HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-07-15 City Council Summary Minutes
Special Meeting July 15, 2002
1. Study Session for the El Camino Real/Caltrans Project.......295
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m...................295
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS..............................................296
1. Adoption of a Resolution and First Reading of an Ordinance Necessary for the Development and Bond Financing of Community Facility Improvements.............................297
2. Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Art Center Foundation Establishing the Art Center Challenge Grant Program..........................303
3. Park Improvement Ordinance for Improvements to the Memorial Grove at Eleanor Pardee Park................................306
4. Adoption of a Resolution Revising Rate Schedule C-4 to Expand Participation in the Utilities Residential Rate
Assistance Program to Low-Income Housing....................306
5. Approval of Resolution Establishing No Parking Zones on Alma Street North of Lytton Avenue and on Lytton Avenue
East of Alma Street.........................................306
6. Resolution 8199 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the
City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Paul Eagan Upon His Retirement”........................................306
7. Proposed Reclassification of 423 Kipling Avenue:
Recommendation From the Historic Resources Board at the Request of the Owners, the Orwitz Family, to Reclassify a
Category 3 Building on the City of Palo Alto’s Historic Inventory to Category 2 Pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 16.49 (Historic Preservation Ordinance).....................307
8. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and Waterproofing Associates in the Amount of $126,678 for the Repair and
Replacement of Roofing for the Water Quality Control Plant..307
07/15/02 94-293
9. Approval of Asset Seizure Expenditure in the Amount of $26,000 for the Purchase of Gas Masks.......................307
10. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and Cupertino Electric, Inc. in the Amount of $499,782 for the Emergency Generator Replacements and Electrical Upgrades at Fire Stations 1-5, Station 8, and the Municipal Service Center – Capital Improvement Program Projects 19707, 10005, and
10103.......................................................307
11A. (Old Item No. 11) Request to Authorize the City Manager to Execute Replacement Agreements Related to Electric
Transmission Interconnection Services.......................307
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS.........................308
13. Conference with City Attorney -- Potential/Anticipated Litigation..................................................308
12. Resolution Determining that the Public Interest and Necessity Require the Acquisition of a Construction Easement at 525 Alma Street and 542 High Street for the
Downtown Parking Structures (CIP 19530).....................309
COUNCIL COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS...................312
FINAL ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m. in memory of Mark Remmel, one of Palo Alto’s native sons and Little League coach, who was beloved by many throughout the
community...................................................312
07/15/02 94-294
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Conference Room at 6:05 p.m.
PRESENT: Beecham, Burch, Freeman, Kishimoto, Kleinberg, Morton, Mossar, Ojakian ABSENT: Lytle
SPECIAL MEETING
1. Study Session for the El Camino Real/Caltrans Project
The City Council held a study session at 6:00 pm to review progress and comment on the Caltrans/El Camino Real Demonstration Grant Project. Planning Department staff made a brief presentation about the background, purpose and objectives of the project, current status of the project, and various
possible road design alternatives that are being explored. The traffic consultants, Fehr and Peers, made a presentation about
the ongoing transportation analysis and the transportation issues involved in the project. Council Members asked questions of staff and the consultants, and commented on various aspects
of the project. No action required.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m.
07/15/02 94-295
Regular Meeting
July 15, 2002 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 7:10 p.m.
PRESENT: Beecham, Burch, Freeman, Kishimoto, Kleinberg, Lytle, Morton, Mossar, Ojakian
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Spreck Rosekrans, Environmental Defense, 5655 College Avenue, Suite 304, Oakland, spoke regarding Trinity River. Robert E. Mancuso, 321 Nova Lane, Menlo Park, spoke regarding El Camino Real.
Dan Heiser, 983 Lawrence Lane, spoke regarding Harbor Point paving project (negative impact – windsurfing use). Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, spoke regarding City-School Liaison
Committee.
Grant Grundler, 245 Hamilton Avenue, Mountain View, spoke regarding Baylands parking lot renovation project.
Tony Carrasco, 4216 Darlington Court, spoke regarding El Camino Real.
Steve Schaper, 3001 El Camino Real, spoke regarding El Camino Real improvement.
