Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-11-10 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MINUTES PALO ALTO CITYCOIJNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE VIA KZSU- FREOUENCY90.1 ON FM DIAL Regular Meeting November 10,1986 ITEM P G E Oral Communications 7 8 4 6 1. Resolution of Appreciation to the ;Members of 7 8 4 7 the Civic Center Plaza Committee Consent Calendar 3. Joint Operating Agreement By and Among the Cities of Palo Alto, Menlo Park, East Palo Alto, the Town .of Atherton, and the Counties of Santa Clara and San Mateo '`re Provision of Cable Television Services 4. Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 4529 with CH2M Hill for Professional Engineering Services for Capacity Expansion of the Water Quality Control Plant . Ordinance Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1986-87 to Provide an Additional pprapriation for Capital Improvement Project. No. 86-61 "Rental Housing Acquisition Program" and to Provide for the Receipt of . Community Development Block Grant Funds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development 7 R 4 8 7 8 4 8 7 8 4 9 7 8 4 9 6. Matadero/Adobe Pump Station Improvements 7 8 4 9 7. Agreement .with YMCA for Physical Fitness 7 8 5:0 Program for Fire -Fighters 8. 1986-87 Annual Housing Assistance Plan for the 7 8 5 0 ComMunity Development Block Grant Program 9. Ordinance Repealing the Moratorium on Certain 7 8 5 0 Development and Demolition of Historic Structures/Sites in the Downtown Area and Declaring an Emergency 7 8 4 .4 11/10/86 ITEM P.A G E 11. Ordinance Amending Chapter 6.20 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Lo Require Removal of Dog Defacation by Owners and the Carrying of an Appropriate Container for that Purpose 12. Ordinance Amending Chapters 12.12 and 4.10 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Establishing Criteria and Review Procedures for Commercial Sidewalk Encroachments and Pushcart Vendors Agenda Changes, Additions, and Deletions 13. Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board Recommendation re Site and Design Approval of Modifications to the Civic Center Plaza 7 8 5 0 7 8 5 0 7 8 5 0 7 8 5 0 13A. (Old Item 10) Ordinance Amending Chapter 7 8 6 2 16.49 (Historic Preservation) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code 14. Civic Center Plaza Project Request for 7 8 6 2 Increase in Change Order Authority for Design Services with Roberts Associates 15. Palo Alto Airport Traffic Pattern Study 7 8 6 2 Report from County Aviation 16. Request of Councilmember Fletcher re Radio 7 8 7 8 Broadcasting of Council Workshops 17. Request of Mayor Cobb re Cancellation of the 7 8 8 0 November 17, 1986 City Council Meeting Adjournment at 11:40 p.m. 7.8 8 0 7 8 4 5 1/10/86 i Regular Meeting Monday, November 10, 1986 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, Cobb, Fletcher,- Klein, Levy, Patitucci (arrived at 7:37 p.m.), Renzel, Sutorius, Woolley ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Ron Eadie, 877 Sharon Court, said in a canvass of about 600 homes, it was the majority consensus of opinion that residents recognized overcrowding and overuse by nonresidents in Rinconada Park, Eleanor Pardee Park, and perhaps Mitchell Park during the peak months as the key issue; however, all wanted nonresident access to the parks. He believed staff reports focused on specific abuses in the parks but did not hit the main issue. He suggested Palo Alto have a system of monitors in the -park, a thorough reservation system, a modest fee for nonresidents to cover the cost of the system, and limitation of nonresidents to 15 or 20. Councilmernber Patitucci • asked if the item would be agendized in the near future. City Manager Bill Zeller said staff had given Council several status reports and had an assignment to return to Council .with a planof action for the spring and summer season. 2. Jim Hewlett, 1055 Hutchinson Aver ue, said another a3Pect of the park problem was a cultural component. Many of the people at Rinconada Park and Eleanor Pardee Park were non-English speaking C _-ople which created some language problems. He sug- gested Bested it be determined from which communities the non -P residents came and that the monitors be bilingual in order to communicate concerns and/or park policies. He asked Council to encourage Palo Alto residents to realize the problem was partly interaction of, for the most part, two very distinct cultures. He wondered whether the Human Relations Commission could make a contribution to the solution. 7 8=4 6 11/10/86 3. Van Aarem, 2155 Harvard Street, Secretary of the. Committee for Citizens Swimming, said the Committee had 410 signaturese authorizing them to act for better citizens swim hours and to materially reduce overcrowding of the pools. The midday swims were especially congested. With more encouragement from the Recreation Department, they believed at least 500 citizens would swim. The most -wanted weekday swim hours were the early morning hours. Based on 410 citizens and 180 claimed Masters, one expected 1.3 out of 5 hours per week for the Masters both mornings and middays, but the reality was Masters had 3 mornings and 3 noons while the citizens had only 2. The Committee counted 140 citizens at a midday swim and only 23 Masters at their Wednesday noon swim. The Committee under- stood the Masters were soliciting statements from citizens over the telephone to the effect that such citizens never meant to take swim hours away from Masters. The Committee insisted a list of such citizens be produced to facilitate checking. Redistribution of essential swim time was the only possible honest solution. He asked why Masters paid the City less than regular citizens. 4. Jim Dinkey, 3380 Cork Oak Way, referred to his letter to Council of November 3, 1986 (on file in the City Clerk's office) in regard to lane restriping on Middlefield Road northbound towards Palo Alto at San Antonio Road. The inter- section was poorly marked causing unnecessary delays. He asked for an appropriate response from the City to his letter of April 15, 1986 (on file in the City Clerk's office). The left -turn lanes were only sic cars long, and he had counted 22 cars waiting to turn left at that point blocking everything in the intersection. Since April 15, 1986, three other inter- sections had left -turn lanes which were too short. 5. Roger Crisostomo, 1787 Woodland Avenue, East Palo Alto, received a ticket for using a noisy leaf blower. He said he was able to support his family by providing gardening service, which many people in Palo Alto wanted. Councilmember Fletcher asked if Mr. Crisostomo was aware that electric leaf blowers were on the market and were very quiet. ir. Crisostomo said he used a gas blower. } 1. RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF . THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING ITS APPRECIATION TO THE MEMB RS OF THE CIVIC CENTER PLAZA COMMITTEE FOR OUTSTANDING PU L $ERV CE . - - Mayor Cobb said the members of the Civic Center Plaza Committee included Tony Carrasco, Aino Vieira-da-Rosa, Darren Kipper, Naphtali Knox, Mary jean Place, Jeffrey Sawastuk, Derr * Vyn,: And Linn Winterbotham and had served . the City of Palo Alto ;,from 7 _8. 4 7 11/10/86 December 15, 1984, to October 4, 1986. The members of the Committee unselfishly devoted their time and expertise to develop. guidelines for the redesign of the Civic Center Plaza, selected a design consultant, assisted in the development of the conceptual design, and reviewed the final design during the Site and Design Review process. The City acknowledged and thanked the members of the Committee for their outstanding public service, and cne Council recorded its appreciation, as well as the appreciation of the citizens of the community for outstanding public service rendered by the members of the Civic Center Plaza Committee. MOTION: Mayor Cobb moved, seconded by Sutorius, approval of Resolution 6572. MOTION PASSED unanimously. Mayor Cobb presented copies of the Resolution to members of the Committee. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Cobb said Item 2, Award of Contract to Wilsey & Ham for Inspection of the Cable System Installation, was removed by staff. Vice Hayor Woolley asked that Item 10, . Ordinance of the Council the City of Palo Alto' Amending Chapter 16.49 (Historic Preservation) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, be removed. Mayor Cobb said staff provided new wording in the transmittal memorandum associated with Item 8, 1986-87 Annual Housing Assistance Plan for the Community Development Block Grant Program. NOTION* Conncilmeaber Levy moved, seconded by Bechtel., approval of the Consent Calendar. 3, A JOINT OPERATING AGREEMENT BY AND AMONG THE CITIES OF PALO ALTO, MENLO PARK} EAST PALO ALTOL THE TOWN OF ATHERTON AND THE _COUNTIES OF SANTA CLARA AND SAN MATEO RE PROVISION OF CABLE TELEVISION SERVICES (1141-01) C MR:5.37:6 ) Staff recommends that Council: o approve the Joint Operating Agreement among members of the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement and authorize the Mayor to _ execute the Agreement upon approval and execution by all Other members; and 7 8 4. 8 11/10/86 CONSENT CALENDARLLCONT' D ) authorize the Mayor to appo4nt the designated representa- tive to the. Franchise Reviev. Board within 90 days of the execution of the Joint Operating Agreement. 4. AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONTRACT NO. 4529 WITH CH2M HILL FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR CAPACITY EXPANSION OF THE WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT { 0o) (CMR:53 :6y Staff recommends that Council: approve Amendment No. 2 to the design contract with CH2M Hill in the amount of $492,00 for construction management services for the Water Quality Control Plant .Expansion Project, authorize. the Mayor to _execute the Amendment, and o authorize staff to execute change orders, for possible additional work due to unforeseen changes during the construction, in the amount of $50,000. 5. ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE. CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET. FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1986-87 TO PROVIDE AN ' ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, NO. 86-61 RENTAL HOUSING ACOUISITION PROGRAM AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE RECEIPT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS FROM THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 412 HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT" 02} :5 (CMR:5 E }�.