Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-04-01 City Council Summary MinutesCITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL FINAL MINUTES Page 1 of 24 Special Meeting April 1, 2019 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 5:05 P.M. Present: Cormack, DuBois, Filseth, Fine, Kniss, Kou, Tanaka arrived at 5:58 P.M. Absent: Closed Session 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his Designees Pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (Ed Shikada, Michelle Flaherty, Rumi Portillo, Sandra Blanch, Nicholas Raisch, Molly Stump, Terence Howzell, and Kiely Nose) Employee Organization: (1) Utilities Management and Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA); (2) Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Local 521; (3) Police Officers’ Association of Palo Alto (PAPOA); (4) Palo Alto Police Managers’ Association (PMA); (5) International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Local 1319; and (6) Palo Alto Fire Chiefs’ Association (FCA) Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6 (a) Herb Borock related his experience with filing a request for information regarding the number of Utilities Management and Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA) members who would be eligible for retirement within the next five years. The information he requested should be available, and he was entitled to the information under the Public Records Act. MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Fine to go into Closed Session. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 Council went into Closed Session at 5:09 P.M. Council returned from Closed Session at 6:27 P.M. Mayor Filseth announced no reportable action. FINAL MINUTES Page 2 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Special Orders of the Day 2. Resolution 9824 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Jim Amores Upon his Retirement”. Holly Boyd, Assistant Director of Public Works reported Mr. Amores had worked with the Public Works Department for 32 years. Mr. Amores was a thoughtful and hard-working employee. Mayor Filseth read the Proclamation into the record. MOTION: Mayor Filseth moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Fine to adopt a Resolution expressing appreciation to Jim Amores upon his retirement. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 3. Proclamation Honoring National Library Week. Bob Moss, Library Advisory Commission Chair thanked the Council for recognizing the significance of the Library. The Library provided an environment for community engagement and participation. The Mitchell Park Community Center and Library were the most visited and most used facilities in the City. The Library was integral to a successful community. Council Member Cormack read the Proclamation into the record. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions None. City Manager Comments Ed Shikada, City Manager announced the passing of Lalo Perez, the City's former Chief Financial Officer. An event celebrating Mr. Perez's life was scheduled for April 12, 2019. The International City/County Management Association (ICMA) was evaluating ways to increase the diversity and inclusiveness of its membership. A community meeting regarding the Rinconada Park Improvement Project was scheduled for April 4, 2019. The Great Race for Saving Water and Earth Day Festival was going to be held on April 13, 2019. The deadline to submit applications for the Architectural Review Board, Human Relations Commission, Library Advisory Commission, Storm Water Management Oversight Committee and Utilities Advisory Commission was April 2, 2019 at 4:30 P.M. FINAL MINUTES Page 3 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Oral Communications Chris Robell appreciated the City Manager's willingness to dedicate Staff resources to preparing a Residential Preferential Parking Permit (RPP) Program for the Old Palo Alto neighborhood such that the November date could be met. Rob Levitsky commented on the data contained in the Traffic Study for the closure of the Churchill crossing. More study of closing the crossing was needed. Barbara Hazlett remarked that the Traffic Study for the closure of the Churchill crossing was flawed. Closing the crossing was going to increase traffic congestion in the Professorville neighborhood. A mitigation plan that protected the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists was needed. Victoria Velkoff opposed elimination of the Architectural Review Board (ARB) from the approval process for wireless facilities. The Wireless Ordinance needed to be updated to address health concerns. Amrutha Kattamuri supported the imposition of setback requirements for wireless facilities and continuation of the ARB public hearing process. Celia Boyle urged the Council to support residents by imposing setback and minimum spacing requirements for wireless facilities. Rita Vrhel inquired about the status of the City's potential purchase of the Post Office. Perhaps the City was able to support a community clean-up day for Eleanor Pardee Park. Consent Calendar Council Member Kou registered a no vote on Agenda Item Number 6. Council Member Tanaka registered a no vote on Agenda Item Number 4. MOTION: Vice Mayor Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to approve Agenda Item Numbers 4-6. 