HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-05-06 City Council Summary Minutes
Special Meeting May 6, 1996 1. Presentation of Family Resource Center Task Force Business Plan..................................................79-123 1. Resolution Expressing Appreciation to Theodore A. Chandik Upon His Retirement........................................79-125 2. Appointments to the Public Art Commission.............79-125 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS........................................79-126 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 20 AND 21, 1996............79-127
3. Resolution 7583 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Lou Verna Upon
His Retirement≅ .......................................79-127 4. Consultant Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and Judith G. Cunha Land Survey for Manhole Survey Service.......79-127 5. Grant of Airport Safety Zone Easement to the County of Santa Clara for the Benefit of the Palo Alto Airport........79-127
6. Ordinance 4347 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 2.16 [Boards and Commissions] of the Palo Alto Municipal Code by Adding Section 2.16.040 to Prohibit Board and Commission Members From Being Financially
Interested in Contracts With the City≅ (1st Reading 4/8/96,
PASSED 9-0)...........................................79-127 7. PUBLIC HEARING: The Finance Committee recommendation re the proposed Action Plan for the expenditure of 1996/97 Community Development Block Grant program funds.................79-128 8. Ordinance Amending the Municipal Fee Schedule for the Fiscal Year 1995-96 Budget to Authorize Free Parking for the First Hour at Attendant Lots................................79-131
05/06/96 79-121 79-121
9. Ordinance Amending the Budget for Fiscal Year 1995-96 to Create a Capital Improvement Project, Number 19625, City Council Chambers Refurbishing.........................79-137 ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m.............79-139
05/06/96 79-122 79-122
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date at the Ventura School Site, 3990 Ventura Court, at 5:50 p.m. PRESENT: Andersen, Huber, Kniss, Rosenbaum, Simitian, Wheeler ABSENT: Fazzino, McCown, Schneider SPECIAL MEETINGS 1. Presentation of Family Resource Center Task Force Business Plan Synopsis of Study Session re Family Resource Center Task Force Business Plan Mayor Wheeler gave opening remarks and then turned the meeting over to Council Member Kniss who thanked those in the community who had brought the issue of families to her in 1993-94. Council Member Kniss reflected on the dramatic changes in family life in the last 20 years. She noted that while the Senior Coordinating Council was a vital resource for seniors in the community, families with children had no similar organization that coordinated resources for families. Council Member Kniss thanked the committee, staff, and the Council for supporting the efforts of the task force. She introduced John Northway, the Family Resource Center (FRC) Task Force Chairperson. John Northway provided an overview of the two-year process which
produced a business plan. He emphasized the committee=s commitment to defining the problem which he summarized with two main points: 1) Families living in Palo Alto and working in Silicon Valley steadily adapted to the incremental changes of a fast-paced society without noticing the harmful effects on their families which tended to include isolation, stress, and a lack of connection with their community, and 2) Palo Alto had a plentiful supply of services for families, but what was needed was better access to the resources that already existed. Maria Lines, task force member, presented a snapshot of her family
life with ΑA Day in the Life of a Palo Altan.≅ Jeanne Labozetta, task force member, presented the Council with an overview of the work of the task force, including the process for gaining community input which included focus groups, telephone surveys, and written surveys. The proposed solution to the problems identified by the task force included four main components: 1)information dissemination, 2) neighborhood/community building, 3) FRC Membership Club, and 4) advocacy. Also included
in the business plan was the creation of a centralized Αhub≅ which would administer and coordinate the work generated by the FRC,
05/06/96 79-123 79-123
provide person-to-person and on-line resource and referral, and provide a gathering space for families. The presentation also
included the FRC=s mission statement and its nine core values. Natalie Seer, FRC Coordinator, summarized the time line for implementation and the funding request. The study session concluded after a brief question and answer period. Mayor Wheeler thanked all who participated. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
05/06/96 79-124 79-124
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 7:45 p.m. PRESENT: Andersen, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Simitian (arrived at 7:50 p.m.), Wheeler ABSENT: Fazzino, Schneider SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 1. Resolution Expressing Appreciation to Theodore A. Chandik Upon His Retirement MOTION: Council Member McCown moved, seconded by Huber, to adopt the Resolution.