—. Staff recommends that the. City Council: o approve Ordinance No. 3717 amending the appropriation for the Rental Housing Acquisition program from $25,665 to $115,665; and o authorize staff to submit appropriate documentation to HUD for the additional funds 6. MA ERO/ADOBE PUMP STATION IMPROVEMENTS - REQUEST FOR rHRASE IN CHANGE ORDER AUTHORITY FOR CONTRACT NO. 4542 WITH [404NDERER ELECTRIC, INC. (801-04 ) (CPR x544 :6 ) Staff recommends: that . Council authorize staff to execute change orders to the Wanderer Electric, Inc. construction contract ' No. 4542 EOr a total of $40,000. 7 8 4 9 11/10/86 TO THE CI Vl 7. AGREEMENT WITH THE YMCA FOR PHYSICAL FITNESS PROGRAM FOR FIRE - 'FIGHTERS (52aY (CMR:533:6) 8. 1986-87 ANNUAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM (412-02-01) (CMR : 5 38 :6 ) Staff recommends the City Council authorize staff to submit the 1986.87 Annual Housing Assistance Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 9. ORDINANCE 3718 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP PALO ALTO REPEALING THE MORATORIUM ON CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT AND DEMOLITION OF HISTORIC STRUCTURES/SITES IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY* (24/701-03) 11. ORDINANCE 3719 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING CHAPTER 6.20 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE By ADDING A NEW SECTION 6.20.045 TO REQUIRE REMOVAL OF DOG DEFECATION BY OWNERS AND THE CARRYING OF AN APPROPRIATE CONTAINER FOR THAT PURPOSE" (lst Reading. 10/6/86, PASSED 6-3, Cobb, Sutorius, Bechtel "no") (1050) 12. ORDINANCE 3720 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF '"HE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING CHAPTERS 12-.12 AND 4.10 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE AND ESTABLISHING CRITERIA AND REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR COMMERCIAL SIDEWALK ENCROACHMENTS AND PUSHCART VENDORS" (1st Reading 10/27/86f PASSED 9-0) (1011) MOTION PASSED unanimously/ Cobb, Bechtel, Sutorius voting "no" or: Item 11. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS Mr. Zaner said Item 10, Ordinance Amending Chapter 16,49 (Historic Preservation), would become Item 13-A. 13. PLANNING COMMISSION . AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD RECOM- MENDATION,RE APPLICATION OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO FOR SITE AND DESIGN APPROVAL OFMODIFICATIONS PLAZA -(8'10-02) (CMR:541:6 • .� Planning Commissioner Pat Cullen said the Planning Commission was generally enthusiastic about the redesign of the Civic Center Plaza, parti-cularly the flat spaces and the opportunity for perma- nent seating. There was concern about the wind factor, the noise from and height of the fountain, and evaluation of the transporta- tion recommendations. The Planning Commission was concerned about some of the more desired elements --especially the permanent seating and boulevard design --being postponed to Phase II with a risk of no implementation on Phace II and of nonfunding. The C CENTER 7-8 5 0 11/10/86 Planning Commission believed a policy decision was needed from the Council as to whether Phase I and Phase II with additions , funding would be a realizable project. Architectural Review Board (ARB) Chairman Linn Winterbotham said the ARB generally supported the proposal. The ARB was concerned that a pretty place did not necessarily make a "people" place, and it became the City's reponsibility to study the surrounding area in terms of physical character and also to explore the circulation opportunities and the opportunitie for enhancement that would lead ``people to the plaza. The ARB believed the expectations put on the plaza might not be reached unless the additional work was done. The ARB was not suggesting the additional work be done at the same time the plaza was developed. Assistant Director of Pubic Works. George B.agdon introduced two representatives from the design consultant, Roberts Associates, Leslie Simons and Robert Sena. Councilmember Renzel did not see any recent. discussion on having the major step entry down onto Hamilton Avenue at a place where pedestrians could not cross and where nobody could park or stop a car to unload. She asked if any thought was given to extending the bench treatment that went across the Hamilton Avenue entry and making narrower step entries to give more sense of enclosure for the people using the plaza. Robert Sena said there were severe physical constraints on the plaza, the main one being the plaza itself would only hold an. additional 50 pounds of weight. Roberts Associates did not believe enclosure could be achieved because of the weight limitations, and the long-range view of the plaza should be one where people were invited to see the view and to cross into the plaza. Access was provided at the corners for handicapped and ambulatory people. He clarified the 50 pounds vas dead weight, i.e., something new standing on the plaza such as paving,. con- crete, planters, benchs, or trees. There was some opportunity to change, but new holes could not be dug to plant trees. Councilmember Renzel asked about built-in benching. Mr. Sena said that was a possibility. Roberts Associates took the view that the plaza should be accessed from its most dramatic point, and tried to leave open _ the possibility of crossing Hamilton Avenue to do that in the future. Councilmember Renzel verified the handicapped ramps continued up to the second podium. 7 8 5 1 11/10/86 Mr. Sonya said the handicapped ramp went up replacing the stairs towards thebuilding and onto the old paving which would ramp, giving complete access to the entire plaza. Vice Mayor Woolley asked if the outcome of the six items listed in Item 14, Civic Center Plaza Project - Request for Increase in Change Order Authority for Design Services with Roberts Associates, could cause either a change in the design or a change in the cost. Mr. Sena said Roberts Associates knew enough about the structure to know how many pounds it would holds and their design was preliminarily tested by a structural engineer and would not exceed that number of pounds. The reason for the advance structural testing would to determine exactly where the cables existed in the beams in the garage so the existing structure would not be interfered with when the podium was attached to the top. The design would not change. Mr. Bagdon said if items were moved within the plaza, costs _could go up because of redesign in addition to any necessary structural work. Redesign costs were not included in Item 14. Vice Mayor Woolley clarified if Council went with the plan as presented, the items listed in Item 14 would not increase the cost beyond the $300,000 for Phase 1. Mr. Bagdon said that was correct. Vice Mayor Woolley referenced the wind situation and asked if the cost of the two -stage sensor was preferred by the consultant instead of a one -stage sensor. Mr. Sena said the cost was an additional $8,000. A single -stage wind sensor meant when the wind picked up the fountein turned off. A double -stage sensor allowed the fountain to go down to a predetermined midlevel. Vice Mayor Woolley said the number of people who could be seated was of major concern. Mr. Sena replied, not counting the seats on the periphery of the plaza facing outwards towards Hamilton Avenue, about 552 people could be seated: on the various seats, steps, and walls around the fountain. The wood benches specified for Phase II seated an additional 128 people, totaling about 680 people with :a generous seating allowance of 30 inches `per person. That did not include Seating on the lawn nor at the tables. 7 $ 5 2 11/10/86 Councilmember Bechtel asked about the advantage of the stairs on the Hamilton Avenue side. The plaza was presently considerably more accessible because there were no stairs, and she understood someone in a wheelchair would not be able to enter on Hamilton Avenue. Mr. Sena said a preliminary determination in agreement with the AkB was that strong horizontal lines were needed on the plaza to offset the verticality of the building, and they needed to tilt the ramping a ►pact of the plaza to create flat spaces. That created either a wall or steps on Hamilton Avenue. The handi- capped ramp needed to be in an accessible place. Most people approached from Ramona or Bryant Streets, and the handicapped ramps as designed were more accessible to handicapped people than the central ramp. Councilmember Bechtel asked , what ,speci f ica l ly would be done about the wind problem. Mr. Sena said formalized wind testing was not in the original scopa. City staff went out at various. time of day during the year and found the wind direction varied greatly and did not always come from the west. A wind engineer who knew the plaza believed when the wind did blow from the west, which was the pre- vailing wind, it hit the front of the building and scattered. A, canopy over the front might help break up that wind, but something placed at groue.d level to stop the wind would not work all the time and would block views and access. Their best solution was to design the fountain jets in such a way that they'<=,ould not spray onto the pavement under normal wind circumstances. The wind sensor was an additional safety valve. Councilmember Bechtel understood that helped with the fountain but was concerned about someone b=eing uncomfortable from the wind while just sitting. Mr. Sena said they did not have the . technical data, nog^ did they design a hard, physical barrier to block the wind. There were additional rows of trees outside the plaza which would break up the wind to some extent. It still might be uncomfortable on the plaza on a very windy day. Councilrether Klein asked where the $300,000 figure cave from. Mr. 2aner said the $300,000 figure was the amount Council approved in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for expenditure in the next fiscal year. Staff recommended $350,000 to Council and some was spent on design. 