Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1987-09-14 City Council Summary Minutes
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES PALOALTOCITYCOUNCILMEETINGSARE BROADCAST LIVE VIAKZSU-FREOUENCY90.I ON FM DIAL, Regular Meeting September 14, 1987 ITEM Oral Communications Minutes of August 10 and. 17, 1987 Consent Calendar 1. Contract with YMCA for Physical Fitness Examinations and Evaluations for Fire- fighters 2. Amendment No. 1 to Contract SO -4870 with Failure Analysis Associates re Payment for Services 3. Contract with Lombardo Diamond Core Drilling in the mount of $58,800 for Pavement Saw Cutting 4. Contract. with Davey Tree Surgery for -'Tree and Stump Removal in an Amount not to Exceed $75,000 5.. Consultant Agreement with Elevens Associates in the Amount of $26,400 for Renovation of Existing Irrigation Systems 6.. Contract with Caldwell -Roland Roofing Company, Inc., :-for Reroofing of Junior Museum and Foothills Park Restrooms in the it*Ount of $55,295 7. Contract with Maximum Technology in the Amount of $43,884 for Civic Center Con -- starvation Lighting Improvements PAGE 58-220 58-221 58-221 58-221 58-22). 58-221 58-221 58-221 58.221 58.222 58-217 9/14/87 ITEM 8. South Bay Discharger Authority - 1987-88 Budget Approval in the Amount of $474,000 9. Resolution 6644 Approving the Destruction of Certain Police Department Records, Docu- ments, and Papers, Pursuant to Sections 34090 and 34090.6 of the Government Code of the State of California PAGE 58-222 58-222 10. Resolution 6645 Amending the. Compensation 58-222 Plan for Management Personnel and Council - Appointed Officers Adopted by Resolution No. 6554 and Amended by Resolution Nos. 6623 and 6635. to Add One New Classifica- tion 11. Ordinance 3765 Amending the Budget for_ the 58.222. Fiscal Year 1987-88 to Provide an Addi- tional Appropriation for the Arts and Scien,'es Division and to Provide for the Receipt of Grant Funds from the Santa Clara Arts Council and from the American Insti- tute of Architects 13. Ordinance Amending Chapter 9.14 of the Palo 58223 Alto Municipal Code to Add Provsios Pro- hibiting Smoking in Public Areas of Retail Stores, Personal Service Businesses, Non- profit Entity Offices, General Business Offices and Professional Offices as well as Bus Waiting Lines, Train Shelters and Transportation Terminals 12. Ordinance Changing the Zone Classification 58-225 of the Arastradero Preserve* from Open Space to Public Facilities Resolution Amending the Comprehensive Plan by Changing the Land Use Designation of the Arastradero Preserve from Open Space...Con- trolled Development to Pubicly-Owned Conservation Land 14. Ordinance Approving a Lease for a Youth 58-225 Hostel to be Operated in the Arastradero Preserve 58.-218 9/14/87_; ITEM PAGE Adjournment to Closed Session from 9:10-9:48 p.m. to Discuss Potential Litigation re Use of Arastradero Preserve 58-236 19. Request of Council Member Leland Levy re 58-243 CATV Undergrounding 15. Contract with Oakland Fence Company for Construction and Installation of Fences at 1755 Embarcadero Road and Palo Alto Munici- pal Coif Course 16. Ordinance Amending the Budget for Fiscal Year 1987-8B to Provide an Appropriation for Capital `Improvement Project No. 87-26, "School Lease Acquisition" 17. Consultant Agreement with CSS Associates for Site Condition Surveys at Jordan School and Jane Lathrop Stanford School 18. Request of City`Council Member Emily Renzel re Dedication of Scott Street Mini -Park Adjournment at 12.55 a.m. 58-264 58-265 58-265 58-266 58-266 Regular Meeting Monday, September 14, 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: Bechtel, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Patitucci, kennel; Sutorius, Woolley ABSENT: Cobb Mayor Woolley announced• a special meeting to interview Mid -Peninsula Access Corporation candidates was held at 6:15 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, and two closed sessions to discuss potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) and City of Santa Clara v. Herrin ton et al., pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) were held at 7.00 p.m. ,in the Council Conference Room. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Ben Bailey, 171 Everett Street, spoke regarding the right of the public to know what the Palo Alto Police Department was doing with kA tizen complaints. He asked for the citizen complaint summary reports to be publicly displayed at City Hall. 2 and 3. Jo Anne Wetzel, 787 Stone Lane, and Caryn Huber>an, 4152 Georgia Avenue, presented a copy of their book On Stager Back Stage about the Palo Alto Children's Theatre to the Council and staff. 3. Karen Smestad, 1023 Emerson Street, spoke regarding paint fumes from the European Auto Repair Shop and Painting. They were told through a meeting with the European Body Shop there would be painting only within "normal" business hours, and that had not happened. Her home was filled with paint fumes, and she asked the Council how to deal with the problem. 4. Trudy Duisenberg, 1010 Emerson Street, lived directly across the street from European AutoMotive and spoke regarding the neighborhood's :complaining over the past 12 months about paint fumes and sanding of automobiles in the,. open. They would like Some reaction to some of their statements made in writing and on the phone. Mayor Woolley said several more people wanted to speak on the issue and thanked the speakers for consolidating. Council Member Bechtel said the Council made a referral to staff on the issue and asked approximately when it would return to the Council. Assistant City Manager June Fleming expected the issue to return to Council in two weeks at the outset. They were waiting for results from the consultant hired to test the air samples. Mayor Woolley clarified within two weeks the matter would be agendized and the speakers would be notified. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF AUGUST 10 AND 17, 1987 MOTION* Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Klein, approval of the Minutes of August 10 and 17, 1987, as submitted. MOTION PASSED 7-8-1. Vice Mayor Sutorius "abstaining" from Minutes of August 10, 1987, and Council Member Bechtel 'abstaining" from the Minutes of August 17, 1987, Cobb absent. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: CoUncil Member Klein moved, seconded by Rensel, approval of the Consent Calendar. 1. CONTRACT WITH YMCA FOR PHYSICAL FITNESS EXAMINATIONS AND EVALUATIONS FOR FIREFIGH ERS (CMR:4 32:7) (5.03) 2. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT SO -4870 WITH FAILURE ANALYSIS ASSOCIATES RE PAYMENT FOR SERVICES CNRs448:7) (71041) 3. CONTRACT: WITH LOMBARDO DIAMOND CORE DRILLING IN THE AMOUR' F- $58-1U FOR PAVEMENT SAW CUTTING (CMR:450:7) (101 4. CONTRACT WITH. DAVEY TREE SURGERY FOR TREE AND STUMP REMOVAL IN AN AMA__ NE3 TO EXCEED $ 5t 000 CMR:44 :7) (1041) 5. CONSULTANT AGRE ENT WITH BLEVENS ASSOCIATES IN THE. AMa ft OF SYTEMS MR: 4 NG IRRIGATION CONTRACT WITH CALDWELL-ROLAND ROOFING -COMPANY INC.` FOR N T E AMo3 'T-eb asoi 55,295 (CMRx443:7) 1J21-12/1316-02) s i syrr.r - �rrr►a rr rune �.. i - . CONSENT CALENDAR (Cont'd) 7. CONTRACT WITH MAXIMUM TECHNOLOGY IN THE AMOUNT OF $43,884 FOR CIVIC CENTER CONSERVATION LIGHTING IMPROVE- MENTS (CMR:444:7) (810-02-01) 8. SOUTH BAY DISCHARGER AUTHORITY - 1987-88 BUDGET APPROVAL IN THE AMUUNT OF, $ % 000 ( CMR:449 : 7) (1122) 9. RESOLUTION 6644 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF OF PALO ALTO APPROVING THE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN. POLIO DEPARTMENT RECORDS DOCUMENTS, AND PAPERS, PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 34090 AND 34090.6 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA" (CMR:4'20:7 ) (129-02/202) THE CI TY 10. RESOLUTION 6645 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE COMPENSATION PLAN FOR MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL AND COUNCIL -APPOINTED OFFICERS ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION No. 6554 ANA AMENDED BY R TION NOS. 6623 AUK' 6635 TO ADD ONE NEW CLASSIFICATION" (CMR:454:7) (50) 11. ORDINANCE 3765 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR l9$ TO PROVIDE Ali ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR THE ARTS AND SCIENCES DIVISION AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE RECEIPT OF GRANT FUNDS FROM THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY ARTS COUNCIL AND FROM THE Ai'�3ERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS" CMR: NOTICE PASSED unanisoualf, Cobb abut. AGENDA CHANGES ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS MOTION: Vice *a or . $etorino moeetd, Seconded by *eel, to bring forward 1t . 13, Ordinance Amending ChaptuF_` 3,14 e the Palo kite Meaicipal Code ahead of Item 12r Ordinance Amending Section 18.0E.040 of the Palo. Alto Municipal Code (the Inning **0) to Change tb! Zone Classification of the Property known as £zaatrndero Prasree. MOTION PASSE unanimously* Cobb absent. NOTION PASSED unanimously, Cobb absent. 13. ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 9.14OF THE PALO ALTO MUNI- CIPAL CODE TO ADD PROVISIONS PROHIBITING SMOKING IN PUBLIC AREAS OF RETAIL STORES PERSONAL SERVICE BUSI- NESSES_, NONPROFIT ENTITY OFF CES, GENERAL BUSINESS OFFICES AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICES AS WELL AS BUS WAITING LINESi TRAIN SHELTERS AND TRANSPORTATION TERMINALS T1401-02) 1IMON: Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Sutorius, approval of the ordinance with a revision to Section 9.14.095(6) to read, "Buses and bus waiting lines.. ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled *ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF' PALO ALTO AMENDING CHAPTER 9.14 OP THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD PROVISIONS PROHIBITING SMOKING IN PUBLIC AREAS OF RETAIL STORES, PERSONAL SERVICE BUSINESSES, NONPROFIT ENTITY OFFICES, GENERAL BUSINESS OFFICES AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICES AS WELL AS BUS WAITING LIVES, TRAIN SHELTERS AND TRANSPORTATION TERPPINALS" Council Member Levy referred to nonprofit organizations and was concerned it was improper to select out a businessbased on whether it happened to be an entity for profit. The purposes of the organization should control its governance for an ordinance. He asked why it was necessary to single out nonprofit organizations and why nonprofit could not be included within the other definitions. City Attorney Diane Northway believed it would be more clear to someone in a nonprofit entity reading the ordinance. She referred to several other smoking ordinances in Alameda County, and they chose to do it the same way for purposes of clarity, Council Meter Levy asked whether nonprofit offices were encompassed within the other elements of the ordinance or would the City be better off to define "general businesses, N or *personal service businesses," by adding. nonprofit entities rather than having a separate category for nonprofit. Ms. Northway believed *nonprofit offices" w=ould possibly be encompassed in other definitions but she believed it would be clearer for `a. nonprofit entity to have its own definition. 58.223 9/14/87 Council Member Levy believed it was a bad precedent to separate out nonprofit from profit making because they should be treated equally based on the substance of what functions they performed. AMENDMENT: Council Member Levy moved, seconded by Patitucci, to amend the ordinance to remove under Section , the definition (i) 'Nonprofit Entity,' and under Section 2, to remove Item n4. All nonprofit entity offices." Council Member Fletcher said it Council deleted the specific section with the wording explaining "nonprofit entity," it should be included in Section 2 because it was not encompassed under the definitions of businesses and retail stores. Nonprofit entity was a separate category within the zoning ordinance. Council Member Klein opposed the amendment -because he rejected the reasoning that distinctions should not be made between profit and nonprofit corporations. He referred to different rules regarding what a nonprofit corporation could do with regard to lobbying. There were many restrictions on a nonprofit corporation in that regard as _compared to a profit maker. There were significant differences with regard to how a nonprofit organization could raise money. He did not believe it was unique to have a difference drawn between profits and nonprofits. Nonprofits received a significant benefit from state and federal governments, i.e., nonprofit status and tax exempt status in many cases. Ms. Northway referred to the present definition of "general business offices" and did not believe it was clear that "nonprofits" were included. Council, Member Renzel opposed the amendment. The intent was to treat employees and visitors in the types of offices specified equally with respect to smoking. Calling out the nonprofit organizations simply clarified that the law applied to them as well. She believed it was important to include the specific definition. MOTION: VICE MAYOR SUTORIUS CALLED FOR TUE PREVIOUS QUES- TION AND IT WAS DULY SECONDRU MOTION PASSED by a vote of A--2, Levy, Pa ti tucc i voting "no,' Cobb absents ANIMONE T FAILED . by a vote of 2-6, Levy, Patltecci voting 'aye," Cobb &bse t. Council Member Levy would reluctantly support the ordinance but recorded his opposition to the inclusion of items 1 through 5 in Section 2 of the ordinance. MOTION PASSBD unanimously, Cobb absent. 12. ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION OF THE ARASTRADERO PRESERVE FROM OPEN SPACE TO PUBLIC FACILITIES (1321-31) RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF yHE ARASTRADERO_ PRESERVE FROM OPEN SPACE...CONTROLLED LVELOPMENT TO PUBLICLY - OWNED CONSERVATION LAND (1321-31) 14. ORDINANCE APPROVING A LEASE FOR A YOUTH HOSTEL T9 BE OPERATED IN THE ARASTRADERO PRESERVE (1321-31) City Planner Sarah Cheneyreferred to the Comprehensive Plan resolution and said the new Comprehensive Plan land use des- ignation should read "publicly -owned conservation land" rather than "City -owned conservation land." Manager, Real Property Bill Feliman advised of an. addition to the lease made after August 24, 1987. The addition was on page 2, item 3(a)(1). The last sentence previously read, "Ancillary day use of the premises by overnight guests shall be permitted but no community use shall be allowed." It now read, 'Ancillary day use of':.the premises 4y overnight guests shall be permitted. No community use shall be allowed other_ than overnight guests, occupancy and ancillary day use by overnight guests." The addition was required to clarify staff's strict interpretation of council's directive of July 8, 1985 where a motion was passed which stated that "use of the hostel shall be predominantly for lodging with daytime use of the facilities limited to overnight gu.ests."