Gary Atkins, 842 Remington, Sunnyvale, spoke regarding Harbor
Point parking. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme Street, spoke regarding El Camino Real traffic.
Jim Sparkes, 1515 Juarceys Court, San Jose, spoke regarding Baylands parking (Harbor Point).
Costa Tsobanakis, 21520 Addington Court, Cupertino, spoke regarding Baylands parking (Harbor Point)
Frank Rosenberg, 1520 Portola Avenue, spoke regarding Trinity River. Terry Dickerson, 10732 Alderbrook Lane, Cupertino, spoke
regarding Harbor Park improvement.
07/15/02 94-296
City Manager Frank Benest stated staff would contact the people regarding the Baylands Harbor Park issue for a meeting.
Tom Martin, 2204 Greer Road, spoke regarding Baylands parking (Harbor Park). Ron Malmgren, 1188 Jackson Drive, Campbell, spoke regarding park
improvements. Stephanie Munoz, 101 Alma Street, spoke regarding the height of
buildings.
Mayor Ojakian noted that the City flags were flying at half-mast to honor the passing of one of Palo Alto’s native sons, Mark Remmel. He requested that the meeting be adjourned in his memory.
Council Member Kishimoto noted that her family had been fortunate to be friends with Mark and his family and that he would be sorely missed. REPORTS OF OFFICIALS
1. Adoption of a Resolution and First Reading of an Ordinance
Necessary for the Development and Bond Financing of Community Facility Improvements
Assistant City Manager Emily Harrison said staff created a vision for what could happen at Mitchell Park and, as the City
moved into the next phase of design, there would be ample opportunity to talk to the community on what the facility would look like. The Council approved a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, which set an envelope within which a project could be created at Mitchell Park. Thirty-one community meetings went
into the design of the Mitchell Park Community Center. If the bond measure was successful in November, staff hoped to move forward into schematic design with the Children’s Library facility. There was opportunity between the current time and November 2002 to continue the dialogue with the community about
the Mitchell Park Center and discuss the issues of the massing and siting of the facility. Nothing was set in stone about what the buildings would look like when the Council adopted the
conceptual design.
Council Member Freeman said some members of the community might want to know when additional input could be given with regard to the design and site location and asked whether that information could be provided.
07/15/02 94-297
Ms. Harrison said there was no schedule, but an opportunity would be set up to give the community time to continue to
dialogue with staff. Staff would continue to work on the issue of the tennis courts. Karen White, 146 Walter Hays Drive, said Palo Altans had an exciting opportunity to improve the library and community
facilities. Citizens were eager to work for a common sense renovation plan for the Children’s and Mitchell Park Libraries and Community Center. The Council was urged to unanimously adopt
the resolution and to resolve to actively solicit neighborhood input as building designs moved forward. Palo Altans would
approve a measure to fund the basic renovations to: (1) create adequate space in the Children’s Library for the 46,000 items that currently packed a building designed to hold fewer than 7,000 books; (2) upgrade the antiquated roof, as well as plumbing, electric, and lighting systems at Children’s Library;
(3) create at Mitchell Park Library center to offer children homework help and productive afterschool activities; (4) rebuild Mitchell Park Library and Community Center to meet current safety and seismic codes while incorporating adequate lighting, plumbing, air conditioning, and ventilation systems; and (5)
provide both Children’s Library and Mitchell Park center the space needed for adequate community and library services for
Palo Alto’s children, seniors, and families. Libraries were an essential community asset where children were able to listen to a story teller, first-time computer users were able to navigate
the web, retirees were able to discuss the latest best seller, and students were able to do research for term papers. Palo Alto
libraries and community centers were places of opportunity for learning and for recreation. The Council was urged to unanimously adopt the resolution.
Shelby Valentine, 3116 Stelling Drive, urged the Council to
unanimously support the bond measure. Public focus groups, which started in 1996, expressed strong support that south Palo Altans needed more library and community space. South Palo Alto held over half of the City’s population. The largest future development and growth was projected in the south. The dilemma
in architecture was often what came first: form following function or function following form. At Mitchell Park, form followed function. The form (dimension of the buildings)
followed what south Palo Altans had for many years told the City it needed. The size of the buildings was based on the size of
their use. The bond measure would give all of Palo Alto a community facility that took care of the huge, increased number of residents. The Council was urged to vote in favor of placing the bond on the ballot.
