. So, I I just wanted to pro provide a counterargument about that location. Um, I'm concerned about the parking in a completely different way than all my other fellow commissioners are concerned about parking, but we love parking and so you're going to get uh that kind of feedback from all of us. Um, I would say I think when it came before us last time, we discussed not having a ton of underground parking because the I think elevation of this site is like 10 ft above sea level. Um, and so we had discussed not having a lot of underground parking because of where the water table is. So, I was surprised to hear that we've just abandoned all of the above ground parking because it would be an eyesore and we're just going to put all that underground. Um, I'm concerned because that will increase the risk of flooding of the parking garages um and in a location that we're going to be having a lot of young people uh could could potentially be less safe. Now, there are ways to mitigate that. Of course, we all know that you can pump out water from an underground parking facility. Um, but just know that um, occasionally when you

start combining parking with machinery, things fail. We know that about our um, you know, machineoriented parking garages and all those kinds of things. It's just a thing. It happens. Um, so that is my two cents worth uh worth what you paid for it about the underground parking. Um, just quickly I'd like to clarify it's partially underground um not fully. Um, and so we did some initial study with the water table. So, I just wanted to clarify that the due diligence has been done on that. And then we also have some um drilling being done further to make sure that it would be all safe. So, just wanted to clarify that still study.

In our original, uh presentation, I had been told partial underground, but today um I did not hear that. So, thank you for clarifying because that does make a huge difference. So, um that's really important to know. And I would encourage you to always say partial for this site or else you're going to have the same discussion every time. Um be because we know this area is prone to flooding. Like we just know and I know you know that. But if if we allow that um to be confusing. Um there was something I was going to agree with board member Joe Jarth, but I cannot read my own handwriting. So, uh, too bad. Um, the renovation versus rebuild, um, conversation. Oh, that says from chair Chen. Yes. Like I I am surprised at the level of renovation um that you have described not being considered a rebuild. Uh, I don't know what what is the technicality for that. I'm sure there's a reason you were describing it that way. Um, but I am concerned about the the cost being indistinguishable from a rebuild. You may wish to rebuild. Um, and the reason is like I've been in all those buildings. They're disgusting. They're really bad. I I hear no disagreement from my colleagues. They're they're I this is not, you know, slap lipstick on the pig situation, right? It really needs to be completely redone. Um uh regarding the money question um by board member Adcock um I I am and

reading staff's request of us to put money put the money question aside in terms of moving forward with the staff uh recommendation. I'm comfortable doing that. I do still have all the questions that she mentioned and I think it's likely that not only will council have those questions, so will voters. It's really a serious uh thing that needs to be clarified and you only have a couple months to do it. So, that's what we're hoping that this conversation has been useful for you for those reasons. Um, regarding the question about the path to nowhere, I I kind of love that. Um, I I recall our original conversation or our previous conversation. We really wanted to envision this diagonal space, this open space to be something akin to the Stanford oval, right? It's a dest family destination. It's a place to go and lie down in the sun on a beautiful afternoon or to play frisbee or um you know maybe uh maybe somebody would open a farmers market there or have a festival there. So you you have kind of a vision for what to use the space for. But I will just come back to that Stamford Oval conversation. Stanford Oval is not a path to nowhere. And I think that's sort of where we're we're finding a little bit of a disconnect because the story, the vision that we have to um promote to the public to get the funding for this vision of this project needs to have a little bit of cohesion. And right now that that path needs to connect to the neighborhood, right? And that's one thing we heard from our public commenter. This literally does it connects to neighborhoods and schools.

