Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-10-27 City Council Summary MinutesCITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL FINAL MINUTES Special Meeting October 27, 2014 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 6:02 P.M. Present: Berman, Burt, Holman, Klein, Kniss, Price, Scharff, Schmid arrived at 6:07 p.m., Shepherd Absent: CLOSED SESSION 1. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY - EXISTING LITIGATION Subject: Sterling Park, et al. v. City of Palo Alto, Santa Clara County Superior Court, Case No. 109-CV-154134 Subject Authority: Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) The City Council reconvened from Closed Session at 6:57 P.M. Mayor Shepherd reported the Council voted unanimously to authorize the City Attorney to settle the case. The developer would pay $8 million into the City's Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS James Keene, City Manager, announced the City won the Public Power Utility of the Year Award from the Solar Electric Power Association. Library materials could be returned to the new Mitchell Park Library. Community outreach workshops regarding the Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan were scheduled for October 28 and 29, 2014 and December 2, 2014. The City received entries from design teams interested in the Highway 101 Bicycle Pedestrian Bridge, and the competition jury would select the top three entries on November 1, 2014. The developer associated with Moldaw Residences Senior Housing Development agreed to provide 24 Below Market Rate (BMR) units after negotiations with the City. Nancy Shepherd added that the final BMR unit was under contract at Moldaw Residences. Page 1 of 24 FINAL MINUTES ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Jim Wang appreciated Staff meeting with him regarding the project on Boyce Avenue. The final inspection was approved; however, corrections to the project had not been executed. Danielle Martell advised that the City failed to supply her with her hearing rights. She requested the Council order the City Attorney's Office to dismiss the case or extend the hearing date to allow her to conduct discovery. She listed her due process rights. Sea Reddy felt the City needed an emergency preparedness plan for the Ebola virus. Mark Weiss believed the community should discuss rent control or tenants' rights. He was aware of several community members considering leaving Palo Alto because their rents had been increased. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Shepherd noted Council interest in removing Agenda Item Number 2 from the Consent Calendar. James Keene, City Manager, had received notice of the Council's interest. MOTION: Mayor Shepherd moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff, third by Council Member Holman to pull Agenda Item Number 2 to be heard second under Action Items, to become Agenda Item Number 8a. Council Member Scharff was concerned the length of the Council Agenda would preclude discussion of Agenda Item Number 2. Mr. Keene suggested the Mayor allow public comment regarding Agenda Item Number 2 at the current time. Mayor Shepherd announced the public could address Agenda Item Number 2 at the current time or at the time of Council discussion. Wayne Douglass spoke regarding Agenda Item Number 2. Emails on the topic suggested a disparity between transparency and hiding Agenda Items on the Consent Calendar. Mark Weiss spoke regarding Agenda Item Number 2. He felt the contract was a waste of money. Page 2 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES John Fredrich spoke regarding Agenda Item Number 2. While the amount of the contract was small in comparison to many contracts, the funds could be better spent. Outsourcing a job did not increase Staff capacity. The contract defeated the purpose of the scope of services. Sea Reddy spoke regarding Agenda Item Number 2. The money for the contract should be donated to the Ebola crisis. The services outlined in the contract were not needed. Stephanie Munoz spoke regarding Agenda Item Number 3. It was counterproductive for the water utility to force residents to retain a larger meter in times of drought. The Council should review Water Utility operations. MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member Berman to approve Agenda Item Numbers 3-7. 2. Approval of a Two-Year Contract with Flint Strategies For a Communications and Outreach Contract to Support the Our Palo Alto Initiative and the Planning and Community Environment Department at a Cost Not to Exceed $175,000. 3. Resolution 9464 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Utilities Rules and Regulations 15 (Metering), 21 (Special Water Utility Regulations), 22 (Special Gas Utility Regulations), and 23 (Special Wastewater Utility Regulations).” 4. Approval of Contract with Graham Contractors, Inc. in the Amount of $445,586 for Palo Alto Airport Runway and Taxiway Rehabilitation Project AP-15003; Approval of Contract for a Five Year Term with Mead & Hunt in the Amount Not to Exceed $250,000 for On-Call Consulting Services; Approval of Contract for a Five Year Term with C&S Engineers, Inc. for On-Call Consulting Services in the Amount Not to Exceed $250,000; Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance 5277 entitled “Budget Amendment Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto to Adopt and Fund Capital Improvement Program Project AP-15003 in the Amount of $540,000 and to Defund and Close Capital Improvement Program Project AP-15001 Temporary Airport Terminal Resulting in Savings of $180,000; and Allocate Funds in the Amount of $40,000 to the Airport Enterprise Fund Operating Budget to Fund the Cost of Repairs to Palo Alto Airport Terminal.” 5. Budget Ordinance Amendment 5278 entitled “Budget Amendment Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto for $200,000 in Financial Contribution to the Housing Trust Silicon Valley.” Page 3 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES 6. Approval of Mutual Cooperation and Support Agreement Between (YCS) for Youth and Teen programs in Partnership with the Community the City of Palo Alto and Youth Community Services Department. 