4. Approval of Contract Number C19173514 With SP Plus in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $900,000 for Ambassador and Valet Parking Services in Palo Alto Garages and Surface Lots. 5. Approval of Contract Number C19174153 With Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. in an Amount of $633,456 for the Colorado Power Station High Voltage Circuit Breaker Implementation as Part of FINAL MINUTES Page 4 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 the Colorado Power Station Equipment Upgrade Capital Project (EL- 19001); Authorization to Negotiate and Execute Related Change Orders in the Amount of $95,018 for a Total Not-to-Exceed Amount of $728,474; and Approval of Budget Amendments in the Electric Fund. 6. Ordinance 5460 Entitled, “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Various Sections of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Related to Residential and Mixed-use Development Standards Including, but not Limited to, Minimum and Maximum Unit Density, Unit Size, Floor Area Ratio, Height, and Open Space, Including Rooftop Gardens; Parking Requirements Including, but not Limited to, Regulations Related to In-lieu Parking for Downtown Commercial Office Uses and Retail Parking for Mixed-use Projects; Exclusively Residential Projects in Certain Commercial Zoning Districts; Ground-floor Retail and Retail Preservation Provisions; the Entitlement Approval Process; and Other Regulations Governing Residential, Multi-family Residential and Commercial Zoning Districts, all to Promote Housing Development Opportunities in These Zoning Districts in Furtherance of Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): Determination of Consistency With the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Certified and Adopted on November 13, 2017 by Council Resolution Number 9720. The Planning and Transportation Commission Recommended Approval of the Proposed Ordinance on October 10, 2018 (FIRST READINGS: December 3, 2018 and January 28, 2019: PASSED).” MOTION PASSED FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 4: 6-1 Tanaka no MOTION PASSED FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 5: 7-0 MOTION PASSED FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6: 6-1 Kou no Council Member Kou opposed Agenda Item Number 6 because the Housing Incentive Program (HIP) did not include site and design review. The proposed Ordinance did not address natural light and noise and did not link parking and traffic congestion. Council Member Tanaka supported the use of a valet service to increase parking supply; however, the Staff Report did not provide the number of vehicles that utilized valet service, the cost of the pilot program, or an explanation of information. FINAL MINUTES Page 5 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Action Items 7. PUBLIC HEARING/QUASI-JUDICIAL: 3200 El Camino Real [17PLN- 00156]: Consideration of an Applicant’s Request to Adopt an Ordinance Amending the Setback Map to Eliminate the 50-foot Special Setback for the Subject Property Adjacent to Hansen Way; and Consideration of a Request for Approval of an Architectural Review Board Application Allowing the Demolition of the Existing Building and Construction of a new 99-Guestroom Hotel Development. The Request Also Includes a Reduction in Parking to be Off-set by Valet Parking. Environmental Assessment: An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was Circulated for Public Comment From December 4, 2018 to January 3, 2019. The Planning and Transportation Commission Recommended Adoption of the Applicant’s Proposed Map Amendment on December 12, 2018. Zoning District: Service Commercial (CS). Council Member Cormack disclosed an exchange of voicemails with the applicant. Council Member DuBois disclosed no ex parte communications. Council Member Kniss disclosed contact with the applicant many months ago. Mayor Filseth disclosed no ex parte communications. Vice Mayor Fine disclosed a conversation with the applicant in which the applicant expressed displeasure with the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) decision. Council Member Kou disclosed a conversation with the applicant some months ago and receipt of an email. Council Member Tanaka disclosed a conversation with the applicant the previous day. The applicant's displeasure with the PTC decision was likely not a part of the public record. Sheldon Ah Sing, M-Group Contract Planner reported the property included a 50-foot setback along Hansen Way. The applicant requested an amendment to eliminate the special setback, the demolition of the existing motel, and the construction of a new 99-room guest hotel with underground parking. The area was characterized by low-intensity development; however, new development had been approved in the vicinity and should be complete in the next few years. Buildings were surrounded typically by surface lots. Hansen Way divided the property and its development potential in half. The FINAL MINUTES Page 6 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 site was subject to the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. The Service Commercial (CS) zoning district allowed commercial development and limited office potential when converted from one use to another. A hotel was an allowable use for the site. The Council held two pre-screenings for the project, in which Council comments supported a text amendment rather than a variance and encouraged an activating use at the corner. The PTC raised concerns regarding elimination of the "pork chop" and supported elimination of the 50-foot setback for hotel and mixed-use development only. The project included two basement levels of parking, valet parking, a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan, removal of the pork chop, an enhanced bicycle lane, drop-off areas for Transportation Network Companies (TNC), and a coffee shop with outdoor seating. The applicant requested a parking reduction of 18 percent; however, valet parking would provide more parking than required. The Traffic Report found the elimination of the pork chop would probably not impact the intersection because of the low number of vehicles that made the right turn. The applicant had indicated it would work with TNC to ensure drop-offs occurred within the porte-cochere along Hansen Way. A number of special setbacks existed throughout the City. Staff was not able to determine a specific reason for imposition of the special setback. The building adjacent to the site did not conform to the setback. The special setback affected development above and below ground. The driveway was to be located on Hansen Way and as far from the intersection as possible. Vehicles exiting the property had an option to turn both left and right onto El Camino Real. The distance between the face of curb and building was 19 feet, comprised of a 5-foot parkway, a 5-foot sidewalk, and a 9-foot landscape buffer. The applicant revised the project to incorporate balconies as suggested by the Architectural Review Board (ARB). An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), circulated between December 4, 