07/15/02 94-298
Tina Kass, 1730 Cowper Street, Library Advisory Commission (LAC) Chair, said on June 27, 2002, the LAC enthusiastically voted to
endorse the action taken by the Council on June 17, 2002, regarding a community facilities bond measure for November 2002. The LAC recommended that the Mitchell Park Library and Children’s Library were the highest priorities for library reconstruction and renovation in Palo Alto. The LAC considered
the Council’s action to be a first, tangible step towards implementation of the new Library Plan, approved in concept by the Council in 2000. The LAC understood that the program the
Council expected to be supported by the bond measure included renovation and expansion of the Children’s Library, as described
in the approved conceptual plan, and new construction of the Mitchell Park Library to support the full library program and the Mitchell Park Community Center. The LAC looked forward to working with the Council and staff on improving library services throughout Palo Alto.
George Browning, 4005 Sutherland Drive, said the proposed location intruded too far into the park and reduced the number of adjacent tennis courts from four to two. Many Palo Alto residents whom he spoke with opposed the location shown on the
conceptual plan map. The two-story structure was too large for the site. The present library and community center footprint
were approximately 20,000 square feet. A new 70,000-square-foot complex would add an additional acre to the footprint that was shown, which was far out of scale for the site. The Council was
urged to consider modifying the conceptual plan to locate the complex closer to Middlefield Road.
Jean Wilcox, 4005 Sutherland Drive, said the Council approved the conceptual plans for the new Mitchell Park Library on June
10, 2002. Building a 70,000-square-foot library complex towards the middle of the park was a concern because the character of
Mitchell Park would be changed forever. The Council allowed the library advocates and architectural consultants to hijack the park for their own agenda. Making a clear statement that under no circumstances would a new library complex be built over the tennis and paddleball courts towards the middle of the park was
in the Council’s best interest. John Kagel, 737 Channing Avenue, LAC member, said he was not at
the June 27,2002, LAC meeting but supported the actions of the LAC. The project was a two-story building, and the footprint was
not 70,000 square feet. There was much deliberation during the 31 meetings, which the Council needed to take into account. Stephanie Munoz, 101 Alma Street, said the idea that something should be carried forth because it was the greatest good for the
07/15/02 94-299
greatest number seemed highhanded. There was much the Council could do without having a footprint that interfered with tennis
courts. The City did not have enough park space. Mitchell Park Library was crowded because students settled on it as a meeting place. The Council needed to realize that people in the community had not understood there would be a community center.
Lanie Wheeler, 362 Diablo Court, said many people in the community were happy because of the focus and effort the Council placed on moving the projects forward in an expeditious and
meaningful way. Residents were grateful to the task forces that were charged with helping get the designs of the facilities; to
the Boards and Commissions who met to get the plans to the current point; and to staff for its work on the plan. The Council was urged to give first reading to the ordinance to place a measure on the November ballot. A group of citizens was formed to take the project over from City Hall, to move it out
into the community and to convince the community that the project was the right thing for the City. Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, said the bond measure was to pay for the improvements to Mitchell Park and the Children’s Library
facilities. The City submitted an application to receive $19 million for one of the projects, and there were additional
opportunities to receive money. The use of tennis courts at dedicated parkland went back a long way. Phase 4 of Greer Park had not been completed because of cuts in spending in 1976 and
in 1978. Phase 4 was for four tennis courts. Users of the tennis courts in Mitchell Park needed assurance that the City would
address their interest, considering the history at Greer Park. Joy Ogawa, 2305 Yale Street, said she needed to know, with a
reasonable degree of comfort, what specifically was to be constructed at Mitchell Park, the Children’s Library, and the
Art Center, as well as what would happen to the potential $19 million that the City might receive in matching grant funds for construction of the Mitchell Park Library. If Palo Alto was fortunate to receive the $19 million, she questioned whether the principal amount of the bonds issued would not exceed $30.1
million. Words to that affect should be included in the ordinance. The bond measure had “baggage” that might impede its success. Concerns were expressed about the loss of park space
and open space. Voting on a bond measure without knowing the details of the proposed construction was a concern. An
additional concern related to Art Center funding being tied to the success of the bond measure, which meant the Art Center funding was added onto the bond measure, as an additional $5 million expenditure of taxpayer funds.