7. Approval of Council Appointed Officer Committee Recommendation to Appoint Beth Minor as Acting City Clerk. MOTION PASSED for Agenda Item Numbers 3-7: 9-0 ACTION ITEMS 8. Palo Alto Shuttle Program Expansion -- Presentation of Phase 2 Alternatives. Mayor Shepherd recalled the Council authorized Staff in February 2014 to consider a variety of parking strategies, including expansion of the shuttle program. In July 2014, the first phase of the program expanded services in conjunction with East Palo Alto services. The City of East Palo Alto paid for the expanded service; however, the City of Palo Alto managed the program. She reviewed next steps described in the Staff Report. Ruchika Aggarwal, Associate Engineer, Planning and Community Environment reported the Crosstown route was fully funded by the City and provided a north-south connection within the City. A special route served David Starr Jordan (Jordan) and Jane Lathrop Stanford (JLS) Middle Schools. The Crosstown route operated Monday through Friday from 7:40 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. The Embarcadero route operated as part of the Caltrain commuter shuttle program and was funded 25 percent by the City and 75 percent by the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB). The Embarcadero route connected the University Avenue Caltrain Station to businesses located east of Highway 101 and was popular among commuters and students. Shuttles operated during peak hours only Monday through Friday. The East Palo Alto route began operating in July 2014, was fully funded by the City of East Palo Alto, and connected the University Avenue Caltrain Station with the Woodland Avenue community in East Palo Alto. The route operated seven days per week, between 6:00-10:00 a.m. and 4:00-9:00 p.m. Steve Crosley, Fehr & Peers, performed an independent review of the City's existing shuttle system and proposed routes. At the time of the analysis, the East Palo Alto route had no data for analysis; therefore, he analyzed the Crosstown and Embarcadero routes only. He reviewed the amount of ridership per run for each route over the course of a day; however, he did not have data regarding the demand for stops. Over the course of a day, demand for the Crosstown route was extremely high and consistent Page 4 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES throughout the day. The Crosstown route at the current time seemed to cover south Palo Alto well. He recommended the City conduct a survey to identify rider types. The Embarcadero route did not perform as well as the Crosstown route, because there was demand for east-west travel at all times of the day. A satellite parking lot along Bayshore could increase ridership. He believed the City could operate the Embarcadero route without increasing the frequency of buses, denying service to waiting riders, or requiring riders to stand. The Transit Likelihood Index indicated locations of unmet demand. The Crosstown route aligned quite well with the Transit Likelihood. He recommended a trial run of increased shuttle frequency to determine whether the Crosstown route would better meet the needs of residents, visitors, and employees. If shuttle service doubled, he expected a 40-50 percent increase in ridership and decreased wait times for riders. The Embarcadero shuttle appeared to meet current demand, and would not need to increase frequency if a satellite parking lot was implemented. With respect to a University Avenue Shopping Center trolley, he recommended the City either operate two buses to achieve 10 minutes headways or shorten the route to operate at 10 minute headways. Another option would be for the City to consider a trial run during the holiday period. Shuttle service would be a definite advantage during the holidays when parking was constrained. The proposed west shuttle route would connect areas not already connected with the Palo Alto shuttle and provide additional mobility to the technology area east of Highway 101. Some areas in south Palo Alto could be better served. He believed the highest transit likelihood to be the proposed west route that would connect El Camino Real, California Avenue, Palo Alto Medical Center, Downtown, Caltrain, and Stanford University as a one-seat ride from south Palo Alto. Additional shuttle service along El Camino Real should be tested. Ms. Aggarwal advised that the City conducted a ridership survey between mid-September and mid-October 2014. Staff received 116 responses to the survey. Approximately 39 percent of respondents utilized the Embarcadero shuttle to reach schools and 33 percent to reach work. The Crosstown shuttle was utilized throughout the day for shopping trips and errands. Approximately 47 percent of respondents utilized the East Palo Alto route to reach work. 75 percent of respondents felt their wait time for shuttles was 10 minutes or less, and 86 percent felt their wait times were 15 minutes or less. The most favorable characteristic of shuttle service was the lack of cost. Riders felt safe while riding the shuttle. Additional positive characteristics were cleanliness and courteous drivers. Jaime Rodriguez, Chief Transportation Official, Planning and Community Environment indicated this was the first independent analysis of the shuttle system since its inception in 1999. Page 5 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES Mark Michael, Planning and Transportation Commission Chair, reported the Planning and Transportation Commission (P&TC) did not vote on a Motion or recommendation to the Council. Three public speakers at the P&TC meeting, all from the Vista Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired, addressed the previous Marguerite service to the Veterans Administration (VA) and the lack of public transit to Vista Center. The P&TC questioned the extent that shuttle service addressed gaps in services from other public transit providers and whether the survey could have been augmented through an online survey or through a survey of non-riders. A number of Commissioners questioned Staff regarding cost-benefit analysis, capacity utilization, elasticity of demand for shuttle service, and eligibility for grants. The P&TC was impressed that the focus of the intra-city service addressed commuters and students primarily and seniors to some extent. The P&TC discussed the potential linkage between transit use and land use. Council Member Price inquired whether bikes could be taken on shuttles. Ms. Aggarwal indicated all shuttles were equipped for a maximum of two bicycles. Council Member Price inquired about the official carrying capacity of shuttles. Ms. Aggarwal answered 32 seated passengers including a wheelchair seat. She was unsure of the standing capacity of shuttles. Council Member Price asked if Staff had contacted larger employers regarding financial support for the proposed west shuttle route. Mr. Rodriguez had held preliminary discussions with some larger employers located in the Shoreland Business Park and Google and Intuit who planned to locate in the Bayshore Business Park. Council Member Price noted the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) community bus in Palo Alto had the highest ridership of all community buses in the VTA system. She inquired whether Staff had discussed student utilization of shuttle services with Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) in relation to financial support. Mr. Rodriguez remarked that Staff held regular discussions with PAUSD staff regarding many topics. If incidents on shuttles involved students, then Staff contacted PAUSD administrators to become involved in any disciplinary actions. City Staff had not held any formal discussions with PAUSD staff regarding funding for the shuttle program, but had raised the issue in discussions of expanding the shuttle program. Page 6 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES Council Member Price recalled that the PAUSD Board had voted to contribute $50,000 annually to the shuttle program; however, budget constraints eliminated that funding. Council Member Scharff commented that the proposal for the trolley did not contain many details, and asked if Staff would present details should the Council approve trial service. Mr. Rodriguez answered yes. Staff received good recommendations from Fehr & Peers regarding the trolley route, and would present information regarding the proposed service. Staff wished to obtain Council comments regarding recommendations from the report. Staff was not requesting direction to implement any programs or changes. Council Member Scharff suggested a shuttle resembling a San Francisco trolley would be fun and weekend service would be more successful than weekday service. Those were the types of details he wanted. Mr. Crosley advised that the initial Staff recommendation was to operate a shuttle during lunch hours in the summertime. Fehr & Peers suggested Staff consider a holiday shuttle in addition to the summer shuttle. It could operate midday during December, on weekends, or evening periods. Staff needed to identify the areas of greatest demand for such a shuttle. A second option to the summer program would be a holiday program. Council Member Scharff asked about reasons for operating during lunch hours. Mr. Rodriguez wanted to utilize a trolley resembling a cable car during a season that would be attractive to riders. Council Member Scharff clarified that his concern was the time of day rather than season of the year. Mr. Rodriguez explained that discussions with Stanford Shopping Center representatives raised their interest in building a lunchtime crowd. A trial period of one month with service seven days a week could determine demand in order to present a recommendation to the Council. Council Member Scharff inquired whether Staff sought Council direction to contact businesses regarding financial contributions to the proposed west route. Mr. Rodriguez replied yes. Page 7 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES Council Member Scharff inquired about the goals of the shuttle program. One goal could be eliminating the need for residents to drive within Palo Alto. Mr. Rodriguez focused on identifying gaps in service and areas of unmet demand based partially on community comments when developing routes for analysis by Fehr & Peers. Council Member Scharff asked if community comments were obtained from people who did not ride shuttles. Mr. Rodriguez reported Staff held community outreach in 2011 regarding additional shuttle service and received emails from community members interested in additional shuttle service. Staff developed routes based on that data. Council Member Scharff felt a successful shuttle service had to offer more convenience than driving a car. He asked about methods to make shuttle ridership more convenient. Mr. Rodriguez was performing additional analysis to make shuttle service more attractive and more flexible. He was aware of programs in other communities where shuttles deviated from routes to pick up residents at their doors with advance notice. However, too much deviation from the route could increase wait times for riders at designated stops. Council Member Scharff asked if Staff considered developing an app to provide the locations of shuttles and to estimate arrival times. Mr. Rodriguez responded no. Such an app would probably be received well by the community. Council Member Klein felt a simpler metric than boardings per revenue mile would be cost per ride. He asked if Staff had that metric available. Mr. Crosley could provide that data shortly. A vast number of metrics for analyzing transit performance was available such as boardings per revenue mile, boardings per revenue hour, cost per boarding, and cost per revenue hour. He attempted to show the overall performance of the Crosstown route was quite good for a community-based route. It could be improved, and Fehr & Peers was reviewing methods to improve that and to serve additional riders. Council Member Klein wished to know the cost per boarding, because it was more easily understood. Boardings per revenue mile seemed to compare Page 8 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES only to other systems and did not indicate the economic feasibility of shuttle service. He inquired about the effects of new means of transportation such as Uber. Mr. Rodriguez planned to return to the Council for next steps and could provide additional metrics at that time. Internal Staff discussions considered developing stations around the City where people could meet and pick up rides through services such as Uber and Lift.. Council Member Klein wanted to see the impact of that and Zipcar. He inquired whether Staff had discussed the possibility of City shuttles drawing sufficient numbers of riders from VTA buses such that VTA ceased some service within Palo Alto. Mr. Rodriguez developed the west route several months ago and shared all routes with VTA, SamTrans, and Marguerite services. VTA did not believe the proposed west route would compete with VTA routes, because the origins and destinations for the west route were different from origins and destinations for VTA. Council Member Klein asked if VTA was willing to commit to continuing the 22 and 522 buses should the west route be implemented. Mr. Rodriguez did not have that specific discussion with VTA but could do so. Mr. Crosley understood VTA would continue to operate service to the Palo Alto Caltrain Station and would continue Bus 22 service as an overlay to Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service once Bus 522 converted to BRT service. In analyzing ridership provided by VTA, he found the vast majority of riders traveling on Buses 22 and 522 in Palo Alto originated outside Palo Alto. Based on 2012-2013 ridership, The cost per boarding was $1.85 for the Crosstown route. Council Member Klein believed the designation of West Bayshore was confusing in that it had different meanings for people in Mountain View and Palo Alto. Mr. Rodriguez should have stated Shoreline Business Park in Mountain View. Council Member Klein inquired whether any businesses had indicated a willingness to contribute to shuttle service in discussions with Staff. Mr. Rodriguez felt businesses supported establishing a partnership with the City, but wanted policy support for a partnership before negotiating. It would be safe to say some employers were willing to partner with the City. Page 9 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES In addition, some businesses would likely transfer their private shuttle services to City shuttles. Vice Mayor Kniss asked if the City was in essence running a school bus; why VTA was not contributing additional funds; and if Staff had contacted private shuttle services running routes from the Caltrain Station into Mountain View regarding financial support. Mr. Rodriguez reported shuttles were providing a benefit to students. Shuttle service was not a school bus, because ridership was well balanced. Vice Mayor Kniss noted a number of junior high and high school students were riding shuttles and PAUSD had contributed funds in the past. Mr. Rodriguez indicated Staff should discuss a financial contribution with PAUSD. To his knowledge, VTA had not historically funded the City's shuttle service. VTA had grant programs that provided funding for local transit; however, one requirement for grants was that local routes could not overlap with any existing transit routes. Vice Mayor Kniss recalled that the City did not seek VTA funding through grants in 1999. Shuttles from many companies operated between the Caltrain Station and Mountain View. Obtaining funds from those companies could support the proposed west route. Mr. Rodriguez purposely did not include stops at some prime locations along the west route so that companies could sponsor those stops. That was one method to obtain funding for the west route. The private sector was interested in this. Vice Mayor Kniss asked if any cities near Palo Alto operated and funded shuttles. Mr. Crosley answered yes. Menlo Park and Daly City were two examples. Many of those shuttles were first-mile/last-mile shuttles from Caltrain Stations. Each community-based shuttle operated differently. Vice Mayor Kniss wondered why Mr. Crosley did not compare Palo Alto's shuttle to other cities' shuttles. Knowing how other cities funded shuttle services would have been helpful. Council Member Schmid inquired about reasons for not including the Marguerite system in the report. Mr. Rodriguez met with Stanford University regarding development of routes and encouraged Stanford University to respond to the Request for Proposal Page 10 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES (RFP). Stanford University chose not to partner with the City of Palo Alto regarding the shuttle program. Mr. Crosley remarked that the Marguerite system was very successful, because many of the riders were captive. The Embarcadero route provided a similar service to many of the Marguerite routes. Council Member Schmid noted 85 percent of ridership utilized shuttle service multiple times per week and a potential 40-60 percent increase in ridership by increasing shuttle frequency. He inquired about a connection between current riders and potential new riders. Mr. Crosley would not want to opine without clearly understanding ridership. The 40-60 percent increase in ridership was based on national data. Based on data from the shuttle survey, 60 percent of riders utilized shuttles four or more days per week. Therefore, increased ridership could come from the 40 percent of riders utilizing shuttle service less than four days per week. In addition, increased shuttle frequency could convince other individuals to utilize shuttles. Council Member Schmid indicated transit use changed dramatically with density. Palo Alto was on the lower end of density and size. He asked if the 40 percent accounted for Palo Alto's unique position in size and density. Mr. Crosley reported little research existed regarding the unique context of community-based services. He was attempting to provide a general idea of the amount of potential increased ridership. The cost of parking was another factor in people's decisions regarding transportation. There were many variables to consider when attempting to increase ridership. The challenge lay in convincing people with cars to take public transit whether daily or occasionally. Council Member Holman referred to the map on Slide 8 which seemed to indicate Research Park and Barron Park were not high likelihood users of transit. Barron Park residents expressed an interest in shuttle service even though they traveled to Mountain View and Los Altos for shopping. She requested Staff comment on ranking those areas as not likely to utilize shuttle service. Mr. Rodriguez had received a great deal of interest from residents in Barron Park regarding shuttle service; consequently, Staff proposed a stop at Matadero Avenue as part of the west route. Staff talked with the City of Mountain View about partnering in shuttle service, but it had no interest. The City of Menlo Park expressed an interest in partnering with the City. Page 11 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES Mr. Crosley made some assumptions and reviewed a composite of six different variables, including employment density, in developing the transit likelihood. Research Park probably offered a lot of parking; therefore, the employment density there was less than on California Avenue or in Downtown. That did not mean the area had no transit demand. He could provide additional analysis of the area if the Council wished. Council Member Holman would appreciate more information about that. The City did not have free parking for extended stays. She suggested Staff coordinate more with Caltrain regarding use of transit during the holiday season. Shuttles circulating among Downtown and shopping centers could increase ridership. She requested Staff further elucidate Stanford Shopping Center's interest in trolley service during lunch time. Mr. Rodriguez contacted the Simon Group, property managers of Stanford Shopping Center, when developing the concept of a trolley between Downtown and Stanford Shopping Center. The Simon Group expressed an interest in trolley service during the lunch hours. Staff would return to the Council after further discussions with them. Council Member Holman cautioned Staff about siphoning business from Downtown during lunch time. She was interested in additional hours beyond lunch for a trolley service. An app for shuttle service would be helpful as would improve mapping and scheduling. James Keene, City Manager, remarked that knowing routes and schedules and planning trips was different from making a spontaneous trip. Council Member Holman was interested in Staff pursuing financial contributions from PAUSD. Council Member Burt asked if Staff was aware of apps providing real-time information for bus services in other cities. Perhaps those apps could be utilized as templates for an app for the shuttle service. He asked if Staff would consider integrating other transit into such an app. Mr. Rodriguez advised that the RFP contained a requirement for GPS tracking of all shuttles and for development of an app to track vehicles. MV Transportation provided an app that was cumbersome and not user-friendly. Staff expressed their concerns, and MV Transportation was redeveloping the app. Council Member Burt asked if MV Transportation could utilize an existing app. Page 12 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES Mr. Keene felt utilizing a third-party to develop an app was probably a better idea than requiring a transportation company to develop an app. Linking all means of transit in one app would be important to the app user. Council Member Burt inquired whether benches were located at stops with the highest number of boardings. Ms. Aggarwal reported Staff had installed multiple benches over the past several months. Covered shelters had not been installed; however, locations shared with VTA did have covered shelters. Council Member Burt asked if Staff had identified stops with the highest number of boardings. Mr. Rodriguez was working with MV Transportation on that issue. Staff requested MV Transportation provide boarding and deboarding information by location. Over the next year, Staff could utilize that information to improve stops. Council Member Burt felt shuttle drivers could provide a good sense of the most utilized stops. He did not understand the methodology utilized to determine Research Park was a low opportunity for transit use. Mr. Crosley explained that transit likelihood was a composite of six different variables: senior population, zero-car households, youth population, employment density, population density, and intersection density. Downtown ranked higher than Research Park, because Research Park had fewer connections and more large streets. Research Park contained a large amount of employment although it was dispersed. Council Member Burt suggested an average for the entire Research Park could result in a different density pattern. He inquired whether Staff had discussed sharing marketing with VTA. Mr. Rodriguez responded no. Shuttle routes were available via Google Maps and Yahoo Maps. Council Member Burt noted VTA did not utilize zone-based fares. He asked if Staff had inquired whether VTA was interested in zone-based pricing. Mr. Rodriguez advised that Staff discussed costs in general with VTA. VTA did not indicate whether it would move to zone-based pricing in the near term. Zoned or tiered pricing did not align with information VTA received from on-board surveys. Page 13 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES Council Member Burt advised that the medium and large tiers of the EcoPass were inexpensive, and asked if Staff discussed more gradations in the pricing structure with VTA. Mr. Rodriguez did discuss the EcoPass system with VTA; however, that conversation did not include more tiers within the pricing structure. Mr. Keene believed more intermediate tiers would be possible if the City was allowed to bundle tiers geographically within the City. Council Member Burt inquired whether Staff would distinguish ridership between a rainy day and a fair weather day when analyzing boarding data. Ms. Aggarwal provided monthly ridership data for the first six months of 2014. She would provide further analysis for each month over the prior year. Council Member Burt asked if Staff evaluated Alma Street versus El Camino Real coverage on the west route. Mr. Rodriguez reported Alma Street was challenging as a shuttle route because of the limited number of locations for stops and the safety of a left- turn over Caltrain tracks. Council Member Burt did not envision a shuttle crossing Caltrain tracks other than at Oregon Expressway. Council Member Berman asked if Staff attempted to identify additional marketing techniques to increase awareness of the shuttle program. Mr. Rodriguez was reviewing tech companies that provided marketing services for shuttle programs. For a fee, the companies could add a shuttle service to their program. Council Member Berman suggested advertising the shuttle program on Caltrain's website. Staff should focus on identifying new riders. Mayor Shepherd wished to reduce the number of car trips to schools, and asked if Staff could explore increasing the number or size of shuttles running in the morning. Mr. Rodriguez reported the City paid extra money to ensure half-hour shuttle service for schools in the morning. Staff felt running larger buses or more buses during a peak period of the day was cost prohibitive. If the Council wished, Staff could refine those numbers and present them to the Council. Page 14 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES Mayor Shepherd inquired whether the west route would reduce the number of car trips. Mr. Rodriguez indicated the west route would introduce a shuttle route specific to Palo Alto High School in an attempt to reduce auto trips within the community. The west route would act as a commuter express shuttle in the morning rush hour. It would provide new service from Shoreline Business Park to a Caltrain Station. After the morning rush hour, shuttles would travel within the Palo Alto community. During the evening rush hour, commuter express routes would operate again. The west route would reduce the number of car trips in the region as well as in Palo Alto. Mayor Shepherd was interested in demonstrating the number of reduced car trips resulting from the new route. She inquired whether Staff expected funding from businesses to wholly or partially fund shuttle service. Mr. Rodriguez wanted to obtain a 50 percent subsidy of the overall cost of a route. Two shuttles would be necessary for the west route in order to reduce the headway of 1 hour 20 minutes, which was not attractive to riders. Mayor Shepherd asked if Staff would approach the Jewish Community Center (JCC) and Loral/SSL for a financial contribution to the shuttle program. Mr. Rodriguez had already approached the JCC and Palo Alto Medical Foundation. He had not approached Loral/SSL. Staff wished to obtain Council direction before approaching additional businesses. Mayor Shepherd reiterated her desire to demonstrate the number of trip reductions resulting from use of the shuttle. Focusing on the student population could significantly change the driving experience for residents. She inquired whether Staff had set the stops along the west route. Perhaps another stop could be located between California Avenue and Town and Country. Mr. Rodriguez had not set the stops. Staff requested Council input regarding additional stops. Mayor Shepherd felt the operating hours of the trolley should be expanded so as not to strand riders. Adina Levin, Friends of Caltrain, advised that a typical Transportation Demand Management (TDM) survey could provide data regarding individuals who did not utilize public transit. She suggested Staff consider ways to reduce the 15-minute wait times on the Embarcadero route to encourage Page 15 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES additional ridership. Another population to consider for ridership was those who owned a car but wanted to take public transit. Robert Moss related the history of Palo Alto's previous bus service and VTA's failure to continue it. The west shuttle route offered some advantages to riders and offered changes to the route. Mark Weiss wanted Staff to work more closely with Stanford University's Marguerite system. Herb Borock requested the Council ensure the final survey report showed survey responses to each question by route. Staff should have data from the original Crosstown route that showed the change in ridership when headways shifted from 30 minutes to 60 minutes. Vista Center should approach Stanford University to reinstate a route to the Research Park. Stephanie Munoz suggested placing signage at shuttle stops listing arrival times and a design competition for benches at shuttle stops. The City should not have to provide service because VTA charged for transfers. MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Price to direct Staff to investigate the following:: (1) increasing the frequency of service on the existing Crosstown Shuttle Route; (2) soliciting private-sector funding to offset the costs of a new West Shuttle Route from the University Caltrain Station into the West Bayshore Business Park in Mountain View, and not starting the shuttle until funding is secured; and (3) initiating trial service between Downtown/University Avenue and the Stanford Shopping Center Trolley in Summer 2015. Vice Mayor Kniss inquired whether there would be a consortium between Caltrain and the business community in Silicon Valley. Ms. Levin responded yes. An alliance of major employers would advocate for funding to add capacity to Caltrain. Vice Mayor Kniss knew the private sector was interested in their employees' modes of transportation. Employers interested in increased funding for Caltrain would also be interested in the City's shuttle service. The City needed to be aggressive in soliciting funding and in marketing. Page 16 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES Council Member Price believed the proposals were logical and the next steps would be good in providing additional information. She inquired whether Staff had the capacity to respond to the many requests for data from the Council or whether additional consulting services would be needed. Mr. Rodriguez advised that Staff could perform much of the work. Requests for comparisons to other communities could require additional consulting services; however, other contracts possibly could be utilized for those services. Council Member Price understood Marguerite did have a route to Research Park. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add a Number 4: to direct Staff to discuss with Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) the reinstatement of an earlier adopted policy to provide appropriate funding on an annual basis to the City to support shuttle services that benefit students. Vice Mayor Kniss felt all partners should provide funding for the shuttle service. Council Member Price commented that contributing to shuttle service would be less expensive than reinstating free bus service. Council Member Schmid wanted to reduce the number of single car trips. Shuttles served primarily first mile/last mile, business, and school riders. He was concerned about enticing more people to utilize public transit and other means of transportation that did not involve single car trips. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add a Number 5: to direct Staff to explore what kind of alternative technologies exist that can open up the taxi/van information world to single person travel from home to destination. Council Member Klein indicated the proposed west route would reduce the amount of pass-through traffic in Palo Alto. He inquired about a different name for the west route. Mr. Rodriguez replied Shoreline Business Park. Council Member Klein suggested Shoreline Business District. Council Member Klein recommended deleting Number 4 and directing Staff to discuss with PAUSD additional methods to reduce student vehicular traffic Page 17 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES in mornings and afternoons and to discuss with PAUSD sharing some of the costs. Vice Mayor Kniss would consider amending the Motion to incorporate that language if Council Member Klein would refine the language. Council Member Klein indicated the City needed to reduce student traffic through use of the shuttle and other means. Vice Mayor Kniss preferred to retain Number 4 and incorporate Council Member Klein's language as Number 6. Council Member Klein explained that Number 4 and the proposed Number 6 would be duplicative. Number 4 was much more specific to reinstate a previous policy. Vice Mayor Kniss wanted to retain the reference to past PAUSD action so new Board Members would know the policy existed. Council Member Klein stated Number 5 should include not only alternative technology but also other innovative approaches. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add a Number 6: Staff will come back with cost per rider metrics for the shuttles. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add a Number 7: Staff will come back with plans to build a robust and user-friendly app. Council Member Scharff wanted Staff to develop a plan for a convenient easy-to-use shuttle or ride share that provided mobility for the entire City and was more convenient than driving. He questioned whether such a robust system would be cost prohibitive; however, he wanted to know what a robust shuttle system would look like. There were many opportunities for making a shuttle system convenient and easy to use. Because Staff was reviewing the shuttle system, they should consider it in a robust way that encouraged people not to drive. AMENDMENT: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Berman to direct Staff to return with a plan for a convenient and easy-to-use shuttle or ride-share system that provides mobility around the entire city and is more convenient than driving. Council Member Scharff believed one goal of a shuttle program should be to provide a convenient way for residents to move around the City without Page 18 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES using cars. It would be a mistake not to consider such a convenient and robust system. Council Member Berman felt the proposals did not address the entire need for public transportation. Additional data was needed to create a robust shuttle system that addressed the needs of more residents. Mayor Shepherd requested the City Manager respond to the Amendment in relation to the scope of work entailed by the Amendment. Mr. Keene did not interpret the Amendment as being limited to expanded shuttle services only; thus, he requested clarification. Over the past year, the Council had held a broad conversation regarding responses to traffic and parking issues and had set in motion different programs. The Amendment was an expansion of concepts that Staff had developed. Staff would need to provide a detailed response as to the amount of work the Amendment would require in addition to other requirements in the Motion. Council Member Scharff agreed to Staff returning. Mr. Keene recommended Staff return as needed for Council action regarding each component of the Motion. Council Member Price commented that the Amendment was not necessary and insulting to Staff. Mr. Rodriguez reported on concepts and information Staff continued to develop. SUBSTITUTE TO THE AMENDMENT: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member Price to continue consideration of the proposed Amendment by Council Member Scharff to another time. SUBSTITUTE MOTION PASSED: 5-4 Berman, Burt, Scharff, Schmid no Council Member Scharff called Point of Order. Council Procedures required continuing the item to a specified time and allowed amendment and debate as to the propriety of the time set. Mayor Shepherd inquired whether Council Member Scharff was suggesting the item had to be continued to a specific time. Council Member Scharff answered yes. The Motion to Continue was also debatable. Mayor Shepherd requested the City Attorney clarify Council action. Page 19 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES Molly Stump, City Attorney, reported Council Member Scharff was correctly reading from the Council's Procedures. A Motion to Continue to another specific time could be made, required a second, was debatable, and carried with a simple majority. Council Member Klein reported debate of a Motion to Continue was limited to whether or not the item should be continued. SUBSTITUTE MOTION RESCINDED BY THE MAKER SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member Price to continue consideration of the proposed Amendment to the meeting of December 1, 2014. Council Member Scharff agreed to continue the Amendment to the meeting scheduled on December 1, 2014. Council Member Price expressed concern that Staff would not have sufficient time to compile information for the discussion. Council Member Klein reiterated that debate was limited to whether or not to continue the item. Ms. Stump felt Council Member Price's comment met the question of whether or not the item should be continued. The conversation regarding whether Staff would be directed to perform such work would return on the December 1 Agenda. Council Member Schmid requested clarification as to whether the Amendment included a ride-share program. Council Member Scharff indicated it was a part of the Amendment. Council Member Holman was interested in mobility issues for neighborhoods and Research Park west of El Camino Real. Mayor Shepherd noted the topic of debate was whether to continue the item. Council Member Holman wished to understand topics included in the Amendment so that she could determine whether to propose another Amendment. Mayor Shepherd advised that if the item was continued, then the Council could develop topics of the Amendment. Page 20 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES Mr. Keene wanted to develop a facile method for choosing a date so that Staff could report implications of that date. Staff would likely take the liberty of providing a scheduling assessment on December 1. SUBSTITUTE MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Council Member Berman was not excited about the proposed trolley between Downtown and Stanford Shopping Center as a lunchtime service. A worker could not take the trolley to Downtown or Stanford Shopping Center, eat a meal, and return to work within an hour. He inquired about an approximate cost for extending the hours of operation for a trolley. Mr. Rodriguez would return to the Council with additional information for discussion of trolley service beyond the lunch hour. Council Member Berman interpreted the Motion as a trial period for trolley service. Mr. Keene indicated Staff would design a trial period of service and return to Council prior to implementation. Council Member Burt suggested Staff consider long-term funding sources and report those in the next discussion. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add a Number 8: to direct Staff to return with additional consideration of shuttle service west of El Camino including Stanford Research Park, considering employment nodes. Vice Mayor Kniss inquired whether the proposed Number 8 was for Staff to explore a new shuttle route. Council Member Holman replied yes. As Council Member Burt mentioned, strong employment nodes were located in the area. Council Member Price noted Marguerite served Research Park and Bus 88 served the Arastradero Corridor. Considering a route in that area without considering existing services seemed unnecessary. Vice Mayor Kniss added that this information would indicate whether existing services were adequate. Mr. Keene clarified that consideration would not necessarily result in a Staff recommendation. Staff could return with advantages and disadvantages of a route in the area rather than a viable route. Page 21 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES Vice Mayor Kniss felt the Council wanted more data points. Mr. Rodriguez agreed that more data points could answer Council Member questions. Mayor Shepherd was interested in working with PAUSD to create a transit management system between secondary schools. She inquired whether Number 4 allowed Staff to initiate a conversation with PAUSD. Mr. Rodriguez responded yes. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 9-0 Mayor Shepherd inquired whether the Council was willing to take up the remaining three items on the Agenda. Council Member Scharff asked if Item Number 8a was time sensitive. Mr. Keene did not believe there was a requirement to award the contract within a specified time period. Mayor Shepherd continued Agenda Item Number 8a to another meeting. 8a. (Former Agenda Item Number 2) Approval of a Two-Year Contract with Flint Strategies For a Communications and Outreach Contract to Support the Our Palo Alto Initiative and the Planning and Community Environment Department at a Cost Not to Exceed $175,000. 9. Council Direction on Selection of Voting Delegate for the National League of Cities Annual Business Meeting on Saturday, November 22, 2014. Mayor Shepherd reported Vice Mayor Kniss and Council Members Holman, Klein, and Price would attend the meeting. MOTION: Mayor Shepherd moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to designate Vice Mayor Liz Kniss as the voting delegate and Council Member Karen Holman as the alternate voting delegate. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 10. Cubberley Community Center Lease Status and Update. James Keene, City Manager, advised that he had met with the Superintendent of Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD). He needed Page 22 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES additional Council direction in Closed Session that could allow him to present information to the Council in Open Session. MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Price to discuss Agenda Item Number 10 in Closed Session. Stephanie Munoz indicated the City's 8 acres at Cubberley could be used for rental housing for teachers while still accommodating current uses of the building. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 The City Council went into Closed Session at 10:32 P.M. 11. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS, CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 Properties: Cubberley Community Center, 4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto 94306 (including 8 acres owned by the City of Palo Alto and remaining acres owned by the Palo Alto Unified School District); and Ventura School site, 3990 Ventura Court, Palo Alto 94306 Agency Negotiators: James Keene, Lalo Perez, Joe Saccio, Hamid Ghaemmaghami, Greg Betts, Rob De Geus, Thomas Fehrenbach, Molly Stump Negotiating Parties: City of Palo Alto and Palo Alto Unified School District Under Negotiation: Lease and/or Purchase/Sale* *Purchase/sale is listed to comply with Brown Act legal requirements, and includes other transactions such as easements, options, rights of first refusal and land exchanges. The City is not considering selling any of its interests in Cubberley or Ventura. The City Council reconvened from the Closed Session at 11:15 P.M. Mayor Shepherd announced no reportable action. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 P.M. ATTEST: APPROVED: Page 23 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14 FINAL MINUTES City Clerk Mayor NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 2.04.180(a) and (b). The City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are made solely for the purpose of facilitating the preparation of the minutes of the meetings. City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are recycled 90 days from the date of the meeting. The tapes are available for members of the public to listen to during regular office hours. Page 24 of 24 City Council Meeting Final Minutes10/27/14