HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-08-07 City Council Summary Minutes
Special Meeting
August 7, 2006
1. Regional Transit and Transportation Trends and Issues for Palo Alto .....470
2. Proclamation Recognizing Palo Alto Reads… Funny in Farsi Month ...472
3. Parks and Recreation Commission Challenge to the City Council to see
which group takes the most steps over a three month period between
September 1 and December 1, 2006 per the FY 2006-07 Parks and
Recreation Commission priority “Creating a Culture of Fitness in Palo
Alto” .............................................................................................472
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ........................................................................473
APPROVAL OF MINUTES ..........................................................................473
4. Resolution 8634 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo
Alto Expressing Appreciation to Michael Kelly Upon His Retirement” ......474
5. 2nd Reading - Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding
a New Chapter 18.66 to the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Adopt Regulations Establishing a California Avenue Pedestrian Transit-
Oriented Development Combining District .........................................474
6. Ordinance 4912 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo
Alto Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract Between the Board of
Administration of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System
and the City Council, City of Palo Alto to Implement the Pre-
Retirement Optional Settlement 2 Death Benefit for Local Fire
Members, IAFF Local 1319” .............................................................475
7. Resolution 8635 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo
Alto Approving the Transmission Agency of Northern California’s
Amended and Restated Project Agreement No. 5 for Participation in an
Open Access Same Time Information System and Delegation of
Authority to the City Manager to Execute Amendments to the
Agreement” ...................................................................................475
08/07/06 100-467
8. City Council Endorsement of the California Publicly Owned Electric
Utilities' Principles Addressing Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals ..........475
9. Approval of Agreement with Michael J. Gennaco and Robert Miller of
OIR Group for Police Auditor Services with Amount Not to Exceed
$19,936 ........................................................................................475
10. Approval of Offer and Agreement to Purchase Real Property - 2460
High Street ....................................................................................475
11. Approval of 1101 East Meadow Drive and 1010 East Meadow Circle
[06PLN-00135]: Final Map for Standard Pacific Homes to merge two
parcels and create one multiple-family lot that would contain 75
condominium style residential units ..................................................475
12. Approval of 4219 El Camino Real [05PLN-00235]: Final Map including a
street name map for DR Horton Homebuilders creating eleven single-
family lots, one multiple-family lot that would contain 170
condominium style residential units, a new public street .....................475
13. Initiation of Rezoning to Pedestrian and Transit Oriented Development
(PTOD) District and Comprehensive Plan Amendment for 195 Page Mill
Road ............................................................................................475
14. Approval of Amendment No. One to Existing Purchase Order
4506000261 with Municipal Maintenance Equipment Inc. in the
Amount of $406,988 for the Purchase of Two Compressed Natural Gas-
Fueled Street Sweepers ..................................................................475
15. Council Approval of Appointment of Cara E. Silver as Senior Assistant
City Attorney .................................................................................475
16. Approval of Contract Amendment Extending Agreement with the City of Inglewood for Parking Citation Processing From September 1 to
October 31, 2006 ...........................................................................476
17. Approval of a Contract with C.F. Archibald Inc. in the Amount of
$3,746,646 for the 2006 Street Maintenance Program Phase 2 Capital
Improvement Project PE-86070; Authorization for the City Manager or
His Designee to Negotiate and Execute One or More Change Orders to
the Contract with C.F. Archibald Inc. for Related, Additional but
Unforeseen Work that may Develop during the Project, the Total Value
of which Shall Not Exceed $374,665 .................................................476
18. From Policy and Services: Adoption of Procedure for Appointment and
Duties of Emergency Standby Council Members .................................476
08/07/06 100-468
19. Finance Committee Recommendation for Council Approval of Ultra-
High-Speed Broadband Request for Proposal (RFP) From Finance
Committee Meeting of July 18, 2006 .................................................476
19. Finance Committee Recommendation for Council Approval of Ultra-
High-Speed Broadband Request for Proposal (RFP) From Finance
Committee Meeting of July 18, 2006 .................................................476
20. Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter
16.47 (Approval of Projects with Impacts on Housing) to Remove an
Exemption for Hospitals from the In-Lieu Fee Required of Commercial
Development Projects with Impacts on Affordable Housing” .................477
21. Potential Strategy Regarding Restrictions on Conversion of Commercial
Uses to Residential Use ...................................................................478
22. Designation of Voting Delegate and Alternate for the 2006 League of
California Cities Annual Conference ..................................................489
23. Discussion of Compensation Recommendations for City Manager Frank
Benest, City Attorney – Gary Baum, City Auditor – Sharon Erickson
and City Clerk – Donna Rogers ........................................................489
COUNCIL COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AND REPORTS FROM
CONFERENCES ...............................................................................491
24. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY -- EXISTING LITIGATION ............492
25. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY -- EXISTING LITIGATION ............492
FINAL ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 10:45 p.m. in memory of
John Duryea, long-time Palo Alto resident. ........................................492
08/07/06 100-469
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council
Chambers at 6:13 p.m.
Present: Beecham (arrived at 7:20 p.m.), Cordell, Kishimoto, Klein,
Kleinberg, Morton, Mossar (arrived at 7:20 p.m.)
Absent: Barton, Drekmeier
STUDY SESSION
1. Regional Transit and Transportation Trends and Issues for Palo Alto
1. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Transportation Goals
2. The Big Picture – Transportation Outlook: Now and 2030
a. Santa Clara County Mode Split Comparison
b. ABAG 2030 Job Growth and Housing Growth Projections
3. Major regional transportation plans
a. Valley Transportation Plan 2030 and Measure A
b. Peninsula Gateway 2020 Corridor Study
c. Dumbarton Rail, High Speed Rail
d. Local Transit, shuttle services and VTA Community Bus Program
e. El Camino: Grand Boulevard and Bus Rapid Transit
f. County Expressway Enhancements
g. Smart Growth Strategies: Network of Neighborhoods
4. VTA Measure A
a. 30-year Overview
b. North County projects
i. Caltrain
(1) Upgrades and Electrification
(2) Palo Alto and California Avenue stations
(a) Palo Alto stations rank 1st and 11th busiest
(b) 2025 Service Plan envisions increase from 96 to 172
trains
(c) Vehicle parking demand could triple at both stations
ii. Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center
iii. El Camino Bus Rapid Transit
5. Peninsula Gateway 101 Corridor Study
a. Describe study area and participating agencies
b. Focus on Roadway capacity improvements
c. Develop broad universe of projects
i. Implications for changes to San Antonio/Hwy 101 interchange
08/07/06 100-470
ii. Auxiliary Lanes on Hwy 101
iii. Capacity Improvements on Willow and University approaches
to Dumbarton Bridge
6. Local Transit and Shuttle Services Opportunities
a. History of VTA service cutbacks
b. Palo Alto Shuttle history and costs
c. VTA Community Bus Program partnership with Palo Alto
7. Transit-Oriented Development in Palo Alto: prospects
a. University Ave is 2nd busiest station on line, enjoys frequent
service
b. Relatively good bike, pedestrian, shuttle links for “last mile” to
doorstep
c. Still low transit usage compared to Bay Area
d. Policy question on access: provide more parking?
e. Policy question: how much transit-oriented development along El
Camino?
8. County Transportation Funding Picture
a. Palo Alto contributes approximately $20 million per year in sales
taxes towards transportation funding in Santa Clara County
b. Summary of planned projects and funding commitments
9. Summary of City’s Funding Request to VTA and Regional Agencies
a. Request to VTA for Measure A Funding for Palo Alto Intermodal
Transit Center by 2015
b. Request to Board of Supervisors for release of $13.0 million in
Measure B funds for ADA and platform improvements at Palo
Alto and California Avenue stations
c. Request to Caltrain JPB Board for restoration of service to
California Avenue Station
d. Request to VTA for Community Bus program project in Palo Alto
e. Request to MTC and VTA for funding of California Avenue
streetscape project
f. Request to VTA for Stanford Avenue/El Camino Real context- sensitive streetscape demonstration project
10. Policy Issues for Council
a. Role of land use patterns (PTOD, mixed use) in support of transit
and alternative transportation
b. Position on Caltrain electrification and grade separations
c. Need for future parking structures at Caltrain stations as Caltrain
service plan evolves
08/07/06 100-471
d. Position on capacity improvements on Highway 101 and
approaches to the Dumbarton Bridge
e. Continued commitment to local shuttle and bus services
No Action Required.
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
2. Proclamation Recognizing Palo Alto Reads… Funny in Farsi Month
Interim Library Director Diane Jennings invited the Council and the
community to read Funny in Farsi, and participate in some of the many
planned activities for the Fall. She was pleased the library would be
partnering with the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) to offer the first
of many events; a talk by the author Firoozeh Dumas, which was scheduled
for October 10, 2006 at the Haymaker Theater on the Palo Alto High School
campus.
Marie Scigliano, Director of Educational Technology at PAUSD, said she was
excited to participate in “Palo Alto Reads” and encouraged everyone to
attend the kickoff event taking place on October 10, 2006.
Maya Spector, Coordinator Library Programs, said the library had
approximately 50 copies of the book Funny in Farsi: a Memoir of Growing Up
Iranian in America. She encouraged everyone to read it.
Mayor Kleinberg said the “Palo Alto Reads” program reflected the
community’s intellectual and academic concerns, interest and passion. It
also reflected an ongoing effort to collaborate with the PAUSD to give
children and youth an opportunity to learn more about cultural differences.
3. Parks and Recreation Commission Challenge to the City Council to see
which group takes the most steps over a three month period between
September 1 and December 1, 2006 per the FY 2006-07 Parks and
Recreation Commission priority “Creating a Culture of Fitness in Palo
Alto”
Anne Cribbs, Parks and Recreation Commissioner (PARC), said the PARC
issued a challenge to the City Council to create a culture of fitness of Palo
Alto. The idea involved: 1) wearing a pedometer and traveling at least
10,000 steps per day; 2) swimming an hour per day; or 3) biking an hour
per day. Stanford had provided staff with the opportunity to use their
‘stepping out’ program for the period of September 1 to December 1, 2006.
She asked Mayor Kleinberg whether she would accept the challenge.
Mayor Kleinberg said she would accept the challenge on behalf of her
colleagues.
08/07/06 100-472
Council Member Cordell asked how 10,000 steps a day equated to one hour
of swimming.
Ms. Cribbs said Dr. Walter Borst, an expert on aging in the community,
concluded 50 minutes to an hour of swimming was the equivalent of 10,000
steps of walking.
No Action Required.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Tig Tarlton, 359 Channing, spoke regarding Heritage Park Playground.
Douglas Moran, 790 Matadero Avenue, spoke regarding emergency
preparedness.
Annette Ashton, 2747 Bryant, spoke regarding CMR 330:06, Emergency
Preparedness Update.
Sheri Furman, 3094 Greer Road, spoke regarding emergency preparedness.
Robert Moss, 4010 Orme Street, spoke regarding emergency preparedness.
Albert Dorsky, 3846 Corina Way, spoke regarding emergency/disaster
communication.
Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, requested public identification of Planning
Commission applicants who gave rise to Council Member Morton’s conflict.
Edel Young, 460 Ferne Avenue, spoke regarding Proposition 89 (public
financing of elections).
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION: Council Member Mossar moved, seconded by Morton, to approve
the minutes of July 10, 2006.
Council Member Klein requested a correction to minutes on Agenda Item No.
16, page 21, third paragraph, to change the word “completed” to
“contemplated.”
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to accept the change requested by Council
Member Klein.
MOTION PASSED 7-0, Barton, Drekmeier absent.
08/07/06 100-473
Mayor Kleinberg reported a study session was scheduled on September 11,
2006 at 6 p.m. on the emergency preparedness update.
CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION: Vice Mayor Kishimoto moved, seconded by Morton, to continue
Agenda Item Nos. 5 and 13 to the September 11, 2006 Council Meeting.
Council Member Mossar believed a policy had been established requiring a
second reading of an ordinance for which Council had already taken action,
could only be pulled under extreme circumstances. She asked about the
extreme situation.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto said Item 5 had a divided vote and a lengthy
discussion. She felt it would be fair to have the full Council present for the
vote.
Council Member Morton said a large number of residents indicated they did
not believe they were adequately notified.
MOTION PASSED 6-1, Mossar no, Barton, Drekmeier absent.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Kishimoto moved, seconded by Klein, to pull Agenda
Item No. 19 from the Consent Calendar but to still be heard as Agenda Item
No. 19 immediately after the vote of the Consent Calendar.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Kishimoto moved, seconded by Morton, to approve
Consent Calendar Item Nos. 4, 6 through 12, and 14 through 18.
Joy Ogawa, Yale Street, spoke regarding agenda Item No. 10. She was
opposed to selling a city-owned public facility zoned land and having the
conversion of the proceeds used to build more housing. Residents were
concerned how growth had increased demands on the City’s infrastructure;
however, the infrastructure had not kept up to meet those demands. The
decision would have a direct impact on residents’ pocketbooks.
Council Member Cordell registered a “no” vote on agenda Item No. 10.
4. Resolution 8634 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo
Alto Expressing Appreciation to Michael Kelly Upon His Retirement”
5. 2nd Reading - Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding a
New Chapter 18.66 to the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Adopt
Regulations Establishing a California Avenue Pedestrian Transit-
Oriented Development Combining District (1st Reading 7/24/06, Passed 5-4, Barton,
Cordell, Morton, Mossar no (To be continued to September 11, 2006)
6. Ordinance 4912 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo
08/07/06 100-474
Alto Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract Between the Board of
Administration of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System
and the City Council, City of Palo Alto to Implement the Pre-
Retirement Optional Settlement 2 Death Benefit for Local Fire
Members, IAFF Local 1319” (1st Reading 7/17/06, Passed 9-0)
7. Resolution 8635 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo
Alto Approving the Transmission Agency of Northern California’s
Amended and Restated Project Agreement No. 5 for Participation in an
Open Access Same Time Information System and Delegation of
Authority to the City Manager to Execute Amendments to the
Agreement”
8. City Council Endorsement of the California Publicly Owned Electric
Utilities' Principles Addressing Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals
9. Approval of Agreement with Michael J. Gennaco and Robert Miller of
OIR Group for Police Auditor Services with Amount Not to Exceed
$19,936
10. Approval of Offer and Agreement to Purchase Real Property - 2460
High Street
11. Approval of 1101 East Meadow Drive and 1010 East Meadow Circle
[06PLN-00135]: Final Map for Standard Pacific Homes to merge two parcels and create one multiple-family lot that would contain 75
condominium style residential units
12. Approval of 4219 El Camino Real [05PLN-00235]: Final Map including a
street name map for DR Horton Homebuilders creating eleven single-
family lots, one multiple-family lot that would contain 170
condominium style residential units, a new public street
13. Initiation of Rezoning to Pedestrian and Transit Oriented Development
(PTOD) District and Comprehensive Plan Amendment for 195 Page Mill
Road (To be continued September 11, 2006)
14. Approval of Amendment No. One to Existing Purchase Order
4506000261 with Municipal Maintenance Equipment Inc. in the
Amount of $406,988 for the Purchase of Two Compressed Natural Gas-
Fueled Street Sweepers
15. Council Approval of Appointment of Cara E. Silver as Senior Assistant
City Attorney
08/07/06 100-475
16. Approval of Contract Amendment Extending Agreement with the City
of Inglewood for Parking Citation Processing From September 1 to
October 31, 2006
17. Approval of a Contract with C.F. Archibald Inc. in the Amount of
$3,746,646 for the 2006 Street Maintenance Program Phase 2 Capital
Improvement Project PE-86070; Authorization for the City Manager or
His Designee to Negotiate and Execute One or More Change Orders to
the Contract with C.F. Archibald Inc. for Related, Additional but
Unforeseen Work that may Develop during the Project, the Total Value
of which Shall Not Exceed $374,665
18. From Policy and Services: Adoption of Procedure for Appointment and
Duties of Emergency Standby Council Members
Ordinance 1st Reading – “Ordinance of the Council of the City of
Palo Alto Hereby Amends Title 2 Chapter 2.12, Section 2.12.090
of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Relating to the Appointment and
Duties of the Emergency Standby Council Members”
19. Finance Committee Recommendation for Council Approval of Ultra-
High-Speed Broadband Request for Proposal (RFP) From Finance
Committee Meeting of July 18, 2006 (Moved to follow Consent Calendar)
MOTION PASSED 7-0 for items 4, 6-9, 11, 12, 14-18, Barton, Drekmeier absent.
MOTION PASSED 6-1 for item 10, Cordell no, Barton, Drekmeier absent.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
19. Finance Committee Recommendation for Council Approval of Ultra-
High-Speed Broadband Request for Proposal (RFP) From Finance
Committee Meeting of July 18, 2006
Council Member Mossar stated she would not participate in the item due to a
conflict of interest because of family holdings in several telecommunications
stocks including SBC and Comcast.
Council Member Morton stated he would not participate in the item due to a
conflict of interest because of family holdings in SBC and Comcast.
Mayor Kleinberg stated she would not participate in the item due to conflict
of interest because her work at Joint Venture Silicon Valley Network has to
do with the broadband companies and their financial partners.
08/07/06 100-476
City Attorney Gary Baum stated Section 2.04.320 of the Palo Alto Municipal
Code and Section 7 of the City Charter required a majority of the Council
Members be present for certain decisions involving City business. One item
requiring five affirmative votes was the approval of the Universal Broadband
contract. Another item was approval to continue the Hospital Exemption
ordinance (Agenda Item No. 20). Since two Council Members were absent
that evening, and three had conflicts of interest there were only four Council
Members able to participate. The participation of one Council Member who
would otherwise not be allowed to participate was legally required in order to
have a majority of five Council Members to take action. One of the conflicted
members may be randomly selected to participate in the item in order to
achieve the minimum group required. The City Clerk would assist in the
random selection.
Council Member Mossar said she was not sure whether any of the conflicted
Council Members was up-to-date and conversant in the issues. She
questioned whether the discussion should be put over to another date.
Mayor Kleinberg said it was possible for the non-conflicted members to make
a motion to agendize the item for another date.
City Attorney Gary Baum said if the conflicted members were removed,
there would no longer be a quorum. An option would be for the City Clerk to
continue the item due to the lack of a quorum.
Mayor Kleinberg said she was familiar with the issue because of the work of
her organization.
Council Member Cordell said there ought to be more Council Members
present to discuss the matter, and believed it should be continued.
Mr. Baum said the Brown Act provided that any matters on the Council’s
agenda may be continued by staff (City Clerk) in the event there was not a
quorum.
City Clerk Donna Rogers stated due to the lack of a quorum, Agenda Item
19 would be continued to September 18, 2006.
Council reconvened with seven members present.
20. Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter
16.47 (Approval of Projects with Impacts on Housing) to Remove an
Exemption for Hospitals from the In-Lieu Fee Required of Commercial
Development Projects with Impacts on Affordable Housing” (Continued from
7/10/06, Item to be continued by Council Motion to 09/18/06)
08/07/06 100-477
Council Member Mossar stated she would not participate in the item due to a
conflict of interest because her husband was employed by Stanford
University.
Council Member Klein stated he would not participate in the item due to a
conflict of interest because his wife was employed by Stanford University.
Council Member Cordell stated she would not participate in the item due to a
conflict of interest because she was employed by Stanford University.
City Attorney Gary Baum said based on the same issue as previously
addressed, the conflicted Council Members could either draw straws, a
provision allowed for in the Political Reform Act, or if the members chose not
to draw straws the City Clerk was empowered to continue the matter.
Council Member Mossar understood because it was suggested the matter be
continued but she had no problem drawing straws.
Mr. Baum said Government Code (GC) 1090 would normally not allow
drawing straws, but because there was an exemption to GC 1090, it was
acceptable.
City Clerk Donna Rogers conducted a random drawing of the three conflicted
council members and Council Member Cordell was selected to participate in
the item.
MOTION: Council Member Beecham moved, seconded by Kishimoto, to
continue Agenda Item No. 20 to be heard at the September 18, 2006,
Council Meeting.
MOTION PASSED 5-0, Klein, Mossar not participating, Barton, Drekmeier
absent.
REPORTS OF OFFICIALS
21. Potential Strategy Regarding Restrictions on Conversion of Commercial
Uses to Residential Use
Director of Planning and Community Environment Steve Emslie referred to
the staff report (CMR:312:06), which provided an overview of the options
outlined per Council’s direction to investigate the potential short-term
solutions for properties zoned residential that were in commercial use. The
two properties most at risk in terms of potential redevelopment were the
Mayflower Motel and Palo Alto Bowl; both sites were located on El Camino
Real. Staff had worked closely with the City Attorney’s office in developing
an agreement between the analyses of both properties. Four options were
analyzed to limit conversions of existing nonresidential uses to residential
08/07/06 100-478
use: 1) prohibit housing in those zones through a zoning amendment; 2)
require conditional use permits for housing; 3) allow only mixed residential
uses with ground floor retail; and 4) place a moratorium on all new housing.
The two options that presented the most realistic and direct approach in
dealing with the Council’s concerns included prohibiting residential uses in all
commercial zones, and allowing mixed use sites with commercial or retail
uses on the ground floor with housing to be developed on the upper floor(s).
Council Member Morton questioned the impact on the Fry’s site, and whether
it fell under a different zoning.
Mr. Emslie said Fry’s was listed as one of the sites identified in Attachment
‘C’ of the staff report (CMR:312:06).
Sheri Furman, 3094 Greer Road, requested that Alma Plaza, as well as
Edgewood Plaza and Town and Country, would be included as sites to be
studied regarding the conversion. Those sites met the objectives to preserve
revenue generating commercial uses, provide local services for residential
areas, and ensure compliance with the housing sites inventory and State
housing law. She urged the Council to enact Option A2, which eliminated
‘stand alone’ housing in commercial zones.
Robert Moss, 4010 Orme Street, said the development of housing in place of
retail was an economic loss to the City. He favored ground floor retail with
housing above.
Joy Ogawa, Yale Street, said the ground floor retail protection ordinance was
written to prohibit office uses unless established prior to March 19, 2001,
although residential use was permitted. She wondered how existing
residential uses would impact areas where neighborhood commercial zones
existed.
Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, understood with regard to a conflict of interest,
if the Council reached a point where they did not have a quorum the
meeting had to adjourn. He also believed whenever the need arose to
substitute conflicted members to create a quorum, they were prohibited
from substituting for absent members who were not conflicted. He did not
believe the meeting that evening was valid.
City Attorney Gary Baum said if the meeting was adjourned due to a lack of
quorum the Council simply reconvened, which they did.
Council Member Klein referred to page 4 of Attachment ‘A’ under multi-
family residential zones. He asked whether Council could select from any of
the six parcels or were all of them to be included.
08/07/06 100-479
Mr. Baum said any of the six parcels could be selected as long as there was
a rational basis.
Council Member Cordell clarified there were two types of properties that
caused concern: 1) those zoned commercial, which could be utilized for
housing in the future; and 2) those zoned residential which presently had
commercial use. She asked if the Council followed one or both of the routes,
did the rezoning have to be completed before the November 7 election.
Mr. Baum said staff would have to use an urgency ordinance to rezone.
Council Member Cordell said both options if followed required rezoning; one
to mixed-use and the other specifically zoned commercial.
Mr. Baum said if housing was totally eliminated as an option it might require
greater environmental review, which made the November election timeframe
impossible. The mixed-use did not require a Comp Plan amendment and
could be done by November 7 if staff was available to do the work.
Council Member Cordell asked whether the process had to be completed or
initiated by November 7.
Mr. Baum said it had to be completed. It could be curtailed, however, by an
urgency ordinance.
Mayor Kleinberg asked what would happen if the Council stated only the
housing had to be 100 percent affordable.
Mr. Baum said staff would need to conduct research on the matter, but he
believed it was legal as long as it was narrow in scope.
Council Member Morton asked if the Council approved amending the
commercial zone to delete housing as a permitted use what were the next
steps and the timeline.
Mr. Baum said the more dramatic step of eliminating housing from
commercial zones as opposed to mixed-use involved a multi-step process
that required a Comp Plan amendment as well as a zone change. It could
also require substantial environmental review and possibly an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR).
Council Member Morton asked why an EIR might be required.
Mr. Baum said traffic studies would be needed because housing was being
prohibited as opposed to adjusting the type of housing. In turn, the Comp
Plan would need to be modified to reflect those changes.
08/07/06 100-480
Mr. Emslie said staff had initiated a number of zoning amendments through
the Zoning Ordinance Update (ZOU) process, all of which were consistent
with the Comp Plan. If staff were to draw back from the Comp Plan they
would not be able to use the analysis from 1997.
Council Member Morton asked if the Council were to adopt the solution to
delete housing in an area which currently permitted it, such as Fry’s, would
it require an EIR in order to eliminate housing or to continue commercial
zoning.
Mr. Emslie said it would require an amendment to the Comp Plan land use
designations to call for an exclusive commercial zone and possibly an
amendment to the Comp Plan EIR or a stand alone EIR.
Council Member Morton questioned if staff had felt it was an urgent issue the
Council would have been informed.
Mr. Emslie said that was correct. It was not possible to do a conventional
zone change for the proposed sites in time for the November election.
However, an interim urgency measure was possible in order to get all the
requisite paperwork done and hearings completed.
Council Member Morton asked whether those steps could be completed in
short order.
Mr. Baum said the urgency ordinance would only save 45 days. Staff did not
have the grounds to do a moratorium.
Council Member Morton asked if the Council approved a motion to remove
housing as a permitted use from the commercial zone, and then set in
motion a series of events which may not get completed by the November
election, what would be the next step.
Mr. Emslie said staff could make the text changes to the commercial zones,
which was scheduled to come before the Council in fall 2006. However, the
zones could still not be applied to the six parcels without the required
environmental review.
Mr. Baum clarified staff would not have time to complete the mixed-use
change with the assumed negative declaration.
Mr. Emslie said the Comp Plan environmental analysis could be used to
complete the mixed-use changes while the work program was already in
place. It could not, however, be applied to the six parcels because they were
identified for residential uses and, therefore, involved a change in the Comp
Plan.
08/07/06 100-481
Vice Mayor Kishimoto asked if there was anything that could be done to
apply any new zoning or change to the six parcels.
Mr. Emslie said the Anderson Initiative, if passed, had far-reaching impacts
on the ability to determine land use in all California cities. Rezoning was
essentially a “taking” or substantial erosion of the land use control that was
applied at the local level.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto asked what steps could the Council take in terms of
rezoning or reducing housing by the November election.
Mr. Emslie said if the Council wanted to make zone changes, such as retain
ground floor commercial uses in a mixed-use or commercial fashion, staff
could accommodate that with the current zoning process underway. The six
parcels zoned multi-family were more problematic and involved more
detailed environmental review and could not be done before November 7.
Mayor Kleinberg asked if the six parcels were rezoned to mixed-use would
everything previously stated apply.
Mr. Emslie said it would help because mixed-use had already been identified
in the Comp Plan and a change was not required.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto said there was the possibility of losing Alma Plaza and
Edgewood, two neighborhood centers, to a mixed-use development. She asked whether staff had any recommendations on how to protect the two
centers.
Mr. Emslie said the Alma and Edgewood Plaza sites were zoned Planned
Community (PC), and there was land use zoning. The Council had already
exercised the greatest amount of land use discretion on those sites.
Council Member Klein asked whether Option A2, as described in Attachment
‘A’ of the staff report (CMR:312:06), could be completed by the November
election, and if staff could also consider a modification if there was an
urgency ordinance in place.
Mr. Emslie said yes it could be done; however, it did not address the six
parcels.
Council Member Klein asked whether the six parcels, if changed to mixed-
use housing with commercial on the ground floor, could be completed by the
November election.
Mr. Emslie said no. It would involve a Comp Plan change which staff did not
have the analysis or the environmental work to support such a change.
08/07/06 100-482
Council Member Mossar said two years prior the Council received numerous
e-mails from residents who argued the amount of commercial development
in Palo Alto was untenable and had a huge impact on the community. At that
time, the Council worked hard to reduce the amount of commercial use in
the community because of its perceived detrimental impact and its relatively
limited sales tax base. Tonight, the Council was being asked to rezone
property to something the community did not want two years ago. The
Council needed to be cognizant of huge population growth pressures in the
Bay Area and their impact on the economy. Retail, just like transportation,
required density and Palo Alto’s policies were escalating in a direction that
discouraged density. She encouraged her colleagues not to take the matter
lightly.
Council Member Morton asked which option, if any, reflected the retention of
commercial uses in residential areas, and could be completed by the
November 7 election.
Mr. Emslie said the Comp Plan anticipated those conversions and it would be
problematic.
Council Member Morton said the impact of the dot com bust was the loss of
sales tax revenues from restaurants and other businesses during daytime
hours. The preservation of services such as medical/dental offices and the
California State Automobile Association (CSAA) was what brought people
into Palo Alto to shop and dine. He believed some commercial uses were beneficial to the community and should be preserved.
MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Cordell, to approve
the City Attorney’s Option A2, as follows: Council-passed ordinance
modifying zoning to eliminate “stand-alone” housing in Commercial zones
(excluding those sites listed within the Housing Inventory) but to continue to
allow “mixed-use” housing with commercial on the ground floor in those
zones.
Council Member Klein said the housing inventory listed in Attachment ‘B’ of
the staff report (CMR:312:06) noted the housing units Council had approved
in the period 1999 to 2006, as compared to the City’s needs under the
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). Other key properties coming
before the Council included the Alma Substation, the Campus for Jewish Life
(CJL), and Bridge Urban Infill Land Development (BUILD), which posed
impacts to the school district, to the environment, and financially to the City.
He felt Palo Alto had done its share in building a large amount of housing
and now needed to take steps to cut back.
Council Member Cordell concurred with the comments of Council Member
Klein.
08/07/06 100-483
Council Member Beecham expressed support for the motion. He was
comfortable leaving the Housing Element alone and would not decrease the
Council commitment.
Council Member Morton asked whether it was possible for the Council to vote
in favor of the motion and then later on have the ability to eliminate mixed-
use zoning and make it solely commercial.
Mr. Baum said yes. The Council could approve one now and another one
later.
Council Member Morton expressed support for the motion and would have
liked to have seen Option A1, an ordinance modifying zoning to eliminate
housing in commercial zones, completed by November 7.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto asked whether adherence to not having
medical/professional business offices located on the ground floor applied to
all the ‘C’ zones.
Mr. Emslie said it applied in the context of the ground floor conversion. It
prevented a protected use (retail, personal services, residential) from
converting to offices in the ‘C’ zones under the ground floor protection
ordinance.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto asked what would happen if it was an empty lot with a new application coming in.
Mr. Emslie said the ground floor retail would not apply because it did not
establish a protected use prior to March 19, 2001.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto said theoretically an applicant could submit an all
office application.
Mr. Emslie said yes.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto said her intent was to protect retail, especially
neighborhood retail.
Council Member Mossar clarified Option A2 sounded like what her colleagues
wanted, but it was mixed-use zoning with commercial use. Commercial use
did not include the small coffee shop. She was not confident that by
approving the motion the result would be neighborhood serving retail and
low density housing.
Mayor Kleinberg said she was passionate about the City providing enough
affordable housing in the community so past discussions of transit
08/07/06 100-484
orientation and mass transit actually worked. She favored something that
did not prohibit housing; however, she did not want more office buildings.
Council Member Mossar noted an example in a commercial zone of housing
over commercial on El Camino Real. In that instance, the concern had been
the housing was almost immediately converted to office. She encouraged
her colleagues to be precise in the language or there would be a repeat of
the same type of project.
Mayor Kleinberg asked whether there was any way to control the commercial
use so that it was retail serving.
Mr. Emslie said yes. It was an accepted convention for cities to zone
commercial and retail uses separate from office use.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to amend the motion to state “retail” and not
“commercial.”
Council Member Klein asked whether the incorporation would cause any
delays.
Mr. Emslie said no.
MOTION PASSED 7-2, Barton, Drekmeier absent.
MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Cordell, to ask staff to
initiate the rezoning process for the last four of the six properties on
Attachment C.
Council Member Klein said it was important to keep the City’s commercial
enterprises in place by making the zoning consistent with its current uses.
Whether the Anderson Initiative passed in November or not, it would be
important to move forward and get it done.
Council Member Cordell said irregardless of whether the Anderson Initiative
passed, by taking a use already in existence and having it remain that way
had merit. The Anderson Initiative would probably go through legal
challenges for a number of years even after the election.
Council Member Mossar said the zoning suggested the motion could turn
Fry’s into an office park. She clarified that none of the four parcels was in
the City’s Housing Element.
Mr. Emslie said that was correct.
08/07/06 100-485
Council Member Mossar expressed concern about what the sites would
become when they were rezoned commercial, and what opportunities would
be lost.
Council Member Morton asked why the neighborhood serving retail parcels
(i.e. Surgery Center, CSAA, and the Medical Office) were excluded from the
motion.
Council Member Klein said the Surgery Center and the CSAA offices were
already in the midst of the residential neighborhood. The medical office site,
at a maximum yield of seven units, seemed too small to worry about.
Council Member Morton said the Surgery Center and CSAA offices
surrounded the Downey House, which was entirely commercial. He proposed
including all six parcels in order to keep those areas that served the City’s
population.
AMENDMENT: Council Member Morton moved to include the other two sites
in the motion.
AMENDMENT FAILS FOR LACK OF SECOND
Council Member Beecham said two weeks prior in discussions about the
Pedestrian Transit Oriented Development (PTOD) the Council directed staff
to work on the Fry’s site. He asked whether it was the intent of the maker of the motion to supersede the previously-approved motion.
Council Member Klein said he believed it was consistent with the motion.
Council Member Beecham said it may not be in terms of the timing. He
recalled the timing was left open on the previous discussion of Fry’s which
was critical. He would prefer to let the previous action stand as opposed to
having an overlay with the motion currently on the table.
Council Member Klein said he was in favor of eliminating the Fry’s site from
the motion.
Council Member Cordell asked what would be staff’s direction in regard to
the Fry’s site if it was eliminated from the motion.
Council Member Beecham understood staff would be directed to work with
the stakeholders to find a solution to retain Fry’s on its present site.
Council Member Cordell asked what would happen if a resolution could not
be reached.
Mr. Emslie said staff would evaluate and present options to the Council.
08/07/06 100-486
Council Member Cordell expressed concern about other options should staff’s
progress fall short.
Mr. Emslie said staff had already begun contacting the owners and initiating
discussions. He suggested returning to Council with a status report prior to
November 7 if acceptable options had not been reached.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to remove Fry’s from the list, leaving the last
three properties on the list, since staff was directed to work further with
Fry’s.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto asked whether there would be a specific commercial
zoning designation.
Council Member Klein said he would leave that for staff’s recommendation.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto said while she expressed support for the motion, the
Council was open to listening to the community’s input.
Council Member Mossar clarified Palo Alto currently allowed housing in areas
zoned commercial.
Mr. Emslie said that was correct.
Council Member Mossar asked whether housing could be built if the three
sites were changed to commercial use.
Mr. Emslie said no. The first part of the motion was to eliminate or restrict
housing from commercial zones. Restricted housing would be limited to
mixed-use with ground floor retail. Staff was on track to have the latter in
place before November 7.
Council Member Morton clarified Council’s direction to staff was to find a way
to preserve Fry’s and asked that it be included in Option A1.
Mr. Emslie said Council’s direction was to preserve commercial and retail
uses in that area and it would be possible to include the site in Option A1.
Council Member Morton clarified by removing the Fry’s site from the motion
did not negate the possibility of modifying zoning to eliminate housing in
commercial zones.
Mr. Emslie said that was correct.
08/07/06 100-487
Council Member Mossar asked whether the prior motion for a zoning change
to commercial meant someone could not build SummerWinds Nursery on the
site.
Mr. Emslie said the first part of the motion addressed all the commercial
districts, which did not include the six parcels.
Council Member Mossar understood the first motion for “stand-alone”
housing in commercial zones was eliminated; however, “mixed-use” housing
with commercial on the ground floor was permitted. She stated
SummerWinds Nursery could be built, but housing would not be allowed on
the site.
Mr. Emslie said it would have to be mixed-use with commercial on the
ground floor and residential above it.
Council Member Mossar clarified with the Palo Alto Bowl, bowling would be
on the ground floor with residential units above it.
Mr. Emslie said that was correct. Commercial uses would be permitted
although housing was optional.
Council Member Mossar was opposed to the motion. She wanted to leave
opportunities open for residential development and felt the Council needed
to be mindful of the impacts commercial zoning had on the community.
Mayor Kleinberg expressed concern about not allowing housing on El Camino
Real. El Camino Real was a transit corridor, the Grand Boulevard design was
underway, and there would be an effort to cluster housing in such a way as
to have neighborhood serving retail and office buildings nearby. She did not
want ‘spot zoning’ to prevent that design from happening. SummerWinds
Nursery was also on a major artery and provided easy access to and from
Highway 101. A more in depth analysis of that site was warranted. She could
not support the motion.
Council Member Morton said the intent would be to preserve commercial
uses on the SummerWinds Nursery site. He clarified the proposed motion
would allow for commercial zoning and the deletion of housing, including
mixed-use housing.
Mr. Emslie said that was correct.
Council Member Morton clarified the three sites identified in the motion
would all remain commercial uses with no housing.
Mr. Emslie said that was Council’s direction to staff.
08/07/06 100-488
Council Member Klein said it should be clear that sites in Option A2 were not
the same as those in Option B1 of the staff report (CMR:312:06). Presently
there would be nothing to prevent the six parcels from reverting to housing.
Housing would be a dramatic loss to the City’s flexibility. Palo Alto was
ahead of where it wanted to be in the Comp Plan. He was opposed to
housing being built on a haphazard basis.
MOTION PASSED 5-2, Kleinberg, Mossar no, Barton, Drekmeier absent.
COUNCIL MATTERS
22. Designation of Voting Delegate and Alternate for the 2006 League of
California Cities Annual Conference
Mayor Kleinberg said four Council Members including herself were scheduled
to attend the 2006 League of California Cities Annual Conference. Although
she would be attending the event, she did not want to be considered a
voting delegate. Consistent with the League bylaws, the Council must
designate a voting delegate and alternate.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Kishimoto moved, seconded by Kleinberg, to hereby
designate Council Members Klein and Barton, as voting delegate and
alternate respectively for the 2006 League of California Cities Annual
Conference in San Diego from September 6-9, 2006.
MOTION PASSED 7-0, Barton, Drekmeier absent.
23. Discussion of Compensation Recommendations for City Manager Frank
Benest, City Attorney – Gary Baum, City Auditor – Sharon Erickson
and City Clerk – Donna Rogers
Council Member Morton said the Council Appointed Officers (CAO) committee
met with and reviewed the four CAOs after meeting with the City Council.
Although the CAO committee did not recommend a bonus for the City
Manager, he requested to modify the CAOs recommendation to authorize a
bonus of $4,000.
Mayor Kleinberg asked whether a formal motion was required on a
recommendation from the CAO committee.
City Attorney Gary Baum said a formal motion was required.
MOTION: Council Member Morton moved, seconded by Beecham, to
approve the CAO Committee recommendations for compensation, as follows:
• No adjustment to CAO base salaries. As per contracts, each CAO
officer will be given the same percentage increase as the
management group and will continue to receive the same
08/07/06 100-489
benefits for retirement, medical, dental and vision coverage, and
deferred compensation.
• Bonuses are recommended as follows:
- City Attorney $4,000
- City Auditor $6,000
- City Clerk $3,000
- City Manager No Recommendation
Furthermore, authorize a bonus of $4,000 to the City Manager.
Council Member Mossar recommended separating the motion into two
actions.
MOTION WITHDRAWN BY MAKER AND SECONDER
MOTION: Council Member Morton moved, seconded by Beecham, to
approve the CAO Committee recommendations for compensation, as follows:
• No adjustment to CAO base salaries. As per contracts, each CAO
officer will be given the same percentage increase as the
management group and will continue to receive the same
benefits for retirement, medical, dental and vision coverage, and
deferred compensation.
• Bonuses are recommended as follows:
- City Attorney $4,000
- City Auditor $6,000
- City Clerk $3,000
MOTION PASSED 7-0, Barton, Drekmeier absent.
MOTION: Council Member Morton moved, seconded by Beecham, to
authorize a bonus of $4,000 for the City Manager.
Council Member Mossar said she would be voting against the motion.
Bonuses granted to the CAOs were in special recognition for performance
and achievement. While Palo Alto had an outstanding City Manager and a
capable individual who, along with his staff, had accomplished a great deal,
the past year had been fraught with difficulties. She had no doubt the City
Manager would merit a bonus in the future.
Council Member Klein said he hoped and expected to be able to grant a
bonus for the City Manager. He wanted him to succeed. His successes were
in turn the successes of Palo Alto. He was unable to make that finding for
the 2005-06 fiscal year. He would be voting against the motion.
Council Member Cordell said the motion proposed a two percent bonus for
the City Manager, which would be less than what the other CAOs received.
She believed Palo Alto had one of the best city managers in the country. He
had suffered huge losses in his life over the past two years and doubted
08/07/06 100-490
anyone could come through without being affected. Legitimate criticisms had
been conveyed to him that concerned the Council, and his ability to do
better in the coming year. The message should be that he was valued, had
many successes, and the Council did expect more and encouraged him to
commit to doing that. She expressed support for the motion.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto expressed support for a smaller, more nominal
amount. She concurred with the comments of Council Members Klein and
Mossar.
Mayor Kleinberg said in her experience bonuses were given to people who
did not reach perfection and whose achievements may not have risen to the
level of all expectations. Bonuses were not seen as a complete measure of
achievement, but in recognition of optimism and commitment, as well as
incentive. It was also important in terms of the other parties the City
negotiated with to signify Council’s faith in the City Manager’s performance
and his ability to meet all expectations. She expressed support for the
motion.
Council Member Beecham said by the community’s own evaluation, Palo Alto
was one of the best cities in the country, and it was due in large part to what
the City did. There were a number of great things going on that were
accredited to the City Manager. He believed a bonus was appropriate and
would support the motion.
Council Member Morton said Palo Alto was one of the best managed cities in
the country, and it was not by chance. It was because the City Manager was
committed to his job, and staff was committed to him. The bonus signified
that although it was not a perfect year a large amount of energy and effort
went into it.
MOTION PASSED 4-3, Kishimoto, Klein, Mossar no, Barton, Drekmeier
absent.
COUNCIL COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AND REPORTS FROM CONFERENCES
Council Member Mossar reported she was on a panel discussing water supply
at the League of Cities Conference in Monterey last week. She was happy to report on the wonderful things Palo Alto is doing regarding water. She
requested the meeting adjourn tonight in honor of John Duryea, who passed
away two weeks ago and was close to many in the community.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto congratulated Reed Stevens, a Palo Alto resident, who
won Round Nine of the Formula BMW San Jose Grand Prix competition on
Saturday, July 29, 2006.
08/07/06 100-491
The meeting adjourned at 10:13 p.m. to a Closed Session
Mr. Baum stated he would not participate in Item No. 25 because his wife
works for Hewlett Packard and, therefore, Senior Deputy City Attorney
Donald Larkin would handle the Item in Closed Session. Also, he stated that
Item No. 24 would not be heard this evening.
24. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY -- EXISTING LITIGATION
Subject: The Embarcadero Publishing Company dba Palo Alto Weekly
v. The City of Palo Alto, the City Council of the City of Palo
Alto SCC#CV814137
Authority: Government Code section 54956.9(a)
25. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY -- EXISTING LITIGATION
Subject: Telik, Inc., et al. v. City of Palo Alto, et al., Santa Clara
Superior 1-04-CV-027100
Authority: Government Code section 54956.9(a)
Mayor Kleinberg reported no action was taken.
FINAL ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 10:45 p.m. in memory of
John Duryea, long-time Palo Alto resident.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor
NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto
Municipal Code Sections 2.04.180(a) and (b). The City Council and Standing
Committee meeting tapes are made solely for the purpose of facilitating the
preparation of the minutes of the meetings. City Council and Standing
Committee meeting tapes are recycled 90 days from the date of the
meeting. The tapes are available for members of the public to listen to
during regular office hours.
08/07/06 100-492