Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-05-11 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MINUTES -PALOALTOCITYCOUNCILMEETINGS ARE UROADCASTLiVEVIA KM- FREOIJENCY90.1 ON FM DIAL ------- Regular Meeting May 11, 1987 ITEM Oral Cr rnmu n i ca t i on s Minutes of April 13, 1987 PAGE 57-176 57-177 1. City of Mountain View Vice Mayor Maryce 57-177. Freelen re Solid Taste Report Consent Calendar Referral 2. 1987/88 Budget - Refer to Finance and Public Works Committee Action 3. Construction Contact with Stevens Creek Quarry for Landfill State I Closure Project for $124,782 4. Contract with Pacific Contractors, in.. , for the Water Main Replacement Project, Phase I, in the Amount of $259,849 5. Contract with Murphy and Associates for Internal Service Fund Program Consultant Service in the Amount of $5,000 6. Garage Fans Control System - Rejection of Bids, .CIP d5-08 7. Ordinance 3749 Amending the Park Regula- tions Ordinance to Prohibit Fires Except in City Provided Barbecues, Fire Rings and Other Such Fixtures 57.178 57-178 57-178 57-179 57-179 57-179 57-179 57-174 5/11/87 ITEM PAGE 8. Policy and Projedures Committee Recom- 57-179 mendation re Review of the Proposal to Operate the Arastra Stable Recess from 9:33 p.m. to 9:47 p.m. 57-201 9. Resolution to Establish a Service Author- 57-205 ity for Freeway Emergencies 10. Resolution re Public Power Fuel Cell 57-207 Demonstration Project Adjournment at 10:30 p.m, 57-211 Regular Meeting Monday, May 11, 1987 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:35 p.m. PRESENT: Cobb, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Pati tucci , Renzei, Sutorius, Woolley ABSENT: Bechtel`•,, Mayor Woolley announced a Special Joint Meeting with City Council/Visual Arts Jury re Byxbee Park Design, Percent for Art Ordinance, and Review of Permanent Collection was held at 6:00 p.m. in the council Conference Room. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Toby Sterling, La Para Avenue, voiced concerns for the kids at the Palo Alto Children's Theatre, particularly those involved in the cas.t and crew of the ongoing show. Recently the Palo Alto `-Children's Theatre stage was closed as a result of. the fire curtain not meeting the requirements of Palo Alto City -law. Last summer, the theatre hired a corporation to fix any safety p,►.;oblems the theatre might have, and the problems presently experienced were..the-result of that -company's failure. The show had been postponed and possibly canceled depending on the speed at which the problem could be fixed which caused a good deal of trouble for the kids who had summer plans but still wanted to do the show, not to mention .-the many adults who bought tiekets. They would appreciate any help -Council could •give to speed correction of the problem due td legal work. It was particularly important now at the 50th anniversary of ethe theatre. Perhaps the many people who had recently. recognized its value as an institution could put. their words into helpfule action iri its time -Of need. 2. Larry Faber, 3127 David Avenue, said the Arastra Advisory. Committee in its report recommended a trail going from the Arastra property through the City park to the Los Tr.anco_s Open Space Preserve. Some years ago, Council appointeda committee to find a proper route for the trail. A committee was formed and put the trail together, and he asked the present status of that. trail. Mayor Woolley felt sure staff would contact Mr. Faber. 57=176 5/11/87 APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF APRIL 13 1987 Council Member Patitucci had the following correction:, Page 57-59, sixth paragraph, line 7, "state" should read "City." MOTION: Council Member Cobb moved, seconded by Sutorius, approval of the Minutes of April 13, 1987, as corrected. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 7-0-1, Levy "abstaining," Bechtel absent. 1. CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW VICE MAYOR MAR10E FREELEN RE SOLID WASTE REPORT -(1072) City of Mountain View Vice Mayor Maryce Freelen spoke as Palo Alto's representative on the Solid Waste Management Committee of the Intergovernmental Council (IGC) a.nd , intro- duced Neil Beck from the committee. She said the problems of solid waste management were catching up and was an enor- mous -problem and concern to them all. The committee ~°'anted to increase the information and knowledge of everyone; par- ticularly people who would be making decisions about what would be happening in the County in that area. They';were about to review the County plan and were also workiri'g on revising the subregioual policy and. would be returning to Council with an addition on importation of garbage within the County within a few months. Vice Mayor Sutorius was curious to know how the committee would summarize, proceedings with respect to. the availability of Kirby Canyon` to other than the City of San Jose. Mr. Neil Beck said San Jose was currently in the process of reviewing their positions as to the availability of land- fills in San Jose to outside cities within the County. Ho did not believe they had trade a decision at that . point. .He understood that landfill space would- be a va ilabie but had not become official. Mayor Woolley asked the current position of the County in terms of asking for intervenor status regarding the Combustion Engineering project in Redwood City. Ms. Freelen said they were in the process of filing for intervenor status at that paint in time. Mayor Woolley clarified the County was going to do that. MS. Freelen said not the County but the IGC; there would be agencies within the County that would be intervenors. 57-177 5/11/87 Mr. Beck said at the last meeting there was information to go to each City recommending tnat each City file their own intervenor status on the issue. The IGC Solid Waste Committee would file simply as a matter to monitor, not necessarily to reply. If it then needed to be filed offi- cially, they would already have the open window to do so. Mayor Woolley asked whether the committee had looked at all at the next best step cities, such as Palo Alto, should take in order to increase the amount of recycled material. Mr. Beck said basically the City would expand from its cur- rent curbside to multi -family. Once the City developed in those areas, it would foe looking at commercial/industrial business locations that had the potential and would develop the necessary programs. Council Member Fletcher said even though Palo Alto was in the forefront in participation rate, the total waste stream diverted into recycling was about 7 percent. That wee a fraction of what happened in some European countries, and Japan had 80-90 percent recycling.: She asked about -the pos- sibility of the Solid Waste Management Committee gathering material and presenting a day -long workshop on the poten- tials for substantially more recycling. Ms. Freelen believed the Committee would be examining the issue in the future. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Council Meter Klein moved, seconded by Cobb, to approve the Consent Calendar. Referral 2. 1987/88 BUDGET - REFER TO FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE 1280-03) Action 3. CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH STEVENS CREEK QUARRY FOR LANDFILL STAGE I CLOSURE PROJECT FOR $124/782 (CMR:247:7) 1072-01) Staff is authorized to execute change orders of up to $19_000. 57-178 5/11/87 CONSENT CALENDAR CONTINUED 4. CONTRACT WITH PACIFIC CONTRACTORS, INC., FOR THE WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT, PHASE I, IN THE AMOUNT OF $259,849 (CMR:251:7) (1120) Staff is authorized to execute change orders to the con- struction contract in the amount of $40,000, to cover unforeseen extra work. 5. CONTRACT WITH MURPHY AND ASSOCIATES FOR INTERNAL SERVICE FUND PROGRAM CONSULTANT SERVICE IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,000 (CMR:248:7) (603-1) 6. GARAGE FANS CONTROL SYSTEM -- REJECTION OF BIDS, CIP 85.08 (CMR:240:7) (810-01-01) 7. ORDINANCE 3749 Entitled "ORDINANCE or THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE PARK REGULATIONS ORDI- NANCE TO PROHIBIT FIRES EXCEPT IN CITY PROVIDED BARBECUES, FIRE RINGS AND OTHER SUCH FIXTURES" (1st Reading 4/27/87, PASSED i-0, Cobb absent) (1321) MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. 8. POLICY AND PROCEDURES pOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION RE REVIEW OF THE PROPOSAL TO OPERATE THE ARASTRA STABLE (CMR:250:7) (1321-31) MOTION: Council Member Renzel for the Policy and Procedures Committee moved, if the Council desires to pro- ceed with the proposal as submitted by the Arastra Stable Committee, using the existing John Marthens Lane, to: 1. Direct staff to prepare a Request for Proposal (RFP) to select an outside consultant to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) which would include scenarios for both the approved hostel operation and the proposed stable operation on the Arastradero Preserve. Consid- eration of the proposed stable operation should include the environmental •impact of the possible relocation of the 22 horses from the 77 acres to the Preserve south of Arastradero Road. The hostel and stable would contract directly with 'the consultant and pay for the entire oast of the EIR; and 2.. Direct staff to discontinue development of the Arastradero Preserve until the Council can make further decisions on the . use of the Preserve based on the findings of the EIR. 57-179 5/11/87 Council Member Renzel said the P&P Committee requested staff to explore with the homeowners on"John Marthens Lane their willingness t.o fund the unfunded portion of the safer, Alternate 1 road and had a response the homeowners were not interested. '&P Committee also directed staff to make fur- ther review of the Planning Commission and City Council. documentation, deliberation, and decisions pertinent to the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) negative declaration work already accomplished on the overall undertaking and that the review be for two purpose.,, 1. To provide Council on receipt of the issue further analysis of the current staff recommendation that an EIR is, in tact, required;• and 2. To provide Council with updated input beyond what was currently available on the questions of any feasible means by which a hostel operation could be undertaken prior to the completion_ of an EIR it, in fact, an EIR still remains to be done. Zoning Administrator Bob Brown believed the key issue for discussion that evening which would be the form of environ- mental review necessary for the implementation of the Arastradero Preserve Master Plan. Two actions which would occur subsequent to approval by the City Council for the park plan would be an additional environmental assessment. The first was the required improvements to John Marthens Lane which Council mandated. That process would involve a site and design approval by the Planning Commission and Council and additional environmental review would be neces- sary. Secondly, the City Attorney determined that the leases for both the stable and the youth hostel were proj- ects as defincd by the California Environmental :Quality Act (CEQA) and would, therefore, also require subsequent envi- ronmental. review. Mayor Woolley clarified Council could not enter into a con- tract or a lease with either the hostel or stable people w;thrwt triggering the need for an EIR and could not make any repairs to John Marthens Lane without triggering an EIR. Senior Assistant City Attorney Sandy Sloan clarified some furtherenvironmental review was needed and the question was what form was necessary. Staff looked at whether an EIA concluding with a negative declaration �d ` e prepared, d o �.