=Staff interpreted the clause to mean no community use aside, which included weddings and community meetings as well as. the American Youth Hostels board meetings and cor:nuni ty fund- raisers. Staff's action prompted Barbara Wein, Executive Director Of the American Youth Hostels, to request.. a clar- ification " from Council as to whether its board meetings and fund-raisers would be allowed if the daily traffic count of 32:oneeway tripe was not exceeded. He clarified they were not included in the lease , as presented. Sr. Assistant City Attorney Sandy Sloan said .after extensive study and analysis including community involvement the City Council, on July 23, 1984, adopted a negative declaration and approved the Arastradero Preserve Master Plan which 58-225 9/14/87 included the operation of a youth hostel with no guest vehicular traffic sand the maintenance of the existing stable. The environmental review and negative declaration was prepared as required by the California Environmental Quality Act-(CEQA) on the whole of the action at the earliest possible stage of review. Since that time. Council took various steps to implement the Master Plan, including installation of a parking lot on Arastradero Road and improving the trail system throughout the park. To further implement the Master Plan, the Comprehensive Plan designa- tion and zoning ordinance land use map needed to be amended to reflect the appropriate designations for public parks. Since the adoption of the master plan, Council made two changes in the Master Plan to terminate the stable use and to allow guest vehicular traffic at the hostel on a limited basis of 20. one-way trips per day. When an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a negative declaration has been pre- pared, no additional environmental work need be prepared except under certain circumstances, i.e., if changes were proposed in the project which required important revisions due to the involvement of new, significant environmental impacts, or changes occurred with respect to. the circum- stances under which the project was undertaken, or new information .became available and the information was not known or could not have been known at the time the previous EIR or negative declaration was adopted. Staff did not believe the changes of eliminating the stable and instead allowing 20 one-way guests per day to the hostel rose to the level set forth in CEQA requiring additional environmental review; 'however, in the interest of public information, staff prepared a separate environmental assessment addressing the changes in the traffic allowed to and from the hostel. Planning Commission Helene Wheeler said the change in the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations were unanimous rccomaendations to the Council. The Commission found the } ci4sysed uiirsnyssrs to be }o_____R consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation and the zoning designation for all park dedicated lands within the City of Palo Alto. The Commission recommended the "V site and design suffix be added to the new zoning designation in order to ensure that any future changes to the plans for Arastra parkdevelopment went under careful public review and citizen participation. It was important to note that although it was logical. for Council to consider Items 12 and 14 together, the only item before the Planning Commission for discussion was Item 12. Council. Member Patitucci asked how Council's action that evening was affected by the question of park dedication. He understood the area was dedicated open space, which could only be changed by the voters, and he queried whether changing the zoning in any way interrelated with that action. Ms. Northway said it was park dedicated land which became final on November 3, 1981. "Park dedicated" meant the use of the land as parkland could noL be changed without a. vote of the people and a vote of the Council. Council Member Patitucci referred to the criteria applied before deciding whether to do an EIR. He referred to the Alza Corporation, hazardous materials site, in which the City did an Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) and deter- mined no environmental impact; however, based primarily on the question of controversy, it was recommended that Council vote to postpone the project for.. a year while an EIR was completed. While discussing the EIR process, he did not hear that controversy was a potential motivator for doing more extensive EIR work than was done. In the subject instance a complete EIR was not done. He clarified that controversy was not an issue. Ms. Sloan said CEQA required that an EIR be prepared if the initial review of the project indicated the potential for significant adverse effects. Another section of CEng► pointed to certain factors where if it was a marginal case whether an EIR should be prepared, significant public con- troversy should also be considered. Council Member Patitucci asked for an official differentia- tion between the public controversy associated with the Alza situation versus the particular case. Ms. Sloan said in the case of Alza, the City Attorney's office assessed the negative declaration and believed it indicated the potential for significant adverse effects with or without the public controversy. ..In addition, an entire neighborhood submitted petitions and were appealing the negative declaration as a group. In the present case, staff had determined that the previous environmental review was adequate. Also, .the controversy over the project was from a small group of people. Council Member Klein believed the City Attorney's Office had indicated controversy was not in and of itself sufficient to generate the requirement of an EIR. Ms. Sloan said that was correct. 58-227 9/14/87 Council Member Klein clarified that public controversy was not enough 'to trigger an EIR and if it were, it would mean that any two, three or four citizens could trigger the requirement of an EIR. Ms. Sloan said that was correct. Karl Geier, Law firm of Miller, Starr & Regalia, 101 Ygnacia Valley Road, Suite 401, Walnut Creek, CA 94596, represented many of the home owners along John Marthens Lane, the pri- mary access proposed ay the City to use for what amounted to a 35 -bed hotel in an undeveloped area. The public considered a youth hostel to be a'somewhat desirable use for any type of property. The City made up its mind that it wanted a hostel in the area. His clients did not agree and believed a youth hostel was a good use elsewhere. In the subject location it was a commercial use in the middle of a pristine area surrounded by private homes and it committed a winding roadway not designed for the traffic introduced by the Ci tag..! s use of the John Marthens house. The roadway had limited site distances and was much narrower than was per- mitted by any city or County ordinance for a public or a commercial access road. He presented some photographs which showed the limited site distances at the entrance to John Marthens Lane and other pictures showing the limited clear- ance for vehicles or bicycles or any other type of user of the road. Converting such a road into_. a public access road for a commercial use in the John Marthens house was totally inappropriate. Earlier that day he delivered a letter (on file in the City Clerk's Office) to the City which set forth many reasons why his clients strenuously disagreed with the City. Attorney and City staff's position. His clients intended to litigate most of the issues with the City if necessary. He asked the record to reflect that the City Council received that letter. Aside from the various and extensive effects of the project particularly on his clients who were- the directly affected parties that lived along Jahn Marthens Lane, the project had additional- effects which affected surrounding land owners. The residences were located in an area not presently used at night. The project introduced a night time use with lights and noise which car- ried in the still night air and which significantly affected the residents' quiet and solitude. Further, they disagreed with the City Attorney in her contention that changes were not made in the project. Many significant changes were made from a CEQA standpoint. An important change deleted stable traffic, a locally oriented use, with a user familiar with the road who had a reason for being there to a youth hostel traffic which aside from introducing parties who were not familiar with the road and its hazards, particularly to bicyclists and pedestrians, it also introduced people .who would not normally have a reason for being in the area in the evening and people who were not familiar with fire dangers in the vicinity and it generally introduced an ele- ment of public use which involved a much less manageable type of traffic. Mayor Woolley verified that Council received the letter mentioned by Mr. Geier that evening at their places but that no one had yet had the opportunity to read it. Ted Carlstrom, 285 Hamilton Avenue, spoke on behalf of some of the residents in the localit•= of the Arastradero Preserve. He submitted a letter to the Council (on file in the City. Clerk's office) which set forth many legal posi- tions about which he advised the residents and many of which were previously the subject of discussion with the City Attorney. He clarified that by sending Council the letter he meant to disclose the earnestness and good faith of the position of the residents' in the locality and that their position` was one based upon advise: and merit. In his judg- ment, the causes of.action which those residents had because of their ownership of the ?load were good causes of -action and if a case was filed on those actions, the residents would prevail. The most important action Council could take was to act on wise policy which he believed was to recognize the points as set forth in Ed van Bronkhorst's letter, dated September 10, 1987. Council was authorizing the use of a substandard structure for the purposes of what was equiva- lent to a public accommodation and hotel and was allocating one acre in a ten -acre zone. The standards in the zone were for impervious cover limitation; the property was not on sewers and did not have leach field. The absence and neces- sity of a leach field were not addresssed and unless some- thing was done one would probably smell the hostel before they saw it. The property did not have an alternative emer- gency access which was required in every subdivision in the locality. It was at the end of a long driveway; it was served by a road which the City and County reported and every expert witness said was .substandard for the purposes for which it was intended for use. Council was gratuitously imposing upon the land owners in the locality the exposure to liability which he believed was an unfortunate deed. At one' point there was an offer by the City Attorney's Office to. include his clients within the scope of an indemnifica- tion agreement and within the scope, of iesur nce. His clients were asked to give up a civil right, i.e,:, not to ease for a period of two years in consideration for their being included in.. the protection of their .interests as prop- erty owners, In his clients' seeking of peace to use the 58-229 9X14/87 road the way it was originally intended and the way it was historically; used, there was a suggestion at one point that they pay the City $250,000 for an alternative access. There were no fences or barriers to prevent hikers from going into surrounding properties and there was nothing to prevent the. hikerl from being turned away from the hostel to be sleeping in the area. The highest points of occupancy would be in tie summer where the fire danger was the highest and the park diu not have 24 -hour rangers. He suggested it was a liability exposure totally disproportionate to the community benefit to be involved. He believed it was a disposition of property by the City Council of dedicated parkland. The wisest thing Council could do was -to reconsider any action. In 1984, they started out with the City Council considering no traffic except pedestrian traffic on John Marthens Lane, and they were now at the place where that action was totally reversed. Greg McCarthy,, 4 Arastradero Road, Portola Valley, asked that John tarthens Lane be depicted on the map. Six hundred feet of his property line bordered along John Marthens Lane. He felt the people were being pushed around, and the City of Palo Alto would be sued by the injured individuals. The landowners along John Marthens would be sued and they did not need that. They collected 34 names of the landowners on Alpine and Arastradero Roads, which was everybody in that area. The petition (on file in the City Clerk's Office) said that the .undersigned did not believe the Arastradero Preserve was an appropriate location for a youth hostel. They would favor a study to locate a more convenient site closer to Palo Alto streets, activities, and public trans- portation.: He could not understand why the City would want to use an inferior street such as John Marthens Lane when many thousands of feet of Arastradero Preserve bordered Arastradero Road. He believed the record would show that everybody in the area was against the use of John Marthens. Lane. Nine people did not oppose the hostel but, if the hostel had to happen, would like to see that it was access- ible from Arestradero Road via Palo Alto's lands. Paul Reimer, 6 Arastradero Road, addressed the zone change as well as the lease of the hostel space within the Arastradero Preserve. While he agreed the routing was fairly accurate outside the reserve itself, the internal street shown within the Arastradero Preserve would be called a driveway; he was aware of no official designation that John Marthens Lane did anything more than go to the property edge. That might be important because the Council's action to date, and at that particular point in time the property was zoned Open Space (O8). OS zoning carried quite a few restrictions including the amount of impervious cover, the 58.23d' 9/14/87. size of the allowable parcels, and the controls on what could be done within any property zoned OS without the proper site and design review. The zoning action faced the Council with a dilemma. He did not see that the Council could in any way interpret the actions, the condition of the lease, the fact that a lease had been presented by the City and signed by the AYH in an OS zone that essentially created a one -acre parcel. That was against the