Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-02-23 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MINUTES PALOALTO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE VIA KZSU - FREQUENCY90.1 ON FM DIAL Regular Meeting February 23, 1987 ITEM Oral Communications Minutes of January 26, 1987, February 2, 1987. and February 9, 1987. Consent Calendar 1. Housing Improvement Program Evaluation - Refer to Finance and Public Works Committee 2. Preliminary Impact of Palo Alto Unified School District/City of Palo Alto Grand Lease Proposal - Refer to Finance and Public Works Committee 3. Change Order to Contracts C-4300 and C-4301 with Santa Clara County Health Department for Mosquito Abatement Services in Palo Alto Marsh- lands and Catch Basins 4. Project Mobility Status Report and Receipt of Santa Clara County Grant 5. PUBLIC HEARING:, 725 Welch Road (New Children's Hospital at Stanford) : Review of EIR 6. Finance and Public Works Committee Recommenda- tion re: Addition of Engineering Technician III to Refuse Area Staff 7. Ordinance Approving and Authorizing the Award of a Franchise to Century Federal. Inc.. Pursu Uant to an Order of the United States District Court. Northern District of California PAGE 8 0 7 0 8 0 7 0 8 0 7 0 8 0 7 0 8 0 7 0 8 0 7 1 8 0 7 1 8 0 7 1 8 0 8 8 0 8 5 8 0 6 8 2/23/87 ITEM PAGE Recess from 9:25 p.m. to 9:40 p.m. 8 0 8 9 8. Transportation 2000 Plan Review and 8 0 8 9 Recommendations 9. Ordinance Amending the Budget for the Fiscal 8 0 9 3 Year 1986.87 to Provide an Appropriation for, Park Supervision at Eleanor, Mitchell, and Rinconada Parks 10. Funding Request from Palo Alto Medical 8 0 9 4 Foundation 11. Request of Vice Mayor Sutorius re Northern 8 0 9 9 California Power Agency Financing and Credit Rating Discussiors 1.2. Request of Mayor Woolley and Council Members 8 1 0 0 Klein, Renzel, and Bechtel re Legislation to Complete San Francisco Buy National Wildlife Refuge 13. Request of Mayor Woolley re Cancellation of 8 1 0 1 the March 2, 1987, City Council Meeting ADJOURNMENT AT 11:01 p.m. 8 1 0 2 8.0..6 9 2/23/87 �i (I Regular Meeting Monday, February 23, 1987 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7;33 p.m. PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Patitucci, Renzel, Sutorius, Woolley Mayor Woolley announced chap:. a Special Meeting for the purposes of a Closed Session re Litigation to discuss Century red:ra1 v. City of Palo Alto pursuant. to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) was held in the Council Conference Room at 6:30 p.m. Mayor Woolley announced at some point during or after the meeting there would be a Closed Session re Litigation to discuss Lazanski, et al. v. Cit of Palo Alto pursuant to Government Code Section 5956.9(a). ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Ben Bailey, 171 Everett, spoke regarding the Freedom of Information Act and human rights. MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 1987/ FEBRUARY 2, 1987, AND FEBRUARY 9 1987 MOTION* Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Levy, *Wawa of the Minates` of January .2i, 199.7, Febrnary 2, 1987, and February 9, 1987, as submitted. MOTIO PASS= mnanimously, Cobb, Sutorius, -"abstaining' on Minutes of February 2, 1997. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION' Vice Mayor Sutorius moved, seed. by Cobb., approval of the Consent Calendar. 1. HOUSING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM! EVALUATION REFER TO FINANCE AND PUBLI WORKS C_ AI EE CMR:1 7: -02 - 2. PRELIMINARY IMPACT OF PALO ALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT CITY OF ALO PA GLAND LEASE PROPOSAL s-_ REFER TO FINANCE .AND PUBLIC WOR. S COMMITTEE (CMRI1S2:7) (1341 -►01 8 0 7 0 2/23/87 CONSENT CALENDAR CONTINUED 3. CHANGE ORDERS NOS. 2 TO CONTRACTS C-4300 AND C-4301 WITH SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT FOR MOS UITO ABATEMENT SERVICES IN PALO ALTO MARSHLANDS AND CATCH BASINS CMR:1 :7) 1510 Staff is authorized to increase the contracts as follows: Contract C-4300 (Marshlands) $32,000 Contract C-4301 (Catch Basins) $ 3,000 4. PROJECT MOBILITY STATUS REPORT AND RECEIPT OF. SANTA CLARA COUNTY GRANT (CMR:150:7) (1165-01) ORDINANCE 3739 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1986-87 TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR THE TRANSPORTATION DIVISION AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE RECEIPT OF COUNTY FUNDS" MOTION PASSED unanimously, 5. PUBLIC HEARING: 725 WELCH ROAD (NEW CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL AT STANFORD): REVIEW OF EIR (CMR:149:7) (232/300) Council Member Patitucci said he would not participate in the item due to a possible conflict of interest. Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber introduced. representatives of two consulting firms who worked with the City on the Environmental Impact Report (EIR)., Brian Boxer of EIP Associates, and Brent Ogden from DKS Traffic Consultants. Planning Commissioner Ellen Christensen _ said the Planning Commission felt the EIR was well written and thorough. The Planning Comission raised questions related to the justification behind the traffic mitigations and conditions of approval but found the EIR correctly assessed the direct and cumulative impacts of the project and saw the continued commitment to improving the traffic situation in the Sand Hill corridor. The Planning Commission believed the mitigations and conditions of approval recommended were reasonable and accounted for the need to proceed with resolving problems in the Sand Hill corridor while not imposing an .undue, upfront financial burden on the new .Children's Hospital. The Planning Commission felt there was justification for the overriding circumstances finding for the impact to the major intersections along Sand Hill Road, Junipers Serra Boulevard, and El Camino Real in that the benef.ite .of the New Children's Hospital to the community outweighed adverse effects. The Planning Commission continued to be concerned about the lack of comprehensive idiid use and transportation planning in the West Campus Medical Center area but believed some contribution would have to be made project by project towards resolving the serious traffic problems in that area. On balance, the Planning Commission recommended the package of mitigations and conditions as a balanced package which rook into consideration the needs of the New Children's Hospital and the need to begin the process of resolving the traffic issues. Coune 1 Member Fletcher asked how many of the parking sp ccs were attributable to the modernization project. Mr. Schreiber said the project included a two -level parking struc- ture containing 300 parking spaces. He understood the spaces would be for the users of Children's Hospital --staff, doctors, visitors, and patients. - The parking would be physically separate from the rest of the parking serving the hospital and Medical Center, so was not directly related to the hospital modernization project. However, parking on the Medical Center site was being developed in a coordinated way, and the amount of parking provided related to both the needs of the facility and was also developed in relation to the ongoing need for parking in the area. Council .Member Fletcher said the EIR stated, "When appropriate, construction would be .limited to daylight hours." She expected the noise and activity would be controlled ,by the noise ordinance which limited construction to daylight hours, and wondered why the phrase 'when affr.:,p iatc" wee included, the implication being some nighttime construction. Bruce Boxer, EIP Associates, said they were informed by the spon- sor and by representatives -of Stanford University Hospital there would be times where it would be most appropriate to do construc- tion during off hours so it did not interfere with use of sensi- tive medical equipment. Council Member Fletcher asked if the project would, in effect, be exempt from the noise ordinance. City Attorney Diane Northway said no, an exception would have to be obtained. Mayor Woolley declared the public hearing open. Dr. Lawrence Crowley, Vice Chairman of the New .Children's Hospital Board of Directors, stressed the importance of the construction of the New. Children's Hospital and the resultant consolidation of the Stanford University Hospital and Children's Hospital at Stanford children's programs to the long-term improvement of health of children ` in the region. They were satisfied with the.. development of the EIR and basically accepted and agreed with the findings. S; 0 7 2 2/23/87 They also accepted as reasonable the mitigatior;s recommended by the Planning Commission, particularly those surrounding the hospi- ta. itself on Welch Road. One major exception was they did not believe it was _ reasonable in any way to require that New Children's Hospital provide a fee of $750,000 as a condition for granting the Use Permit for the purpose of funding a study and carrying out some of the necessary changes to improve the Sand Hill corridor. The New Children's Hospital itself did not add to the Sand Hill traffic problem. They would be moving the present personnel in the Children's Hospital over to Welch Road, consoli- dating with personnel from the Stanford University Hospital,, and the result would be a net reduction in the ,number of employees and, therefore, the number of cars, and would negate the present situation where families staff, and patients had to move back and forth across Willow Road. The projected 1995 increases in the Sand Hill Road area might be reasonable if one considered the multitude of developments under consideration throughout the entire Palo Alto/Stanford area, but the proportion attributable to the New Children's Hospital project seemed unreasonable and was entirely attributed to the possible reuse of the Children's Hospital and the reuse of a small section of Stanford University Hoseita.: It seemed more logical for the consideration of the reuse of Children's Hospital to be taken up at some future date. Council Member Renzel understood the current use was subtracted in computing the impact er the reuse of an additional site The City and Stanford had to agree on which the site the burden would fall. It was reasonable to assume the volume of traffic in the general corridor would increase upon reuse. Dr. Crowley agreed but believed it was hard to project what the reuse and impact would be because it was 'not known and the deci- sion was still two or three years away. Council ,ember . Renzel asked how much Children's Hospital was paying into Stanford's fund for future required projects Dr. Crowley did not believe there was anything specific. New Children's Hospital was contributing to the General Plant Improvement Fund which helped out with parking, tre`fic, street improvements, etc. The amount was in the neighborhood of 5 percent of the construction costs of the project and amounted to several billion dollars. Council Member Renzel clarified Stanford was also collecting funds for what were essentiallyequivalent to traffic mitigations. Dr. Crowley said Stanford had the responsibility for providing parking as a major part of that, plus utility improvements, etc. 8 0 7 3 2/23/87 1 William F. Massy, Vice President for Business and Finance at Stanford; said Stanford wished to raise one matter of principle which was that staff proposed New Children's Hospital pay as much as $750,000 for planning and construction of improvements to the Sand Hill Road corridor. The size of that levy was entirely inappropriate and unreasonable and, in fact, the EIR showed the New Children's Hospital would actually reduce traffic on Sand Hill Road. The reuse of the old site was another chatter and should stand on its own. Any future use of that site would most likely involve a new population, require a new use' permit, and its own environmental assessment. The Planning Commission discussed the possibility of separating the reuse project from the New Children's Hospital -project by assuming a zero base population in the nvironmental assessment of that future project. Stanford supported that approach as inherently fairer than assessing the New Children's Hospital for traffic that might be generated by a future project in which it would not be involved. He clarified that Stanford was supporting the existing site should bear the burden. If the City decided toe assess the reuse project rather than the New Children's Hospital, Stanford would help to ensure that such zero -base population assumption for the vacated space was incorporated into the EIR for -the new use. Stanford also had discussions with City staff on forming an Assessment District to pay for improvements on Sand Hill Road and supposed, if that were to be done, both the New Children's Hospital and the old site would be included and would ray their pro rata share . of the cost. Stanford agreed a study of ;;cud Hill Road was needed and the time was perfect to begin a cooperative planning process that might bring the project to fruition, but it was not reasonable to lay the burden of getting the project started on the New Children's Hospital. If the City agreed but was anxious to secure funds to start the study immediately, Stanford would be pleased to provide up to $50,000 for that purpose and hoped the offer would allow the City to clear the air with respect to the New Children's Hospital project. With respect to the General Plant Improvements Fund, he believed the amount was about 5.5 percent. The fund was campus wide and paid for all the roads, lighting, paths, bicycle facil- ities, etc., and would pay for the mitigation and for other miti- gations applied to Stanford, but was intended to pay for much more than that, e.g.. resurfacing of Palm Dri ee and Arboretum. Vice Mayor Sutorius said technically Mr. Massy spoke for Stanford, and the applicant was Children's Hospital. He understood the City was looking for conditions and processes that could be approacha- ble within the given documentation He asked if Stanford had found a way to offer the aasurance that could be incorporated, if Council chose a !zero base concept, beyond the present discussion. Mr. Massy said .when the . New Children's Hospital opened, the old Children's Hospital and the land would revert to Stanford University d Therefore, Stanford University tas in a position to 8 0 7 4 2/23/87 give Council assurances with respect to the processing of an application to reuse the old site, and he gave that assurance although he had not worked with Counsel to attempt to work out a mechanism. Vice Mayor Sutorius clarified Stanford was willing to provide up to $50,000 to start a study of the corridor. He understood up to $150,000 of the $750,000 in question was going to be contributed toward that study process and saw a difference of $100,000. Mr. Massy envisioned the $50;000 would be sufficient to get the study to the point where Stanford and the City had a reasonable view of the prospects of going ahead, and he' was confident there was a way to go ahead it that was the decision. Vice Mayor Sutorius hoped that Palm Drive and Arboretum would be resurfaced soon and said that widening of Arboretum w.as also important from a safety standpoint. Mr. Massy said Stanford was aware of the difficulty. Council Member Klein believed the proposal should solve the prob- lem with which the Planning Commission wrestled so hard. Assuming Council wanted to accept Mr. Massy's suggestion in lieu of the $750,000 Planning Commission recommendation, he asked staff how that could be done. Senior Assistant City Attorney Sandy Sloan clarified. New Children's Hospital was the applicant, and it would be difficult to enter into an enforceable contract because there was not enough consideration at the time; however, the suggestion about zero base was in the control of the City. When the old Children's Hospital was reused and an application applied for, it was up to the City and staff to determine how to evaluate the EIR. The statements given by Mr. Massy on the record that evening with regard to Stanford's not objecting to icy way the City would treat the EIR, would be helpful. Council Member Klein asked why the City could not have a condition that stanford and the City enter into an agreement as outlined by Mr. Massy, and Council accept that in lieu of the $750,000. He asked if the University would be .willing to sign the type of agreement outlined. Mr. Massy had no problem in principle in putting the agreement in writing. Ms. Northway believed the way to accomplish Council Member Klein's suggestion was eoefe type of tripartite agreement in which Stanford, New Children's Hospital., and the City were all signae terries, rather than a third -party beneficiary contract. 8 0,7 5 2/23/87 O Dolores Furman, 1070 Cambridge, Menlo Park, wondered if the joy of being in the outdoors and having the wonderful things on which to play would be truly duplicated at the hospital on the roof. She was concerned about the smoke emanating from near the hospital, and the closeness of the emergency helicopter to where the chil- dren would play. She was also concerned about what would replace the old Children's Hospital, the old sidewalks Stanford left by the creek, and the water emanating from the drainages. Langston Trigg, Project Directorof the New Children's Hospital, responded to the parking question. He said 300 parking spaces would be built as part of the project. They would be contained in a two -level parking deck at the front of the site and would be reserved exclusively for volunteers, patients, and patient visit- ors. Julia Fremont Assistant Manager of Transportation Programs at Stanford, referenced the staging scenario of the Medical Center parking plan which went month -to -month whenever necessary for changes in supply and demand in parking in the whole region of the main Medical Center, which included the Hospital, Medical School, and all surrounding facilities. In September, 1987, the plan was to begin construction of New Children's Hospital and accounted for Lilts jaiking ,Spoeee lost to that 4 eoet .tip: till project. In January, 1990 occupancy of New Children's Hospital was planned. In the mcazicime there were a number of other events, and the effort in the Medical Center planning was to ,accommodate all the events in sequence-- to ensure adequate parking a t all times. The staff of New Children's Hospital would be parking with other medical staff within the Medical Center, and those spaces were added and sub- tracted in the staging scenario from month to month. Council Member Fletcher asked where the staff would be parking in relation to the Children's Hospital. She understood the only parking adjacent to the Children's Hospital would be the 300 -car garage which was not for staff use. Mr.. Trigg clarified therm was parking directly adjacent to. the west which was currently a combination of existing parking ,,.... surface arkin and a ..site which would be cleared concurrent with the New. Children's Hospital construction. Therewould be direct access to the hospital from that side of the building. Council Member Fletcher said the parking ordinance only required ;e parking space , per 1.5 beds, which was 83 spaces, but the requirement was evidently not adequate because more parking was being supplied. She asked if New Children's Hospital agreed that proportionately the - bicycle parking was also tdo low at the rate of 10 percent of auto parking. id. Trigg said New Children's Hospital was providing ten parking spaces for bicycle parking in the form of lockers as required by the second Architectural Review Board (ARB) hearing. There would be discussion of the matter March 5 at the.. final ARB hearing. Council Member Fletcher asked if there were other bicycle parking spaces on the rest of the complex. Mr. Trigg said yes, some would• be provided with the Hospital Modernization Project (HMP) construction. Council Member Fletcher asked if allowance was made in the calcu- lations for daytime clinic visitors. Mr. Trigg said yes, that was the reason the formula was exceeded. Council Member Fletcher asked if ..the overlap in shifts was taken into account. Mr. Trigg said the overlap was taken into account in the overall comprehensive parking plan; however, the New Children's Hospital was not providing for that parking in the 300 -car lot under discussion. Council Member Fletcher asked about the noise created by the heli- copter. Mr. Trigg said New Children's Hospital double -plated the windows in thTi patient rooms to reduce the noise level. The comments and responses document included discussion of potential noise impacts fro the helicopter and clearly identified measures taken by the architects to deal with the possible problems. Mayor Woolley declared the public hearing closed. Mayor Woolley asked for staff comment on the difference between the $150,000 for the inauguration of the Sand Hill Road project, and Stanford's recommene!ation of $50,000. Mr. Zaner clsritied the $150,000 was for as -yet Unspecified studies and analyses. Staff met with . Stanford that afternoon to talk about -the specific project on,Sand Hill. Road, and the initial study to determine whether or not the project would actually go ahead, and staff felt comfortable with the $50,000 figure. Mayor Woolley asked if different timing would be involved. The staff recommendation would : be triggered within 30 days Of the issuance of the Use Permit for the hospital. Mr. Zaner understood that should Council move in th3 direction that relieved the Children's Hospital of the financial obligation, Stanford itself would be prepared to put up those . funds independ- ent of any other kind of permits issued. Mr. Massy said yes. MOTION: Council Ee r Klein moved, seconded by Cobb, to adopt Planning Commission recommendation A) . that the City Council, has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIrR) and certifies that the SIR has bees completed in compliance with CEQA. NOTION PASSED unanimously, Patitucci "neat participating." NOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Sutorius, to adopt Planning Coaaission recommendation S) that the City Council recommends to the Zoning Administrator.. that the .project (issuance of a conditional use permit for operation of New Children's Hospital at Stanford) bs approved with specified mitigation mea- sures and findings of overriding considerations and conditions, and revising 4(c) of Attachlent 1, as follows: 1. $ith the following mitigation neaautes to bit imposed as condi- tions on the use permit, which will eIi plate or substantially►- lessen the following significant environmental effects . identi- fied in the SIR: a. Traffic and Circulation o Pro j»ct will be rospoasibl os for providing tba off -site traffic improvements listed below, such improwwseente to be constructed either on an . "as -warranted" " basis, with an agreement between teas applicant and the City similar to that entered into by Stanford University and the City for the SSOO and MGM projects, or according to the following schedule: Application for design approval of required improve- ments tO be mad* no iaitar than January 19$3. Construction to commence no later than January 19,0, mad to be completed its a timely *user. The off --sits traffic =_improvements required are: Excl ssLee imatimbisad left -turn isms :' at the inter- olketiOn Of Welch and Quarry Ronda and related widening of Quarry Road to Arboretum Road, 8 0 7 8 2/23/87 MOTION CONTINUED Re -striping to accommodate . Leo .lanes each northbound and southbound on Pasteur Drives near Welch Road. Re -striping to accommodate exclusive left, through and through/right lanes northbound on Arboretum Road at Quarry Road, and related signsl- : difidatfons. ea Project must provide City standard sidewalks or paths connecting; (1) Medical Center.. main_entrance ntraRnc• and New Children's Hospital mein entrance; and (2) Hew Childron's Hospital main entrance and sidewalk on Welch Road. o Project must provide bus statelier on Welch Road near the New Children's Hospital driveway entrance, the location of tea• bus shelter being subject to approval by the appropriate transit districts. b. Air Quality • Project must implement energy conservation measures identified in the DEIR. o Project construction procedures must incorporate Nee sures identified in the pant to minimize dust andother construction omissions. o The project must -yaks every effort to be incorporated in Stanford University plans and programs designed to minimise auto trips, or implement its own progra■ to minimize auto trips, such programs .to be subject to review and approval ..by the City. c. Noise Project construction procedures must inoorporata measures to minieziss solace and concentrate a.isee-producing constructioA du yitmg daylight hours. Project construction) to conform to /*.test building codes in order to minimise- totemic hazards. Hydrology o Project construction procedures wont implement erosion control measure's identif isd in the DZIL NOTION CONTINUED o Insofar as possibl., construction should be scheduled to minimize exposure of .earth during rainy season. o Project design must incorporate catch basins with sediment storage base in new drainage systems. Utilities Applicant or its representatives should continue to work with Palo Alto Utilities Department to insure implementa- tion of energy conservation measures, as discussed in the DEIN. Public Services: Police Applicant should work with Palo Alto Police Department to incorporate crime prevention measures in the project design and operation. Public Services Waste Disposal Project should inp1enont a solid waste disposal and solid waste reduction program appropriate to a health care facility. ArchaeologP Project construction procedures must incorporate: o Notification of Stamford University archaeologist of sigaiificaat construction activities. o Procedures to iaplemwat Stanford policy on arc#saeolog- .. icel sites. 2. With th* finding that the id•ntifi•d mitigation eteasvres for 'the significant traffic, effects at the fallowing intersections are within they responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agoacies and such measures can and should be . adopted by such a► ar „a*fits, and that 'the benefits of the Nov Children.* min/itat ,' djeet (proVlsion Of enhanced, stat a*of-the-art meatcal _ arm for the treatment of sick Children) oetw*igh tho amitioidablet advoras environmental impacts at the into -emotions listed" below and these effects are therefore considered acceptable: Sand Bill d and Oak mvease 8 0 8 0 2/23/87 MOTION CONTINUED b. Sand Hill Road and Santa Cruz Avenue c. El Camino Real and Ravenswood Avenue d. El Camino Real and Santa Cruz Avenue e„ Juniper* Serra Boulevard and Campus Drive West f. Santa Cruz Avenue and Alpine Road 3. With the finding that the identified mitigation measures for the following significant effects are infeasible due to eco- nomic, social, or .other considerations, and that the benefits of the New Children's Hospital project (provision of enhanced, state-of-the-art medical came for. .th. treatment of sick children) outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts listed below and these effects are _therefore con- sidered acceptable: a. Traffic effects a El Camino and Esbarcadero Road. .Mitigation infeasible because of economic cost. o El Camino Real and University Avenue/Palm Drive. Miti- gation would be infeasible without complete reconstruction of the -interchange; : which- would be *canonically prohibitive o El Canine and entrance to Stanford Shopping Center. Mitigation ( s. gp , through lane widening of El Camino Real) would be infeasible due to economic cost. o El Camino Real and Palo Alto Avenue/Alsa Street. Miti- gation would be infeasible dse . to •conanic . cost (widening Palo Alto .Avenue) and potential: conflict with Palo Alto policy prohibiting direct access from a future Sand Bill Rod Extension to Palo Alto &venni. o Sand Hill Avid and ' Oak Creek East. Mitigation infeasi- ble because of *cosmetic cost of providing additional lases o* Sand Bill Seed and need for additional study of integrated improvements la the Sand Oil/ Road Corridor. 8 0 8 1 2/23/87 MOTION CONTINUED o , Sand Hill Road mad Qak Creek West. Mitigation infea- eiblo because of economic cost of providing additional -lanes on Sand ,Hill Road and .aaed for _additional study of integrated iseproveaents. in . tbe, Sand Hill Road cor- ridor. o Palm Drive and Arboretum Road. _ Mitigation world be infeasible because the .intersactiox involves two\ pri- vate roads belonging to Stanford University. b. ct Air Qua t Sffe s ■ 1i 3 Mitigation is infeasible because predicted adverse air quality conditionswould occur whether .the pcoject is con- structed or not, and it . is not possible to „ detersine the degree to which recommended mitigation measures will reduce the predicted air quality condition* to acceptable levels.. 4. With the following additional conditions, to be imposed as conditions on the use permit; a. The maximum number of hospital beds permitted at New Children's Hospital at Stanford shah, not exceed 140. b. Parking for 300 cars and 10 bicycles shall be provided on the projoct sits, to act in concert_ with the Stanford Medical. Center Parking Plan and ongoing implementation Of the parking provisions in the Hospital Modernization Project use permit. c. & three -party agreement be negotiated between the New Children's Hospital et Stanford, Stanford University, and the City of Palo Alto within .the next, , 60 days. Such agreement should provide that Stanford University would agree that upon consideration of any reuse of the Old Children's fiespital at Stanford site, that -its use for environmental *Assessment be regardedas zero and that Stanford University coetribaet,_ up to 050,000 for a traffic ,study is the Sand Hill Hoed corridors, Applicant to submit drainage„ plans And calculations, as well as- drawing indicating location and details of new moles, to Public Werks .Engineerin0 for review and approval 30 days prior to commencemont of cooatrnetion. Applicant to obtain street opening permit from Public Works Engineering for driveway at Welch Road. 8 0 8 2 2/23/87 MOTION CONTINUED Applicant to provide turnaround space at front circular drive acceptable to Palo Alto .Fi-rs<..Depar ment. provide for emergency vehicle access through sa►st4f z ing ` lot, and net allow parking at Southwest corner of the"lot. Council Member Renzel said currently the proposed New Children's Hospital had 125 beds, but the approval of the use. permit .permit- ted up to 140 beds, and the current usage between the Pediatrics Department and Children's= Hospital was 129 beds, and she asked if the 11 beds made any difference in the traffic impact that needed to be accounted for. Chief Planning Official Carol Jansen said the purpose .of allowing 140 beds was for unusual circumstances where New Children's Hospital might need additional beds on a one- or two-day basis. The anticipation was that 125 would be the number. AMEiiDNENTs Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Renzel to delete from 1.a., "Project must provide City standard sidewalks or paths cO* necting x (1) Medical Center main entrance ard New Children►' s Hospital main entrance: and (2) New Children's Hospital main entrance and sidewalk on Welch Road," and substitute. "The exterior at grade bicycle/pedestrian access between the end of Bloke -Wilbur Drive and= Welch aged shall be maintained... Director of Planniem and Community Ei:•: i ronment :yen Schreiber said there was a difference between maintaining . an exterior at grade and a new path in terms of grade. He did not believe there was a conflict between the proposed condition and the aaaierdment. AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN BY MAIER AND SECOND Council Member Fletcher referenced Condition 1.h. Waste Disposal, and said she woule like to substitute the wording of the condition with the. Wording on page 142 of the EIR, "The New Children's Hospital at Stanford shall be included in the comprehensive recycling program plans by the Leland Stanford University." Planner Steve Olsen- said staff subsequently learned that agreement applied only to the residential portion of the campus. Since the Medical Center was within the City . of Palo Alto, it was : within the service area of the Palo Alto ' sanitation preparation. Representatives of Children's Hospital strongly ea eased the peculaarities of recycling as applied to a medicalfacility and the difficulties of separating out, contaminated materials, etc., which waswhy the recom endation was changed to speak of a waste ;reduc- tion and recycling program appropriate to a medical care facility. Public Works, was desirous sf working with the New Children's, 8 _0 0 3 2/23/87 1 1 1 1 Hospital in trying to cut down the amount of waste and implement recycling wherever possible. AMENDMENT:. Council Member Fletchermoved, seconded by Renael , to revise recommendation 4 (b ) to change the wording "10 bicycles shall ' be ... " to .the following warding,_ "l.5 Class 1 bicycles/ lockers and 15 Class 11 racks shall bs ! . 4 " Council Member Bechtel asked how many other current Class II parking spaces were there already and at the adjacent site. Mr. Schreiber said neither staff nor Stanford had that information available. Council Member Klein asked if the City could propose a requirement for 30 spaces rather than ten. Ms. Morthway said that figure could be required under the use per- mit procedure if there was a finding of an extraordinary need. She believed the record should support the imposition of that con- dition. Council Member Fletcher believed the extraordinary need was demon- strated by the fact Stanford was required to. provide. 30,0 auto- mobile spaces rather than 83. The request was not to provide 10 percent Class I --which would be 30 --but that half of those be Class II racks. Council Member Menzel believed the Children's Hospital was volun- tarily providing the number of parking spaces, but it was clear here was a severe shortage of parking, and the extra bicycle spaces would free up those spaces so there would not be the con- tinuing shortage. Council Mey er Fletcher had not seen any bicycle racks in sight at the main Medical Center. AMEMDMEET TO AMENDMENT: Vice Mayor Sutorius moved, seconded by Sschtel, ; M .to change the wording to "lg Claws 1 bicycle lockers and 20 Class II racks,. AMENDMENT TO AMSOMENT PASSED by a vote of 7-1, Fletcher voting "no,* Patitacci -"not participakirg.'° AMENDMENT AS AMMO PAS 6-2, Fletcher, Woolley vo lag "no, Patitucct 'sot *rtiei atfmW Council Member Fletcher recomuended to applicant and Stanford administration an extension of the 'path from the San Mateo Drive bridge from Menlo Park up to the traffic light at Pasteur Drive, because the path came out et a busy place on Viand Hill - Road with 8 0 8 4 '2/23/87 no way to cross safely. With regard to the path recommended for eight -foot width, she read from the Highwaye Design Manual, Bikeway Planning and Design, from the State of California, "Where heavy bicycle volumes are anticipated and/or significant pedestrian traffic is expected, .the paved width of . a two-way path should be greater than eight feet, preferably twelvefeet or more. Dualuse by pedestrians and bicycles is undesirable and the two should be separated wherever possible." WOIO* AS AMENDED PASSED unanimously, Patitucci 'not participating." 6. FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION RE ADDITION OF ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN III TO REFUSE AREA STAFF (505) MOTION; Council Member Mein for the Finance and Public Works Committee moved to authorize an additional Engineer Technician III in the Refuse Budget effective February 1, 1987. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 8-1, Patitucci voting 'no.'° 7. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE AWARD OF A FRANCHISE ENABLING CENTURY FEDERAL.TO CONSTRUCT A CABLE SYSTEM IN THIS SERVICE AREA (CMR:153:7) (1141-01) Vice Mayor Sutorius said he would not participate in the item ,due to a potential conflict of interest. Mayor Woolley said the issue had been a particularly difficult one for Council. It was Councils practice to conduct its business in public, and yet the Cable issue involved litigation necessitating closed sessions. Council believed it needed to be aware of the risk to which it was exposing the tax payers of Palo Alto, and yet after years of study and expenditure wanted to provide the area with an excellent Cable system. The ordinance in .question con- tained the terms and conditions most consistent with what the City desired in its Cable system and which could be justified under existing law, including State law and the Cable Communications Act. Council would not be commenting upon the impact of the terms and conditions on the litigation or on Cable Co-op. Litigation impacts had been, and would continue to be addressed in closed litigation sessions. Co-op impacts would be discussed at a late r time in the context of discussions provided for: by the specific provisions of Co-op's franchise agreement. Daniel Appelman, 112 Yale Road, Menlo Park, .a Board Director of the MidPeninsula Access Corporation (M-Pac), said M-Pac was affected by consideration of the ordinance. M-Pac was the inde- pendent community access organization called for in the franchise agreement, set_ up specifically to carry out the vision of the City of Palo Alto and the other municipalities in the service area. He urged Council not to forget the vision it started with in awarding the Cable franchise and in designating an independent community access organization. Public access could be the model system in the service area that Council always hoped it would be. There were a number of portions of the text of the ordinance that were inconsistent with the intention of the ordinance and oversights that needed to be modified. M-Pac would be willing to work with Council to modify inconsistencies. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme Street, spoke as an individual and was con- cerned about the ordinance before Council. He recognized the constraints and assured Council if it passed the ordinance it would have complied with the court otcier; however, that did not mean he found: the ordinance acceptable nor to provide the type of service the citizens of Palo Alto waited more than 15 years to get. The major defects were that the ordinance did not require serving the community needs and interests, did not provide ade- quate community programming or support, did not provide service drops to publicfacilities, did not require the franchisee to pay a fair share of the Cable consultant and other acquisition costs, did not require an adequate support of M-Pac, eliminated clauses throughout the document which either forbad or discouraged law- suits and litigation, permitted changes in the terns and condi- tions without City Council oversight that were built into the ordinance originally, allowed the immediate transfer of the fran- chise to a third party without penalty, allowed damage of utilities or other services unless considered unreasonable, did not require the franchisee to offer higher levels of services available in other areas or systems which they operated. He believed the ordinance was unfair and if it passed, he intended to lead a referendum and have the people of Palo Alto vote on the terms and conditions of the ordinance and on whether or not they wanted the franchisee in the community under the circumstances. Council Member Klein understood Mr. Moss was a Director of Cable Co --op TV. Mr. Moss said yes. Council Member Klein asked if Mr. Moss spoke for himself or for Cable Co-op, Mr. Moss said he spoke for himself and had not discussed the mat- ter with any director or member of the Cc -op. Council Member Klein asked if the matter had been discussed_ at any Board meeting of Cable Co-op. Mr. Mosssaid. no. 8 0 8 6 2/23/87 George Heaton, 817 Santa Fe Avenue, Stanford, believed a good argument was that the ability of the people for whom the First Amendment was original devised was forgotten. Free speech was a birthright. He urged Council Members to be wise in their deci- sions. David Harris, 455 Margarita Avenue, believed the Freedom of Speech right was precious, but the economic nature of Cable television made the judge's decision a bad one. Cable was a "natural monopoly;" after one strung the first set of wires it was hard to enter the market with a second wire, disrupted the system and lost the benefite of having a single set of standards through which all could communicate. The decision might be a historical collision between the right to freedom of electronic speech and the tradi- tional structure of the Cable industry. A compromise might be that the control of the expensive wires be separated from the con- trol of the messages sent over the wires, as was mentioned by Vice Mayor Sutorius during the franchise hearings. ?'he wires should be regulated but the content as free as newspapers. He urged Council to appeal the judge's decision and seek a compromise in which freedom of electronic speech was protected by requiring the sale of small blocks of time on the channels. Freedom of speech would be well served if a regulated carrier allowed everyone with a Mes- sage equal ability to "publish" to the community. Dick Jensen, 356 Monroe Drive, had been a Director on the M-Pac Board, but spoke as a citizen. He had an interest in education and spoke to the removal of the requirement to provide a free drop to public buildings. Schools needed encouragement to participate in the process and the requirement would have been a good encour- agements He was concerned that Century Federal would eliminate all of Appendix E in terns of their obligations. It was important for the people negotiating to have a clear statement, and he sug- gested a statement that Century Federal would share equally in any obligations put torth originally in the ordinance. A contract existed between Co-op and M-Pac, worked out at approximately the tip :the franchise was granted, and that contract might be the base of any financial agreement or funding that M-Pac depended upon and could be shared equally with the two organizations. Joseph Edozien, P. O. Box 5156, Stanford, was on the Board of M-Pac and was concerned about the internal structure of M-Pac in relation to the new environment. It was one thing to expect dities to place requirements on the new franchisee but was more realistic to expect M-Pac to be structured in such a manner that it could determine its relationship with the new franchisee. Ideally, one wanted one strong, economically -viable systL,m in.. the franchise area. He did not agree with the judge's opinion and.. his interpretation of the First Amendment issues, but they needed to address the issue of the economic viabilities of the Cable :opera -- tors and the relationship of M-Pac to those people. The visions i 1 of public access were dependent on how strong operators were, and a system should be established in which both Cable operators could cc operate. Furthermore, there clearly had to be some balance in requirements placed on both operators so one was not overly bur- dened. Clearly, M-Pac needed support f,rom the cities, but such an organization needed to be built bottom -up from the public and sub- scribers; therefore, he recommended the relationship between the joint_ rowers and M-Pac be one of benevolent distance. He con- tinued to be a strong supporter of the Cable Co-op. Robert Smith, th, 2291 Greer Road, was ' a member of Cable Co-op but did not speak for them that evening. Cable Co-op way a fine organiza- tion dedicated to bringing a high quality of Cable television to the City, and he believed they could survive competition. However, in regard to the law suit and its .merits.. on First Amendment grounds, he believed the judge was right. Not everyone in the community was of the opinion that the City shouid have the kind of franchisingpower previously assumed. It was probably a bad idea that further measures be taken to fight the matter, and the course of having a franchise given to Century Federal was a good one. He advised giving Century Federal a franchise consis- tent with the First Amendment, and to further renegotiate matters with the_ Cable Co-op. He looked forward to subscribing to Cable Co-op because he believed their offerings would be stunning and of very high quality. Mayor Woolley asked staff to comment on the appropriateness of the subject ordinance and of`a referendum. Senior Assistant City Attorney Anthony Bennetti said the City amended its Charter two or three. years ago when it was involved in the` franchise process in order to allow Council to grant CATV franchises without a vote of the people.: At that time, it was provided that any grant of such franchise would be granted by ordinance subject to referendum. The Court had not addressed the question of how the Ccuncil should grant its franchise, so the ordinance was brought to Council pursuant to its already - established procedures. The ordinance might be subject to refer- endtm, but staff did not know what the Court's reaction to that would be, and it was possible the Court could enjoin the City to allow Century Federal . to enter the streets and rights of way of the City of Pala Alto on the . terms and conditions provided in the ordinance. While a referendum would bind the City and suspend the effective date of tho ordinance until an election was held to either ratify or repeal the ordinance, there might be other ways in which Century Federal Could succeed. The City essentially pro- posed the order to the Court as a possible means of reducing any eventual damage claim if, in fact,. the City was unsuccessful in defending the law suit. The City reserved its rights to defend the law suit and believed it had a meritorious case, and it was possible if the City could not reach a settlement of the issues on 8 0 8 8 2/23/87 terms acceptable to the City, the City might end up appealing the judge's granting of partial summary judgment to_higher'courts. It was also possible that, if the terms and conditions proposed in the ordinance were adjudicated by the judge as either being con- stitutional or unconstitutional as proposed in the judge's order, that the City would have an appealable order that could resolve the issues in a satisfactory and expeditious manner. MOTIONS Council Member Levy moved, seconded by Bechtel, to approve staff recommendation that, in accordance with United States District Co rt Order No. C 85.-2168 EFL, Council . adopt an ordinance granting Century Federal, Inc.., a . frawcbiree as defined by 47 U.S.C. 522(B) of the Cable Comnunicati.on& Policy Act of 19614 for the entire Service Area covered by .the franchise agreement between .the City on behalf of the parties to.the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement of July, 1953, and Cable Communications Cooperative of Palo Alto, Inc. ORDINANCE. FOR FIRST READING entitled -"ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF Tiff C Y PALO ALTO. _ APPROVING- - AND AUTHORIZING THE AWARD OF A FRANCHISE TO .CENTURY FEDERAL, INC., PURSUANT TO AN ORDER OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIYORNIA Mr. Bennetti clarified the provision of he Cable Act was sub- division (8) rather than (B), and he had distributed at places an errata sheet showing typographical errors in the document. On the cover sheet of Appendix E, the statement, "There' i.s no Exhibit C and no Exhibit D to this Ordinance," should read, "There is no Appendix C and no Appendix D to this Ordinance." MAKER AND SECOND Or NOTION AGREED TO INCORPORATE THE REVXSI€es PROPOSED BY STAFF NOTION PASSED unanimously, Sutorius "not participating." COUNCIL RECESSED TO CLOSED SESSION:FROM 9:25 p.m. TG -_9:40 p.m. 8.. TRANSPORTATION 2000 PLAN REVIEW AND REC E lD1 TIONS (CMRsl48:7) (1163-01) Chief Transportation Official Marvin overway i.ntrodu<ed .Dawn Cameron, a staff meMber of the County Transportation Agency. Mayor Woolley- introduced Council Member John Gatto of Cupertino, who was the representative of the northern county cities on Transportation 2000 (T-2000) . Mayor Woolley asked how detailed the letter to T-2000 would be. 1 Mr. 0verway said staff already sent a copy of the staff report (CMR:148=_7) to Mr. Lightbody of the Santa Clara County Transportation Agency for .information. but could attacha copy of the staff report to the formal letter if satisfactory. Peter Taskovich, 751 Gailen Avenue, believed the T-2000 study and plan was a good first step and would help mitigation but not solve the problems in the year 2,000 or beyond. The residents of the county were looking for a solution. A long-range study should propose more intensive rail use or morehighways, and he preferred more intensive rail use. The capacity improvements as. proposed would not be sufficient even with limits on growth of commercial buildings and development. He urged Council to keep a vigilant eye on the progress of the transportation situation in general to help set a goal to solve the problem. The transit provisions for commuters from Palo Alto to the South Bay were grossly inadequate and should be looked at in the. short termk He recommended light rail .service from Fremont to Palo Alto on the Dumbarton Bridge. The report promoted light rail aver heavier rail uses, such as Bart, and he did not believe light rail would solve the problem and would keep Santa Clara County predominantly an 'automobile society. He noticed othercities took more of a leadership role than Palo. Alto in coming- up with regional transportation solu- tions. Bob Moss, 4010 Crme Street, said the staff recommendations were good but were not adequate. He suggested three additional policy statements .for Council to make to the T-2000 Task. Force. 1) He believed some ',concern and reservations should be expressed about the commuter lanes on both Central Expressway and Foothill -- Central Expressway could significantly increase traffic going into Alma 'and Palo Alto and adding commuter lanes to Foothill Expressway would funnel three lanes to one which could lead . to a huge traffic jam; 2) He noticed in the Planning Commission min- utes the urban interchanges at both Foothill and Page Mill, and El. Camino and Page - Mill were considered and explicitly removed from the Comprehensive Plan severalyears ago on the grounds they would not Asecessarily alleviate traffic and might create more of a demand. He suggested Council make it clear it was not endorsing those interchanges at this time; 4nd 3) Council should go on record as supporting the :extension .of light rail to north county, and specifically to the Palo Alto/Mountain View area. • Irene Saupsont 3992 Bibbits Drive, spoke on behalf of , t e League of Women Voters of Palo Alto. The League was glad to add its sup- port to a plan which addressed ,one, of the County! s biggest problems--transportation--and agreed with the problem statement in the T-2000Plan which noted , the lack of viable transportation choices and uncoordinated land use policies ;,;.were contributing causes. The League believed .alternatives to the auto lust be developed and their use encouraged and .that effective land use and `8 0 9 0 2/23/87 growth management policies were equally, if not more, important. They were pleased the concept of balancing housing, .jobs; and transportation was included in the plan. The League urged . Council to endorse the T-2000 plan and work incooperation with the rest of the county to implement its recommendations. Council Member Patitucci clarified Council was attempting to get a general idea of the sequence with which to approach the matters in a community -wide agreement. Council was not deciding to spend money on one item versus another. Mr.. Overwav believed that was a fair statement. Three priorities were given and sufficient funding wasnot available, but it desig- nated the priorities in the three categories. NOTION: Council Bomber Bechtel aged, seconded by . Renzel, to adopt staff recommendations that the Council endorse the Transportation 2040 Plain and direct a letter to the Transportation 2400 Steering Committee cormuniceting the following points: 1. Palo Alto supports and endorses the Transportation 2000 Plan, with the understanding that City decisions regarding whether or not to support implementation of specific projects will be based -upon information and evaluation from ongoing planning processes; 2.. Palo Alto requests that signal coordination and synchronise- tioa on Oregon/Page Bill Expressway and Foothill Expressway be pursued immediately; 3, Palo Alto supports improved rail service in the Route 101/ Peninsula Corridor and encourages the expeditious formation of a Joint Powers Authority and acquisition of Southern Pacific right-of-way. �4. Palo Alto supports expanded peek hour and computer transit service end requests the ongoing active participation of County Transit in the promotion and funding of the Dumbarton Bridge line. 5. Palo Alto supports continno0 efforts to i►wprove the cost effectiveness of elderly and ° handicapp transport .services, by involving . tbs private *motor and evaluating service options; 6* Palo £lt.o smpperts the development ►f more effective -circ - tion and dintributtma systems as a.moarns to seduce dependency on the eutomObile end encourage the use at alternative trans poctatlon awes. Palo Alto regnesis that such feeder systems also locus ea CalTrain stations a trust line bus routes, . as well as the 1.2T states highlighted in the .Ilan; 8 0 9 1 2/23/87 1 MOTION CONTINUED 8 7. Palo Alto supports the commuter lane system, as a means to encourage ridesharing and enhance .the prospects of more effective Transportation Demand Management programs. Palo Alto is cbncerued that such projectsconsider the effects of increased traffic and that efforts to .improve the connection from Route. 101 to the Dumbarton Br1dgc bed limited to HOV lane operation, thereby Providing a strong incentive .for car- pooling and transit usage; 8. Palo Alto supports an effective Transportation Demand Management program for the eat.:.; n . County, as an important mans to reduce traffic and encourage the use of alternative travel modes; 9. Palo Alto supports continuing serious commitment to bicycling as a commute alternative, with the recognition that financial resources are an important part of such a commitment; 10. Palo Alto supports effective land use/.growth management strategies and looks to the Golden Triangl* Task •.Force pro - Coss as an ongoing opportunity to identify and evaluate various strategies; and 11. Palo Alto commends the Transportation 2000 Steering Committee, other study committees, and_ project staff for a coapreheneivo look at transportation needs -and alternatives in Santa Clara County, coupled with a thorough public review and participating process to achieve a -broad base df under- standing and support. Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Menzel, td change recommendation 4 to add after °Palo Alto supports erpe.n peak hour and Commuter transit service" the following wording, °with improved direct bus service to San Joao. ° Council Member Fletcher had raised the matter on a number of occa- sions and said County staff was looking into express service to the airport and then into downtown San Jose. Presently, it took 1.25 to 2 hours to reach the airport. Mr. Overway believed the amendment was appropriate. AMENDMENT PASSED unanimously. Council: Member Fletcher had the same reservations about the com- muter lanes and the urban interchange* as Mr. Moss. The reason the commuter lanes on Central Expressway were not planned to go to San Antonio Road was because she emphasized strongly cne impact on 8 0 9 2 2/23/87 Alma Street would be devastating; therefore, the plan was to go no further towards Palo Alto than Bailey. She would like the con- cerns expressed, and it was already in the body of the report that Council was not necessarily supporting those plans pending further study. Mayor Woolley believed Council's feelings would be conveyed by the inclusion of the staff report. MOTION LS AMENDED PASSED unanimously. 9. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 1.986--87 BUUG1T _ TO PROVIDE AN APPROPRIATION FOR PARK SUPE` :VISION AT .ELEANOR, MITCHELL, AND RINCONADA PARKS (CMR:143:7) (1321-24) MOTIONs Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Klein, to adopt an ordinance to amend the 1986-87 Budget to appropriate $6,000 to Employee Services in the Resource Management Program of the Parks Division, and $7,500 to Employee Services in the Facilities Operation Program of the Recreation Division. ORDINANCE 3740 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL .OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1986-87 TO PROVIDE AN APPROPRIATION FOR PA SUPERVISION AT ELEANOR, MITCHELL, AND RINCONADA PA.R&Sm Council Member Levy endorsed the purposes of the appropriation but wondered whether taking money out of two different programs in two different divisions --Parks and Recreation --obscured Council's objectives. The purpose of budgeting was to attach the money to specific objectives. Mr. Zaner said the funds were going to two completely separate departments. It would require an effort on the part of the Public Works Department, in which the Parks Division was located, and also an effort on the part of the Recreation Division. E,ch required additional funds to carry out the program aulthorized by Council. Council Member Levy asked how accountability could be kept in focus in review. Mr. Zaner said staff already committed to the Finance and Public Works (F&PW) Committee to provide a number of cuts across the budget different from the past so they could look at soma specific programs. Also, staff committed to 'return to Council , and report on the success or failure of the program to reduce the problems in the parka. At that time, staff would: return with a financial statement so Council had an opportunity to see what kind :o f funds were spent in which departments. 8 0 9 3 2/23/87 Council Member Levy tripe] to approach the budget in the way staff suggested, which was to look at the larger program costs and the objectives of each of those programs, and to evaluate whether they were getting proper program accomplishment for the money. Even though the _amounts of money were small, it reflected frustrations that were often existent when looking at the overall budget to to trace a program and its costs when the objective had funding from several different programs. LOTION PASSED enanimously, Bechtel absent. 10. FUNDING REQUEST FROM PALO ALTO MEDICAL FOUNDATION (CMR:154:7) (1031/404) Council Member Klein was unable to participate due to a conflict of interest. Pr. Robert W. Jampliss, President of the Palo Alto Medical foundation, believed they had been successful in putting the same stamp of quality on the Palo Alto Medical Clinic (the Clinic) as he enjoyed at. the Mayo Clinic.. They had many firsts, e.g., CAT scan, prepaid plans, digital subtraction, etc., and took care of half the people in Palo Alto. In the late 1970s i t . `became appar- ent that government and other grants for research and patient fees would go down, and. if they were to posture themselves in the proper position to get into the 21st century, they needed to be in another mode. The Clinic needed sourc=es other that: patient fees and grants and one way was in tax-exempt bonds. On January. 1, 1981, the Palo Alto Medical Foundation for Health Care, Research, and Education became a reality. Since 1981, all the monies coming in from health care, patient fees, government and other grants, and philanthropy went to the Foundation. On the health care side, the Foundation contracted a group of doctors, called the Palo Alto Clinic, to deliver health care to the Foundation's patients.. They were on the final step which was for the Foundation to buy the land, buildings, and equiment owned by the Clinic. The bond issue did not involve any additional construction, : but a buying of the assets so the nonprofit, charitable organization could continue in perpetuity in a public trust, governed by a Board of 20; .16 of whom were laymen. The public trust would be run by the Foundation. . In 1986, the Foundation gave $3 million worth in the Health Care division for charity. A government agency ---either a State or a City --had to issue the bonds. Bond Counsel assured him there was no direct _ monetary financial risk to the City of Palo Alto. There would be bond . insurance by Cal Mortgage and °AAA" rating: on the bonds. In 1985 in :`California $2 billion in bonds was issued for health care institutions. The Foundation asked for action of the Council to approve the issuance of the bonds subject to. final : documents for Council's approval, such as feasibility studies, etc, 8 0 9 4 2/23/87 Council Member Cobb asked if there was any difficulty in staff's suggestion that the lost property tax could be replaced by an annual fee. Dr. Jampliss said the Foundation did not expect a free ride and would want to pay its share --whether tax-exempt or . not --in the proper ratio. The staff report (CMR:154:7) referred to $200,000 in property taxes paid last year, but only $157,000 was pertinent to the issue because the Foundation was not going to buy all the assets. Some assets were in Fremont and some were non --qualifying for the bonds. He estimated the Foundation would pay approxi- mately $20,000. Vice Mayor Sutorius asked if the Foundation's favorable considera- tion would extend similarly to the portions of property taxes that went to the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD). Dr. Jampliss said that issue could be negotiated. He asked if those were City taxes. Vice Mayor Sutorius was speaking to the subject of property taxes and how the local community would be affected. Dr. Jampliss said the Foundation would want to pay its share of City taxes. If those taxes included schools, that could be dis- cussed. Mr. Zaner said the amount for schools was small but was not included in his estimates. Dr. Jampliss believed the Foundation would probably want to pay. Council Member Patitucci cla:< ified that Council was to establish policy with regard to the City's bonding authority for that type, of project. The doctors who owned the Clinic as a private busi- ness were, in effect, selling to a Foundation which was using tax-exempt bonds as the means to raise the money to buy out the doctors. Dr. Jampliss said it had always been the goal of the Foundation to eventually own all of the building. Council Member Patitucci clarified bonds would be sold with the City of Palo Alto's name on them, and there would be no financial risk or exposure to the -City. The money would go to the Foundation, which would buy for $18.75 million the assets of the Clinic from the 104 doctors. Dr. Jampliss said the_. property was valued at $31.75 million and the $10 million was a gift from the doctors. The money would go to the doctors anyway, and they, were only getting it sooner 8 _0 9 5 2/23/87 because they would rather give it to the Foundation and take a tax. write-off. Also, the doctors capitalized the Foundation at its inception for $7.5 million and had forgiven that debt. Council Member Patitucci wanted to ensure the net result was a Foundation which was contracting with the doctors who no longer owned assets but owned a contract to work for the Foundation which was negotiated yearly. Rather than having shares in the business, the' doctors became more like employees without an ownership stake. Dr. Jampliss said correct, the doctors could not be employees by State law which was the reason for the contract. Council Member Patitucci asked if Dr. Jampliss saw any problem in maintaining the high quality of the doctors and medical care with- out the equity interest: and the opportunity to make an equity rate of return. Dr. Jampliss said no, the Foundation believed the quality of the doctors would go up because with access to tax-exempt funding, philanthropy, etc., the Foundation could have the equipment and do the necessary projects. Mayor Woolley asked if the processing of the bonds and the work load on City staff presented a problem. Mr. Zaner said the bonding process might present some problems. Staff had a number of major projects. If Council decided to move ahead with the item, staff would attempt completion in an expedi- tious manner, but he could not guarantee an April 1 deadline.: MOTIOMA Mayer Woolley moved, seconded by Fletcher, to support the concept of the Palo Alto Medical Pounding issuing bads through the City of Palo Alto provided further financial analysis by City staff indicates that there will be go significant risk to the City and provided the timing can be integrated with other City project* and a fee to replace property tax revenues based on the most currant appraised valuation can be arranged. Mayor Woolley believed the City was gaining a significant public benefit i'ra that the Foundation would be guaranteed a life forever, and that kind of high quality medical care was important for the citizens of Palo Alto. It was worthwhile if the City was partici- pating in the endeavor so the very long-range benefit could be. offered the people of the area. Council Member Patitucci supported the motion generally. The whole pt rpose of public :'benefit bonds that benefited private pur- poses .was a tricky area. During the development of the 1986 tax legislation, the whole issue. :of public and private purpose was 8 0 9 6 2/23/87 looked at hard, the type of financing in question survived that examination, and the use was an authorized one which had met a lot of scrutiny in the past. If the City did not participate, there was a State agency set up to do so. Being primarily in favor of local control, he could support the approach as long as it did not cost the citizens of Palo Alto more than putting the City's name on the bonds. AMENDMENT: Council Member Patitucci moved, seconded by $utorius to replace, "a fee to replace property taa revenues based on the most current appraised evaluation can be arranged,' with "the City would negotiate an ongoing fee for Cityservices related to the cost of services provided by the City to the Clinic.° Council Member Patitucci believed the property tax bill was based on a historical valuation of property under Proposition 13 and Might produce revenue which reflected the services being provided to the facilities in Palo Alto. Upon re -revaluation of the prop- erty according to the appraised values of $31 million and even if the Proposition, 13 rates were applied, he did not know whether the tax bill would be 50 percent greater than reflected. While they could assume the new appraised value was the basis for the taxes lost, the old taxes could be the basis for the taxes lost, and he preferred to consider what it would cost to provide the services not otherwise paid for by the Clinic and negotiate it as part of a fee so there was no cost to the general citizens for supporting a nonprofit entity. He clarified the problem with replacing the property taxes was the arbitrary number. Mr. Zaner said one reason for a property tax was to pay for ser- vices supplied by .a community to its constituents, whether they happened to be businesses or individuals; the value of which could not be easily identified, but the cost of which must be spread across the entire community. It would be hard to identify the cost for police services ..to be charged the Clinic since a police officer might never be sent there. On the other hand, ten police officers might be sent tomorrow. The same was true with fire and building inspection. A property tax assessed the .entire community for having the service available regardless of . whether the commu- nity made use of it. The most common basis for doing so was to value the property and assess costs on a proportionate basis, i.e., a property tax. The system was not perfect, but it was probably the most equitable way to spread such costs. While he sympathized eth the desire to try and identify the costs, the property tax did so in a rather crude way. Council Member Patitucci clarified he was interested in some way to determine the City's budget not financed by other sources of revenue or by general taxes. He did not believe the historical: tax bill was particularly relevant, especially if the property were sold, the appraised value ended up being nearly twice what it currently was. 8 0 9 7 2/23/87 f i Mr. Zaner did not know whether Council Member Patitucci's ideas could be accomplished or were worth the effort. It sounded to him like a lot of guessing or calculating in an effort to arrive at a number which might be higher or lower than the property tax. AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN Council Member Pa titucci clarified if the property was being sold, the estimated lost property taxes should be based on the most recent . valuation. Mr. Zaner said it had always been his intention that anyproperty tax in -lieu payment would be based on the assessed valuation as it existed when the properties were going to change hands. The City might want to build in some type of formula to account for the fact that the value increased over time as did the City's costs. Council Member Levy asked whether the costs involved to the City would exceed $1,000. Mr. Zaner said yes. AMENDMENT: Council Member Levy moved„ seconded by Rensel, that the City of Palo Alto be compensated for employee time involved in the bonding process. Council. Member Levy clarified compensation included direct and indirect expenses. Vice Mayor Sutorius supported the amendment. The kind of costs referred to in the amendment could not be measured against the cost of the $20 million bond issue. Even though a great deal of time would not be devoted to the matter, there were multiple proj- ects on the agendas of both the Finance and Legal Department, and the motion was not intended to take priority over. the same type of action presently underway with respect to City's refinancing. The City's interests needed to be protected and time was cr$tical with respect to those determinations. AMENDNENT PASSED unanimously, Klein not participating,. Council Member Renzel supported the motion. As she understood Council Member Patitucci's cz^cern, the payment in lieu of taxes would be computed on the basis of the appraised ..value and not the assessed value. Mr. Zaner said the calculation would be based on the new assessed value after property sold. When the property sold, it would be revalued by the County Assessor and that was the value on which he assumed the fee would be levied. 8 0 9 8 2/23/87 Council Member Renzel believed Council Member Fatitucci spoke in terms of tha market value which was suggested as being approxi- mately $30,000. It was being sold for appcoprimately $18 million, which was the price on ohich the assessor would base the asessment by law. She asked for clarification of Council Member Patitucci's intent. A big chunk of the value of the propertywas being donated rather than sold and the price the Assessor would use was the actual sale price. Council Member Patitucci disagreed. The transaction was part gift and part cash. but the assessed value was the market value in the most recent transaction. He expected the numbers would reflect the actual value of what was being transferred, Council Member Renzel understood the intent was for valuation to be based on the market value rather as opposed to the sale price. Mayor Woolleysaid that was correct. NOTION RESTATED: Council supports the concept of the Palo Alto Medical Foundation isaning bonds through the City of Palo Alto provided further financial analysis of the City staff indicates there . weald be so significant risk to . the City and provided .the timing can .be integrated with other City. projects .and a fee to replace the property tax rov%onue based on the_ gust recent a%set sed valuation can be arranged. NOTION AS AMENDED PASSED unanimously, Klein Rnot participating. 11, REQUEST OF VICE MAYOR SUTORIUS RE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY (NCPA) FINANCING AND CREDIT RATING DISCUSSIONS (1103) Mayor Woolley noted that Vice Mayor Sutorius spent about as much time on NCPA business as he did on Council business. It was an incredible amount of time to spend on City business and she con- veyed appreciation on behalf of the Council and rate payers. Vice Mayor Sutorius said NCPA's planning and timing of a major refinancing resulted in a gross savings of approximately $75 mil- lion over the life of the issue compared to the financing refunded. Adjusted to present value, it: came to about.$43 million. In terms of Palo Alto's entitlement _ in the geothermal project, it had no participation in Plant #1, and the financing covered both Plants #1 and #2. Palo Alto had a little more than 12 percent participation in Plant #2, so the City's overall participation entitlement was in the neighborhood of six and one -sixth percent. Applying the figure to either the $43 ,million or $75 million would show the effect of lowering the debt service liability. Palo Alto. through staff recommendation and Council action, contracted with the Turlock 8 0 9 9 2/23/87 1 1 Irrigation District to sell its share of the project to Turlock. The base load delivered by the project was more suitable to Turiock's needs since Palo Alto's needs were presently more in the peak area. Palo Alto achieved the savings, but passed it on directly by contract to Turlock. At its meeting in December, the credit agencies wanted to know about NCPA as a total operation as well as the geothermal phase and how the major cities performed. It was satisfying to be in those conferences and represent not only NCPA but Palo Alto. Palo Alto's participation in the project and its own utility operation received high marks. He believed the compatibility of NCPA's performance and the improved credit rating, should have a beneficial effect on Palo Alto's financing as it went forward. Council Member Cobb believed much of the credit for the types of savings brought forward and the successful refinancings over the past two years were directly attributable to the efforts of Vice Mayor Sutorius. NO ACTION TAKEN 12. RE UEST OF MAYOR WOOLLEY AND COUNCIL MEMBERS KLEIN RENZEL AND BECPTEL RE LEGISLATION TO NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE (702-06-02) Council Member Renzel said hopefully in the Spring, new legislation would be introduced in Congress to complete the San Francis' o Bay National Wildlife Refuge. When the Refuge was established, there were 22 hunt clubs, a lot of farmlands and other dikes and seasonal wetlands available to wildlife. As urban areas expanded, it was apparent that the particular kinds of habitat were vital to the wildlife enjoyed in Palo Alto's baylands, as well as wildlife throughout the Bay and for open space and other human needs. The legislation intended to bring under the protection of the Refuge some of the diked and historic baylands critical to the overall health of the Bay. She urged unanimous support of the legislation. Palo Alto had no properties likely to be incorporated in the Refuge, but would `benefit by having the type of habitat included. NOWION s Cosnc i l Ne.ber Menzel moved, seconded by Bechtel, appro 1 of the resolution. o 6595 entitled !Rl UTION OF 'ia COUNCIL 01' T "lIOr PALO ALTO SUPPO*AG TSB CONFLICTION OF TSE NAN FRANCISCO BAY NATIONAL molars MOW COMPL ETE THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY Trish Mulvey, 527 Rhodes: Drive, represented the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society, who supported the protection of wetlands and com- pletion of the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge. She endorsed the resolution. Wetlands protection was important to the National Audubon Society and was the top priority of the eight Bay 8 1 0 0 2/23/87 as corrected 3/23/87: Area Audubon Society chapters which collectively represented 1.7,000 member households. San Francisco Bay and its marshes contributed to the moderate climate and clean air and its associated wetlands provided natural open space barriers against increased urban devel- opment, traffic congestion, noise, and air pollution. Wetlands provided critical nesting and feeding grounds for both resident and laboratory water and shorebirds along with essential yearend habitat for endangered species and other wildlife. Florence LaRiviere, 453 Tennessee Lane, represented the Citizens Committee to Complete the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge. The Refuge was in the midst of a dense urban center and established because of a massive five-year campaign by the people of the South Bay. Palo Alto was one .of the first cities to unani- mously pass a supporting resolution in 1969, and three years later, enabling legislation was passed. The Refuge was a haven for people and wildlife, but inadvertent mistakes were made in the purchase of the 17,000 acres currently within its boundaries. Almost all of the acreage were salt ponds and some tidal marshes. Only 200 acres were seasonal wetlands --the type of habitat proven necessary for the survival of six or seven species of water fowl and an endan- gered mammal. Those lands, once thought to be safe, became targets for development with the pressures of population. She urged sup- port of the resolution. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Klein absent. 13. REQUEST OF MAYOR WOOLLEY RE CANCELLATION OF THE MARCH 2, 1987 CITY COUNCIL MEETING (701)' M©TIO z Mayor Woolley moved, seconded by Fletcher, to cancel the March 2, 1007, Regular Meeting of the City Council and schedule Monday, March 30, 19*7, as a Special Meeting. Council Member Bechtel noted Council had approximately three spe- cial workshops in a row, and she queried the purpose of the March 30, 1987 meeting and whether it was of such urgency as to call a meeting on a fifth Monday. Mayor Woolley said the March 30, 1987 meeting was scheduled for March 2, 1981, so Council would not have ended up with three work- shops in arrow. The reason for the workshops had to do with the current pt6posal for a possible utility tax and the City's needs in relation to revenues, Council Member Bechtel asked whether the workshop was related to the Utility User's Tax or was it strictly the City's long range plans for utilities. Assistant City Manager June Fleming said the wOrkahopwas related to both. 8 1 0 1 2/23/87 Council Member Patitucci asked whether it was possible to put two of the three items together in one evening. Ms. Fleming said there were two items scheduled for March 23, 1987. NOTION PASSED by a vote of 7-1, Bechtel, '8O," florin absent. ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned at 11:01 p.m. ATTEST APPROVED: Mayor 8 1 0 2 2/23/87