HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-04-11 City Council Summary Minutes Regular Meeting April 11, 1994 1. Resolution Expressing Appreciation to John Willis Leslie Upon His Retirement ............................ 72-388 2. A Play that Recreates the City's Incorporation Election 72-388 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ........................................ 72-388 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 7, 1994 ....................... 72-388 3. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and Hot Line Construction for Installation of Primary, Secondary and Street Light Cables for Underground District 34 ....... 72-389 4. The Finance Committee Recommends Approval of a Budget Amendment Ordinance to Adjust Budgeted Revenues and Expenditures in Accordance with Recommendations in the Midyear Report ........................................ 72-389 5. Resolution Changing the Name of a City Alley to Centennial Walk ....................................... 72-389 6. Ordinance Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1993-94 to Provide an Additional Appropriation for Capital Improvement Project No. 18812, `Information Systems Development' .......................................... 72-389 7. The Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board Recommend Approval of an Application by Palo Alto Hills Golf and Country Club for Conditional Use Permit (Recreation Use) and Site and Design Review for the property located at 3000 Alexis Drive ................. 72-390 8. Amendment No. 1 to Contract C4045004 between the City of Palo Alto and Palo Alto Housing Corporation to Increase the Amount of Available Compensation by $4,780 to $92,780 ............................................ 72-404 9. Report from Palo Alto Community Child Care Strategic Planning Committee re Long-Term Goals and Status of Child Development Inc. Contract ....................... 72-405 10. Amendment No. 1 to Promissory Note between the City of
04/11/94 72-386
Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Community Child Care, Inc. for Extension of Loan Repayment ....................... 72-411 COUNCIL COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS ............. 72-413 ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m. .......... 72-413
04/11/94 72-387
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 7:15 p.m. PRESENT: Andersen, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Simitian, Wheeler SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 1. Resolution Expressing Appreciation to John Willis Leslie Upon His Retirement MOTION: Vice Mayor Simitian moved, seconded by Kniss, to approve the Resolution. Resolution 7302 entitled "Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to John Willis Leslie Upon His Retirement" MOTION PASSED 9-0. Battalion Chief John Willis Leslie thanked the City for the many opportunities afforded him. Acting Fire Chief Ruben Grijalva thanked Mr. Leslie for his many years of service and for his compassion and humor. Council Member Fazzino said Mr. Leslie epitomized superb community service, and he helped to make the City's Fire Department one of the best in the state. 2. A Play that Recreates the City's Incorporation Election Bob French, 526 Seneca Street, explained the history of the play that he wrote which recreated the City's Incorporation Election. The City Council and staff participated in a play (script on file in the City Clerk's Office). ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Edmund Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding "Who runs this town?" (letter on file in the City Clerk's Office). Margaret Ash, 446 Forest Avenue, No. 6, spoke regarding homelessness. Herb Borock, 2731 Byron Street, spoke regarding: 1) Foothills Park entrance requirements and 2) Midtown property for sale. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 7, 1994 MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Schneider, to approve the Minutes of March 7, 1994, as corrected. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Kniss absent. CONSENT CALENDAR
04/11/94 72-388
MOTION: Council Member Wheeler moved, seconded by McCown, to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 3 - 5. 3. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and Hot Line Construc-tion for Installation of Primary, Secondary and Street Light Cables for Underground District 34; change orders not to exceed $16,000 4. The Finance Committee recommends to the City Council approval of a Budget Amendment Ordinance to Adjust Budgeted Revenues and Expenditures in Accordance with Recommendations in the Midyear Report Ordinance 4211 entitled "Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for Fiscal Year 1993-94 to Adjust Budgeted Revenues and Expenditures in Accordance with Recommendations in the Midyear Report 5. Resolution 7303 entitled "Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Changing the Name of a City Alley to Centennial Walk" MOTION PASSED 8-0, Kniss absent. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 6. Ordinance Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1993-94 to Provide an Additional Appropriation for Capital Improvement Project No. 18812, `Information Systems Development' (contin-ued from 4/4/94) Council Member Fazzino said he would not participate in the item because of his employment with Hewlett-Packard. Senior Systems Analyst Jeremy Hoptowit said the item before the Council requested advance funding for the 1994-95 Information Systems Development capital project to purchase a new UNIX system. The immediate purchase of the system and the associated conversion of the City's financial system to the UNIX environment were necessary for the following reasons: (1) the Mission Driven Budget (MDB) would require massive changes in the City's financial system and there was a relatively short time period to program the changes; and (2) the original MDB time line did not provide for the acquisition of a third-party payroll system which had to be tightly integrated with the City's financial system. MOTION: Council Member Andersen moved, seconded by McCown, to approve the Budget Amendment Ordinance in the amount of $160,500 to purchase the new UNIX hardware and software to allow implementation of Mission Driven Budgeting by July 1, 1995. Of the $160,500, 45 percent or $72,225 would be reimbursed from the Enterprise Funds. Ordinance 4212 entitled "Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1993-94
04/11/94 72-389