�* i-� r Q L .i. V i i could t3.8. L.Z I..t C or whether staff would recommend an EIR be .prepared. As out- lined in the staff report (CMR:250:7), staff concluded for the hostel alone an EIA would probably be sufficient. When the stable was added in with the hostel and the improvements 57-180 5/11/87 to John Marthens Lane, the environmental effects became potentially significant enough that staff recommended an EIR be prepared. There were changes since the original EIA in 1984. First, the stable now proposed to keep 50 acres of pastureland under their lease rather than release them back to the City. The land was about one -tenth cr one -fourteenth of public park land, and staff saw the decision to keep the land under the'control of the stable as a significant land - use decision, and it was also significant regarding the possible environmental effects. CEQA required that if a fair argument that a project might have a significant effect on the environment could be made, an EIR should be prepared. The law said in marginal cases if there was significant pub- lic controversy, the balance was tipped in favor of doing an EIR. The fact there was significant public controversy over continuing with the proposed uses before Council tipped staff's decision in favor of preparing an EIR. Mayor Woolley claa:,ified executing a`. lease with the hostel but not with the stable probably would not trigger an EIR. She asked about the reverse situation, i.e., executing a lease with the_ stable and not the hostel. Ms. Sloan believed that would open the City to more risk because of the pastureland issue. Council Member Patitucci did not see in any of staff's analysi3 of the proposal from the Arastra Stable Committee any numbers that showed the City's exposure financially at any one point in time. He understood any improvements made to John Marthens Lane, to the alternate route, or to ensure the stable could operate, would be financed by the City, and the City would be paid back over time, and that period of time would be a function of the revenues the stable gener- ated. If the City, in effect. was the banker for the proposal, what were the dollar amounts and when. Manager, Real Property, William Fellman, said the_ City would have essentially all the exposure. Under the $85,000 improvement, the City would pay for $14,500; the remainder being_ paid by the hostel and stable. The City would collect over the term of the lease with interest. Council Member Patitucci asked if the idea of the hostel and stable getting the money elsewhere and paying for the improvements . had been explored. Then they would be obli- gated to a third party rather than to the City. City Manager Bill Zanor believed it was determined-:., the hostel and stable had no other source of revenue. 57--181 5/:1.1/87 Council Member Patitucci asked for an explanation between :that approach and the one contained in the original RFPs when the City asked for private operators to make an approach that would not cause the City any financial risk, exposure, or any out-of-pocket costs. Mr. Fellman replied it was not an issue to make improvements to John Marthens Lane when the first RFPs were put out. In the original RFP, the City required certain improvements be made to the stable by those bidding for the right to operate the stable, to be paid in the same way as currently proposed for John Marthens Lane. Council. Member Patitucci clarified it would have been less expensive for a private operator than it was now for the nonprofit. If it was now financially feasible for a non- profit with greater financial obligations, he asked why the City did not invite private operators to put their money in so the City would not have the financial exposure. Mr. Fellman said when the original RFP was put out to the private sector, the City did not receive any proposals back. The people with horses at the stable put together the pro- posal to continue the operation. It was not a money -making operation; therefore, he did not believe the private sector would be interested. Council Member Patitucci was concerned that private opera- tors did not submit proposals for the operation. He asked if there was discussion with the proponents for their bonding or putting up money in case the operation fell through -so the City would get' its money back. Mr. Fellman said no. Council Member Klein asked about the interest charged on the amount of money the City would be advancing. Mr. Fellman said the interest was the current rate of return the City received for its investments. Council Member Klein said the proposal was based signifi- cantly on the use of the 77 acres north of Arastradero for pasturing, and he asked if that was part of earlier pro- posals. Mr. Fellman said yes. Council Member Klein asked if the same proportion of revenue was being attributable to the 77 acres. 57-182 5/11/87 Mr. Fellman said the number of horses on the 77 acres by the Arastra Stable Committee was an increase of 11 over the original RFP. Council Member Klein asked whether staff believed the alter- native road was a good idea, taking into account the cost, other needs for funds in the City, and particularly whether it would have a visual impact on the use of the property by others. Mr. Zaner replied it had been his consistent position, whether it was the original $385,000 road or one at lesser expense, that other places deserved the expenditure of the funds more than the subject road. Council was currently reviewing infrastructure deficiencies in the system and knew additional funds were desperately needed on other roads and highwaysE. He recommended the funds be expended there and not on a roadway of relatively limited usage. The question of whether the road constituted an intrusion into the park was a matter of some difference of opinion. The roadway cut up through the middle of a relatively. unspoiled piece of property, although there was presently a fire road. Some could argue that an improved road that handled additional traffic would despoil the area and detract from it; others could have a different opinion. Mayor Woolley referenced the staples and asked if the City Attorney saw any conflicts' -in the Committee's proposal with the City's normal definitions of what kinds of operations could occur on park -dedicated land. City Attorney Diane Northway said statf-was concerned about such a large usage of fenced -pasture on park -dedicated land. The traditional use of parkland was land that was open and accessible to the public which was not consistent with the proposal. There had been suggestions for additional public access as part of the proposal , but she was not sure those would solve the problem of the environmental issue with respect to the road and the traffic on the road. It was a two-edged sword: The more access encouraged, the more traf- fic encouraged; and the more traffic encouraged, the more environmental problems. On the other -hand, if access was not provided and 50 acres of land was penned off where people could hike and there could be trails, the land was taken out of vistal4 park use for,the exclusive use of the people who had . horses . there.. She believed that created probleles under the Park Dedication Ordinance. Mayor Woolley asked if there was any problem withthe use of the stable itself and who kept horses there that would be in conflict with the park ordinance. 572-18s3 5/11/87 Ms. Northway believed there was language about applicants having to present references from veterinary clinics and previous boarding establishments. The City would take the approach that keeping horses at the stable should be on, a first-come/first-served basis. That was the most open and accessible approach for that kind of exclusive use of park property. Mayor Woolley asked for a ballpark value of a ten -acre parcel with a nine -acre easement if Council were to decide to raise money in that fashion. Mr. Fe,liman said the value depended on what could be done with the nine -acre easement. If it was left in park alone without any building allowed, he believed the ten -acre parcel would take on the value of a one -acre parcel because only one acre would be available for use, The school district sold sites on a gene -acre value of about $230,000 for unimproved land. If a -ten-a :re site was sold without the nine -acre exclusive park use, Mr. Reimer used $2 per square foot in his estimate of the road value, which was about $800,000 for the ten -acre site. Mayor Woolley asked if Council was unable to take action that evening due to lack of', consensus, did the previous action hold where Council agreed to' close the stable and- continue with the hostel. Ms. Northway believed Council's previous action would hold. If Councilwas unable to reach a consensus that evening, she believed it was probably advisable to continue the issue to a meeting with full Council. Council Member Levy referenced the costs of the original RFP versus the current recommendation and asked if the reason for no bidders on the original proposal relative to the stable was because it included a demand for a fair amount of capital improvement expenditure not contemplated in the cur- rent proposal. Mr. Fe.iiman . said the only items taken out of the original RFP were a bicycle rack and reconstruction of the riding ring. The Arastra Stable Committee believed a ring was essential to the continuation of their operation. Council Member Levy assumed the question about the value of the housing was designed to elicit a clarification of the. value of the house on one acre of land. Mr. Feilman said that was not his understanding. He under- stood the question referred to a ten -acre vacant site at the end of the blacktop portion of John Marthens Lane just inside the Arastradero Preserve. 