Okay, how does that tie into our design so that this path is not to nowhere, it's to your neighborhoods and it's to your friend's house or whatever it is going to be. Um, uh, it's a place where you can all go from different paths and get to the tennis courts to play a match together on the weekends or whatever it is. But that story needs to have some cohesion in order to get over the hurdle of the ballot box in November. Um, okay. So then, um, I realize we have not yet heard from our PTC chair. So, um, I will hold off, but I'm just going to preview what I'm, um, I'm thinking. I'm I'm I'm also ready to support the staff recommendation. And I would like us to um consider adding a couple of thoughts to include in the motion about things for um this the project team to consider before it comes back after the next iteration. So things like pool size, um renovation versus rebuild, the bike pedestrian routes, um a better plan for building I I'm totally sneaking that in there. Um um parking improvements clarifications on our our deal with PA USD. um the adding the the uh language to the preface from page 52, but also those three words that that I mentioned um modern, safe, and sustainable. Um and then I am not sure exactly what to do about the council prioritization if that's something we need to advise council on. I think somebody said maybe not. That'll come of its own accord. So maybe not. And then if we want to add a plug in there for

any plan or recommendation about how to solicit legacy funding. Um so those are the notes I took and um yeah I'm ready to support this after we hear from everybody else in the last round. Thank you.

Thank you commissioner. You saved a few uh items that were on my list as well. So um so we were asked to consider two things. both the draft initial study and the master plan itself. So, regarding the initial study, um, prior to this meeting, I heard concerns from the public about environmental risks, particularly sea level rise, uh, but also seismic hazards from liquefaction. Um, the initial study, I think, analyzes those carefully. Uh and it also covers uh other issues that people might have not been aware of. Uh exposure to asbestos and lead paint during demolition. Uh leaking underground storage tanks that are nearby. um and noise and I believe the combination of the mitigations proposed in the initial with the initial study and uh the master plan particularly appendix B um provide convincing mitigation strategies for all of these issues. Um, I am interested to hear the uh negative comments about the traffic analysis because I thought it was particularly well done uh compared to many we see certainly uh and I'm happy to see that it concluded some lane changes uh and a new signal on middlefield are warranted. I think both of those would have been required in practice. Um, so the bottom line for me is that I think the mitigated negative declaration is appropriate and I have no remaining SQA concerns as regards the master plan.

Now, as far as the plan itself, um, I would say that it's comprehensive and well prioritized. It's interesting that I got such a different impression than uh some of the other comments we've heard tonight. But thinking about it, I believe that's because I treated it as a very high level conceptual plan and assumed that many if not most of the key issues that we brought up tonight would be addressed during architectural program development. Uh so that made those of less concern to me. Um the phasing made sense to me. I identified the same I identified the same uh comment on page 52 that Commissioner Hecman noted. Uh yes, I did not go so far as to recommend that it be um used more heavily throughout the document, but I believe that is the right answer. uh so that that understanding is um more widespread. Um for me the circulation looked well designed for all modes. Now Miss Elson's comments about the crossing uh particularly the one to piaza um had not occurred to me and I would like to make sure that when uh design reaches that stage that that's given adequate attention. Um, I'm not sure that anything more needs to be done at the master plan level, but it's clear that making that crossing safe is going to require care. Uh, so that's a good a good point to highlight um, regarding the architectural programming process to come. Um I just observe as I

have earlier that there is really great guidance in appendices B and C of the master plan that covers the building systems uh the parking analysis uh and it sketches architectural programming outlines in sufficient detail that you can feel some confidence u about the uh cost estimates. Um, so I think that's it's really important to emphasize that those documents exist. Um, I might also add that this version of the plan addressed all the questions I'd posed previously um in our uh analysis. So I was happy to see that. Um, so all in all, I'm impressed by the thoughtfulness and care that went into this. Um, as many of us have said, thank you to the residents, to the consultants, and to staff who spent so much time to create this. I will add a couple of things in response to comments I've heard tonight uh on the tennis pickle ball noise. Um, yeah, you should check out the uh initial study on some of that, but I agree that there may need to be a sound wall uh around the north and perhaps western uh edges of that court. Uh there are substantial playing fields there already. So, people are getting some um getting some noise already and there is some distance particularly to Nelson Drive. Um but we may we may need more. So that should be the uh a consideration during the architectural design. Um my understanding of the prominade was as

commissioner Templeton mentioned that it might also be a destination event space. Um so I would like to see um more thought about how that could be explained and used. Uh, I will make um a note about parking that's precisely the opposite of some that I've heard tonight. And that is that I appreciated the attention given to the possibility of eliminating parking in the future. Uh so the flat floors, the high ceilings, the ability to convert parking. So should it happen that we've al overestimated the amount that we need, we may have more usable space here at a reasonable cost and I appreciate that uh foresight. Um so bottom line um I also support this. I have faith in the architectural programs and design to come to address the issues that have been raised tonight. That's it for me. We have uh opportunity for another round of comments or follow-ups if anyone cares to make any. If not, I think we're ready to make motions.

