HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-10-06 City Council Summary Minutes Adjourned Meeting of September 30, 1997, to October 6, 1997 4. PUBLIC HEARING: The Palo Alto City Council will consider the recommendations of the Planning Commission for a 1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan....................................84-386 1. Appointments to Architectural Review Board............84-387 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS .......................................84-387 2. Request from the Jewish Community Center to Extend Lease of Terman Site - Refer to Policy and Services Committee..84-388 3. Telecommunications Policy - Refer to Policy and Services Committee.............................................84-388 4. Stop Sign Intersection System Update and Recommendation to Install Stop Signs at Hale Street at Hamilton Avenue - Refer to Policy and Services Committee......................84-388 5. Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. S7095293 between the City of Palo Alto and Addison Olian, Inc. to Provide Advertising, Marketing and Public Relations for Utility Marketing Services and Community Relations...............................84-388 6. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and Advanced Environmental Technical Services for 1997-98 City Generated Hazardous Waste Management Services...................84-388
7. Ordinance 1st Reading entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Sections 2.36.030 and 2.36.040 of Chapter 2.36 [Personnel Procedures] of Title 2 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Pertaining to Adherence to Peace Officer Standards and Training and Receipt of State Aid for Recruitment and Training of Peace Officers and Public Safety
Dispatchers≅ ..........................................84-388
8. Ordinance 4451 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 5.20 of Title 5 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Pertaining to the Collection, Removal and
Disposal of Solid Waste and Recyclable Materials≅ .....84-388
10/06/97 84-383
9. Ordinance 4452 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing Administrative Procedures and Penalties for Violations of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and
Amending the Palo Alto Municipal Code≅ ................84-388
10. Ordinance 4453 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Provide the City Attorney With Discretion in the Level of Penalties for Violations and to Make Repeals and Amendments of Certain
Outdated and Preempted Sections≅ ......................84-388
11. Ordinance 4454 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Chapter 19.10 to Title 19 [Master Plan] of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Relating to Procedures for
Preparation of Coordinated Area Plans≅ ................84-389 AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS ..................84-389 12. Evaluation of the Downtown Health and Safety Detail and Request for Approval of Permanent Implementation of the Program, Including Three Community Service Officer Positions 84-389 12A. (Old Item 15.) Recommendations Regarding Safety and Lighting in the Downtown ......................................84-397 13. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1997-98 to Provide an Additional Appropriation for Election Expenses Associated With the November 1997 Election................................84-401 14. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1997-98 to Provide an Additional Appropriation for Litigation Associated with the City of Menlo
Park=s Challenge to the Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects, to be Reimbursed by Stanford................84-401 16. Valet Parking - Interim Monitoring Enforcement Plan...84-402 17. Mayor Huber re Cancellation of the October 14, 1997, Regular City Council Meeting..................................84-405 18. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements........84-405 ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m............84-405
10/06/97 84-384
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 7:10 p.m. PRESENT: Andersen, Eakins, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. PUBLIC HEARING: The Palo Alto City Council will consider the recommendations of the Planning Commission for a 1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan, including goals, policies and programs for six elements (Land Use and Community Design, Transportation, Housing, Natural Environment, Community Services and Facilities and Business and Economics); creation of new land use designation categories and street classifications; a modified Land Use and Circulation Map; and a Governance chapter which is not an element. The Final Environmental Impact Report analyzes potential environmental effects and impacts of the new Comprehensive Plan, mitigation measures for reducing environmental impacts and responds to comments received during public review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report. (continued from 9/30/97) MOTION TO ADJOURN: Mayor Huber moved, seconded by Andersen, to adjourn the meeting to 3:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 15, 1997. MOTION TO ADJOURN PASSED 9-0. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:12 p.m.
