Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-03-16 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MINUTES PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVEVIAKZSU-FREOUENCY9O.1 ON FMDIAL--=\, Regular Meeting March 16, 1987 ITEM Oral Communications PAGE 57-2 Minutes of February 17, 1987 57-3 Consent Calendar 57.3 1. Refinancing Outstanding Debt - Refer to Finance 57-3... and Public Works Committee 2. Wells Fargo Bank - Funds Transfer Agreement 57-3 3. Report from Council Legislative Committee: 57-3 ACA 4, AB 36, SB 100, and SB 269 4. Finance and Public Works Committee Recommenda- 57-3 tion re City's Financial Condition 5. ' Planning Commission Recommendation re the 575 Request of the Golden _Triangle Study for Identification of Potential Housing Sites 6. Amendment No. 1 to Contract No„ 4591, Franchise 57-12 Agreement by` and between the City of Palo Alto and Cable Communications Cooperative of Palo Alto, Inc. 7. Request of Council Member Emily Renzel. and 57-12 Mayor Gail Woolley re Oversized Houses an R--1 Lots Adjournment to a Closed Session re Litigation at 57-14 8:45 p.m. Final Adjournment at 8:47 p.m. 57-14 57.1 3/16/87 Regular Meeting Monday, March 16, 1987 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:34 p.m. PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Patitucci, Renzel, Sutorius, Woolley Mayor Woolley announced the need for a Closed Session re, Litigation to discuss Philadelphia Gear vs. City of Palo Alto pur- suant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to be held after the meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Suzan Stewart, 1550 Middlefield Road, spoke about the new liability waiver form for recreation programs and the Children's Theatre. She believed the people of Palo Alto might have the impression the form was absolutely necessary and would protect the City against law suits. She understood most of 'the suits brought against the City of Palo Alto con- cerned traffic matters, that the waiver was not required by an insurance company, and was not a total condition for member- ship in the group insurance plan of self -insured cities. Council Member Klein said it was not accurate that Palo Alto was self -insured. The City was only self -insured up to a certain point and had to deal with insurance companies. 2. Richard Govea, 2771 South Court, believed the newly -revised Release of Liability and Indemnity Agreement was bad precedent. and bad policy angl,. requested Council direct appropriate revision to its content and tone. He was particularly disturbed by the implication of the new policy on City - sanctioned sports programs. 3. Ben Bailey, 171 Everett, spoke concerning violation of human rights by the Palo Alto Police Department. 4. Edie Gordon, 185 Heather Lane, protested the new Release of Liability and Indemnity Agreement. 5. Trudi Reinhardt, 3440 Kenneth Drive, requested the new Release of Liability and Indemnity Agreement be agendized. Council Member Levy understood the item would be age ndlized on March 23, 1987. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 17, 1987 -MOTION: Council Member Sutorius moved, seconded by Levy, approval of the Minutes of February 17, 1987, as submitted. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 8-0--1,_ Renzel 'abstaining." CONSENT CALENDAR MOTIOMi Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Klein, approval of the Consent Calendar. 1. REFINANCING OUTSTANDING DEBT - REFER TO FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE (CMR:168:7) (404-04 407--01) 2. WELLS FARGO BANK - FUNDS TRANSFER AGREEMENT (CMR:167:7) (407-01) The Finance Director is also authorized to make changes as needed. 3. REPORT FROM COUNCIL LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE: ACA 4t AB 36, SB 00, AND SB 269 (CMR:173:7) (702-06-02) MOTION PASSED unanimously. 4. FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION FINANCIAL CONDITION (CHR:170:7) 411) MOTION: Council Member Klein for the Finance and Public Works Committee moved that City Council authorize transfers and project Closures as indicated in staff report (CMR:1O0 7) in order to restore the Unappropriated Reserve for Capital Projects to prudent levels. RE CITY'S Vice Mayor Sutorius believed staff and the F&PW Committee did a thorough job.. In regard to the transfers on which the F&PW Committee asked for information and did not recommend, he under- stood staff was recommending they not be adopted. Director of Finance Mark Harris said thatwas correct. Vice Mayor Sutorius agreed with staff that such transfers would not be appropriate. Mayor Woolley. clarified the only transfer was the excess app ro_ priatiana from the Tarman Reserve. Council Member Levy commended -staff for its work. He asked if the sick leave liability would show up as a reserve in the annual statements, 57-3 3/16/87 Mr. Harris said the annual statements were out and were finally presented as indicated that evening. Council would recall the statements had not been totally audited. The sick leave accrual showed up in a "long-term debt account," as a long-term liability, but