Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-06-13 City Council Summary Minutes 06/13/94 73-81 Regular Meeting June 13, 1994 1. Joint Meeting with Utilities Advisory Commission.......73-83 1. Appointments to the Utilities Advisory Commission......73-83 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS.........................................73-84 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 18 AND 19, 1994................73-84 2. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and John Plane Construction, Inc. for Remodel of Building C at the Municipal Service Center...............................73-84 3. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and Lewis and Tibbitts, Inc. for Storm Drain Repair Project..........73-84 4. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and Universal Sweeping Services for Sweeping Services for City Garages and Parking Lots.......................................73-84 5. Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and Peninsula Children's Center for Playground Renovations with Funds Allocated During Fiscal Year 1993-94 Under the Community Development Block Grant Program........................73-85 6. Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and Palo Alto Senior Housing Project, Inc. for Renovations to Adlai E. Stevenson House with Funds Allocated During Fiscal Years 1991/92 and 1993/94 Under the Community Development Block Grant Program..........................................73-85 7. The Policy and Services Committee recommends to the City Council approval of the staff recommendation not to pursue the traffic study for the Waverley/Addison area to any greater extent other than to designate the 300 block of Addison as a Class 3 bicycle route..................73-85 8. Retirement Plan Alternative for Hourly Employees.......73-85 06/13/94 73-82 9. Modifications to City of Palo Alto's Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance Establishing the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's Regulation 13, Rule 1 as Palo Alto's TDM Ordinance and Giving Bay Area Air Quality Management District the Authority to Implement and Enforce Rule 1 in Palo Alto............................73-85 10. Waiver of City Council Procedures for Appointment to the Mid-Peninsula Access Corporation Board of Directors....73-85 11. Request for Authority to Participate as Amicus Curiae in Water Quality Association and Coastal Cities Water Treatment, Inc. v. City of Escondido, No. N53243 (San Diego County Superior Court)...........................73-85 AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS ...................73-85 12. Conference with City Attorney-Potential/Anticipated Litigation.............................................73-86 13. Proposals for the Swim/Tennis Facilities at 3005 Middle- field Road and Budget Amendment Ordinance for Removal of Pool...................................................73-86 16. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adopting the City's Nondisposal Facility Element Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 41730 et seq.................................................73-97 17. Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and Mojave Pipeline Company to Provide Natural Gas Transportation.73-98 RECESS TO A CLOSED SESSION: 9:12 P.M. - 10:08 P.M..........73-98 14. Reconfirmation of Rental Rate Structure Policy for Subleases at the Cubberley Community Center and the Eleven Extended Day Care Sites, and Request for Council Direction Regarding Bid Procedure......................73-98 14A. (Old Item 19) Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and San Francisco Bay Area Task Force '94 for Reimburse- ment of City Service Expenses Associated with World Cup 1994 Soccer Matches at Stanford Stadium................73-99 15. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolutions Regarding Assessments for University Avenue Area and California Avenue Area Parking Bonds for Fiscal Year 1994-95.........................73-102 18. The Policy and Services Committee Recommends Approval of the Staff Recommendation that Stop Signs Not Be Installed on Hamilton Avenue at West Crescent Drive.............73-103 06/13/94 73-83 20. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements........73-107 ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m...........73-107 06/13/94 73-84 06/13/94 73-85 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Conference Room at 5:30 p.m. PRESENT: Andersen, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler ABSENT: Simitian SPECIAL MEETINGS AND/OR CLOSED SESSIONS 1. Joint Meeting with Utilities Advisory Commission No action taken. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. * * * * * Regular Meeting June 13, 1994 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Andersen, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Simitian (arrived at 8:06 p.m.), Wheeler SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 1. Appointments to the Utilities Advisory Commission Council Member Rosenbaum said the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) was continually involved in issues of complexity and emphasis should be placed on continuity and the ability to get up to speed quickly. His first vote would be for Fred Eyerly, who had 20 years of utilities experience. His second vote would be for Mark Chandler, who was a valued member of the original UAC. He was pleased that Mark was willing to serve again. His third vote would be for Paul Johnson, who demonstrated a good grasp of the issues facing the City and the UAC. Council Member Andersen supported Council Member Rosenbaum's candidate selections. He was impressed with the quality of service and guidance the UAC provided to the Council. 06/13/94 73-86 RESULTS OF THE FIRST ROUND OF VOTING VOTING FOR BRISKI: VOTING FOR CHANDLER: Andersen, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler VOTING FOR EYERLY: Andersen, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler VOTING FOR JOHNSTON: Andersen, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler VOTING FOR SCHNEIDER: VOTING FOR SHEEHAN: City Clerk Gloria Young announced that Mark Chandler, Fred Eyerly, and Paul Johnston received eight votes, with Vice Mayor Simitian absent, and were appointed on the first ballot. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS James Lewis, Abate Shoreline Amphitheater Noise (ASAN) Coalition, spoke regarding the June 21, 1994, Mountain View City Council meeting to discuss the Noise Ordinance (letter on file in the City Clerk's Office). Jam Van der Laan, 3090 Ross Road, spoke regarding the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update meeting on May 14, 1994. Edmund Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding representative government (letter on file in the City Clerk's Office). APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 18 AND 19, 1994 MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Wheeler, to approve the Minutes of April 18, 1994, as corrected. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Simitian absent. MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Wheeler, to approve the Minutes of April 19, 1994, as submitted. MOTION PASSED 7-0-1, McCown "abstaining," Simitian absent. CONSENT CALENDAR 06/13/94 73-87 MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by McCown, to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 2 - 11. 2. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and John Plane Con- struction, Inc. for Remodel of Building C at the Municipal Service Center; change orders not to exceed $8,000. 3. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and Lewis and Tibbitts, Inc. for Storm Drain Repair Project; change orders not to exceed $13,000. 4. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and Universal Sweeping Services for Sweeping Services for City Garages and Parking Lots; change orders not to exceed $2,200 for 1994 and $2,200 for 1995. 5. Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and Peninsula Children's Center for Playground Renovations with Funds Allocated During Fiscal Year 1993-94 Under the Community Development Block Grant Program 6. Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and Palo Alto Senior Housing Project, Inc. for Renovations to Adlai E. Stevenson House with Funds Allocated During Fiscal Years 1991/92 and 1993/94 Under the Community Development Block Grant Program 7. The Policy and Services Committee recommends to the City Council approval of the staff recommendation not to pursue the traffic study for the Waverley/Addison area to any greater extent other than to designate the 300 block of Addison as a Class 3 bicycle route 8. Retirement Plan Alternative for Hourly Employees Resolution 7319 entitled "Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adopting a Retirement Plan for the City's Hourly Employees; and Approving Execution of an Agreement with ICMA Retirement Corporation for Administration of the Plan" Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and ICMA Retirement Corporation for Administration of the Alternative Retirement System Program for Hourly Employees 9. Modifications to City of Palo Alto's Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance Establishing the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's Regulation 13, Rule 1 as Palo Alto's TDM Ordinance and Giving Bay Area Air Quality Manage- ment District the Authority to Implement and Enforce Rule 1 in Palo Alto 06/13/94 73-88 Ordinance 1st Reading entitled "Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 10.70 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Relating to a Congestion Management Transporta-tion Program" 10. Waiver of City Council Procedures for Appointment to the Mid- Peninsula Access Corporation Board of Directors 11. Request for Authority to Participate as Amicus Curiae in Water Quality Association and Coastal Cities Water Treatment, Inc. v. City of Escondido, No. N53243 (San Diego County Superior Court) MOTION PASSED 8-0 for Item Nos. 2-6 and 8-11, Simitian absent. MOTION PASSED 7-0 for Item No. 7, Huber "not participating," Simitian absent. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by McCown, to move Item No. 19 forward to become Item No. 14A. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Simitian absent. CLOSED SESSION 12. Conference with City Attorney-Potential/Anticipated Litigation Subject: Significant Exposure to Litigation Authority: Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1) arising out of the death of Police Reserve Officer Ted Brassinga. [Government Code ∋54956.9(b)(3)(B)] Public Comments None. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 13. Proposals for the Swim/Tennis Facilities at 3005 Middlefield Road and Budget Amendment Ordinance for Removal of Pool (continued from 6/6/94) City Attorney Ariel Calonne said it was permissible for the Council not to take testimony from speakers who had already spoken last week on the item. He had given the Council a copy of a letter responding to a statement in the Palo Alto Weekly regarding a Brown Act violation last week, and it was important that the public 06/13/94 73-89 understand that the reason for the inconvenience of carrying the item over was to adhere to the Open Meeting Law. Marianne Lipanovich, 1715 Virginia Avenue, Redwood City, represent- ing the Board of Directors, Community Skating, Inc., addressed what the land issue was in 1985 and what the voters perceived as the issue. The voters that signed the initiative clearly saw recre-ation versus high density housing as an issue that should be addressed. Measures A and B clearly stated the plan would allow not only the acquisition of an ice skating facility but also a recreational site. The residents viewed the site as recreation- oriented and the initiatives were designed to preserve that state. The material stated that since the ongoing operation of the Winter Lodge was self-supporting, the City, by pursuing the land swap, could acquire land for a permanent recreation facility in Midtown on the entire parcel. It was a trade of parkland for parkland and was considered the only viable solution to emerge after a two-year study of ways to save the Winter Lodge. The community still believed that recreation was an important part of the quality of life in Palo Alto, and the City's Winter Lodge site was a recre-ational parkland. Before Council rejected that designation, there should be a clear mandate from the community to change. Debbie Sparck, 1326 Hoover Street, Menlo Park, Secretary, Community Skating, Inc., supported the Community Skating, Inc. (CSI) proposal. Phase I called for tennis only and allowed CSI to upgrade the courts and provide the City with a regulating authority for the courts, at no cost to the City. The site and parking area had already been approved by the Architectural Review Board. She asked the Council to pass Phase I of the proposal. She referred to the staff recommendation in CMR:293:94 which rejected the proposal because there was no public need for the facility, the cost to the City, and concern for potential impact on neighbors. Historically, the land was used for ice skating, tennis, and swimming. The voters in 1985 clearly approved the land swap with the intent that it be for recreational use. In 1990, the Council asked staff to prepare an Request for Proposal (RFP) for long-term recreational use of the site, which was done in 1993. Phase I was designed to be of no cost to the City. In addition, CSI had committed to $100,000 toward the upgrade of the facilities currently on the site. The impact on the neighbors would be minimal. Tennis was a relatively quiet sport. CSI's goal was to provide quality recre-ational benefits for Palo Altans. Susan Kelso, 2125 Emerson Street, member of the Board of Directors, Community Skating, Inc. said CSI supported the staff recommendation to allocate City funds to remove the existing pool at the Chuck Thompson site. CSI respectfully requested that Council approve its basic Phase I proposal to provide a tennis facility at the site. 06/13/94 73-90 It was fully responsive to the RFP and provided for long-term recreational use of the site at no cost to the City beyond that of removing the pool. The impact on traffic, parking, and the neighbors due to the proposed tennis use would be relatively minor. The Phase I proposal was separate from the Phase II proposal and should be considered on its own merits. Phase II was based on a contingency that the City might want to invest in a larger Midtown multi-purpose recreational facility. If Council approved the staff recommendation to reject CSI's proposal, CSI wanted to emphasize several points: 1) the City acquired the parcel in order to save the Winter Lodge, and the voters in 1985 believed that the entire parcel would be used for recreation or parkland; 2) in considering alternative uses other than tennis or swimming, Council needed to consider the needs of the entire Midtown Community; and 3) Council might consider dedicating the entire parcel as parkland, which CSI enthusiastically supported. Council Member Andersen asked whether CSI's support regarding dedication of the parcel as parkland was over and above CSI's RFP. Ms. Kelso said the RFP would be included. Terri Evans, 1555 W. Middlefield Road, Mountain View, said the goal of the CSI was to serve the community by providing low cost accessible recreation facilities. Winter Lodge was one of the top ten Institute of Skating in America (ISIA) facilities in America and was the only outdoor rink in California, It provided a unique skating experience which brought many people to Palo Alto. CSI responded to the RFP as required; however, the overall goal was to keep the land zoned for recreational use. The Planning Commission rejected the proposal because of the cost of the pool. The entire proposal should not be rejected and the land rezoned because of the cost of the swimming pool. The CSI and the Palo Alto Tennis Club (PATC) stated they were willing to help the City develop the land in a variety of recreational ways. Noise problems would not be solved by putting people into a high-density condominium complex with more noise-related activities involved. The Winter Lodge staff had tried to reduce the noise. Tennis and swimming were summer activities and skating was a winter activity, the parking lot would not be overwhelmed and the noise would not be doubled. The issue was whether the land around the Winter Lodge should remain zoned for recreational use or become high-density housing. She asked the Council to honor the voters wishes in 1985 and keep the land zoned for recreational use. The community would be better served and it would make Palo Alto a better place. Bobby Squires, 53 Osage Avenue, Los Altos, had worked in the City of Palo Alto for over ten years, partially as a skating teacher at the Winter Lodge. She had helped with the 1985 initiative and 06/13/94 73-91 would not have participated if it meant taking away parkland from the City of Palo Alto. The purpose was to keep a recreational facility. She asked the Council not to reject CSI's proposal to improve the site and not turn the property into high-density housing. Condominiums would bring more people in and take recreation away. Her children used both the Winter Lodge and the Chuck Thompson facilities. CSI had run the skating facility at a modest cost and had even improved the facility by building a new teaching rink at no cost to the City. CSI had shown it had the money to improve the tennis courts. She asked that Council accept CSI's proposal. Diane Squires, 53 Osage Avenue, Los Altos, said there had been discussion about the impact Winter Lodge had on the neighbors and suggestions were made that condominiums would make the area more pleasant. She said it would not make it any better, and the noise and parking situations would get worse. The Winter Lodge program provided a source of enjoyment and healthy activity for teenagers. If the tennis courts were supervised, there would be less noise. John Conforti, 500 Fulton Street, No. 202, had been a resident of Palo Alto for 18 years, a member of the PATC for 9 years, served on the Board for 3 years, and was currently Tournament Director. He worked closely with the Recreation Department in the scheduling of tennis courts on weekends for the PATC and felt the City was fully aware that there was no surplus of tennis courts in Palo Alto. Some of the neighbors had the misconception that tennis was dying out, but tennis was growing, among the senior, adult age, and youth groups. He implored that the four courts at Midtown be retained and improved. Tom Watzka, 2330 Heather Court, Mountain View, said he and his son participated in a Sunday program at Winter Lodge for the physically and mentally disabled and their families. The program was run by volunteers, provided instruction, open ice for children with limited coordination, and at a nominal cost. The Winter Lodge had done a tremendous job of managing its facilities, and made them available to people of special needs. He encouraged the City of Palo Alto to expand the availability of recreational facilities at the Winter Lodge site. Tom Datharsh, 3689 Louis Road, United States Tennis Association (USTA) Chairman for Palo Alto Tennis Club, said PATC ran an adult league, a mixed doubles league, and a senior league which were the most prestigious leagues that Palo Alto was involved with. The leagues competed in the Mid-Peninsula league, the state, and nationally. Sometimes 15 courts were needed at one time. The growth in tennis in the USTA alone was striking. The USTA was a prestigious organization which represented 20 percent of the number 06/13/94 73-92 of teams playing in Mid-Peninsula area. The USTA almost exceeded the capacity of the Palo Alto lighted courts during the season and they certainly needed more courts, not less. Carole Kraiss, 919 Bautista Court, said when she visited the Winter Lodge, she saw a wholesome and unique facility that was enjoyed by both young and old. It was a trade-up for Palo Alto and the voters had voted intelligently in 1985. Many voters wanted the impacted Midtown area to remain as open space and wanted to see control over oversized development in the Midtown area. Citizens wanted to preserve a centrally located recreational space for the community to enjoy. She quoted from a letter to the editor of the Palo Alto Weekly dated May 1, 1985. The campaign stated that an option for the entire parcel could be dedicated parkland. The decision as to the use of the parcel should include citizen input and she felt the only direction to go was to keep the Midtown area an open space recreational park-like setting or to turn the decision over to the voters once again. Charles Scott, 3136 Genevieve Court, wanted to see the former Chuck Thompson swim and tennis area remain for public recreational use as originally intended. The City and Midtown area needed a pool. Greer Park could not be considered for a pool site because the water level was too low. The only City pool for the Midtown area was at Rinconada Park. The new pool for the YMCA and the Eichler pool were not open to the general public. The proposal for housing on the site surprised him, and it seemed to be without the consideration of the citizens of the larger Midtown area. The purpose of the land swap was to save the Winter Lodge and prevent housing from being built on the site. Keith Clark, 963 Moreno Avenue, had been a Palo Alto resident since 1962. He was a teacher, tennis coach, and former President of the Palo Alto Tennis Club. Palo Alto had not added any new courts and tennis had been short changed in Palo Alto. There were fewer playable courts because the courts at Jordon Middle School, Palo Alto High School, Gunn High School courts needed to be resurfaced. The Jane Lathrop School courts were built uphill, and the Cubberley courts were good. He felt the City should do more for the juniors and the Chuck Thompson complex adapted itself nicely for junior clinics. It would cost more to build new courts than it would to resurface the courts. M. J. Miller, 5 Big Tree Road, Woodside, Vice President of Palo Alto Tennis Club, wanted to live in Palo Alto because it was an active community and had wonderful recreation facilities. She felt housing had to be supported by recreation or the quality was lost. The PATC had a 50-year history in Palo Alto and was run exclusively by volunteers. Recreation Departments in other cities 06/13/94 73-93 ran the tennis centers but the PATC helped Palo Alto. The PATC would contribute $15,000 to help promote and save tennis in Palo Alto, but the property had to be dedicated to tennis. The PATC would match City funds through private fund-raising and it would take approximately $50,000 to recenter and resurface the courts. New courts would cost approximately $30,000 per court, or $120,000. She asked Council to keep the Chuck Thompson site as a recreational facility. She thanked Council for considering PATC's recommendation. Edmund Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, said in 1985 the City needed the votes to maintain the Winter Lodge. In order for the property swap to occur, the developer, in exchange for the Winter Lodge, was given a piece of dedicated parkland. The citizens now wanted to save the recreational facility that the City was trying to break up. He hoped the Council would vote in support of keeping the Chuck Thompson site as a recreational facility. Nataly Burhan, 3073 Middlefield Road, No. 204, said she supported the staff recommendations, which contained honest and detailed analysis of the existing situation. The staff recommendation concluded there was not a high enough demand for the proposed swimming pool. To support that fact, she referred to an article in the Palo Alto Weekly entitled "Empty Pools" on August 11, 1993. During the peak of swimming demand, the City decided to close the three pools at Gunn High School, Jordan Middle School, and Jane Lathrop School one day each weekend for the final three weekends of the summer swim program due to lack of interest. With regard to the Winter Lodge proposal to create a park zone with barbecue areas and other activities, she pointed out that Hoover Park and Mitchell Park were within half a mile of Midtown. The staff recommendation made no threat to the future of the Winter Lodge, the benefits of ice skating, or how to use the property but rather how not to use it. The critical question was whether to use the land for recreational purposes. There would be various uses which would not be disturbing to the neighbors if the Council decided to use all or part of the land for recreational purposes. She asked the Council to direct staff to evaluate the proposal further with respect to neighbors concerns regarding noise. Pat Congress, 1070 Coleman Avenue, Menlo Park, said her family had been using the Winter Lodge for the past nine years. The Winter Lodge was a very special place, had been run well, and CSI would be excellent stewards of the entire property. She urged the Council to allow the land to be used for recreational use. Mayor Kniss declared the Public Hearing closed. 06/13/94 73-94 Council Member McCown said in the staff report CMR:293:94 analysis, there was potential to make valuable use of the entire site for recreational purposes, and she felt that the process had not gone far enough before considering other non-recreational uses. MOTION: Council Member McCown moved, seconded by Andersen, to direct the staff to: 1) Proceed with Phase I of the Community Skating, Inc. (CSI) proposal with the participation and assistance of the Palo Alto Tennis Club (PATC), as appropriate; 2) Explore with CSI and PATC, as appropriate, development of the remainder of the site with low intensity recreational uses that were compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods, not including a swimming pool use, that there be no cost to the City, and return to the Council with recommendations; and, 3) Adopt the Budget Amendment Ordinance establishing a Capital Improvement Project (CIP) in the amount of $30,000 to remove and backfill the swimming pool. Ordinance 4226 entitled "Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1993-94 to Provide an Additional Appropriation for Capital Improvement Project No. 19420, 'Chuck Thompson Site Pool Removal'" Council Member McCown said a lot of points, concerns, and history had been brought up regarding the item and the Council had the benefit of lawyers studying the ballot arguments of the language in the original measure. It was clear in the Ordinance that there was absolute commitment at that time that the entire property would be used exclusively for recreational purposes. The Council Members who proposed the exchange of the land said that the effect of the exchange would control the development of site acquisition of the whole parcel and would allow, as with the Gamble property, citizen direction for the use around the Winter Lodge. Nothing precluded dedicating the entire Midtown as parkland. The future use of the property would involve the process the Council was going through now, which was participation on the part of the community. She felt there was an overwhelming bias by the proponents of the measure that public and worthwhile recreational uses of the site be considered. The staff report acknowledged that there might be worthwhile recreational uses at the site. The problem with the proposals was that further development of a new pool as proposed by CSI would involve substantial commitment of City dollars which staff recommended against. She agreed with staff on that point. The pool represented a more intense use and a far greater potential problem for the surrounding neighborhood. For that reason, she felt it would not be appropriate to pursue that further. CSI did not feel that it could be pursued without financial participation on the City's part. She recommended other recreational uses, such as community gardens, tennis courts, or a combination of both be considered. It was open space; but once it was developed for 06/13/94 73-95 housing or other structures, it would be gone. To the extent it was available to the neighborhood for a long time as a recreational facility on open space, it could be incorporated in an intelligent way into the neighborhood. It was an extraordinarily valuable asset to that neighborhood, but she understood the frustration with the noise problems which needed to continue to be addressed. She believed the community, CSI, and the tennis supporters should really consider making smart use of the site for the benefit of that neighborhood and for the entire City before concluding that it could not work. Council Member Huber agreed with Council Member McCown and supported the motion. He agreed legally that it was clear in the Ordinance that the City could do whatever it wanted with the property. There was no question in his mind that most of the people who had supported the exchange, including himself, meant for the property to be used for recreational purposes. At that time, there were tennis courts, an ice skating rink, and a swimming pool. No one knew that those things would not continue to exist; and unfortunately, houses had been built close to the property. Council's action that evening would benefit the householders because the potential for the pool had always been there. He agreed explicitly with Council Member McCown that a pool was an expensive proposition and should not be put in that location. If that kind of money were going to be spent to put a pool in, the City would be better off if it put in playground equipment, resurfaced tennis courts, etc., which would provide better recreational use than spending money for a pool. Council Member Andersen agreed with the motion. He wanted to include a condition that there not be lighted tennis courts as a benefit for the neighbors. Council Member McCown asked whether Phase I of the CSI proposal intended to add lights. Senior Financial Analyst Janet Freeland replied there were lights on the site but they were not currently hooked up. The CSI proposal included updating the lights to low standards that had less impact on neighbors or there could be no lighting. AMENDMENT: Council Member Andersen, seconded by Wheeler, to specify that the tennis courts not be lighted. Council Member Andersen appreciated the need for lighted courts in the community and other areas might be considered. One of the major issues was the impact on a neighborhood that was close to the site, and one way that night noise could be controlled would be if the opportunity to play tennis in the evening were not available. 06/13/94 73-96 It would create a better environment for the neighbors in that area. Mayor Kniss asked what percentage of the tennis courts in Palo Alto were lighted courts. Chuck Bradley, member of Palo Alto Tennis Club, said there were 13 lighted tennis courts, six at Palo Alto High School. Council Member Huber opposed the amendment because the Council would look at the issue again after proposals for use of the property were reviewed. At that time, it could be decided whether there would or would not be lighted courts and what time the courts would close, etc. Council Member Rosenbaum opposed the amendment. For the purposes of the PATC and USTA matches, it would be beneficial to have four courts that were lighted, and the lights could be turned off at a reasonable hour. Vice Mayor Simitian asked whether the proposal would return to the Council for review, which would allow for discussion of the issues brought up by Council Member Huber. City Attorney Ariel Calonne said yes. As he understood Council Member McCown's motion, it would return to the Council with an option to lease the property. The staff report advised the Council that an Environmental Impact Assessment of that proposal would have to be done at that time. Council Member Wheeler was still in agreement with Council Member Andersen's amendment. She had difficulty determining at that particular location, which was immediately adjacent to residences, that it would be a good place to add lighted tennis courts. There were a number of existing tennis facilities within the City park system that were more appropriately located for lighted courts and were not so close to immediate neighbors. Vice Mayor Simitian opposed the amendment but was sympathetic to Council Members Andersen's and Wheeler's comments. He agreed with Council Member Huber that if the motion were successful, the staff could return to Council with a proposal that would be responsive to the concerns of Council Members Andersen and Wheeler with regard to the impact on the neighbors and the relationship that night lighting might have. There had been a lot of discussion around the issue of who was there first, the housing or the recreational facility. He felt that was irrelevant. The fact was that there was a recreational facility that was adjacent to a residential use, and the Council had the responsibility to make the uses compati- ble. That kind of debate would always be around when there were 06/13/94 73-97 people that wanted the integrity of their R-1 neighborhood respected but who also wanted services and amenities in close proximity to their R-1 neighborhood. The two desires conflicted with each other. Mayor Kniss supported Council Member Andersen's amendment not to have lighted courts, not because the lighting might disturb the neighbors, but because of the noise factor. AMENDMENT PASSED 5-4, Huber, McCown, Rosenbaum, Simitian "no." Council Member Fazzino found it difficult not to support Council Member Andersen's amendment given the arguments. He supported the main motion. It was clear the intent of the 1985 campaign and the actions by many in the 1980s were to preserve the site for recreational use. He had been on the Board of the YMCA at that time and for many years the YMCA had looked long and hard at that site for recreational purposes. The measure on the ballot was a carefully constructed compromise with a split Council. If the Council decided to use the site for a purpose other than recre-ational use, he felt the decision should to return to the voters. The primary effort in 1985 was to preserve the Winter Lodge, and the Council should not do anything to jeopardize its future. He and former Council Member Cobb had opposed the proposed condominium development recognizing there would be noise problems associated with the juxtaposition of the Winter Lodge and the condominium development. Notwithstanding that, he wanted to continue to encourage the Winter Lodge and neighbors to work closely together to mitigate noise problems in that area. With respect to the former Chuck Thompson site, he did support continued recreational use along the lines of what Council Member McCown had recommended, but at the same time he did not want to exacerbate noise problems for the neighbors. He preferred a low intensity recreational use on the site without lighted courts, which would not create additional significant noise problems but would meet the intent of the voters and provide a critically needed recreational use for the Midtown neighborhood. Council Member Rosenbaum recalled that in the background of a discussion which he had with Council Member McCown regarding the use of the site was a proposal for housing for the developmentally disabled. He did not know whether the City's contribution of $20,000 had any impact on the staff recommendation, but he was not prepared to rule out that possibility. He asked Council Member McCown what her thoughts were on the subject. Council Member McCown did not believe the motion ruled out that possibility, but Phase I of the CSI proposal was intended to use the site as it existed. The second part of the motion was to 06/13/94 73-98 pursue low intensity recreational uses; and if that were success- ful, a package would be put together and returned to the Council. If a suitable package were not put together which was compatible with the neighborhood uses or acceptable to the Council, then other possibilities could be pursued. Council Member Rosenbaum clarified that if it were possible to keep the site for recreational use only, then Council Member McCown would not want to consider the housing for the developmentally disabled. He was concerned with the application of the PATC. Council Member McCown had suggested that the PATC and CSI should get together. The PATC had identified an important potential use for the facility since there had been an increase in USTA team tennis in Palo Alto and there was not a good facility for the teams to play. Based on his experience of organizations getting together, if the option to CSI were awarded, he did not know what the basis would be for the two to negotiate. He believed it might be a good idea for the Council to delay its decision and ask the two organizations to try to get together. Since CSI was putting up the bulk of the money, it should be entitled to the bulk of the use of the tennis courts. It was conceivable that a joint arrangement could be worked out, but he did felt it would not be possible if the Council awarded the option to CSI that evening. Council Member McCown felt there was a logical partnership between CSI and PATC in the Phase I approach of reusing the courts, and also the other use of the site might involve something similar to what Council Member Rosenbaum said. She included in both parts that the concept of the use of the site would be pursued with both organizations together. The Phase I proposal was specifically made by CSI alone. She asked whether that could be pursued with both organizations by a direction to staff to determine a joint option to lease could be brought forward. Her main intent was to bring the two organizations and their resources together with staff to pursue what other uses could be done for the remainder of the site. Ms. Freeland replied the PATC had stated in its recommendation that it was legally not the type of organization that could enter into an option to lease. Council Member McCown clarified that PATC's role would be financial with some understanding with CSI, but it could not be a lessee from the City. She did not know how the Council could have that flexibility since it could not be leased to PATC. Council Member Rosenbaum was not happy ruling out the housing for the developmentally disabled proposal. It had potential difficulty and might not be feasible. 06/13/94 73-99 SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Rosenbaum moved to direct staff to: 1) Reject the CSI proposal and the PATC recommendation and refer evaluation of the site to the Policy and Services (P&S) Committee with the following provisos: 1) that there would be no swimming pool; and 2) that the recreation uses would involve no City funds. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND Council Member Rosenbaum wanted a mechanism worked out to make sure that PATC would have some leverage in the negotiations. City Manager June Fleming said it was staff's understanding that the motion as proposed by Council Member McCown was that staff would work with both PATC and CSI to attempt to assist them in putting together a proposal which would meet the criteria outlined in the motion. The City would not negotiate but would facilitate the discussion and work with both groups to make it become a reality. Council Member Rosenbaum asked what the product would be that would return to Council if it did not go to the P&S Committee. Ms. Fleming replied it would be an option to lease to CSI. As the motion stood, it would return to Council. If Council Member Rosenbaum wanted it to go to the P&S Committee first, the Council would have to make that a direction. Council Member Rosenbaum asked how the PATC would fit into the scenario. Ms. Fleming said that issues would have to be worked out. Council Member Rosenbaum asked whether staff could provide more information. Ms. Fleming said the staff understood the spirit of the motion and if that piece of information were not accurate, then the leasing could be worked out. Director of Finance Emily Harrison clarified the staff's response came from the PATC's response to the proposal and that was within the context of the PATC's understanding that it would be function- ing as a commercial operator for the site. There might be arrangements whereby the PATC potentially could be the lessee. Council Member Rosenbaum asked whether there was a way that CSI and PATC could be equal participants in the process with staff. 06/13/94 73-100 Council Member McCown said in light of the last exchange, perhaps there was more discussion that could go on with the PATC. If it were the intent of the Council to have a joint proposal brought back from both organizations, facilitated by staff, she would be happy to modify the motion to indicate that intention. Mr. Calonne said the point was that the PATC chose not to make a proposal and it offered a recommendation on how to use the property. He understood Council Member McCown's motion stated that the PATC's recommendation should be taken into account through staff facilitated work in the process, and the Council was not in a position at that point to convert the PATC into a proposer. Council Member Schneider said she supported the motion. She had a great deal of sympathy for the neighbors that were impacted by noise, and wanted to see a buffer zone between neighbors and the tennis courts, e.g., a pocket park or community gardens which could be enjoyed by all but would not be overactive. Vice Mayor Simitian said it was one of the most singularly untidy issues to come before the Council. It was untidy in the way it was presented, processed, the motion, and the site in itself, in terms of its configuration in the community. He did not believe the ballot measure in 1985 required the Council to view the site as recreational in its entirety. He recalled the measure was to save the Winter Lodge. He wished he had heard more discussion, not about entitlements, but about what was the best proposal for site, what was in the community's best interest, and what would work. He was not convinced that four tennis courts were the best possible use of the site given the other competing needs and interests in the community, one being the proposal for an affordable housing project for developmentally disabled adults. There was a process in place, an RFP which people had responded to in good faith and the fact that he might reach a different conclusion if the Council started from scratch did not permit him to toss aside the process that had been used. It was really a question of the process that was used and who responded to the process. In his view he had split the two issues, and he understood where Council Member Rosenbaum was coming from that there might be a better use of the site, but he was not disagreeing. A process was started, people were asked to respond, and if there were a good, acceptable recreational use for the site that came forward as part of the process, he felt some measure of responsibility to move ahead. The motion represented such an approach, so he would support the measure with mixed feelings. He believed the City received the best recreational proposal possible with respect to that site after going through an RFP process, but he had some concerns as to how long it took to go through the process. He wanted to continue to underscore the concern that was expressed regarding the impact on 06/13/94 73-101 the neighbors. He wanted to be clear with CSI and PATC that the Council's intent was to allow the recreational use to move forward in a way that was truly low intensity and would minimize to the greatest possible degree the impact on the neighbors. Council Member Wheeler supported the motion with a lot of the same feelings expressed by Vice Mayor Simitian and Council Member Rosenbaum. If she would have received as much background informa-tion when the RFP was drafted as she had received over the last week, she might have felt differently about the way the RFP was structured. The RFP was structured in a way that invited proposals for very specific purposes, and the people responded in good faith to those proposals. She did not believe it would be fair at that point to change the game. She saw the need for finding a site for housing for the developmentally disabled, and in the event that the that site could not be developed within the parameters for recreational uses, it could then be opened up again for consider-ation. She felt the Council owed the proponents of the recreation-al proposals and a good number of people that had an understanding of what they were voting for in l985, the obligation to attempt to find recreational uses that could be good neighbors to the residents. One of the things she became aware of with the proposals and the testimony that came forth from the neighbors was that universally there was non-support among the neighbors for expanded use on the site by CSI. She hoped that CSI would be mindful of that in its further deliberations and that steps would be taken to make a better attempt at being better neighbors. Mayor Kniss apologized for the delay in hearing the item. She felt there were three issues the Council was considering: 1) the actual wording; 2) what people thought they remembered; and 3) the fact that there was no question that people felt that parkland was being exchanged. Palo Alto liked its parkland, and it was monitored very carefully. For those that had gone through old minutes, etc., they knew that the previous Council was extremely divided and there had been a very lively discussion before it had gone to a vote. She supported the motion; and even though there were parts that were difficult to deal with, it was a RFP that asked for a response that was correctly described on the agenda. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED 9-0. MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Wheeler, to bring Item Nos. 16 and 17 forward for the purposes of a continu-ance. MOTION PASSED 9-0. 06/13/94 73-102 16. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adopting the City's Nondisposal Facility Element Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 41730 et seq. Mayor Kniss declared the Public Hearing open. MOTION TO CONTINUE: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Wheeler, to continue the Public Hearing to the Monday, June 27, 1994, City Council Meeting. MOTION TO CONTINUE PASSED 9-0. 17. Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and Mojave Pipeline Company to Provide Natural Gas Transportation MOTION TO CONTINUE: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Wheeler, to continue Item No. 17 to the Monday, June 27, 1994, City Council Meeting. MOTION TO CONTINUE PASSED 9-0. RECESS TO A CLOSED SESSION: 9:12 P.M. - 10:08 P.M. The City Council met in Closed Session to discuss a matter involving significant exposure to litigation as described in Agenda Item No. 12. Mayor Kniss announced that there was no action to report with respect to the Closed Session. 14. Reconfirmation of Rental Rate Structure Policy for Subleases at the Cubberley Community Center and the Eleven Extended Day Care Sites, and Request for Council Direction Regarding Bid Procedure (continued from 6/6/94) Council Member Wheeler said she would not participate in the item due to a conflict of interest. Real Property Manager William Fellman said there was one correction to the staff report (CMR:285:94), Attachment A, the Total Monthly Payment from City to PAUSD should be $28,843. Council Member Andersen asked given the significant subsidy that was provided for the artists in regard to the rentals for the artists, was there a sunset on the leases, what was the present arrangement. Mr. Fellman replied that each of the artists had been on a one-year lease term. The policy to turn over the tenants was not in place but staffs intent was to return to Council next year with a policy 06/13/94 73-103 for the turn over. Staff had to meet with the artists and create a policy. Director of Finance Emily Harrison said part of the complexity was that staff wanted to create an advisory committee, perhaps using the Public Art Commission (PAC), that could advise as to the appropriateness of the artists and do some kind of ranking and rating. MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by McCown, to: (1) Reconfirm the rental rate policy and direct staff to maintain the level of revenue necessary to cover the "pass-through" rent due Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD). If opportunities arise to provide subsidies to the arts community other than those specified in the lease rate plan, while still maintaining the same level of revenue with minor adjustments to the rental plan structure, staff would return to the Council for approval of any proposed adjustments; (2) Waive Policy and Procedures 1-11 pertaining to the Leased Use of City Land/Facilities, for the existing subtenants at the Cubberley site and authorize staff to renegotiate additional three- to five-year subleases with the existing subtenants; and (3) Reconfirm the existing rental rate structure for the eleven extended day care providers. Council Member Andersen said staff needed to explore a sunset provision that would allow some degree of equity for the artists who were waiting in line. He was not persuaded that it should be based on the quality of the art work. It needed to be clear and should be true of both artists and dance studios. It should not be for the exclusive use of the people that were first in line. Vice Mayor Simitian said there were many reasons he ran for Council but serving as an art critic and a landlord at the same time and place was not one of them. He felt it was difficult enough to choose among one proposer on a recreational site that night and he wanted to be very clear that he did not ever want to see in front of the Council a group of artists making their case as to why they were more entitled or more artistically deserving of space at Cubberley. He looked forward to the staff putting together a package which would rely on some mechanism other than Council involvement on that issue. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Wheeler "not participating." 14A. (Old Item 19) Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and San Francisco Bay Area Task Force '94 for Reimbursement of City Service Expenses Associated with World Cup 1994 Soccer Matches at Stanford Stadium 06/13/94 73-104 City Manager June Fleming said the agreement had been negotiated through numerous meetings and exchanges of information with the San Francisco Bay Area Task Force '94 (Host Committee). Staff had been diligent with its preparations for the World Cup. The resolution that went before Council initially recommending that Palo Alto support the concept of the World Cup being held at Stanford ended up with the staff being instructed to recoup the costs for the World Cup that were related to police and fire services, and the agreement before the Council allowed that to happen. She was confident there was a system in place to account for the costs. The Host Committee had some preferences with regard to the initial payment, and the payment would be received with the understanding that if all of the funds were not expended the remainder would be returned to the Host Committee. If there were additional costs, the Host Committee would also be notified. Staff thought it was an interesting experience, felt well prepared for the World Cup, and looked forward to it coming to Palo Alto. Vice Mayor Simitian referred to page 3 of the staff report (CMR:320:94) which read "The temporary fence installation along Embarcadero Road in the vicinity of the stadium was mandated by, and funded by, the U.S. Department of Defense; it will enhance the efficiency of police efforts at pedestrian traffic control." He asked how the U.S. Department of Defense mandated the chain link fence. Ms. Fleming said it was mandated by the U.S. Department of Defense coming to Palo Alto and installing the fence. The City could not dictate what the U.S. Government would or would not do. It was a security measure and Palo Alto had no control. She deferred the question to Assistant Police Chief Lynne Johnson to explain the exact purpose. Assistant Police Chief Lynne Johnson explained the primary purpose of the fence was to help funnel the majority of the people that would take the train so that pedestrians did not funnel into traffic onto Embarcadero Road. At the December 18, 1993, game when the fences were not up, the fans actually impeded traffic. The fence would prevent that from happening. Vice Mayor Simitian asked that it be explained to him again just what jurisdiction the U.S. Department of Defense had. He asked why the U.S. Department of Defense would be interested in World Cup Soccer and was the decision for the fence unilateral. Ms. Fleming said it was done unilaterally. The interest for the U.S. Department of Defense was that there might be dignitaries traveling along that motor route and it required the fence for 06/13/94 73-105 protection of foreign dignitaries or even the President of the United States. Frank Patitucci, 57 Castlewood Drive, Pleasanton, representing the San Francisco Bay Area Task Force '94, introduced Anne Cribbs, who established the Soccer Center which was a facility in the rehabili- tated Hubbard and Johnson building donated by the Palo Alto Medical Foundation. He said the Host Committee supported the agreement which would allow the City to be reimbursed for the costs involved with supporting the event at Stanford Stadium. The City staff and the Host Committee had worked very hard for the past year, and he felt the agreement was fair and workable. He had a check in the amount of $170,000 to pay for the estimated costs involved. He referred to a hand out which explained the World Cup, which was the world's largest soccer tournament. The World Cup had a finals match every four years held in a different country. The 1994 World Cup was the 15th and would be held for the first time ever in the United States. The tournament actually started with regional play three years before the final event. The last World Cup was in Italy in 1990 and immediately thereafter 130 countries started a playoff for the opportunity to end up in the United States for the final matches. There were 24 teams participating. The handout showed the schedule of the 52 games. There would six matches at Stanford: four first round, one round of sixteen, and a quarter final. The semi-finals would be in Los Angeles and New York, and the final in New York. The World Cup was the biggest sporting event in the World. It was estimated that it would make a $4 billion impact on the economy of the United States and a $350 million impact on the Bay Area. In 1988 the United States was picked to host the World Cup. The bid for the games in the Bay Area started in 1989 and 26 bids went in December 1991. The bids were awarded in March of 1992 of which the original bid included both Stanford Stadium and Candlestick Park. The Federation of International Football Associations (FIFA) funded and governed the World Cup and it preferred Candlestick which was eliminated because of conflicts with baseball. The United States Soccer Federation was the governing body for the United States. The Host Committee was separate from the venue staff. The venue staff, Executive Director, was responsible for running the games at Stanford. The Host Committee was a group of volunteers and its major objective was to have the World Cup event allow the Host Committee to raise funds to support the youth soccer legacy. Any excess funds from the $170,000 not spent by the City of Palo Alto or excess funds from the Host Committee would go toward funding that legacy. Council Member Rosenbaum had gotten some adverse comments about the commercial content of the banners from some of his constituents and asked Mr. Patitucci for a response. 06/13/94 73-106 Mr. Patitucci said all over the United States the World Cup had run a banner program with its sponsors. The sponsors paid for the preparation and placement of the banners. MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Wheeler, to approve the agreement between the City of Palo Alto and San Francisco Bay Area Task Force '94 for reimbursement of City service expenses associated with World Cup 1994 soccer matches at Stanford Stadium. Council Member Fazzino recognized the outstanding efforts of the City staff and the Host Committee, in particular, Frank Patitucci, for working toward a very fair agreement to reimburse the City for its most significant costs associated with World Cup. It was the first time a group had come to the City and propose that it be reimbursed for costs prior to a sporting event and he felt it was an important precedent and one that should be pursued with Stanford University in the future. He also acknowledged Anne Cribbs who had the public relations responsibility for the games in that venue. She had done a fantastic job letting the rest of the World know that the World Cup games were taking place in Palo Alto, not San Jose or San Francisco. The Council was delighted that Palo Alto was being recognized for the fact that it was expending some costs and that the citizens would be impacted by the soccer games. He also recognized the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce which did an excellent job in working with the City in putting together a real business municipal partnership to promote the soccer games and support local businesses. He was delighted to support the agreement and felt it was a remarkable event and a lifetime opportunity for Palo Alto. Palo Alto had hosted the Super Bowl nine year prior and he believed that Palo Altans were far more excited about the World Cup. Council Member Rosenbaum commended the City staff, Mr. Patitucci, and the Host Committee. He initially believed Palo Alto would not gain a penny from the event, and he congratulated the Host Committee for its check for $170,000. MOTION PASSED 9-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 15. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolutions Regarding Assessments for University Avenue Area and California Avenue Area Parking Bonds for Fiscal Year 1994-95 Council Member Schneider said she would not participate due to a conflict of interest. 06/13/94 73-107 Mayor Kniss said it was the time and place set for the public hearing for the parking assessment roll for the following projects: 1. California Avenue Off-Street Parking Project No. 71-63 2. University Avenue Area Off-Street Parking Project No. 75-63 3. University Avenue Area Off-Street Parking Projects, Lot J Refunding and 250 University Avenue Acquisition 4. California Avenue Keystone Lot Parking Project No. 86-01 5. California Avenue Parking Project No. 92-13 The City Engineer had caused to be prepared and filed with the City Clerk a report providing for the levying of special assessments within the parking assessment districts created and established for the projects and under the Resolutions of Intention just expressed. The report sets forth the amounts of assessments proposed to be levied for the Fiscal Year 1994-95. The assessments would be used to pay principal and interest on the bonds issued in the various projects. The report had been open for public inspection. The purpose of the hearing was to allow Council to hear all persons having an interest in any real property within the parking assessment districts; to hear all objections, protests, or other written communications from interested persons; to take and receive oral and documentary evidence pertaining to matters contained in the filed report; to remedy and correct any error or informality in the report; and to amend, alter, modify, correct, and confirm the report and each of the assessments therein. Director of Public Works Glenn Roberts pointed out that the assessments included the new California Avenue parking structure approved by the City Council last fall which was now under construction, so property owners would see the assessment for that new structure for the first time. Also, there were two addendums modifying assessments, one attached to the staff report (CMR:318:94) and one distributed at places containing new informa- tion received by staff since the preparation of the report. Senior Engineer James Harrington said that Mr. Roberts was formally requesting that the addendums be added to the formal Engineers Roll and that would be done as part of the resolution. Mayor Kniss asked if the City Clerk had received any written communications. City Clerk Gloria Young said no. 06/13/94 73-108 Mayor Kniss declared the Public Hearing open. Receiving no requests from the public to speak, he declared the Public Hearing closed. MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Rosenbaum, to adopt the Resolutions confirming the Engineer's Report and Assessment Roll for: California Avenue District, Project No. 71-63; California Avenue District, Project No. 86-01; California Avenue District, Project No. 92-13; California Avenue District, Project No. 75-63; and University Avenue District, Lot J Refunding and 250 University Avenue Acquisition. Resolution 7320 entitled "Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Confirming Engineer's Report and Assessment Roll California Avenue Off-Street Parking, Project No. 71-63 for Fiscal Year 1994-95" Resolution 7321 entitled "Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Confirming Engineer's Report and Assessment Roll University Avenue Area Off-Street Parking Project No. 75-63 for Fiscal Year 1994-95" Resolution 7322 entitled "Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Confirming Engineer's Report and Assessment Roll University Avenue Parking Projects (Lot J) Refunding and 250 University Avenue Acquisition for Fiscal Year 1994-95" Resolution 7323 entitled "Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Confirming Engineer's Report and Assessment Roll California Avenue Keystone Lot Parking Project No. 86-01 for Fiscal Year 1994-95" Resolution 7324 "Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Confirming Engineer's Report and Assessment Roll Califor-nia Avenue Parking Project No. 92-13 for Fiscal Year 1994-95" MOTION PASSED 8-0, Schneider "not participating." REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS 18. The Policy and Services Committee Recommends Approval of the Staff Recommendation that Stop Signs Not Be Installed on Hamilton Avenue at West Crescent Drive MOTION: Council Member Huber for the Policy and Services Committee moved approval of the staff recommendation that stop signs not be installed on Hamilton Avenue at West Crescent Drive, and no other traffic control measures be installed in the 1200 block of Hamilton Avenue. 