57-.184 5/11/87 Council Member Levy asked staff's judgment of the house there on one -acre of land with a nine -acre easement exclu- sively devoted to park use. Mr. Fellman said at least $1 million. Council Member Klein asked who would have priority for use in the stable if the proposal went through. He understood the people who presently boarded there horses there would have priority, and most of those people were not residents of Palo Alto. Mr. Wellman said yes. Council Member Klein asked if Council as a condition of their approval could require that the list start over again with priority given to Palo Alto residents or on a lottery basis. Ms. Northway said absolutely; that was called for at the minimum under the City,'s Park Dedication Ordinance. It should be remembered the stable was on park -dedicated property and some means had to found to make the facility open and accessible to the public, at least on the one-time basis. She did not believe that had been done. Conditions could be some kind of lottery and a requirement that a mini- mum percent be Palo Alto residents. Mr. Wellman said the proposal committee was made up of people who had horses at the stable. It would herd to have their horses not be there. There were a number of vacancies at present, and it would be easy to fill the vacancies with Palo . Alto people as there was a Palo Alto list and a non - Palo Alto list. Council Member Patitucci asked whether the general public, and primarily Palo Alto residents, would have access to the hostel facility in a way that met the requirements of dedi- cated parkland under the City Charter. Ms. Northway said the use of the hostel by any one person or group of people would not be exclusive. There would be con- stant rotation of who was able to use the facility, and that rotation constituted the openness a:Id accessibility given the nature of the facility.__. I.n rege,rd to the stable,there was not the rotation because the horses would stay there and not change. Council Member Patitucci asked whether "the public" was defined as the public in general or as Palo Alto residents. He understood it would be a rare Palo Alto resident who would spend a night at the hostel. The turnover would not be Palo Alto residents. 57-185 5/11/87. Ms. Northway did not dispute that statement, but the hostel was open and accessible to Palo Alto residents. As an abstraction, anyone could use the facility which was not<, true with respect to the stable. Mayor Woolley asked what would need to be done to John Alan: thens Lane if Council decided to close the stable opera- tion and continue the hostel operation. Chief Transportation Official Marvin Overway said the improvements appropriate to that activity had previously been identified as being in the order of $28,000 and involved cape sealing, signs --some of which had already been erected --tree trimming and delineators. Council Member Renzel clarified the 20 round trips for the hostel activity would still warrant significant activity if the stable operation was closed. Mr. Overway said all those improvements would be recommended if the hostel only was in operation. Council Member Renzel clarified staff was recommending the improvements for the current operation of the Arastra prop- erty as well. ,Mr. Overway said the cape sealing was primarily for bicy- clists who were more oriented towards using the hostel than the stable. Lewis Litzky, Sausalito, was President of the Board of Directors of the Golden Gate Council oft American Youth Hostels (AYH) and a member- of the National Board of Directors at AYH. He asked that Council not be hostile to the hostel. AYH was part of the International Federation of Youth Hostels but were fairly new in the country and tackling some big projects throughout the country and con- sidered the subject project a prime one in Palo Alto. They put in a lot of effort, resources, ;and staff ,time and felt they had been pushed around and delayed. By the present time a lease should have been signed and they should be on the way to opening the hostel. -- They had succeeded in getting over 300 individual contributors to raise $90,000 for -the project and were ready to go but could not keep delaying indefinitely. He did not believe turning the hos- teI .area over ,to private <?perators would work nor be in the community interests. A private operator who paid $100,000 for the improvements would charge such high fees, that the facility would be 4 resort and not benefit- the community. AYH wanted to, and Would make the hostel available to t ;e Palo Alto community. They successfully operated a Youth 57-186 5/11/87 Adventure Program and an Elder Hostel Program in all five Bay Area hostels. The Youth Adventure Program brought kids out of the cities and into the hostels to let them learn about nature and the national parks. All five hostels were currently in national parks. They wanted to make the hostel available for daytime use by the community, but he under- stood that had been turned down. He strongly encouraged Council to go ahead, take the risk, and approve the lease for the hostel. Jeffrey Shopoff, 2310 Washington Street, spoke as a member of the Board of Directors of the Golden Gate Council AYH, and expressed their strong commitment to operating the youth hostel. He understood it was the commitment of the Council more than two years ago when they approved the operation of - that facility. When the Council approved that plan, it called for the hostel to be opened some months ago. AYH had done everything that was asked of them. They raised the $100,000 to improve the house and make it usable. They had monthly meetings and had a large group of supporters of Palo Alto residents. Their executive director who had some five hostels they owned and many others they licensed and many staff, was responsible for all that and had been spending a third of her time on the project in questions They were frustrated at every turn. The best way to '. i? 1 a project was to throw up costly hurdles. Three years later they heard the suggestion there should be en EIR. He strongly disagreed with that suggestion and took issue with the specifics of the staff report which said there had been changes _since the negative declaration. That was not true; nothing had changed. The three things identified in the staff report did not constitute a change. The project on which a negative declaration was filed was a much less intensive project because it assumed greater vehicular traf fic and greater participation during the day. The public, controversy had not increased in the past two years. It was misleading that staff had conducted a more in-depth analysis of the traffic because the ac tua- traffic had greatly decreased from the negative declaration. Only a handful of cars would use John Marthens Lane under the circumstances. Council believed the project was a good one mere than two years -ago. Had staff given the lease Council instructed and AYH asked tor, they would currently be operating a youth hostel for the benefit of mahy people. People from Palo Alto would visit the hostel because it was unique. Council Member Klein - gathered Mr. Shopoff and. his organizations- felt very strongly that an EIR was unnecessary but asked who would puy for the lawsuit if the City Attorney was right and AYH wrongs 57-187 5/11/87 Mr. Shopoft said he did not know; AYH was paying for all the improvements and he supposed that question would be subject to more negotiation. Council Member Klein said in the staff report there was a suggestion that in ether places, when applicants felt strongly that an EIR was not necessary, they agreed to indemnify the City in question against any costs that might result from litigation. 14r. Shopoff was familiar with that, but also knew AYH had limited funds He said perhaps the City might like to bar- gain with them for sharing some of the costs of the improve- ment of the building in return for that. Council Member Klein asked how Mr. Shopoff proposed the City avoid needless costs of litigation. Mr. Shopoff believed one way was not to bow to the idle threat of litigation. Susan Ivy, 1983 San Luis, Mountain View, thanked Council for the consideration of their proposal. They had been able to demonstrate considerable public support. Over 1,700 letters had been submitted to the {'i y in support of the proposal to keep the stable open, and over half the letters came from Palo Alto residents. The proposal; was endorsed by staff and the P&P Committee, and they sincerely -hoped Council would accept it. The proposal conformed to all the City require- ments that were initially given: the stable would be managed independently of the City; the stable would be financially independent of the City; it would be able to finance its share of the .road debt which was identified to them as $57,000 at 9 percent interest.; and they would be able to keep traffic at a minimum. In addition, they addressed . the problem of public access quite extensively. Being aware that only 50 or 60.people would be able to board at the facility, they wanted to implement a program whereby Palo Alto residents would have preference. They would main- tain two separate lists and Palo .Alto residents would have the, first option for every opening. available, and the opening would only be offered to other area residents if every Palo Alto resident had turned it down. In addition, they wanted to develop public service programs involving communty_ education and disabled riding, which would 'directly benefit the citizens of Palo Alto and would be More - than wining to work with City staff to come up with more ways _to do that. They believed the concept'of the stable as a isolated entity, remote from the population, was wrong and that more people should be -able to visit the stable, learn about. horses in a structured environment, and perhaps 57-188 5/11/87 develop an interest in a new sport. The additional require- ment that had been proposed to finance an EIR was not included in the proposal since they were unaware it would be an issue- Unfortunately, she did not see any way to raise the money up front and would have to request that become part of the long-term debt. They were willing to work with the City as the lead agency on the matter of the environ- mental assessment. The reasons given for an EIR in the staff documentation to date seemed inconsistent. The traf- fic estimate in the May 7, 1987 report (CMR:250:7) added the hostel traffic to the April traffic; which added up o 100 trips a day. The trips generated by the residents of the house should be subtracted which put the number of trips into the ballpark identified in the 1984 EIA. After reviewing the EIA, she agreed with the hostel representa- tives that traffic to the hostel was considered in that document on page 21. The staff recommendation the hostel be allowed to operate without an EIR only in the case that the stable be closed was unnecessary and placed the stable in an adversarial position with -the hostel people. They had worked hard at staying -in a cooperative mode. It was also counter to the original City recommendation, and she could not feel -it was justified by any information presented to date. It was time to move forward. If the proposal- toy.. retain the 50 acres was truly such a massive problem, they were willing to give it up and proceed with the original plan which involved putting all the horses in paddocks at the stable.