to Provide an Additional Appropriation for Capital Improvement Project No. 18812, `Information Systems Development'" MOTION PASSED 7-0, Fazzino "not participating," Kniss absent. 7. The Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board Recommend Approval of an Application by Palo Alto Hills Golf and Country Club for Conditional Use Permit (Recreation Use) and Site and Design Review for the property located at 3000 Alexis Drive (continued from 3/21/94) (Public Hearing closed) Vice Mayor Simitian noted the item had been continued from March 21, 1994, and the public hearing was closed. He and Council Member Schneider were absent from that meeting but had since viewed the videotape in its entirety. Therefore, under the rules of the City, they were eligible to participate that evening. City Manager June Fleming said she would not participate in the item because of the proximity of her home to the subject property. Vice Mayor Simitian said people had been overlooked at the March 21, 1994, meeting who had asked to participate, and a communication from the Town of Los Altos Hills had been received. He asked the City Attorney to comment on that evening's process. City Attorney Ariel Calonne referred to the letter submitted from the Town of Los Altos Hills. He said that an opportunity to speak should be given to Dr. Ken Kato and Mrs. Beverly Nelson. Vice Mayor Simitian clarified that other members of the audience would not be allowed to speak since the public hearing had been closed. Don Klages would be allowed a rebuttal limited to the comments which were introduced that evening. Planner Robert Schubert said the Planning Commission and Architec-tural Review Board (ARB) recommended approval of the proposed expansion of the Palo Alto Hills Golf and Country Club (the Club) which included a 4,812-square-foot addition to the clubhouse, as well as an expanded parking lot. He said the plan which was presented to the Planning Commission was posted on the left, and a revised plan which was presented to the ARB was posted on the right. The revised plan satisfied Conditions A.1. through A.8. on page 5 of the staff report (CMR:223:94). The only items left which needed to be returned to the ARB were itemized in Condition No. 9 on page 6. He referred to the letter from the Town of Los Altos Hills which summarized the Town Council's comments on the project from its meeting of April 6, 1994. The letter stated that the Council's main concern was the impact of traffic on Page Mill Road and its side roads. The Los Altos Hills Council requested that Palo Alto add a condition of approval requiring some type of extensive traffic monitoring of the existing club and the completed project. The intent of the condition would be to allow the City and the Town to review whether additional traffic mitigation measures would be needed in the future. At the Palo
04/11/94 72-390
Alto City Council meeting of March 21, 1994, staff was requested to respond to three questions: 1) what conditions of approval existed for country clubs in other jurisdictions, 2) what the possibility was of using the parking lot on Page Mill Road to park buses that went to the Club, and 3) what the standard conditions were of approval regarding construction. He said Sharon Heights Golf and Country Club in Menlo Park and Los Altos Golf and Country Club in the unincorporated part of the county were the only two clubs in the area with similar activities and memberships as the Club. Neither of those clubs had conditions of approval which restricted the operational aspects of the club such as the size and number of events. Staff had contacted Caltrans which indicated that the parking lot spaces on Page Mill Road were for commuters only and buses would be cited by the California Highway Patrol if parked in the lot. He pointed out that projects in the foothills typically had conditions of approval related to grading activities and tree production. Since the Club was a developed site, conditions regarding grading were unnecessary. Tree protection standard conditions would be included in the landscape plan required for the final ARB review prior to issuance of a building permit. Other conditions could be added during the final review by the ARB. Finally, he made three corrections to the staff report. On page 1 of the staff report (CMR:223:94), the first sentence under Background should read, "there is a total of 55 additional parking spaces." On page 4 under Findings for Site and Design Approval, the last sentence in Finding No. 1 should be replaced with "The lowered height of the roof and chimney will minimize impacts on scenic views from adjacent residences." On page 7 under Ongoing, Condition D.2. should read "The applicant shall continue to maintain the traffic journal, investigate and respond to all neighbor complaints regarding parking or other matters, and limit special events of more than 350 persons to no more than 12 in one calendar year." He concluded with the recommendation that Council adopt the negative declaration and approve the use permit and site design application. Council Member McCown asked if the environmental analysis included any base line data of current traffic counts or estimated traffic with the improvement that would provide a base for monitoring an increase or change. Mr. Schubert said a traffic study had been submitted which documented the amount of traffic coming out of the clubhouse. He said a supplemental study had been received that day which included actual traffic counts on Page Mill Road. Council Member McCown asked the City Attorney if there were no condition which involved some type of monitoring of traffic, whether the City would be able to reopen the use permit to consider additional mitigation if evidence were presented in the future that traffic had worsened. Mr. Calonne said yes. The zoning administrator could notice a hearing to modify the conditional use permit when there was evidence of health and safety concerns. Traffic impacts were such concerns. He clarified for the record that while a study had been
04/11/94 72-391
submitted to the staff, it was not specifically in the record and before the Council that evening. Vice Mayor Simitian clarified the Council was being asked to approve a use permit and a site and design application. Mr. Calonne replied that was correct. Vice Mayor Simitian asked for clarification on which actions gave rise to the requirement for use permit approval, which actions gave rise to the request for site and design approval, and what the requirements were for standards against which those approvals were to be measured. Manager of Planning Projects James Gilliland said the use permit conditions were as a country club or facility of a private nature in the open space district; the operations of that were subject to a use permit which allowed for the addition of conditions for that site and design and specifically as it related to the facility's improvement and what had been allowed by the use permit. Vice Mayor Simitian asked whether staff would have looked for any approvals of the use permit if the applicant had not come forward at that time for a request of expanded use. Mr. Gilliland said no. The expanded use had to occur because of the use permit. Mr. Calonne said some findings required for approval of the conditional use permit came from the OS zoning district regulations in the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC), and the other findings were the standard use permit findings. Specifically, the OS district called for findings that showed adequate justification that the proposed use would be consistent and compatible with the intent and purpose of that chapter of the zoning ordinance and that the number of employees and resident population approximated that which would result from a principal permitted use. With the conditional use permit ordinance, the PAMC required the Council to find that the proposed use at the proposed location would not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience. Secondly, the use permit must be supported by a finding that the proposed use would be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of the zoning ordinance. With respect to site and design, PAMC findings called for meeting the following objectives: assurance that the construction and operation of the use would be in an orderly, harmonious, and compatible manner with the existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites; assurance of the desirability of investment or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities or other authorized occupations in the same or adjacent areas; assurance that sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance would be observed; and assurance of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan.