And to provide clarification, just so everybody understands, we are looking to do two separate motions and two separate votes. There will be one you you may choose whether you'd like the if the planning commission would like to go first followed by the ARB or the other order. Um that's not critical but that there would be one vote and recommendation from each body individually. As our guests I would like to invite the ARB to go first. Commissioner Tempe, do you still want to say something since your light is on?

Yeah, I just wanted to say I was going to offer to make the motion, but I was surprised that the chairs like you other people do it. So, uh, it's up to you guys, but I will tell you as an offer, no, hold on. As an offer, I'm I'm prepared to make a motion that you may also wish to reuse or modify. So, it's totally up to you. Um, but I'm prepared whenever ready. Chair, thank you.

Miss Armor, is that acceptable or does a member of the ARB need to make the motion? So, um, based on what I'm hearing, uh, I think it would be fine for once the planning commissioner made a motion, a second, and we had a vote that then the ARB could say, um, I make a motion as um as provided by the PTC with the following modifications. So kind of using it similar to the way you would say I make a motion to recommend the staff recommendation with the following modifications.

I I see nods that that's acceptable to everyone. So Commissioner Templeton, would you proceed?

Thank you guys. Um I I know we're we're some of us are even way past our bedtime here tonight. So I appreciate everybody's patience. Um so I'll start with moving the staff recommendation and um then with the following modifications uh to include notes to staff to review or revise the following issues that we identified tonight. Is is there a way that we can get someone to type this up on the board just to make sure we're all on the same page here?

I I know that we often do have that capability at the ARB level. It's not something that we do as standard practice at PTC. Um we can this once let me see if understood. Understood. You got a different liaison here today though. So, um, give me a moment and see whether it's something we can do. Um, so that's a strong maybe. Give me a moment.

Not that we would object to that being policy for PTC as well. All right, we'll give it a try this evening. No promises for the future. Appreciate your flexibility. I think with this many people involved in this many additions, um it would be super valuable. So, I appreciate you guys taking a stab at this. Okay. So, the motion uh to recap is to move the staff recommendation and and to recommend the council asks staff to review or revise the following. And then we're going to do a bulleted list. Okay. Um, consider competition friendly pool size of 50 m by 25 yards.

25 yards. Thank you. Um, revisit the cost effectiveness of a renovation versus rebuild on buildings ST VF. Were there other buildings A or B friends? I'm trying to remember. Okay, thank you. And just a raider. S T V E F. Oh, thank you. Also C N G.

Yeah, partial. Yeah, C. Yeah, thank you. I love it. Teamwork making the dream work. Okay. um to review bike and pedestrian routes including the diagonal. What was the word below? Is it below? No.

Prominade. prominade and the existing safe routes to school through the property. Man, you're fantastic. Thank you so much. I know we're giving you a lot of words here tonight, but thank you. Okay. Um to clarify the agreements about parking lot improvements and duration of access. Okay, next one is

that would be parking uh improvements. Yeah. Oh, thank you for catching that. Thank you. Preface. I'm not sure if preface is the right word, Steph, but the language we want to add is that section called the preface. The one you had on the slide. It was the agreed to description of the project. Is preface the right word? Uh, sure. As far as uh, Commissioner Hecman's comments. Yeah. Um, so that was moving language from page 52

to the preface. And yes, I wanted to phrase it 49. Okay, that's okay. But I wanted to know if it was called a preface. Okay. So, I would I would change uh Can we start over? um modify the preface to include language from page 52 about flexibility of the plan. Okay, I think that's sufficient for the motion. Yeah. Um just to I think it's the executive summary.