10/06/97 84-385
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 7:14 p.m. PRESENT: Andersen, Eakins, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 1. Appointments to Architectural Review Board VOTING FOR BELLOMO: Andersen, Eakins, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler VOTING FOR HANSON: VOTING FOR HUO: VOTING FOR LIPPERT: Andersen, Eakins, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler VOTING FOR PETERSON: Andersen, Eakins, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler City Clerk Gloria Young announced that Joseph Bellomo, Lee Lippert, and Robert Peterson were unanimously appointed on the first ballot. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS T. J. Watt, homeless, spoke regarding more photos with explanation. Tomas Moran, Alger Drive, spoke regarding homeless eviction. Margaret Ash, 164 Hamilton Avenue, spoke regarding homelessness/ eviction. Michael Anthony, spoke regarding homelessness. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Council Member Wheeler moved, seconded by Andersen, to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 2 - 11. 2. Request from the Jewish Community Center to Extend Lease of Terman Site - Refer to Policy and Services Committee 3. Telecommunications Policy - Refer to Policy and Services Committee
10/06/97 84-386
4. Stop Sign Intersection System Update and Recommendation to Install Stop Signs at Hale Street at Hamilton Avenue - Refer to Policy and Services Committee 5. Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. S7095293 between the City of Palo Alto and Addison Olian, Inc. to Provide Advertising, Marketing and Public Relations for Utility Marketing Services and Community Relations 6. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and Advanced Environmental Technical Services for 1997-98 City Generated Hazardous Waste Management Services
7. Ordinance 1st Reading entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Sections 2.36.030 and 2.36.040 of Chapter 2.36 [Personnel Procedures] of Title 2 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Pertaining to Adherence to Peace Officer Standards and Training and Receipt of State Aid for Recruitment and Training of Peace Officers and Public Safety
Dispatchers≅
Resolution 7711 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 1401 of the Merit System
Rules and Regulations≅
8. Ordinance 4451 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 5.20 of Title 5 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Pertaining to the Collection, Removal and
Disposal of Solid Waste and Recyclable Materials≅
9. Ordinance 4452 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing Administrative Procedures and Penalties for Violations of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and
Amending the Palo Alto Municipal Code≅
10. Ordinance 4453 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Provide the City Attorney With Discretion in the Level of Penalties for Violations and to Make Repeals and Amendments of Certain
Outdated and Preempted Sections≅
11. Ordinance 4454 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Chapter 19.10 to Title 19 [Master Plan] of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Relating to Procedures for
Preparation of Coordinated Area Plans≅ MOTION PASSED 9-0 for Item Nos. 1 - 10. MOTION PASSED 8-0-1 for Item No. 11, Huber Αnot participating.≅ AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS
10/06/97 84-387
MOTION: Council Member Schneider moved, seconded by Andersen, to move Item No. 15 forward ahead of Item No. 13 to become Item No. 12A. MOTION PASSED 9-0. ORDINANCES 12. Evaluation of the Downtown Health and Safety Detail and Request for Approval of Permanent Implementation of the Program, Including Three Community Service Officer Positions City Manager June Fleming said the two reports before the Council were a collaborative effort of the staff. Staff discussed the reports and she commended the staff for their work on the report which was comprehensive and addressed the Councils issues. Council Member Kniss said it was an excellent report. Assistant Police Chief Lynne Johnson had seen a substantial improvement in the Downtown area based upon comments received from business owners, visitors, and police officers who worked the Downtown. One of the most telling statistical pieces of information included in the report was the decrease in number of arrests in the Downtown area, especially the drunk in public cases. Those arrests were down substantially over the previous year. The emphasis had been placed on prevention so that people did not get to the intoxicated state. There were more citations issued for open containers and consumption in public. The arrest and citation offenses included people who frequented Downtown bars as well as street people. Council Member Kniss said it appeared that there were more people in the Downtown, starting with Tuesday night, and by Thursday night the Downtown was really busy. She asked whether there was a possibility of putting more of the Community Service Officers (CSO) in the Downtown. Police Captain Kathleen McKenna said the CSOs spent time Downtown at night dealing with the volume of people and traffic and issued citations. Council Member Kniss heard from the community that evidence of authority figures were very important. When visiting the Downtown on weekends, she noticed the activity level was incredible. Ms. McKenna said the level of activity throughout the entire week had increased over the last couple of years to the point where as much police presence as possible existed. The use of civilians in
10/06/97 84-388
certain situations Downtown could present some problems. The Police Department would continue to back fill those Downtown designated officers with other officers who worked a particular shift as activities and calls for service permitted. Council Member Kniss said her daughter lived in the north part of Downtown Palo Alto. Her daughter said people seemed to have a terrific time; the downside was that she heard from people who said
it was not Αour own≅ Palo Alto anymore. One person suggested there be a Palo Alto night where only Palo Altans went Downtown. She asked what else was required in terms of keeping streets safer. City Manager June Fleming said making the streets safer included activity from the Police Department and other City departments. The Parks Department worked closely to keep the area clean and attractive; Public Works was involved by increasing trash pickup, watching the plants, and maintaining the pavement. Council Member Kniss noticed more parking in the train parking lots at night. The lots were very dark, and she asked whether the City had jurisdiction in that particular area. Ms. Johnson said those lots were under the jurisdiction of the Joint Powers Authority (JPA). City staff had a preliminary discussion with the JPA about the possibility of assisting them with funding for additional lighting in the lots. When Utilities did an assessment, they found additional lighting could enhance the perception of safety. Council Member Kniss asked whether anything could be done about parking there because it was so dark and people crossed the streets against the light in an unsafe manner. Ms. Johnson said the owners of Lot Q, as part of their Use Permit with the Planning Department, had a security guard on site in the evening hours. City staff talked with the security guard who assisted in trying to make sure people crossed at the proper locations and not against the light. Ms. Fleming said one of the things staff learned and benefited from was that staff had been gently persuasive and a bit aggressive in dealing with other organizations to get mutual cooperation and to understand what the staff was trying to do in the community. As a result, staff developed valuable liaisons with other agencies and institutions in the area. Staff will continue to work on the parking lots with the appropriate agencies. Council Member Kniss addressed the issue of street and sidewalk lighting on page 3 of the staff report (CMR:410:97). She recalled when she and Council Member McCown brought up the issue of sidewalk lights versus street lights. In some communities there were lights that went in both directions; there were street lights and sidewalk
10/06/97 84-389
lights. She imagined they were expensive and beyond the City=s capital outlay possibilities, but asked whether they had been discussed. Ms. Johnson said the staff report discussed that throughout the City there were street lights that had been installed, but to the
best of staffs= knowledge, there were no sidewalk lights. Street lights were installed for the purpose of illuminating the streets, not the sidewalks. There were no discussions about sidewalk lights other than what was preliminarily discussed in the Downtown Urban and Design Master Improvement Plan for the second phase. Ms. Fleming said sidewalk lights were an entirely different element than street lights. Street lights usually could not be adapted to become sidewalk lights. A different system of lights and poles would have to be looked at in order to illuminate sidewalks. As the report stated, total illumination was not a guarantee to total safety; the two were not equivalent. It was true that there was a perception that people felt safer when it was brighter, but the City had to be careful how much light was put in any residential area. The report did not address putting in an entire new lighting system and that was what street lights would be. She and the Director of Utilities attended a meeting in Toronto where they saw sidewalk lights which worked to an extent, but Palo Alto had not gone into that investigation. A new system would be expensive. Assistant Director Utilities Electric Operations Larry Starr said the lights on University Avenue were on lower poles with Washington fixtures on them. They lit up everything, including sidewalks and
people=s front yards. They did not do as good a job of lighting the streets, so it would take more fixtures. Council Member Kniss said she had not realized how complicated the matter was until she started walking at night to observe it. The sidewalks were very dark. Unless the trees were trimmed substantially, there was no way to illuminate the sidewalk. People were forced to walk in the street if they wanted to walk at night. Ms. Fleming said the staff would look into sidewalk lighting if the Council gave those instructions. Mr. Starr described what the City was faced with in places where there was some illumination from the shorter poled street light onto the sidewalk. Vice Mayor Andersen asked what the purpose of a street light was. One purpose was to give some illumination along the sidewalk as well. What was the real reason for that if they were primarily designed to be on the street Mr. Starr said the real reason was to light the streets for people driving. Vice Mayor Andersen asked if that was a safety issue for drivers.
10/06/97 84-390
Mr. Starr said that was correct. Vice Mayor Andersen said the staff report (CMR:411:97) mentioned that the staff did not focus on any of the areas other than the Downtown, given that was the instruction the Council gave, but reference was made to the California Avenue and Midtown area. Even though a formal assessment had not been done, he asked whether those areas had lighting that was as good, better, or not as well done as the parking lots mentioned in the report. Ms. Johnson said there could be some enhanced lighting in at least the parking lot at Midtown. The parking structure in the California Avenue area was fairly well lit. Not much of an assessment of other lots in the area had been done. It was possible that safety would be enhanced with additional lighting. Staff needed to take a closer look. Vice Mayor Andersen asked whether the CalTrain Station at California Avenue had the same lighting as the CalTrain Station at University Avenue. Assistant Planning Official Jim Gilliland said the Joint Powers Board lot at California Avenue was better lit than the others. The parking lots on California Avenue in general were about the same as the parking lots Downtown. Council Member Wheeler said the report pointed out the tension between and the balance that needed to be struck among the issues of providing sufficient light in certain facilities, on and between the streets and trees that Palo Altans wanted to preserve if not enhance. In her discussions with her neighbors, she observed that
one man=s enhanced light source was another man=s ΑIt=s shining in
my bedroom all night and I can=t get to sleep.≅ When private developers talked to the Planning Department, Planning Commission, or Architectural Review Board (ARB), there were restrictions put on
the developers= applications in terms of types of the lights installed, particularly in areas such as parking lots and landscape areas. Would the City hold itself to the same standards if lighting in parking lots or park facilities in residential neighborhoods were increased. Mr. Gilliland said as City projects came through the Planning Department, they are reviewed on the same basis as private projects. Staff made sure the light did not go off the property to be illuminated. Council Member Wheeler asked whether lights were which that did not allow lighting to go upward from the light source. Mr. Gilliland said that was done as much as possible. The Washington light fixture allows light up and out rather than
10/06/97 84-391
straight down. There were instances were lights went up, but in general those were along a street or in a park. Council Member Eakins was concerned with the statement on page 4, Item 12 (a) that a conflict occurred if the tree growth interfered
with the intended light pattern. It said Αremoval of a few trees
and/or possible relocation of street lights.≅ She wondered if there was more that was not said, if something was not included in the guidelines for removing trees or pruning patterns. Mr. Starr said removing a tree would be considered if trimming that tree to enhance the light of the street light would cause the tree to die. Prudent pruning of trees would give lights a chance to shine down on the streets and sidewalks. Director of Public Works Glenn Roberts said those circumstances would be minimized to the greatest extent possible, and the trees would be determined on a case-by-case basis. Council Member Fazzino, as a neighbor of Johnson Park, asked what the impact of the increased lighting would be. Director of Parks Paul Dias said there would not be much impact. Several pathway fixtures would be added to the lights to illuminate the interior of the park. There were plans to hang another arm off the existing poles to illuminate the dark corners of the park. Council Member Fazzino clarified that the light would be directed
into the park as opposed to into the neighbors= window. Mr. Dias said that was correct. Council Member Fazzino knew that staff was searching for the right words to use when it came to the issue of impact of increased lighting. His concern was with the statement that improved lighting provided only a means to improve and enhance the perception of safety was too weak. He thought the statement should be stronger to say that improved lighting increased the odds of safety. Perception was not enough to make the case for improved lighting. Ms. Fleming said perception was extremely important. People were more assured if their perception was they they were safer. They reacted differently and had a different comfort level. Police Chief Chris Durkin agreed with perception, noting that an empty police car placed Downtown or an officer walking Downtown would change the perception. Council Member Fazzino said perception was critically important and one of the criteria that would be used in making decisions, but one would argue that statistically if a police car and police officer
10/06/97 84-392
were sitting in a certain area, there was probably less of a probability of a crime occurring in the area. He asked whether the conclusion made would be that with improved lighting statistically there was less incidence of crime in a well lit area as opposed to an area not as well lit. Mr. Durkin recalled the incident of a few years ago where the serial rapist took women off the street in daylight. Criminals do violent things in broad daylight as well as in areas that are not so well lit. Susan Frank, President, Chamber of Commerce, 325 Forest Avenue, thanked the City Manager, Chief Durkin, Assistant Chief Johnson and Captain McKenna. The Police presence had made a tremendous difference in the Downtown. The Chamber represented over 800 businesses throughout the Bay Area, which included about 75 percent of the employee population in the Downtown. In the past year, letters received from businesses or residents stating there was not enough presence in the Downtown had diminished. The comments were on how visible the officers on bicycles and on foot were. The officers had been terrific, attended Downtown marketing meetings, and were a very active and important part of the community. She urged the Councils support of continued funding and for the three
CSO=s. On the issue of lighting and safety, she urged the Councils support of the staff report. She was pleasantly surprised to see the focus on parking lots. Much discussion by the Parking Committee had occurred over the years about the best kept secrets in Palo Alto being Lots E and G on Gilman Street, Webster-Cowper lot, and Lot Q. Part of the problem getting people to use those lots was that they were not very visible and hard to find. Increasing some of the lighting in those lots would mean better utilization of them. The lighting and safety improvements were important. The California Avenue district was different how it was laid out. It was smaller but should also be examined for the possibility of lighting improvements. The staff recommendations for the Downtown lots were important. There had been a tremendous growth in foot traffic in the Downtown. It was a regional district, not just for Palo Altans anymore. It was important to make it a healthy and safe place to be for all people who chose to do business there. Barbara Gross, Chairperson, Board of Directors, Chamber of Commerce, 325 Forest Avenue, endorsed the staff recommendations. She reiterated the importance of police presence in the Downtown, not only to the shoppers but to the merchants as well. Relationships with the officers had been developed. The merchants were trying to police themselves to help keep the Downtown clean. Enforcement of the codes was a critical key to making progress.
10/06/97 84-393
Dan Lorimer, 465 Hawthorne Avenue, said Johnson Park was a neighborhood park and if heavily lighted, the perception of the area around it would change. He did not like more cobra head
fixtures being proposed. He respected people=s point of view regarding the safety issue, but from an aesthetic standpoint, he would encourage the Council not to change the lighting. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme Street, supported the thrust of the staff recommendations on Items 12 and 15. He said that Vice Mayor Andersen talked about other areas that would benefit from similar programs, and Susan Frank mentioned California Avenue specifically. He wanted the adoption not be limited only to the Downtown in terms of additional policing but that the police be available as necessary for other areas such as Midtown, California Avenue, El Camino, and Stanford Shopping Center. The same applied to the lighting at other facilities, such as parks. The only park mentioned was Johnson Park, but there were other parks that could use some evaluation. Other areas to be considered were parts of
Park Boulevard, the area near Fry=s Electronics, and the area between what used to be the railroad tracks and California Avenue. Those areas seemed dimly lit at night. Pat Burt, representing University South Neighborhood Association, 1239 Harriet, said the Association supported the CSO positions. Those officers served a role in the literal sense of being Community Service Officers. They were there to help people in various ways, i.e. giving out-of-towners directions. Regarding the lighting aspect, his neighborhood had brought up the issue of lighting in residential areas as a component of walkable neighborhoods. It was not merely an issue of the Downtown. Members of the neighborhood liked to walk Downtown but were hesitant to do so at night. Safety issues included hazards of tripping and falling while walking. He observed the different types of lights in the neighborhood and found there were lights designed as street lights but were more dual purpose than other types of lights. In some areas of Crescent Park, the light fixtures were shorter and not readily blocked out by the foliage and served the purpose of lighting sidewalks as well as streets more effectively than other types of fixtures. In terms of cost considerations when addressing sidewalk lighting versus street lighting, it seemed that existing poles might be better utilized for dual purposes. If there were a fixture attached at a lower level over the sidewalk, perhaps of low wattage that would not intrude on neighbors not wanting excessive lighting, the cost would be lower because the pole was already there. In order to keep the issue alive, a fourth action might be taken by the Council to request staff to evaluate how residential sidewalk lighting would be improved in the future. MOTION: Council Member Schneider moved, seconded by Kniss, to increase the authorized staffing levels in the Police Department to
10/06/97 84-394
include three Community Service Officer (CSO) positions and approve the Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) in the amount of $113,000, to provide the funding for the remainder of FY 1997-98.
Ordinance 4455 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1997-98 to Provide an Additional Appropriation for Downtown Area
Enforcement≅ Council Member Kniss said if future additional funds were available maybe more CSOs could be added in the Downtown area. MOTION PASSED 9-0. 12A. (Old Item 15.) Recommendations Regarding Safety and Lighting in the Downtown MOTION: Council Member Schneider moved, seconded by Kniss, to direct staff to: 1) Include in requests for funds in the 1998-99 Capital Improvement Project (CIP) funding for: a) increased lighting in Downtown City parking lots that would make levels more consistent with Illuminating
Engineering Society=s (IES) guidelines; b) additional lighting at Johnson Park; c) a formal study on lighting needs at other City parks and facilities; d) installation for emergency notification units in Johnson and El Camino Parks; 2) Initiate formal discussions with the Joint Powers Board (JPB) regarding specific upgrades and funding for additional lighting in the JPB parking lots east of the railroad tracks; and 3) Conduct a more detailed analysis to develop a proposal to increase the number and location of additional pay telephones in the Downtown area. 4) Further, that the staff be directed to study the area East of Middlefield and South of Palo Alto Avenue with respect to potential safety needs and tree trimming as well as other areas of the Downtown. Council Member Rosenbaum asked Council Member Schneider what was unique about the area, why residents of the City would not share
10/06/97 84-395
the same concerns, and why that would not be a study of the entire City. Council Member Schneider said the particular area, east of Middlefield/South of Palo Alto Avenue, was brought to her attention because it was a dark area. That was an area she wanted to see studied and addressed, and hopefully the information would be gathered to lead the Council to look to other areas in the future. That area was contiguous to the area that was recently studied by the Police Department. The City Manager assured her that could be added to the current work load and could be done in an efficient manner. Council Member Wheeler supported the staff recommendation. The recommendation struck a good balance between the Council taking action to address issues that had been raised and yet approached those things that needed further study in an analytical way. She appreciated that balance and thought the subject called for a balanced approach. The comments made by Vice Mayor Andersen were very interesting and worth thinking about as the Council examined lighting needs of other City facilities. She spent considerable time on California Avenue and hoped to spend more time in the future in the Midtown area during the nighttime hours. California Avenue was changing dramatically and quickly. University Avenue
was no longer the only Αhappening≅ place after the hour of 6:00 p.m. California Avenue was becoming far more lively than it had been and was headed toward the direction of becoming an area where people spent more time after dark. It was important in the analysis that the Council look at the parking facilities in areas
other than the Downtown. Mr. Lorimer=s comments were indicative of what she was trying to get at during the questioning period. The
staff report (CMR:410:97) stated Αprior to the installation of any
lights in Johnson Park.≅ If that proposal came forward, she assumed that would be done only after consultation with and agreement reached with the neighbors of the park. It was extremely important, particularly in discussing the park facilities located in residential neighborhoods, as those facilities were evaluated. The thought was that lighting would be good in those facilities. The agreement of the neighbors was needed. It had always been her thought that the parks were supposed to close when it became dark and, if putting lights in the parks would encourage them not to close when it became dark, that may be a direction the Council might not want to go. Ms. Fleming said the parks closed at 10:30 p.m. The issue from staff was for lighting that did not encourage more use, but there were activities that could occur in the parks where the Police were not able to check out. It would aid them in seeing what was going on in the park. The thrust was not to illuminate the parks so that people would be there all hours. The regulations would be enforced. Nothing would be done to Johnson Park without talking to
10/06/97 84-396
the neighbors, but she could not assure the Council that they would
all agree with staff=s solution. Council Member Wheeler clarified that if there was general opposition, the project would not go forward. She thought it was interesting that, while the Council was talking about and receiving a report related to enhancing the amount of light being spilled onto the streets and sidewalks, there was an item that appeared in
the ΑNations Cities Weekly≅ that discussed several cities including Branford, Connecticut; Tucson, Arizona; San Diego; Atlanta; Boulder; Hanover County, Virginia; and which were cutting down on the lighting in their cities because their residents found the extra lighting highly annoying. There was a need to go ahead with a balance and sensitivity and be thoughtful on how it was approached. Council Member Eakins asked for reassurance that the concerns of Mr. Lorimer and Mr. Burt regarding the types of lighting were included. Would the kind of fixtures and their suitability for specific needs be considered.
Mr. Starr said, based on Council=s direction, staff would look at all kinds of lighting fixtures to do what was necessary in the Downtown. Many people did not care for the cobra fixtures, but they were some of the most efficient lighting fixtures to
illuminate the streets. They light the street and not people=s yards. The City standard was to use cobra lights. Mr. Gilliland said staff would consider the types of lights for the specific functions. The staff report for Johnson Park mentioned acorn lights. Staff planned to revisit that issue. Vice Mayor Andersen clarified that the use of CSOs was not being limited to the Downtown area if needs were apparent in other parts of town. Mr. Durkin said the CSOs were used throughout the City in various roles. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add 1(e) that staff be directed to include the California Avenue and Midtown public parking lots in the evaluation of additional lighting needs. Vice Mayor Andersen asked whether the lighting fixtures took into consideration historic areas. Ms. Fleming said yes. Council Member Rosenbaum would be happier if the staff recommendation were limited to City parks and facilities. He recalled in the early 70s a tremendous lighting dispute in Crescent
10/06/97 84-397
Park which took a lot of staff time. There might be certain parts of the City that were darker but, with priorities and staff constraints, he did not want to embark on that project. Council Member Kniss clarified that Council Member Rosenbaum did not wish to have the piece suggested by Council Member Schneider be included. She mentioned meeting with the neighbors in August when they discussed what was going on in their neighborhood. They had problems with parking because of being two blocks from the Downtown and indicated a good deal of the parking excess in the Downtown had spilled into their area. The neighbors thought they were as impacted as the west side of Middlefield Road, but that area was not as intense as it was on the other side of University Avenue. The picture they painted was substantial as far as the amount of parking in that particular area. The area was north of University Avenue, to the east of Middlefield Road and encompassed a small area. Ms. Johnson said there had been few complaints about parking on the other side of Middlefield Road in all their discussions about residential parking. The concern had been predominantly from the west side of Middlefield Road. MOTION PASSED 9-0. 13. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1997-98 to Provide an Additional Appropriation for Election Expenses Associated With the November 1997 Election MOTION: Vice Mayor Andersen moved, seconded by McCown, to approve the Budget Amendment Ordinance for election costs associated with the General Municipal and Special Elections to be held on November 4, 1997, in the amount of $67,000.
Ordinance 4456 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1997-98 to Provide an Additional Appropriation for Election Expenses
Associated With the November 1997 Election≅ MOTION PASSED 9-0. 14. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1997-98 to Provide an Additional Appropriation for Litigation Associated with the City of Menlo
Park=s Challenge to the Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects, to be Reimbursed by Stanford Herb Borock, 2731 Byron Street, did not believe the City should spend any money on the lawsuit. The real party of interest, Stanford University, should have paid for the lawsuit and the litigation which was the agreement in 1992. Stanford had
10/06/97 84-398
demonstrated during the negotiations over the language of the project approval that it was unwilling to agree to anything except what was written. A statement in a report from the City Attorney that Stanford said it was going to pay for something was not to be relied upon. Instead of relying on what Stanford said or what someone said they said, the Council should rely upon their actions. For example, one thing Stanford said regarding Sand Hill Road was how important it was to improve traffic in the Sand Hill corridor and the effect it might or might not have had on traffic in Palo Alto, including University Avenue and Crescent Park. One of the people he thought was affected by that was Bill Phillips, Managing Director of the Stanford Management Company, who lived at the corner of University and East Crescent Drive in Crescent Park for ten years. Mr. Phillips thought the traffic would be so bad if either of the measures were approved that he moved to Portola Valley. On the issue currently before the Council, the City Attorney indicated that some or most of the money he talked about had to do with the administrative record, but there was still an amount that was at risk to the City taxpayers, and there was nothing in writing from Stanford that indicated they would pay for it. He suggested delaying the matter until after the election. MOTION: Council Member Wheeler moved, seconded by Andersen, to approve a Budget Amendment Ordinance appropriating $150,000 for defense of the City of Menlo Park vs. City of Palo Alto litigation.
Ordinance 4457 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1997-98 to Provide an Additional Appropriation for Litigation
Associated with the City of Menlo Park=s Challenge to the Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects, to be Reimbursed by
Stanford≅ MOTION PASSED 9-0. REPORTS OF OFFICIALS 16. Valet Parking - Interim Monitoring Enforcement Plan Susan Frank, Chamber of Commerce, 325 Forest Avenue, supported the staff recommendation. The valet parking put into place by staff was a creative way to allow restaurants to park cars in private lots. As the program went into place, there was abuse of the system. The Chamber fully supported what was before the Council. All five restaurants that were currently using valet parking were Chamber members. If any of those restaurants abused the system, went through the process, and it was determined that their permit would be revoked, the Chamber would support that. The only way valet parking would work was if it were done appropriately and correctly. When a permanent ordinance returned, they hoped the kinks would be worked out and the restaurants would respond appropriately. 10/06/97 84-399
Pat Burt, 1249 Harriet, said there was a situation where the necessity of valet parking was questioned. One of the latest editions was Evvia, one of the most popular restaurants in Palo Alto without valet parking. Valet parking had recently been added. He asked the Council to consider if there was a permanent valet parking program, that spaces be found in private lots and that City lots not be used for that purpose. There was an acute evening parking program and about 1,000 private, unavailable Downtown parking spaces on Saturday nights. If there were a private entity for profit, it should not be subsidized with badly needed public spaces. If the public spaces were underutilized and people were walking five or six blocks into the neighborhood to find spaces, there would be a reason why that occurred. It might have had to do with lighting and safety at places such as the Gilman Lot, but some of it might have been informational. While the Chamber Parking Committee did an excellent job of promoting the City lots, there was no mechanism that described to the public which lots had parking spaces readily available. If onstreet spaces were to be used for loading and unloading, those spaces could be dual purpose. There was a real need in the Downtown for folks who dropped off people going to a restaurant and then leaving to find a parking space five blocks away. Those spaces could be used for valet purposes and a public loading and unloading as well. The public would then get some benefit from losing the spaces in front of restaurants. There would need to be a concern that the valet parkers did not get cited for double parking. It might be something for staff to consider. MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Schneider, to approve the Valet Parking Interim Monitoring Program. Council Member Rosenbaum clarified that page 3 of the staff report (CMR:404:97) Fiscal Impact, indicated the cost of the program was $2,500 per month for six months. Assistant Police Chief Lynne Johnson said that was correct. Don Hartnett, Traffic Division Manager, said that staff currently used an existing encroachment fee for the number of spaces. For two spaces, the restaurant would pay about $3,000 per year. There were five restaurants paying about $15,000. The money collected went into the Transportation Division Budget for the Police Department. Council Member Rosenbaum said when the permanent ordinance returned to Council, that would be a cost recovery process. Council Member Fazzino asked what was being collected from the restaurants as opposed to the costs associated with the program. Was the encroachment different than what each restaurant paid for designated spaces, e.g., Stars paid $6,000 per year.
10/06/97 84-400
Mr. Hartnett said there was a $400 fee to apply for an encroachment permit. If parking spaces were occupied, they were charged $30 per space per week. Council Member Fazzino asked what the total amount of money the City received was from restaurants on an annual basis for the program. Mr. Hartnett said the cost was approximately $20,000 for the five restaurants. Council Member Fazzino asked what the total cost would be for the valet parking program when police overtime was included for monitoring purposes. Mr. Hartnett said the fees collected were based on the cost to administer the program. The $30 per space per week did not create a large cost to the City. About half of what was collected was used for direct staff time. Council Member Fazzino recognized how and why valet parking was successful. It made an impact with respect to some uses, but he believed there was a fundamental unfairness associated with it. A number of onstreet parking spaces were being taken away from merchants and individuals who wanted to use other Downtown businesses. Other businesses, besides restaurants, in the Downtown area could ask for valet parking. Council Member Schneider took issue with some of Council Member
Fazzino=s comments. There were no more than ten parking spaces in front of restaurants being considered. The Chamber had their parking program in effect. The valet parking was a small element of it. There were solutions which would occur down the road. The program provided necessary parking usage in the Downtown without taking up street side parking. Business owners contracted with private parking lots or used Level C of the City Hall parking garage. Council Member Kniss said the shuttle system discussed by Council that would allow people to park on their own and get moved around Downtown was one area the Council said it would get to but had not. As long as there was no other mechanism for getting around town or some indication as to where the 1,000 nonavailable parking places were, the valet parking moved people around more expediently than cars driving around waiting to find a parking space. MOTION PASSED 7-0 with Andersen and McCown absent. COUNCIL MATTERS
10/06/97 84-401
17. Mayor Huber re Cancellation of the October 14, 1997, Regular City Council Meeting MOTION: Council Member Schneider moved, seconded by Rosenbaum, to cancel the October 14, 1997, Regular City Council Meeting. MOTION PASSED 7-0 with Andersen and McCown absent. 18. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements Mayor Huber mentioned the letter dated September 29, 1997, from a citizens group called UPROAR regarding airport noise. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 2.04.180 (a) and (b). The City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are made solely for the purpose of facilitating the preparation of the minutes of the meetings. City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are recycled 90 days from the date of the meeting. The tapes are available for members of the public to listen to during regular office hours.
10/06/97 84-402