Resolution 7582 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Theodore A.
Chandik Upon His Retirement≅ MOTION PASSED 6-0, Fazzino, Schneider, Simitian absent. Superintendent, Open Space and Sciences, John Walton said Ted Chandik served as his mentor, guide, advisor, and supporter and helped him develop an understanding and appreciation of the natural history of the Palo Alto Baylands. At a modest four interpretive programs per week over the prior 32 years that Ted had worked for the City, he had helped over 150,000 individuals develop an understanding, appreciation, and awareness about the natural world. He thanked Ted for all that he had done for the City. Mayor Wheeler said she had been privileged to go on a nature walk with Ted, and it had been a delightful time for her. She knew he had shared many of those moments with many citizens of Palo Alto. She presented the Resolution. 2. Appointments to the Public Art Commission Council Member Simitian announced he would abstain from the first ballot as he was absent from the interviews. He would vote if additional ballots were necessary. RESULTS OF THE FIRST ROUND OF VOTING VOTING FOR BRETT: Andersen, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Wheeler VOTING FOR EMSLEY: VOTING FOR FRAUMAN: VOTING FOR HUO: Rosenbaum
05/06/96 79-125 79-125
VOTING FOR JENKINS: VOTING FOR LEVIN: Andersen, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Wheeler VOTING FOR MORRISON: VOTING FOR WASSERMAN: Andersen, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Wheeler VOTING FOR WELLS: Andersen, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Wheeler Assistant City Clerk Kathi Hamilton announced that Gerald Brett, David Levin, Judith Wasserman, and Natalie Wells received five votes or more and were appointed on the first ballot. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Roy J. Blitzer, 618 Fulton Street, spoke regarding the Homelessness Task Force. Michael Gagliasso, 2064 Middlefield Road, spoke regarding the Civic League. Edmund Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding secret
government (letter on file in the City Clerk=s Office). Brandon Burke, City of Palo Alto Employee, spoke regarding Service Employees International Union, Local 715 (SEIU) Contract with respect to 2 percent at 55. Angelo Lombardo, 231 Alturas Avenue, Sunnyvale, spoke regarding Agency Shop. Sarah Tyree, 1671 Woodland Avenue, East Palo Alto, spoke regarding SEIU Contract with respect to 2 percent at 55. Dan Serna, 733 San Simeon, Sunnyvale, spoke regarding SEIU Contract with respect to 2 percent at 55. Bob Jahnsen, City of Palo Alto Employee, spoke regarding SEIU Contract with respect to 2 percent at 55. Mary Lee, SEIU representative, spoke regarding SEIU Contract/Agency Shop. Tony Spitaleri, City of Palo Alto Employee, spoke regarding SEIU 715 issues. Herb Borock, 2731 Byron Street, spoke regarding the sale of the Hyatt Hotel and the final environmental impact report.
05/06/96 79-126 79-126
Lynn Chiapella, 631 Colorado Avenue, spoke regarding Matadero Creek. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 20 AND 21, 1996 MOTION: Council Member McCown moved, seconded by Kniss, to approve the Minutes of February 20 and 21, 1996, as submitted. MOTION PASSED 7-0, Fazzino, Schneider absent. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Andersen, to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 3 - 6.