07/15/02 94-300
MOTION: Vice Mayor Mossar moved, seconded by Kishimoto, to
approve the staff recommendation as follows: 1) Adopt the
Resolution Determining That the Public Interest and Necessity Demand the Acquisition and Development of Certain Municipal Improvements and Their Financing Through the Issuance of General Obligation Bonds; and 2) adopt the Ordinance Ordering the Submission of a Proposition of Incurring Bonded Debt to the
Qualified Voters of the City of Palo Alto at the Special Municipal Election to be Held on November 5, 2002, for the Purpose of the Acquisition, Construction and Improvement of
Library and Community Center Facilities.
Resolution 8197 entitled “Resolution of the City Council of the City of Palo Alto Determining That the Public Interest and Necessity Demand the Acquisition and Development of Certain Municipal Improvements and Their Financing Through the Issuance of General Obligation Bonds (City Libraries
and Community Center Project)”
Ordinance 1st Reading entitled “Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Palo Alto Ordering the Submission of a Proposition of Incurring Bonded Debt to the Qualified
Voters of the City of Palo Alto at the Special Municipal Election to be Held on November 5, 2002, for the Purpose of
the Acquisition, Construction and Improvement of Library and Community Center Facilities”
Vice Mayor Mossar said the Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) included many policies and programs that related specifically to
the work currently before the Council. If the City was fortunate to receive bond money from the State for Mitchell Park, the materials before the Council were clearly written as to what
could be spent. The City expected to spend less money on the project. The Council was urged to unanimously approve the
motion. Council Member Kishimoto said the motion placed the Children’s Library, Mitchell Library and Community Center facilities on the ballot for a maximum dollar amount of bond financing. Questions
existed about the site and building design. The Council took a step forward to ask the voters and taxpayers to support the $49.1 million maximum financing.
Council Member Morton said the new design of the project moved
the tennis courts and got a children’s courtyard. The front space on Mitchell field became park space that currently was concrete. The architects came up with a proposal that enabled the City to have a “park sense” of the community center from Middlefield Road. The most needed upgrades in the community were
07/15/02 94-301
at Mitchell Park. The Mitchell Park Library and community center were combined with the Children’s Library. The Council
needed to make it clear to voters that it was investing in the future of the community. Council Member Freeman had a long history working with libraries, having been a founder of Libraries Now and a gold
card member of the library. The proposal helped all segments of the community. The Children’s Library was for both children and adults. The City Attorney was asked whether language needed to
be added that stated the Council would reduce the total bond amount by the dollars that were received from the Library Bond
Act. City Attorney Ariel Calonne said additional language was not necessary because the ordinance was clear that the $49.1 million could only be spent on the specifically identified project. If
the grant came in, the City had no incentive to do something else with the $19.1 million. Staff added a citizens’ oversight committee, along with the routine, annual audits. Council Member Freeman hoped the majority of the community was
as excited as she was.
Council Member Burch appreciated the people who asked questions about the proposal and noted there would be opportunities for additional input.
Council Member Lytle felt there was consensus about the cost,
package and bond measure. The community input led to a strong, solid base for moving forward. The fact there was time to reach a broader consensus was reassuring. The Council needed to meet
the 20 percent segment of the voters that the consultants noted had not made up their minds. Council had to be prepared to
listen throughout the campaign in order to reach that segment of the voters. The library was a benefit for all of Palo Alto. The Council had significant information to answer the questions raised and to launch a successful campaign.
Council Member Kleinberg appreciated the anxiety mentioned by some speakers about the park and open space issue, as well as concern by homeowners about the manner in which the bond was
done, for example, based on assessed value. The Council tried to develop something as fair and equitable as possible and cost
effective. The community needed to be patient and to trust that the process was evolving. The Council listened to those who responded at community meetings and through the survey about the amount of the original proposed bond. The current bond was half the amount as originally proposed. The interface between the
07/15/02 94-302
Mitchell Park complex and the park was entirely compatible. Libraries and community centers allowed intergenerational
experiences. Council Member Beecham said six months prior, the action seemed unattainable because the concepts and compromises were not apparent or achievable by the Council. The community showed
great flexibility during the prior six months in realizing what needed to be done to be successful in taking care of the libraries and community facilities. The conceptual plans would
evolve with the continued input from the entire community.