__ That would have a small increase on traffic but would much reduce the impact, according to staff, on the park environment. The stable was currently being operated as a contract, a.nd they would like to assume that contract. and work with staff towards an amicable solution to the difficulties. The stable would be run in accordance with the proposal, and they, would have increased supervision, increased maintenance, and begin increased public activity. They began the proposal to operate as a nonprofit corpora- tion nine months ago and many people had given their time and energy. Vice Mayor Sutorius asked if Ms. Ivy would like her response regarding the 77 -acre aspect of the proposal on the record (on 'file in the City Clerk's office). Ms. Ivy said basically the Arastra Stable Committee :identi- fied three scenarios for the 77 acres: 1) if the 77 acres: were closed belt they were able to move all the horses to the main facility, there would essentially be no impact of the stable operation. and no impact on their ability to repay the long --term debt; 2) If none oy the horses were t0 be waved to the main facility, and they lost that revenue which 57-189 5/11/87 constituted approximately 37 percent of the total revenue projected, ,they would be able operate but would no longer be able to pay'for the road debt or capital improvements; 3) If half of the horses were moved to the main property, they would be able to fund the capital improvements 68 percent, or fund the road debt but probably not both. John Mock, 736 Barron Avenue, st!: ;ngly supported the_ stable proposal and had been reassured privately that some of the concerns he raised in the P&P Committee would be attended. The 50 -acre pasture was a relatively uninteresting part of the park and he had no objection to that use, provided it was not extensively managed, i.e., did not affect the sur- rounding fauna or flora. There had been a major accident that resulted in a. fatality. The road received heavy bicy- cle use and cars frequently crossed the center line to avoid bicycles. There had been a serious problem with people drinking and attempting to negotiate the narrow and con- gested road. Any intersection on the big curve would be a bad idea due to heavy bicycle use and the short sight lines. He particularly opposed the less --extensive intersection and suggested Council might be exposing the City to possible lawsuits. He also opposed splitting the park with the alternative, road, and so did the Citizens Advisory Committee. Traffic would discourage the use of the current firetraii which was one of the more scenic trails in the park. An unpaved road would cover foliage for several yards on either side, and a paved road would attract non --stable and non -hostel traffic. No matter who paid for the alterna- tive road, it would cost a lot more than had already been spent on the. park. He ured for the adoption of the stable proposal, with the exception of the alternative road. Artemas Ci. .ton, 28014 Natoma Road, Los Altos Hills, sup- ported the project and believed the use of the house would be of tremendous benefit to Palo Alto. The place was lovely, especially in the daytime. She fe) t it was Palo Alto's opportunity to take advantage of a lovely facility in the foothills, unique to the area, and to lake it a wonder- ful place for people visiting from other countries and other parts of the State. Joyce Leonard, 4107 Briarwood Way, spoke as a memberof the hostel support group, particularly active in the fund raising. She had some difficulty in assessing the City's potential legal controversy on John Marthens Lane. She askedif the City of Palo Alto ciearly had jurisdiction over 57-.x.90 5/11/87 John Marthens Lane as stated by the City Attorney in her 7/18/84 letter to Mr. Carlstrom, and whether the City would be liable for any mishaps oh the road and/or the six resi- dents claiming easement holdings. If the proposed ten round trips per day by hostel users and those by the current operation of the stable did not markedly exceed the 1986 usage of John Marthens Lane when six tenants, were still in residency, she asked if that would interfere legally with the six residents' use of the road. Had the 520 acres of Arastra lands been developed residentially as had been planned, and not opposed by the six residents along John Marthens Lane, that would have been considerably more traf- fic than the proposed hostel and existing stable would gen- erate. The City's provision of a large house for potential hostel use and the continued use of City lands and buildings for horse owners and users in the community was indeed gen- erous. In the final analysis, she would not want to compromise the City's legal p^c;�;^_r, by failure to do an EIR P Y 9 N -_ �_ ..� - or bringing the road up to Code; however, in light of the 1984 EIA, and the Citizens Advisory Committee recommenda- tions on the Arastra land, she wondered how much was really necessary and how much was pressure put on staff by a few home owners. Barbara Wein, AYH. 425 Bivisadero, San Francisco, said Palo Alto was enjoying the current network of hostels. They received the endorsement of the Santa Clara Girl Scout Council and ai eo the Palo Alto PTA. The AYH went throuoh the various approvals of the City Council, had acted based on those approvals, and now would .like to enter into a lease to start the hostel. The hostel was scheduled to open May 1, 1987, was published in the International and A;nerican Handbooks, and she understood hostelers were already going. She asked staff to enter into a lease with AYH, which she believed could happen without an EIR. She took issue with the statement on page 5 of CMR 250:7 which said the project and the NIA was approved with a hostel with no vehicular access, In tact, the staff report had been written three months prior to the City Council's er ig nil approval which limited vehicular access. The EIA was based on grossly exaggeratedtraffic and still came up with a negative decla- ration. The AYH still believed traffic generated by the hostel would be far less than that generated by the indi- viduals who rented overthe past few years. They had proven with the stables that the traffic generated by both would be well within the means without having significant, impact on the road. . As much -as they wanted the hostel t� open as soon as possible, it was not -fair to close the stable in order tor the hostel to operate. They worked hard to' create a 1 1 1 cooperative arrangement witL the itable end both facilities would provide valuable services. Bobbie Redstr.om, 251 Churchill. read a letter to the editor in that evening's newspaper pertinent to the meeting headed "No reason to require an Arastra Park impact report. The letter said that on July 30, 1984, Robert Brown, Pal ltot Planning Official, filed an EIR on the Arastra Park [1 ster Plan for the creation of a low -intensity open space park including an equestrian center and youth hostel. The docu- ment made a negative declaration and found the project had ;o signiticant. environmental impact. Consequently, no EIR was required. It was important to note =tne document covered the youth hostel and the stable as proposed in the Arastra Citizens Advisory Committee's Park Improvements and Policies completed in February, 1984. Only two questions in the assessment related to the hostel: 1) the character of John martssesatatanatteee0s2J,Araffic generation on it. The Council resolved those issues after public hearings.and debate by placing severe restrictions on trips that would be generated from the hostel and by requiring financial assistance for the road improvements. All of that was done even though it was determined in the assessment that there was no signifi- cant environmental impact. How could the staff now justify requiring dpi „EIR. The considerable public opposition cited existed from the very first neighborhood meeting in December, 1983, and each public meeting and hearing there- after. Those meetings essentially consisted of protests by only six families who lived on John Martheris Lane, a road that was totally 'owned by the City of Palo Alto. The i=alo Alto City Council had already taken the opposition into account in the automobile access and day -use restrictions on the hostel. Ten automobile round trips per day was very close to the traffic engendered by residents who lived along the -road or in the Arastra house --the proposed hostel now. The traffic for the stable operation proposed December 15, 195.6, would be essentially the same as it existed now, which the neighbors said was acceptable. They hoped the City Council • would not accept the recommendation for requiring . the-__RTR with tMht added delays and added enpense. They Urged Council now to recommit itself -to the projects and to the values they would bring to the' City. The letter was written by Mary Gordon and Artemas Ginzton, both members -of the. Palo Alto Alostel support committee ttee of which she was also a member. Sally €guy: oski, 2607 Emerson Street, said she would like the Disabled Riding Program located at the Arastra property. Her words were read: 'As a member of,a physically -limited 57-192 5/11/87 community and member of the Bay Area Riders, I would like to encourage the City Council to approve the Arastra Stable for use by the public. The Bay Area Riders, operated by the UCPA, provide horsebackriding for physically -limited indi- viduals. This riding is not only recreational but good physical therapy. This is not supplied anywhere else in the local area for adults. This is the only adult program. With a large, local, disabled community, there is great need for such a facility. As it is now, the disabled have little use of the area parks due to accessibility problems. The therapeutic: riding would open up the park for the physically -limited communities." Council Member Patitucci said the first alternative before Council was if the hostel operated as originally approved, and the stable operated in accordance with the proposed plan, or some modification thereof. Two kinds of costs would be incurred: The $85,000 improvements to John Marthens Lane, and about $30,000 for the cost of the EIR recommended by staff. Once the EIR returned and was approved, then Council would consider the uses according to the plan. The stable would continue to operate in its current mode during that period, and the hostel would be delayed in its operation. Mr. Zaner said that was