HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-12-20 City Council Summary Minutes Special Meeting December 20, 1999 A. Proclamation Honoring Palo Alto Knights Junior Pee Wee Football Team.........................................89-270 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS........................................89-270 1. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and Community Federal Credit Union in the Amount of $350,000 for Providing Home Efficiency Improvement Loans at Below Market City Subsidized Interest Rates........................................89-270 2. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and Addison Olian, Inc. in the Amount of $140,000 for Advertising, Marketing, and Public Relations to Utility Marketing Services and Community Relations.............................................89-270
3. Ordinance 4604 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving and Adopting a Plan of Improvements at
the John Lucas Greer Park≅ ............................89-270 4. CLOSED SESSION: Conference with City Attorney--Existing Litigation............................................89-271 4A. (Old Item 6.) Library Advisory Commission RecommendationSupporting Request of the Friends of the Palo Alto Library to Conduct Library Expansion Feasibility Study Co-Funded by the City and the Friends.................89-271 5. PUBLIC HEARING: The City Council will consider applications by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department regarding Downtown Parking Structures...........................89-272 7. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements........89-281 ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m.............89-281
12/20/99 89-269
Regular Meeting December 20, 1999 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 7:05 p.m. PRESENT: Eakins, Fazzino, Huber, Mossar, Ojakian, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler ABSENT: Kniss SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY A. Proclamation Honoring Palo Alto Knights Junior Pee Wee Football Team Mayor Fazzino presented a proclamation to Mike Piha, Junior Pee Wee League President; Jeff Kalb, Coach; and members of the Palo Alto Knights Junior Pee Wee Football Team in honor of their first undefeated season and first Peninsula League Championship. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Ed Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding communication. Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, spoke regarding new elementary and middle school sites on Stanford Open Space Lands. Lynn Chiapella, 631 Colorado Avenue, spoke regarding Arastradero. Irwin Dawid, 753 Alma Street, #126, spoke regarding transportation. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Council Member Schneider moved, seconded by Mossar, to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 - 3. 1. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and Community Federal Credit Union in the Amount of $350,000 for Providing Home Efficiency Improvement Loans at Below Market City Subsidized Interest Rates (continued from 12/14/99) 2. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and Addison Olian, Inc. in the Amount of $140,000 for Advertising, Marketing, and Public Relations to Utility Marketing Services and Community Relations (continued from 12/14/99)
3. Ordinance 4604 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving and Adopting a Plan of Improvements at
the John Lucas Greer Park≅ (1st Reading 11/15/99, PASSED 9-0) MOTION PASSED 8-0, Kniss absent.
12/20/99 89-270
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS MOTION: Council Member Ojakian moved, seconded by Huber, to move Item No. 6 forward ahead of Item No 5 to become Item No. 4A. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Kniss absent. CLOSED SESSION
This item may occur during the recess or after the Regular Meeting 4. CLOSED SESSION: Conference with City Attorney--Existing Litigation (continued from 12/13/99) Subject: Jeanine Martin v. City of Palo Alto, et al., Santa Clara County Superior Court #CV755863 Authority: Government Code section 54956.9(a) REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS 4A. (Old Item 6) Library Advisory Commission Recommendation0Supporting Request of the Friends of the Palo Alto Library to Conduct Library Expansion Feasibility Study Co-Funded by the City and the Friends Tom Wyman, Chair, Library Advisory Commission (LAC), emphasized the proposal had the full support of the Friends of the Palo Alto Library (Friends), staff, and the LAC. The proposal was an excellent example of public and private sector cooperation. He urged the Council to move forward with the proposal. Mary Jean Place, President, Friends of the Palo Alto Library, 809 Northampton Drive, presented a $15,000 proposal from the Friends to create a joint venture between the City and the Friends to do a
planning feasibility study on the Children=s Library to determine
if the Αfootprint≅ of the building could be changed. She urged the Council to accept the proposal. She thanked Helen Beardsworth for
her efforts as the Chairperson of the Children=s Library Committee to create the proposal. MOTION: Council Member Schneider moved, seconded by Wheeler, to approve the Library Advisory Commission recommendation requesting the Friends of the Palo Alto Library to conduct a building
expansion feasibility study of the Children=s Library. The request further proposes that the expense of the study be shared equally by the Friends and the City, up to a maximum of $15,000 each, with the City paying the costs over $30,000 up to a potential maximum City expense of $35,000. Council Member Schneider supported the request. She was impressed with the amount of work the LAC did.