04/11/94 72-392
Vice Mayor Simitian clarified that with eight Council Members present, it would take a five-member majority to take any action on either item that evening. Mr. Calonne replied yes. Council Member Andersen asked staff to comment on Condition C.6. which was added at the Planning Commission level and stated "the project landscape architect shall provide construction administra-tion and submit a letter to the Planning Division indicating whether the new landscaping is installed according to plan." He noted correspondence had been received which said that was out of the ordinary and questioned whether it would be an effective way of determining it. Mr. Calonne said he understood that Mayor Kniss had received correspondence on the matter since the close of the public hearing. His response to Council Member Andersen was if the concern arose out of correspondence following the public hearing, he would not consider that issue. Council Member Andersen appreciated the clarification but indicated it had been a concern to him before the item was brought to his attention in the correspondence. Mr. Gilliland indicated it was a condition that was added at the Planning Commission level. Landscape architects or architects had not been asked extensively in the past to certify or provide records that landscaping had been installed per the plans as submitted. However, it did work and placed the onus on the landscape architect to certify the work in accordance to the plans. Many cities had used that method, especially smaller cities with fewer inspectors. Planning Commissioner Jon Schink added the intent was for a more stringent requirement, not a relaxing of rules. The City would still count the number of trees and shrubs that were installed, but it was important to know that the landscaping was installed correctly. The ordinance compliance person would have difficulty understanding if the tree had been planted too deep or too high. Therefore, it seemed reasonable to require the landscape architect to ensure the job was done correctly. Council Member Andersen asked what benefits would be derived for the neighborhood or whether there would be a reduction in cars if buses were located on the upper parking lot to reduce visibility from Alexis Drive. He asked if it would produce undue difficulties in terms of bus mobility on the upper level if that were a condition. Mr. Schubert said no. If the buses were parked on site, parking spaces would not be needed for those who came on buses and thus would have no impact on parking. Council Member Rosenbaum noted Council received a letter from John Slenz from Los Altos Hills which pointed out the Club was a for-
04/11/94 72-393
profit organization and asked whether a limitation could be imposed as a condition on the percentage of commercial revenue to total revenue. Mr. Calonne asked what the objective was that would be in relation to the issues that were in the record thus far. Council Member Rosenbaum said it would limit the amount of commercial activity and the associated noise, traffic, and number of events. Mr. Calonne clarified the assumption was there would be an increase in traffic as a consequence to the commercial activity. He said there was a nexus between that type of condition and the impact being mitigated; therefore that type of condition was theoretically possible. He was not prepared to comment on how practical it would be. Vice Mayor Simitian declared the Public Hearing reopened for the limited purpose as previously stated. Ken Kato, 2995 Alexis Drive, said he lived directly across from the Club. He built his home in 1975 fully aware of the traffic, activity, and noise of the Club. He said the Club was a landmark for all of Palo Alto. Granted, it was a private club, but it elicited a feeling of pride and excellence. It was important for the Club to update and improve its facilities. It would enhance the image of Palo Alto as a truly fine place to live. He believed the improvements would increase the value of the homes in the neighborhood. His children grew up using the Club as an extension of their home. One son worked as a busboy, on the driving range, cleaning golf clubs in the locker room, and played on the Gunn High School Golf Team. A daughter excelled on the swim team. The Club had been a good neighbor and friend. His local dental society had used the club for numerous meetings. Noise, litter, debris, and traffic were a great concern. Noise from the rain gutter and frogs from the back of their property bothered them more. He was not bothered by traffic sounds even though his bedroom was on the second floor directly across from the parking lot. His mailbox had been completely knocked down three times; however, none was attributed to traffic from the Club. He stressed that only a few neighbors had complained, even though the San Francisco Chronicle made it appear that Palo Alto residents were against the project. He had a petition of 68 persons of the neighborhood which validated that the majority of homeowners was supportive of the Club's renovation plans. He was happy and proud to live in Palo Alto directly across from the Club. Beverly Nelson, 3030 Country Club Court, read Jim Nelson's letter into the record. The letter stated that Mr. Nelson had been a neighbor of the Club since 1980. He said the Club had been a good neighbor and was an important asset to the Palo Alto Hills community, the City of Palo Alto, and surrounding communities. The Club had gone out of its way to listen to the concerns of the neighbors and others and had made responsive changes resulting in the current proposal. He had attended all five neighborhood
04/11/94 72-394
meetings. The Club had attempted to reach a compromise with the neighbors, the ARB, and the Planning Commission. There was strong support in the neighborhood for the current proposal, as well as a vocal minority who had opposed every action the Club had proposed. He believed the vocal opponents should not be able to block the expansion proposal given the effort and open process which had been sponsored and supported by the Club. The Club was an important asset to the neighborhood and the community. He was concerned that the Club needed to be improved in order to be a modern, up-to-date operation to be competitive and financially healthy. It was old and tired and in need of improvement. The Club's board had tried to improve the Club without success. The proposed improvements would upgrade the facilities and image of the Club significantly. If the improvements were not made, property values could be substantially affected, as well as its financial strength. The clubhouse was set several hundred feet from the neighbors and the street. He did not believe the proposed improvements would be detrimental to the surrounding aesthetics of the neighborhood but would, in the final analysis, enhance property values. He supported the proposed improvements and that the spine was an important part of the proposal. The facade, roof, and spine would greatly enhance the appearance of the Club and would improve the overall feeling when a person was inside the facility. The improvements were long overdue and significant from a facility beautification and landscape point of view. He and his wife were strong supporters of the proposal, along with most neighbors. Don Klages, President, Board of Directors of the Palo Alto Hills Golf and Country Club, said with respect to the letter from the Town of Los Altos Hills which raised concerns regarding traffic, he believed the issue had been well documented that evening when the traffic studies were entered into the record. He and his group were available to answer any questions regarding profitability of the Club or other issues. Vice Mayor Simitian declared the Public Hearing closed. Vice Mayor Simitian clarified for Sal Giovannotto that the public hearing had been closed at the March 21, 1994, meeting. The reason the two speakers were allowed to speak that evening was that they were accidentally overlooked at the previous meeting. The City Attorney had advised, in the interest of fairness, to allow them an opportunity to speak. Council Member Rosenbaum asked representatives of the Club, with respect to corporate for-profit status versus nonprofit status, what was meant by nonprofit corporations only being allowed 15 percent of its total income coming from commercial activity. He asked what percentage the Club had and if it would be a problem if a limit were imposed on the percentage of commercial activity. Lynn Nelson, General Manager, Palo Alto Hills Golf and Country Club, said most clubs were not incorporated and had a tax-exempt status. To maintain that status, they were limited to a total of 15 percent of total revenue coming from non-member related
04/11/94 72-395
sources. If there were a banquet of 300 people for a member's daughter, it would be considered member revenue even though it was a banquet. The Club was incorporated for profit and paid taxes. In comparing revenue among the Club, Los Altos Hills, and Sharon Heights, there was approximately $150,000 separating the three. Council Member Rosenbaum asked if the nonprofit, tax-exempt organizations maintained the 15 percent limitation. Ms. Nelson said yes, and it was 15 percent of the total revenue which included dues, golf revenue, etc. Council Member Rosenbaum asked what the Club's percentage was. Ms. Nelson said the accounting was a little different. There was a per member count or a banquet sale. A member of the club who had a daughter's reception would fall into banquet sales. Sixty to sixty-five percent of total revenues came from banquet sales. Council Member Rosenbaum asked what the non-member commercial activity of the Club was, relative to the manner a tax-exempt country club did its books. Ms. Nelson said the operations were very similar. A member of Sharon Heights who was sponsoring an event had to fill out a form that accompanied the banquet proceeds in case of an Internal Revenue Service audit. It is referred to as a 507(C) club. Council Member Rosenbaum said that Ms. Nelson had indicated earlier that it was not the intent of the expansion to increase the amount of commercial member activity. He asked if there would be any objection to a condition which would limit activity to the average of the last few years. Ms. Nelson said whatever was offered as a condition would be reviewed. Council Member McCown asked whether a condition of having buses park in the upper parking lot would present any problems to the Club. Mr. Klages said no. The reason it was put in was because the Planning Commission thought it was better to have buses rather than 50 or 60 cars which was not a problem. As a club member, there were only 10 buses last year, 7 buses the previous year, and 14 buses the year before. Council Member McCown said on page 7 of the staff report (CMR:223:94), it noted one condition was to continue maintenance of the traffic journal. A previous condition said records would be kept on the numbers of people attending events in order to monitor the condition of no more than 12 events with more than 350 people. She asked if it would be difficult to add monitoring the level of buses. Ms. Nelson replied it could be done.