Mayor Ojakian was pleased that the legislation called for an oversight committee. MOTION PASSED 9-0.
RECESS: 9:04 p.m. – 9:14 p.m.
2. Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Art Center Foundation Establishing the Art Center Challenge Grant Program
Assistant City Manager Emily Harrison said the Council asked
staff to provide additional information and to flush out the public/private partnership that was the result of a Colleague’s memo. Staff developed a methodology for disbursing the
contribution. A fund would be created in the Capital Projects Account, and $1 million per year would be appropriated to that
fund. Money would be transferred from the appropriation to the actual fund in order to earn interest in the General Fund until the point of time of transfer. Dollar for dollar would be
matched, and transfers would be made to the fund based on the fund raising efforts of the Art Foundation. The opportunity
existed to renegotiate the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) if the financial circumstances warranted that. The MOU did not take effect unless the bond measure was successful. Council Member Kishimoto asked about impacts on the City
commitment to street and sidewalk repair. Ms. Harrison said the philosophy of the City Public Works
Infrastructure Program was not to be finished at the end of ten years, but to maintain a commitment to the infrastructure so the
City did not encounter the kind of backlog it had previously with City facilities. Staff was confident it would maintain the commitment for the streets throughout the program and into future years.
07/15/02 94-303
Carolyn Tucher, 4264 Manuela Way, Palo Art Center Foundation President, asked the Council to approve the Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU). The City needed more programs for children during the summer. With City support, the Foundation believed it had a powerful incentive to donors to support the Art Center project. With private donor support, the Foundation would leverage community money in a way that gave the citizens good
value for City money invested. Brian Kreischer, Palo Alto Art Center Foundation Board, said the
relationship between the Foundation and the City was based on cooperation, respect, a shared passion and vision. The MOU
demonstrated the shared passion and vision. The Council was urged to approve the MOU. Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, thought the Council needed to take action by resolution or ordinance, but that was not before the
Council. The MOU contained a paragraph (e) that said the Art Center Foundation wished to assist in the passage of one or more bond measures intended to secure voter approval of funding for Palo Alto library and community services facilities. The City gave $5 million for the purposes of the Art Center which, in
exchange, helped to pass the bond measure. The appearance was a campaign contribution. Linking the Art Center Funding to the
Library Bond Measure was a mistake unless the voters were given the opportunity to vote for or against the Art Center as a separate Bond Measure or as part of a combined Bond Measure. The
agenda item should be continued until after November 5, 2002.
Stephanie Munoz, 101 Alma Street, said people questioned why items the Council wanted were prioritized before putting in items such as storm sewers.
Joy Ogawa, 2305 Yale Street, said the appropriate vehicle for
funding the Art Center was a bond measure because residents of Palo Alto had an opportunity to speak out and express their views on the funding. MOTION: Council Member Kleinberg moved, seconded by Beecham, to
approve the staff recommendation to approve the Memorandum of Understanding for a public/private partnership with the Art Center Foundation to renovate and expand the Art Center.
Council Member Kleinberg thanked the Art Center Foundation, the
Art Center staff, and City staff, for the work they did to find opportunities that were attractive to the public. The MOU was a carefully crafted and conservative memorandum and established the operating rules for the Art Center Challenge Grant program. The MOU was the official commitment of the City to create a true
07/15/02 94-304
public/private partnership to improve the Art Center. The City had a joint approval process for the project disbursements. The
process provided for an incremental disbursement of funds for the most effective construction program that could be designed. Capital infrastructure reserve funds were leveraged to serve as matching funds in order to help the Art Center Foundation do its fund raising. The process included the offset to the
Infrastructure Management Plan. The City’s match would be implemented in manageable $1 million increments. The money was earmarked before being transferred into a fund. The staff and
Art Center Foundation crafted a conservative, careful financial package, which the community was able to carefully observe and
hold the City accountable for its management. The MOU honored the values in the community to continue to improve and enhance community services and the facilities where the services were performed.