12/20/99 89-271
Council Member Eakins hoped in hiring the appropriate architectural and engineering professionals that the services of a qualified architectural historian would be used. Vice Mayor Wheeler thanked the Friends and the LAC for its thorough discussion of the proposal. She agreed with Council Member Eakins in regard to the historic nature of the facility. She supported the concept and the caution that the LAC in its discussion of the programmatic issue brought before the Council. The LAC was careful to note that it was not a determinant in the way that library services were provided to the children of the community. She was aware that one of the most heartfelt series of comments that the LAC heard was the love the people felt and expressed for the branch library system, particularly as it related to services rendered throughout the community. Council Member Ojakian said the LAC was sensitive to where childrens services could be provided. The building was in need of some sort of revamping. Mayor Fazzino supported the proposal. He expressed concern over
the proposed plan=s impact on the historical integrity of the
building. He walked through the Children=s Library a few weeks prior and there was no question that renovations were desperately needed. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Kniss absent. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 5. PUBLIC HEARING: The City Council will consider applications by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department regarding Downtown Parking Structures for the following: (continued from 12/13/99) 445 Bryant Street (Lots S/L: 1) Zone Change from Public Facilities (PF) and Commercial District with Pedestrian Shopping Combining District (CD-D (P)) to a Planned Community (PC) Zone and to allow the Construction of a Multi-Level Parking Garage on Existing City of Palo Alto Parking Lots S/L; 2) Tentative Subdivision Map Approval to Remove 19 Underlying Lot Lines and Combine the Lots Into One Lot for the Purpose of the Above Project; and 3) Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). [File Nos. 98-ZC-11, 98-ARB-159, 98-EIA-23, and 98-SUB-5] 528 High Street (Lot R): 1) Zone Change from Public Facilities (PF) to Planned Community (PC) Zone to Allow the Construction of a Multi-Level Parking Garage on an Existing City of Palo Alto Parking Lot R; 2) Tentative Subdivision Map Approval to Remove 8 Underlying Lot Lines and Combine the Lots Into One
12/20/99 89-272
Lot for the Purpose of the Above Project; and 3) Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). [File Nos. 98-ZC-12,98-ARB-180, 98-EIA-25 and 98-SUB-6] Council Member Schneider said she would not participate in the issue due to a conflict of interest. Acting Chief Planning Official Lisa Grote said the Working Group supported the redesign of the parking structures. The Working Group noted the structures were part of an overall parking and traffic management program in the Downtown. Some of the other aspects of the parking and traffic management program included the recently implemented shuttle system, the hiring of a commute coordinator, and the more effective use of existing parking spaces that were already located in the Downtown. The presentation at
that evening=s meeting focused specifically on the design of the parking structures and how the designs evolved over the prior month. The formation of the Working Group came about as a result of Council direction on October 18, 1999. The Council requested the Working Group be formed to reduce the appearance of both structures and to ensure the structures fit in with the surrounding environment. Specifically, the direction included the removal of one floor on Lot L, the Teen Center and Office component would be reduced so the pedestrian environment could be enhanced, and two bays of parking would be removed and the top floor set back and reduced in appearance. The Working Group believed the redesign of
the structures presented at that evening=s meeting accomplished the
Council=s direction and goals. The Working Group=s members were selected to represent local architects, landscape architects, designers, artists, representatives from the Architectural Review Board (ARB), Planning Commission, Public Arts Commission (PAC), and staff members. Some of the members were selected specifically because they had been critical of the designs up to October 18, 1999. Lots S/L redesign separated the structure into three parts to reduce the scale and the bulk which included a green landscaped wall that was set back from the street and softened the appearance of the building; moved the elevator enclosure away from the corner of the building to the center of the building and incorporated more glass and transparent materials, and included transparent materials for the stairways. The architecture reflected the rhythm of the Senior Center but did not mimic it. A fountain was included in the plaza which provided soothing and calming sounds of water. Bulb-outs and pedestrian materials were used to connect pedestrians safely to Bryant Street and the Senior Center. Landscaping was included at the base of the building to soften the overall appearance and public art as well as street maps and informational signage which were included at the main entry and elevator lobbies. The building bulk and scale was reduced on Lot R by using concrete and stone which offset one another. The top level of Lot R was set back as a result of the loss of two parking spaces. The elevator enclosure was moved away from High Street, and the stairs were opened reducing the transparency of the overall building. Building