2018 and January 3, 2019, found significant impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and geologic hazards. All impacts were able to be mitigated to a less than significant impact. Staff proposed additional conditions of approval pertaining to the TDM and participation in the Downtown Transportation Management Association (TMA). Jonathan Lait, Director of Planning and Community Environment advised that the additional conditions of approval contained the City's standard language. Public Hearing opened at 7:36 P.M. FINAL MINUTES Page 7 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Yatin Patel, Applicant indicated the building was constructed in 1947. He requested the Council remove the site-specific 50-foot setback, which was imposed in 1959. The setback made the site impossible to develop. The project complied with the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Code, and the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines, with the exception of the 50-foot special setback. The motel, if constructed, was thought to generate approximately $1 million annually, in addition to Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenues. Relocating the entrance/exit to Hansen Way improved traffic along El Camino Real. The project met the high standards expected in Palo Alto. Council pre-screenings were held April 4, 2016 and May 1, 2017. In the pre-screenings, the Council preferred a text amendment to eliminate the special setback and generally liked the project; they suggested some enhancements though. He corrected his written comments to the Council by stating the special setback was presumably enacted to maintain a generous landscape buffer along Hansen Way. He shared quotes regarding the project from members of the ARB. He did not understand the impetus for the PTC conditioning removal of the setback. Rita Vrhel hoped Staff would require the applicant to utilize secant walls during construction to reduce the amount of groundwater extracted from the site and require some type of landscape mitigation. She assumed the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the hotel was 2.5-3.0. The Council should retain the 50-foot setback or, alternatively, require a minimum 25-foot setback. Herb Borock remarked that the applicant appeared to be requesting a change in zoning by removing the setback, which would make the property more valuable whether or not the project was constructed. Public Hearing closed at 7:41 P.M. Council Member DuBois inquired about the applicant's construction plan. Mr. Ah Sing related that a construction plan was not required at the current time; however, a condition of approval required a logistics plan. Council Member DuBois asked if a closure of El Camino Real during construction would be possible without a condition of approval. Mr. Lait explained that the Public Works Department and the Office of Transportation would review an applicant's request for lane closures or work on El Camino Real or Hansen Way. Council Member DuBois expressed concern about the possibility of El Camino Real being closed or partially closed. FINAL MINUTES Page 8 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Mr. Lait indicated Staff shared the concern. Council Member DuBois requested the number of trees the applicant had to plant as part of the project. Mr. Ah Sing promised to respond at a later time. Council Member DuBois inquired about the possibility of removing the pork chop but retaining a dedicated right turn-lane. Jodie Gerhardt, Planning Manager clarified that the purpose for removing the pork shop and the free right turn was to increase safety for pedestrians and to decrease traffic speeds at the intersection. Council Member DuBois asked about the path for pedestrians. Ms. Gerhardt advised that removal of the pork chop and the turn lane would create a shorter distance across the street for pedestrians and bicyclists and would slow traffic. Hansen Way was a bicycle boulevard, so bicyclists traveled that route. Council Member DuBois requested the purpose of and actions taken at the March 21, 2019 ARB or subcommittee meeting. Mr. Ah Sing reported a subcommittee of the ARB reviewed the color for the stucco siding, the spacing of trees in the landscape buffer along El Camino Real, the architectural form at the corners of the building, and the placement of mechanical screening on the roof so as to limit the apparent height of the screening. Council Member DuBois felt the screening covered a large amount of the roof. Mr. Ah Sing explained that the conceptual drawings were used to determine the best placement for rooftop equipment. The drawings were fairly accurate for indicating area. Council Member DuBois requested clarification of the process that allowed a subcommittee of the ARB to review plans. Mr. Ah Sing reported the ARB sometimes referred minor issues to the subcommittee for review. At times, the ARB referred minor issues to Staff for review. Council Member DuBois asked if an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the project. FINAL MINUTES Page 9 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Mr. Ah Sing responded no. The project caused impacts to certain topics, but the impacts could be mitigated to less than significant levels. An EIR was prepared if an impact could not be mitigated. Council Member DuBois asked if the site was part of any Superfund site and if Staff reviewed the need for vapor prevention. Mr. Ah Sing reported a condition of approval required a vapor barrier for construction workers. Council Member DuBois inquired whether testing indicated a need for a vapor barrier, following construction. Amie Ashton, Senior Project Manager advised that the site was not located within the plume area, but it was close to the plume area. Groundwater testing found low levels of toxic substances. Mitigation measures were necessary during construction because of the depth of the basement. Standard conditions of approval were included for ventilation, including a vapor barrier following construction. Mr. Lait added that Condition Number 9 pertained to toxic substances. Mr. Ah Sing indicated the site had 12 existing trees, five of which were protected. Seven trees were to be removed, and 20 trees were