staff's understanding. Council Member Patitucci said another alternative was if Council were to return to the recommendation made by Council in August, that the hostel proceed and the stable not be allowed to operated. The improvements to the road were $28,000, for which the City agreed to spend $14,500 and the hostel was to pay $13,500. Be asked if an EIR would be required in that instance or no other environmental action. Ms. Northway believed the City would be required to do other environmental action, but staff felt that would proba- bly take the form of a negative declaration, Council-- Member Patitucci said the City could probably move quickly to enter into the lease and begin the hostel opera- tion fairly immediately. A third alternative was for Council to determine the stable continue in operation, but not enter into a lease with the hostel. He understood the $28,000 in street improvements was the minimum if one or the other of the operations went ahead and continued at any level/ if both operated, $85,000 was the minimum. In that alternative, there would still be $28,000 of improvements 57-193 5/11/87 for which the City had not agreed to pay anything. A nega- tive declaration would be required and presumably the upgraded operation of the stable could continue. Mr. Overway clarified the roadway improvements identified for the situation in which the hostel did not exist but the stable was in operation totaled $70,000. Basically, it was the -$85,0.00 improvement minus $15,000 for. the cape sealing which would not be necessary. Council Member Patitucci clarified for the stable to operate was $70,000; for the hostel only to operate was $28,000; but for both to operate wac $85,000. Mr. Overway said yes. Council Member Patitucci presumed that operation could con- tinue and flow quickly ,into the expanCed operation `,as proposed. The fourth alternative- was to cancel the whole operation, and he asked if an EIR was necessary in that case. Ms. Northway said no; an EIR would need to be done if every- thing was canceled. Council Member Patitucci assumed there would be no EIR until Council restudied the options to decide what they ultimately did want to do. He asked if there was legal or financial exposure if they decided not to go ahead with either opera- tion. Ms. Northway did not believe there should be. With respect to Council Member Patitucc e s third alternative of the -stable only and his statement that a negative declaration would be done, she was not sure that was the case. There was a possibility that an KR eight need to be prepared, depending on what the proposal was and whether it included the 50 acres. Mayor Woolley said a fifth alternative was proposed by Vice Mayor Sutorius at the P&P Committee meeting, to sell one ten -acre parcel with a nine -acre easement of the Tiacres, because that was not •park --dedicated and would not require returning to the voters. The $230,000 ballpark estimate by staff would be used to build a new road which would allow the City to maximize the •use. of those facilities. Council Member Fletcher . asked if proceeding with an EIR was insurance the City would not be litigated. 57-194 5/11/87 Ms. Northway said no, but probably it was insurance that the City would not have to pay attorneys' fees if they were not successful. She opined the more successful challenge in the particular situation would be on the CEQA grounds. The other theory advanced was not one that would be sustained either legally or equitably by a court. SUBSTITUTE MOTION I Mayor Woolley moved, seconded by Sutorius, to direct staff to report back to Council on the feasibility of raising sufficient funds to construct- a new road through the net proceeds of the sale of a ten -acre parcel with a nine -acre Open Space easement from either the &rastra Preserve or the 77 acres. Mayor Woolley, said she would not presume to locate the site because there was a lot involved in preparing a parcel tor building. utility and access problems had to be considered which could only be done a ftor an engineering survey. Council was really constrained. She appreciated the argu- ments of the members of the public who did not believe an SIR was needed but was convinced to discharge their respon- sibility as Council Members and to protect the General Fund from the cost of lawsuits, Council did not have a choice. She was concerned about maximizing the City's investmment. They had between a $l-$2 million investment in the house at the top of the hill, and as -long for►g as they had to use John Marthens Lane, she did not believe they would ever be able to use the stable or the hostel to full advantage. She would particularly like to see the hostel used in the day- time. She was also concerned the City not spend further from the General Fund in order to enable either the hostel or the stable operation to keep going. The substitute motion was the one way. Of raising funds'without taking money ,out of the General Fund, yet maximized the City's investa- ment, and allowed the operations to continue and the public to benefit. Vice Mayor Sutorius said were the time more propitious, he would have favored a motion i irnu Liuy 1h sits selection to the property at the end of John Marthens Lane, i.e., closing it off as a normal park access, leaving an easement situ- ation that would permit .f lire and . necessary maintenance access, and siting in a way that was not detrimental to the park. However, Council would .need the site identified, an accurate description of it provided, and a resolution of intent passed that evening, in order to meet all the neces- sary timeframes to permit the consideration to be acted in the November ballot. The next opportunity for an election would be either April 11 or June 7, 1988. Tee substitute motion on the floor broadened the search area. r Council. Member Cobb said "broadening the search area" would broaden it into dedicated parkland, which would have to go before the voters whereas the 77 acres would not. Mayor Woolley clarified the. substitute motion was both the Arastra Preserve or the 77 acres. Council Member Cobb understood the points of timing made by Vice Mayor Sutorius. If the 77 -acre parcel was used for some important purpose by being partially or wholly sold, it should be something very significant and important, and he did not believe the issues before Council that evening were in that category. Council Member Renzel asked if an EIR would be needed in order to subdivide off a small parcel and to create the new alternate road, Ms. Northway said staff could not answer that evening but would look into the matter .i f Council passed the substitute motion. Council Member Renzel asked the cost of the improvements to John Marthens Larne according to the original staff recommen- e. dation. Mr. Brown said originally there was a proposal to upgrade John Marthens Lane that reached approximately $350,000- $370,000. Council Member Renzel asked if the City were to improve John Mar.thens Lane in a more significant way than previously proposed so it could be used as the principal access to the park, would that require an EIR or an EIA. Ms. Sloarasked if that was just to: improve the road without any uses or in conjunction with uses. Council Member Renzel said her, impression was that the prin- cipal environmental impact of the uses as considered was traffic necessitating improvements to the road both for the environmental :rti igat.ion as well as safety. If council answered those concerns basically to eliminate the question of whether the re was. a significant impact of traffic and to eliminate: the question of safety, would they require an EIR for the uses discussed.• Mr Brown believed an EIR would be likely. The improvement of John Marthens Lane to a reasonablestandard would ;involve :000e tree loss and grading impacts that were moreSubstan- tial than creating the new roadway in the center of the Arastra property. 57-196 5/11/87 Council Member Ren ;el asked if that EIR would take -a whole year. Mr. Brown said without a doubt. Council Member Renzel said if Council were to proceed with the road in the middle of the property and continue with the uses as proposed, would an EIR be necessary. Mr. Brown believed an EIR would be less likely, because the requirements for earth movement and vegetative disruption were significantly less. The uses without any access from John Marthen Lune but access through the center of the prop- erty reduced the problems with the safety of the roadway, which was the principal concern an EIR would address. Staff would have to investigate what would be necessary for environmental review of creation of one or two lots on the 77 acres which might rise to a level of significance that required an EIR. Council Member Renzel clarified the process would take a year one way or the other while everything was put on hold. Mr. Brown said if a new roadway in the center of the prop- erty simply involved a mitigated negative declaration, the engineering work and the possible funding mechanism might reach a year. He imagined that would be part of staff's study of the creation of the lot on the 77 acres. Council Member Renzel was concerned about the roadway down the middle of the property. She remained concerned the tenor of Council's response to the whole issue seemed t� focus around the concerns of the property owners on John Marthens Lane instead of the real issues concerning the City as a whole. If Council was to solve the dilemma by selling a parcel of land, she would want to see that option of improving John Marthens Lane as part of the report back as an alternative to the road down the center, because the road down the center had more impact on the overall environmental character of the site. Also, the location where the road came out was fairly dangerous and had its own traffic prob- lems. She was hardpressed to see how Council could solve the problem if they were constantly working around the con- cerns of the small group of neighbors. If Council were to sell a parcel, having only an acre of . it usable with the remainitj portion in an Open Space easement was critical to ensure that solution would not be looked at frequently. Council Member Klein opposed the substitute motion for two reasons: First, he concurred with Council Member Renzel that the road down the middle of the property was not a good 57-197- 5/11/87 idea. It would be visually harmful as well a. a safety problem. Second, it would be extremely bad public policy. The idea behind the motion seemed to be that selling off a lot would justify being able to spend money and not take it out of the City's present cash reserves, but the 77 acres was not free money. The City could sell off the. lot now and use the money for other purposes; and whenever one consid- ered selling off a portion, one must weigh it against other potential public uses of the cash developed from the sale. He did not believe the use was appropriate when he consid- ered all the other crying needs for fundsinthe community. It would be a tremendous subsidy for a very small group of people, and he could not justify it-. Council Member Levy asked about the intersection at Arastradero of the road through the property. If Council spent the amount called for and financed the improvements, would Arastradero be safer than at present. 1 Mr. Overway said that was a judgment call. If, the addi- tional intersection was added in at that point, the safety was certainly improved. The design, howevet, accommodated 1 the movements produced by the intersection so did not sig- nificantly change or diminish the general safety measure of the road as it was at present. Council Member Levy asked if the City was to sell one acre, or ten acres with a nine -acre easement, from the 77 -acre site, would it be possible to have that one acre accessed through the existing streets from within the Los Altos Hills subdivision adjacent to the 77 acres. Mr.. Brown said staff would have to investigate that issue but believed it was unlikely both for jurisdictional_ reasons and also in terms of topography and accessability through existing lots. Council Member Levy asked if Council proceeded without an EIR to have the stable, the hostel, and the access through John Marthens L, ne, with $85,000 of; improvements . and fought and lost a couet action, what would the cost be to the City in terms. of time and money. Ms. Northway said just at the trial level the time would be three to six months and thousands o.f dollars worth of staff time to produce all the records over the years the matter had been proceeding, added to the time of the City. Attorney's office of several hundred hours and probably one and one-half attorneys over an intense period of time. If unsuccessful, there would also be all the costs and expenses advanced by the other, side. The usual rule that the courts 57-198 5/11/87 followed was to award reasonable attorney fees. In one previous case, she was involved in six years ago, the attor- ney fees were $30,000 or $40,000, but billing rates for attorneys had gone up considerably since then. She believed a court at a minimum would award $150 per hour and probably whatever the normal billing rates of the attorney working on the case. There could be a minimum $50,000, $60,000, or $70,000 in attorneys' fees and costs for the City to be involved in that kind of a lawsuit. Council Member Levy understood Ms. Northway's feeling was that the likelihood of not prevailing in a court action was high, and he asked for a judgement as to whether she felt there was a 50/50 chance of prevailing or worse than that. Ms. Northway said there were six cases decided by the California Courts of Appeal last year having to do with whether a city should have prepared a negative declaration or an EIR. _ In each of those cases the cities lost. The attitude of the courts was so favoring cities to do EIRs, that she believed that statistic was better than an analysis of what she believed. Council Member Fletcher asked about scheduling. Assuming the Council was to approve selling a piece of land and con- structing the road --which combination might require an EIR because of the selling of the land --what would be the earli- est the hostel could `open. Mr. Loner said, assuming the City was not to be "the banker," they would have to sell the lot or lots first. There was no guarantee they would be purchased immediately, so there might be some delay in a sale. He deferred to Mr. Adams for how long it would take to do the design and con- struction. Director of Public Works David Adams said staff had deter- mined with the design and review pro,ess, they would not finish that portion until fall at the earliest, which meant construction could not start until the end of the rainy season a year from now. Construction would then take approximately six weeks until about July, 1988. Council Member Fletcher realized thy:, substitute notion had some attractive featuresz They would not have to do an EIR, and the stable and hostel could_ both operate. However, she did not believed the motion would result in the best of scenarios. It would delay the hostel considerably and would disect the pak. She opposed selling a piece of the 77 acres. Council's decision on the 77 acres in the past ;was to keep it ` to examine what to do with it at some future 57-199 5/11/87 time, and starting to slice it up would reduce options. The long delay in starting the hostel would increase the costs of renovations considerably, and it had been a considerable effort for the hostel to raise the money. Finally, the City's operating a stable was in competition with the pri- vate sector. She read that a new stable was opening in Woodside, and she guessed if the stable closed on the Arastra property, that would give an impetus to some private property owner to offer that type of a facility. It was a very public park, and a large part of it would be reserved for a limited number of persons. She opposed the substitute motion because, on balance, the better way togo was close the stable as Council decided once before, and let the hos- tel open in the near future, Mayor Woolley believed the improvements to John Marthens Lane at $375,0.00 could well cost about twice as much as the other. If staff's estimate .was anywhere near correct that the City could realize more like $2_30,000 from a sale, they would probably have to sell 20 acres instead of 10, and she did not believe Council wasup to that: In terms of the safety a-spect, a totally visible road would be far safer than John Marthens Lane which had two blind places. In regard to using the sale of parkland, it would be parkland funds being used to improve parkland, so at least the capi- tal would be kept within the same kind of use ,which was not quite as offensive a use as some, might be. Mr.._. Zaner said Mr. Brown reminded him that when they dealt. with the subject sometime ago, the density was transferred from the park property over to the 77 acre property, so the ten -acre figure was ►got correct. They would in fact only have to sell an acre or two to get the $230,000 and would not have to do the ten -for -one and keep nine in an ease- ment. Council Member Renzel said with respect to using the funds for John Marthens Lane, she recollected the half acre Mullen, property given to the City as a below -market -rate lot. sold' for .$450,000 some time ago. Vacant lots much smaller than an acre in town sold for much more than the .amount of money suggested by staff as the value of a foothills', lot. She. suspected the land value situation was vastly undervalued. She did not believe the , fact that the density had been transferred from :the 500 acres to the 77 acres -would increase the value of one acre any more than ten acres with an easement for nine, because it was stir` one house on one acre. With respect to the issue of using parkland to gener- ate dollars to use on parkland, she did not regard a road up the middle as an improvement to the parkland. To the extent the land could be kept integral was important for the nature 57-200 5/11/87 of the parcel. She also felt they would not have to make as extreme improvements to -John . Marthens Lane as suggested by Mr. Overway, but maybe something more significant than originally approved. Generally, she was opposed to selling off parkland at the present time. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED by a vote- of 6-2, Sutorius and Woolley voting 'aye,9° Bechtel absent. COUNCIL RECESSED FROM 9:33 p.m. TO 9:47 p.m. Council Member Klein thanked Council Member Patitucci for organizing the various alternatives in a systematic way. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Fletcher, to direct staff to proceed with a lease with the Youth Hostel and to terminate the use of the stables. Council Member Patitucci could not support one operation and not the other. Council had made some decisions that already violated the original intent of a passive park by encour- aging- the hostel operation. The kind of operation Council= encouraged with the -hostel was less than they themselves wanted and less than the City's subsidy was worth. He cal •culated the subsidy in that instance to be somewhere between $50,000 and $100,000 per year just considering what the City did not get on the value of $--he property provided. Although he believed the hostel movement was a highly -valued one, he did not see any direct benefit to the citizens of Palo Alto because of the lack . of daytime use. A hostel in downtown Palo Alto or near the Baylands would be appropriate to have available to the people of Palo Alto. Conversely, he did not like the idea of subsidizing the stable, but the stable was a more natural use for that environment and deserved to continue. If Council violated the use of a passive park by allowing the hostel to operate, they should go a step fur- ther and allow both to operate. Generally, he would like both operations to proceed. They were basically being asked to approve an EIR based primarily on the same issue before Council with ALZA Corporation,- i.e., public controversy.' He was the only orie to vote against that EIR, and he would be prepared to support a motion for both the stable and the hostel to go forward with no EIR. He did not believe the impacts were significant. If the City was sued, they -had staff to defend i.t, and he believed the assessment was ade- quate. He, woUld-41ot support the :substitute, motion. Council Member Cobb. Said he was not present last August when the final vote.was made with respect to the hostel issue and would have expressed concerns at that time about the.subsidy 57-201 5/11/8.7 involved for serving a reia€_iveiy few Palo Altans. He did not necessarily subscribe to Council Member Patitucci's remarks with respect to the EIR but concurred with the rest of his comments, Council Member Levy agreed with the views of Council Members Patitucci and Cobb. It would be unfortunate if the stable was closed. The stable users developed a plan to keep it open economically, and it served a number of values in the community, even though it would be used by numerically fewer people. The fact that horses grazed in the area was a natu- ral us•e and added to the pleasure of being on the property even for non -riders. He wished Council could develop a way to keep the hostel and the stable open. He believed the extra amount of money was not dramatic and was affordable for the community; unfortunately, an EIR looked like it would be inevitable. He would support a different motion to keep the stable in operation. Council Member Pletcher said the fact the stable had exclue sive use of a very valuable property for all those years was not justification for continuing. The best of all scenarios would be to let both operations go ahead immediately without 'any added construction, expense, and delay; unfortunately, they could not have that. In regard to not being able to use the hostel in the daytime, hostels throughout the world she knew of were closed froth about 9:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. The types of use contemplated were not for the people who stayed at the hostel but for special events. It would be .nice to have those, toe_- hut unfortunately the situation did not allow that bec<use they were trying to minimize the traffic. As far as not serving many Palo Altans, she spoke as -a Palo Altan who traveled and stayed in hostels and there were always some local people who benefited greatly from the social interaction with people who carne from ail countries of the world and all parts of the United States. The hostel was not like a hotel or rooming house; a hostel had a common kitchen and area, and people cooked, ate, and socialized together in the livieo area. There was true interaction, songs and tales from different countries, and it was a bene- fit to local peoples Many of the hostels were in gorgeous settings which made staying in them ;;err -u iique and benefi- cial to those people who traveled mostly under their own steam and who could not afford- expensive. accommodation in the middle of big cities. Council Member Klein said if he had total control over issues, he would have placed the hostel in downtown Palo Alto or elsewhere rather than on the property: but they were not writing on .a clean slate. Council did make abasie 57-202 5/11/87 decision to go with the hostel in the house on the property, and he believed they should respect that decision given the tremendous amount of dedicated work put into the project by the people backing the hostel. The stable was not a bad use, but he saw a much greater public benefit from _he hos- tel than from the stable. The community would benefit a great deal from having particularly young visitors from foreign countries. In regard to the stable, he believed the City was being asked to do too much for too few. The poten- tial costs were huge, and the proposal before Council from the stable organization was a remarkably well-done presenta- tion but depended on a trade-off to meet the City standard at no out-of-pocket City cost. The trade-off was 50 acres of exclusive use and continued and more intensified use of the 77 acres. In other words, almost exclusive use of 127 acres, or just over 20 percent of the land. That was . too much public land dedicated to one particular use for a small number cf people. Council heard there was a crying need for stable facilities. If that was really the case, there was an opportunity for the private sector to provide the use for which people wanted to pay. It was not fair and appropriate for the City using tax payers' dollars to allow a small group of people to have use of 127 acres. He recalled the City spent about $7 million to buy the property and 20 per- cent of that was $1.4 million which was a fancy price tag. It was clear there were substantial costs and delays associ- ated with trying to have both uses, and the better choice was to move forwar=d with the hostel with a relatively minor expenditure of public funds and a minimal time delay. He urged his colleagues to vote for the substitute motion. Council Member Rer 'el. concurred with Council Member Klein's remarks, especially the latter ones. It was unfortunate that a few neighbors forced is good uses to vie with each other --for the land. Council' was faced with a dilemma of delaying the access and use of the land if they tried to accommodate both uses under the circumstances. The stable people put together a meritorious proposal, but in the end she -sympathized with Council Member Klein's analysis that the hostel offered more opportunities to more people than the stable could possibly offer under the logistics of o per- ating a -stele and people having their own horses. She viewed the use of .the house by the hostel not as a give -.away, of a valuable piece of property but rather use of a resource .that the City would otherwise lose. She would not be willing to sell an inholding in the middle of the _park, which Council would have -to do in order for someone to own that house, and then would have seven people instead of six attempting to impose their will on the remaining users of the park-. Inholdings in 'the middle of pOirks were terribly unfortunate. In that respect, the house had zero value unless used . for a park purpose, for which a hostel quali- fied. , She believed Palo Altans would use the hostel. She e remembered her Girl Scout troop from San Jose staying at a place -in Alum Rock Park in San Jose, and the hostel would be used the same way by young people from Palo Alto and offered a real opportunity for a nearby outing. Likewise, her stays in hostels in Vienna and Florence were wonderful experi- ences. The system of hostels served everyone and was not exclusive to the local people. She supported the substitute motion with regrets Council could not accommodate all the uses because of a few neighbors. Vice Mayor Sutorius believed the action taken in 1986 which modified the earlier 1985 action was not inappropriate. He held hopes and believed the efforts by the committee for the stable were earnest, and a very professional job was done. However, he reaffirmed the position he took in 1985 and would vote in favor of the substitute motion. Council Member Levy voiced a different view of the 50 acres to be used as pasturage tor horses and did not believe it took the property out of the public domain. The property was still there in its natural state as a pastoral, visual experience even though the hikers or bicyclists would go on the outskirts rather than through it. Mayor Woolley said her preference would have been the new road because she would like to see the City get full use out of the property, particularly the house. However, the motion before Council was the next best one. Council Member Klein summed up the problems with the stable very well. She was most concerned that Council was really tying up 77 acres because the stable proposal was not viable unless the City started to make other trade-offs if the 77 acres should be used for another purpose at some time. In terms of the hostel, the Comprehensive Plan and tip service from the Council was usually directed at the very people who would most benefit from the hostel, i.e., Council was usually con- cerned about low-income people, and' the hostel system was the least expensive way to get around to see the United States or even further afield. They were also usually con- cerned about senior citizens, and the Elder Hostel Program was an excellent one; and young people were often hostel users. Those groups most frequently used the hostel; there- fore, it was appropriate that Palo Alto beinvolved in pro- viding such a facility. In regard to the motion before Council toproceed with the lease, she asked if the terms were already set or would the terms be reviewed in :light of the fact the stable would not be in operation, particularly in terms of the amount of traffic on the road and daytime use as long as access was by the alternate road by hikers rather than vehicles. 57-204 5/11/87 Mr. Fellman said the conditions of the lease were already set. A motion would be neccesary if Council wished to change the conditions. SUBSTITUTE MOTION PASSED by a vote of 5-3, Levy, Cobb, Patitucci voting "no," Bechtel absent. MOTION: Mayor Woolley moved to direct staff to reconsider the provisions of the lease evaluating the traffic from the standpoint of the hostel only using the road, and to look at the part that restricts any kind of daytime activity as long as the daytime users arrived on foot over the fire road rather than up John Marthens Lane. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND 9. RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH EMERGENCIES (CMR:232:7) (1163) Council Member Klein understood staff was concerned that the City was using special government agencies as a way to get around the Gann limit, and he asked what the alternative was. A SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY Mr. Overway said the alternative would be for Caltrans, the County Transportation Agency, or a similar existing agency responsible for roadway operation and maintenance to do it. Council Member Klein clarified such an agency was not willing to do so because of problems with Gann. Mr. Overway said that Avis his understanding. The staff recommendation was that the benefits from what was being provided were not offset by the disadvantages of creating the other organization. Council Member Fletcher said the proposal was to add a sur- charge to the vehicle registration fees and asked if that would have to . be put to the voters as a tax. Mr. Overway understood the legislation .passed last year already provided for that to be done and was being done in San Diego County without going to the vote of the people. Council Member Fletcher asked if the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) was authorized . under the proposed legislation to implement the call box plan; would that be a problem with the Gann limitation. Mr. Overway did not believe so. It would end up organization ftor the Bay , Area instead of nine. legislation provided for nine organizations. being one Existing 57-205 5/11/87_ Council Member Fletcher asked if staff considered that a viable plan if MTC took the lead. Mr. Qverway said one versus nine was much preferred. MOTION: Vice Mayor Sutorius moved, seconded by Patituccf, to adopt staff recommendation as follows: 1. Not approve the Resolution to Establish a Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies in Santa Clara County as requested by the County Board of Supervisors; and 2. Express support for the implementation of emergency call boxes along freeways and expressways through existing transportation organizations. Vice Mayor Sutorius understood the thrust of Council Member. Klein's concern but it seemed the MTC option was available, and he commended staff. They were a bureaucracy but were saying "nt)" to creating another bureaucracy, Council Member Fletcher opposed adding more charges to the vehicle registration fee because various bills were proposed to do that to take care of all kinds of problems. She believed eventually vehicle registration fees would be much higher if they continued in that direction. Council Member Klein opposed the motion and hoped there would be sufficient votes to support the County and the establishment of the authority. The MTC option would be available if the bill became law and the County would be wise to adopt that. Pending that and the amendment of Gann, the service ;gas'needed. They were talking about the poten- tial loss of lives. He did not disagree with governmental purity but believed the priority item should be the safety of citizens. Council Member Patitucci was concerned about the prolifera- tion of single -entity kinds of agencies. If made Council's job harder and created constituencies that had single- purpo9e boards .and commissions that never got changed or deleted even when laws changed. He believed staff's approach was a better one. He hoped they could communicate the proposal well to their other constituent cities so they did not feel Council was being -recalcitrant. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 7-1, Klein '1no, • Bechtel absent. 57-206 5/11/87 10. RESOLUTION RE PUBLIC POWER FUEL CELL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT (CMR:246:7) (1101) Council Member Cobb asked where the plant might be sited. Given the level of environmental sensitivity in the commu- nity, he asked if they were putting themselves in the possible situation where they could have the project, money, etc., and wind up having interminable battles over the site. He assumed the project would be sited somewhere within the City. Director of Utilities Richard Young said the whole objective of acting as the host city was that the project be sited somewhere in the City. In terms of finding a site and making it fit within the framework of the project, he referred- to the first section of the Resolution, Section 1(a), "A site for such a project_; satisfactory to the Council, is identified and available." That proviso must be met before the City could go further with the project, and staff had no intention of spending any money on equipment or going forward until such a site was available. Council Member Cobb believed it was an excellent project. If -Council voted approval that evening, he asked whether locating a site and getting Council's approval would be a fairly short time frame activity. Mr. Young said it would go as quickly as staff could do it. Their original schedule as conceived left a six-month window for that. Planning Department essentially said that time frame might be too short, and they might be looking at nine months to a year. It would have to be recognized going in there was a process that must be followed. The staff report (CMR:246:7) said the site, itself would be determined as part of the ongoing process for project development and would be subject to all. normal City planning and land use procedures and regulations. Council Member Cobb believed the membership in Electric ruwtt Research istitute'(EPR1) was an excellent idea, but in the pastthe City had not enjoyed that membership because of its opposition with respect to some of the other work there on nuclear power. He asked if that would become a problem with respect to the proposal. Mr. Young said the membership in EPR1 had many different benefits. The organization itself did work in the nuclear, area and spent a certain amount of money on safety issues and keeping track of developmental issues. ;e did not believe at that point in time EPRI was out to develop new power plants but was trying to see that things were done 57-207 5/11/87 safely and could be controlled. How much of an issue the membership was came down to policies to be determined by Council. Membership in the organization was tied to the project because they said upfront they would not put their $ 5 million toward a project for someone who was not a mem- ber. Council Member Fletcher asked what additional staff would be needed to staff such a facility in Palo Alto. Mr. Young said that was somewhat unknown at present, but probably a variable. Going through the initial stages, he anticipated need for staffing around the clock which would represent probably ten people, some of whoa would be staff members of other organizations involved in the project. If theplant worked as envisioned, it should be remotely con- trolled and staffing would be reduced, but he could not say how far down the figure would go. It had to be integrated into the overall picture of the utility. Council Member. Fletcher asked for a ballpark idea on the diffeLence of the cost to provide that power compared to the present power frct°m the federal government, assuming the plant was a success, they sold the power and received 100 percent of the proceeds. Assistant Director, Utilities Resource Planning and Administrative Services, Kenneth UeDario said in making the recommendation staff compared the resource to supplemental power purchased through Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) and possibly Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&F). He could not comment on the actual dollar difference. Council Member Fletcher assumed the profit margin would be much greater than the current source of power. MOTION: Vice Mayor Sutorius moved, seconded by Cobb, to adopt staff recommendation to: 1. Approve the conceptual program as set forth in the project plan; and 2. Adopt the resolution of intention RESOLUTION 6607 entitled RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING ITS INTENTION TO ACT AS THE HOST SITE FOR A PUBLIC DER FUEL CELL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE AMERICAN PUBLIC POWER ASSOCIATION, SOME OF ITS MEMBERS, THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INTERNATIONAL FUEL SELLS CORP., AND POSSIBLY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT `7---2u8 5/11/87 Vice Mayor Sutorius observed the response to the siting question was accurate. He added that Council had previously approved a study of siting situations for a generating loca- tion with the City that could be for a fuel cell process or alternative processes. Part of the examination into site potentials was underway, and that was a factor in how things would proceed from a timing standpoint. In addition to the off ramp of Section 1(a), there was the specific off ramp of Section 1(e) that, "Satisfactory environmental review of the proposed project is completed prior to any decision to pro- ceed." Staff had wisely and conscientiously prepared the rr ezolution - so there was - assurance - to Council, 'to their citi zens, and to the other potential participants, that the City took the project seriously as an excellent opportunity but. were also very conscious and concerned about any of the potential impacts and needed to have the off ramps in the resolution. Council Member Renzel asked how the City expected to fund the $15 million the City was supposed to contribute to the project. Mr. Young said there were a number of potentials in terms of how to develop the funding. It was premature at present, but he suggested the City would be looking to a financial advisor to evaluate the possibilities between such things as lease purchases, revenue bonds, use of reserves, etc. Council Member Renzel asked if those funding potentials were subject to any of the Gann limitations or Proposition 13 rules for a two-thirds vote, etc. Mr. Zaner said that depended on the revenue source selected; some were and some were not. Council Member Renzel referenced the top of page 10 of the Project Plan which said that one of the major issues still requiring resolution were understanding, assigning, and managing the technical risks. She asked if staff had any idea what those technical risks might be. ' Mr. DeDario said that would be done during the negotiating process with international Fuel Cells Corporation. Palo Alto's main concern was that they had a commercially - operating unit at the end of the demonstration phase. They wanted to ensure International Fuel Cells was there , .had spare , parts, and would be able . to service after the demon- stration period. Council Member Renzel clarified staff was thinking in terms of being ably, to continue to service the equipment after making an investment rather than breakdowns that might be environmentally ---harmful_ .• 57-209 5/11/87 Mr. DeDario said yes; but they were concerned about environ- mental risks also. Council' -Member Renzel asked if there were significant risks. She understood a fuel cell was somewhat like a battery, and batteries sometimes leaked acid. She asked if that kind of thing could happen. Mr. DeDario said yes; staff had a report on the 4.8 megawatt fuel cell sited in New York and in Tokyo which stated any type of a spill inside the cell stack would remain inside L: a cell slack. Council Member Renzel asked if the plants had a lifetime or could one keep adding parts ' to make them go on indefi- nitely. -- Mr. DeDario said the life was expected to be in the 20-30 year range, but there would be a periodic change of things such as the cell stack in order to make it last 30 years. Council Member Renzel asked whether the things that had to be disposed of when the parts were changed would be con- sidered hazardous, or could they be deposited in any land- fill or recycled. Would the City be generating a waste product that it would be difficult to dispose of. Mr. Young understood thee fuel' eell cannisters themselves had catalytic materials in the_ m that had quite a bit of value, and they would be recycled in order to reobtain the mate- rials. John Mock, 736 Barron - Avenue, was 4specially encouraged about Palo Alto's considering the development of alternative' energy projects. His questions came up in view- of the Combustion Engineering controversy they were currently facing. he asked if the process could be described briefly, and what inputs were involved. He presumed they were not looking at significant emissions nor significant environ- mental hazards, although the question of the quake situation occurred. Mr. Zaner said staff could provide Mr. Mock with a copy of a previous informational : staff report (CMR:178:7) . Mr.. Mock asked about the siting requirement; whether project needed to be near water, etc., and how long plant took to shut down. He had experience with equipment with small serial numbers and it had not been pleasant. Fortunately; they were going into it as a demonstration project and •understood there were risks involved. His the the 57.210 5/11/87 concern way if there were engineering change orders further down the line when they were getting to serial numbers 4, 5, 6, etc., how would the cost be shared between the City and I F°C , Council Member Renzel would support the motion to send the resolution forward but had concerns about the siting of the plant and also about the way in which the plant would oper- ate and what kinds of effects that Might have in the community. She hoped the environmental review would be more significant than one that was promised up front on a project and was tantamount to no review at all. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned at 10:30 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: 57-211 5/11/87