rules. Equally, he could not see that the Council could go for the impervious coverage to the extent spoken to ----some 2,400 feet of the driveway --in an area where by the very ordinance they could only covert 3.5 percent of the site to impervious coverage. One factor why the Council might want to consider it a valid zoning was that the conditional uses for OS zone included that of a guest ranch,. and the hostel might be interpreted as falling within that category. If the zoning was changed to PF as proposed, the impervious cover restriction was gone, and in the foothills they did away with what had been an important consideration on the use of properties.. The ten -acre minimum sized property in the OS zone was gone, but he did not find are, allowable use under the PF zone compat- ible with the hostel. The dichotomy was whether the Council would zone it and find the use subject to challenge, keep it in the current zone where they probably had a compatible use but one which was out of sorts with the OS zone. On page 5 of the 1987 EIR there was a statement that grading would be on the roadway itself as follows: "Insulation of earth berms along the edges of the drop offs on the unpaved sec- tion of the road," to be completed in August 1987. He showed a presentation of what was involved with that opera- tion showing the City's equipment working, before and after pictures, and the conditions of the OS zone.. Unless the,\.. City could produce the site and design review, the geologi- cal reports, and the erosion control plan, he believed the serious amount of work involving more than 100 yards of grading. had been done in violation of the OS zone. It was an important element that the actions to date had been very strongly pointed toward bringing the hostel into being, despite the fact the zoning, size of parcel, and impervious coverage was not compatible. He had copies of what accur- ately presented the arithmetics of the OS zone as it applied to the site, which set forth the difference in parcel size. The lease had a parcel of 49,500 square feet, the OS zone required 435,500 feet. The impervious coverage for the particular site involving the off -site driveway and the house itself was 58,200 square feet --well over an acre of impervious coverage. John. Law, 830 Los Trarcos Road, said their property abutted the southwest corner . of Arastradero Pt`eserve. Their prop- erty was not nearly as impacted by the proposed action 58-231 9/14/87 as the properties of the residents on John Marthens Lane. However, he spoke as an avid utter of the land as a trail runner, a serious bike runner, and a lover of open space. Arastradero Road was a dangerous route for bike riders and car -drivers. Regardless of that evening's actions, he believed the danger could be significantly mitigated by forcing car drivers to drive slower and bike riders to ride in single file at the edge of the road. Clear signing and active enforcement could solve the problem, as Woodside did around its town center. The laws for riding bicycles were clear, and in Woodside'a violator received a minimum of a $ 30 ticket and a half-hour time delay while receiving the ticket. A paved bike lane would be an additional long-term improvement. He agreed John Marthens Lane was not designed for the car usage that could occur if the existing stable and hostel were fully developed without additional access, and he agreed there was a fire danger in any use of the relatively dry And windy open space. He also believed that public open space should be used by the public. As a local architect, developer, and commissioner for 25 years, he had complete confidence in the process that the City would follow :'with a PF(D) zoning. Improvement of the existing Meadowlark Road/trail from the existing Lake Utility Road could provide additional service and emergency access to the stable and hostel. ;, Longer term, the road could be -upgraded for public access Or the stable and hostel could eemoved nearer Arastradero Road. He believed it was sore- to focus only on the ways to limit the public user ,he public land. . It was important to find enviror ,..,tally --sound solutions that would encourage others to share the use of the beautiful land, and thereby give the heritage long-term meaning. Alma Ostrander, 4135 Dake Avenue, had never found John Marthens Lane bad to walk on, nor had problems walking there by herself. She was concerned John Marthens was being treated as a private country lane to the homes. It was a Palo Alto Road and they never objected when the stable •:was there and people went there all the. time, as did huge hay trucks. They just objected to youth who wanted an overnight stay, and. it was not a hotel but a hostel. She was present to see the lease signed that evening. Susan Varian, 327 Addison Avenue,,, favored the present plan, was glad the Council had the lease before them, and hoped they could see some action and get the hostel opened. Arteaas Qinzton, 28014 Natoma Road, Los Altos Hills, was present to answer any questions on either Items 12 or 14, and she hoped both items would pass that evening. Mary Davey, 12645 La Cresta Drive, Los Altos Hills, spoke on behalf of those who supported the Council action to approve the lease with the youth hostel. She also spoke for those Palo Altans who used hostels in other parts of California. Groups such as the Stanford nurses, Palo Alto Lutheran Church, Stanford Memorial Chapel, Stanford University Fund -Raising Committee, Palo Alto .Cub Scout Troups, Palo Alto Unitarian Church, National Organization for Women, St. Marks Church, Stanford Alumni Association Palo Alto Branch, Brownie Troups of Palo Alto, Girl Scouts of Palo Alto, and Ohlone School benefited from hostels up and down the sea coast. Barbara Wein, 474 - 21st Avenue, San Francisco, was the Executive Director of American Youth Hostels (AYH). She believed the proposed lease was fair especially to those concerned about the number of people. AYH requested clar- ification regarding its use of the facility no more than four times a year for fund raising events and perhaps a board retreat. In terms of John Marthens Lane, AYH was limited to 20, guest trips and agreed to limit its staff trips and deliveries although it was not part of the City Council's action. AYH agreed to no day use unless it was associated with overnight use and to pay $13,500 toward road improvements. AYH was paying for all of the improvements on the house including the septic system and leach field,which was different from any other government contracts. There had always been a participating share done by the government agency. AYH also took responsibility for locking the gate. All advertising and promotion for the hostel included the restrictions on the traffic and required reservations for cars. After much discussion, AYH agreed to indemnify and hold harmless the neighbors as well as the City on the road, but the neighbors did not agree. AYH did everything possible to comply and make accommodation. She did not believe the neighbors were concerned about the safety of the road but rather who was going to use the hostel. Mr. Geier clearly did not understand what the hostel was when he called it a hotel and when he said it was a commercial use. All of a YH's hostels were located in parks --some were in national parks, state parks, city parks, county parks and none _ were in commercial areas. Hostels were very basic, shared accommodations for people who liked to meet other people, who cared about the environment, who cared about learning more about the surrounding area and its culture. AYH just opened a hostel in Redwood National Park and it was filled with interpretive displays. The Superintendent of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area referred to AYH as its partner in the park, helping themto carry out their park mission by doing the things they wished they could do 58-233 9/14/87 if they had the resources. Hostels were used by a variety of people. She did not believe there would be much give by or pedestrian traffic. The hostel did not have good public transportation to it and it was visualized mainly as a group facility. Hidden Villa, a similar type hostel on the peninsula had 24 beds, was two miles from the nearest bus stop had about 5 percent pedestrian traffic and Sanborne Park with 40 beds, three miles from public transportation had about 8 to 10 percent walk in traffic. Jeff Shopoff, 2310 Washington Street, San Francisco, was an attorney representing Golden Gate Council of American Youth Hostels and a director of AYH. After listening to the testimony he believed opposition to the hostel was a matter of misinformation. AYH ran six youth hostels and each one was located in a park and enjoyed the support of the park administrators and the community in which they were located. He urged that Council stay on course and in a short period of time he assured the opposition would dissolve because they would see what AYH was and would know what it brought to the community.. Eric Willis, 2361 Byron Street, opposed the hostel and the zoning. He worked on the Stable Committee which tried to use the open space and the existing stable facility because he was an avid rider and believed horses and horse training could be an asset in Palo Alto. Their application was denied and the Committee was told that a full EIR was required in order to have the stables and that they would have to pay for all If the increased costs. The property owners in the area never objected to the use of the barn. He believed the property should be used by the people of the City of Palo Alto and not exclusively for a small, special group. He saw no benefit to the City of Palo Alto by the use of the property by the AYH. He believed there was unequal and unfair treatment in looking at and approving the use. The road was inadequate for people who had never been on the road. The alternative accessway needed to be graded and worked on but it was wide enough and was already a scar on the land. He believed everyone could benefit by proper planning. Harrison Otis, sympathized with the property owners. He did not believe people from the outside should say what to do with the property. The Horsemen Association tried to work out a day use and were willing to make trails, commit money and hard work. He was not opposed to youth hostels but was concerned about lawsuits with which the City would be faced in the event of any fire. He referred to the Arastradero fire and urged caution. 58-234 9/14/87 Olive Mayer, 245 Josselyn Lane, Woodside, urged approval of the lease with AYH. She referred to the Sierra Club's Hikers Hut which had been operated for the past ten years in McDonald Park. When they first went to the County to obtain permission to use the park and build a. hostel in the park, they had many complaints from all the people who had holdings in the park. The park nevertheless granted permis- sion. In the ten years they had operated, they had never had a complaint from the neighbors in the area. The YMCA did not originally support the hostel but now brought its children to the Hikers Hut. The counsellors at the YMCA used the Hikers Hut for their retreats. The Sierra Club carried fire and liability insurance. Smoking was not allowed. They had never had any tires in the area. She pointed out the average number of round trips per day to a house was 12 and the hostel would only have ten. In .tents of the EIR, she believed the City was on solid ground. Mayor Woolley reminded her colleagues that they had heard the threat of litigation that evening and might want to consider a closed session rather than getting into such an area. Council Member Klein asked the City Attorney, said since two of the attorneys who spoke made it very clear that if the Council did not vote tae way they wanted, they would file a lawsuit, whether a closed session was appropriate. City Attorney Diane Northway replied under the Brown Act when there had been a threat of litigation, they could adjourn to closed session to discuss the legal aspects of the matter. She recommended the Council do so if they wished, and the reasons were obvious. Council Member Klein asked if the City Attorney intended to follow the practice of suggesting the matter be taken up in closed session if asked a question she believed would bear on litigation. Ms. Northway said yes. Council Member Bechtel said they had excellent, well - documented preparation for the action. The issue came before the Council back in 1982 or 1983 when a citizens committee was first appointed to evaluate and make recon- mendations. on the use of the property. For those reasons, because of the information she reviewed, because of the Planning Conmission's recommendation on Item 12, she was ready to proceed. 58-235 9/14/87 MOTION: Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Renzel, to adopt the Ordinance and Resolution. ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING untitled "ORDINANCE OF THE .COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 11.00.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (THE ZONING NAP) TO CHANGE THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS ARASTRADERO PRESERVE FROM OPEN SPACE (OS) TO PUBLIC FACILITIES (PF) SITE AND DESIGN REVIEW COMBINING DISTRICT REGULATIONS" RESOLUTION 6646 4 6 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMEBDIG THE PALO ALTO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS ARASTRADERO PRESERVE FROM OPEN SPACE ... CONTROLLED DEVELOPMENT TO PUBLICLY OWNED CONSERVATION LAND" Council Member Renzel commented the publicly -owned conservation land use designation and the public facilities zoning district were standard zoning and comprehensive land use designations for all manner and fashion of parks in the City. She did not believe the subject park should be treated any differently, and the Council should proceed with the change. Council Member Klein referenced the material received at 7:25 p.m., which obviously no Council Member had a chance to read, and asked if the City Attorney met with the attorneys for the John Marthens Lane. 14s. Northway said not that she was aware of. Council Member Klein asked if the City Attorney had a chance to receive their materials. Ms. Northway said they received the materials about 3:00 p.m. that afternoon and went through it, although it was voluminous amount of materials to receive at that late hour. Council Member Klein said he would appreciate the City Attorney's opinions on what was contained in those materials. Ms. Northway believed the moment was right to retire to ' a closed session. COUNCIL ADJOURNED FROM 9:10.9:48 P.M. TO CLOSED SESSION TO R - DISCt1SS POTENT AL L GAT ON RE U OF ARA ERV 58-236 9/14/87 Council Member Patitucci asked if the Council would be making the change anyway if they were not going to lease the property. Ms. Northway said yes. NOTION PASSED unanimously, Cobb absent. NOTION* Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Renzel,` to adopt the negative declaration, approve the park improve- ment ordinance authorizing the City to enter into the lease with the Golden Gate Council of American Youth Hostels, Inc. (AYE),, and direct staff tO install a sign at the junction of Arastradero Road and 4ohf Narthens Lane directing park traf- fic to the Arastradero Preserve parking lot, with the fol- lowing amendment to the lease to allow AYH to use the site for internal AYH needs not to exceed four times per year, with the understanding that the vehicular trip limit remain the same. ORDINANCE FOR. FIRST READING entitled 'ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL or THE CITY oE_ PALO ALTO APPROVING A LEASE FOR A YOUTH HOSTEL TO BE OPERATED IN THE ARASTRADERO PRESERVE* Council Member Renzel was delighted to see the issue finally reach that stage despite obstructive behavior, perhaps, on behalf of the neighbors. Many .concerns were raised by the neighbors with respect to traffic and safety on John Marthens Lane, and she believed the City had bent over back- wards to address those concerns. The 1984 environmental assessment and the negative declaration done in conjunction with the specific action that evening covered the situation as to the travel on John Marthens Lane and, in fact, with the closure of the stable and the limitation of the hostel,. there would be less traffic. Having a presence in the house was a: value to the preserve in that someone was there if there was a problem on the property. Concerns about lights at night were never expressed with the property was rented to at lease three different owners and when Mr. Reimer him- self lived, there. It was a public use, open to anyone on a first-come/first-served basis, open to Palo Al tans and indeed to peeple from, other communities just as other hostels were open to people from Palo Alto. The use allowed the facility, which was in parkland, to be used in appropri- ate way for the public. She hoped her c:til ea jaes would sup -- port the motion. Council Member Patitucci noted in the lease the total amount of deposit was ”,OOO, and he asked if that was the limit of liability if anything should occur to the adjacent property,. 58-237 9/14/87 Mr. Fellman said the $5,000 was similar to a rental deposit. AYH was also asked to provide insurance. Council Member Patitucc:i clarified the insurance would cover the other liabilities. Mr. Fellman said that was correct. Council Member Patitucci referenced page 3 of the lease which spoke to a one dollar per year lease, yet acknowledged the prior rent was $2,450 a month and said it needed to be acknowledged strictly for City accounting purposes. He asked why that was. Mr. Fellman said that was true to staff's formula of pre- senting to the Council what the rental value was in the past. It was part of the City's lease policy and was typi- cal with all the City's leases. Council Member Patitueci asked tor an explanation of the action the City would take in order to correct a default on various provisions, such as 34 cars per day. Ear. Wellman said staff told the AYH as well as the people on John Marthens Lane that a one-time overage of the amount of cars would not necessitate a breach of the lease, and it would take several overages. Staff's first form of action would be to put in their own automobile counter. The AYH would be required to correct the action and would be in breach of the lease if they did not do sc. Ms. Northway clarified the City could terminate the lease if there was a material breach.-. Council Member Patitueci neither favored the position of the home owners on John Marthens Lane nor the position of the hostel. Basically, he believed the project developed a momentum, was being carried forward, and really should be totally reviewed from the outset not only for its environ- mental impact but :for its public policy impact. He did not believe the Council should do the project but should admit it was the wrong decision at the wrong time for a number of reasons. First, -the project was in no . way consistent with the 'master plan effort done over two years ago which resulted in recommendations to have a stable, a full-time resident ranger, perform minimal road improvements, and allow the hostel to operate. He believed the proposal at that time was for the hostel to operate in the evenings and there would be a public use of the facility_ in the daytime 58-238 9/14/87 by Palo Alto residents. About 75 to 80 percent of those proposals were gone. There was no stable, no ranger, and even the letter received from the AYH Executive Director that day recommending the Council approve the lease, regretted the diminished use and the fact it was a far - reduced hostel activity than was ever proposed. It did not make sense and needed to be restudied. A second problem was the incredible subsidy for the use. The property was worth $3 or $4 million, with rental value on a proven basis at least $2,500 and probably $3,000 a month, and the City was giving it away at $1 a year, which was excessive. He did not believe the City of Palo Alto could afford to subsidize a youth hostel at between $30,000 and $100,000 per year, and if the City was going to subsidize it, he preferred that it was somewhere else. He really did not believe it was the best place for a youth hostel that would benefit the people of Palo Alto. He believed in the hostel system and had used it himself, but the people of Palo Alto deserved to have a hostel in the middle of their town where people could use mass transit, interact with the citizens, and, most impor- tantly, where the facility was available for residents of Palo Alto to use. They would see very little use by resi- dents of Palo Alto under the circumscribed procedures to which they had all agreed. Lastly, the City would have litigation on the subject. Given a consistency to avoid controversy; they probably should have done a complete EIR. He believed they would hear more of that issue in the future, which was very unfortunate because the people on John Marthens Lane, the City, and the hostel would spend a lot of money and they would not have gotten anywhere. He hoped ,his colleagues would have the courage to review their past decisions. Vice Mayor Sutorius observed that earlier that evening there were references to a number of materials that had been received and, th,a. amount of paper, and he said it was true that some of that material was received at the eleventh hour. His .folder containing the one 42 -page communication was time -stamped a.t 3:05 p.m., which was approximately the time staff also received it. Another letter was not time - stamped. It was heard that the Council received the materials actually available at their positions when they arrived that evening. The Council did have, an earlier meeting that evening so had an opportunity to scan some of the materials and analyze those aspects that might be con- sidered new information or shed light on past information. He was not speaking for his colleagues in commenting that, from his vantage, it would be wrong to say there was not new written material that had been received,, but thepoint would be what the relevance of the material was, and whether it 58-239 9/14/87 shed new light on the subject. In his judgment in receiving the material, attempting to evaluate it, and understanding all the issues and concerns expressed, the 1984 process followed from an EIA standpoint and the update of teat process were all properly done, and the Council .had the information -that evening upon which to confirm or deny the decisions the Council had made over a. long course of time. He did not see something that altered the process he used in arriving at his decision and his past votes on the subject, nor did he hear anything new in Council Member Patitucci's expressions, except his nuances applied in the very end comments about anticipating litigation. It was Council Member Patitucci's choice to anticipate litigation and announce it in that fashion, and it should be understood there were other Council. Members who were ready to make their vote now not because they were anticipating litigation but because they believed a proper job had. been done, a proper foundation for their decision existed, and they were prepared to make the decision which many people honestly felt was long overdue. Council Member Levy came into the process prepared to vote in favor of moving things along. He opposed approval ofthe hostel earlier but was out voted by a substantial majority of his colleagues, so felt the deed was done and they might aswell go ahead. He had net been swayed particularly by the arguments made by members of the public on one side or the other but believed he would return to his original position of opposition. His decision had to do with the value of the property and what they would do with the money if the property did not exist. He believed Council Member Patitucci was being extravagant with numbers when he stated the value of the property at $3 to $4 million, but the property was worth $1 million and maybe a little more. In order to be objective, one would have to say if the City of Palo alto had $1 million, would they use those funds to fund a youth hostel, and the answer was clearly "no." There were many other pressing issues and they would use .the funds elsewhere. They were taking a property that had a market value of $1 million and not only funding using that property to fund a youth hostel but, in order to make way for the youth hostel, they were losing a stable which was costing the City nothing and giving members of the community oriented towards equestrian activity another element of diversity in the total mix of.Palo Alto, and they would lose that. He rejected the argument that the City did not really have $1 million up there because if they did not have a hostel, theproperty would sit vacant. The property could well be used as a private holding. As a private .home, it'. would not interfere with the usage of the land any more than it would as a hostel. It had been used by private individuals up until the present and : had not interfered with the usage of the land to the public. He believed they had let their priorities go in the wrong direction simply because the house was there. In fact, the house had a significant value, a value they would not turn into a youth hostel in other circumstances and, if they were going to uee that property, they should use it in a way` that would enable the City to realize that value and, in turn, use those funds in many other ways more needed within the community. The youth hostel was certainly a valuable usage. He had nothing against it, and it would make a contribution to the public, but he just did not believe the value was there. He would align himself with Council Member Patitucci. Mayor Woolley agreed that the process: had been very long. She reminded Council Members Patitucci and Levy that the parcel on which the house sat was park -dedicated land. The City was able to rent it for a period of time because they had excepted that portion up until. November of the previous year, but from then on that portion went in with the rest of the park under the park ordinance. As such, they could not rent the house to a private individual unless they returned to the voters and ask them to undedicate that particular piece of land; however, she agreed it was certainly an under-utilized asset of the City. Previously, Vice Mayor Sutorius suggested the way to maximize the use of the precious asset was to build their own road so they had no limitations on being able to use the property. Regarding where to get the money to build the road, he came up with the very good solution of actually selling one lot --and it had to be ten acres because there was ten-acrezoning--from a portion of property the City had on the other side of Arastradero Road which was not park -dedicated. The suggestion did not have much support among the rest of the Council; nevertheless, she did not feel discouraged because the land was still there and, by doing what they were doing with the hostel, the property would still be there, although under --utilized. Perhaps in the future they would want to look at the suggestion again and do something to have better use out of the investment. She was pleased the Council was finally able to move ahead on the issue that evening, and she was not discouraged by the fact they were not utilizing the properly as fully as they might be able to in the future. Council Member Klein responded in much the same way as Mayor Woolley to some of the remarks made by Council. Members Patitucci and Levy. He agreed that, to some degree, it was a very heavily subsidized hostel, and that was one reason why he voted to limit any further expenditures of the City on the property in other hearings on the subject. He believed they had done enough and, if people wanted the 5.8 241 9/14/87 hostel, they should come forward. But, if there was a sub- sidy, it was a strange one. It was not as if the City was taking money out of its bank account and using it to pay for the hostel - The land was there; _the building was there, and they really could not be used for other purposes. As Mayor Woolley pointed out, the property could be _rented only if they returned to a vote of the people. That was an unlikely occurrence and one the Council had never followed .in the past with respect to properties in park zones. Similarly, it was unlikely they would be able to sell it off. Although it was an extremely valuable piece of property, the only alternative use he realistically saw for the property was to demolish the house and use the land as an additional part of the Preserve.. That would not be such a bad alternative but the hostel alternative, even with its limitations, was prob- ably better. On that rationale,. he voted in the past for the hostel and would do so again that evening because he had not heard new or persuasive arguments to change his Jmind. Indeed, he was really disappointed by the comments made'by the residents on John Marthens Lane. They were really based on irrational tears that the people who would be using the hostel were somehow bad people. He found no evidence Of that when he considered what other hostels did, and the people they attracted. There was the same degree of prob- ability that the people who used the hostel were going to be bad people as the people who were residents of John Marthens Lane. They had to expect the young people who visited were going to be good people. He saw nothing to make him feel otherwise and got a feeling of almost bias when he heard comments they would not: be good people and that bothered him;. He heard concerns that somehow the people were going to set fires. That was an extreme and unworthy argument. If the fire danger was so high in that area, maybe nobody should be there. When he heard those arguments he got the feeling that maybe the residents of John Marthens Lane had not been using arguments all along that were really their true arguments. He and the other Council Members had been very ssanssitive to the arguments about traffic. . They set traffic conditions for the hostel that were tough, would be enforced, and more than adequately protected the interests of_the people who lived along the road. He was surprised at the vehemence of the remarks made by the people on John Marthens _ Lane because he felt the restrictions imposed on traffic -at the early hearings on the subject had won, if not their acceptance, -at least grudging acquiescence that they were being protected. People were free to differ on such subjects. His vote was that the CouncAl had carefully con- sidered the issue, the evidehc;e before them was basically a rehash, and they should go fo:}ward with the lease. 