04/11/94 72-396
Council Member Huber recalled one of the complaints about buses was that they were left running. He asked if a condition could be added to turn them off. Mr. Klages said yes. MOTION: Council Member McCown moved, seconded by Wheeler, to adopt the negative declaration and approve the Conditional Use Permit and Site and Design Application, based on the findings and conditions as amended by staff: FINDINGS Findings for Conditional Use Permit: 1. The proposed use at the proposed location will not be detri-mental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience, in that the project as conditioned will supply all incrementally required parking on-site, and improve the access site distance for the main driveway, reducing the potential for accidents caused by poor driver visibility. Landscaping will be used to soften and enhance the visual impacts of the addition as well as provide additional screening along Alexis Drive. 2. The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accordance with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, in that a country club and golf course is a conditionally permitted use in the OS zoning district. As conditioned, the project will not cause a significant increase in the intensity of use above current levels, and will not operate contrary to the first goal of the Housing Element, which protects the charac-ter and qualities of existing single-family residential neighborhoods. In addition, as documented in the negative declaration, the project as conditioned will not create significant environmental impacts, including traffic or visual impacts. Findings for Site and Design Approval 1. The proposed use will be constructed and operated in a manner that will be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites when the project has been designed to minimize impacts and is subject to review by the ARB. The lowered height of roof and chimney will minimize the impacts on scenic views from adjacent residences. 2. The proposed use will not affect the desirability of invest-ment or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities, or other authorized occupations, in the same or adjacent areas in that the project is a limited expansion of an existing facility.
04/11/94 72-397
3. The proposed use will not affect the sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance in that the project has been assessed in conformance with CEQA Guidelines and has been designed to be compatible with native vegetation. 4. The proposed use will be in accord with the Palo Alto Compre-hensive Plan in that the definition for "Open-Space, Con-trolled Development" allows some development, providing that the open space amenities are retained. CONDITIONS A. Prior to Submission for a Building Permit 1. The applicant shall redesign the chimney and central roof "spine" element to minimize the impact on scenic views from adjacent residences. These changes would be subject to ARB review and approval. 2. The applicant shall remove the three parking spaces along the easternmost parking aisle to provide sufficient room for two-way traffic. 3. The applicant shall provide some additional bicycle parking in a convenient location. The number of spaces and location shall be subject to review and approval of the City's Transportation Division, prior to ARB review. 4. The applicant shall revise the landscaping plan to include only low groundcover (less than six inches) within the sight line drawn on Attachment 13. This sight line is to ensure that exiting drivers can see an approaching southbound vehicle on Alexis Drive at least 300 feet away. Visibility from this distance will ensure adequate time for the exiting vehicle to accelerate, cross the southbound traffic lane and turn left into the northbound lane. 5. The new club ID sign shall be relocated to the outside of the sight distance line shown in Attachment 13 and is subject to review and approval by the ARB. 6. The dirt berm within the sight distance line shown in Attachment 13 shall be lowered by about six inches to ensure the 300 foot driver sight line is maintained. 7. The applicant shall demonstrate how the remaining unimproved roof equipment will be treated to improve the visual appearance, subject to review and ARB approval. 8. The applicant shall provide a private outdoor area for use by on-site employees, subject to ARB review and
04/11/94 72-398
approval. Such area shall be located so that it cannot be viewed by adjacent residences. The applicant shall also improve the appearance of the worker housing roof, either by re-asphalting the roof or using some other type of roofing material to make it more attractive when viewed from neighbors living above the club. 9. The following shall be submitted for review and approval by the ARB: a. a material and color board; b. a descriptive sign submittal including egress from the site; c. complete landscape plan; d. window details for second floor; e. refinement of window color panel on first floor in front of the bathroom on right of entry; f. detail of second story windows; g. correct the chimney height to as low and narrow as possible and as the code allows; h. landscape reserve for five cars; i. the Transportation Division needs to review the median strip at exiting. Further study is required for access of buses and trucks; j. further refinement of balcony to reduce noise; k. further study of facade front elements and hip roof behind entry prow and how it transitions to the spine; l. proposal for visual mitigation and reducing impacts of roof equipment. At minimum, paint the equipment to reduce bright elements; m. exiting signs to direct users to Page Mill Road; n. further study of landscaping and removal of barbed wire fence along the Alexis frontage and for the extent of the property; o. site lighting including redirecting pool lights. B. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit None C. Prior to Occupancy
04/11/94 72-399
1. The applicant shall retain the STOP sign on the egress lane of the site access drive. 2. The applicant shall provide adequate exterior lighting to ensure pedestrian safety and building security. All entrances should be lighted with a minimum 60 watts of photocell lighting. Light fixtures should be placed high enough to be vandal resistant and should be protected by a wire or plastic cover. Other activity areas such as walkways and the parking lot should be lighted with a minimum of 1/2 footcandle. 3. The applicant shall modify the existing exterior lighting on the clubhouse roof and near the pool area so that it does not shine in the windows of adjacent neighbors' homes, subject to review and approval by the ARB. 4. The applicant shall install a fully automatic fire sprinkler system and fire extinguishers throughout the clubhouse building. 5. The applicant shall provide emergency lighting and signage, per Fire Department regulations, throughout the clubhouse structure. 6. The project landscape architect shall provide construc-tion administration and submit a letter to the Planning Division indicating whether the new landscaping is installed according to plan. D. Ongoing 1. The applicant shall maintain the hedges to the right of an exiting driver to the height identified in Attachment 14. This is to ensure that the 300 foot driver sight line is maintained, subject to ongoing review by the City's Code Enforcement Officer. 2. The applicant shall continue to maintain the traffic journal, investigate and respond to all neighbor com-plaints regarding parking or other matters and limit special events of more than 350 persons to no more than 12 in one calendar year. The applicant shall submit the projected special event calendar for each upcoming year to the Zoning Administrator and shall continue to keep records of the number of persons attending, in order to monitor compliance with this condition. The traffic journal and a record of any neighbor complaints shall be made available for review by the Zoning Administrator on an as requested basis. Council Member McCown said when the item came before the Planning Commission four years ago, it was a very different application. The application had been responsive to previous concerns, as well