going to be planted on the site. Council Member Cormack remarked that she calculated six tree removals and 19 tree plantings. Council Member DuBois asked if the protected redwood trees were located along the rear. Mr. Ah Sing clarified that the redwood trees were located adjacent to the property. Council Member DuBois inquired whether a traffic analysis was performed to determine the impact of removing the turn lane. Mr. Ah Sing reported a Traffic Study evaluated removal of the turn lane. Based on the volume of traffic making the turn, intersection operations were not going to be significantly impacted. Council Member DuBois requested the impact at peak hours. FINAL MINUTES Page 10 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Ms. Ashton stated the project was estimated to generate 515 new daily vehicle trips including 32 new trips during the A.M. peak hour and 38 new trips during the P.M. peak hour. Council Member DuBois asked if the study included the issue of having to wait for the light to make the turn. Ms. Ashton indicated the Level of Service (LOS) was not evaluated at the intersection as it was not required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). There was a possibility of a delay of a couple of seconds if the traffic signal was red but that situation would not contribute to a LOS delay, as a whole. Mr. Ah Sing related that the Office of Transportation reviewed the traffic memo and approved the findings. Council Member DuBois requested the party who proposed the posts for the bike path. Mr. Ah Sing recalled that the applicant proposed them as part of the application process. Council Member DuBois asked Mr. Baltay to comment regarding the architectural findings, particularly mass, and the reason one member of the ARB opposed the project. Peter Baltay, Architectural Review Board, Vice Chair did not recall the reason for Mr. Hirsch's opposition to the project. Mr. Hirsch was new to the ARB and had not reviewed the project previously. Perhaps he had difficulty understanding the massing of the building. The project was a hotel and was allowed twice the typical FAR. The ARB worked hard to get the applicant to mitigate the appearance of mass through stepping the stories and changing the appearance of the sides of the building. The ARB was complimentary of the design as a whole. The applicant did as good a job as could be expected given the size of the building. Council Member DuBois recalled the Council's discussion of the project at the pre-screenings. He appreciated some of the architectural features, the step- backs, the underground parking, and the applicant's commitment to valet parking. Waiving the setback for a hotel or residential use was logical. He was not interested in generally removing the 50-foot setback. He expressed concern regarding the aggressiveness of the bike path and the posts and the removal of the pork chop. Few people biked or walked along El Camino Real, near the project site. During rush hour, traffic on El Camino Real FINAL MINUTES Page 11 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 almost stopped. Removing the turn and installing the posts seemed to increase the frontage of the hotel. MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Kou, to: A. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as set forth in the Record of Land Use Action; B. Introduce an Ordinance amending the Setback Map to eliminate the special setback for the subject property including recommended restrictions made by the Planning and Transportation Commission; C. Adopt the Record of Land Use Action approving the Architectural Review, based on findings and subject to conditions of approval as recommended by the Architectural Review Board with the added conditions: i. Standard condition for Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program and reporting; ii. Condition for participation in the Palo Alto Transportation Management Association (TMA); and D. Maintain the right turn lane in an appropriate design as determined by Staff Council Member DuBois noted most traffic was vehicular. The intersection was difficult because two traffic signals were located near each other. His primary concern was access to Stanford Research Park. He proposed eliminating the setback requirement for hotel and residential uses only. Council Member Kou asked if the impacts on air quality resulted from construction. Mr. Ah Sing replied yes. Council Member Kou inquired whether mitigation measures would ensure toxic substances were not released into groundwater and the air. Mr. Ah Sing answered yes. Council Member Kou asked if Staff had approached the applicant about utilizing green storm water infrastructure. FINAL MINUTES Page 12 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Mr. Lait reported all City reviewing agencies had reviewed the plans and offered conditions of approval. Planning Staff incorporated the conditions of approval into the project plans. When the applicant sought a building permit, Staff could review projects for compliance with applicable regulations. Any requirements mandated by the Municipal Code or contained in established City policies needed to be incorporated into the project through the review process. To his knowledge, the Public Works Department had not raised any issues with the project. Council Member Kou asked if the Council would review the project in the future. Mr. Lait responded no. If approved, the proposed Ordinance was going to return to the Council for a second reading. The project was going to be subjected to a more rigorous review process prior to a building permit being issued. Council Member Kou wished to ensure the project complied with all sustainability requirements. Mr. Lait clarified that draft policies would not apply to the project as the Council had not adopted them. Council Member Kou inquired about the Council not receiving the Traffic Study and the MND. Mr. Lait indicated the Staff Report contained links to the two documents in an effort not to overwhelm Council Members with attachments. Council Member Kou asked Staff to reconsider providing links. She inquired about upgrades to improve pedestrian safety at the crossing of Hansen Way. Mr. Lait reported the City Transportation Staff sought removal of the crosswalk between the sidewalk and the pork chop to eliminate potential conflicts among pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. The applicant had agreed to pay for the improvement. Council Member Kou had observed motorists making the right turn. Mr. Lait advised that the Council could remove the conditions of approval pertaining to the crosswalk. Council Member Kou asked if something less obtrusive than the proposed posts could be used in the bike path. Mr. Lait related that the Council could eliminate the bollards. FINAL MINUTES Page 13 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Council Member Kou asked if the bike path had one or two lanes. Mr. Ah Sing replied one. Vice Mayor Fine asked if the applicant agreed to the two additional conditions of approval. Mr. Patel responded yes. Vice Mayor Fine noted Hansen Way was a gateway to Stanford Research Park and a Class 2 bike lane. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan called for bike paths into Stanford Research Park. The pork chop detracted from the plaza area requested by the Council. City policy had identified pork chops as a safety issue for bicyclists and pedestrians. AMENDMENT: Vice Mayor Fine moved seconded by Council Member Kniss to remove Motion Part D. Mayor Filseth offered to split the Motion into Parts A, B, C and D. AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER MOTION SPLIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF VOTING Vice Mayor Fine reiterated the many reviews of the project and Staff's proposal to remove the pork chop to enhance bicycle and pedestrian safety. Mayor Filseth noted the applicant was not given an opportunity for rebuttal on public comments. Mr. Patel declined to speak further. Council Member Kniss requested the applicant comment regarding the right turn-lane. Mr. Patel reported he originally opposed removal of the turn lane and pork chop. With the suggestion for a plaza and café, the improvement was going to be nice. Pedestrian traffic on Hansen Way was not heavy. However, he expressed no opinion regarding removal of the pork chop. Council Member Kniss asked if the intersection had a traffic signal. Ed Shikada, City Manager responded yes. There were pedestrian and traffic signals. FINAL MINUTES Page 14 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Council Member Kniss felt the intersection was somewhat messy. She was pleased with the proposal for a plaza and requested clarification of the intersection for pedestrians to cross the street. Mr. Lait explained that the pork chop had a light signal that would be replaced with a new sidewalk. Pedestrians were not going to cross El Camino Real at the intersection of Hansen Way. Council Member Kniss remarked that an appropriate design for the right turn-lane was important. She inquired whether the applicant would encourage people to travel to the hotel via Uber and Lyft. Mr. Patel believed most of his guests were already utilizing Uber and Lyft. Council Member Kniss noted the high number of people utilizing Lyft and Uber while traveling. Council Member Cormack requested a PTC Commissioner comment regarding the PTC's suggestion to restrict the parcel to either a hotel or residential use. Mike Alcheck, Planning and Transportation Commission, Vice Chair advised that the PTC considered the intensity of the use. The PTC unanimously supported the project with no other vision in mind. Council Member Cormack inquired regarding the timing of the dedication of a portion of TOT revenue to infrastructure and construction of the two hotels on San Antonio Road. Mr. Lait indicated the dedication occurred prior to the San Antonio Road projects. Council Member Cormack asked if the Council should determine whether a portion of the TOT revenue from the project would be dedicated to the Infrastructure Plan. Mr. Shikada suggested that would be determined during the Budget process. Council Member Cormack inquired about signage for the coffee shop. Mr. Lait explained that the review did not include signage. Council Member Cormack was disappointed the plan did not include more native trees. She requested clarification of Part D of the Motion. FINAL MINUTES Page 15 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Council Member DuBois indicated Staff could design a right turn-lane with or without a pork chop. The policy direction to Staff was to maintain a free right turn. Council Member Cormack asked if anyone other than Transportation Staff had reviewed the turn lane. Mr. Lait advised that the Office of Transportation included the Safe Routes to School team. Any concerns about the turn lane were raised by Transportation Staff. Council Member Cormack inquired about the possibility of implementing temporary improvements to ensure traffic flowed as intended. Mr. Lait noted the applicant would pay for the improvement; efficiencies would be gained by constructing the improvement as part of the project construction. Caltrans had to approve improvements in the area. Mr. Shikada reported a temporary improvement would not be feasible. Staff was willing to work with Caltrans to identify an improvement that would maintain as much right-turn capacity as possible for motor vehicles. The turn lane appeared to be a free right-turn, but technically it was not. The policy and practice to remove pork chops made more sense if removed uniformly throughout the corridor. Staff could work with Caltrans to determine if right-turn striping could be maintained because there would be no parking along the El Camino Real frontage for the hotel. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to amend the Motion Part D to state “… capacity in an appropriate design as determined by Staff working with Caltrans.” Vice Mayor Fine reiterated that City policy was to remove pork chops. Mr. Shikada clarified that the pork chop would be removed. Council Member DuBois preferred to simulate the crosswalk change prior to implementing it to ensure there were no unintended consequences. Council Member Kniss suggested Staff utilize hay bales to simulate the improvement. Mr. Shikada agreed to do as much as possible to simulate the improvement, but Caltrans agreement was necessary. Council Member Kou asked if Lyft and Uber drop-offs and pick-ups on El Camino Real would be prohibited and enforced. FINAL MINUTES Page 16 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Ms. Gerhardt indicated stopping and parking along El Camino Real would be prohibited. If the Council wished, Staff was able to determine an appropriate distance to prohibit stopping along Hansen Way. Mr. Lait recalled that the hotel operator had agreed to work with TNC to identify a drop-off and pick-up location on Hansen Way, near the porte- cochere. Council Member Kou wanted to institute rules and enforcement. Mr. Shikada remarked that cities were working with Uber and Lyft to identify drop-off and pick-up locations. Staff planned on exploring opportunities to work with the applicant and TNC. Council Member Kou inquired about something to ensure the safety of bicyclists when motorists turned across the bike lane to enter the garage. Mr. Lait noted a parking lane was available on El Camino Real for vehicles to stop near the curb. However, parking and stopping was prohibited along the full length of El Camino Real. Mayor Filseth observed that an enforcement protocol to stop TNC from picking up and dropping off passengers in no-stopping zones was beyond the scope of the Motion. He asked how Staff would measure reductions in Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) trips. Mr. Lait understood the applicant would identify a series of mechanisms to reduce vehicle trip traffic. Staff was going to determine whether the mechanisms could reduce the number of trips and the applicant was going to submit an annual report for Staff to review. He thought the reduction may be based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates. MOTION TO BE VOTED ON AS WHOLE MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Kou to: A. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as set forth in the Record of Land Use Action; B. Introduce an Ordinance amending the Setback Map to eliminate the special setback for the subject property including recommended restrictions made by the Planning and Transportation Commission; FINAL MINUTES Page 17 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 C. Adopt the Record of Land Use Action approving the Architectural Review, based on findings and subject to conditions of approval as recommended by the Architectural Review Board with the added conditions: i. Standard condition for Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program and reporting; ii. Condition for participation in the Palo Alto Transportation Management Association (TMA); and D. Maintain the right turn capacity in an appropriate design as determined by Staff working with Caltrans. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 7-0 Council took a break at 8:45 P.M. to 8:57 P.M. 8. Ordinance Amending Section 18.18.120 (Grandfathered Uses and Facilities) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Adjust Regulations Pertaining to Noncomplying Facilities. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): This Ordinance is Within the Scope of the Comprehensive Plan. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Certified and Adopted on November 13, 2017 by Council Resolution Number 9720; the Ordinance is Also Exempt From Environmental Review Under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15305. Jonathan Lait, Director of Planning and Community Environment reported the proposed Ordinance was an effort to restore a provision of the Code that was inadvertently changed in 2016. The previous Code language allowed a Downtown property owner with a nonconforming building to convert one land use to another. The proposed Ordinance reestablished the longstanding provision and, based on Council direction, included a restriction on the conversion of a residential use to a nonresidential use in a noncompliant building. A noncompliant building did not meet the existing development standards. The policy shift reflected the Council's increased focus on housing production and preservation. Consistent with prior Council direction, the proposed Ordinance included a waiver whereby the City Council at a noticed public hearing could modify the provisions of the Zoning or Subdivision Code in response to an applicant's showing that strict application of the Codes would violate preemptive State or Federal law. If a property owner argued the proposed Ordinance or a combination of City regulations impermissibly burdened or violated preemptive State law, the property owner must present his case to the City Council before seeking judicial relief. If the Council was persuaded by the property owner's FINAL MINUTES Page 18 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 arguments, the City Council would have an opportunity to decide how to adjust land use policy to comply with State law while advancing the public interest to the maximum extent feasible. The waiver reduced the risk of a challenge based solely on the text of the Ordinance that would invalidate the Ordinance in all situations. With a waiver, a property owner who claimed he was harmed by the City's laws needed to establish a violation of his rights based on the facts of a specific development application. Without the waiver provision, a property owner was able to omit City Council review and seek judicial relief where the legal issues and proposed remedies were framed by the property owner and determined by a court. Public Hearing opened 9:01 P.M. Mary Sylvester remarked that the community should not pay the price for AJ Capital incorrectly interpreting the grandfathered facilities provision of the Zoning Code. A law was needed to prevent the conversion of residential properties into commercial spaces. The proposed waiver was problematic. Mayor Filseth clarified that the item did not pertain to the Hotel President specifically. Rita Vrhel indicated many people in the community felt the item directly concerned the Hotel President. The community was outraged over the actions of AJ Capital. The proposed waiver was a horrible idea. Winter Dellenbach appreciated the explanation of the proposed waiver. She offered revisions to the proposed Ordinance and questioned steps in the process. Carol Kiparsky urged the Council to retain the 