Thank you. That is that is the word I was looking for. I was like my brain is not if we can change from preface to executive summary. Thank you so much. It's It's actually both. The preface preface is on page three. The executive summary is on page 48. If you're wanting to choose one of those, let's do both. Now, I don't want to choose. I want staff to choose. I really Yeah, whatever. However, we want to we can to include language.

Thank you. To include language from language from Thank you. Good catch. and to add the words modern, safe, and sustainable to the project goals. Okay. Be anything else? Don't don't type. I'm going to ask questions. Um, the other two things I had written down were Yes. were do we want to put anything about council priorities? I think we decided that was not necessary. And do we want to include direction um suggestions about legacy funding? Um okay. Okay. So then we'll add one more bullet when you're ready to encourage a program to raise

formal process. a formal process to raise funding for legacy projects within the site. Is that I'm open to other fra phrasings. If you want your building named after you sign here, something like that, right? That's the idea. Is this the right way to describe the program to encourage a formal process to raise funding for legacy? Maybe to raise funding from private sources.

From private sources. Okay, let's do that. Yeah, I think that will cover all the Okay. All right. How does this look? First of all, thank you so much, Mr. Divera. I appreciate that. Okay. Um, this is the motion. Uh, chair, is there a second? Uh, I was waiting to hear if anyone from the ARB had an addition that they would like to make. Okay. We will certainly entertain that. They could make suggestions though this isn't their motion yet. They can on discussion. We can always modify if there is a

and we will restrict our uh attention to these. Looks like board member Hirs. Yes. Uh so could we could we add to uh your number four clarify the agreement the parking improvements including landscaping because it's not just trip hazards etc. It's okay. Uh I I accept that suggestion. the parking improvements including landscaping and paving.

Okay. Good interaction between PTC and ARB is to be encouraged. And um I I I would like to highlight one of the comments made by chair Akin u about uh the noise M uh and possible um uh mitigation around the tennis/pickle ball court.

And so those are included in the SQA the environmental review document. And so if that is recommended for approval, that would be included already in the proposed project. And also I want to clarify just cuz I know pickle ball is a very hot item at this time. They're tennis courts only. Um, if we ever add, just because I know this it could go communitywide very quickly. If we add pickle ball in the future, that would be something we would take, you know, to the proper sources and stakeholders if we were to add pickle ball lines. And so, I just wanted to make sure that was clear. I feel really targeted by that comment.

Anywh who, I'm just kidding. Go ahead, Sher. Just want to point out that pickle ball is, uh, active at, uh, Mitchell, you know, very close by. It's true. It's true. Commissioners, uh, PTC commissioners, anything to add, Commissioner Hecman?

So, I think we need to clarify bullet four a little bit. I think what we're talking about there when we say the agreements, I think we're talking about wanting to make sure that our leases with the school district cover these topics. Is that is that what's intended? What excellent wording. I love it. Please proceed with modifying this and then I will accept the modification.

Okay. Um to clarify that the city lease agreements with PAUSD. Uh I think what we want to say is provide flexibility to the city to make and then you can get rid of and u the agreements of the um and then I need a little help on the back end of this. the duration of access. Are we talking about the term

how long the lease lasts? Right. One of us is a lawyer and one is not. So yes, thank you for that. Um that's exactly what I mean. How long are we going to have access to this if we enter into this agreement? Sure. Okay. So let me think about that for a minute. So would it be term of lease rather than duration of access? Well, the lease agreement sufficient A and have a sufficient duration. U yes

for to to adequately serve the improvements contemplated in the master plan

and now in English. That costs extra at the end. Everything you have there is right. So add this to the end starting with to adequately serve.

Split infinitives are acceptable in legal language. um so actually to adequately um provide access to we're going to get rid of the access before provide access to the improvements contemplated in the master plan. Sorry. Sorry.

Sam, you are doing awesome by the way. Just no pressure. You're doing awesome. I didn't even know that was a word. Yeah. And then up in the second line there, you can after duration, you can get rid of of access. Okay. You guys are amazing. This is This is great. What a what a good motion. I'm very happy I have made this motion. Would anyone like to second it? May I jump in quickly through the chair? We're so close.

We Yeah, I know. But I want to make sure the language is really strong. Just the first um actually it's the second line. Um staff would recommend just for clarity that it be that the words ask staff to review and revise be deleted so that it's just saying recommending that city council um maybe consider the following. I like that. Let's do it. So after city council put the word consider, but we really want you to be ask staff. Yeah, delete them. Yeah, there we go. Are we done? Can I second? I second. No, you do adjust. Thank you, vice chair.

You know, staff, we want more than that, right? We We'll use that word.

Any discussion? Any final discussion? Commissioners? Okay. Moved and seconded. Mr. Tero, would you call the role, please? Um, yes. Uh, Commissioner Hecman, yes. Uh, Commissioner Peterson, yes. Uh, Commissioner Templeton, yes. Uh, Vice Chair Chang, yes. Chair Aken, yes. Motion carries 5-0. Motion, if you want to change something. Thank you, Commissioners. And now we hand it over to Chair Chen. All right. To my ARB uh board members. So, do we have any changes, modifications to this motions?

I'm going to make a motion that we start with the same template. I would include a a point around um you know consider um uh consider you know adequate amount of parking amount of parking and coordination between the school district and and uh you know the the tenants especially in especially in future phases to make sure there is enough parking. So in plain language that would be um review um adequacy of parking given um uh significant new uses outlined in the master plan and uh consider uh tighter collaboration with various stakeholders to ensure adequate parking at all times. Safe, adequate and safe something like that. What do you think? considering sorry processing um I'm trying to make sure that it's something unique from the parking commentary earlier and that we're not being repetitive lease agreements. So just basically review the adequacy of parking and who would be the various stakeholders. So Powell to Unified School District.

Yeah. and the theater works and the pool. Pool will probably have an anchor tenant like Pasa.

Well, I think maybe we could make four and the new one to be two separate ones. One is maybe more focused on the leasing agreement. Yeah, I think the other is more functional. More functional. Yeah. Now, my question to follow up with this is

if this should be tied into the concept of some type of um operations management, but I don't know how we recommend that to city council. Right. So, that's that's sort of my my the reason that I'm pausing here is because I want to make a recommendation that actually city council can do something about. This is something that's actually going to end up so far down the line. Um that I don't know if that's something that we should be including right now other than to say, "Hey, by the way, when this project's actually built and up and running, let's make sure that parking's I mean parking planning for parking ahead of time and making sure the parking's adequate." That's something we can do ahead of time. So, sorry, I'm don't mean to be delaying. And I'm just trying to understand what is an active action item that we can present to city council. And also apologies to the uh uh PTC that we didn't bring this up on theirs as well. I was hoping these would be pretty mimicked. Um I mean I'd almost leave it as Luc's review adequacy of parking. Um, and just almost leave it that open open-ended, just making sure that we've got really a solid review of parking ahead of time and that they plan it out ahead of time because while I would love to get operations and management stuff in here, it's just I don't know if that's something that city council would be able to require or approve at this time. How do you feel about leaving it more open-ended and just saying review adequacy of parking?

Are you comfortable? Amazing. Okay. All right. Let's keep it simple. Does anyone else have any recommendations to add? I do. And I feel like typically we do a motion and then a second and friendly amendments with ARB. So, I'm wondering if we're a little bit out of order here. Is this working? No. Uh number you want to keep it there for a second. I think when we have too many mics on. Yeah.

Um under to review bike and pedestrian routes including clarifying the intent and use of the diagonal prominade. including and then add in the words the intent clarifying the intent and use. So bullet point number three to review bike and pedestrian routes including the intent and use of the diagonal prominade. Mhm. Intent and use.

Yeah. Beautiful. And then I would change the and to as well as the existing safe routes. So I'd change and to as well as. It's a small thing but as I'm just adding the word as right where your cursor is. As well as Yeah. As well as the existing safe routes. Can you read that one more time?

It's just adding the word as right where your cursor is so that it reads to review bike and pedestrian routes including the intent and use of the diagonal prominent as well as the existing safe routes to school on the property. David, you good with that? Maybe it's a little different in you don't need intent in use of a safe route. So, but Exactly. That's why I changed it to instead of and to as well as the existing safe roots on school on the property. So, it's two separate items. That's what I'm trying to I would slip in there maybe defining the existing safe routes or something like that. As well as defining the existing safe routes. Mhm. I'm good with that.

I have an item to add if I can go next. Um so, uh maybe it goes after the second item. consider I'm not sure if it's viability or value of saving building I and designing the master plan around the angle of that building. Yes, please. Thanks. Yes. Well, it's fun. So, it's funny. I I heard that brought up several times during the meeting. Please continue writing for now. Um and designing the entire plan around this one building. Um you can literally write it that way. be a little value of saving building I and designing the master plan

around it around it. Yes.

So I had heard that brought up and again I'm sort of pulling from my memory bank and and I did a cursory review of my previous notes before this um from when uh we had our presentation several months ago. Um I remember there were several schemes right that we had gone through and so just understanding that this one was one of the ones that we had sort of leaned towards. So I again I heard it brought up and I'm like I'm not as fussed about it because we had gone through several schemes and this seems to be the one that we had leaned towards back then. And so again if you get rid of that you're really changing the overall master plan right to one of the other schemes. So that's sort of the question is, you know, how viable are the other master plans at this point or are we really sort of set on this one? Um because once you remove building I you're changing the whole diagonal. You're changing all of that around it and it really ends up being a totally different scheme. And so I'd hate to put a recommendation in here that completely changes everything that we just looked at tonight. I

mean, not necessarily. that building can go and still have similar layout, but it is a little bit of a tail wag in the dog. Um, so I think at least it should be considered cuz it's a small building, 6,000 square ft, that's driving a lot, even like the shape of that amphitheater and everything else. So cuz this is a framework, it's about parts and pieces,

not necessarily this layout is what I keep hearing from, you know, the preface and everything, which is true. And therefore in this being fluid, I feel like that should not be so set in stone. And the other item which may be related that I want to add is uh the council uh uh that um recommend the council consider the phasing of um the phasing within phase one um in the implementation of this master plan in the in the future phases. is the phasing within phase one.

Phasing within phase one is that's all kind of goes back to funding being one but it's sorry Sam I want to back you up. Consider the phasing within phase one. Yeah. Consider the phasing within phase one. Yeah. Just because if they need to again and all this is going to depend on funding and what permits we get first. Um, I'm fine with that. I'm still dwelling on the saving building. I I I definitely hear uh PTC's comments on that and ARB's comments on that. I just

correct. And it's one of those that if they've gone through three rounds of public comment and public comment landed on this scheme and we say throw out that building and all of the diagonals that go with it, then we're completely changing the scheme to something that has had three rounds of public comment and is preferred. So that's sort of where I'm a little bit hesitant here. But I, if I may, please, but it is very fluid. I mean, that's the preface is that this is a framework. It's about the the overall square footage and the the f the big vision

and in that what you know whether phase 2 and three happen whether parts of B and sorry C and D get fractionally chopped those are all an idea to be further studied right so I feel like building I is also an idea to be f further studied

yes uh you know to add to that you Look at it Kendra in another way. Look at the building from the outside from the landscaping. You know, imagine that that can be an amphitheater of note in that area, a feature of the of the site planning here that I think we'd be remiss not to not to emphasize. So, so that's a that's a valid point, David. Or maybe it doesn't need to stay the building. Maybe it can become something else. Well, there was a suggestion become a stage house, become a gazebo was this was this thought and it's not a bad not not a bad idea because it it could work in with the landscaping.