58-242 9/14/87 Council Member Renzel concurred with Mayor Woolley and Council Member Klein's remarks about,,the value of the home in the midst of parkland. Also, she pointed out the home was located at the end of John Marthens Lane -that went into the property, and to sell off the ten -acre parcel in order to use it would be creating an inholding in the middke of the Arastra property and would have one more home owners attempting to dictate what kind of public uses could take place in parkland. It was terribly important that the land remain public. Council Member Bechtel said her comments had been amply stated by Council Members Klein, Renzel, and Mayor Woolley., They had discussed the issue over and over again for the past few years and should proceed with the vote before Council that evening. NOTION PASSED by a • vote of 6-2, Levy, Patitucr:i voting "no," Cobb absent. MOTION: Mayor Woolley moved, seconded by Levy, to bring Item 19, Request of Council Member Leland Levy. re CATV Underground, forward ahead of Item 15, Contract with Oakland Fence Company for Construction and Installation of Fences at 1755 Babarcadero Road and Palo Alta Municipal Golf Coarse. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Cobb absent. 19. REQUEST OF COUNCIL MEMBER LELAND LEVY RE CATV UNDER - GROUNDING (1141) Council Member Levy was sure his colleagues had heard a great deal from members of the public since the undergrounding installation of . Cable took place in Leland Manor. . A large number - of people had called him to ask what was going on, and he agendized the item so the Council could hear from the public, the Cable company, and from Pacific Telephone who installed the system, to determine what, if anything, could be done. His understanding was that the franchise agreement called for pedestal boxes in the underground .areas. He would like to see three questions addressed that evening by every- one who spoke. From a technical standpoint, the first ques- tion was did they need the pedestal boxos .at all. Other com- munities did not have them. The second question was, if they did need the pedestal boxes, what could they do to provide flexibility in their placement so they had minimum neighbor- hood impact. The third question was how could they improve the notification process so home owners knew more precisely what was happening, and so they could work better with the installers of the pedestal boxes to minimize -their neighbor- hood impact. He understood there were several different 58-243 9/14/87 types of pedestal boxes. The one used most broadly was fairly small and . nonintrusive and was put in one for every four homes. A number of other pedestal boxes, and boxes that were not quite pedestals, were much larger than he antici- pated and the sitting of the boxes on lawns and elsewhere had often been done without the sensitivity that should have been accorded. City Manager Bill Zaner introduced Assistant City Manager June Fleming, Senior Assistant City Attorney Anthony Bennetti; Director of Information Services Dianah Neff; Assistant Director of Utilities, Engineering, Ed Mrizek, who was an expert on the undergrounding systems; Frank Riddle from the Pacific Bell, and Peter Fechheimer from Cable Co-op. He clarified with regard to the provisions of the franchise and the pedestals, that the franchise itself did not require pedestals. It did require that a cable televi- sion company provide the City with a design plan tor the system which did include pedestals. The relationship back to the franchise was through the design plan. Council entered into a franchise with the Cable Co-op for the purpose of providing cable television to' the community. Cable Co --op, in turn, contracted with Pacific Bell to provide the physical hardware, i.e., the wires overhead or the underground system depending upon the area, for the cable.. system. The telephone company trucks seen on the street were actually installing the cable TV system on behalf of the Cable Co-op, which was responsible for its operation. Peter Fechheimer, General Manager of Cable Co-op, 625 Lytton Avenue, said the Cable Co-op was owned by local residents and most of them were property owners in Palo Alto who cared a great deal aoout the community. For the record, the Co-op was not the other company who had sued the City. The pedestals were being used because the cable television indus- try learned through experience that the old method of placing cable and electronic equipment in vaults did not work because the electronic equipment got wet, which created technical problems. The electronic equipment in a cable system was very delicate. If the equipment became wet, it corroded quickly. The corrosion and/or water intrusion caused increased interruptions of cable service, which meant there was ,likely to be an increase in .service problems and area - wide outages if the vaults were used. Also, water damage required the system to be rebuilt sooner than .was normally required and could result in more frequent street openings for replacement or repair of equipment. Another factor to be considered was the potential for signal leakage in a cable system using vaults. When equipment or roads - deteriorated, the signal could leak and perhaps cause interference with airplanes passing overhead, which could be very serious. To support his statements and to clarify why they felt so strongly about vaults, he quoted from some cable television consultants, an Assistant City Manager in a nearby city, and a number of cable operators. First, a quote from Dane Ericksen, a consultant for Hammett & Edison, Inc., the consultant company the City of Palo Alto hired to study cable in Palo Alto who said, "There is rarely a technical issue which is so clear-cut: flush -mounted, below -grade vaults for cable television systems should be avoided at all cost. Flush -mounted vaults inevitably accumulate water and damage cable passive devices (taps, directional couplers, splitters, etc.) and active devices (line extenders, trump amplifiers, etc.). The damage may not be immediate, as the failure mode is oaten corrosion, but the damage will occur. The legacy is an unreliable system and a system which is very costly to maintain. Of course, subscriber satisfaction will be poor due to frequent outages which will result, and the complaint rate to City Hall will be high." A quote from George Livergood who did some work for the Alameda system said, "As a qualified technical and operational consultant to the cable industry, I cannot overemphasize the disastrous consequences of a construction practice which would require :the placement of any cable televisiion system corpus+„ts in the Alameda system in flush --mounted enclosures. Rather than dollars, the long-term operational political costs of such a policy will be measured in the number of dissatisfied subscribers and the hours of waste of City Council time discussing system outages and service interruptions due to the ill-fated practice of a mandate and an irresponsible use of flush -mounted underground enclosures. Any possible perceived advantage of totally underground cable televi=ion system in the Alameda soil conditions is so dwarfed by the real and ruinous aftermath of the consequences as to render the entire underground question a nonissue." Later the quote continued, "In other words, a classic 12- or 20 -channel cable system (which is not the type we are building) can be able to operate satisfactorily with a modest amount of corrosion evident, while the same level of corrosion would likely create widespread service and maintenance problems tor today's state-of-the-art cable system." Cable systems under construction in :the City of Alameda and the one they were building. Robert Wonder, the Assistant City Manager of Alameda, wrote, "Based upon what has been learned from the experiences .of other cable operators and from information supplied by the City's consultant, the evidence suggests that the disadvantages of underground placement... far outweighs the advantages. Carter"J. Stroud, Alameda City Attorney, said, "The evidence 58-245 9/14/87 appears overwhelming that undergrounding is not reasonable." He added, "The purpose of the rebuild is to eliminate unreliability in the system. To require features in the rebuild which are unreliable puts the City in a poor light if this is litigated." He also had letters from the cable gen- eral manager -in Union City and a representative of a large cable company on the east coast explaining why they had prob- lems using vaults. The letters were in the Council packet. Vaults were not recommended for new cable systems. Some people would query why vaults could not be used with some state-of--the-cart technology and be sealed to be -protected from water. Cable system personnel needed to get into the vaults on a regular basis. Unlike Pacific Bell and PG&E per- sonnel who did not need to service the equipment because it was serviced from the rain office. Cable equipment could not be sealed for a long time. It needed to be accessible. There were attempts to seal cable equipment in vaults recently but it did not -work. George Livergood said, "Regardless of the latter observation, however, the systems constructed underground in the proposed manner always experi- ence increased service calls which vary as high as 500 per- cent of the generally accepted norm for the system.as-a whole." Regarding attempts to seal the equipment in vaults Mr. Livergood said, '"the most successful of which was a con- crete enclosure which incorporated an upside down plastic liner held in place by a sciesos-e-type bar wedged into the sides of a vault..." It was an ingeneous approach which did not work. When United Cable faced the same problems in Foster City, they sey up a cable television committee whose sole purpose was to investigate the possibility of putting cable taps in flush mounted boxes. The cnmmittee was made up of two Foster City residents who were engineers. One sug- gested 100 percent installation to prevent the accessible problems in creating flush mounts. The Foster City Planning Commission completed its staff's report on cable television undergrounding, took the results from Un i tell Cable's experi- ence along with information gathered from several other Bay .Nrea systems to conclude there were no existing flush mounted hardware enclosures on the market which merited field tests by United Cable of Foster City. Gene Mussleman, the Chief Operating Officer of Herst Cablevision who operated the Mountain View system said, "since they inherited vaults, they tried -putting -electronic equipment in a 'bubble' to protect it from water which caused the equipment to 'sweat.'" They experienced corrosion problems. It was ingeneous approach which did not work. He hoped he clarified why cable telewie elan electronicequipment- could net be kept in underground Vaults and pedestals Were necessary for an efficient, well - run cable -systeas. In terms of pedestals, there were three sues used in Palo -Alto- all of which were green. The tap 58-246 9/14/87 pedestals were most common. They were 22 inches high, 8-1/2 inches wide. There were approximately 3,800 tap pedestals in the entire service area, which also included East Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Atherton, Stanford and some county area. They were placed on one side of the street on the lot line between every two homes. There were power supply pedestals which were 32 inches high and; 16-3/4 inches wide. There were approximately 50 power supply pedestals in the entire service area. They were also placed on one side of the street and the distance varied according to density of residences in the area. The amplifier pedestal was 24 inches high and 36 inches wide. There were approximately 1.00 in the entire ser- vice area. They were placed on one side of the street approximately every 1s500 to 1,800 feet along the main trunk line. He showed a viewgraph to illustrate where the pedestals would be placed. Each pedestal served four homes --two on each side of the street. A flush mounted box was used when no electronic equipment was required. The pedestal was located in the public easement which was right next to the sidewalk. Whenever possible, pedestals were placed next to or in shrubbery or bushes in order to be hid- den as much as possible. He understood the concerns but vaults were not the solution if the City wanted a state-of- the-art and reliable cable system. He believed the best solution would be to look at ways the pedestals could be con- cealed. He recommended that shrubbery, bushes or flowers be planted around and over the, pedestals for screening. The Cable Co-op was prepared to work with residents to help accomplish the plantings. The pedestals could also be painted in order for them to blend in better and look more attractive. A small fence could be placed around the pedestals or a table could be placed over. them. He believed the City of Palo o Alto residents could be creative in helping to shield the pedestals. Everyone should work with City staff to set up acceptable guidelines. Frank Riddle, :Pacific Bell, believed they tried to be sensi- tive in terms of placement of the pedestals where possible. There were some technical standards which must be adhered to or the system would not work. If they had not been as sensitive as they should be to some customers, Pacific &ell would