HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-11-13 City Council Summary Minutes8
CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
PALO ALTO CITYCOUNCILMEET' NGSARE BROADCAST LIVEVIAKZSU- FREOUENCIr 90.1 ON FM DEAL
Regular Meeting
November 13, 1989
ITNM
Oral Communications
Minutes of October 2, 1989
Consent Calendar
PAGE
62-281
62-282
62-2P2
1. Contract with Sierra West Industries for Tree 62-282
and Stump Removal
2. Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. S0006214 with 62-282
Durham Transportation for Bus Transportation
3. Supplemental Amendment to Agreement with 62-282
Mountain View re the Regional Water Quality
Control Plant Industrial Waste Program
4. Contract with Wahler Associates for Leachate 62-282
Discharge Monitoring; Change Orders to the
Contract Not to Exceed $2,500
5. Resolution Declaring Its Intention to Establish 62-282
Underground Utility District No. 32
6. Resolution Regarding the Permanent Installation 62-282
of Road Bumps in the Midtown Road Bump Demon-
stration Area Pursuant to Certain Design Stan-
dards; and Making Findings with Respect Thereto
PALO ALTO OTT TT COUCH. MEETINGS M* ALSO CASLECAST CO GOVE*ISEMIT CAMEOS
62.279
11/13/89
7. Council Members Emily Renzel and Ellen Fletcher
re Sale of Arastra Land
8. Mayor Larry Klein re Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)
Recycling of Automotive Air Conditioning Fluids
9. Council Member Ellen Fletcher re Support for
Rail Bond Initiative
10. Ordinance to Delete the Requirement that the
Landlord Give the Tenant 60 Days Notice That
He Intents to Increase the Rent
11. Ordinance Amending FY 1989-90 Budget to Provide
Funds for CIP Project No. 45690 for Byxbee Park
12. Council Member Gail Woolley re Restoration of
the Juana Briones House
Adjournment at 11:00 p.m.
PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL MUTTONS ARE ALSO CA&ECART ON OOVERINEIIT CAANNEL SS
PAGE
62-288
62-292
62-293
62-295
62-295
62-299
62-300
62-280
11/13/89
Regular Meeting
November 13, 1989
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the
Council Chambers at 8:15 p.m.
PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Patitucci
(arrived at 9:30 p.m.), Renzel, Sutorius, Woolley
Tj pY SESSION REGARDING LEASE AND COVENANT NOT TO DEVEL4p
w,u3L_TKE_EAL QNMI,zp._,_aglKVLLDIEntr=
The Study Session regtrding the Lease and Covenant Not to Develop
with the Palo Alto Unified School District started at 6:30 p.m.
Council Members Cobb and Sutorius summarized the differences
betweenthe old Lease and Covenant Not to Develop and the proposed
new one. Council Member Sutorius stated the Utility payment for
the Extended Day Care facilities needed to be resolved. Council
Members Renzel and Fletcher thought the City should split the
Utility charges with the Palo Alto Unified School District.
Council Members Levy, Bechtel, and Mayor Klein thought negotiating
the issues should be left to the negotiators. Council Member
Renzel asked if there had been any thought to a City reimbursement
for expenditures in the first fee years of the lease. The
reimbursement would tz: enacted if the Gann Limit was voted down.
Council Member Renzel proposed a sliding scale reimbursement and
Council. Members Levy and Fletcher agreed.
Mayor Klein indicated concern that the City would not take
possession of the property until the end of June 1990 and not on
January 1, 1990 a€ originally planned. School Board Member Carolyn
Tucher stated the sixth month delay in moving was for the benefit
of both sides.
Allison Lee, a member of the public, requested the Palo Alto
Chamber Orchestra be included in any space design consideration at
Cubberley.
ORAL CQMMUNIC'AT QNS
Edmund Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street,
tion of the Baylands and its estuary
Clerk's office).
Ben Bailey, 305 Cotton, Menlo Park,
to Police Department complaints.
spoke regarding the preserva-
(co a =nts on file in the City
spoke regarding public access
62-281
11/13/89
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 2. „1989
NOTION: Council Me ber Sutorius moved, seconded by Fletcher/
approval of the Minutes of October 2, 1989, as submitted.
NOTION PASSED 7-0-1, Levy "abstaining", Patitucci absent.
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTION: Vice Mayor Bechtel moved, seconded by Fletcher, to approve
Consent Calendar Items 1 - 5, Sutorius "not participating" on
Item 5.
1. Contract with Sierra West Industries for Tree and Stump
Removal (1015) (CMR : 52 3 : 9 )
2. Amendment No. 1. to Contract No. S0006214 with Durham Transpor-
tation for Bus Transportation (1030) (CMR:498:9)
3. Supplemental Amendment to Agreement with Mountain View re the
Regional Water Quality Control Plant Industrial Waste Program
(1122-01) (CMR:524:9)
4. Contract with Wahler Associates for Leachate Discharge
Monitoring; Change/'} Orders to the Contract Not to Exceed $2,500
(1122-01) (CNR:504:9)
5. RESOLUTION 6832 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALO ALTO DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO AMEND SECTION
12.16.020 OF CHAPTER 12.16 OF TITLE 12 OF THE PALO ALTO
MUNICIPAL CODE BY ESTABLISHING UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT
NUMBER 32" (1101) ( :526:9)
NOTION PASSED 8-0, Items 1-4, Patitucci absent.
NOTION PASSED 7-0, Item 5, Sutorius "not participating," Patitucci
absent.
T N 1$I$I g BUSIIIMS
6. Resolution Regarding the Permanent Installation of Road Bumps
in the Midtown Road Bump Demonstration Area (Continued from
11/06/89) (1041-09) (CMR:472:9)
Council Member Renzel said a number of people commented that some
of the bumps were too gradual and queried if it wouldbe possible
to correct the situation.
Associate Transportation Engineer Carl Stof fel said the bumps were
all constructed with a standard height of three inches. He did not
62-282
11/13/89
recommend changing the height of the bumps and believed they were
properly constructed.
Council Member Cobb said one resident who lived on Marion Avenue
complained of a bump in front of a bedroom window closest to Tasso
Street. He queried if an alternative placement for that bump could
be located to resolve the problem.
Mr. Stoffel said locations were carefully selected to compromise
various factors. While they could be moved, it would be expensive
and might create problems for someone else.
Council Member Cobb queried whether the results of the Hoover Park
Neighborhood Association Midtown Traffic Study Questionnaire
correlated with 1987 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and current
data, and if the estimated changes in traffic flows as estimated
in the 1987 report correlated with current data.
Mr. Stoffel believed the results generally seemed to correlate and
traffic volumes were also consistent.
Council Member Fletcher said prior to the implementation of the
plan, there was a stop sign on Colorado at Byron which was taken
out as part of the experimental plan. She did not sec it
referenced in the evaluation and queried its status.
Mr. Stoffel said staff had recommended and Council had concurred
that the stop sign should be removed because the bump would take
its place. He presumed the stop sign removal worked well since no
responses were received.
Council Member Fletcher queried whether the citizen complaint that
traffic counting was skewed because it was taken during the time
the water district closed the street for replacement of the bridge
over the creek was valid.
Mr. Stoffel said the counts were taken, and the counts on
Middlefield Road, Waverley and Cowper streets were taken in
comparable circumstances.
Council Member Levy queried whether the program would be com-
promised by removing bumps on Marion Avenue to satisfy the
residents.
Mr. Stoffel did not believe the program for Cowper Street and
Colorado Avenue should be compromised, but bumps on Marion Avenue
could be eliminated as recommended by the neighborhood study.
Mary Ashley, 3134 Cowper, referred to her letter (on file in the
City Clerk's office). She resented not having her opinion
62-283
11/13/89
solicited and believed road bumps were a nuisance and potentially
hazardous. The purpose of road bumps was to slow or divert traffic
by being hard on cars end people, but were minimally effective in
reducing traffic speed and volume. She believed the Fire Depart-
ment should have an important voice in the road bump decision
because the road bumps would impede the ability to respond quickly
and efficiently to emergencies. She urged Council to consider
Alternative 4, Remove All Bumps and No Future Installations, as a
conclusion to the project because the bumps were of questionable
legality and safety, impeded emergency operations, and were
potentially hazardous to emergency personnel and victims.
Mary Beth Abarbanel, 2521 Webster Street, supported the road bumps
on Marion Avenue, Cowper Street, and Colorado Avenue. Problems in
cut -through traffic, previously experienced, including buses,
trucks, especially around 5:00 p.m., had been greatly reduced by
the road bumps. She recommended improved crosswalk visibility,
especially at Middlefield at Webster. She urged Council to keep
the bumps and consider other measures to increase pedestrian safety
in the neighborhood.
Tatiana Van Houten, 600 Marion Avenue, said the road bumps reduced
the traffic volume and speed on Marion Avenue. She opposed
removing the bumps from Marion Avenue because one objective of the
program was to have an integrated approach; one street would not
have an increase in traffic at the cost of the others. Removing
the bumps beat against that point of the study. The bumps were a
good beginning; however, more was needed because of heavy commer-
cial traffic. She supported the recommendations of the Hoover Park
Neighborhood Association.
Roland Van Houten, 600 Marion Avenue, supported the road bumps
because they were effective in reducing the volume of traffic and
vehicle speeds. He urged Council to approve retaining the bumps.
Drew Beck, 521 Marion Avenue, supported the bumps because of the
reduction in both the volume and speed of automobiles. A year ago,
Council voted for a compromise from what the consultant recommended
and reduced the number of bumps. He urged Council to find
additional ways to help reduce traffic problems in residential
areas, and to provide integrity to the program by applying the same
decision regarding removal of speed bumps to all three streets.
Herb Borock, 2731 Byron Street, urged Council to retain the speed
bumps and to add two bumps to Cowper Street, as recommended by the
Hoover Park Neighborhood Association. One objective of the
experimental project was to reduce the speed limit to 25 miles per
hour. The experiment included various distances between bumps, but
the ones that were approximately 300 feet apart brought the speed
down to the desired goal. The budget approved for the d€monstra-
62-264
As 1 2ct Core d
12/20/89
0
tion project included money for installing two new bumps. He was
pleased the specifications called for reflectorized legends in
front of the bumps, but doubted if the bumps had been inspected
because the existing paint was barely legible. He believed there
was a difference in the height of the bumps compared to Menlo
Park's speed bumps. He was disappointed there were no traffic
counts from Oregon Expressway to Middlefield.
Todd Piffero, 2934 Cowper, had a bump in front of her bedroom
window. She believed bumps should be placed between Loma Verde
and Matadero Creek because speeders on Cowper usually started near
Lonna Verde. She hoped the bump could be moved to the other side
of Matadero Creek.
Louis Bachmann, 570 Marion Avenue, opposed the bumps and was
concerned because the City hired a traffic consultant for $85,000
and rejected the recommendations in favor of an in-house plan
dictated by nonqual if ied local residents. After the 15 -month
demonstration project, a public acknowledgment by the transporta-
tion engineer stated there was not a lot of difference with or
without the bumps; yet, a staff report notified the public the
project was a huge success. The consultant'sspecifications called
for a standardized petition, wherein two-thirds of the households
within project's zone of influence must consent to the installation
of the bumps. He believed the petition should have been given to
the community because then Council would have been given instruc-
tions as to what approach to take. He referred to his letter (on
file in the City Clerk's Office) in which deficiencies currently
existing between the in-house plan and the consultant's plan were
identified. He believed the City created a safety hazard in the
Marion Avenue project due to insufficient lighting. He did not
believe the City exercised reasonable diligence because paramedic
services response time would be impeded by the speed bumps.
Joanne Matthew, 575 Marion Avenue, agreed with Mr. Bachmann and
strongly supported the City Fire Department and its opposition to
the bumps. Stop signs at major intersections would better deter
and slow down traffic, but not compromise public safety. She
believed the bumps increased the City's liability and cost too much
to install and maintain. She appreciated Council's efforts to
listen to the public and hoped it would consider the concerns of
the residents on Marion Avenue.
Council Member Refuel queried the recommendation that Council take
no further action until the California Traffic Control Device
Committee (CTCDC) completed its analysis in 12 months.
Mr. Stoffel did not know if action would be taken by the CTCDC, but
the conaittee and the Institute of Transportation Engineers planned
to set up standards for adoption.
62-285
11/13/89
Council Member Renzel queried if cities would be required to
retrofit according to the standards.
Mr. Stoffel said the standards would not be mandatory until adopted
by CALTRANS. Retrofitting could be accomplished with routine
maintenance.
KOTIONs Council Member Renzel moved, seconded by Fletcher, to
approve the staff recommendation as modified: a) adopt the
negative declaration; b) adopt the resolution approving permanent
installation of the eight road bumps except that an attempt be made
to relocate the bump on Cowper and Matadero if feasible, not more
than 100 feet to the north; c) direct staff to delay consideration
of future road bump installations and the preparation of warrants
and procedures until California Traffic Control Devices Committee
(CTCDC) completes its analysis or 12 months, whichever first
occurs, and further staff to evaluate recommendations of Hoover
Park Neighborhood Committee as contained in its letter of October
23, 1989 and additional safety features on Middlefield and Webster;
and d) report to the Policy and Procedures (P&P) Committee.
$.g.SOLUTIQN 6833 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVING PERMANENT INSTALLATION OF ROAD
BUMPS IN THE MIDTOWN ROAD BUMP DEMONSTRATION AREA PURSUANT TO
CERTAIN DESIGN STANDARDS; AND MAKING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT
THERETO"
AMBIDNRMT: Council Member Levy moved to amend the motion by
adding, to request staff to poll the residences on Marion Avenue
and Tasso Street regarding possible removal of the bumps on Marion
Avenue while leaving the bumps on Colorado Avenue and Cowper
Street, and the polls should clarify that removing bumps on Marion
Avenue could lead to greater speed and volume on Marion.
AMMOKINT FAX FOR LACK OF A SECOND
Council Member Woolley asked about the possibility of using stop
signs instead of speed bumps.
Mr. Stoffel said control right-of-way, and were not recommended to
control speed or volume.
Council Member Woolley asked about the suggestions from the Hoover
Park Neighborhood Association.
Mr. Stoffel said adding bumps would be a big project and budgeted
funds were not sufficient. While the bumps were visible, reflec-
tors would help. The bumps were built according to specifications.
A pedestrian flashing light on Webster would not be recommended
62-286
11/13/89
because a traffic signal was needed and a flashing light created
a false sense of security. Textured crosswalk tape was not
installed because the manufacturer did not guarantee the thickness
of the tape for crosswalks. Regarding bulbouts, the planters were
not recommended because they created a large maintenance problem;
the Greenmeadow Association had asked that planters there be
removed.
AMINDK Tz Council Member Woolley moved, seconded by Levy, to
delete Item D, the request to refer to staff the evaluation of the
Hoover Park Neighborhood Association letter of October 23, 1989,
and the recommendations therein for staff to consider improvements
for traffic and safety at the Middlefield/Webster intersection.
Council Member Fletcher agreed the project was marginally success-
ful; more reduction in volume and speed of vehicles resulted when
bumps were placed closer together. She believed the bumps should
be placed between 150 to 300 feet apart because the closer together
the bumps were placed, the better the traffic control. She did not
believe the height was standard for all bumps, some were four
inches, and should be compromised to three and one-half inches.
Costs should be evaluated by staff and brought to the P&P Committee
or the F&PW Committee for further evaluation and consideration in
future budgets. If the intent of the bumps was to reduce traffic
and speeds, then Council should make the program as successful as
possible. She urged Council to reject the amendment and give staff
the opportunity to make recommendations.
Council Member Levy seconded the amendment because the basic motion
called for staff to return in 12 months or when the State Uniform
Standards were developed. The Hoover Park Neighborhood recommenda-
tions should be considered in the context of overall standards.
Council Member Renzel had intended for the report regarding the
Hoover lark Neighborhood recommendations and the standards to
return to the P&P Committee in 12 months; however, there might not
be any standards at that time and she did not want the process to
stop while waiting for another government agency to take action.
She believed the Hoover Park Neighborhood Association was per-
suasive about the need for additional bumps, but if standards were
to be forthcoming within the next 12 months, the decision should
be made then.
AKKMDKUT FRU= 3-5, Bechtel, Klein, Woolley "aye."
Council Member Sutorius supported the main motion and believed the
project should be kept as a package; the bumps_ worked together
towards cutting the volume of traffic and improving safety.
62-287
11/13/89
Council Member Cobb queried if a sign "Road Bumps Ahead, Reduce
Speed," could be installed to make existing bumps more effective
He believed the road bumps worked in reducing the speed of
vehicles.
Council Member Levy supported the motion and the general success
of the program, although the reductions in speed and volume were
not as great as anticipated. He was concerned that the residents
on Marion Avenue and Tasso Street objected to the bumps and did not
believe Council should impose bumps on Marion Avenue. He supported
the bumps on Cowper.
MOTION PAW= 8-0, Patitucci absent.
MUM; 9.20 R.AM -- 930 P.M.
7. Council Members Emily Renzel and E13en Fletcher re Sale of
Arastra Land (continued from 11/06/89) (906)
Council Member Renzel referred to the memo regarding the assignment
to the Finance and Public Works (F&PW) Committee to review the
basic policy considerations regarding the sale of Arastra, the
identification of the steps to be taken before the City decided to
proceed, and an outline of. other relevant factors. Staff prepared
the results and concluded the cost would be between $25,000 and
$50,000 to update the financial factors of the property. Substan-
tial staff resources would also be required to manage the process.
On October 3, 1989, the F&PW Committee did not act on the staff
recommendation, but on a 3.1 vote, requested the City Manager seek
a letter of appraisal with a cost estimate of approximately $5,000.
She did not believe the FidoW Committee's action was within
the scope of the full Council referral and believed the subject
matter was of sufficient public interest that Council should decide
whether the City should pursue the matter any further before any
money was spent on any appraisal.
Mayor Klein said the F&PW Committee voted for two letter ap-
praisals, one with respect to the 77 acres and the other in regards
to the 13 acres across the street which was privately owned by the
Bressler family,
Council Member Renzel believed Council should create a policy on
Bressler land before spending money on it. The motion before
Council dealt only with the 77 acres of City -owned Arastra land.
MO•TIO is Council Member Renzelmoved, seconded by Fletcher, to
instruct the City Manager not to seek letter of appraisal for the
77 acres of Arastra property.
62288
11/13/89
John Mock, 2823 Alma Street, queried whether the item was correctly
agendized at F&PW Committee. The motion which passed requested an
appraisal of the Bressler property as well as the 77 acres, yet no
mention was made on the agenda of the Bressler property. The
notice in the newspaper was the only notification the public had.
Not even the landowner was notified that the matter would be
discussed that evening. She was only there because of the 77 acres
of Arastra land. He had serious questions as to whether Council
might be in conflict with the Brown Act on the item. The F&PW
minutes did not mention many of his comments, nor many of
Jacqueline Bressler's. He did not see any problems with the
Bressler's rebuilding the Flying Tail farm: there was local
precedents for having a working farm being associated with open
space, specifically Rancho San Antonio and the Dubeneck ranch. He
objected to Plan A in which the project would tower over the 77
acres and could not be effectively screened by vegetation. His
previous comments regarding the worthiness of, the land was not
included and neither were the comments of Jobs Brant with any
degree of clarity. He reiterated the Arastra item was scheduled
for the ?&PW Committee meeting at a time when an opponent of the
item was absent, turning the vote into a 3-1 vote instead of a 2-
2 vote. He noted the minutes of the F&PW Committee meeting
containing background information should have been included in the
extra materials for the public. He urged Council to reject the
concept of the sale of the 77 --acre Arastra parcel and requested
verbatim minutes of the F&PW Committee meeting to avoid needless
repetition before Council.
Council Member Levy said John Mock correctly recorded his feeling
regarding the Arastra item at the F&PW Committee meeting. If he
had been there, he would have agreed with Chairman C )bb's comments,
which wererecorded in the minutes, that he had little enthusiasm
for a land sale at this time and that a fundamental policy decision
could be made without going through an appraisal.
Council Member Patitucci opposed the motion because the F&PW
Committee action was within the scope of the referral. The
question was whether the City should consider the sale of one of
its assets to help finance budget problems. Since that time,
Council was faced with a decision of how to finance the City storm
ewer system and other capital improvements. An ideal situation
would be to keep all assets and be able to pay all the bills, but
when faced with increased fees of $3.25 per month for every
residential homeowner and looking ahead to spending $15 to $30
million of additional public money, Council needed to consider
other financing methods, such as converting some of the City's
assets. If the worth of the assets was unknown, the public• would
not have enough information be make choices regarding options of
whether a business license tax was needed, a $7 to $9 a month storm
drain fee, or the sale of one asset. The purpose was net by the.
62-289
11/13/89
F&PW Committee and he believed whether the City chose to sell the
property or not, it was reasonable to get an estimate of its worth.
Vice Mayor Bechtel believed it was a mistake to even consider
selling the 77 acre Arastra parcel, so she supported the motion.
All City property was valuable, and if the City was so desperate
as to sell assets,. Council should be evaluating the sale of air
rights, and the City Hall Plaza, which were far more valuable per
square foot than the Arastra property. She would not consider
selling any of tnose assets.
Council Member Woolley acknowledged the F&PW Committee meeting
minutes of October 3, 1989, may not have reflected all of what was
said, but did reflect Mrs. Bressler's request that the matter be
continued which was what the F&PW Committee did. One of the
Committee's concerns was that the property not be dealt with in a
piecemeal fashion. When the youth hostel was dealt with, there
were some unsolved problems; the Arastradero Road had a dangerous
curve, the parking lot was on the opposite side of the road, and
other situations where the Committee requested more information.
The F&PW Committee wanted more information regarding the total
package on the Arastra property, so she supported themotion to
have the property appraised. While she did not believe the City
should sell the 77 acres, she did want to solve existing problems
with the Arastra Preserve. She opposed the motion.
Council Member Renzel did not disagrees with Council Member
Woolley's objectives, but those objectives were not part of the
referral t.o the F&PW Committee and should have been sent to the
P&P Committee. The matter referred to the F&PW Committee was the
sale of the Arastra property and the subject of the motion was the
appraisal which had nothing to do with the overall solutions
mentioned by Council Member Woolley. She urged Council to support
the motion because of insufficient interest in selling the 77 acre
Arastra land. Any City real estate would be valued twice as much
in terms of future quality of life, and keeping the land was
important.
Council Member Sutorius opposed the motion and supported comments
by Council Members Patitucci and Woolley. The matter was retained
in the F&PW Committee, and any judgements the F&PW Committee ma
in further review would be thoughtfully and carefully made, and
probably challenged by ors of the public. He believed the F&PW
Committee made a prudent and fair decision.
Council Member Fletcher believed the ultimate decision regarding
the sale would be made by newly -elected Council Members and
decisions regarding the expenditure of funds relating to the sale
of the land should be deferred to the new Council.
62-290
11/13/89
Mayor Klein said staff revised the appraisal cost to approximately
$2,000. It was unfortunate not to obtain the information for the
use of future Councils. He opposed deferring decisions because
Council Members had a responsibility to serve in the public
interest during the entire four-year term. He supported the
concept of open space, was a co-founder of the Mid -peninsula Open
Space District and made the motion to dedicate the 432 acres as
open space. The 77 -acre parcel was adjacent to the 432 acres
dedicated to open space and the approximately 4,090 total acres of
open space in the foothills. Open -space properties should remain
open space; however, the decision must be made as to whether a
property should be designated as open space or devoted to other
uses. The 77 -acre Arastra land was not open space property. The
13 -acre Bressler property was a concern because of its proximity
to the Arastra Preserve and the owners could build on it without
restrictions. People opposed selling the 77 -acre parcel, but the
City was facing financial needs due to environmental problems;
costs of services at the Water Quality Control Plant tripled
because of stricter requirements of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board. It was a mistake not to consider selling the land
and to foreclose knowledge of what the land was worth was an even
greater mistake. The City of Palo Alto should lead the nation in
matters such as water quality, hazardous waste removal, elimination
of chlorofluorocarbons, and other environmental problems and
without the resources, than: would be impossible. In the Year 2004,
the contract with the Western Area Power Association (WAPA)
expired, higher electric rates would come into effect and there
would be less profits to transfer to the General Fund. The process
to sell the 77 acres should be started soon because it could be
years before completion and the shortfall could begin before the
year 2000. Palo Alto's real estate prices, historically, were ap-
proximately 50 to 60 percent above national averages, and last year
were 300 percent above the averages. It was a good time to sell
because economic history showed nothing kept going up at the
current pace. Money from the sale would provide a variety of
services to the community and provide the funds necessary for
purchasing the Bressler property to complete the 432 -acre, open -
space preserve. Without appropriate information, however,
judgments would be difficult to make, and Council should be
welcoming more information instead of trying to cut it off.
Council Member Renzel said the Bressler property was not part of
the Arastra referral to the FiPW Committee, but it should have
been. Many properties were not park -dedicated and could be
considered as assets to deal with financial crises. One parcel
should not be singled out to the exclusion c:f the others. She
would support evaluating all of the resources to balance finances
in the future.
62-291
11/13/89
Mayor Klein believed Council committees should have freedom to ask
staff to develop more information when the cost was within the City
Manager's discretion. Attempting to take things out of committee,
when referred there by Council action, was an abuse of the process
and limited the committee's ability to make recommendations before
returning an item to Council.
NOTION PASS= 5-4, Klein, Patitucci, Sutorius, Woolley "no."
8. Mayor Larry Klein re Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) Recycling of
Automotive Air Conditioning Fluids (continued from 11/06/89)
(1440-05)
(NOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Renzel, to direct
the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance which would require
service stations and auto repair shops to capture and recycle air
conditioning fluids containing CFCs.
Council Meter Cobb queried staff whether the ordinance would cause
an economic burden on anyone.
Mr. Zaner was not aware of any, but believed some would surface.
Mayor Klein asked for a time frame from the City Attorney's Office.
Senior Assistant City Attorney Tony Bennetti said the ordinance
would return to Council in sufficient time to meet the deadline,
and for discussion and input from affected parties.
Council Member Patitucci queried how far Council would be into the
process before !t heard from affected parties.
Mr. Zaner said those affected would be contacted immediately. The
City garage operation would also be affected, so it would need to
gather information while the City Attorney researched the
zdinance, and provided the information to Council so any
difficulties could be addressed by the time the draft ordinance
returned to Council.
Council Member Patitucci queried if the motion needed an amendment
to require that the item return to Council with a report before
the draft ordinance was presented,
Mr. Zaner said the two activities would be coordinated with the
City Attorney's office.
NOTION VASS= 9-0.
62-292
11/13/89
1
9. Council Member Ellen Fletcher re Support for Rail Bond
Initiative (continued from 9/18/89) (1164) (CMR:527:9)
MOTIONs Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Renzel, to
approve the staff recommendation to: (a) endorse the Clean Air and
Transportation Improvement Act of 1990 (PCL); (b) endorse the
Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act of 1990 (Costa); (c) direct
staff to prepare the appropriate letters for the Mayor's signature
to each campaign organization; and (d) direct staff to return to
the Council with an analysis of The Traffic Congestion Relief and
Spending Limitation Act of 1990 (SCA 1).
Council Member Patitucci believed SCA 1 was related and Council
should look at the issues as a package.
Mr. Schreiber said the Planning and Conservation League (PCL) rail
bond measure was a stand-alone measure, separate from the other
issues.
Council Member Patitucci believed the items were tied together as
part of a package, so he could not make a decision on the Rail
Bonds without information on the others. He had requested
information on the other items when the issue was brought before
Council in September because he was concerned about the lack of
public information on the gas tax measure.
Mr. Schreiber said the two that were interrelated were the Costa
Rail Bond Measure and SCA 1, the gas tax measure, to the extent
that passage of SCA 1 was necessary for funding of the Costa Rail
Bond Measure. He recommended continuing the analysis of SCA 1 and
return with a recommendation regarding the gas tax measure.
Mayor Klein said the question raised when the itea was previously
presented to Council was whether the supporters of the Rail Bond
measure would also support SCA 1. If supporters of the Rail Bond
measure were not supporting the gas tax measure, both measures
could fail. He was interested in hearing what Council Members who
were endorsing the rail bond measure would say regarding support
of the gas tax measure.
Mr. Schreiber said the staff review of the campaign related -
literature developed with the PCL bond measure did not identify
negative comments regarding SCA 1, the gas tax measure. The
campaign had a .long way to go, but at this point in time, staff was
not finding negative comments; however, it was generally silent on
the gas tax measure.
Vice Mayor Bechtel believed staff had done an excellent job of
preparing the materialand bringing it back to Council in a
complete fashion. Council did not give staff an assignment on
62-293
11/13/89
SCA 1. She supported the motion and the additional staff assign-
ment on SCA 1.
Council Member Sutorius supported having information regarding the
entire package before taking any action.
Alan Hirsch, 2539 Ross Road, a member of the CALTRAIN Citizens
Advisory Committee, supported the Rail Bond Initiative and said
there was no conflict or overlap between SCA 1 and the rail bond.
The explicit strategy of the PCL was to not attack SCA 1 and not
take a position. If both passed, there would be more money for
mass transit. If the rail bond initiative passed and SCA 1 did not
pass, there would be less money, but no conflict. He believed they
were stand-alone measures. Palo Alto benefited more per capita
from the measure than almost any other part of the State. .Santa
Clara County would get approximately $77 dollars per capita whereas
the State average was $69 per capita. The State gave local
counties a three-year deadline to buy the right-of-way and take
control or the State would back out. A clear, strong endorsement
of the bond measure would move CALTRAIN ahead and improve mass
transit service for the Peninsula. The only alternative to
CALTRAIN was more roads. The Clean Air Act would put pressure on
people to take public transit. Endorsing the rail bond would
notify the public that Palo Alto was a transit -oriented City. He
urged Council to endorse the rail bond and work for its passage,
Council Member Patitucci queried if the CALTRAIN Citizens Advisory
Board favored SCA 1 and the Costa Bond Issue.
Mr. Hirsch said the CALTRAIN Citizens Advisory Board had taken no
position on SCA 1, and he did not know if the group had taken an
official position on the Costa Bond measure.
Council Member Patitucci said staff did an excellent job clarifying
the bond issues, but he was still not clear on whether taking a
position on the bond issues made sense without taking a position
on SCA 1. He believed Council should be looking at the issues as
a total package.
Council Member Fletcher said supporters of both the SCA 1 measure
and the Mail Initiative Bond Initiative would not oppose the
other's measure. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
endorsed both the SCA 1 and the Rail Bond Initiative. The Rail
Bond Initiative was a stand-alone measure. She urged Council to
endorse the Rail Bond Initiative because of its many benefits to
Palo Alto and Santa Cla•a County, and direct staff to continue
studying SCA 1.
Mayor Klein asked Council Member Pletcher if she planned to support
SCA1.
62-294
11/13/89
Council Member Fletcher ,said SCA 1 was a very complex issue, but
on balance she supported it.
Mayor Klein said while all the issues should have been considered
as a package, it was important that all of the items be supported.
He had been very involved with the issue for several years and
strongly supported the total package. Under the last two gover-
nors, California ranked lowest per capita in spending on roads; the
earthquake proved that was a mistake. The governor campaigned with
promises to increase funds for road improvements, but did not carry
out those promises. SCA 1 included more than just a gasoline tax
to build roads to benefit Palo Alto; it included a congestion
management plan and raised the Gann limit. More money was needed
for traffic improvements but under current legislation, additional
funds could not be appropriated to traffic improvement. He
supported all three measures and urged the PCL to support SCA 1.
AMENDMENT: Council Member Sutorius moved, seconded by Patitucci,
to delete Recommendation (b) and add new Recommendati (d) defer
endorsing the passenger Rail & Clean Air Bond Act of 1)90 (Costa)
pending Council review of analysis of SCA 1.
AMENDMENT PARSED 7-2, Bechtel, Levy "no."
MOTION AS AMENDED PABSED 9-0.
10. Ordinance to Delete the Requirement that the Landlord Give the
Tenant 60 Days Notice that He Intends to Increase the Rent
(continued from 11/06/89) (702-04-02)
MOTION TO CONTINUE: Mayor Klein moved, seconded by Cobb, to
continue the item to the December 4, 1989, City Council meeting.
MOTION ABED 9-0.
REPORTS OF OFFICIALS
11. Ordinance Amending FY 1989-90 Budget to Provide Funds for CIP
Project No. 45690 for Byxbee Park (1321-05) (CMR:530:9)
Director of Public Works David Adams referred to the staff report
(CMR:530:9) and said since the Capital Improvement Project (CIP)
budget was approved three years ago, charges were made in landfill
regulations, creating a need for an .additional $150,000 in the
requirements for the park design; and the art work which was not
included in the original budget amounted to another $255,000,
including $200,000 for the add Alternates and $55,000 in the base
bid. Council wanted the art work added, so staff recommended it
approve the contract with Granite Construction in the amount of
62-295
11/13/89
$1,551,675 for the base bid and alternatives for construction of
Byxbee Park Phase I, including change orders to the contract not
to exceed $79,105, and the budget amendment ordinance of $463,000
to support it.
Vice Mayor Bechtel queried which parts contained in the staff
report were actually art because as she studied the Add Alternates,
she observed some of them included benches, wood headers, oyster
shell, trash receptacles, interpretive map signs, chevrons, and
windwaves.
Mr. Adams said the Add Alternates were almost entirely art. For
example, trash receptacles were selected to be compatible with work
from an artistic point -of -view rather than bare -bones wire
containers, so the cost reflected the additional art value.
Vice Mayor Bechtel clarified the Add Alternates were all art;
however, she did not consider 21 benches, steps, wooden observation
platforms, or decks as art so indirectly it was a park environment.
Mr. Adams said the items were added by the artist's design and
served useful purposes.
Council Member Cobb referred to the last page of the staff report
(CMR:530:9) where it stated that Council had directed the Reserve
to be targeted at $7.5 million, in 1988 dollars, as of the landfill
closure date of 1999. He queried how using the reserves as
recommended would impact meeting that objective and if that target
would be met.
Mr. Adams said the target would be met as rates were adjusted
according to new regulations. He did not see any problem in
meeting the target and believed reserves would be sufficiently
built up to meet the new financial requirements of closure and
post --closure maintenance. Income would also be received from the
new gas lease.
Council Member Cobb asked about the magnitude of the rate increases
associated with the motion.
Mr. Adams the items in the motion would not effect any rate
increase, and additional reserves would be accumulated without rate
increases. He anticipated other reasons for rate increases in the
future.
Tonic Macneil, 1650 Waverley Street, Chairman of the Public Art
Commission (PAC), thanked Council for supporting the PAC over the
years and for raking Palo Alto a liveable City. She urged -Council
to support the Byxbee Park recommendation in its entirety. Phase
I was an important addition to Palo Alto's aesthetic and open -
62 -296
11/13/89
space heritage, and the City's foresight and resources to support
the park would be a continuing source of pride and benefit. As a
major work of public art, the park was an integrated design in
which one element depended upon another. Postponing elements of
the design for later installation would increase costs and create
problems.
Orlando Maione, 1300 Oak Creek Drive, urged Council to appropriate
the funds for the entire Byxbee Park Project to create a complete
park. The park would be hindered if the master plan was separated
into parts; it was designed as a useful, passive park. Staff
worked closely with environmentalists and naturalists to create a
unique, 36 -acre park for the City.
Mary Jean Place, 809 Northampton Drive, urged Council to support
the Byxbee Park Project and the Add Alternates under discussion.
The PAC produced an artistic team who worked with the design team
to create a sense of place. The artistic statements in the Add
Alternative items made one aware of the environment.
Lois Vanderbeek, 736 Barron Avenue, was concerned about the
windwaves of two 35 -foot high poles supporting a cable with plastic
strips to underlay air currents. Birds and plastic did not mix;
many plastics deteriorated from the elements and got into the birds
digestive system. She saw seagulls trying to eat the plastics
during her visit. She did not support spending money for waving,
plastic strips in Byxbee Park.
MOTION: Council Member Levy moved, seconded by Bechtel, to approve
:he staff recommendation as follows;
1. Adopt the Budget Amendment Ordinance in the amount of
$463,000. Funds are available from the Refuse Fund System
Improvement Reserve.
2. Authorize the Mayor to execute the contract with Granite
Construction Co. in the amount of $1,551,675 for the base bid
and all add alternatives for construction of Byxbee Park Phase
I.
3. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and
execute one or more change orders to the construction contract
with Granite Construction Co. the value of all of which change
orders shall not exceed $79,105.
ORDINANCE 3907 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PAW ALTO MENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1989-90
TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. 45690 FOR BYXBEE PARK"
62-297
11/13/89
Contract with Granite Construction Company for Construction
of Byxbee Park - Phase I
Council Member Levy asked whether plastics would be a threat to the
birds.
Senior Engineer Edgar Ugarte did not have specific information
regarding the quality of the plastic used on the poles, but he
believed it would last a number of years. The pole field was
welcomed and encouraged by the Audubon Society because a number of
birds went through the site and the poles provided perching sites.
Council Member Levy was liaison to the Public Arts Commission while
discussions were held regarding Byxbee Park. The art team, Public
Works, and a number of community organizations worked together to
enhance the environmental elementsof the Baylands areas, and he
was impressed with the thoughtfulness and caring that went into the
planning of the groups. The art elements represented approximately
$200,000 in the Add Alternatives and he concurred with Vice Mayor
Bechtel that a number of those elements were standard park
elements, even if not designated as art elements. The cost was
higher because of the art features, but walkways, benches, trash
cans, etc. were needed. Landscape artists worked together in the
design and creation of the elements, so the park would be a credit
to the community. By 1999, the reserves would he to the expected
levels, so he supported the total package.
Council Member Woolley concurred with Council Member Levy. The
park was relatively inexpensive, would be left fairly natural, and
the environmental art features were important and exciting. Byxbee
Park wouldbecome a work of art and it would be a great error to
eliminate the art features from the entire package. She urged
Council to support the motion.
Vice Mayor Bechtel supported the lotion and queried if staff had
heard from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regarding the
location of the design chevrons.
Mr. Ugarte said the Airport Land Commission was concerned that the
chevrons could be mistaken for landing symbols. The Burlingame
office of the FAA gave staff a letter stating that in its opinion,
the chevrons did not represent a hazard to aircraft in the
vicinity.
Council Member Fletcher said the poles were to act as perching
posts for the seagulls and she queried how they were compatible
with the waving plastic strips because they would deter the birds.
62-298
11/13/89
1
Mr. Ugarte said the pole field was in an area removed from where
the windwave would be, so the two would not be seen from a single
point.
Council Member Renzel was not enthralled with some of the art work
proposed in the plans.
Mayor Klein supported the motion, but did not regard the art work
as an add-on; it was a necessary component of the park. Without
the art work, the landfill would have been a wasteland, and he
believed the public deserved a park that was environmentally
sensitive and worth the money spent on it. The design was exciting
and would promote civic pride.
Council Member Patitucci believed Byxbee Park was a culmination of
the use of the landfill, and the artistic items were as important
as the structural items. He supported the motion, but reminded
Council that at some point, the park would require funds from the
General Fund.
MOTION PASSED 9-0.
COUNCIL MATTF24
12. Council Member Gail Woolley re Restoration of the Juana
Briones House (263)
MOTION: Council Member Woolley moved, seconded by Klein, to direct
the Mayor to appoint a Citizen's Committee which would prepare a
plan recommending: extent and nature of restoration, cost and
funding, provision for ongoing public benefit. The Mayor will
appoint a Council Member as liaison to that Committee. In working
with the Committee, Council confirms that staff involvement will
be limited to providing legal assistance in preparing grant
applications and assuring an ongoing public benefit, and when
necessary, financial assistance by the City's Finance staff in
receiving, depositing and distributing funds.
Vice Mayor Bechtel queried if the motion should state the appoint-
ment of a citizens' committee to work for the restoration of the
Juana Briones house.
Council Member Renzel queried if under the Brown Act, it was
necessaryto have a staff member present at committee meetings, or
if Council needed to be apprised, because the motion did not
mention staff involvement.
Senior Assistant City Attorney Tony Bennetti was not aware that a
staff member would be needed to comply with the requirements of the
62-299
11/13/89
As Correct d
12/20/89
Brown Act. He would work with the committee to determine proper
procedures.
Council Member Woolley said the motion deliberately avoided saying
there would be a staff member; the function would be fulfilled by
the Council liaison. The only comparable experience she could
recall was when former Mayor Comstock appointed a committee to save
the Squire House, and the group met without staff.
City Manager William Zaner said an ad hoc committee could meet
without compliance with the Brown Act.
Council Member Sutorius was concerned whether Federal or State
grant funding would be available since only the site, not the
house, had been designated as a state -registered landmark.
Council Member Woolley said Dorothy Regnery had stated the
designation was changed at the Landmarks Commission from "house"
to "site." Only two or three walls remained of the original house,
so whether it was still considered a house was debatable. Other
adobes had been totally reconstructed because the material did not
last that long, but were referred to as adobe.
Council Member Sutorius clarified there may be restrictions on
Federal Assistance Grants identified through the earthquake relief
process and the grants may not be as applicable as presumed at the
outset.
Council Member Woolley said the local inventory listed the property
as a house and the Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) money
was based on the local inventory.
MOTION PASSED 9-0.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m.
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with
Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 2.04.200(b)- The City Council
meeting tapes are retained in the City Clerk's Office for two years
from the date of the meeting, and the Finance and Public Works
Committee and Policy and Procedures Committee meeting tapes are
retained for six months. Members of the public may listen to the
tapes during regular office hours.
62-300
11/13/89
1
1