3. Resolution 7583 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Lou Verna Upon
His Retirement≅ 4. Consultant Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and Judith G. Cunha Land Survey for Manhole Survey Service; change orders not to exceed $4,000. 5. Grant of Airport Safety Zone Easement to the County of Santa Clara for the Benefit of the Palo Alto Airport
6. Ordinance 4347 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 2.16 [Boards and Commissions] of the Palo Alto Municipal Code by Adding Section 2.16.040 to Prohibit Board and Commission Members From Being Financially
Interested in Contracts With the City≅ (1st Reading 4/8/96,
PASSED 9-0) MOTION PASSED 7-0, Fazzino, Schneider absent. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7. PUBLIC HEARING: The Finance Committee recommendation re the proposed Action Plan for the expenditure of 1996/97 Community Development Block Grant program funds Council Member Kniss acknowledged the members of the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) present that evening. She said page 2 of the staff report (CMR:242:96) indicated the amount of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds was still unknown, but she reassured the public that the allocations had been set. Community Development Block Grant Coordinator Suzanne Richards clarified the budget was passed in Washington, D.C., on April 25, 1996. The national funding for CDBG was the same as the previous year which was $4.6 billion, but the City of Palo Alto had not been notified of its particular allocation. The allocations assumed a 6
05/06/96 79-127 79-127
percent decrease, and the City should know the actual amount shortly. She thanked the members of the CAC for their efforts; they tackled some difficult issues. Owen Byrd, CDBG Citizens Advisory Committee Spokesperson, said the CAC had almost $2.5 million of requests for CDBG funding for the current year. The CAC assumed the allocation from the federal government would be approximately $1 million, and it was very difficult for the CAC to reduce the list of requests. Some good projects did not get funded. There was still a compelling need for affordable housing in the community and the services that people who needed affordable housing required. The CAC did its best to allocate scarce resources. Most of the projects were noncontroversial, and several received considerable attention, especially the grant request from the Urban Ministry of Palo Alto. Mayor Wheeler declared the Public Hearing open. Liz Anton, 1851 Alma Street No. 10, said the Emergency Housing Consortium (EHC) appreciated the funding the City had provided over the years for its services to the homeless residents of Palo Alto. The need for a comprehensive network of services for homeless individuals, families, and youth continued to grow. Daily requests
for assistance at EHC=s shelters and transitional housing programs far exceeded the beds available. Recently, when notices went out that EHC was opening a 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. unit single-room occupancy program in San Jose, 4,000 applications were received. Homelessness had many causes from a one-time financial crisis, to chronic mental illness, substance abuse problems, domestic violence, or a relationship breakup; and EHC responded to those causes with a continuum of care that started with emergency shelter, food, health care referrals and then more long-term solutions that helped people deal with the issues themselves. EHC worked with many other agencies in the community in order to help meet those needs. EHC served 78 Palo Alto residents last year both in the cold weather shelter program and the year-round transitional housing programs. Approximately 60 percent of the guests moved into stable housing, and one particular program was at 100 percent. Donna DiMinico, Director, Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program of Catholic Charities, 2625 Zanker Road, San Jose, thanked the City for its ongoing support for the program. The program handled advocacy and complaint investigation for the residents in Palo
Alto=s five nursing homes and nine residential care facilities for the elderly. Two training sessions were recently completed at Cubberley Community Center with the cooperation of Lytton Community Care and Lytton Health Care for onsite exposure. The program had done a good job for the long-term residents of Palo Alto. Mayor Wheeler declared the Public Hearing closed.
05/06/96 79-128 79-128
MOTION: Council Member Kniss for the Finance Committee moved to: (1) authorize staff to carry out any further required environmental assessments and certifications for each project under both the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) prior to the commitment of any funds for each project; (2) adopt the Resolution establishing funding allocations and a funding contingency plan for the 1996/97 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program; (3) authorize the City Manager, or her designee, to execute and submit the 1996/97 CDBG application and other documentation necessary to file the application with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and to otherwise bind the City with respect to the application.