06/13/94 73-109 Council Member Huber said the item was not put on the Consent Calendar because of a change in committee members. The current Policy and Services (P&S) Committee voted 4-0 to support the staff recommendation of no stop signs, but the earlier P&S Committee voted 2-1 to put in stop signs or an alternative. The staff held a number of meetings discussing various alternatives but came up with no consensus from the neighborhood. It was brought back to the P&S Committee again with a recommendation that stop signs not be installed. Adding stop signs on Hamilton Avenue at West Crescent Drive would make a stop sign on every block rather than every other block as was the normal practice, there was no accident history, and the speed was not much different than other areas in the community. The staff was working on a standard so there would be something neighborhoods could look at when they came to Council, and there would be a decent percentage of people committed. Mayor Kniss referred to page 2 of the staff report (CMR:243:94) regarding the speed survey. She said she walked and jogged on that route and felt that the speed was a little over the 85th percentile of 31 miles per hour (mph). City Traffic Engineer Ashok Aggarwal said that a 24-hour speed survey had been done and the 85th percentile speed in that area was actually 33 mph. Chief Transportation Official Marvin Overway said that 15 percent of the traffic was going faster than the 85th percentile speed and that was most likely the ones that would attract attention. Howard Wolf, 580 W. Crescent Drive, said he was the most vocal catalyst regarding speeding on Hamilton Avenue starting 18 months prior. Last year when the item was brought up before the P&S Committee, it was a 2-1 vote in favor of the stop sign with a request to be more creative with a solution. The current P&S Committee had changed the recommendation to no stop sign, and he was stunned. He felt it was a problem and that Council needed to look at it with regard to future residents. He would have voiced a much stronger preference for doing what the previous P&S Committee had voted for if he had known the outcome. There was no plan from the previous P&S Committee as how to reach a more creative solution. The neighbors tried to come up with a creative solution with the Transportation Department but ran into problems with losing parking, aesthetics, etc. The Council needed to find a way to send the P&S Committee directives down to the staff level so everyone would know where things were going with the neighborhood committees. Lastly, with regard to the 85th percentile of 31 mph which was really 33 mph, his main concern was his children and how long it took for a car to stop. At 25 mph, it took 150 feet to 06/13/94 73-110 stop and at 33 mph it took 250 feet. He felt the 15 percent that was going faster was going 45 mph which would take 400 feet to stop. He would rather find another solution but asked for a stop sign because it was the most palatable solution. Kevin Owen, 1290 Hamilton Avenue, said lived in that area since 1970 and raised three children. He had not noticed any change in the percentage of traffic speeding on the street. It was any different than the recent speed survey indicated. He spoke on his own behalf and his neighbor, Mr. Higgins, and supported the staff recommendation not to install stop signs or additional traffic measures on the street, and he hoped that the full Council would support it. The installation of stop signs was not speed control devices. He was concerned with the increased noise and pollution involved by installing stop signs in that location. An overall traffic study of the area was needed, not a piecemeal solution to a specific problem. Mayor Kniss asked whether Mr. Aggarwal had information on the number of cars or traffic that had changed over the last few years. The indication from University Avenue was dramatic, and people that lived on Hamilton Avenue felt there were many more cars than there were previously. Mr. Aggarwal said staff did not have the traffic volumes from center of Lincoln Avenue but did have them close to Middlefield Road and Chausser Street. The numbers seemed to have gone up, but he did not have the figures. Mayor Kniss said she had observed that the cars that were went off of University Avenue because of the increased traffic volume between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. went to Hamilton Avenue. That had been her observation. Mr. Aggarwal confirmed that was probably true. Vice Mayor Simitian supported the staff recommendation and the recommendation made by the previous P&S Committee of 2-1, he had been the descending vote. He voted against the stop sign then and again that evening because he felt that stop signs were not speed control devices. It had reached the point in many neighborhoods, not particularly that neighborhood, where stop signs had become part of the problem rather than part of the solution. People cruised through stop signs when there were too many of them and felt they did not need to take them seriously. There needed to be a balance between having enough stop signs to give people the protection they needed and trying not to put a stop sign at every intersection. In Mr. Wolf's description of what he went through with his neighborhood, maybe he could now see what a Council Member 06/13/94 73-111 went through in making a decision. It was impossible to make everyone happy. The Council listened to everyone and made a decision based on the best interest of everyone. He commended Mr. Wolf on his thoughtful, well prepared, cogent, and well spoken presentation both to the P&S Committee and the Council that evening. Council Member Fazzino disagreed with Council Member Simitian and believed that stop signs did play a role in controlling speed. Stop signs caused him to focus on where he was and the need to stop. Stop signs had been removed on Bryant Street in recent months which certainly had an impact on the speed on that street. A stop sign had been installed on Channing Avenue and he felt it had a very significant impact in reducing speeding problems. He said that both speakers presentations were excellent. It was a tough call for him, and he wished a new approach could have worked among the neighbors. He would support the original plan to install a stop sign in that location. The situation could be evaluated in a year to determine the impact it made. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Kniss, that a stop sign be installed on Hamilton Avenue at West Crescent Drive. Mayor Kniss reiterated that she had definitely noticed a change in traffic on Hamilton Avenue. It was not substantiated, but the number of times she had almost been hit by a car had been astonish-ing. She had a friend that lived two houses from the Channing/ Greer stop sign who was skeptical about the installation of that stop sign but said that the traffic pattern on Channing Avenue had changed dramatically. She was aware that Mr. Owen spoke from excellent evidence from living in the area for over the last 20 years, but she was surprised the traffic pattern changes did not show up differently. The amount of traffic there must be quite different than it was 20 years ago, especially an increase on University Avenue which she believed caused an overflow onto Hamilton Avenue. She supported the substitute motion, and she had hoped that another alternative would have been found for that area because the neighbors. Council Member McCown expressed her frustration with the absence of a better mechanism of dealing with neighborhood problems, such as with an earlier item on the Consent Calendar with regard to Waverley/Addison. There had been a lot of effort put forth in trying to find alternative traffic devices. She was concerned with the Council relying on its own empirical evidence for making decisions. She was not discounting the perception, but it was difficult when it was being measured against a desire to quantify and the appropriate way in which the staff approached it. It was 06/13/94 73-112 frustrating because of the stalemating that happened within the neighborhoods; different ideas and different groups of people with different likes and dislikes. The decision felt very ad hoc to her and therefore she did not know what could be done the next time another neighborhood had a similar concern that needed to be evaluated. The staff would give the Council professional advice and the Council would disregard it. For that reason, she could support the installation of the stop sign at the committee level or at the Council level, she did not feel that . She would like to pursue with the staff a way to generate some new techniques that were better than the ad hoc way the Council had to deal with neighborhood types of issues. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED 2-7, Fazzino, Kniss "yes." MOTION PASSED 7-2, Fazzino, Kniss "no." RESOLUTIONS ORDINANCES REPORTS OF OFFICIALS COUNCIL MATTERS 20. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements Council Member Rosenbaum urged his colleagues to read the Utilities Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of March 2, 1994, regarding the Mojave issue. Mayor Kniss announced that the first World Cup Soccer Game at Stanford would be held on Monday, June 20, 1994, at 1:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 2.04.200 (a) and (b). The City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are made solely for the purpose of facilitating the preparation of the minutes of the meetings. City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are recycled 90 days from the date of the meeting. The tapes are 06/13/94 73-113 available for members of the public to listen to during regular office hours.