So, let's let's also trim this down. I like things short and sweet. Uh, so I just leave it as consider the value sorry and add the word the please. Consider the value of saving building one. There you go. That bullet point building I excuse me. Thank you. Appreciate that. To the left. Yeah, there you go. And just put the word 'the' between consider and value because I'm a stickler. Thank you. Should May may I interject here just to say um I would clarify because if someone hasn't been in this discussion, they might think we're recommending like that. So you may want to say versus other uses of that space or something clarifying that.

I I I appreciate that. Yeah, it's up to you. I know you versus other uses of that space. Yeah. Again, it's just it's I guess the intent here is to try and understand that like we've definitely had public comment. We've definitely had people reviewing this and and we're not trying to redesign this from scratch today. That's you know, we've gone really far down this road of what people appreciate and approve. And while we understand there's some fluidity and some flexibility and exactly what's happening that taking that out and completely redesigning it would be a major

Can we clarify that with staff? because I did ask that question and they did not say that there was a reason other than we thought we could save it. Other than that, is there is there the question being why did we uh renovate building I? Uh yeah, the main

Well, I there's probably a couple points and Kristen, you can chime in. I'll start. Um we're guided heavily by a coverly ad hoc committee which includes three council members. And so one of their biggest priorities um reflected from community need is trying to keep our cost as low as possible throughout the project. Um and so we one of the first things that we did was uh structural analysis um to see which buildings could be preserved. So it's one of three. Um so that was one of the main drivers. Um so it could be preserved and renovated. um if it was to be replaced, it would be significant cost added to the project.

But could you respond to um board member Rosenberg's um concern that this was a feature that was requested by the public in terms of the use of that building being kept? Other than the cost, you've explained the cost, which is very helpful to understand, but did people say, "I really need that building to remain." I think that I was at two of the meetings and I never never heard any I don't believe anyone specifically has said I love the eyebuilding so much. Um so I believe it's probably cost savings um and has been a priority expressed by council.

So to follow up with this if you don't mind um how set are we on this scheme? How far down the road are we with this scheme versus those other schemes that we had seen several months ago? Um this is our final master conceptual plan. So at this point we would consider it done. Um the community weighed in and made their selection and we have built off of it and at this point we are in our final draft. So can you clarify that compared to your statement earlier that everything here is completely in flux?

Yeah, it can be changed but as far as selecting the scheme. We had a meeting all about it and the community weighed in and they chose their scheme. That was the purpose of one of the community meetings. So yes, we could start all over. Um, but this has all been built off of the community impact. So, um, thank you for answering those questions and I apologize, board member Rosenberg. I'm just trying to clarify because I think there's some assumptions about the level of completion of this plan that I'm just challenging with staff and it's uh, you of course can do whatever you want with your motion.

Again, sort of trying to clarify this point. I think that to board member Adcock's commentary, I just want to make sure that we're not treading into the territory of saying let's get rid of building I and redesign, right? So, if building I gets removed and turns into an amphitheater or something like that, I'm amendable to that, but I I we you know, from my understanding and from what they're saying right now, we've had significant public outreach on this. And if this design hinges on building I one way or the other, I'm a little less inclined to say let's let's remove it and reorient the prominade and redesign this thing. Now if we're saying

that's not how I sorry to interrupt. That's not how I understood this master plan and the framework to be right because at the beginning as you said and as um Terry also said is that this is and I've read through this master plan word for word um and it does say that it's a framework and therefore it you know whether there's a block building and an L building those are all to be studied. further because there is the program has not been developed enough to say this is the plan, right? So, it's a little bit of the chicken or the egg. Yes, you have to have a master plan framework to then go into detailed programming of each building which will then form the shapes of the overall site.

I I would argue the other way. I think that the reason why they have this master plan is to show the overall layout and whether that building is sort of, you know, purposed as one item versus another, whether it's a theater or whether it's back of house for something. I I would argue that that is sort of where the the flexibility is coming in. But I think that by saying, well, we've got this master plan, but you know, 6 months from now, we're going to throw it all out because this building doesn't angle this way anymore, and so now we don't need this big angle anymore, is is taking the at this point years of work and sort of tossing it out the window. And I'm really hesitant to go down that path. Now, while saying, okay, maybe building I doesn't need to be saved in its current state or maybe but I would argue that yeah, we do have a master plan for a reason. They've done this work for a reason and it's been chosen by the public for a reason. As a as a general layout, right, but building I is 6,000 ft. In a 3 to400 million project, 6,000 ft² building is $6 million. So, so let me clarify because maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are saying. What it sounded like with your earlier comment to saying let's, you know, what's the point of keeping this building and having everything designed around it, right? So, my comment is I have no problem getting rid of that one specific building, but I am very concerned about removing everything else around it. Right.

Yes. But it's also um this diagonal alignment of this prominade that we've also discussed, correct? which is the way it's been chosen by the public is based on that angle sort of it's not exactly parallel um but that overall layout yes that pathway can remain with or without that building correct right I agree with you

and the then there's this curved area I I think I understand that to be the amphitheater the four um the focal point of that curved area is the exterior of this I building which is you you know, not a glorious thing to look at. And the point of that eyebuilding is not a glorious thing to look at. And that framing this being the center, you look at the site plan. Sorry, I have it on my screen. Is the center of this overall layout seems a little presumptuous to say that this 6,000t building should stay and therefore that should be what people look at as they come in to this amphitheater. Yes, I want to just add to that that really the community was very concerned about having a a wonderful green space landscaping in the middle of this area. They emphasize the the biggest emphasis that the community has was actually make sure we recognize the landscaping here. Keep keep this the green space a major element of this project.

Totally agree with that. So again, to sort of clarify my standpoint on this, I have no issue with saying that building I could be removed and utilized as green space or an amphitheater or something else. I draw the line at saying sort of that second half of the sentence that we were sort of snarkly saying before is and having the whole master plan designed around it. Certainly not. It's not being designed around it. I say that let me see. Sorry to interrupt you, David. Let me see if I can rephrase this in a way that everyone sort of is on board. So consider the value of saving building I uh comma versus reutilizing that space for something else for another purpose for another program and keeping the building its shape. No

no no it's not about keeping the building. It's consider the value of saving building I versus reutilizing that space as part of the landscaping. As part of anything else, right? Yeah. Yep. Part of the landscaping would be the better way. Anything else for another program? Right. Say instead of saying anything else, say for another program which could include landscaping.

Perfect. Are you guys on board with that? And may I suggest we try for a second soon? Sure. We're coming up in 10:00 here. I second. Thank you.

Okay. Any final comments? Turn through my notes. Sorry. No problem. Any any other friendly amendments?

Nope. All good. Awesome. Thank you. And appreciate the uh back and forth. I think that those things always sharpen our commentary. So, appreciate it. Call. Can I call for the W vote, please? Yep. Um, board member Jar. Yes. Board member Hirs. Yes. Uh, board member Rosenberg. Yes. Uh, Vice Chair Adcock, yes. Chair Chen, yes. Motion carries 5-0.

Thank you all. That was well worthwhile, I think. Um, moving on to the penultimate item here. Uh, board member and commissioner questions, comments, and announcements. So, do we have any from the BTC? Commissioner Tippleton? Yes. There's a community meeting tomorrow to discuss the closure of Churchill at the PA USD facility at uh 6 p.m. Any other commissioners, questions, comments, announcements? If

I can just make a quick comment. Thank you guys for hosting us this evening. We uh definitely are used to our morning meetings. So, we appreciate the time and effort that you guys have to put in taking these nighttime meetings. I'm ready for bed. It's it's really been a privilege to share the dis with you tonight. Um thank you staff for arranging all this. Uh, thank you to board members, all of you for contorting your schedules to to fit this in. Um, and thanks to everyone. These deliberations were well worthwhile tonight. Anything else?

I have something. Good job, chairs. You navigated this and you set this up really well. Thank you. Thank you. And thanks for thanks for Sam for feeding us. Thank you. Very well. Then we are adjourned.