7 8 5 3 11/10/86 Councilmember Klein asked for the logic behind the $300,000 1 figure. Mr. Zaner said at the time the Council appointed the Committee, they looked for some guideline and some way to give the Committee boundaries within which to work. Staff looked to see what the CIP could accommodate in the next year, and the $300,000 figure was settled upon. Councilmember Klein asked how the CIP would: be affected if Council went above that number. Mr. Zaner said the $300,000 figure was somewhat arbitrary in order to give guidelines. There was a possibility Council could increase that amount in next year's CIP. .Some funds were available from the balance of the construction in the Civic Center. The plaza changes were a mitigation measure for tearing down the canopy so the funds were appropriately expended in that direction, and there might be other funds which could be applied. Councilmember Klein asked if the consultant could prioritize the eight items in their Phase II list of July 21, 1986. Mr. Sena believed the two items of first priority would be the boulevard strips along Ramona and Bryant.. Streets which were important to creating visual limits to the plaza, and the double -sided benches which created a warmer place to sit and a comfortable bench away from the main activity on the plaza. The trash receptacles were already moved to Phase 1. The drinking fountain would be nice and was not a high-prf,ced item. The third priority would be the lighting. Phase I included lighting for the fountain and its waterfall, repaired the lighting under the existing magnolias, and put in place the wiring and receptacles for the lighting for the rest of the plaza. Phase II simply - completed that lighting. The tables and umbrellas were fairly low. on the list because they were a security and storage problem and were not required to make the plaza work. Councilmember Klein asked for clarification of the logic behind the bollard and chain. Mr. Sena said the consultants believed the fine bollard and chain would be one additional way to lightly outline the edge of the plaza. Councilmember Klein asked whether a gift to help fund the project was a possibility. 7 8 5 4 11/1086 Mr. Zaner said the City made contact with private donors in the community, but at that point, there were no firm commitments. Staff also had conversations with persons in •th.e community who might be interested in assisting the City secure donations. Councilmember Sutorius understood there were problems of mainten- ance, vandalism, storage, etc. with the. tables, chairs, and umbrellas. Mr. Sena said the Planning Commission, ARB, and City staff were somewhat uncomfortable with handling movement of the tables. Making the tables permanent lost the flexibility of the space. The problem was nut yet solved. Councilmember Sutorius believed the consultants dealt with the design constraints creatively, but he was concerned that a sig- nificant problem was nc,t.yet solved. If that aspect of the under- taking was not known and might not be introduced into the use of the plaza, he asked what had been created from a design standpoint as far as usability, appearance, aesthetics, etc. Mr. Sena said the consultants believed the basic plaza with the fountain thrusting into the second promenade level was a strong design with.a lot of built-in seating, especially if the benches were added., The seating, practical usage of the plaza, and its appearance would be strong without the tables and umbrellas. The tables and umbrellas would give a cafe feelieg to the lower level, and were a good addition to color and activity. The storage problems brought up by the City were real. A compromise would be to have fewer tables permanently attached in a location where they could be used and would add color without taking away from the informal use in front of the fountain for concerts, etc. The plaza itself was a strong enough design to work without the tables and umbrellas. Councilmember Sutorius asked where the Transportation Division and Risk Manager stood with regard to the boulevard stcips. Planner Sarah Cheney said some recommendations would be considered in the development of the construction details of the boulevard strips, such as assuring adequate visibility for pedestrian safety, adequate turning radius for both vehicular access and street sweeping. Councilmember Sutorius said if the plaza extended out from the current sidewalk an additional eight feet, the City lost a right - turn lane for traffic around Ramona Street onto Hamilton Avenue, and off MamiIten Avenue onto ,Bryant Street. Cars would stack up more than at present. He asked whether a creative design that would make an attractive surrounding .for the Civic Center had associated negative impacts. 7 8. 5 5 11/10/86 Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber said Transportation staff looked at both the volumes and turning move- ments, and he was not aware of any major problems either at pres- ent or anticipated. He` believed Transportation Division would accept the type of boulevard design as being consistent with the traffic -carrying capacity need of those streets and intersections. Councilmember Sutorius clarified the City had $300,000 in the CIP for 1987.88 and asked if staff had an estimate on operating costs for the design. Mr.' Bagdon said the estimate was general. If the umbrellas went in, the major operating cost would be removing, storing, and replacing them if they were vandalized or stolen, which would take a fraction of one person's time over a year. The other impact was the annual plantings, also a fraction of one person's time. Trash pickup would require more staff .time. There was no significant impact, and he could not put a dollar figure on it. Staff time would have to be shown in the operating budget when reviewed. Councilmember Sutorius asked if the item would return to the ARB with respect to unresolved design questions, or whether staff looked for any commentary from Council in that regard. Mr. Schreiber said the item would return to the ARB for the final landscape plan, including the items identified in the first recom- mendation on page 5.of CMR:541.6; however, it would be appropriate to pass on any thoughts Council had such as night lighting or use of the bollards. Councilmember Sutorius endorsed the concerns raised by both public bodies on the Phase II consideration of the lighting question on top of the vent housings. The introduction of grill work and the large --sphere did not excite him. He: questioned the introduction of three additional trees at the rear. Some way needed to be identified so the multi -use feature of '.the fountain in the second tier could drain away and become a stage.. There was a safety consideration associated with any use of that stage, and he would want to know that the solution was identified in advance of opening day. Councilmember Levy said the primary consideration in developing the plaza was that it encourage interaction and human activity. The concept of the plaza as an introduction` to the City Hall building was unnecessary. The center approach' was an open area that was shown with no people. He queried if Council downgraded the sweeping view area both up to City Hall and towards. University avenue, iwhether things be done to improve the area in terms: of attracting people to that part of the plaza.. i 8 5 6 11/10/86 Mr. Sena said if the area was not used as a circulation route, there could be seats and a continuation of the line of trees across the front. Many things could be done to add physical seating. A lot of seating was provided on the plaza, and the con- sultants believed it was important to have a number of different activities in the plaza, including flexible space. Councilmember Levy said the tables and umbrellas looked attractive and would increase the activity and usabilty of the space; how- ever, he understood they were impractical unless they were bolted down. Mr. Sena said the consultants favored some umbrellas and tables on the plaza for their color and seating ability. Councilmember Levy asked if it was physically and economically practical to have tables set up for 1•anch and have them taken in at night. Mr. Zaner said staff was researching thepossibility of a conces- siona:ire or lease arraniernent with a food vendor to provide such a service especially during the months of good weather. Councilmember Levy said if Council approved everything except tables and umbrellas, he assumed a table at a time could be added later. Mr. Sena said some vendors would sell the City some tables at a wholesale cost. He did not know whether there were a°minimum o.f tables. Councilmember Levy said given all the restraints, the proposal was impressive. Councilmember Patitucci referred to the costs of reopening the fcuntain. Mr. Bagdon said there would be costs for chemicals, etc. for main- tenance, and while he did not have the actual energy costs, he did not believe they world be major. Councilmember Fletcher clarified the water would be recycled. Mr. Sena said yes. Councilmember Fletcher said the performing arts staff mentioned there would be some type of vehicle access to transport equipment to the stage area and she asked f it was possible with the load factor and the steps. 7 8 5 7 11/10/86 1 1 i Mr. Sena said the performance was not such a major item over the whole range of what would happen with the plaza that the design should be shifted back towards ramps, but the load factor was a problem. Councilmember Bechtel commended the various groups. On the whole the design added more seating and the area was more inviting. The fountain was a plus with the sensor described. She was concerned about taking possible parking and the right -turn lanes for the Phase II section. The City Transportation Division's concerns, as expressed in an earlier memo, did not seem to be taken care of in the recommendation. She asked for comments. Ms. Cheney referred to condition of approval number 3, which required all conctruction drawings subject to further review by the ARB . be subject to the approval of the Chief Transportation Official Councilmember Bechtel specifically did not want to lose any of the existing parking on the opposite sides of Ramona and Bryant and it was not clear whether Council should adopt the recommendation. Mr. Bagdon said the plan did not incorporate removal of parking on the other side of the street. It was contained in an earlier plan, but was quickly discarded. Councilmember Bechtel supported the staff recommendation based on the comments by staff and knowing the plan would return to the ARB for final review and approval. 4OTIOWs Councilmember Bechtel moved, seconded by Woolley, to adopt the staff recommendation findings 1 That the project will not have any significant environmental impacts in that the proposed project consists of minor altera- tions to an existing facility, and proposed modifications to the street widths of Ramona and Bryant Streets will noc have an adverse impact on the area traffic or circulation; 2m the proposed design win be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining property, in that the proposed us* currently exists and the improvements are intended to increase opportunities for bemoticial use of the plaza by Palo Alto citizen*; 3. The project will maintain the desirability of investment in the sane or adjacent areas, i■ that the proposed imgrOvoments are intended to increase pedestrian activity iu the area which will benefit neighboring commercial uses; 7 8 5 8 11/10/86 MOTION CONTINUED 4. The proposed design will observe sound principles of environ- mental design end ecological balance -, in that measures have been incorporated into the dsaigo to provide area for both active and passive use o.f .the spce, to provide safe access for vehicles, pedestrians, and the handicapped; 5. The proposed use will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, in thatthe proposed improvements_ are an amenity to an existing public space, will strengthen the visual character and vitality of the downtown area; and approve the site and design application with the following condi- tions: 1. The final landscape plans, including lighting plan, founda- tion, bollard, and other Phase I and II plaza improvement details, shall be submitted to the ARB for review and approval. The final landscape plan shall address the fol- lowing: a) The use of bollards and chain; b) Integration of art work with plaza design; c) Night use and night lighting; d) Bus shelter and parking; e) Consideration of various trees and plants for annual color; f) Review of furnishings design and how movable furnishings would be secured; and g) Bicycle parking. 2. Final construction drawings shall be subject to the approval of both the City's Structural Consultants (EDAC) ens the City's Public Works Department. 3. Final design and construction documents for Phase II widening portions of the Bryant and Ramona Streets sidewalks shall be subject to the review and approval of the City's Transportation Division and Department of Public Works. Councilmenber Klein strongly supported the motion and commended the work of the consultant and the Committee. He was enthusiastic about the design and was concerned the project be done right. Council knew from past experience with City Hall that decisions to save money proved to be penny wise and pound foolish, and he did not want to see that repeated, pa titularly with respect to the boulevard strips. 7 8 5 9 11/10/86 ktieNDNIONTs Councilmember laciAn moved, seconded by Levy, to add to the base project the following improvements: 1. The Boulevard strips; 2. The double -sided benches; and 3. The lighting of the plaza. Vice Mayor Woolley agreed with Councilmember Klein's comments but opposed the amendment. While the project was not extravagant, it should be thought of in terms of other constraints and demands for funding in the budget. She was pleased with the phasing, and especially with the items in Phase II not costing more than if they had gone in with the Phase I items. She preferred to see how theproject evolved as Council might prefer to change something in Phase II. The. City was having trouble with several of the parks, and she did not want to rush into a situation where the plaza attracted a large number of people. Councilmember Levy believed the expenditure was worthwhile. Council was spending 80 percent of the money but getting less than 80 percent of the value unless quite a few furniture benches were added, which was $19,000 out of Phase II, Be did not have the design sense to say with certainty the Boulevard strips were exactly right, but he was confident in the AR}3 and the planners who acid the strips would add a significant dimension to the plaza`_. There came a time during the winter months when it would be nice to have the lighting, and it was a fairly small dollar expenditure to get the plaza ready for people usage. Councilmember Klein agreed with Councilmember Levy's comments. It Council approved the main motion, it would have agreed to spend e .little over $35 ,000. The items in the amendment would be another $58,000 Mr. Bagdon noted there was a 10 percent contingency. Councilmember Klein believed if the add-ons were not done then, they would _ never be done. He pointed out that people had been. talking about improving the Civic Center Plaza for at least tqn years. He believed Council wanted to make the plaza attractive eo people could use it and would welcome the problem of 200 people sitting around the plaza at lunchtime. He encouraged his colleagues to support the amendment. Councilmember Sdtorius asked what the reasonable time line wa3 from that evening to completion of Phase I if the main motion without amendment was approved. 7 8 6 0 11/10/86 Mr, Bagdon said construction money was not available until July 1; 1987. The design would be completed probably late in the winter, would go out to bid in the May/June time frame and start construc- tion soon thereafter. Construction would take about three months. Councilmember Sutorius understood the benches could be a stand- alone item; it was a matter of acquiring and placing them and would not be a big decision if made the following June. Mr. Bagdon said that was correct. Councilmember Sutorius asked for amplification of the inter- relationship between the Boulevard strips and the Phase I project from a design and work standpoint. Mr. Bagdon replied it wculd . be much less inconvenient to the public if the items were all done at one time. If Council wanted the Boulevard strips as part of Phase I, it would be helpful if they were in the same contract. Councilmember Sutorius agreed because from a construction stand- point it 'alleviated upset and inconvenience to the public and merchants in the surrounding buildings. The benches were a small item and . the money could be found at an appropriate time. The lighting from the standpoint of the wiring, etc., ;would be accounted for in Phase I. He was willing to support the amendment but believed Couciil could remove the benches and lighting. AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT: Councilmember Sutorius moved, seconded by Renzel, to limit the addition to Phase 1 to the Boulevard strips. Councilmember Bechtel believed the lighting and benches were an essential part and'would vote against the amendment to- the amend- ment. Councilmember Levy believed the lighting and benches were impor- tant. AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT .FAILED by a Sutorius voting "aye.* AMENDMENT PASSED by a vete 'no.* vote of 3-6, Renzel, Woolley, 7-2, . Renzel, Woolley voting Councilmember Fletcher wantedto see permanent tables on, the plaza when games could be played. Although the umbrellas were attrac- tive, they would be a maintenance problem. 7.8 6 1 11/10/86 AMENDMENT: Councilnember Fletcher moved to add a limited number of permanenttables to the plaza area. AMENDMENT DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilmember Levy endorsed Councilmember Renzel's comments regarding the Hamilton Avenue approach. He preferred to see the Hamilton Avenue area treated as an additional way of attracting people to the plaza rather than primarily a visual approach. Mayor Cobb appreciated the people -orientation of the plaza design. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED unanimously. 13-A. (OLD ITEM 10 ORDINANCE 3721 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING CHAPTER 16.49 SHISTORIC PRESERVATION) OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE" 1st Reading 10/27/86, PASSED 8-1, Patitucci "no") (701-03/211--01) MOTION: Vice Mayor Woolley moved, seconded by Fletcher, approval of Ordinance 3721 to amend Municipal Code Section 1i. 49. g 38 (a) revised to read: "One (1) member shall be an - owner/ occupant of a category one or two historic structure, or of a structure in are historic district;T after *historic preeerva- tion.' ORDINANCE 3721 AS AMENDED PASSED.8r 1, Patitucci voting "no." 14. CIVIC CENTER PLAZA PROJECT -- REQUEST FOR INCREASE IN CHANGE ORDER AUTHORITY FOR DESIGN SERVICES WITH ROBERTS ASSOCIATES ( (CMR:539:6) c�o ba MOTION: Council mber Fletcher moved, seconded by Klein, to adopt staff recommendation to authorise staff- to *potato a total of $18,000 in change orders with Roberts Associates. MOTION PASSED unanimously. 15. PALO ALTO AIRPORT TRAFFIC PATTERN STUDY - REPORT FROM COUNTY AVIATION (1161-01/1041) (CMR:547: 0 Councilmember Patitucci asked if the City participated in any way or just monitored. Assistant to the City Manager Vicci Rudin said the report was pre- pared by the County Department of Aviation. Prior drafts ,were made: available to staff and the Good Neighbor Committee, and they provided suggestions as to information to be addressed. 7 8 6 2 11/10/86 Vice Mayor Woolley asked: if the complete elimination of the City - side traffic pattern would reduce noise. J. Jaso, Director of Aviation, County of Santa Clara, said he con- sulted with the Tower Traffic Manager. Hank Barbachano and under- stood traffic would be circulated to other areas of the City and noiee would transfer to other parts of the City. In addition to the safety concern, that was one of the concerns in eliminating the approach completely. Councilmember Fletcher understood the noise occurred because the planes were descending from their ideal 1,500 feet height if the west approach was used. If the planes were not coming in from the western approach but used other parts of the City and presumably kept the higher height, she asked for clarification of why there would be more noise. Mr. Jaso said there would not be more noise per se, but the per- ception of noise by other people who had not seen aircraft over their area might lead to complaints. Eith the present traffic pattern and modifications, the County believed ` the situation in terms of noise and noise complaints was manageable. Councilmember Fletcher asked about the number of flights compared with the last study in 1982. She wondered why there was currently a safety problem when it was not considered a safety problem in 1982. Mr. Jaso did not have thespecific figure as to number of flights as compared to 1982. He knew the traffic pattern had not been publicized as a regular pattern, and the recommendation was the pattern be used only for relief purposes. The pattern might have previously been used beyond relief and might have been where many of the complaints originated. The people using. the City -side pattern might not have used it according to the noise abatement procedures in effect. They were not specifically asking pilots to ensure proper procedure when using that pattern. Councilmember Fletcher said evidently only about 8 percent of the flights would use the City -side approach under fhe "reliever" situation. If the flights were so arranged -that there would not be the additional. 8 percent at any one time, 'she asked whether the need for the western approach could be eliminated. Mr. Jaso didnot believe so because the use of the pattern was not related to the total number of flights as compared to a previous. period, but the level of flight activity, over any certain period. Councilmember Fletcher clarified the relief situation was related to periods of heavier activity, e.g., on a Saturday morning. { ,, 7 8 5.3 11/10/86 Mr. Jaso believed that was a correct assumption. Councilmember Fletcher asked how often the saturation point was reached. Mr. Jaso said a very preliminary survey indicated the pattern was., used about 8 percent of the time. The County had no ongoing verification. Mr. Hank Barbachano, Manager Airport Tea f f is Control Tower, said the 8 percent was a figure from a four -weekend survey of arrivals only and did not include departures nor through flights. Councilmember Fletcher asked whether the tower could see if planes flew lower than the presecribed 1,500 feet west of Bayshore. Mr. Barbachano said the 1,500 feet was a noise abatement recom- mended altitude and not the pattern altitude. .For the most part, the altitude of aircraft within a mile to two miles of the airport couild.only be ascertained by their report. The Federal Aviation regulations stated that 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a. 2,000 foot radius was the proper safe altitude for an airplane to fly. Palo Alto went one step further and recommended the pilots use a 1,500 feet crossing altitude coming in from the west until they crossed the freeway. Councilmember Fletcher asked if it was a true that from most parts of the City the flights that came in under 1,000 feet would not be visible from the tower. Mr. Barbachano said depending on the visibility, the tower could see planes approaching from as far as Hoover Tower when they entered the pattern. It was unlikely the planes would be visually spotted five miles away from the tower. The only way the tower would know the planes were there was by radar and asking their position. Radar did not give altitude and the tower relied upon pilot report for` altitude. Given the visibility in the last two days, the tower could ascertain the altitude was at least the pattern altitude of 1,000 feet in the vicinity of Hoover Tower. Councilmember Patitucci said the County's report had eight recom- mendations which were already inthe process of being implemented. He understood the City of Palo Alto had no direct power to do anything. The City leased the land to the County, the County operated the airport, and the FAA was ultimately responsible for flight safety and operation, and all along the line there was a chance for a certain amount of attrition in the recommendation process. Mr. Jaso said that was correct. 7 8 6 4 11/10/86 Councilmember Patitucci asked if the FAA bought off on the eight recommenvaations and whether the County had documentation or validation of those which would go ahead. Mr. Jaso said the recommendations on the report were fashioned under the purview of the Good Neighbor Committee who wanted to work towards being an exemplary neighbor, not just a good one. The FAA participated in the process closely, and Mr. Barbachano personally attended --each of the meetings and committed to work with -the County in implementing the recommendations. Mr. Barbachano assured the first four recommendations would take place. The next.step was to present the recommendations to the Airport's Commission for ratification and tel establish a formal process. Councilmember Patitucci asked about the penalties for pilots who did not adhere to the recommendations or, below 1,000 feet, to the regulations. Mr. Jaso said that was a key concern brought up by the members of the Good Neighbor Committee. One question was why there was no ordinance establishing monetary penalties. In reviewing the complaints, they found in every instance the pilots desired to work with the County in abating any type of noise concerns. Councilmember Patitucci did not see. the i onetary penalty mechanism anywhere in the regulations. The eight recommendations made a lot of sense, but he did not see the teeth in the process. He wondered what could be done to assure the recommenda t. i ;ng which applied to the actual flying of aircraft were adhered to. Mr. Jaso said the County had the authority to ask a pilot to relinquish his tie -down if it believed other major overriding concerns were being detrimentally impacted by the pilot's behavior, but the County had not formalized the authority as yet. If someone was identified as a repeat offender, he was not sure the County wanted that individual flying out of the airport if it disrOpted the relationship with the City Council, the Good Neighbors Committee, and with theneighbe s. Councilmember Patitucci asked if anyone had been asked to remove their plan from Palo Alto Airport. Mr. Jaso said no, at that point only one individual had been identified as a repoat offender with a second complaint logged against him. There was not a clear enforcement .mechanism. 7 8 6 5 11/10/86 Councilmember Levy referred to Exhibit "E" attached to the Study of October 1986 where complaints were logged, and asked if the 59 complaints received during the 12 months from October, 1985 to October, 1986 were the totality of the complaints received at the Palo Alto Airport. Mr. Jaso said yes. Someone might have called expressing dissatis- faction or frustration and not have given any more information. The complaints were the individuals on whom the Airport had a documented instance of someone reporting a complaint against a specific aircraft or type of flight activity. Councilmember Levy clarified there was only _ one repeat offender within the group of complaints. Mr. Jaso said that was correct. Councilmember Levy asked if it was necessary for the number of the. plane to be recorded in order to identify a possible violator. Mr. Jaso said no, many times the aircraft could be identified if someone said the offense occurred at a certain time, and the County could recognize the pilot had established a regular schedule. The County .could ther use someone with binoculars at that site to try to identify the aircraft, or the staff could identify the aircraft as it approached from a description. Councilmember Levy said the number of complaints did not mean the County identified 59 individual offenders but rather 59 instances of a violation. Airport- Supervisor Jiro Spalding \said a number. of those complaints were. specifically identified by aircraft number. Council ember. Levy asked what, the airport did when someone was identified by aircraft number. Mr. Spalding said if the plane arrived at the airport, they would talk to the pilot. Councilmember Levy asked how many of the 59 were airplanes that landed in Palo Alto as opposed to going through or taking off. Mr. Spalding did not have a breakdown of the number of landing aircraft, but believed 15 to 20 percent of the aircraft complained about were actually identified and landed at the airport. Larry Templeton, 495 Cuesta Drive, Los Altos, a pilot out of Palo Alto Airport for 20 years, said some of the complaints were related to jet aircraft inbound to San Francisco. 7.8 6 6 11/10/86 Mr. Jaso said Exhibit "F" identified the noise impact management system in which he laid out an ideal: proceee for managing noise complaints and impacts. .Item #4 specifically said a systematic method of enforcing noise violations would be developed. COUNCIL RECESSED FROM 9:40 p.m. TO 9:50 p.m. Mr. Templeton said the standard departure for the Palo Alto side of the airport was to fly outbound on the runway heading until reaching the Dumbarton Bridge and then making a left turn and crossing and proceeding. .The presentlandingpatterns on the City side was for aircraft to 'econverge in the Los Altos, Stanford, Linear Accelerator area at about 2,500 feet and then descend to a minimum altitude of 1,500 feet .a t Bayshore, cross Bayshore and begin a descent to the 1,000 -foot altitude. It was a 1,000 -foot minimum for a short distance adjacent to the runway and then air- craft began their decent to reach the altitudes necessary to land. The patterns previously used which were suspended or restricted included the "left -=base entry." Airplanes would come from the south and skirt the edges of the Moffett air space, and make a left -base entry. The problem was if one tried to maintain 1,500 feet on the left -base entry until crossing Bayshore, it was difficult to make the airplane descend rapidly enough to arrive at the airport at the right altitude for a landing. There was the potential for low flying aircraft to miss. The "right 270 departure" was where the pilot proceeded at a continuous .270 degree right turn with full climb power crossing generally at the center of the airport and proceeding over the City. The recom- mendation to suspend the right 270 departure was because airplanes crossing the area were at relatively low altitudes --above 1,000 or 1,500 feet --but they had full engine power on. Mr. Jaso said the FAA was not required to use communications ter- minology which alerted pilots to altitude and noise concerns, but the Tower Chief said they would endeavor to make communications terminology a standard practice given the constraints of regu- lating the other flight activity. The County needed to be more aggressive in implementing noise abatement procedures and getting information to pilots, talking to the flying clubs and getting them to grail out information. Datthee Webster, 2510 Greer Road, lived right under the flight pattern and said the noise was nota problem. The noise they heard was Bayshore Freeway and Shoreline Park. She did not believe 59 complaints in a year was an issue. Louie Marincovich, 943 Moreno Avenue, said the 1982 Santa Clara County Airport Master Plan ehowed only one approved landing pat- tern for the Palo Alto Airport from over the Bay. The County's own Master Plan intended to keep p1axes over the Bay et all times 7 8 6 7 11/10/86 when landing or taking off for public safety and noise abatement. Without notifying the public or the City of Palo Alto, the County and FAA let more planes use an anauthorized City sides as a landing pattern. The unauthorized pattern had been used for f -" r years and i t was now thought of as a standard landing approach. The pattern was used at all hours even when traffic was light. The County wanted the City of Palo Alto to legitimize the unautho- rized, unneeded and unsafe landing pattern but nowhere in the County report was there one documented objective reason for doing so. Vague concerns about the unauthorized landing pattern being needed for flying safety were specious because there were no mid- air crashes before the landing pattern began in 1982. The San Cerlos Airport had a bay -side only landing pattern for many years without mid-air collisions. The average glide ratio of the three most commonly used training planes at the Palo Alto Airport was nine to one. If a plane lost its engine at 500 feet, ,it could glide 4,500 before it hit the ground. The Airport proponents requested an unauthorized landing pattern that the County's Airport Master Plan considered to be too unsafe and noisy to use in 1982. He referred to a petition signed by over 1,000 people (on file in the City Clerk's office) who requested their interests be kept paramount and to get rid of the unauthorized landing pat- tern. He urged the bay -side only landing pattern not be changed. Dr. Michele Fisher, 410 Sheridan Avenue, Unit 335, -said Mr. Jaso's report did not indicate how often there were saturation points. The report verified that 21 percent of all recorded noises in Palo Alto were caused by general aviation planes going in and out of the Palo Alto Airport. Mr. Jaso's study did not gather the views. of Palo Alto residents, and the survey confidently stated small aircraft noise was not a concern to residents of the most affected neighborhoods which was not true. Mr. Jaso's eight -point plan was a "paper tiger's with no teeth in terms of enforcement. There was no way to measure the altitude of low flying planes, to track and discipline offending pilots, or prevent a careless pilot from endangering homes and schools. She urged that Council close the left-hand approach pattern. Midge Vaughn, Chairperson of the Santa Clara County Airport Commission, 70 West Hedding, San Jose, said the report was informally discussed and the findings were supported. The Commission as a whole would discuss the report and take a pos Lion within the next month or two and refer the matter to the Board of Supervisors. A left hared pattern had been used since Palo Alto Airport opened --it did not suddenly appear in 1982. The left-hand pattern was excluded from. the Master Pia:- but not because of safety. Commander Holden at Moffett Field also supported the left-hand pattern because he believed it was safer for the pilots at Moffett Field. 7 8 6 9 11/10/86 Councilmember Patitucci asked if the Airport staff worked for the Airport Commission. Ms. Vaughn said the. Airport staff worked for the County Executive who was advisory to the Airport` Commission who was advisory to the County Board of Supervisors. Councilmember Patitucci asked about the composition. Ms. Vaughn said there were three pilots and three community residents and there was a vacancy. Councilmember Patitucci asked whether the Commission might be able to fund an independent determination of who flew over Palo Alto,. what direction they went, how loud they were, etc. to provide some data. Ms. Vaughn said the Commission was a voluntary advisory group. The Commission would be able to direct the aviation staff tofind a neutral person to review the data. Councilmember Patitucci asked i.f Council went along with the eight recommendations, whether the Commission could support hiring an independent consultant to pick some random days to test what was going on and return in a year - with some hard information and whether the County would fund i t . Ms. Vaughn was not in a position to say what the County would do. The Commission's budget was in the neighborhood of $1,000 per year. She -would be willing to participate and seewhether someone could be found to do it. Councilmember Sutorius asked whether the Commission addLessed the subject of infractions, follow up and any kind of penalties. Ms. Vaughn said the Commission was primarily a policy developing body. Enforcement was discussed some time ago with the Good Neighbor Committee, but the Commission was not as directly involved in the last few months and waited while the Committee and Mr. Jaso collected information. The Commission was only four years old. Councilmember Levy asked whether the Master Plan for the Airport was under the Commission's purview. Ms. Vaughn said it will be. The Commission was established after the Master Plan, but when the Master Plan was updated in June, 1987, the Airport Commission would have direct input and responsibility. Larry Templeton, 495 Cuesta Drive,. Los Altos, spoke to .residential safety for those under the flight pattern of the aircraft, and said the PAAA was surprised by the 1,000 -signature petition. The Elsbach survey asked a person to agree they were not bothered by small airplanes flying over their homes and were asked to express a concern towards safety. The petition said they wanted to see the City -side traffic pattern left open and 182 of 187 people signed the petition. The petition circulated by Mr. Marincovich asked the people if they agreed with the idea of eliminating a noise and safety hazard; to have landing approaches over the bay; and the petition asked to close the City -side landing traffic. The common thread in both petitions seemed to be a desire of safety. One issue was the risk and another was whether anything would be improved by changing the west side patterns. In the, study years 1964 through 1970 from the National Transportation Safety Board which covered the entire United States, during the 16 years there were 34 off -airport, third party fatalities. "Off - airport" meant someone who was not on the airport at the time of the fatality, and "third party" meant someone who was not an occu- pant of the airplane directly involved in the operation of the airplane. There were 2.1 fatalities per year for the entire United States an third party off --airport crashes. Ann Elsbach, 1901 Embarcadero Road, representing the West Valley Flying Club, complimented all parties involved in the study for a great deal of work. She believed the recommendations made key Mr. Jaso were sound and could be supported by the aviation community. They already bent over backward and effected some changes. The pilots showed a continuing intent to be good neighbors and did not want to jeopardize the safety of pilots or the community. She urged Council to accept the recommendations as presented. The FAA did suspend or revoke pilots' certificates for flying below the 1,000 foot minimum altitude over congested areas. Martin Litton, Box 7538, Menlo Park, spoke earlier that day with Mr. Latte, . nublisher of Sunset., who expressed the high value the Sunset organization placed on the Palo Alto Airport. In regard to how plots could be identified if they were in noncompliance with the regulations, aircraft were identified when they entered a pat- tern of a controlled airport. At Palo Altothe pilots identified their aircraft as soon as they were in contact with the tower, and all contact with the tower w.as recorded and the tape kept for a minimum of two weeks. In times of heavy traffic or reduced visibility, a transponder was required which identified the air- craft even from a great distance where it could not be seen. In the near future there was a possibility that all transponders would be equipped with an altitude encoder, which would identify the aircraft by code and explain the altitude. Only the FAA had power of enforcement,, and federal law ' would have to be changed in order for the FAA to do more. 7.8 7 0 11/10/86 Marge West, 3631 Evergreen Drive, lived in Palo Alto for 29 years and had never had a problem with airplane noise. She was a student pilot at Palo Alto Airport and was instructed never to get too low near the airport. She was grateful for the west approach and believed congestion would be a problem if the approach was not kept open. Thomas A. Glaze, 301 Victoria Place, was a pilot for 22 veers and flew out of the Palo Alto Airport since 1975. The left-hand pattern \had been there since that time. He lived near the Southern Pacific tracks and heard the whistle but never used the train and did not complain about it. The Palo Alto Airport was one of many amenities, and it was selfish for people to believe the airport was unnecessary because they did not use it. In regard to whether restricting the left-hand pattern would eliminate some of the safety features of the airport and stop any of the noise, aircraft coming from the south and west had to cross the City of Palo Alto somehow if they were to land at the airport. They could not go higher than 2,500 feet. There would be the necessity for circling over the City of Palo Alto which would increase the level of noise waiting for a slot on the right-hand side. He did not believe there was a problem, and any perceived noise problem would not be resolved by eliminating the left --hand pattern. Daniel Bartsch, 302 College Avenue, represented the Evergreen Park Neighborhood Association and was the Environmental Issues repre- sentative for the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee dis- cussed the issue of low -flying aircraft over residential areas and believed it was unfair for those who operated aircraft to impose on others the noise and hazards of their activity. Virtually everyone acknowledged that Low -flying aircraft reduced the life quality and property values in the neighborhoods. They endorsed any proposal to make Palo Alto a safer, quieter place to live by putting aircraft flight patterns over the Bay rather than over people's homes. They asked Council to find aome way to more .effectively enforce minimum altitude'regulat .nns over all of Palo Alto. Orval Fairbairn, California Aviation Council, started flying in Palo Alto in 1974 and vouched for the fact the westside traffic pattern was in effect then. • The California Aviation Council was a Statewide pilots' organization. The question of safety was raised as to whether it was more important to have a dispersed or concen- trated traffic pattern and whether the dispersed traffic pattern imposed any threats on residents. Representatives of the PAAA had shown there was no significant threat to residents. They had also shown compression of traffic was a threat to aviation safety; therefore, it was not a good idea to remove the westside traffic pattern. There was controversy regarding the allegations of 7 8 7 1 11/10/86 low -flying aircraft, and he displayed a chart showing an aircraft at various altitudes, and how to estimate the height with a stop watch or second hand. He challenged anyone to show a reduced property in Palo Alto for residential uses. He said the traffic patterns shown in the master plan were only the standard traffic patterns and did not show the ones used on a contingency basis. Bea Peterson, 939 Moreno Avenue, spoke for the safety, peace and quiet of their neighborhood. She did riot believe their neighbor- hood should be used as part of the landing pattern for the air- port. For safety's sake, there might need to be scheduling in ,regard to landings to avoid the stacking problem or a limit to the number of planes permitted. Erk Rei «: itz; 914 Van Auken Circle_ , complained about noise, and said unless one was really attuned to the environment, one would not notice the airplanes. He was also concerned about hazards which stemmed from hearing an increasing number of reports of accidents and near misses over populated areas. He asked that the westside traffic pattern be closed. John Vaught, 1549 Channing Avenue, lived directly under the traf- fic pattern and heard several aircraft every day, but believed the other noise sources were far worse. He noticed the 59 complaints were all made by 11 people. The real safety issue related to the pilots. If the westside pattern was closed, it would put everyone into the eastside pattern making traffic far more congested with a higher chance of midair collisions over the City of Newark. It scared him Lo fly c:e= Neeark at present and he did not need any more aitlalanes there. The airports basically should be approached from all directions, thereby decreasing traffic density. The density within► the airport traffic area of 75 square miles was low. Doug Pursell, 1652 Ca stelleja Avenue, queried whether the com- plainants were cognizant that low power on landings was not nearly as noisy as the -high -power settings in taking off. The Right 270 pattern came out over hie house, and the one repeat offender was obnoxious. Many aircraft passing through the area bore no rela- tionship to Palo Alto Airport, and there was no control over those. There was no control in a three-dimensional space. Rich Leamon, 1514 Clay, Los Altos, was a pilot and believed the real message was the airportwas struggling to be a good neighbor. He wanted the airport to be the beat asset possible. Councilme er Sutoriuia asked about self-discipline and peer enforcement. 7 8 7 2 11/10/86 Mr. Leamon believed it was possible to bring peer pressure on non- complying pilots, and was part education with some of the pilots who might not know the noise abatement procedure. They did not want anyone to fly below 1,500 feet, and wanted people who flew below 1,000 feet to be sanctioned as it was not safe. Councilmember Sutorius clarified a pilot who observed that type of action might report it. Mr. Leamon had knowledge of that happening once. Vice Mayor Woolley asked if Exhibit "F," Item #4, was an appropri- ate addition to the eight -point program staff recommended to Council. Mr. Jaso said all the other items in Exhibit "F" would be appro- priate additions. Vice Mayor Woolley believed some of the other items were already covered in the eight -point program, and Council was most concerned about the enforcement aspect. She wondered why the repeat offender who did not follow the correct procedures still continued to fly. Mr. Jaso said the individual had been identified, and he would be concerned if they got a third complaint because the individual had been counseled twice. Vice Mayor Woolley said there appeared to be far more evidence than just the two registered complaints, and she hoped the County would take strong action with the individual. She believed a few offenders were making life miserable for a large group of people. MOTION: Vice Mayor Woolley moved, seconded by Levy, to adopt the staff recommendation t4 endorse the eight -point implementation plan of the Director of aviation as follows: (a) The west -side traffic pattern should be retained but only with use of a typical traffic pattern; (b) . The west --side left base entry to runway 30, should be deactivated; (c) Me 270 departure should be prohibited; (d) a straight -oat departure to Dumbarton Auto Bridge should be retained (e) The FAA should continue to use radio terminology that alerts pilots to altitude and roots; 7 8 7 3 11/10/86 NOTION CONTINUED (f) County Aviation should develop a more extensive noise abate- ment information package end more aggressively publicize noise abatement procedures to all pilots; (g) The membership, structure, and charge of the Good Neighbor Committee should be formalized; (h) County Aviation should continue to conduct random, unannounced noise monitoring tests.; and Further to set in place a process for regular periodic reports to the City on the successful implementation of the eight -point plan; with the addition of #4 in Exhibit F of the Study of the Feasibility of Elimination of West Traffic Pattern for Palo Alto Airport, •4. ENFORCEMENT OF NOISE ABATEMENT PROCEDURE VIOLATIONS Develop a systearat c eetho o enforcing via atioi no s abatement procedures by repeat or deliberate offenders. Establish 'ladder of consequences' that ties in the severity of the offense with the severity of consequence." Vice Mayor Woolley said Council was confronted with the whole problem of noise more frequently and there was nothing it could do to totally eliminate the problem. The invasion of technology made more noise inevitable, but Council could work to reasonably mitigate it. She looked on the steps taken by the airport as a compromise. The airport changed the traffic pattern and if it was enforced, the people from the neighborhood primarily affected should experience significant relief. She questioned whether closing the west pattern altogether would help because of circling airplanes that might result at heavy times. She was concerned many of the offenders were planes not going to the airport. Council received one letter: that noted Sunday mornings were a particularly offensive tine,` aand she suggested emphasis be placed on that time. Councileember Fletcher said in 1982 there was no Airport Commission and its function was the responsibility of the Transportation Commission on which she served. The 1982 Master Plan stated, "Landing aircraft using Runway 30 enter the pattern frog the north, and landing aircraft using Runway 12 enter from the east.* The map had no west ` approach. The report gave no information of what was different from 1982 to the present date and .why the west approach was needed currently and not in 1982. The 1982 Master Plan resulted from a study that took 18 months to two years, with many Public Hearings, and was done by a'profes- sional consultant with expertise in general aviation, and no mention was made of the need for a west approach Council had no 7 8 7'4 11/10/86 convincing information that things had changed. If so, Council needed data. They had no information on how often the approach was needed, nor at what times of the week or day. When that information was gathered, there could be some kind of mitigation to eliminate the need for the west approach. The report on the noise meters said that aircraft operating according to the Good Neighbor policy (1,500 feet above ground level until crossing Highway 101) did not exceed the threshold necessary to record an event, and yet in the 48 hours the noise meters were put out there were 57 "recorded events." She did not believe only one or two pilots were causing the. problem. The choice of locations for the noise meters was ludicrous. Only one was placed in a.' backyard, which was where people wanted peace and quiet. She asked what would change if the policies were adopted because the Good Neighbor policy was already in effect, and the FAA's record for penalizing violations was dismal. AIfRH DKENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Reined, . .to delete Item (a) from the recommendations which would delete permission to use the west -side air traffic pattern. Councilmember Fletcher said to give carte blanche endorsement, of the use of the west -side pattern without having the necessary information was not proper. Councilmember Renzel associated herself with Councilmember Fletcher's remarks. Vice Mayor Woolley outlined the many kinds of noise complaints, and the subject item was one where Council could and should get some control. She would support the amendment. Councilmember Klein believed Council was seeing a bashing of the private aircraft people for reasons that were not totally clear. There was a problem, albeit a minor one, but weighed against that was safety. Everyone who was knowledgeable said the west -side approach was important for safety. Council did many things in the name of safety, and to depart from that seemed extraordinary. The benefits of tentative, unproved reductions in noose against safety seemed a no contest* situation. He opposed the amendment. Councilmember Levy opposed the amendment because it went about the situation in the wrong way. Council should give the changes recommended by the aviation commission an opportunity to take effect. He was concerned about. the lack of enforcement proce- dures; however, two elements were related to enforcement: The enforcement of noise abatement procedure violations, and that County Aviation should conduct ongoing random noise monitoring. He wanted to give the aviation community a chance to "put some teeth into the paper tiger's by endorsing the prograz before Council. If the program was not endorsed, Council should consider closing the west -side traffic pattern. While he agreed 7 8 7 5 11/10/86 1 e safety was extremelyimportant, he was not convinced the west -side traffic pattern. had to remain open for safety purposes. At pres- ent the benefit of the doubt should 'go to the aviation community and there should be an ongoing monitoring procedure. ANENDME T FAILED by a vote of 2-7, Fletcher, Renzel voting way* . w Councilmember Levy said staff also recommended Council set in place a process for regular periodic reports to the City on the successful implementation of the nine -point plan. AMEMDIUNTs Councilmember Lem* moved to direct the Director of Aviation to report to the City every siz months on the implementa- tion of their program with the first report to reach the City by May 1, ll87. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND MAKER AND SECOND AGREED THAT "REQUEST THE COUNTY" BE INCORPORATED IN THE MOTION AFTER "AND FURTHER TO..." Councilmember Patitucci believed there was a noise problem and Council needed to deal with it in ways that had not been used in the past. When things began to deteriorate the quality of life in the community, Council had acted in the past and would act in the future. He would not oppose the nine -point plan because it was a good start: however, the data in the report woefully lacked in independent substantiation and relevance to the points made. Second, he did not believe the report was adequate in terms of independence and as a source of information the City could count on not to be biased. He also recognized the reality of the lack of City control. He did not believe planes landing were the big- gest cause of noise, but other aircraft activities over Palo Alto were the source. The enforcement procedures discussion that evening were abominable, and self -enforcement process in an area like air traffic control was an eye-opener and he was scared. He would support the motion. AMEKMin Councilmember Pstitacci moved, seconded by Rensel, that the City of Palo Alto review the report in one year and request that the County and the FAA fund an independent study of Noise and Flight Patterns in the Palo Alto area at a rendoa period without announcement and that the data be made available to the City. Councilmember Patitucci believed it was the County's responsi- bility to provide the City with objective information in the future, and the pilots and staff of the County Airport Commission could support such a study which might end all future discussion. 7 8 7 6 11/10/86 Councilmember Fletcher .asked if the activity to be studied in the amendment was general aviation or all aircraft activity. Councilmember Patitucci clarified the intent of the study was what kinds of aircraft activities went on,. above Palo Alto and what kinds of noises were generated. Councilmember Fletcher said the Moffett Field planes were not as annoying because they were jets and did not keep droning. She was more concerned about general aviation. Councilmember Patitucci said general aviation would be the biggest part of the study, but it was unfair to say that was the only source of aircraft, and the proportions would be useful information. Councilmember Levy asked how the amendment would change Item (h) in the nine -point plan which spoke to random noise monitoring. Councilmember Patitucci envisioned an audit more than the con- tinual collection of data. The points made were good ones and he wanted to see the County's report and for the County to continue onits ongoing program. The intent of the independent study was a check on the system. Councilmember Bechtel believed many of the ideas in the amendment were already coveted in terms of periodic monitoring, and she was concerned about the vagueness of a study. She suggested the study be more specific or the amendment be split. Councilmember Patitucci believed the study was specific. It was not a periodic reporting nor monitoring but was a study to deter- mine the sources of aircraft activity and the source and quantity of noise generated by that activity over Palo Alto, to be reported to Council in a year for review. Councilmember Bechtel clarified the study included all aircraft activity, i.e., commercial aircraft, private aircraft, navy. aircraft, etc. Councilmember Patitucci believed Council needed an inventory of what aircraft were in the air and what caused the noise. The study ° did not conflict with what the County was going to do but an augmentation. Communities impacted by such environmental problems would increasingly want that kind of information. Councilmember Menzel believed the amendment would provide Council with background information to help analyze the level of the spe- cific problems related to the airport and various landing patterns. 7 8 7,7 11/10/86 AMEUD$EN ' PASSED by a vote of 7-2, Bechtel and Fletcher voting "no." 1 Councilmember Renzel would support the motion although she dis- agreed with legitimization of the west -side traffic pattern. She believed the Master Plan for the airport was referenced in the City's lease to the County and, therefore, any changes to the Master Plan should go to Council for approval. She was prepared to vote against any formalization of the west -side traffic pattern and a subsequent Master Plan amendment if noise problems continued to be experienced over Palo Alto. Mayor Cobb was struck by Mr. Glaze's comments because he also lived close to the railroad tracks. Eliminating the west -side traffic pattern over Palo Alto pushed the,. problem up to Menlo Park. He hoped the amendment would build a fire under the County and pilots to ensure they behaved in a manner to make the situa- tion as good as possible for the residents. It would make sense in terms of safety if efforts were made for the student pilots to practice over the Bay rather than over the City. He said the County's response to the known repeat offender was bland, and he counseled both the County and the pilots to take strong stances to eliminate the problem. MOTION AS MINDED PASSED unanimously. 16. R VEST OF COUNCILMEMB .R FLETCHER RE COUNCIL W (SHC P ( 1084/1080--01) MOTION* Co*eecilaember Fletcher moved, seconded by Levy that the December S workshop be held in the Council Chambers unless arrangements can be wade for broadcasting from the Council Conference Rom, and further that future workshops be held whey* broadcasting can occur. Councilmember Klein favored broadcasting as many Council meetings aspossible, but was more concerned that Council conduct business as well as possible in a public manner. He was concerned that Council was locking itself into a formal procedure that might be antithetical to the needs of the public. The workshop idea was good and worked better in a smaller, less formal setting. RADIO BROADCASTING OF SDSSTITUTE MOTION: Coaac i leember Klein moved, seconded by Willey, to direct City Manager to es® his best efforts to arrange that broadcasting be possible from tho Council Conference Room. Councilmember $utorius preferred the substitute motion, , but wondered . if it was loose enough to avoid any extraordinary expenditure. 7 8 7;8 11/10/86 Councilmember Klein said his intent was to make the option more flexible. He would regret it it it was not possible to broadcast from the Council Conference Room, but Council needed workshops and they worked better in an informal setting. MAISR AND SECOND AGREED TO INCORPORATE LANGUAGE "PROVIDING IT DOS NOT INCUR ANY MAJOR EXPENSES• TO MOTION Councilmember Levy asked whether it was feasible to broadcast from the Council Conference Room. Mr. Zaner said staff had looked at the feasibility in the past, and it was not impossible but would require an additional amount of money. As he understood the substitute motion, staff would go ahead if the project was reasonable and easy to do. If not, Council would be informed. Councilmember Levy believed the objective should be to broadcast to the public. Itwas almost as good to have a workshop in the Council Chambers as in the Council Conference Room. All the audio -visuals were present to conduct a good workship. He supported the substitute motion. Mr. Zaner believed it was important for Council to have the work sessions in a smaller setting in the Conference Room. Council - members had an opportunity to exchange opinions across the table, and the public attended some of the sessions and felt more com- fortable speaking from the audience in a less formal atmosphere. He reminded Council the meetings were open to the public, the press was invited, and no decisions were made at the meetings, Councilmember Fletcher said •Councilmember Levy pointed out that Council business was usually broadcast and members of the public were used to that. She suggested Council could conduct. its workshops just as well sitting at the' staff tabled as in the Conference Room, and it was ins►z.lting for members of the public to have a broadcast started at 7:10 p.m. and at 7:45 p.m. could not hear the rest of the meeting. She was in favor of exploring broadcasts from the Council Conference Room. Vice Mayor Woolley said _ the intent of the substitute motion was that Council would like staff to return if the cost was in the region of $2,000, but not; -$250. Councilmember Sutorius was concerned with a blanket motion that applied generically to the work study subject. Work study ses- sions might begin at 6:00 p.m. Decisions were not made in work study sessions. 7 8 7 9 11/10/86 Councilmember Klein pointed out it was up to the \radio station to decide whether a meeting was broadcast. He wanted to find out if the meetings could be broadcast for comparatively little cost and was prepared to have the radio station broadcast every meeting that went on in the Conference Room that was open to the public. The substitute motion was a means to make the meetings more accessible, if feasible. SUdSTITOTN !MOTION PASSED unanimously.. 17. REQUEST OF MAYOR COBB RE CANCELLATION OF THE NOVEMBER 17, 1986 CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOTION: Mayor Cobb mowed, seconded by Fletcher, to cancel November 17, 19$6 City Council Meeting, NOTION PASSED unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Coun'i1 adjourned at 11:40 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: 7 8 8 0 11/10/86