no funds had been reserved to account for that long-term liability. Staff had the current year's portion in the current liability but not years beyond 1986-87. Council Member Levy asked how that would be handled for the accrual to be built up. Mr. Harris said staff currently had no plans to partially or fully finance the liability. It would be paid on a "pay as we go" basis. As people retired or left the City and had vested inter- est, the sick leave would be paid to them because eventually that liability would go away, but that would take many years. The employee benefit was no longer in the pay plans. Council Member Levy asked if it would be clearly noted that the liability was unfunded. Mr. Harris said it was right now. The statements showed it was. recognized but unfunded. Council Member Levy commented it might be misleading to Council and the public if it was not clearly stated the liability was unfunded. Mr. Harris said the footnotes on page 13 of the Annual Financial Report spoke to the long-term debt account. Council Member Klein said he raised the question at the F&P d Committee meeting of how the City was handling the interest on the reallocations. The statement was they were going to be put back into the various reserves in the Utility and other enterprise funds, and he believed the staff .report (CMR:170s7) was intended to address the question as .to whether one way of handling the short fall in the Capital Improvement Budget would be to make an additional allocation from the new $470,000 that would otherwise be in the various reserve funds for the enterprise funds. Staff said that should not be the case, and he asked-> for clarification because he did not see any language that explained why .the stabil- ization reserves were right at particular levels, and presumably were also at the right level when they were $400,000 less. Mr. Harris did not feel it was a matter of whether the stabiliza- tion reserves were at a prudent level. In either case, -there were sufficient funda, and . it was a matter of what staff felt was the appropriateness of those transfers. The Utilities did transfer to the General Fund what the anticipated transfer would be . in 1 1 1985-86, and if Council adopted the recommendations, the City would have prudent reserves available in case of contingencies. Ultimately, the $470,000 should accrue to the rate payers, and that helped the General Fund because. it ,gave the Utilities more flexibility in keeping rates down and transfers at the fair rate -of --return level. Given all those considerat*ons, staff did not see . where it was necessary to make those transfers and recommended against it. Council Member Klein asked whether Council would receive any information as to how to determine whether the stabilization reserves were at the right level or not. There was some level where the reserves got too big, and he was concerned as to where the guidelines were and also about what would happen with the Capital Improvement Program in the spring. Mr. Harris believed in the case of the transfer stabilization reserves, staff had guidelines in the area of 10 or 20 percent of annual revenues as a maximum for the transfer stabilization reserves. When those reserves got too high, rate decreases or some way of returning the excess to the Utility rate payers would be considered. The Electric Fund was substantially less than the guideline. He believed_ the Gas Fund presently had excess reserves, and the Utilities Department planned to return with that for discussion. As the City continued the policy of keeping gas rates at or equal to PG&E's, they accumulated some excess reserves. Staff did not -have all the data yet as to exactly what to do with that transfer stabilization reserve in the Gas Fund. Council Member Klein asked when the matter was scheduled for Council. Mr. Harris believed the topic was a relevant one for budget hearings. MOTION PASSED unanimously. 5. PLANNING COMMISSION . RECOMMENDATION RE THE RE UEST OF THE GOLDEN TRIANGLE ..STUDY FOR IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL HOUSING SITES CMR:166:7) 1041--a 7/ 715-€ 1 Planning ., Commission Che._irperson Ellen Christensen stressed the recommendation was interim, which was the reason for the language in the ` staff report (CMR:166:7) that public meetings and hearings were being conducted. The Planning Commission was not set to finally act on the sites for the Citywide Land Use and Transpertation Study until April 1, 1987. The recommendation could- well change by that date. 57-5 3/16/87 Council Member Renzel was astounded to see that Stanford had another plan Council had not heard about, i.e., the psychiatric hospital, and she asked when the City found out Stanford had that idea in their plan. Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken -Schreiber could not give a specific data but said the information was added into the New Children's Hospital Environmental ImpactReport (EIR) pro- cess as a somewhat firm proposal at the end of the review. The project would take a County General Plan amendment. He understood Stanford would be filing an applicationsin May and the City could expect to see that sometime in the summer or fall. He anticipated referring the EIR of the project to the Planning Commission and Council because of the importance of the properties from a traffic sense, etc. Council Member Renzel asked about the status of Council's earlier referral to the Planning Commission of whether the RM-5 zone was appropriate in Palo Alto. The zone was used as a reference point for densities in some categories, and she queried whether it was realistic to suggest those high densities in the report to the Golden Triangle Task Force. Commissioner Christensensaid the higher densities were chosen as a worst -case scenario in terms of analyzing the impact of those developments if the study went at that high ,density. Staff, the Planning Commission, and the Architectural Review Board (ARB) formed a subcommittee to look at RM zoning in the City, to analyze whether or not RM-5 was still appropriate, and to look for other areas that might be changed in the multi -family zoning ordi- nances. Council Member Cobb questioned why some of the sites were listed, e.g., the Elks Club and some of the Stanford areas, particularly. those outside the City limits. Mr. Schreiber .said the factor driving the study was the commitment made to tike Golden Triangle process to try to identify sites. In past years, Council, the Planning Commission, and staff reviewed vacant sites. As there were few vacant sites left, this time they also looked for sites that might be anticipated to be redeveloped. No one from the Elks Club had contacted staff regarding reuse of the site, but it was a large site, prominently located, with good access, and that possibility might occur when contemplating the next ten to fifteen years. He dad not anticipate a City action to study the possibility of a housing designation should becon- sidered a signal the City wanted to remove the Elks Club from Palo Alto. That was , not the intent. Councils Member Patitucci asked the relevance in the recommenda- tions with regard to property outside the City's jurisdiction. 57e6 3/16/87 Mr. Schreiber said the sites outside the City's municipal juris- diction were still within its area for planning concern and, to a certain extent, planning responsibility with Santa Clara County. Looking primarily for vacant or underdeveloped sites, staff looked to the Quarry Road parcels as being prme candidates for some type of development. Staff recommended in the early 1980s the site should be designated multiple -family residential, which was not approved at the time, but given the unresolved designation in the County General Plan, staff felt it was an opportunity to again raise the possibility of housing. Further, in the Citywide Study, staff needed to make some assumptions regarding land use and development potential for the traffic analysis given their promi- nence. Some assumptions and alternatives would need to be looked at because of the impacts. Council Member Patitucci clarified because the site was within the City's •general range of planning areas, the City had more influ- ence with the County than if the development was in San Mateo County, but the County was the actual decision -maker. Mr. Schreiber said that was correct. Mayor Woolley quoted . page 3 of the staff report to the Planning Commission in regard to Children's Hospital, "Staff gives the highest re -use priority to . multiple -family residential," which later spoke to housing for seniors, and she asked why multiple - family residential was preferred over senior housing. Mr. Schreiber said the language contained in the staff report to the Planning Commission was developed at a time when' the range of options for the existing Children's Hospital at the site appeared to be quite wide. Stanford did not seem to have a preferred alternative in' discussions, although there was some mention of senior housing. Since that time, more precise discussions indi- cated Stanford was interested in pursuing some kind of a life -cage concept to include senior housing and multiple -family residential. Senior housing seemed appropriate to the site in that .context given some of the available facilities, such as kitchens, that could be saved and used in another form. Mayor Woolley asked the date of Stanford University's Modified Santa Clara County Use Permit referenced in (F) of staff's report to the Planning Commission. Mr. Schreiber said the permit was initially processed with the Draft Environmental, Impact Report (DEIR) lastyear and sent back by the County to Stanford for a complete re -doing. Staff did not have a schedule for Stanford's timing on returning to the County with _a new DEIR on that project. 5.7-7 3/16/87_ Vice Mayor Sutorius understood there was a two -point contribution from the list of the areas identified: One to Palo Alto's Citywide Land Use Study and the other to the Golden Triangle strategic planning process. He asked what staff work load commit- ment Council was conveying if the recommendation was adopted as presented, and if staff could separate Citywide Landuse contribu- tion versus Golden Triangle. Also, what had been transpiring,in the Golden Triangle strategic planning process and were there any. informative updates or communications.' Mr. Zaner replied a status report was currently being prepared to bring Council up to date -on where the Golden Triangle Task Force was. Some progress had been made, mestings were becoming more frequent, and some decisions were about to be evade within the Organization. Mr. Schreiber.said since the. City was committed to the Citywide Study and the staff report -spoke to items staff would have pursued in the Citywide Study in any event, he did not believe that par- ticular aspect: of the Golden Triangle process generated any additional work load beyond that expected. Council Member Klein said the Golden Triangle Task Force focused almost exclusively onissues of growth control and transportation. There had been little, if any, discussion on housing,, and cer- tainly none of the specifics in the subject requirement was subject to discussion at all. Council was complying with the compact of nearly a year ago. John Mock, 736 Barron Avenue said Council should remember the Phase II study would be looked at by the entire Golden Triangle area, and what was included would be viewed by many as what Palo Alto intended to do with regard to future residential development. In view of that, it should be explicitly stated the densities were individual maxima, and the City did not intend to build out all of the areas to their full densities. He would like to see that specific point included in the introductory material presented to the Golde t Triangle Task Force., The sites certainly needed to be used for housing, but Council must consider the neighborhood impact. Expanding the Mayfield School site to include `the two adjacent properties would remove the last gas station on Page Mill Road and the only one likely to be found by out-of-town people. Fiesta Bowl was another exemple. When the use changed, it should become housing, but the City probably wanted to retain its current use in the near future,..; They -did not want to blindly replace existing uses with residential where the existing uses would bet- ter serve the . community. Residential development which would be growth inducing should be avoided, nor was; it necessarily a good idea to replace open apace with residential use without careful consideration. In regard to the Quarry/Arboretum area, a davelop- sent of 20 units per acre was subetentially. larger than the 0.4 0 and 0.7 floor area ratios being considered for academic and med- ical use. A development of 27 units per acre would open the door to more intense nonresidential development in the area, which the City did not need, particulary in view pf the gargantuan develop- ment considered at the other end of University Avenue. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme Street; said originally the question of housing on the Elks Club site was the Barron Park Association's (BPA) idea. There was discussion at a Zoning and Landuse Committee meeting about development potential along El Camino Real, and the question was raised about what would happen if the Elks club ever closed. The site was a large site, about eight acres, and some large organizations had expressed interest in such a site. The concern was if the Elks ever decided to move out, the CS zone would rapidly become an intensive commerical use with resulting traffic generation. That concern, plus the recognized need for housing, caused them to suggest to staff that the site be zoned for housing, not with the intention of forcing anybody out but to ' have an underlying zone similar to Woolworth, where the Elks could apply for perpetual use of the club but where the site would be used for housing if the Elks decided to abandon the site. The BP A's idea for appropriate density of housing was low to medium, on the order of 20-30 units an acre, and they would cer- tainly not support high density on the order of 30-45 units an acre. Council Member Klein asked what the criteria were when Phase 1.1 of the Golden Triangle planning process asked Palo Alto to identify sites, e.g., were they talking to vacant sites or ones ripe for redevelopment. Mr. Schreiber said there was a general request to identify addi- tional sites for housing. Council Member Klein asked i_ f other cities were doing similar studies or looking at vacant parcels. Mr. Schreiber understood in conversations with other Planning staff, the general intent was to look at sites in general not just vacant sites. The time frame was at least the year 2000- 2005. NOTION: Council Member Klein moved, secomded by Pletcher, to adopt the Planning Commission rocommondation to approve studying for housing the sites and maximum densities identified on Table I of the !'eba teary 20, 1907, staff f report. The housing analysis wield be part of the Environmentel Impact Report for the Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study. Council Member Renzel asked why the Hubbard & 3ohnson site was not included in the study. The the site