12/20/99 89-273
openings were smaller and varied for better pedestrian orientation. Lot R was a simple design reflecting the clean lines of the surrounding buildings. A transparent wall with typographical messages were included as part of the art program for Lot R. Signage was a functional as well as artistic element of the structure. There were 878 parking spaces in both garages. The Working Group supported the approval of the final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the Planned Community Zone (PC Zone) change applications, the building designs, and the subdivision map to merge the underlying lots. Chop Keenan, 700 Emerson Street, said the Working Group started with the philosophy of the design trying to address issues regarding the mass of the structures. The result was a product the Council would be proud of. The Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce reviewed the design and was behind the plan 100 percent. Architectural Review Board Member Bob Peterson, Webster Street, said the parking structures needed a fresh approach and should be background buildings. The HRB described background buildings as relaxed and serene for Palo Alto and should not be aggressive and aloof. The parking structures must fit into the context of the Downtown and blocks in which the structures were located. The appearance of bulk and mass needed to be reduced. Pedestrians, more green space, and people space needed to be engaged in better ways. The Commercial/Teen Center should be reduced from three stories to one or two stories. The HRB commented that there should be multi-story buildings on Bryant Street, Alma Street, and Lytton Avenue to help define the park and outdoor rooms, improvements to the Downtown alleys to encourage pedestrian circulation, and an artist should be involved in the design. The Working Group recommendation addressed all concerns and dramatically improved the appearance and fit of the parking structures. The collaborative efforts of the Working Group members were unique and real teamwork. He discussed the design of the structures using overhead projections. Both designs adopted unique and timeless solutions. The solutions employed involved massing proportion, the use of landscape, and architectural integrity. The fundamental improvement to the structure on High Street was the inclusion of a
Αpocket park.≅ The upper story of the structure on Alma and High Streets was set back approximately 20 feet. The set back of the upper story lent to a three story element in the front of the structure. A natural stone material was used in the front and concrete with a compatible colored stain was used in the backdrop. The two materials emphasized the front level as a three-story building. Lots S/L were separated into three structures and treated with different materials and forms. Public Art Commissioner Judith Wasserman, 751 South Hampton Drive, found the parking designs to be exceptional. She was proud to be part of the collaborative process that produced the designs. The Public Art Budget set by the City was commensurate with the scale
12/20/99 89-274
of the project. The artist selected by the design team was Professor Sam Schmidt of San Jose State University (SJSU). Professor Schmidt was on the Fine Arts Faculty at SJSU, was in the permanent collection of the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, and his projects were widely recognized. Professor Schmidt would design all the graphics and signage for the parking structures and collaborate with Sam Richardson, a Professor of Fine Arts at SJSU on the public art element. The intention was that the art would be thoroughly integrated into the design of the building and be related to the signage and the graphics package. The design team would return to the PAC with a progress report. Roger Holland, 1111 Parkinson Avenue, believed the City was not taking into account the things the City requested Stanford University to do to control traffic. Stanford had a seven point program for controlling traffic and so far, the only thing done was an attempt at a shuttle. He hoped the shuttle could be improved upon. He believed that it was inappropriate to not give the new Council an opportunity to vote on the parking structures. Mayor Fazzino said the new Council would have an opportunity to discuss the item when it was brought back to the Council for second reading in January 2000. Irvin Dawid, Transportation Co-Chair, Loma Prieta Chapter Sierra Club (the Sierra Club), 753 Alma Street, #126, said staff was trying to present the parking garages as a package along with the shuttle. The shuttle was only temporary with no long-term funding; the parking garages were seen as a private matter. The Downtown businesses were willing to tax themselves and needed Council support to do so. The parking garages belonged to the