Resolution 7584 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving the Use of Community Development Block Grant Funds for Fiscal Year 1996-1997" Council Member Andersen thanked the members of the CAC for their outstanding efforts. He referred to the Finance Committee minutes dated April 2, 1996, and thanked Walt Lundin of the Urban Ministry for his helpful responses to many of the questions that were asked that evening. Council Member Rosenbaum referred to page 15 of Attachment B, staff report (CMR:242:96), and the request for $286,380 for the water supply pipe system replacement at Arastradero Park Apartments. The property was purchased by the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) in 1995 and the water problem clearly existed at that time. He asked whether there should have been disclosure at the time of sale and whether the buyer, PAHC, would have recourse against the seller to attempt to recover the cost of the project. City Attorney Ariel Calonne had spoken to Marlene Prendergast, Executive Director of PAHC, regarding the matter. He understood
the purchase contract was an Αas is≅ purchase and there was not a statutory disclosure obligation on that kind of property. Marlene Prendergast, Executive Director of the Palo Alto Housing Corporation, reminded the Council of the context of the purchase of the property. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) set the price, did the inspection initially, and determined the rehabilitation budget. PAHC did some inspections and got the $74,000 estimate by HUD up to $744,000 which was considered the real needs of the property. Every decision PAHC made was balanced against the question of whether it was a good idea to save 66 units of affordable family housing in Palo Alto. She recalled a month prior to the final acquisition that at a tenant meeting, someone jokingly referred to the fact that water in the showers stopped suddenly. An inspector was sent out to inspect the water system, and it was his opinion at that time that the exterior lines were clogged up so money was put in the rehab budget to replace those
05/06/96 79-129 79-129
lines. The inspector did not believe the interior lines were the cause of the difficulty the tenants were having. A survey was done of the tenants; and based on that survey and the inspection, PAHC
proceeded. The purchase contract was Αas is.≅ PAHC had looked
into possible recourse, and both the consultant=s report and the records indicated there was no misrepresentation. The residents at the project wanted water to come through the pipes on a regular
basis, and she hoped the Council would uphold both the CAC=s and
the Finance Committee=s recommendation. Mayor Wheeler asked whether PAHC had been notified of a similar situation at Palo Alto Gardens. Ms. Prendergast said owners could prepay the mortgage by August 1996, and she understood the owners planned to remain at the property. Jim Gilliland clarified the most recent list from HUD indicated the owners did not plan to prepay. Council Member Rosenbaum clarified the project was sold for $7 million and he felt it was unconscionable on the part of the seller to sell the property with a known problem that was not revealed and to not put aside money to correct that problem. He asked whether it would be worthwhile to review the record of that transaction to determine whether there might be a possible way to seek recourse on that transaction. Mr. Calonne said $286,380 was worth a few hours of staff time to look at the file. He would review the file and report back to the Council. Vice Mayor Huber complimented the CAC on its work. He recalled that four or five years previously when the CAC came forward, the Council Chambers would be filled with people requesting more money which was an indication of the time, fairness, and effort that the CAC had put forth. Mayor Wheeler echoed the comments of Vice Mayor Huber. She had been on the first Citizens Advisory Committee for the CDBG funding, and it was not an easy job then. It had become more difficult over the years because the needs were greater, the applications were more worthy, and the dollars did not stretch as far as they did previously. She personally thanked Helen Tao who had been on the CAC for many years. MOTION PASSED 7-0, Fazzino, Schneider absent. MOTION: Council Member Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Huber, to direct staff to review the purchase records of the Arastradero Park
05/06/96 79-130 79-130
Apartments to determine whether there was a basis to seek recourse on the cost of repairing the plumbing. MOTION PASSED 7-0, Fazzino, Schneider absent. ORDINANCES 8. Ordinance Amending the Municipal Fee Schedule for the Fiscal Year 1995-96 Budget to Authorize Free Parking for the First Hour at Attendant Lots Assistant Police Chief Lynne Johnson recalled that the original intent of the attendant lot was to provide long-term parking for a minimal cost for visitors to the Downtown area and to maximize the use of that space for parking. While there had been an increase in the number of long-term users over the first four months as evidenced by the information provided in the staff report (CMR:244:96), the number was in the minority. Together with the
members of the Chamber of Commerce=s Parking Committee, staff was working to increase the number of long-term users and to reduce the current level of City subsidy. The request before the Council that evening was an interim alternative to be used for the next few months while further analysis of other cost recovery options could be more thoroughly reviewed. Staff was purposely not requesting a significant change to the originally approved fee schedule in
keeping with the Council=s previous direction to keep the fees at the lower end of the price scale. Susan Frank, Executive Director and member of the Parking Committee, Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce, 325 Forest Avenue, said the Parking Committee supported the staff recommendation. Most of the previous recommendations regarding parking had been consistent. The importance of giving the attendant lot a chance was not as much about whether the lot was the best choice for attendant parking but whether the public would accept the concept of that type of lot and whether the public wanted long-term parking. Besides the other two private pay lots, the attendant lot was the only place in the core Downtown district where a person could park all day. She reminded the Council that one of the goals of the 13-point plan was to provide long-term parking inside the core business district. She hoped the Council would give the lot an opportunity to succeed. The Chamber planned to increase the marketing for the lot, and she had discussed with Assistant Police Chief Johnson the possibility of vigorously exploring the validation process among Downtown merchants. The attendant lot was not a revenue generator to the City; and since color zone parking went into place in March 1995, parking revenues to the City had gone down. If the parking plan continued to be successful, there could continue to be a loss of parking revenue to the City. One way to deal with the issue might include increasing permit fees which probably would occur in the next budget year. The Council would be faced with a policy decision soon. Since the Council had
05/06/96 79-131 79-131
approved the second year of color zone parking, the Parking Committee needed to move forward with its plans for increased marketing and outreach. If the Council allowed the Parking Committee to move forward on the 13-point plan, the recommendations
made might affect revenue to the City. She hoped the Council=s decision regarding the impact to the revenue would be positive especially since the other side of the equation was the economic success of Downtown. She recently reviewed the sales tax revenue for the third quarter 1995 versus the third quarter 1994, and it had increased 15 percent over the previous year. Some of that increase was due to the success of the parking program. The
Council=s vision in approving color zone parking for a second year meant the Council saw the benefits of the program, including a significant decrease in the amount of complaints about parking.
She hoped the Council=s vision would continue as the Chamber embarked on the second year of the program which might mean providing funding to the Parking Committee for updating the parking brochure or not making any changes to the program even when faced with a loss of revenue to the City. The Parking Committee still had a great deal of work to do and goals to accomplish for the
current year, and the Council=s action that evening supporting the first hour free for the attendant lot was another example of how the Council trusted the staff and the Parking Committee to do its job.
Council Member Kniss asked whether the reference was to the City=s overall revenue or just for the attendant lot. Ms. Frank said there was less revenue received for the attendant lot than originally projected. Also, the City had lost an estimated $200,000 in parking citation revenue in the first year of color zone parking. Council Member Kniss asked whether there were fewer complaints about the color zone and more clarity about how to use the zones and whether the citizens were pleased that the parking citation revenue was down. Ms. Frank said many community residents and merchants had supported the color zone concept. She recently received a call from the City of San Jose regarding the color zone program so the program must be working. The number of complaints had decreased, and there were 12,000 happy people who did not receive citations the prior year. Most people viewed any parking citations as a way for the City to make money, and the concept of the City embracing the idea it did not intend to make money from parking was a strong policy statement. Council Member Rosenbaum agreed the City needed space for long-term parkers but the City had a problem with the associated cost of an
05/06/96 79-132 79-132
attendant at the lot. He asked whether an automated system for collecting the fees for long-term parkers had been considered. Ms. Johnson said that possibility was considered when staff originally discussed the idea, and it could be considered in the future. However, because it was a new venture for the City, staff felt a person at the lot would be better alterative at the beginning. Council Member Rosenbaum clarified staff would consider that alternative given the discrepancy between the costs and the revenue at that lot. Ms. Johnson said staff would continue to consider that alternative. Vice Mayor Huber said the City had projected a revenue of $100,000 from the attendant lot, and he asked why the projections were considerably lower. Ms. Johnson said the original projection was speculative because the City had no previous experience in that area and had relied on
the information from vendors= experience in other areas. Some of the comments heard from people were that it was the first time they had had to pay for parking in Downtown other than the permit system. The change and the pricing were taking longer for people to understand.