Council Member Morton complimented the staff and community for coming up with another public/private partnership. Vice Mayor Mossar enthusiastically supported the adoption of the MOU. The Art Center was a heavily utilized facility and included
beautiful gardens that provided a place for respite and reflection.
Council Member Lytle supported the MOU and hoped it could be used as a model for matching funds with other facilities, such
as the Junior Museum.
Council Member Freeman thanked the Palo Alto Art Foundation and City staff for their tenacity, vision, and financial creativity. The City would maintain and achieve the streets and sidewalk
goals while gaining new and renovated art facilities. Art was a symbol of an enriched community, and Palo Alto was considered an
enriched community. An environment was created where both the infrastructure and enrichment could be gained at the same time. Council Member Burch said the Art Center hosted special art programs, and many groups held meetings at the Arts Center.
Council Member Kishimoto supported the MOU.
Mayor Ojakian appreciated the work of his colleagues, staff, and members of the public.
MOTION PASSED 9-0. CONSENT CALENDAR
07/15/02 94-305
Mayor Ojakian noted that Item Nos. 5 and 7 would be removed from the agenda at the request of staff.
Council Member Lytle requested that Item No. 11 be removed. Mayor Ojakian noted Item No. 11 would become Item No. 11A and would be heard after the Consent Calendar.
MOTION: Council Member Burch moved, seconded by Mossar, to
approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 3, 4, 6, and 8-10 on the
Consent Calendar.
LEGISLATIVE
3. Park Improvement Ordinance for Improvements to the Memorial Grove at Eleanor Pardee Park
Ordinance 1st Reading entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Approving and Adopting a Plan for
Improvements to the Memorial Grove at Eleanor Pardee Park” 4. Adoption of a Resolution Revising Rate Schedule C-4 to
Expand Participation in the Utilities Residential Rate Assistance Program to Low-Income Housing
Resolution 8198 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Utility Rate Schedule C-4 of the City of Palo Alto Utilities Rates and Charges Pertaining to the Residential Rate Assistance Program”
5. Approval of Resolution Establishing No Parking Zones on Alma Street North of Lytton Avenue and on Lytton Avenue
East of Alma Street
Resolution entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving and Adopting No Parking Zones on
Alma Street North of Lytton Avenue and on Lytton Avenue East of Alma Street” ADMINISTRATIVE
6. Resolution 8199 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the
City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Paul Eagan Upon His Retirement”
7. Proposed Reclassification of 423 Kipling Avenue: Recommendation From the Historic Resources Board at the
Request of the Owners, the Orwitz Family, to Reclassify a Category 3 Building on the City of Palo Alto’s Historic
07/15/02 94-306
Inventory to Category 2 Pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 16.49 (Historic Preservation Ordinance)
8. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and Waterproofing Associates in the Amount of $126,678 for the Repair and Replacement of Roofing for the Water Quality Control Plant
9. Approval of Asset Seizure Expenditure in the Amount of $26,000 for the Purchase of Gas Masks
10. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and Cupertino Electric, Inc. in the Amount of $499,782 for the Emergency
Generator Replacements and Electrical Upgrades at Fire Stations 1-5, Station 8, and the Municipal Service Center – Capital Improvement Program Projects 19707, 10005, and 10103 MOTION PASSED 9-0 for Item Nos. 3, 4, 6, and 8-10.
11A. (Old Item No. 11) Request to Authorize the City Manager to Execute Replacement Agreements Related to Electric Transmission Interconnection Services
Council Member Lytle asked that the item be pulled because she
wanted to see Utility Advisory Commission (UAC) minutes when any UAC items went before the Council.
City Manager Frank Benest said staff believed the Council needed to move forward on the matter, and staff was available to answer
any questions. The minutes would be included in the future. Council Member Beecham agreed the UAC minutes were important.
The issue was before the Council that evening because Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) had pushed to cancel the
interconnection agreement. MOTION: Council Member Morton moved, seconded by Mossar, to authorize the City Manager to approve Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Replacement Agreements Related to
Electric Transmission Interconnection Services. Resolution 8200 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the
City of Palo Alto Authoring the City Manager to Execute Replacement Agreements Related to Electric Transmission
Interconnection Services” Council Member Morton said he appreciated Council Member Lytle’s desire to get minutes, but did not want to hold up the process.
07/15/02 94-307
Vice Mayor Mossar said approving the resolution was appropriate Council action. Mayor Ojakian asked staff to provide the Council with an informational report on Committee/Commission minutes. Council Member Kleinberg said the staff report (CMR:298:02)
indicated the increases were already included in the budget. The question was raised whether the issue went to the Finance Committee.
Mr. Benest said the increases were discussed during the Finance
Committee process. Council Member Kleinberg asked whether there were any comments by the Finance Committee.
Assistant Director of Utilities Resource Management Girish Balachandran said staff discussed the issue with the UAC and the Finance Committee when the budget was presented. As noted in the staff report (CMR:298:02), staff kept the UAC updated for several months. The issue was noncontroversial with the UAC.
Council Member Kleinberg suggested all Committee/Commission
minutes be included on the website. MOTION PASSED 9-0.
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS
MOTION: Vice Mayor Mossar moved, seconded by Morton, to move
the Closed Session Item No. 13 forward ahead of Item No. 12. MOTION PASSED 9-0.
CLOSED SESSION
The meeting adjourned at 10:13 p.m. to a Closed Session. 13. Conference with City Attorney -- Potential/Anticipated Litigation Subject: Significant Exposure to Litigation
Authority: Government Code section 54956.9(b)(1) arising out of acquisition of a construction easement at 525 Alma Street and 542 High Street, Palo Alto (Gov. Code 54956.9 (b)(3)(B).)
07/15/02 94-308
The City Council met in Closed Session to discuss matters involving existing litigation and potential/anticipated
litigation as described in Agenda Item No. 13. Mayor Ojakian announced that no reportable action was taken on Agenda Item No. 13.
The City Council meeting reconvened at 10:40 p.m.
REPORTS OF OFFICIALS
12. Resolution Determining that the Public Interest and Necessity Require the Acquisition of a Construction
Easement at 525 Alma Street and 542 High Street for the Downtown Parking Structures (CIP 19530) Mayor Ojakian said legal counsel for the property owner, Jill Vandervoort, Trustee of the Jill Vandervoort Trust, requested
and was entitled by law to address the Council on the following findings and conclusions that the Council needed to make in order to authorize eminent domain: (a) the public interest and necessity required the Downtown Parking Garage Project; (b) the project is planned and located in the manner which will be most
compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; (c) the taking of construction easement is necessary for
the project; and (d) an offer of compensation required by Section 7267.2 of the Government Code was made to the owner of record of the property sought to be condemned. The resolution
required approval by a vote of at least two-thirds of the Council. Brenda Ross, Attorney At Law, 1521 Escobita Avenue, representing the property owner, said the issue was under the threat of
litigation. The matter dealt with private property rights. The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the 19th Amendment
of the California Constitution required that the City pay just compensation prior to taking of property. Because of the constitutional rights, there was a great deal of statutory law
and cases that dealt with how the City acquired property rights. The Council needed to look at the findings listed in the staff
report (CMR:307:02). The Council reviewed options and determined that the parking garage might or might not be important to the public. The Council provided a design for that, which she did
not challenge. The Jungle Copy building had a side access, which was in the City’s landscape plans referred to as a wheelchair
ramp and entrance. The entrance was the subject of discussion as it provided the access to the main part of the building and
provided the main entrance to the building tenant, IDEO, in the center, which had a second exit onto Alma Street and provided a
07/15/02 94-309
second access for Jungle Copy. Placing the building and parking structure between the two existing buildings created a six-foot
walk on each side. The current building had to be accessed from the outside in order to maintain the drainage. The drainage ran along the top and had a structure that could not be accessed from the inside. The building was historic, with a tin roof that could not be accessed. The drainage was a considerable problem,
should the parking structure be abutted to her client’s building. Another issue was maintaining the bricks on the outside of the building. The staff report (CMR:307:02) contained
erroneous information. The bricks were reinforced with rods and concrete and existed as fillers between the structure that was
supported. The building did not suffer any seismic damage in the 1989 earthquake. No offer was made for the rights lost for the access, and no offer was made in conjunction with redoing the corridors on the interior of the building to provide for secondary access. There would be access only on High and Alma
Streets if the structure were built next to her client's building. A brick wall was proposed to run the length of the block between Alma and High Streets and was not of greatest public benefit. Her client had not received an offer for the access or an offer for the amount of money it might cost to redo
the corridors. An offer was received for the construction easement. The underpinnings would remain on two and one half of
approximately 563 square feet of her client’s property after construction. That was noted in the construction easement. There was no offer for a permanent easement to remain on the location.
Attaching the proposed building to her client’s building was a concern because a seismic study was not done using the City’s
building code calculation for sway. The proposed building needed to be moved so that the sway would not damage the existing building in the event of an earthquake. A request was made to
object to the right to take based on possible violations of the Political Reform Act of 1974, which was Government Code Section
87103. The City was asked to provide her with the Conflict of Interest statements that would have been obtained by the City in connection with Professional Selection Services. The hearing that led to the adoption of the right of necessity reflected the fact that the City had gone so far in the process that there was
no discretion left to pass the resolution. The Court might question whether the City could condemn the property. The Council was urged to do more work on the resolution prior to
adoption.
Council Member Lytle asked staff why the idea of centering the structure between the two properties was not considered. Director of Public Works Glenn Roberts said there were a number of deliberations during the site design review process. The
07/15/02 94-310
decision to locate the proposed structure was not arbitrarily decided. The final determining factors related to several
issues. The corridor that was selected called for in the Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) for the cross-town corridor to be emphasized. The width of the corridor was to provide for two-way pedestrian traffic. There were four openings to different businesses on one side.
Council Member Lytle asked whether multiple properties were affected on the other lot.
Mr. Roberts said there were multiple openings and egress points
in the design in Lots S and L. Council Member Lytle asked whether there was an alternative for the fire exit.
Mr. Roberts said design studies were performed that demonstrated access could be provided by means of internal reconfiguration of the building, should the property owner choose to do so. Council Member Freeman clarified the wall was adjacent to and
touching the Jungle Copy wall.
Mr. Roberts said the proposed structure did not touch the wall of the Jungle Copy building. The problem was the Jungle Copy building wall did not follow the property line and varied along
the length of the building. The foundation crossed and intruded onto the City parking lot.
MOTION: Mayor Ojakian moved, seconded by Mossar, to approve the
staff recommendation to approve and authorize the Mayor to
execute the Resolution determining that public interest and necessity require the acquisition of construction easements for
the purposes identified above; and authorize the filing of eminent domain proceedings to acquire this easement for the Downtown Parking Structures (CIP 19530). Resolution 8201 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the
City of Palo Alto Determining that the Public Interest and Necessity Require the Acquisition of Construction Easements at 525 Alma Street and 542 High Street for the Downtown
Parking Structures (Capital Improvement Project 19530) and Authorizing and Directing the Filing of Eminent Domain
Proceedings” Council Member Kishimoto said she was on record as consistently opposed to the building of parking garages and would not support the motion.
07/15/02 94-311
Council Member Beecham said information in the staff report (CMR:307:02) convinced him that conditions to meet the findings
to proceed with the action were met. MOTION PASSED 8-1, Kishimoto “no.” COUNCIL COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council Member Freeman thanked the members of the wind surfing group, noting that staff would review the concerns of the
Baylands parking area, and include the wind surfing group in the decision-making process.
Council Member Kleinberg asked whether it was possible to have a staff report regarding the Trinity River issue. Council Member Lytle thanked staff for the signage for
construction and requested that further work be done on the issue.
Council Kleinberg complimented the City staff on expanding the recycling program.
Mayor Ojakian noted that Council Member Burch was appointed as
the Northern County representative on the Pollution Prevention Committee. He noted a recent article on Commuter Rail and Traffic in Western City Magazine.
FINAL ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m. in memory
of Mark Remmel, one of Palo Alto’s native sons and Little League coach, who was beloved by many throughout the community.
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.
07/15/02 94-312