revisit the customer and see what could be done, Council Member Bechtel asked whether prior notification was given to a home owner and whether anyone worked with the property owner to find a suitable location. Mr. Riddle said in the first underground installation, a short unacceptable notification was given. Based on the experience, a system was designed whereby two weeks advance 58-247 9/14/87 notice was given to each home owner in the area that the work would begin and a telephone number was given for questions. The day before the underground installation, a door hanger was placed at each residence saying the Cable Co-op and Pacific Bell would be in the area the following day and it requested that cars, etc., be removed. A telephone number was given again for questions. Council Member Bechtel clarifier tie goal was to be between two property lines. Mr. Riddle said they wanted to be very close to the edge because if the tap pedestal was moved too far one way or the other, it infringed on one property owner's property while servicing anothers. It was imperative that the pedestal stay closeto the property line. Council Member Bechtel understood the present notifications included a description of what would be installed. Mr. Fechheimer said that was correct but the Newell/ Southampton/Seale area did not receive the same notification and description. Council Member. Patitucci believed the pedestal issue was con- sidered by the Council and was a necessity for the system to operate. Council Member Levy queried whether there was any- thing to be done about the pedestals and if not, how could the City learn to live with them. Council should address the fundamental issue of whether the system could do without pedestals. Mr. Fechheimer said the system could not, and if that was the case, the public needed to know i t was not an alternative. He queried whether there was any alternative to the pedestals. Mr. Fechheimer opined the answer was no, which was cited other experts in the field. why he Council Member Patitucci said short of stopping the system, the. City had no alternative to the pedestals. The public needed to answer whether it wanted the system in their neighborhood and if not, what needed to be done. If the public wanted the system, they needed to determine how to best live with the pedestals. The City` did not have the choice of having cable and not having pedestals. Mayor Woolley queried -whether certain areas could decide whether to have cable. 58-248 9/14/87 City Attorney Diane Northway said not as such. Anything decided with regard to the bilateral agreement would have to be negotiated between the parties. The first fundamental issue was whether the other parties to the franchise were willing to agree to not serve certain areas. The franchise was granted tor the entire City. If the answer to the first question was no, the next question was what mechanism would be implemented. Vice Mayor Sutorius clarified feeder cable went down the street, a connection was made at the pedestal (described as a passive device) and there were essentially four drops from the pedestal just as if a telephone pole was either in the sidewalk with the cable in the air or in some situations in the backyard between the yards of two houses. Sometimes when an aerial drop was fed for telephone or cable service, the drop ran along the 'feeder cable" to the opposite :,se of the house. In terms of undergrounding,%he asked about the added problem, beyond the easement question, if the pedestal was moved back into private property but into vegetation or on the common property line in some instances. The property owner might be willing to have the pedestal physically located adjacent to his or her home in the same manner as a gas meter or an electric meter. He understood the average situation would require 20 additional feet per drop. It did not seem to be much in the way of material. The only question might be a negotiation with property owners. He sensed from the communications and concerns that there was enough neighborliness that it might be the preferred way of handling many of the installations. He asked for comment. Mr. Riddle could not accept the assumption that it might not change the design if they ran the feeder cable another 30 feet. He understood the system was designed on a footage basis and if too many feet were added to the design, there might need to be a redesign of the system to ensure the signal met standards. If that happened, there would be additional costs and delay and could require renegotiation. Regarding easements, they would not want to put feeder cable in on people's property without an easement and the cost of easements were high. Since easement negotiations were not in the contract, it was not an easy issue and could possibly add enough upward pressures to the cost where they would need to renegotiate the contract. Mr. Fechheimer said if the cable drop were moved closer to one house, it extended the distance to the house across the street. It would need to be redesigned but he believed they could get around it if the easement problem could be handled. 58-249. 9/14/87 Mayor Woolley said there were discussions about the easement problem from the standpoint of whether it would be reasonable for the cable company to just make an agreement with the property owner who lived in the house but there would be no legal agreement and no easement written into the deed of the property. The \Cable Co-op and Pacific Bell did not feel comfortable with such an arrangement because when the house was sold, the new owner might well say to take the pedestal away. It would be necessary to have some type of legal agreement which complicated the expenses in terms of having a lawyer and the time involved in carrying out the agreement. She referred to the extra labor of digging the trench to get from the sidewalk back 20`teet. Mr. Fechheimer said it cost $13 to $15 per foot for trenching. Council Member Fletcher asked about the possibilities of getting boxes which were a darker green rather than expecting adjacent property owners to paint the boxes. cis . ,.�....�.. =ddle acid based on Pacific Telephone's contract with - Cable Co-op, the boxes were ordered in volume. Council Member Fletcher asked how much it would cost to paint the boxes Mr. Zaner said the costs were not estimated. Council Member Renzel asked whether the big boxes could not be moved. Mr. Riddle said because of the ,technical standards, the big boxes were much more critical. Amplification had to be every so many feet and the line extenders had to be at certain points. There was about one and one-half feet of flexibility. Council Member Renzel asked if there was any way to create waterproof vaults for the big pieces of equipment. Alameda and Foster City were largely filled wetlands with high groundwater tables. Mr. Riddle understood the larger boxes were the active compo- nents of the system. The more active components, particu-- larAy power, needed to breat'Se to keep the moisture out and to dissipate the heat. For . that reason, they coul-1 not be placed in vaults. 58-250 9/14/87 Council Member Klein asked whether vaults could be used if the system was simpler. Mr. Fechheimer said yes but it was not appropriate for dis- cussion because subscribers were already on-line, Pacific Bell already ordered the equipment and was in the process of construction. The time delays and costs associated with trying to change would be incredible. Council Member Klein sensed from Mr. Fechheimer's quotes of other communities who addressed the question of vaults versus pedestals that there were citizens in those communities also concerned about aesthetics. He asked what happened. Mr. Fechheimer said in Alameda, about 50 percent, of the people asked the cable system to put in shrubbery, bushes or flowers and they were working with the people to conceal the pedestals. The cable company also worked closely with the residents to let them know when they would be there to install the pedestals, where they would be located, the size, etc. The solution seemed to be concealment. Council Member Klein asked whether the pedestals in other communities looked like Palo Alto's. Mr. Fechheimer they were approximately two inches wide_ r and about four or five inches shorter. Council Member Klein asked whether the City would be forced to let a cable company in no matter what if it did not have a syste s p Ms. Northway said depending on the stage, Council could decide to not issue a franchise for a certain area. Once the decision was made to let a franchise in, Council needed to negotiate what the system would be and what area it would cover. If a cable company could `choose not to wire certain areas, she believed Council could choose not to have certain areas wired. She believed Palo Alto was beyond that point. She did not know whether a cable company could come to Palo Alto regardless. Judge Lynch's decisions had not addressed that point. She did not know whether the decision was even decided in the United States. David Mitchell, 526 Center Drive, lived in Crescent Park since 1981 and the underground utilities were installed in early 1983. . He heard a lot about how cable did not work underground ; which was interesting because other things also did not work well underground. They had two "brow: -outs" in 58-251 9/14/87 0 their house since the underground utilities were installed anci had to replace a television tube and a refrigerator. While he could not directly attribute the problems to the "brown -out," they both happened in the same one' -day period right after the "brown -out" which lead him to believe they were related. In both cases, the "brown -out" occurred as a result of wet connections in the underground vault in front of his house. Before the undergrounding was installed, the then Assistant City Engineer told the neighbors how much they needed underground utilities. The neighbors were told the undergrounding would occur beneath the sidewalks and they were installed under the parking strip with no notice to the neighborhood. The sidewalks were leveled in 1987 in a separ- ate project. Frank Riddle said power needed to breathe and he could not believe the underground vaults did not also need to breathe. He wanted the City to address the entire problem as it addressed the technology of the cable system. It was difficult for him to believe technology did not enable the entire system to be underground. He was concerned with the lack of disclosure by the City in what it would do next and how home owners could plan around what was to be done. He was amused by the alternatives to install benches or tables over the pedestals because the people were told earlier that the cable company needed to get into the pedestals fre- quently. The two times their vault was opened because of wet connections, the shrubbery around the large vault was destroyed by the crew. He queried how one could have some- thing attractive around something which had to be opened fre- epently. Ellen Wyman, 546 Washington Avenue, said her neighborhood had thick black squirrel cages across their lines for cable television. Palo Alto residents cared enough about aesthetics to pay for underground` utilities and she was amazed the City Council would think ets residents would not mind a big black stripe in the sky. She believed there would ultimately be a 28 percent subscription rate to cable which meant the wishes of a minority were forcing hardware in people's yards and in the sky. Many people did root care at all about cable television. The people should be asked whether they wanted cable television recognizing the boxes were a necessity. It might be interesting to determine whether people, preferred an .ordinary system and to wait for the technology of the boxes to catch up with the technology of the broadcasting. When such an issue arose, if the residents did not watch out, everyone was affected regardless of whether they were interested in the system. Thepeople counted on the City Council to protect them interests. She urged the Council to find a way to look at the issue again and to ask people whether they wanted cable television. 58-252 9/14/87 Steven Franklin, 645 Center Drive, associated himself with the previous speaker. Crescent Park previously had above- ground utilities and there might be a fair number of ease- ments available already. Some thought should be given to placing the underground cables where the telephone and elec.= trio poles were previously. The scope of the problem with \regard to the boxes might be three or four times greater than the boxes the Cable Co-op was planning to install. He under- stood that Judge Lynch basically said Palo Alto could not limit the cable system to one company but needed to provide equal opportunity to other companies. He was concerned that if the Cable Co-op was allowed to put up boxes, and three or four other companies wanted to service Palo Alto, there would be four boxes for four houses rather than one box for four houses. He was concerned about negative aesthetics being multiplied by a factor of three or four. They were dealing with a friendly company who was trying its best to satisfy the people. Another company who came in under Judge Lynch's opinion might be less interested in satisfying the people and might take a more aggressive stand on what they could do in light of the fact that the City of Palo Alto let the Cable Co-op go so far. George McKee, 1491 Edgewood Drive, thanked Council Member Levy tor agendizing the matter. Judge Lynch's ruling was outlined in that mornings Wall Street Journal and it appeared there would be an opportunity for other cable com- panies to be in Palo Alto which would mean many pedestals. It seemed to him that Judge Lynch's ruling would require the Cable Co-op contract to be renegotiated at some -point. With Judge Lynch's ruling, there was a possibility. that each loca- tion would have a number of boxes. He urged the Council to stop all further installation of pedestals until the legal questions were resolved. Conduit installations could be put in under the streets and just stubbed out where the boxes would be. Council could then enter into a new agreement which would be technically feasible and aesthetically accept- able to the citizens. He recognized the delay in installa- tion of boxes would delay the cable service but he believed the delay was warranted. If, in the end, the installation was one . for which Palo Alto and its citizens could be proud, it would be worthwhile to consider. Robert Smith, 2291 Greer, was a member of the Cable Co-op, but spoke on his own behalf. •He referred to the cable fran- chise, hearings two years ago and said the issue of pedestals