Ms. Frank said people=s habits changed slowly, and the lot was in a key central location that previously had free parking. Palo Alto was one of the few cities in Northern California that offered as much free parking. The change would take awhile, and that was the reason for the incremental increase in usage. The idea was that people would be enticed to park longer if the first hour were free. Council Member Simitian clarified the City did not presently have one-hour parking areas in the Downtown. Ms. Johnson said that was correct. Council Member Simitian recalled the most frequent complaint he had received in the past was from people who had tried to either shop or dine in the Downtown in one hour and had received a ticket. He asked about the possibility of not charging for the first two hours. People who were of modest means did not want to pay a few dollars every time they came to the Downtown. The process was confusing because the attendant lot was the only place that had a one-hour rule. Only a modest amount of money was generated. He believed two hours would be simpler to administer and it would be the same two hours that a person was entitled to on the street. If the proposed amount were increased from $2 to $3 for a person who parked for more than two hours, anyone who parked beyond the two hours would pay the additional fee; and if he/she parked anywhere
05/06/96 79-133 79-133
else in the City longer than two hours, there would be the cost of a ticket. If the City really wanted people to use the system, there should not be a detriment by having it the only place in the City where parking was free for one hour. Ms. Frank said when the Parking Committee presented the 13-point plan previously, the recommendation was to make the first two hours free in the attendant lot. The Council decided to make the lot distinct from any other lot in the Downtown and to charge for each hour that a person used the lot. The suggestion for the first hour free addressed the issue of the continuing loss of revenue and also the difficulty for the vendor. Ms. Johnson said there was a revenue issue, and also the original intent was to have the lot available for long-term parkers. Theoretically, the lot could be totally filled by two-hour free users and that would preclude people from using the lot for its original intent. She pointed out that with the availability of on-street parking, parking in the lots due to the success of the color zone, and the addition of the additional 30-minute zones, she was uncertain that the problem was at the same level as previously. Council Member Simitian recalled that a big part of the issue was based on the fact that if the City had attendant parking, the City
would be able to Αcreate≅ the additional spaces. He asked how many additional spaces were created by having the ability to park over the driving area. Ms. Frank replied approximately 40 additional spaces. The lot was always full when it was two hours free. The original concern was to have some turnover in the lot so there would be free spaces for people to park long term. If the first two hours were free, there was the possibility that the lot would be used for two hours free all day as previously and there would be no long-term parking availability. Council Member Simitian asked how many times the lot had been full and all the 40 incremental spaces used during the period to date. Ms. Johnson replied none to date. MOTION: Vice Mayor Huber moved, seconded by McCown, to adopt the Ordinance.
Ordinance 4348 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Municipal Fee Schedule for the Fiscal Year 1995-96 Budget to Authorize Free Parking for the
First Hour at Attendant Lots≅ Council Member Simitian said one of the major driving forces when
the issue was discussed previously was that there was a Αshortage≅ of parking Downtown. A lot in the most centrally located desirable
05/06/96 79-134 79-134
place in the Downtown with 40 additional spaces created, which would cost the City $20,000 per space or $800,000 to construct a parking structure(s) in the Downtown area that was being unused, suggested to him there was a major accomplishment that had not yet been seen in terms of the project. He asked whether the issue would return to the Council for review in four months. Ms. Johnson replied yes. Council Member Simitian clarified at that time if the new fee structure had not produced substantial use on site, the Council could reconsider the issue of the first two hours. City Manager June Fleming said that would be the time to give staff the assignment, or it could be incorporated into any considerations made during the four months. Staff would also have time to evaluate the impact of the additional green zones which were currently being implemented. MAKER AND SECONDER AGREED TO INCORPORATE INTO THE MOTION to direct staff to comment on the desirability and/or impacts, if any, of the first two-hour free parking concept when the item returned to Council in four months.
Council Member Kniss recalled the Council=s goal was to increase the ease of parking in the Downtown area. It took a long time for people to get used to a different type of parking. She supported the motion but would have supported keeping the lot totally pay longer to see if it worked. Council Member Andersen had heard more complaints about paying for the first hour. Many of his students came to the Downtown for lunch, and the first hour free would be an appropriate solution for them. He felt the first two hours free would create the possibility of a full lot and lose the possibility of long-term parking. He was not concerned about whether the City was making money on the fines, but he was interested in exploring further whether or not permanent machinery could be used rather than an attendant. Mayor Wheeler was not very supportive of the incorporation into the motion but would support the motion. She suspected that the staff would return to the Council in four months with an evaluation of not only changing the fee structure but also consideration of an automated system or changing the lot. There was a number of alternatives, and the fee structure was only one alternative that the staff might bring back in four months if the increased marketing of the lot did not produce the number of cars anticipated.
05/06/96 79-135 79-135
Council Member Simitian asked whether there was a system under which automated parking would create an additional 40 parking spaces in the core of the Downtown. Ms. Johnson said that was the downside of the machines. Council Member Simitian said if the City announced that it were eliminating 40 parking spaces in Downtown, there would be quite a reaction from every sector of the public. He was not optimistic that that was an option the Council would want to consider seriously in the future. MOTION PASSED 7-0, Fazzino, Schneider absent. 9. Ordinance Amending the Budget for Fiscal Year 1995-96 to Create a Capital Improvement Project, Number 19625, City Council Chambers Refurbishing Council Member Kniss asked about the communication link among the Mayor, City Manager, and City Attorney. City Manager June Fleming said the Mayor had brought the issue to
staff=s attention that it was virtually impossible to communicate with some of the people in the staff area. The communication system would be between the people who needed to have it. Council Member Kniss clarified it was indication equipment. Ms. Fleming said that was correct. Council Member Rosenbaum said the microphone system was not very good in the Council Conference Room. The City of Mountain View had a similar room with two microphones which picked up the Council Members and the audience and it was not necessary to pass around a portable microphone. He asked whether that system would be considered in connection with the project. Ms. Fleming said the system in Mountain View was built into the building and was a sophisticated system that suspended from the ceiling. The City had looked at that system previously and the retrofit that would be needed to make that kind of system work would be extremely expensive and would be better done if extensive remodeling were done. Council Member Rosenbaum suggested the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project consider that issue as a worthwhile item. Mayor Wheeler referred to the staff report (CMR:250:96) and the
second part to the Council=s action that evening which was to
direct staff to pursue the Council=s desired approach to retain a consultant through a separate Request for Proposal (RFP) or to amend an existing contract.
05/06/96 79-136 79-136
Council Member McCown asked whether direction should be given to staff that evening regarding that issue. Public Works Director Glenn Roberts said yes, so that staff could move forward, particularly if the Council wanted the expedited approach. Council Member McCown asked, if the Council chose the expedited approach, whether there would be a cost savings if the existing Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) consultant were selected. Mr. Roberts said savings would be in time, and the cost of the work would be about the same. Council Member Andersen asked whether the microphone for the public could be replaced in the short term while the City was waiting for a consultant to prepare a more comprehensive approach so that the people could be heard from various angles. Mr. Roberts said that would be considered in the context of the short-term improvements. Vice Mayor Huber asked whether the ADA consultant could add that process to what he/she was currently doing. Mr. Roberts said yes. Staff had discussed the project with the consultant and had also reviewed his/her skills and felt satisfied that he/she would do a good job of developing alternatives for the
Council=s consideration. Assistant Public Works Director George Bagdon said the consultant would also add some subconsultants to perform the audio/visual portion of the project. MOTION: Council Member McCown moved, seconded by Huber, to adopt the Budget Amendment Ordinance and direct staff to proceed with the
Αexpedited≅ approach as outlined in Attachment B of the staff report (CMR:250:96) using the existing Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) consultant.
Ordinance 4349 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for Fiscal Year 1995-96 to Create a Capital Improvement Project, Number 19625, City
Council Chambers Refurbishing≅ MOTION PASSED 6-0, Fazzino, Schneider, Simitian, absent. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED:
05/06/96 79-137 79-137
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 available for members of the public to listen to during regular office hours.
05/06/96 79-138 79-138