was similar to the Elk's in `hat it was a large parcel of land containing a small amount of construction, easily converted to other kinds of uses. Commissioner Christensen believed the only sites included in the study were those the Planning Commission specifically suggested might be rezoned to housing. In the Urban Lane area they were talking about a commercial zone continuing out with housing incen- tives on top of the commercial zone as opposed to rezoning any of the particular properties to housing. The recommendations could change as the Planning Commission went through the final round of making recommendations to Council on the EIR for the Citywide Land Use. Council Member Renzel commended staff for looking at parcels that might at some . point be redeveloped. Council did not want to wish away the current uses, but needed to anticipate in long-term plan- ning that some of the pieces of land were underutilized, particu- larly given the desirability of location in Palo Alto and present economics. It was important to look at what could be there rather than what was there for purposes of evaluating future traffic potentials and looking to ways to solve serious imbalance problems in the community. Council Member Levy asked how the attachment related to develop- ment since 1980 and conversion of commercial into housing since 1980 would be used, and how it would relate to other things the Golden Triangle was doing. Mr. Schreiber said the attachment would relate only tangentially. If the staff report was available to other jurisdictions, the attachment was part of the staff report. Staff wanted to compile the data not only for staff's and the public's interest in -.Palo Alto but also to have it as a resource available for inclusion in discussions of what jurisdictions had done recently regarding - housing. Council Member Levy asked whether other jurisdictions compiled similar data. Mr. Schreiber was not sure whether other jurisdictions compiled similar data but were making references, at ,least at the staff level, to actions taken. Council Member Levy was satisfied with what staff had done. ` Over the past number of years, Council paidattention to commercial sites : with potential for conversion to residential use, and he believed Council should continue to examine them, e.g., the Elk's site might or might not turn out to be a good residential site in all or in part, but should certainly be studied and subjected to 1 an EIR. Wherever possible, Council should increase the residen- tial capacity and decrease the capacity for employing more people in Palo Alto. Council Member Cobb said not every site was right nor would all the sites become available for housing. If the motion passed, Council would get a deluge of calls from members of the Elks, and he believed the sites should be picked with more foresight and forethought. He agreed with Council Member Renzel's comments that Council should try to anticipate problems before they happened, but he was not convinced that was being done with the item in question. He was not comfortable with the motion nor with some of the density levels proposed. Council Member Klein believed what was being suggested was appro- priate, and Council Member Renzel's comments were to the point that Council should stay ahead of the game if possible. He assumed staff would include language in the covering letter to the Golden Triangle indicating, fir example, that the Elk's Club site was presently occupied and Council had no knowledge it was likely ._ X P 9 to be redeveloped within a short time frame. He regarded the P 9 densities as merely a tentative benchmark against which things were to be judged and not a commitment. The numbers should not be regarded as significant. Council Member Fletcher concurred with Council Member Klein's remarks on densities and current usages. She asked if Council should include an overall indication of the incentive program. The City could have new housing on sites not currently used for housing because of the incentives. Mr. Schreiber believed that level of detail and refinement was beyond what was requested from the Golden Triangle process and suggested the calculation and explanation be cumbersome. Council Member Fletcher was pleased with the trend to look ahead at sites that could potentially be used for housing in the long run as was done with the Woolworth site. With the financial bene- fits of intensified use, it was never known when usages might change. Once the process started, it was difficult, if not impos- sible, to change. Mayor„ Woolley supported the motion. It was important to plan ahead and, therefore, she approved thoroughly of staff's and the Planning Commission's recommendation with the Elk's Club and FiesIta site. It was better to err on the side of planning too far ahead than to wait until the last minute to deal with the problem. She was a little concerned about taking staff time to study unlikely sites, but was willing to support the recommendations because the. staff time was already being used as part of the City's study. 57-11 3/16/87 MOTION PASSED by a vote of $-1, Cobb voting °no.. S. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. 4591, FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BY AND,. BETWEEN `THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COOPERATIVE ,OF PALO ALTO, INC. (CMR;171:7) (1141-01) Mr. Zane said the action came before. Council as the result of a number of actions that influenced the timing for Cable Co-op. Staff did not feel the timing problem was serious and the delay would not substantially delay the project in. whole. The City Clerk indicated that day she received the documents necessary for the circulation of a referendum petition in the community with regard to the franchise Council subsequently issued to Century Federal. Thy Senior Assistant City Attorney, Anthony Bennetti, and he indicated to the proponents of the measure that they would be available to assist in understanding the Council's reasons and motivation for adopting the ordinance as adopted and passed. MOTION:. Council Member Levy moved, seconded by Bechtel, to adopt staff recommendation to amend the Franchise Agreement with Cable Co-op, all wing the company to extend the date of system activation to May 24, 1987. Council Member Cobb asked if the action had any potential negative impact on the situation with regard to the lawsuit. Senior Assistant City Attorney Anthony Bennetti did not believe so. Council Member Patitucci asked for clarification of the causes for the delay. . Cable Coordinator Jeanne Moulton said the primary cause was Cable Co-op were . slower leasing a building than they hoped. The build- ing was not ready for staff, and Cable Co-op would prefer to wait until they had customer service representatives trained and ready before they had a large number of subscribers. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Sutories perticipeting. i 7. REQUEST OF COUNCIL MGii tK EMILY RENZxb.AND MAYOR GALL : WOOLLEY RE OVERSIZED HOUSES ON R- LOTS Mayor Woolley was concerned about the amount of staff time required. but believed theprocess would require a minimal amount. She envisioned members of the committee would each select three houses they felt were very good or bad examples of large sixes on R-1 lets and would ask Planning Department to provide the data .on setbacks, heights, and .to calculate the FIR. The .committee. would then tour and come up with a recommendation to Council. 571.2 3/16/87 1 i Bob Moss, 4010 Orme Street, referred to a letter (on file in the City Clerk's office) distributed at places. The Barron Park Association (BPA) was interested in oversized houses on small lots and was delighted to see Council taking action. Council should understand the BPA did not intend the numbers for setbacks, etc., to be magic, but they were interested in the concept of having a larger setback on the second floor either with new or building onto existing construction. The BPA surveyed the neighborhood on a number of issues and would be distributing the survey to Council and to the press when everything was tabulated. Over 66 percent of the esspondents were either extremely strongly or strongly in favor of some kind of neighborhood review process of large houses on small lots, and only 4 or 5 percent were very negative. He hoped Council would come up with some means of ameliorating the worst of the oversized houses, especially on small lots. John Mock, 736 Barron Avenue, applauded Council for bringing the matter forward in a timely fashion. He recommended Council include in the committee a representative of one of the affected neighborhood associations. MOTION: Mayor Woolley moved, seconded by kennel, to asthorize the Mayor to appoint a committee in order to study the question of oversized houses and report back in six weeks to Council, at which point a specific referral could be made to the Planning Commission Council Member Fletcher was pleased tosee the item, and said she had a lot of respect for the recent ordinance passed in Mountain View and hope that received careful scrutiny. The ordinance dealt much more with setbacks than Palo Alto currently had. She was also hoping the item in question would be the first phase of a two-phase study; the second phase being the bulk of multi -family developments, especially in relation to surrounding neighborhood R -is. Council Member Levy spoke in endorsement of forming the committee and moving ahead. He had a reservation about the neighborhood review concept and .believed the wise course of action was for Council to pass the appropriate ordinances so everything was clear on the books to all, and so . all would be treated as equally as possible. To ask someone coming into a neighborhood, or having been a neighborhood resident, to go before his peers and vice ,versa could result in local problems and unequal treatment., He felt it was necessary to develop new standards by which to imple- ment the density of single-family homes. MOTION PASSED unanimously, 57-13 3/16/87 ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned to a Closed Session re Litigation at 8:45 p.m. FINAL ADJOURNMENT at 8:47 p.m. APPROVED; ATTEST: