Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-02-01 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MINUTES -.--- PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGSARE BROADCAST LIVE VIA I(ZSU-FREQUENCY90.1 ON FM DIAL Regular Meeting February 1, 1988 ITEM PAGE Study Session on Council Priorities 59-197 Study Session re Dumbarton Bridge 59-197 Recess 59-200 Oral Communications 59-200 Approval of the Minutes of January 4, 1988 59-201 1. Appointments to Visual Arts Jury 59-201 2. Contract with DMC Energy Inc., Intelfac, 59-20.1 Inc., and All American Insulation, Inc., for inspection/Correction of Cellulose Attic Insulation 3. Report from City/School Liaison Committee 59-203 4. Vice Mayor Larry Klein re City Council's 59-204 Policy for Reimbursable Travel Expenses Adjournment at 10:40 p.m. 59-206 59-196 2/01/88 Regular Meeting Monday, February 1, 1988 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 6:05 p.m. PRESENT: Bechtel (arrived at 6:15 p.m.), Cobb, Fletcher, Klein (arrived at 6:10 p.m.), Levy (arrived at 6:10 p.m.), Patitucci (arrived at 6:10 p.m.), Renzel, Sutorius, Woolley STUDY SESSION ON COUNCIL PRIORITIES The Council adjourned at 6:10 p.m. to a Special Study Session in the Council Conference Room re Council Prior- ities, in order to begin the process for establishing priorities for 1988. Council Members reviewed the process whichthey had used last year and determined how they would proceed. As a basis for issues to consider, the Council reviewed the priorities which they had selected for emphasis in 1987 at well as the list of other issues which had been suggested for 1987 but not selected as highest priorities. Mayor Sutorius called on Council Members in turn to suggest addi- tions, deletions, or modifications to the list of proposed priorities. Staff was then directed to compile the list and prepare a score sheet which would be distributed in the next Council packet. Council Members would do their individual ranking of issues and return the score sheets to staff on February 8, 1988. The second study session, at which Council would review the rankings and proceed to establish the priorities for 1988, would be held on February 22, 1988. That would allow time for the process to be publicized, enabling residents and community organizations to partici- pate The study session adjourned at 7:28 p.m. STUDY SESSION RE DUMBARTON BRIDGE The Council met at .7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers for a Study. Session regarding the Dumbarton Bridge and approach roads. Mayor Sutorius indicated that the purpose of the meeting was to review past and present issues, activities, 59-197 2/01/88 interests, and policies regarding the Dumbarton Bridge and its approach roads. Four speakers were invited to address the Council en particular aspects of the issue. Mayor Sutorius introduced former Palo Alto Mayor Alan Henderson, Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Deputy Director William Hein, Atherton City Council Member Malcolm Dudley, and Caltrans Project Development Engineer for District IV, Frank Tedesco. Mr. Henderson reviewed actions taken by the City of Palo Alto and nearby jurisdictions during the period from April, 1972, when State legislation was introduced to fund a new Dumbarton Bridge and approach roads, through 1981, when the City of Palo Alto and the East Palo Alto Municipal Council considered the feasibility of a two-lane southern approach road. Mr. Henderson stressed that the Palo Alto City Council had supported a southern approach road as outlined in a plan developed by the then -Menlo Park Council Member Stephens on the condition that the existing two-lane Dumbarton Bridge would be retained, rather than a new bridge constructed. Mr. Hein summarized two major MTC activities related to the Dumbarton. First, MTC was seeking comprehensive State bridge toll legislation. The objective was to have tolls on the Dumbarton and several other bridges raised from 75 cents to one dollar and the potential uses of bridge toll revenues expanded to include maintenance, roadway improvements, and transit activities related to the bridges. Second, MTC was actively involved with local jurisdictions in trying to maintain and improve the provision of transit services across the Dumbarton Bridge, especially from East Bay resi- dential areas to West Bay employment areas. Atherton Council Member Dudley reviewed an effort currently under way in San Mateo County to develop a ballot measure for a one-half cent increase in sales tax, with the proceeds used for transportation -related projects. The improvement package that would hopefully be submitted to the voters in June had been approved unanimously by a committee of repre- sentatives of all San Mateo County cities as well as the County. The proposed plan would divide revenues equally between transit and highway projects. Major attention would be given to CalTrain, including a connection to the San Francisco Airport and support for extension of CalTrain in San Francisco to the Transbay Terminal. The sales tax reve- nue plan also included projects to expand the University Avenue connection to the Dumbarton Bridge to four lanes, and ttS:iupgrade the Bayfront Freeway to four lanes extending as as a connection to Woodside Road (Route 84) . The plan a srj contained an allocation of $200,000 to be used by 2/01/88 Caltrans to study ways to improve access to the Dumbarton Bridge for traffic destined for or going from areas to the south of the Bridge. The study was not limited to a new southern approach road but was broadly worded to allow study of a variety of ways to improve the traffic connection from the south. Mr. Dudley noted that an important part of the proposed sales tax -related projects would be acquisition of the Southern Pacific right-of-way and bridge that currently crossed the Bay from Redwood City to Fremont. Southern Pacific was not using the right-of-way and wanted to dispose of it. Mr. Dudley and other San Mateo County representa- tives wanted to facilitate initiation of train service to and from the East Bay. Mr. Tedesco reviewed the status of Caltrans corridor plan- ning for the area between the Dumbarton Bridge and route 101, noting that projections indicated the need for substan- tially more traffic -carrying capacity by the year 2000 and beyond, but that there was a limited number of specific projects likely to be pursued. He noted the importance of the role of local jurisdictions in initiating and supporting projects to improve transportatin capacity. In response to a question from Council Member Cobb, he indicated that the growth projections were based on work done by MTC and Association of Bay Area Government..s (ABAG), and he believed reflected levels of growth comparable to recent growth levels in the Bay Area. He noted the attractiveness of the Bay Area and indicated it was reasonable to assume that new transportation facilities, especially roadways, would be used to a high level of activity almost immediately upon opening. In response to a question regarding the potential traffic generation resulting from new facilities, he indi- cated that new facilities often resulted in traffic being reduced on local streets, and that was a major benefit of many new facilities. After a series of questions from Council Members, Chief Transportation Official Marvin Overway reviewed recent City actions regarding the Dumbarton Bridge and the approach roads. Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber indicated the study session was intended to identify a variety of activities all of which had some direct relationship to the Dumbarton Bridge and its approach roads. A perspective that had not been emphasized in the discussion thus far was the sense of increasing frustration and anger on the part of East Bay commuters regarding the difficulty o►f the Dumbarton commute, and pressure on East Bay legislators to facilitate some improvement in the Dumbarton corridor. City policies regarding the issue had not been seriously reviewed for a substantial period Of time, and it might well be appropriate for the Council to 59--199 2/01/88,. initiate further discussion of Dumbarton issues, including policies and objectives regarding the carrying capacity of the Bridge, the capacity and configuration of approach roads, and the role of rail and bus transit across the Bay. After presentation from members of the public, including comments from Alan Nagy, a member of the City of Newark City Council, the study session adjourned at 9:40 p.m. COUNCIL -RECESSED FROM 9:40 P.M. TO 9:54 P.M. The regular meeting of the City Council reconvened at 9:54 p.m. it the Council Chambers. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Arden Anderson, 807 Oregon Avenue, President of Neighbors Abroad, said they had 18 visitors from their four Sister Cities scattered �,,. , ����.:.� over a two-week period to celebrate the 25th anniversary of Neighbors Abroad. He thanked the Council for their support. Edmund Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding honesty in government. He had received no response to his request for an interpretation of "Greater public access," and to Council Members to give a valid reason for the destruction of Palo Alto Harbor. 3. R. J. Debs, 3145 Flowers Lane, spoke to the Dumbarton Bridge. He warned that allowing the southern approach to get into 101 with the promise there would be only a connection to the southbound 1011 was like letting the head of a camel into a tent. Palo Alto did not need another "Oregon Exp: easway, " splitting the City in three. 4. Dr. Nancy Jewell Cross, 301 Vine Street, Menlo Park, spoke for Clean Air Transport Systems, and said op nor tu- nities to address the traffic situation with intelligent transportation development within their reasonable local control were the TDA Article 3 funds for pedestrian and bicycle purposes and the San Franscquito Creek corridor which offered an opportunity to make attractive trans- portation options to decrease traffic in the corridor. She showed transparencies and said another option was intelligent bus service. 5. Omar Chatty, ]8216A Hale Avenue, Morgan :sill, distri- buted information (on file in the City Clerk's office) in regard to the Southern California Auto Club's Year 2000 projection for what they needed to help their 2/01 /200 transportation problems, a letter to the MTC supporting CalTrain it the present funding issue, and an editorial from the Mercury News on light rail. The Bay Area needed to look at a comprehensive highway -oriented transportation solution as well as transit. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 4,_1988 Council Member Cobb submitted corrections to pages 59-91 and 59-112 on behalf of Council Member Woolley. MOTION: Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Cobb, approval of the Minutes of January 4, 1988, as corrected. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Woolley absent. 1. APPOINTMENTS TO VISUAL ARTS JURY (702-05) MOTION: Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Cobb, to appoint the three applicants (Braunstein, McCraley, Montgomery) to the three, three-year terms. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Woolley absent. Mayor Sutorius congratulated the appointees and welcomed them to the Visual Arts Jury. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Council !Member M1ein moved, seconded by Renzel, approval of the Consent Calendar. Council Member Patitucci removed Item 2 for discussion. 2. CONTRACT WITH DMC ENERGY INC. INTELFAC INC. AND ALL AMERICAN INSULATION, INC. , FOR INSPECTION CORRECTION OF CELLULOSE ATTIC INSULATION (CMR:140;8) (1410.01) Council Member Patitucci asked about the discrepancy in the hourly rates in the two approved contracts for what appeared to be the same work. Assistant City Manager June Fleming said the rate was the Intelfac's estimate of how much it would cost them to do the work, and that was why staff had constructed awarding of the bid in such a way that DMC would do the majority of the work. The work needed to be inspected and, therefore, only a small portion of the contract would go to Intelfac for inspecting the work done by DMC. 59-201 2/01/88 Council Member Patitucei understood All American Insulation; Inc., would do the inspection. Ms. Fleming said All American would only do a portion of the inspection. Council Member Patitucci understood the reason for two com- panies was to give more capacity. Given the fact the project might extend over a long period of time, a better price seemed more important than .capacity. Ms. Fleming said a primary reason for, awarding the work to more than one bidder was so a company did not inspect its own work. The majority of the cost for the project was in doing the initial inspection and the repair resulting from that, and it seemed wiser to have someone else inspect that work. Staff could not determine the reason for the differ- ences in the basic bids, although they questioned the company which responded there was no mistake in the bid. All American would only be called in an emergency and Intelfac could not do the inspection. She explained the process was that DMC would go to a home and inspect the insulation. If DMC determined there was a problem with the installation, they would correct it. Upon completion, to assure quality control and that a person was not verifying his own work, Intelfac would be called in for the third step. Council Member Patitucci asked if two people from DMC could inspect each other's work to keep the costae. down. He could not support paying two and one-half times the hourly rate for the same 'work. He said the sentence in the staff report (CMR:140:8) which read, "Staff continued to await develop- ments from relevant state and federal agencies and cellulose industry experts which may significantly affect the final resolution of the issue of cellulose flammability," empha- sized the City was spending a great deal of money on the project In anticipation of a problem that they did not know existed, and he believed they were exposing themselves to greater risks and liabilities by the inspection/correction process than if they waited for better data. He would not support the motion. Vice Mayor Klein shared some of Council Member Patitucci's with regard to the price and noted page 2 of the staff report was revised for clarification. He emphasized the. majority of the work was to be done at $15.45 an hour, and there was a significant difference between "Primary inspec- tion and repair," to be done by DMC and "Primacy quality control examination," to be done by Intelfac. If, as he expected,. most of the primary inspections showed no need for repair, Intelfac would never be involved in that house. 59-202 2/01/88 MOTION PASSED by a vote of 6-1, Patitucci voting "no," Levy, Woolley absent. 3. REPORT FROM CITY/SCHOOL LIAISON COMMITTEE (NPG) Vice Mayor Klein reported the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) would at that point like to take Jordan School out of the lease. As the lease was presently writ- ten, the PAUSD could delay putting Jordan in the lease but could not take it out unless the Council agreed to a change in the for€hula. The Council had always indicated it would be amenable to discussing that. The PAUSD had been told that the Council would consider it if the PAUSD wanted to substitute something else for Jordan, but it had to be some- thing of comparable value. The PAUSD had proposed a number of things, and he and Council Member Cobb had proposed alternatives, and there was a good spirit of trying to find an agreement although it was not certain that one could be found. The PAUSD had proposed a combination of things. They had suggested the City take over space at Cubberley, but that had certain problems with regard to usability, how much capital cost needed to be incurred to make the prop- erties useful, and parking. He and Council Member Cobb had suggested there would be space available if the PAUSD returned to a four -secondary -school configuration and they should lease the City part of that space. The PAUSD# s con- cern was they did not know what that space would be until they finished their configuration studies at the end of the year. As trade-offs for Jordan, he and Council Member Cobb had suggested extending the period of time on the Covenant Not to Develop from 15 to 20 years or that part of the money paid to the PAUSD be regarded as a credit against any future purchase by the City of a secondary school site. The PAUSD was reluctant on both points. They were examining a tempo- rary rental of a portion of Jordan for the time when Lucie Stern would be closed at the end of the year and going into a ;substantial portion of 1989, and that might be feasible. All points were still on the table, and the Liaison Committee was working through them. Council Member Cobb said the concept of the City earning credit towards the purchase of Cubberley and Jordan was not the preferred solution. Other issues discussed were the possible use of space by some of the arts groups in the community, and PAUSD suggested putting in some significant improvements to the playing fields at elementary schools. The City was under prey ure _from pEY3cple in the community to provide the full $3 million anticipated under the Utility Users Tax immediately. However, he and Vice Mayor Klein took the firm view that the City should receive value for its investment, and he believed the public was supportive of. that position. 59.203 2/01/88 Vice Mayor Klein said that Council Member Cobb and ha wrote a memorandum to the PAUSD Board members suggesting the matter be handled on an interim basis for one year until they knew what their configuration would be and what space they would have available. Council Member Renzel appreciated the hard work done by Vice Mayor Klein and Council Member Cobb with the thorny problem, and she concurred the public expected to get value for the tax upon which they voted. She was certain the arts' commu- nity was a strong supporter of the Utility Users Tax in anticipation of additional facilities being made available to them. That point should not be lost of the School Board in their negotiations. From the proposals, it sounded as if the PAUSD was offering small pieces of a variety of prop- erties, and she understood many of the facilities needed a lot of work before they as a City could safely occupy them. She personally preferred concentrating on one site and making the capital improvements count for something. Improving a variety of properties of the PAUSD in order to justify giving them some money did not serve the City well in terms of staff time and energies expended. Mayor Sutorius echoed that a yoeman's effort was being applied which went beyond the weekly meeting time. In addi- tion to the time and skill of Vice Mayor Klein and Council Member Cobb, staff was heavily involved. 4. VICE MAYOR LARRY KLEIN RE CITY COUNCIL'S POLICY FOR REIMBURSABLE TRAVEL EXPENSES (701) Vice Mayor Klein said staff's policy was to submit expenses and get reimbursed. It was pointed out that a per diem that was not accountable might be inappropriate when City Council Members traveled to a town where a hotel room could be rented for $40 a night. It was probably more appropriate that the public be able to see how much was actually spent, and the problem of "fronting" for the money could be handled by a cash advance. NOTION: Vice Mayor Klein moved, seconded by Cobb, to direct the City Attorney to prepare a (resolution which allows City Council Members to be reimbursed for actual expenses for lodging and meals. AMENDl F.NT I Council. Member pati tucci .• moved, seconded by Mensal, to leave the $75 per diem as an option=,, mayor Sutorius asked if the per diem was the $75 presently in Council procedure. 59-204 2/01/88 Council Member Patitucci said yes; for the items identified, i.e., lodging and meals. Mayor Sutorius asked if Council Member Patitucci anticipated any other expenses being vouchered and the miscellaneous expense item, handled as $35 per trip, would not apply. There was a question whether the amendment was appropriate in that it moved the status quo. Council Member Patitucci understood a per diem of $75 for lodging and meals was payable. in advance. That would have been deleted under the motion to actual expenses forlodging and meals. His amendment was for a per diem of $75 or actual expenses if the person travelling cared to submit those. He assumed paragraph 3 related to other expenses, and the amendment . referred to lodging and meals. His under- standing was that for lodging and meals, the Council Members could receive $75 or submit actual expenses. If that was already the case, he would not want to change its He did not believe they should be encouraged to stay in a hotel rather than with a friend. AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN BY MAKER AND SECOND Vice Mayor Klein did not believe it was appropriate for the Council to have a different and easier policy than staff, nor to profit from travels on behalf of the City. Council Member Patitucci's example of staying with a friend was a good one, and he believed they should go to actual expenses. Council Member Fletcher commented that she always documented her expenses and in most cases reimbursed the City for the difference between her expenses and the allowance. She did not feel strongly one way or another. The fact they received more than they actually needed did not mean they could not reimburse the City. Council Member Patitucci did not see any reason to change the system. From his experience, systems that paid a flat per diem ended up costing companies less and $75 was reasonable. He saw no compulsion to change the option :and did not believe they were being unfair to staff. He opposed the proposal. Council Member Renzelagreed With Council Member Patitucci. Council Members were not paid a great deal and did .not have people to help assemble all the receipts from meals,. etc. If the intent of the motion was that expenses above $75 would be reimbursed, the existing policy covered that. 59-205 2/01/88 MOTION PASSED by a vote of 4-3, Fletcher, Patitucci, Menzel voting "no," Levy, Woolley absent. ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned at 10:40 p.m. ATTEST: 1 APPROVED: 59-206 2/01/88