04/11/94 72-400
as being responsive to concerns raised that evening. A number of changes had been made since its original introduction through the Planning Commission, ARB, and the Club processes which indicated a positive desire to make it compatible with the OS district. She said it was difficult to have that type of use in a neighborhood even though it was a longstanding use. There was an effort to do the project in a way that made the Club a better neighbor than in the past. She offered as an additional part of the motion that when buses were brought to the Club, the buses would be parked in the upper parking lot, that the buses would not be left running for long periods of time, and that the Club maintain a record of the number of buses used on an annual basis and would be included in the traffic journal. MAKER AND SECONDER AGREED TO INCORPORATE INTO THE MAIN MOTION under D. Ongoing, Item No. 2, an additional sentence to read, "further, a record of the number of buses used on an annual basis should be maintained and included in the traffic journal," and add Item No. 3, to read, "The buses shall be parked in the upper parking lot and shall not be left idling for long periods of time." Council Member Huber said he was the only person who sat on the Planning Commission when the previous proposal was before that body. He did not remember the vote, only that he had voted against it. There were considerable differences between the initial proposal and the one being considered that night. He believed the proposal before Council was an excellent plan which would enhance the look and feel of the Club. He did not believe it would add significantly to any traffic or congestion. The issues were difficult for those who were in opposition; however, the Club had existed prior to people moving near it. The proposal would actually be better than the existing condition. He supported the motion. Council Member Andersen noted he did not see the bus issue as necessitating a formal condition because he thought the Club would comply with the request as a good-neighbor issue. However, he said he would support the motion as amended. Council Member Rosenbaum said country clubs by definition were located in the country. People purchased homes there expecting peace and quiet. Yet, one of the reasons people joined country clubs was to have a facility in which to entertain guests and have family events. The Club was also available to the entire community for non-members to enjoy events. At some point, the use for the non-member events could exceed a reasonable level which was difficult to determine. He suggested an additional condition. AMENDMENT: Council Member Rosenbaum moved that the percentage of the total revenue due to commercial activity not exceed the average percentage for the last three years. AMENDMENT FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND Council Member Fazzino said he supported the motion. He was
04/11/94 72-401
concerned about visual impact on immediate neighbors and asked Julie Maser to comment on Condition A1 regarding the redesign of the chimney and central roof spine element to minimize the impact on scenic views. He asked what that meant to her and the ARB. Architectural Review Board Member Julie Maser said the ARB was concerned the first time it reviewed the project with the amount of glazing and commercial aspect of the design. The spine was considered by one neighbor to be a problem in cutting off views. The ARB studied the views from that home. The most disturbing part of the view was the rooftop mechanical equipment. The applicant lowered the spine several feet without sacrificing the strong statement that was being made on the inside of the entry. The ARB was comfortable with the redesign, which was friendlier, warmer, more modulated with a more residential quality, etc. The chimney was a minor item. It would be lowered to the height allowed by code and made as narrow as possible. Council Member McCown understood the design had been revised and that the ARB had seen the revision. The only items that remained to return to the ARB were listed on page 6, Item No. 9, of the staff report (CMR:223:94). The reduction of the spine had already occurred. Council Member Fazzino understood that but found the language very confusing under the condition because it said "would be subject to ARB review and approval." Mr. Gilliland said it had gone back to the ARB for review after the Planning Commission review. Conditions A1 through A8 were addressed by the applicant at the time they went before the ARB. The ARB asked for significant details to return in addition to that, and they were contained in Condition A9. He said it was staff's belief that Conditions A1 through A8 had been met. Council Member Fazzino thought the language in A1 needed to be changed. The conditions were being approved that night, and the condition stated that the changes would be subject to ARB review and approval. Mr. Gilliland said there were several statements like that in all of the conditions which would need to be changed. Council Member Fazzino asked that language be clarified in the conditions to reflect the fact that the ARB had indeed reviewed certain aspects of the proposal and would not be reviewing them again. Council Member McCown agreed the language was confusing in light of the status of the revisions presented and what was being acted on that night. Mr. Calonne said Council's objective could be accomplished by adding a preamble that said final ARB review and approval would be for purposes of assuring consistency with the February 17, 1994, plans that were already reviewed and approved.
04/11/94 72-402
Council Member Fazzino found it confusing, and anyone reading it in a month or two could find it confusing. It could be interpreted that the ARB would once again have the opportunity to review Condition A1. Mr. Calonne suggested pursuing a path the Planning Commission had pursued which incorporated the absolute elevation limitations that were shown on the present plans to give some objective criteria for the height limit. The Planning Commission was uncomfortable with it because the ARB had not yet reviewed the plan. Council Member McCown suggested adding the statement the chimney and central roof pine element shall be constructed as shown in the design approved by the ARB on February 17, 1994. AMENDMENT: Council Member Fazzino moved that Condition A1, "The chimney and central roof `spine' element to minimize the impact on scenic views from adjacent residences," be returned to the ARB for final review and approval. AMENDMENT FAILED FOR THE LACK OF A SECOND MAKER AND SECONDER AGREED TO INCORPORATE INTO THE MAIN MOTION that Condition A1, "The design of the chimney and central roof `spine' element shall be constructed consistent with the design approved by the Architectural Review Board on February 17, 1994." Council Member Fazzino questioned the prior-to-occupancy Condition C2, "the application shall provide adequate exterior lighting to ensure pedestrian safety and building security," and Condition C3 which modified the existing interior lighting so it did not shine into windows of adjacent neighbors' homes. He wanted to be sure that Condition C2 was not inconsistent with the objective of avoiding night-lighting problems for neighbors. Mr. Gilliland said it would not be inconsistent. The ARB would have to look at it. The Police Department required it. Council Member Fazzino asked what the specific ARB review procedure was. Mr. Schubert said Condition A9, Item O, required the site lighting to be reviewed by the ARB in the final plans. Council Member Fazzino wanted to be sure Condition C2 in and of itself was not inconsistent with Conditions A9, Item 0, and C3. Mr. Calonne said if Council wanted to assure there was not a possibility of inconsistency, Council could add language requiring glare shielding to the maximum extent feasible on the pedestrian lighting. It would give specific direction to the ARB. MAKER AND SECONDER AGREED TO INCORPORATE INTO THE MAIN MOTION language to revise Condition C2 to add that glare shielding shall be used to the greatest extent possible.
04/11/94 72-403
Council Member Fazzino was not entirely happy with Condition A1. He believed an opportunity existed to achieve further minimization of impacts on the adjoining neighbors. The ARB should review it again, but the overall proposal was much stronger than three years ago. He would support the motion. Staff should remain vigilant and assure the neighbors that potential problems caused by blockage of views, night lighting, traffic, buses, and other issues would not become major problems for the neighbors. Mayor Kniss had conferred with the City Attorney and asked for permission to be readmitted. She had been gone for 45 minutes but had watched and listened while coming and going and had watched the last 15 minutes of the discussion. She had particularly listened to Council Member McCown's comments and concurred with them. For that reason, she supported the motion. Vice Mayor Simitian indicated the City Attorney agreed. Council Member Schneider noted when she listened to the tape, neighbors had referred to the Club as a party hall for hire which concerned her. She had come to realize that the neighborhood grew up around the country club, not vice versa. She would support the motion. MOTION PASSED 9-0. RECESS: 9:20 P.M. - 9:35 P.M. ORDINANCES 8. Amendment No. 1 to Contract C4045004 between the City of Palo Alto and Palo Alto Housing Corporation to Increase the Amount of Available Compensation by $4,780 to $92,780 Manager of Planning Projects James Gilliland said the funds were for the Arastradero Park Apartments and were part of the ongoing effort to retain those as affordable housing. He would be available to answer any questions. MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Simitian, to approve the Budget Amendment Ordinance and approve and authorize the Mayor to execute Amendment No. 1 to Contract C4045004 with the Palo Alto Housing Corporation increasing the agreement's budget by $4,780 to $92,780, for a total of $92,780 for Fiscal Year 1993-94. Ordinance 4213 entitled "Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1993-94 to Transfer Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds from New Housing Development Program to the Palo Alto Housing Corporation Contract" Marlene Prendergast, Executive Director, Palo Alto Housing Corporation, said she was available to answer questions. The project was moving very quickly, and the funds were necessary to complete the project.
04/11/94 72-404
MOTION PASSED 9-0. REPORTS OF OFFICIALS 9. Report from Palo Alto Community Child Care Strategic Planning Committee re Long-Term Goals and Status of Child Development Inc. Contract Council Member Wheeler said she would not participate in the item because of a conflict of interest due to her employment. Director of Community Services Paul Thiltgen said he was pleased with the progress and direction of the Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC). He complimented the staff and the Board of PACCC, as well as City staff. He looked forward to a successful future. Council Member Fazzino said over the past six months, discussions and debates had taken place over the future of PACCC and the future of child care in the community. He said it had been determined that a Request for Proposal (RFP) process for 1994-95 would take place. The recommendation that evening had not included any discussion of an RFP process, and he asked whether there was no recommendation. He asked how dramatic the changes had been within PACCC which resulted in no RFP process. Mr. Thiltgen said there had been a lot of effort on the part of the PACCC staff and Board in working with Child Development, Incorporated (CDI) to show they could handle the subsidy program. There was concern over the RFP process because PACCC was looking at where it was going and what it was going to do, and there was concern that there would not be sufficient time to get everything working well. He said there had been a quick transition over the last few months to get the system in place. The subsidy process had been set up so that it met all the established criteria. When the proposal had been submitted through the Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) process, it needed to be in place before it could be approved. After all the processes had been completed, Mr. Thiltgen worked with the City Auditor's Office to ensure all the steps were in place. He said many volunteers had put in a lot of time to make the effective change. He thought it was the way the City wanted PACCC to go, and staff supported that. Council Member Fazzino clarified that nothing would be gained by an RFP process in 1994-95. Even if an RFP procedure were implemented, it would be staff's recommendation that PACCC be given the subsidy administration contract for 1994-95. Mr. Thiltgen said yes. PACCC went through the Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP). Staff looked closely at that proposal and felt it fit with where the City wanted to go with child care. Council Member Fazzino asked Director of Finance Emily Harrison for any comments regarding the state of PACCC financial records
04/11/94 72-405
and practices at the time City staff ended its assistance to PACCC. Director of Finance Emily Harrison said City staff left the PACCC site at the end of December 1993. CDI took the City's place. She said not everything had been finished, and CDI had been left some work to do, which they were in the process of doing. She felt confident that PACCC had progressed in getting its records back into place. Council Member Fazzino asked for Ms. Harrison's perspective on the information provided regarding the current cash flow. Ms. Harrison said it was reliable to the extent that PACCC had been able to reconstruct and prepare a budget for next year. There was still work to be done, and various reconciliations and audit of prior year financial statements had to be done before budget figures would be reliable. She felt the numbers had given staff enough confidence to recommend the extension of the loan. Council Member Fazzino clarified staff was confident that based upon the current financial information and the practices which were in place, PACCC could put together a realistic budget proposal for 1994-95 and provide expected child care services. Ms. Harrison said yes. Council Member Fazzino asked City Auditor Bill Vinson for his perspective on auditing issues such as calculations of costs of services, attendants, and other issues and the progress PACCC had made to date. City Auditor William Vinson said an audit was a difficult process. There had been some resistance establishing good controls and procedures over the City's subsidy program. He was pleased, however, to join City staff in comments regarding the monitoring of the subsidies. He reviewed the forms and activities being monitored. He believed the follow-up audit in May 1994 would be a clean audit. Staff and PACCC were to be commended. Critical issues such as maintenance of waiting lists, file maintenance, and accurate documentation had all been corrected. He had worked closely with staff and believed the problems had been solved. Margo Dutton, Executive Director, Palo Alto Community Child Care, thanked staff for its comments and said the turnaround was achieved through the efforts of PACCC employees and CDI employees. It had been a cooperative venture. She thanked her staff, the board members, volunteers, and City staff. She said Mary Sylvester, Pam Marsh, and Lisa Stelck had been involved in child care for years and had agreed to put their names back into PACCC to help it get to the next phase of redevelopment. The cleanup was not finished, and there was still a lot of work to be done. City Manager June Fleming said the child care program was truly Palo Alto oriented. Everything that had been said that evening was true. It was an unpleasant experience to go to the City
04/11/94 72-406
Auditor and ask him to be involved in a project such as that. She was pleased that staff could come before the Council that evening and state that great progress had been made. The process had worked because of the way staff worked in Palo Alto, but it would only continue to work if staff continued to work together with PACCC. PACCC had made tremendous progress, and it was determined to continue that progress. Staff had heard from the Council and the community that a community-based child care was extremely important in the City. PACCC had a tremendous job to be done in the future, and staff would support that effort. The problems identified were resolved or almost resolved. Kathleen Sullivan, Board Member, Palo Alto Community Child Care, was excited about the work of the transition team. The visuals showed the look of the transition and the feasibility study and that PACCC could do it right. PACCC was where it was that evening because of the leadership of Ms. Dutton. Ms. Dutton was on the City staff at the time the original Child Care Task Force was formed. PACCC was about to launch a board recruitment plan to strengthen the Board and move forward in the implementation of the new restructure. She thanked the City and its support for child care. Mayor Kniss asked when the new Board would be in place and about the term limits. Ms. Sullivan said the Board currently had 10 members. There were 6 business people, 3 early childhood people, and l school district person, and 5 of the 10 members were parents. The capacity of the Board was 15 members, and the Board wanted to look carefully at the balance of skills. The Board was no longer restricted to a majority of Board Members being parents. The transition plan took precedent, and the recruitment package was now ready to be put together. The recruitment plan was to look throughout the community for people who could strengthen skills not already available. Council Member Andersen would propose when the issue returned to the Council that it be referred to the Finance and Policy and Services (P&S) Committees to be reviewed in an informal manner. He said the increased cost of administration in order to carry out the objectives put an additional burden on the cost of operation. He asked whether there would be an increase in cost to the parents for individual child care. Ms. Dutton said the figures before the Council were a feasibility budget and not the final budget. The increased cost in staff was an increase in the number of people in the administrative office. The people proposed to staff the administrative office were necessary so that PACCC would not be in the bind that it was in the past. The feasibility budget included numbers that would account for capital improvements, building a reserve account, and the debt service. The numbers were preliminary. PACCC would look at fee increase as it did every year, but the fee increases would not be in terms of crisis. As part of the development of the fee structure, the Board looked at what the market would bear, where
04/11/94 72-407
other child care providers were in terms of fee increases, and what the costs would be. The fees had not been determined at the present time. Council Member Andersen asked in terms of the total capacity whether it had been ascertained what percentage of capacity would have to be achieved in order reach a break-even point. Ms. Dutton said the figures were based on a 92 percent year-round enrollment. If the enrollment did not meet 92 percent, the staff costs would decrease. Council Member Andersen said the objective was to achieve 92 percent. Ms. Dutton said that was correct. Council Member Andersen asked what the current percentage was. Ms. Dutton said it was approximately 85 percent, but no exact figures were available. PACCC was currently underenrolled in four of the elementary school programs and underenrolled in one of the preschool programs. Council Member Andersen said the report mentioned the desire to get accredited. He asked whether there was a significant cost associated with the accreditation. Ms. Dutton said there was a cost involved in the accreditation process, and it varied depending on where the centers were at the present time when the accreditation process started. Grant moneys would be sought to improve program content and instructional supplies. An increase to the budget for center costs related to the accreditation process estimated to be between $750 and $1,500 was also planned. It did not include any capital improvements to facilities. Council Member Andersen asked whether there was a time line objective regarding accreditation and when it would happen. Ms. Dutton said it was done on an individual center basis. One center had been accredited, one had filed the required paperwork and was awaiting a validation visit, and two centers were ready to submit the required paperwork. The length of time for an accredi-tation process could take from one to two and a half years. Council Member Andersen asked whether all of the centers would be accredited within three years. Ms. Dutton replied yes. Mary Sylvester, 135 Melville, said she had been a part of the transition planning process with PACCC and a group of community members. The process had been an evolutionary one, albeit a very thorough, well thought out, creative process. She supported the recommendations which came from the staff and Board of PACCC.
04/11/94 72-408
Quality child care would, hopefully, be guaranteed. She believed PACCC was moving toward sound organizational stability, and its fiscal picture was looking optimistic. She thanked the Council and City staff for their attention to what had happened to PACCC over the last year. She thanked PACCC for its commitment to the community. MOTION: Council Member Huber moved, seconded by Fazzino, to direct Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) to return in October 1994 with a status report in the areas of administration, accounting, human resources, and subsidy administration, after completion of the contract with Child Development, Incorporated. Further, that at the same time, PACCC provide an update on the status of PACCC's development and implementation of its midterm strategic plan for restructuring the agency. Council Member Andersen requested a friendly amendment that the status report be referred to both the P&S and Finance Committees rather than directly to Council and that staff be directed to sort the various policy and finance issues. Vice Mayor Simitian pointed out that if the item were heard in both committees, everyone would talk about it twice. Council Member Andersen explained there were several policy issues that had not been discussed, as well as several detailed finance issues related to the budget preparation that would be more easily covered at the committee level. Ms. Fleming clarified the direction. If there were no issues and there was only a status report, it would still go to committee; or it would be taken to committee if issues did arise. Mayor Kniss said it would go to committee. Council Member Huber said if it were a status report, he did not see the point of sending it to committee. He did not support the amendment. Council Member Andersen said there were several questions regarding the issue of vouchers and other questions which would need to be discussed at some point. That discussion could take place at the full Council; however, he believed justification existed to hear it at the committee level. MOTION TO REFER: Council Member Andersen moved, seconded by Fazzino, that the status report be referred to the Policy and Services and Finance Committees, and that staff be directed to sort out which issues are appropriate for which committee. Ms. Fleming suggested the issues raised by Council Member Andersen would be contained in a different type of report and referred to a committee. A status report was just as the name implied. Council Member Fazzino agreed with Council Member Andersen's intent and believed it was not the ordinary status report.
04/11/94 72-409
Council had been awaiting significant developments in the area of child care. Discussions with PACCC over the past few months had centered around complex policy and financial issues. He believed it was appropriate to have the two standing committees wrestle with policy and financial issues. He was willing to accept the recommendations of the Finance Director as far as PACCC's financial situation was concerned. At the same time, when Council was in a position of evaluating PACCC's progress toward development of a long-term strategic plan, it was appropriate for the Finance Committee to wrestle with issues surrounding PACCC's financial situation, as well as for the P&S Committee to wrestle with child care policy issues. He was somewhat amazed and delighted to be there that evening ready to bless PACCC for another year considering that six months ago, PACCC appeared on its deathbed. Given how far the situation had improved, he thought it entirely appropriate to support the motion. He was delighted with the progress that PACCC had made. For all practical purposes, the program would have been discontinued if it were not for the efforts of many people in the room who were to be commended. He believed that PACCC continued to do an outstanding job of providing child care, was in a better financial position, and should be awarded the contract for child care services in 1994-95. The Council needed to address the long-term issues next year on how child care should be provided in the community. Council Member McCown did not believe the status report was the appropriate vehicle to delve into the issues raised by Council Members Andersen and Fazzino. If there were policy issues, someone would have to develop them and bring them forward as policy issues. She did not believe status reports would achieve that. A separate action or referral after identification of the policy or financial issues might be needed. She did not believe the committee process would be particularly helpful. Council Member Andersen was not prepared to change the initial intent regarding September's report. He believed Council had a strong role to see to it that there was a clear and attentive review process. He agreed with Council Member Fazzino's statement that PACCC was dead, but it had come back to life. Council needed to be involved to make certain that the City's interests and the child care interests were being met. The Council's role was one of oversight. He was prepared to do it with that particular process. However, if other things were forthcoming that would clarify the issues, he would support that as well. Mayor Kniss clarified that a status report would contain sufficient substance to be referred to the two committees. Ms. Fleming said as the motion was worded, a three-page status report would be returned. She understood and agreed with Council's concerns regarding operational and fiscal issues. She suggested Council direct staff to return with a status report and a report containing issues related to finance and operation of PACCC which could be combined into one report. MOTION TO REFER WITHDRAWN BY MAKER WITH CONSENT OF SECONDER
04/11/94 72-410
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION that the status report, including financial and operational issues, would be referred to the Policy and Services and Finance Committees, as appropriate. Vice Mayor Simitian supported the motion. He believed the value of bringing a status report back to Council was that Council had set an ambitious agenda for PACCC to accomplish. PACCC had not finished responding to Council's issues. He supported staff's exploring other issues but believed Council should focus on the agenda that was set over the past year and should be the highest priority. Mayor Kniss remembered the headlines and newspaper articles from a few months ago and commended PACCC on turning things around. She believed the child care that was provided in the City reflected the type of City and the type of community Palo Alto was. She congratulated PACCC on how far it had come. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Wheeler "not participating." 10. Amendment No. 1 to Promissory Note between the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Community Child Care, Inc. for Exten-sion of Loan Repayment Council Member Wheeler said she would not participate in the item because of a conflict of interest due to her employment. Council Member Fazzino clarified that the approved $50,000 advance in August 1993 had been paid back to the City of Palo Alto in October 1993 and that the only outstanding loan that Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) had was $75,000. Director of Finance Emily Harrison said that was correct. Council Member Fazzino asked PACCC for justification for its requested repayment schedule and an update on monthly cash flow. Margo Dutton, Executive Director, Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC), said the cash flow had not changed significantly from the report of two months ago. PACCC was still experiencing being in the "black" every month by approximately $10,000. The reason for the requested restructuring was twofold: 1) PACCC did not want to be in the same place in August as last year and 2) summer was a time of low enrollment, unpredictable, questionable cash flow, with no proven track record. PACCC did not want to pay back the loan now in its entirety and put it in jeopardy to come back to Council in September. Council Member Fazzino asked if PACCC was receiving approximately $9,000 a month in positive cash flow. Ms. Dutton said PACCC was receiving approximately $9,000 to $10,000 without some of the restructuring. Council Member Fazzino asked if that excluded the $5,000 payments
04/11/94 72-411
for four months during the current fiscal year. Ms. Dutton said no. Council Member Fazzino clarified it was really $4,000 or $5,000. The expectation was that during the summer, cash flow would be at $10,000 per month. Ms. Dutton said PACCC would be breaking even due to summer being lower. Council Member Fazzino asked if controls were in place to avoid the situation which occurred last August when the need arose for the $50,000 advance. Ms. Dutton said yes, assuming the payback was restructured and that summer was successful in that sufficient enrollment filled the centers and paid for staffing and operational costs. Council Member Fazzino asked what summer enrollment expectations were. Ms. Dutton said only five centers would be open, with a minimum of 30 children per site. She said PACCC would know by mid-May if all five of those sites would be open. Three sites had full registrations at that time. Council Member Fazzino clarified it was a reasonable assumption there would be at least 30 children at each of the five sites. Ms. Dutton replied yes. Council Member Fazzino clarified that if that were true, PACCC would not be in the position of needing an advance from the City. Ms. Dutton replied yes. MOTION: Council Member McCown moved, seconded by Fazzino, to approve Amendment No. 1 to the Promissory Note, under which the City's $75,000 loan was made to Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC), to extend the term of repayment of the loan, with $15,000 payable in April 1994 and $5,000 each month for May and June 1994, and October 1994 through May 1995, with final repayment ($10,000) in June 1995. Further, that PACCC report back to Council on its financial condition in October, after completion of the fiscal year, and after PACCC was able to assess the financial impact of its summer session. Vice Mayor Simitian supported the motion, but he wanted to be clear that that would be the final step. He believed that as a responsible, locally elected official, he could go no further. The last year had been spent resolving various audit problems which resulted in two loans, with the extension of the second loan. He appreciated the job which was being done and the importance of the service being provided; however, this was as far as he was willing to go.
04/11/94 72-412
Mayor Kniss said the reason for supporting the previous motion for a more substantial status report was essential to holding PACCC accountable. It had been a tough year; however, Council would need to be kept informed so there were no further surprises. She acknowledged that PACCC was being fiscally responsible and was looking ahead to avoid future difficulty. She would support the motion. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Wheeler "not participating." COUNCIL COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Council Member Fazzino announced the Centennial Birthday Celebra-tion festivities would be on Saturday, April 16, 1994, at 1:00 p.m. and at 8:00 p.m. at the Civic Center. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 2.04.200 (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.
04/11/94 72-413