2016 regulation and to eliminate any waivers or exemptions that enabled AJ Capital to evict residents of the Hotel President. Jeff Levinsky suggested: 1) the Council ensure tenants receive proper notice from the building owner who is seeking a waiver; 2) that there be an adoption of an Ordinance to prevent residential uses from being converted into commercial use buildings; and 3) that there be direction to Staff to enforce existing laws that capped commercial space in individual buildings. Herb Borock believed the agenda description violated the Brown Act and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff had provided no substantial evidence to support their conclusory statements regarding properties. The proposal permitting nonresidential uses to convert to other nonresidential uses violated the goals and policies of the Comprehensive FINAL MINUTES Page 19 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Plan. The Council was not able to evaluate whether a municipal Ordinance violated a State or Federal law. Robert Moss indicated the Council could amortize a noncompliant property over a number of years and then require the structure to be demolished. A requirement for a structure to comply with zoning or provide a use that fulfilled City requirements was reasonable. He thought the proposed wavier could be more trouble than value. Joe Hirsch questioned whether language in the proposed Ordinance and waiver strengthened or weakened the City's prohibition against converting residential uses to nonresidential uses. Public Hearing closed at 9:23 P.M. Vice Mayor Fine inquired whether the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) proposed any substantial changes other than the request to remove the waiver. Mike Alcheck, Planning and Transportation Commission, Vice Chair advised that the PTC did not understand the waiver process and the need to utilize a waiver process. They struggled with placing the Council in a position to determine whether or not an applicant's evidence was sufficient to support a legal challenge to the Ordinance. There was strong support among the PTC to incorporate some effort to protect housing. Vice Mayor Fine stated there was a legitimate case for grandfathering nonconforming buildings. The Council and community had a policy interest in preventing the conversion of residential uses to other uses. The Staff Report provided reasons for the importance of the waiver. A series of errors or mistakes had caused problems in the Zoning Code. The waiver process allowed the Council to limit the discussion of any potential litigation to the specific issue. He inquired whether the waiver strengthened or weakened the Council's ability to defend the grandfathering law. Terence Howzell, Chief Assistant City Attorney reported the waiver strengthened the Council's ability to defend the proposed Ordinance for the reasons set forth in the Staff Report. The City Attorney's Office sent the Council a confidential communication with additional information concerning the issues contained in the Staff Report. Vice Mayor Fine requested the noticing requirements if a property owner wanted to request a waiver. FINAL MINUTES Page 20 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Mr. Lait indicated Staff would require a notice be sent to all residents and property owners located within 600 feet of the subject property, including the subject property. Vice Mayor Fine inquired about the third-party review of the waiver. Mr. Lait explained that the applicant would pay for any third-party review of the application or request. Vice Mayor Fine asked if the third-party review was required or could be requested. Mr. Lait clarified that if Staff needed additional analysis or materials for a peer review, Staff would retain a consultant and the applicant would pay for the consultant. This was the usual process for cost recovery projects. Vice Mayor Fine believed grandfathering should be allowed Downtown. The waiver strengthened the policy to preserve the conversion of residential uses to other uses. MOTION: Vice Mayor Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to adopt on first reading an Ordinance amending Section 18.18.120 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to allow non-complying (grandfathered) facilities in the Commercial Downtown zoning district to convert an existing use to another permitted use, except for a conversion from residential uses to non- residential uses. Vice Mayor Fine was convinced Staff had corrected the errors and made the Council's position defensible. Council Member Kniss sought Staff's reassurance that no one deliberately made the error. Mr. Lait reported in 2015 Staff drafted an omnibus set of amendments to the Zoning Code in an effort to align provisions of the Zoning Code with evolving City policy and to clean up some administrative changes. After reviewing the administrative record and versions of the Zoning Code, Staff believed some language was copied and pasted into the wrong section. Mr. Howzell added that Staff had confessed to making a mistake. After investigating the issues, Staff reached the conclusion that a mistake was made. Council Member Kniss reiterated that Staff made an honest mistake. The most important sentence was "the City would be a represented party but not likely in a decision-making role." FINAL MINUTES Page 21 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Council Member Kou recalled an At-Places Memo presented to the Council for the December, 2018 discussion of this item. She appreciated the PTC requesting legal assistance with reviewing the proposed Ordinance and waiver. The Council was rushing a decision that had consequences. The Council should discuss the issues in Closed Session. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Kou moved, seconded by Council Member XX to continue this item to a date uncertain and schedule a Closed Session to discuss the implications of this item. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND Council Member Cormack believed the Staff Report explained the rationale for resolving the issues. The waiver would recognize the complexity of the interactions among Ordinances. Council Member Kou noted a mistake in the title of the Staff Report. The proposed Ordinance did not define legal noncomplying. She requested the rationale for removing grandfathered when it had been defined. Mr. Lait explained that the change reflected a more general, gender-neutral approach toward regulations. Council Member Kou asked if it would create a loophole or misunderstanding. Mr. Lait did not believe so. Grandfathering, grandparenting, noncomplying, and nonconforming shared a similar meaning. Council Member Kou preferred the term grandfathering as it was consistent with the Municipal Code. Mr. Lait reported Code Section 18.18.120 contained a parenthetical reference to “grandfathered”. Council Member Kou asked if grandfathering would remain. Mr. Lait clarified that the existing language referring to grandfathering would not be changed. Council Member Kou questioned whether "area" in Section 18.18.120(b)(2)(F) should be "square footage." Mr. Lait advised that "area" referred to gross floor area, which was defined in the Code. FINAL MINUTES Page 22 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion “Amend the Ordinance Section 18.18.120 b. 2. F. to state ‘… shall not be converted to a non- residential land use or reduced in gross floor area or number of units.’” Council Member Kou asked if an applicant would be unable to assert new or expanded legal arguments at a court hearing. Mr. Lait related that providing information so that the case could be presented to the City Council would be in the applicant's interest. Council Member Kou referred to a statement in the Staff Report that the property owner would present all its claims and supporting evidence to the City Council first. Section 18.18.120(b)(2)(F) seemed to require the applicant to provide a statement of its position with all supporting documentary evidence. She inquired whether an applicant would be unable to assert new or expanded legal arguments that it had not put into its statement to the Council at a court hearing. Mr. Howzell reported the proposed Ordinance should be revised to require a broader presentation of the property owner's case. If the matter proceeded to litigation, the provision would not necessarily preclude the applicant from bringing new claims. Council Member DuBois asked if the language should state "all claims" rather than "statement of position." Mr. Howzell replied yes. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion “Amend the Ordinance Section 18.18.120 b. 2. F to state ‘… shall submit a statement of its position with all claims and all supporting documentary evidence at the time … .’” Council Member Kou asked if the City would select the third-party peer reviewer. Mr. Lait advised that the City usually selected the consultant. Council Member DuBois inquired about a legal difference between the terms "waive" and "adjust." Mr. Lait explained that the City Council could identify a development standard in the Zoning Code or in the Subdivision Ordinance that it thought was in the public's interest to waive completely or adjust/modify the standard. FINAL MINUTES Page 23 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 Council Member DuBois asked if it should be related to the issue in question. Mr. Howzell advised that there was a presumption that the Council would respond directly to the claims and statement position in fashioning the action it took. The language presumed the Council would not make adjustments or waivers that were not necessarily consistent with the issue before it. Mayor Filseth inquired whether the language granted the Council any powers it didn't already have. Mr. Howzell answered no. Council Member DuBois interpreted the waiver process as being subject to Council review only. Mr. Howzell did not believe the provision gave the Council any more authority than it otherwise had. The Council's authority was tethered to a specific framework and findings. Council Member DuBois asked if the Council could adjust rather than waive a provision. Mr. Howzell responded yes. Council Member DuBois asked if legal noncomplying was defined. Mr. Howzell indicated the provision defined legal noncomplying. Mr. Lait added that the Code definition of facility referred to noncomplying, legal noncomplying, grandfathered, and grandparented. Council Member DuBois inquired whether legal noncomplying buildings under the Retail Conservation Ordinance would be covered by the proposed Ordinance. Mr. Lait replied no. The Retail Conservation Ordinance applied to noncomplying uses. The proposed Ordinance applied to noncomplying structures. MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Vice Mayor Fine moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to adopt on first reading an Ordinance amending Section 18.18.120 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to allow non-complying (grandfathered) facilities in the Commercial Downtown zoning district to convert an existing use to another permitted use, except for a conversion from residential uses to non-residential uses, including the following changes: FINAL MINUTES Page 24 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes: 04/01/2019 A. Amend the Ordinance Section 18.18.120 b. 2. F. to state “… shall not be converted to a non-residential land use or reduced in gross floor area or number of units.” B. Amend the Ordinance Section 18.18.120 b. 2. F to state “… shall submit a statement of its position with all claims and all supporting documentary evidence at the time … .” MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 6-1 Kou no State/Federal Legislation Update/Action None. Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Council Member Cormack reported she would hold a community meeting on April 10, 2019 at Mitchell Park Library to talk about City projects. Council Member Kou advised that the Caltrain Local Policy Makers Group heard a presentation of the Caltrain Business Plan. She shared information contained in the Business Plan and presentation. Council Member Kniss indicated she attended a conference sponsored by Water Now Alliance and related information she learned at the conference. Ed Shikada, City Manager offered to distribute written versions of Council Member comments. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 10:12 P.M.