Downtown businesses which they were paying for as opposed to City funding. He believed the parking garages were public structures, and the Council was playing a crucial role. The thirteen point parking plan came from the Chamber of Commerce and was not an open process. The environmental community was not involved in the process, there was no real count as to what the actual parking demand was, and the parking garage was meant to increase the parking supply. In terms of demand, there was nothing being done. The only pricing scheme the City used was, the parking permit which worked against Transportation Demand Management (TDM). Once a parking permit was purchased, there was no other incentive to try other parking alternatives. He believed the parking permit was a pay for parking that was not a TDM measure. The City needed to implement a true TDM, where there were disincentives placed on parking. People would have the right to park in Palo Alto, but free parking would not be made available. When free parking was taken away from Lot S, people decided not to park there, which proved the parking scheme needed work. He believed the Council needed to reconsider the parking garages.
12/20/99 89-275
Walter Sedriks, 325 Waverley Street, said based upon prior discussions, it was incorrectly assumed that putting two levels of parking underground was not feasible. He was distressed to know that the City, which prided itself on progressiveness and style, was choosing to create gross visual pollution in the heart of its Downtown. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme Street, said the revised designs were more attractive than the original designs. He believed the basic principle of putting garages in the Downtown was a blunder. Instead of providing solutions to the traffic and transportation problems, the garages created more problems. The Council should
look at a way of systematically reducing the public=s dependance on cars. Dan Lorimer, 465 Hawthorne Avenue, agreed with the comments of Mr. Moss and Mr. Sedriks. He doubted that a five-story building could be made to look like a three-story building. Council Member Rosenbaum said the cost for the parking structures was $25 million, specifically, the parking structure on Alma Street which was increased to $53,000 per added stall. Mr. Keenan said the cost increased with the redesign. Council Member Rosenbaum asked whether it would still be agreeable to the people to build the parking structures with the increased costs. Mr. Keenan tried to keep the Council and key property owners informed. He said there was still support for the construction of the structures. Council Member Rosenbaum said a comment was made regarding placing three stories of the parking structure underground. He asked why three stories were not placed underground. Director of Public Works Glenn Roberts said the Council discussed the matter during prior hearings. Staff believed it maximized the extent to which the underground parking could be provided on the structures. It was not feasible to go underground with Lot R because of structural considerations for adjacent buildings. Only two stories were placed underground in Lot S/L. Because of groundwater conditions, staff was continuously dewatering the area. There was an ordinance in the PAMC that prohibited the design of buildings where dewatering would be a permanent condition. Vice Mayor Wheeler asked whether staff ran numbers for adding an additional level of underground parking on to Lot S/L. Public Works Senior Engineer Karen Bengard said the numbers were based on a prior design, Option B. The plan for Lot R cost $5.3
12/20/99 89-276
million. Removing one level off the top of Lot R and adding one basement floor would cost an additional $1.8 million. Adding a basement level onto Lots S/L and removing a level from the top would have added $.9 million to the cost. Council Member Mossar said there was concern that building parking garages would increase the demand for parking. She asked whether
staff=s workplan for revisiting zoning ordinances for the Downtown
had adequate direction from Council to ensure the City=s ordinances did not promote future growth and parking demand in the Downtown or did staff require additional direction from the Council. Director of Planning and Community Environment Ed Gawf said for the work program for the Downtown staff looked to have a planner or transportation staff focus on the Downtown. One of the difficulties staff had was that different people dealt with different parts of the Downtown, especially in regard to transportation. Staff needed to review the shuttle system, the parking structures, and the commute coordinator which was an
important role in the Downtown. The commute coordinator=s function was to help get the shuttle system operational. Beginning in 2000, staff would be devoted to promoting alternative approaches to arriving Downtown. Downtown parking needed to be viewed as an asset that the City needed to manage effectively. The zoning ordinance worked well for retail and office parking uses which was approximately three to four parking stalls per thousand square feet; however, the parking demand for restaurants was approximately 10-20 parking spaces per thousand square feet. He believed the pricing structure for the parking permit needed to be reviewed. MOTION: Council Member Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Mossar, to approve the staff recommendation as follows: Approve the alternative design for the parking garage at 528 High Street (Lot R) as part of the following approvals: a. Adopt the Planned Community (PC) Ordinance, including findings and conditions, rezoning the property from PF (Public Facilities) to Planned Community PC Zone to allow the construction of a multi-level parking structure on an existing City of Palo Alto parking Lot R; b. Approve the staff-proposed Architectural Review Board findings; and c. Approve the Tentative Subdivision Map based on the findings and conditions of approval for the parking structure at 528 High Street, Lot R 1st Reading - Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the 12/20/99 89-277
Classification of Property Known as 528 High Street (Parking Lot R) from PF to PC Council Member Rosenbaum said the City took action about 15 years prior to limit the demand for parking by limiting the amount of development allowed in the Downtown. The City further required that any development allowed would either self-park or pay an in-lieu fee to be used for a parking garage. The parking structures were part of an overall plan, and, if the City implemented a parking permit system, the parking structures would be required. The parking structures were large but a necessity. The parking
structures were part of having a Αdriving Downtown≅ and the correct thing to do. Council Member Mossar reminded the Council that the 13-point parking plan was incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan which went through extensive public review. She heard many complaints about the neighborhood parking situation. The experience with the Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF) move gave great insight into what could be accomplished by addressing the large parking deficit. The parking structures would allow neighborhood parking strategies, otherwise not possible, to be put into place. A neighborhood parking program could not be discussed without having a place for employees to park. A multi-story parking structure was a cost-effective and environmentally sensitive use of the land.
Surface parking lots had limited utility in the City=s future and an uneconomical use of property. Council Member Huber served on the Downtown Study Group in the early 1980s and recalled discussion about the necessity for parking structures. He believed alternatives were needed in order to clear up the residential neighborhoods. Council Member Eakins supported the parking structures. The designs were improved and the team made remarkable progress. Cars were a necessity for some people. The community was a hybrid community with mixed views towards cars and parking. Parking in the structures would be paid for by permits; however, the permits might not be expensive enough. Council Member Ojakian supported the motion. The structures were needed to resolve the parking problem. The structures took care of approximately half of the parking deficit in the Downtown. He was a member of the Downtown Parking Structure Committee (Committee) during his term on the Planning Commission. One of the things that came out of the Committee was that there was no other lot that was considered acceptable to build on. The structures were to resolve part of the parking problem, understanding that the issue was not going to go away because the structures were built. Vice Mayor Wheeler supported the motion. She believed the viewpoints and concerns expressed by those who had strong reservations about the original designs were taken into account in
12/20/99 89-278
the redesign process and met by the Working Group. In the future, the City should set examples and design its public works projects to inspire those who worked in the public sector. She urged the Planning Department to address the issue of the uses Downtown and how the City controlled the uses. She was on the Planning Commission when the Downtown cap was put in place. At that time, it was commonly accepted that additions to square footage equated with the intensity of use. She found that was not the case, and uses in the Downtown created the need to accommodate additional people and vehicles. The cap was not an effective tool, the City needed to find a tool to control the uses. Mayor Fazzino wanted to emphasize the need for the parking structures. He believed the structures would have a significant impact, particularly during evening hours. The design had improved dramatically, and the Working Group deserved credit. Achieving a balance between addressing current parking need and concurrently time not encouraging traffic growth was important. He was concerned that most of the discussion continue to encourage traffic growth, and the Council did not have enough meaningful discussion regarding ways for disincentive growth. Most discussion in prior years concerned significant development within the City including the Downtown area despite the cap. There were some positive developments with the establishment of the shuttle. The neighborhood parking permit system continued to be delayed. There were no real disincentives for Downtown employees to avoid bringing their cars Downtown. He supported the High Street structure. Given its location on Alma Street, he believed the lot was an appropriate place for a high rise structure, and he was pleased with the preservation of the walkway in that area. He was disappointed that the Council would not accept a reasonable compromise of two months prior to reduce the structure on Bryant Street by one level, which would have reduced its impact significantly and made it more of a project within human scale. He found the structure unattractive despite efforts to beautify it. MOTION PASSED 7-0, Kniss, Schneider absent. MOTION: Council Member Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Mossar, to approve the staff recommendation as follows: Approve the alternative design for the parking garage at 445 Bryant Street (Lots S/L) as part of the following approvals: a. Adopt the Planned Community (PC) Ordinance, including findings and conditions, rezoning the property from (PF) Public Facilities and CD-C (P) Commercial District with Pedestrian Shopping Combining District to PC Planned Community District; and the request for a waiver of required parking for the new square footage of the proposed teen center; and
12/20/99 89-279
b. Approve the staff-proposed Architectural Review Board findings. c. Approve the Tentative Subdivision Map based on the findings and conditions of approval for the parking structure at 445 Bryant Street, Lots S/L. 1st Reading - Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Classification of Property Known as 445 Bryant Street (Parking Lots S/L) from PF and CD-C(P)to PC MOTION PASSED 6-1, Fazzino Αno,≅ Kniss, Schneider absent. MOTION: Council Member Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Mossar, to approve the staff recommendation as follows: Approve a Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) in the amount of $308,000 for additional design-related services. Of this amount, $70,000 is for the consolidation of a previous BAO presented to Council on August 9, 1999 (CMR:341:99) and $145,000 is for design services rendered from October 18, 1999, to December 13, 1999. The remaining $93,000 is for future expenditures that will be necessary to provide structural detailing for the new design.
Ordinance 4605 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1999-00 to Provide an Additional Appropriation of $308,000 for Downtown Parking Structure Feasibility Study Capital Project Number 19530" Approve and authorize the Mayor or his representative to increase the contract change order authority with Watry Design Group for contract C6076145 from $119,100 to $427,100 (for combined BAO). This increase is for design services related to redesign and future expenditures that will be necessary to provide structural design and detailing. Adopt the resolution certifying the adequacy of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and making the required CEQA findings, including a Statement of Overriding Consideration for one finding of significance and potential unavoidable short term impact, that is temporary loss of parking.
Resolution 7917 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the Downtown Lots S/L and R Parking Garage
Projects, and Making Certain Findings≅
12/20/99 89-280
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to amend Section I of the resolution to add language
following the first sentence, ΑAn addendum to the FEIR was released
for public review on December 3, 1999,≅ and to amend the first
sentence of Section J of the resolution, ΑThe City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the projects and on the EIR on
September 27, 1999, and December 20, 1999.≅ MOTION PASSED 7-0, Kniss, Schneider absent. Senior Assistant City Attorney Sue Case noted the matter regarding the two Community Zone changes would be brought before the Council for second reading. Everything else was either a one-time Budget Amendment Ordinance or a resolution. Assistant City Manager Emily Harrison said the second reading was scheduled for January 18, 2000. COUNCIL MATTERS 7. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements Mayor Fazzino announced that the meeting was the was last official City Council Meeting for Council Members Huber, Rosenbaum, Schneider, and Wheeler. They would be missed. Council Member Rosenbaum commended Mayor Fazzino for his leadership and guidance. Council Member Ojakian complimented the outgoing Council Members and Mayor Fazzino.
Mayor Fazzino announced the next ΑConversation with the Mayor≅ would be held on January 8, 2000. He acknowledged the work of many City employees who worked on the Y2K issue. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m.
12/20/99 89-281
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 2.04.180(a) and (b). The City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are made solely for the purpose of facilitating the preparation of the minutes of the meetings. City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are recycled 90 days from the date of the meeting. The tapes are available for members of the public to listen to during regular office hours.
12/20/99 89-282