and other factors of the installation were completely dis- cussed. Some representatives of the City of Davis said Palo Alto would hear aboutthe pedestals when they were installed. He suspected the problem in Palo Alto was worse than in Davis 58-253 9/14/87 1.4/8.7 because everything was magnified in Palo Alto especially in terms of cable. There were massive amounts of equipment already located on the public easements installed over a long history of building utilities. He referred to the controversy over sewers. People were not sure whether they wanted sewers and were concerned it would be a mess to tear the street apart. When the sewers were in, the street was put back together and the landscaping was done, it looked good and people were glad to have sewers rather than septic tanks. The cable system replaced antennas which during the 1950s were considered to be an eyesore. Cable also -replaced ten -foot satellite dishes which were what one would need to get the kind of reception that cable televisor would provide. He believed the pedestals would blend in when _a little landscaping was done around them. Harry Sanders, 1456 Edgewood Drive, did not believe the system was sophisticated. He never criticized the Council and was an ardent supporter of the City and for what its government accomplished for its citizens. Regarding the current Crescent Park II1 Underground Conversion Project, everyone recognized that any installations on properties throughout Palo Alto would be there for many years and no one wanted the "rinky-dinky above -ground pedestals currently in Leland Manor. He was concerned what they would like in a year and how many accidents would have occurred. He did not. understand the legal entanglements reported in the press last week regarding Judge Lynch's ruling that Palo Alto might end up with more than one cable installation and even that day's editorial in the Wall Street Journal, which impressed him, did not answer the question. Last week the attorney for Century Federal remarked to him, during a telethon, that his company had not yet reached the design stage for a cable installation in Palo Alto but when it did, it would provide whatever the City wanted, pedestals above ground or vaults underground. Frederick Chancellor, Jr., 298 Walter Hays Drive, said as he looked at the installations occurring in Leland Manor, it looked like they had a good chance of ending up with two pedestals on his property. Council Member Levy rode past his house two or three times a day on his bicycle and could attest to the efforts put into remodeling their house. He was not pleased with the feeling he had about the Council and felt like he had been under -represented. He did not feel he was given a chance to understand the undergrounding of the utilities to begin with. He was; never a Council watcher but believed he needed to be now. Somehow he would learn to live with whatever was installed on his property, but he was not pleased with the hack of information which went out in advance. 58-254 9/14/87 Mayor Woolley clarified that Mr. Chancellor's neighborhood was part of the Erstwild Underground District. Assistant Director of Utilities, Engineering, Ed Mrizek said the Erstwild District was in next year's budget. Notices were sent out to the area advising that the City intended to create an underground district. Residents were invited to a meeting at the Cultural Center. Many more meetings would be held on the issue and the matter would go to Council later in the year with the intent to create an underground dis- trict. Sid Owen, 246 Walter. Hayes Drive, said they were told that technology was not advanced enough to buy a cable .televi- sion. He disagreed but it was not as cheap. If Palo Alto wanted to trade some aesthetics to keep down the repair costs that was fine. He was an electronic engineer who built salt waterproof equipment which was mounted on the ground in Florida. He noted an amplifier box which could be opened and _the boxes were set in a hole with no bottom. Inside, the amplifiers were already in a waterproof shield built by Scientific Atlanta. A few .of the boxes were camouflaged but most looked like a string of iron tree stumps. He queried what a Marginal cable company would do when the boxes were rusty and needed paint, a car knocked one over, or some kid stole the cover. He believed the junction boxes should be put underground like some neigh- boring cities did. He agreed that underground utilities should be underground. The City needed to get better con- trol over its franchisee. He was not ready to pay $5,000 to replace a pole in his backyard with a tin casket out front. Jack Kelly, 1209 Dana Avenue, believed Palo Alto had 3,800 tap pedestals, followed by 500 line extender pedestals which would be followed by 100 amplifier pedestals, which was something on the order of 4,400 pedestals to be spread over 120 street miles in Palo Altoand neighboring communities. It did not seem relevant whether the pedestalswere in Palo Alto or on the perimeter. He found it to be a 'breach of the citizenry and Council relationship. When all the under - grounding began back in July, 1979, the specifications to Crescent Park said the contractor would construct a trench as required from the sidewalk area to the house, install three plastic conduits in its power .telephone and future. cable television areas. The conduits for telephone and cable te1evislaw might be direct burial polyethelene laid in the same trench with the power conduit. The telephone con- duit shall be three-quarters of an inch and the cable television conduit one inch,. He paid $800 to put in the cable television conduit underground and remove the backyard 58.255 9/14/87 utility poles which he thought were wonderful. They were now going full cycle and were going to reinstall utilities in the front yard. Palo Alto made an offer for the people to pay the money to have underground utilities and he accepted. Palo Alto put in the conduit and now it was not going to be used. Palo Altans could have been given a choice about whether they wanted to pay more to have the cable utilities put underground. Palo Altans might want to wait for the technology which put man on the moon and strung hundreds of thousands of miles of cable under the ocean to put cable television in a vault. If the technology was not available, he queried why choice three to wait for the arrival of the technology was not given. If they were going to ask for the material to be put underground or refuse to take it at all, it would bring trouble. He submitted that Palo Alto's middle name was trouble. The people did not want the unsightly boxes on their lawns. Sue Dinwiddie, `e543 Jackson drive, said one of Palo Alto's special characteristics was its aesthetics. The little green boxes did not blend in, particularly the ones stuck in the middle of someone's lot. She believed it was possible to consult with individual home owners to, f ind a place for the boxes. The big boxes were a blight on the community and she could not imagine the technology was not available to underground the boxes. She was concerned about the safety of the boxes with young children, teenagers and ears. David Steinberg, 1384 Pitman Avenue, associated himself with all the previous comments except those made by the gentlemen from the Cable Co-op. The . design plan came after the contract but it was the essential part because it showed there would be boxes, pedestals, and all kinds of things which would clutter peoples front yards. Council could figure out how to get the people out of the mess it got the people into. Norman Swope, 154 Walter iiayes Drive, was also concerned about the safety of children since the pedestals were fairly low to the ground. He saw a liability problem for the City because the easement was on City property; he saw the cable company being sued; the utility which was right in the same trench would wind up being sued, and the home owner would be sued because of the association with the pedestals. He did not want to take the risk for any of the liabilities. He queried whether anyone looked at the flood plain. There was a problem in the Edgewood area up to Walter -Hayes where there could be substantial standing water which could affect both the utilities and the cable television .system. He was confident the mill spec systems would permit undergrounding, 58-256 9/14/87 epoxy and special cables could be done. Northampton had a problem with the paving. The shoddy workmanship would require major paving and would require major repaving within two years. He urged that the City find out the general feeling of the public and whether they wanted to spend money for a lesser system or a full blown system. Council was alienating a lot of potential subscribers. He urged reconsideration of the plan design, revise the plan design, redo what was done to the aesthetics of the community, and if necessary, rescind the franchise. Fred Rea, 150 Southwood Drive, drove down Southhampton to see if there really was a problem and thought he had stumbled onto a trailer park. The residents did not like the pedestals and in some instances they were in the middle of a person's lawn. In the field of communications, hardly a month went by where there was not some major technical improvement. He believed the program should be stopped and let organizations like Pacific Telesis put their tremendous resources into research and bring something to Palo Alto for which they could all be proud. If it required a redesign of the system, he believed Palo Altans were willing to wait. If that did not work, he queried a petition to get rid of cable television in Palo Al toe Al Kartchner, 577 Patricia Lane, said he already had a bear trap pit in the sidewalks about nine feet deep and big enough to catch several bears and more pedestals were scheduled. He found it difficult to believe that vaults could not be made absolutely air proof and waterproof, with hermetically -sealed enclosures and enert gas to prevent oxidation or corrosion. He believed other solutions could solve the problems.. If the problems could not be worked out, he would lead a campaign to boycott subscribing. George M. Galvin, 1445 Dana Avenue, might have found the evening's conversation credible in 1937 but found it incomprehensible in 1987. He suggested they concentrate on the positive aspects of putting cable underground. He read a letter which said, "It has come to our attention that our neighborhood is scheduled next for installation of cable television boxes, one for every four houses irrespective of whether the home owner is a subscriber to this service. I inquired of friends -.living in an area where these boxes have been installed with respect to how they happened .to allow this: to be done;: 1 was advised that when they objected, they were told by the City Council that the project was a matter of public record and had been under consideration for two .years or more, and that they should have filed objections sooner. At no time, however, did the. City of Palo .Alto directly contact these home owners advising them 58-257. 9/14/87 of the project, much less seeking their input. This Council, of course, cannot be held responsible for the irresponsible maneuvering of its predecessors; however, at this time we sincerely seek your assistance and that of Pacific Bell and Cable Co-op in finding a mutually acceptable alternate for these insightly boxes." William Chamberlain, 1606 Edgewood Drive, was concerned they had been sold a bill of goods. From the first meeting, they were clearly under the impression that they were getting an underground system and were glad to vote for the system because of undergrounding. No representation was made as to pedestals or boxes, above --ground installations were not mentioned, and Foster ti ty and Alameda were both on dredged soil and were clearly not representative. He supported any effort to halt the matter, and to get people in who really knew what they were doing. He urged the Council to take control. Charles D. Pearce, 530 Jefferson Drive, was puzzled because most, people in California had cable television underground and it worked. They did not have the corroion and maintenance problems. Maybe they were talking cost. He would like to know in dollars the cost of an underground system compared to pedestals and the aboveground system. Harrison O;is, 2721 Midtown Court, said a neighbor in Arizona installed about 6,000 square miles of cable TV, all underground with no problem and no ticky-tacky boxes. Where available they used telephone poles, and satellite antennas were mounted on higher peaks and could be mounted on buildings. Palo Alto had a liability situation because people could trip over boxes and should compenea to for that. It was not too late to rescind on agreements and get somebody who really knew cable systems. Phyllis Alden, 1098 Cardinal Way, was not interested in having cable television and objected to the pedestals. She did not remember the issue being submitted to the voters. The sidewalks were hazardous for walking because they were uneven, the police did not enforce the no parking on sidewalks, the trees shed pods, and now they would have another hazard. Robert Schulz, 1061 Stanley Way, seriously doubted there would be two cable systems in any city. He believed the second systems would be carried to the point where "green. mail" would take over, and someone would have to pay up to keep them out. There was no question the system could go underground. He worked- with systems which were just as complex, over long distances, and which required reliability 58-258 9/14/87 far beyond anything required for an entertainment system, and they were perfectly satisfactory. They were expensive. He believed there were several sources of corrosion in aboveground systems that were far more serious than those underground, such as mice nests and tall dogs. He suggested the cable system make use of the multitude of easements whch criss-crossed the area in which he lived. Judy Teitler, 824 Southampton Drive, had a pedestal in front of her house and wanted to add her name to the list of people who were very dissatisfied with the cable system, and expressed her agreement about the concern with the lack of communication. She believed the first step was to stop further installation in order to look at the alternatives and the possible implications of Judge Lynch's ruling. Carroll D. Fruth, 108 Lois Lane, said in his case the box could be easily concealed in the hedge. The atmosphere in submarines was notoriously damp yet they continued to operate very sophisticated equipment with little problem. The technology existed. He asked what percentage of sub- scribers the cable companies needed to stay in business. He submitted Judge Lynch's decision was of no concern. The economics would prevent a second company, and he seriously questioned if the present company would be financially viable. Jim Dobbie, 586 Center Drive, said 20 years ago he designed electronic equipment that worked very satisfactorily under- ground. With the state-of-the-art components since then, there was no question they could design equipment that would. work underground. Maybe the easiest way to settle the matter would be to bring in unbiased opinions. The testi- monials that. evening came from cable companies which had decided they did not want the equipment underground. They should talk to some cable companies that had decided to put the equipment underground. Statements that the system was needed aboveground because of continuous maintenance and that the company would build a highly reliable system were contradictory. He believed it was a matter of cost, not of technology. Council ,Member Renzel referenced the preparation costs to get an easement to the houses and asked whether it would be possible to have a standard form available for people who. wished to have . the boxes placed further back on their prop- erties. Ms. Northway believed it would be a standard fora_ , but the map or legal description varied from property to property. ' 58-259 9/14/87 Council Member Levy said he was not currently in a position to make any decisions. They heard an educational process was needed. One of the shortcomings of the process that needed to be workers on was communication with the residents. Other questions related to the technical questions, and part of the technical question was clearly one of money. He believed anything could be done with enough money. When they wrote in the franchise, they looked to getting a system that was as close to state-of-the-art as possible, and one of the trade-offs required might be the above ground harboring of the interconnects, but there might be other alternatives. The major problem seemed to be the visual impact, but he would like staff to look at the visual impact in the broader sense, and return to Council with the unbiased opinion mentioned by Jim Dobbie as to whether undergrounding was possible. MOTION: Council Member Levy moved, seconded by Woolley, to direct stagy f .to work with the Cable Co-op and Pacific Bell in order to develop mans of minimizing the visual impact of pedestal boxes and provide a report in the Council packet by the meeting of October 5, 1987, the report to cover three areas: 1) Relates to the guidelines for placement of all pedestal boxes with special emphasis on the amplifier and extender boxes to `,minimize visual impact; 2) To investigate alternate kinds of pedestal boxes that might utilize less obtrusive shapes, colors, materials, and also to investigate the possibility and the costs of using vaults rather than boxes altogether; and 3) To review the notification procedure to allow hens owners an opportunity for full consideration of the options available to them in relation to the specific placement on pedestals on their property. Vice Mayor Sutorius asked whether a three -'week period for return to the Council was viable with so extensive a subject coverage and investigation, and whether it was reasonable to reconsider 'an extension of the time frame if no further underground installation occurred in Palo Alto until they had that information, e.g. revision of the work schedule to put more focus on aerial installation. Council Member Levy welcomed consideration of that concept. He believed there was a lot of information available and did not want the issue to lag a great deal because the program was proceeding. Vice Mayor Sutorius asked staff if the suggestion had feasibility in order to avoid a very brief study and response period. Mr. Zaner said yes, and believed the Pacific Bell; and Cable Co-op people could move their schedule over to concentrating on overhead installation for a period of up to two months. WAXER AND SECONDER OF NOTION AGREED TO INCORPORATE THE REWORDING THAT THE REPORTING PERIOD OF STAFF NOT EXCEED TWO !MONTHS, AND IT BE REQUESTED THAT FURTHER UNDERGROUNDING BE SUSPENDED DURING THAT TINE Council Member Patitucci emphasized that when the issue first came up in February and he asked questions about it, he was told they nad no choice and sooner or later the public would get upset and would have to learn to live with it. Council Member Levy's motion raised the prospect that there might be an alternative, and they were going to assess what the costs might be. As part of that; he hoped they would also have some recommendations concerning what people would have to do if they did not want them. If they were promising something they could not deliver, they should own up to that now, but if they were going to see real alterna- tives, i.e., vaults and the cost of those, he could support the motion. He asked for staff's interpretation of the motion. Mr. Zaner said staff would attempt to provide the informa- tion included in the motion. Unless they were able to uncover, some new information, he did not believe they would be returning with alternatives that would do away with the pedestals. He believed they could return with guidelines for replacement, etc. Council Member Patitucci did not want to . see a report that said another survey showed it was not technologically possible. He did not care about a report that did not show alternatives. Mayor Woolley clarified the motion was to authorize staff to meet with Cable Co-op and Pacific Sell in order to develop means of minimizing the visual impact of the pedestal boxes. Special attention should be given to: 1) Guidelines for placement, 2) Investigate alternative kinds of pedestal boxes including vaults; and 3) Review the notification procedure. 5a-260 9/14/87 Council Member Fletcher mentioned that wherever there was undergrounding of utilities, she saw boxes above ground. Granted they ;:ore not at every other house but they were large, pale green, metal boxes in every district that had undergrounding. Assistant Director of Utilities, Engineering, Ed Mrizek, said in all the residential area the City had undergrounded in Palo Alto, all their transformer switches were totally underground submersible. A lot of utilities installed pad - mount transformers in residential areas because of corro- sion. Palo Alto was paying a premium price to put every- thing under the ground. Council Member Fletcher knew in her subdivision they had big boxes above ground, and she saw them on the street, on Middlefield Road, and in lots of areas. Mr. Mrizek said it was City policy to put the pad -mount transformers areas where there was space available, such as commercial areas, industrial areas, and condominium com- plexes, but in single-family residential areas, the transformers were totally submersible. Mayor Woolley asked if the boxes were. to do with the telephone. Mr. Riddle said yes, it was universal that in all the under- ground districts Pacific Bell hada pad -mounted junction bon where the crossconnects were made. AMENDMENT: Council Member Renzel moved, seconded by Patitucci, to add two additional items for staff review as follows: 4) Review the possibility o..t easements to locate the pedestals closer to the house; and 5) Review the possi- bility of having areas which chose not to have service provided at all. Council Member Levy asked the City Attorney where they were with the concept of ordering that certain parts of town not be served. Ms. .Northway :aelieved they were too far down the road to do that in the community. She did not believe it was an option unless they could get all the authorized cable, operators to agree. Mayor :Woolley clarified the motion was to. ask staff to work with Cable Co-op and to discuss the points. 58-262 9/14/87 Council Member Renzel said her intent was to understand the constraints and the possibilities. It appeared there was a possibility that at some point the contrac ts`might have to be renegotiated in any case. It that occurred, they should know what possibilities existed. Her concern was if there was a low subscribership anyway, it might not pay to serve the areas and, if the neighbors did not want the service,\, maybe that was a mutually -agreeable solution. Ms. Northway said staff could certainly reiterate the Council's options and discuss that with the franchisees to determine their. response. Mr. Fechheimer said the idea was interesting but to be prac- tical the Council should take into consideration the Cable Co-op had a fixed price contract with.Pacific Bell to build the whole area as instructed by the City. Not to build some areas was not an easy matter of working things out with Pacific Bell, although it certainly could be done. Council Member Renzel said just that type of information would be useful to understand and have available, i.e., that the systems were in place, and where there was or was not possibility for movement. Council Member Klein had no problem with the easement por- tion of the amendment but was really concerned that looking at neighborhoods' opting out was holding out an absolutely false hope to people. The points raised by the City Attorney were correct. As he read Judge Lynch's opinion, he would find the suggestion that a neighborhood could opt out would have no effect. Judge Lynch believed cable TV systems were like newspapers, and a neighborhood could not prevent a newspaper from circulating in that neighborhood. If Judge Lynch was sincere, the same would be true of any cable sys- tem. He would not oppose the motion just because he believe] staff would return with a very strong :statement that the suggestion was unworkable. Council Member Bechtel wanted the amendment divided. The Council needed to value the time of staff and should . not have them go through an exercise when they knew what the answer would be. She would not support: the portion of the amendment related to allowing a neighborhood to opt out. She commented for the record the Council had heard from many people in Palo Alto who had spoken in opposition . to the pedestals. She had also heard from people in those immedi- ate neighborhoods who supported cable television, who intended to have it, and .who said the pedestals were obtrusive but so were TV antennas and giant dishes. 58--263 9/14/87 Council Member Levy was swayed by Council Member Patitucci's statement, and he believed the second element of the amend- ment would hold out false hope. The amendment should_ be split. Vice Mayor Sutorius said Council not only identified the structure they wanted in the bidding process and through the negotiation down to the two finalists, but a very critical element that sent both parties back to do some recalcula- tions was that the Council would not accept a franchise situation setting up two classes of citizens in regard to potential subscribers, and that was the line extension charge subject. That dramatically changed how the franchise applicants engineered, designed, and planned the financing and the construction. He did not see the Council going in the opposite direction and saying there was a way of closing out an area. MAKER AND SECONDER OF AMENDMENT AGREED TO WITHDRAW *5 AMENDMENT PASSED unanimously, Cobb absent. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Cobb absent. 15. CONTRACT WITH OAKLAND FENCE COMPANY FOR ,CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION OF FENCES AT 1755 EMBARCADERO ROAD AND PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE (CMR:435:7) (1323) ,..._ MOTION: Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Klein, to adopt staff recommendation as follows: 1. Approve the Budget Amendment Ordinance for the Construction and installation of fences at 3.755 Embarcadero Road and the Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course by adding $88,500 to CIP 87-07; 2. Authorise the Mayor to award a contract to Oakland Fence Company, Inc., in the amount. o $212,897, including Add Alternates 1 and 2, for the construc- tion and installation of fences at 1755 Smbarcadero Road and the Palo Alto. Municipal Coif Course driving range; and 3. Authorize staff to execute change orders to the contract .up to $32,A$O." 58-264 9/14/87 MOTION CONTINUED "ORDINANCE 3766 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF TUE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1987-81 TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR CAPITAL I1lPRoVERE$T PROJECT 87-07, 'DRIVING RANGE FENCE ALONG THE TENTH FAIRWAY"' !MOTION PASSED unanimously, Cobb absent. 16. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1987-88 TO PROVIDE AN APPROPRIATION FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT No. 87-26, "SCHOOL LEASE ACQUISITION" j 1R:439:7) (3001.1111-01) Mayor Woolley did not participate to a conflict of interest. Council Member Patitucci asked for clarification of why it was necessary to start the process now versus waiting until there was a vote. Mr. Zaner said the City needed to start now in order to make the January 1 deadline for the signing of the lease. The inspection was necessary to complete that. MOTION' Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Klein, to adopt the staff recommendation td apirove the Midget Amendment Ordinance in the amount of $50,000, to establish a i r tor school site .condition surveys and other school acquisition reiated\ azpeasea. ORDINANCE 3676 entitled _'ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 19$7-$8 TO PROVIDE AN APPROPRIATION FOR CAPITAL Il PROVENENT PROJECT NO. 8706p ' SCUOOL LEASE ACQUISITION" mama ' 8UED unanimously, Woolley 'not participating," Cobb absent. 17. CONSULTANT AGREEMENT WITH CSS ASSOCIATES FOR SITE CONDITION SURVEYS AT JORDAN SCHOOL AND JANE LATHROP STANFORD SCHOOL (CMR: i ( 00 41 1) Mayor Woolley did not participate due to a conflict of interest. 58.265 9/14/87 flOTIOli; Council *weber E10 i e moved, iooOosdod by latitucci, to adept staff racoaua•adatioa as follows; 1) authorise the mayor to ..s*ecsts the: woolliest in . the amount of 435,499 with CS* 's iates,:.for site condition surwoys at Jordan and JLS sbioOLS f sad 2) Authorise staff to •ascuto chaa0• \erdsrs ' t© the agrao■wst up to $3,500. UMW PASSED unanimously, Woolisy °not participating, Cobb abssot. 18. REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL MENDER EMILY RENZEL RE DEDICA- TION OF SCOTT STREET MINI -PARK (1321-26) NQrIOI: Council tsa r 'ousel moved, sscoeaded by Klein, to' direct the City Attora•y to prepare the ssc.0 ry ordinance to dodicat• th• remaining portion of Scott Sttoet Mini -Park. NOTION PASSED usanimeuely, Cobb absent. Coudc i 1 d journed • a t 12:55 a.m. ATTESTg APPROVED: