Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-09-16 City Council Summary Minutes1 CITY COUNCIL 1 ihr ITEM Oral Communications cI OF PALO ALTO Regular Meeting September 16, 1985 Item #l, Welcome Mayor and Visitors of Enschede, The Netherlands, to the City of Palo Alto PAGE 6 2 5 7 5 2 5.8 Item #2, Neighbors Abroad Presentation of Reader's 6 2 5 9 Digest Sister Cities Award Consent Calendar 6 2 5 9 Referral 6 2 5 9 Action 6 2 6 0 Item #3, Resolution of Appreciation do Robert Lee 6 2 6 0 Cleveland Item #4, !Resolution of Appreciation to naret Gale 6 2 6 0 6arci ay !tem #5, Resolution of Appreciation to Leander 6 2 6 0 Philip Auby Item #C, Resolution of Appreciation to Peter Robert 6 2 6 0 Tral orryo Item #7, Newsprint Recycling 6 1 6 0 Item #8, Evaluation of Electric Incentives Program- 6 2 6 0 Selection of Consultant Item #9, Additlion of International City►. Management 6 2 6 0 Association Retirement Corporation as a Plan Administrator for Jeferred Compensation Item #1U, Urban Water Management Plan 6 2 6 1 Item #11, kesidential Conservation Program 6 2 6 1 Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions C 2 6 1 Item #13, Appeal of the Decision of the Zoning 6 2 6 1 Administrator to deny a Use Permit Request for an Automotive Service at 3045 Park Boulevard Item #14, Ordinance re City-wide Moratorium - R-1 6 2 6 2 Substandard Lots Item 015, Noise Ordinance Amendment 6 2 7 0 6 2 5 5 9/16/85 ITEM Item #15-A (Old Item #12), Ordinance Re Transmission Ayency of Northern California Item #16, Landfill (as Lease and Operating Ayreement with Camurian Energy Systems Recess to Closed Session re Personnel Item #17, Arastradero Preserve Barn Reroofing Item #18, Review of the Initial Study of Stanford University Hospital's Third N„rsinJ Pod Item #19, Agreement for Joint Participation ir; Installation of 'Underground Facilities - Welch Road/Pasteur Urive PAGF 6 2 7 1 6 2 7 .2 6 2 7 4 6 2 7 4 6 2 7 5 6 2 7 9 Item #20, Request of Councilmcmber Fletcher re Use 6 2 8 0 of Transit Funds for Road Construction Adjournment to Closed Session re Personnel FINAL ADJOURNMENT: 11:10 p.m. 6 2 8 2 6 2 8 3 6 2 5 6 9/16/85 Regular Meeting September 16 1985 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto net on this date in the Council Chambers, 25U Hamilton Avenue, at 7:35 p.m. PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Renzel, Sutorius, Woolley ABSENT: Witherspoon Mayor Levy announced that a Special Meeting re Architectural Review Board Interviews was held .61 the Council Conference Room at '5:00 p.m. Mayor Levy announced the need for a Closed Session re Personnel to be held at, some point during or after the meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Janis Bolt, 704 Ramona Street, spoke as a member of the Arts Council of Santa Clara Council. The President of the United States declared the week of September 22 through September 29 as National Arts Week in honor of the 20th Anniversary of the National Endowment for the Arts. Cities throughout Santa Clara County declared local celebrations in support and encouragement of the arts in their local communities. The artist and arts organizations of Santa Clara County would be in full force in celebration of National Arts Weeks. Through- out the County events in all areas of artistic discipline would take place. The National Endo\!rent for the Arts was established as a symbol of concern for the developrhent of the coitural life of the Nation. Since then, it served as a cat- alyst for a strong and enduring partnership among government, artists and the public and encouraged an explosion of creative activity in every area of human genius. National Arts 'leek is a nationwide celebration at the grass roots level. Council was presented with a list of 27 arts organizations in Santa Clara County who were hosting events in celebration of Nation- al Arts Weeks. She invited City Council participation. 2. Clarke Stanley, 8 Stowe Lane, President of the Western Wheelers Bicycle Club, sponsored by the Recreation Departments of Palo Alto and Menlo Park, presented Palo Alto with a check for ;300 as a token of the Club's appreciation for the help it received from the Recreation Department and the City of Palo Alto particularly with regard to the Century Ride held in June of each year. That year there were more than 2,000 registered cyclists. The gift was given without strings although it would hopefully be used for some purpose with some relation to bicycle safety or bicycle awareness. He thanked the City of Halo Alto and the Recreation. Department for its continued assistance. Mayor Levy thanked Mr. Stanley. 3. Charles Weigle, 4193 Willmar Drive, was Pack Master of Cub Scout Pack 14, sponsored by the Covenant Presbyterian Church, and attended the meeting with a group of third year boys from the pack who were working on their citizen badges. The requirement was to visit a community leader and learn about the duties of the job or office, write what was learned in the notebook, and tell other members what was learned. He thanked the Mayor for talking with the bcyc, earlier_ and presenting them with the proclamation. Pe also Thanked` Actin° City Clerk -Gloria Young for making the arrangements, and John Joynt for helping to put it together. 6 2 5 7 9/16/85 I TE M 01- WE I COME MAYOR AND. VISITORS OF ENSCHEDE, THE ETF�ERLANDS , TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (PRE 2 -1 -31 - Mayor Levy said it was a personal pleasure for him, as Mayor of Palo Alto, to welcome Mayor Wierenga, and Alderman van der Walle, and Mr. van der Veen on the occasion of their official visit to Palo Alte. The City of Enschede in the Netherlande had many things in common with Palo Alto. The cultural, educational, and business similarities were important in the decisions made by Enschede and Palo Alto when the two cities formed their Sister City relationship in 1979. During the summer of 1978, officials of Enschede approached the City of Palo Alto and suggested they consider affiliation and forming a friendship link for their mutual benefit. Neighbors Abroad, Palo Alto's Sister City organization, worked with their, Enschede counterparts, ►IDZ, .:u m ce it a reality. In 1,279, for- mer Mayor Scott, Carey visited Enschede and confirmed Palo Alto's acceptance of the relationship and its mutual objectives; namely to promote, encourage, and cultivate understanding between the people of Enschede and Palo Alto. in the five years since then, the links to Enschede flourished. In 1983, mutual concerns were shared about the production and deployment of more nuclear weapons. Palo Alto High School Jazz Hand visited Enschede and played. The people of Enschede were - yracious hosts to them, and he understood Palo Alto's young ambas- sadors were a big hit. There have been many individual visits between the two communities and last year the first high school studert exchange was successfully accomplished. He hoped it would become an annual tradition. That year, they saw 30 technical stu- dents from Enschede University share experiences with students from Stanford. in the fall, he looked forward to welcoming a delegation or professional persons who would visit Palo Alto and Silicon Valley to make cntacts with the business community. That day, the Council was honored to have Mayor Wierenga, Alderman Van der Walle, and Mr. van der Veen officially visit and again confirm the friendship and mutually beneficial relationship enjoyed by the two cities. He hoped they would visit often and 4hat the veers ahead would provide many opportunities for cultural and education- al visits by Enschede citizens to Palo Alto. On behalf of the City of Palo Alto, he welcomed the visitors and hoped they would enjoy every minute of their stay. MOTION: Cou cilmember Bechtel moved, seconded by Sutorius, approval of the Resolution. RESOLUTION 6424 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF fH€ CITY OF PALO ALTO COMMEMORATING THE PRESENCE OF, AND WELCOMING TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO THE HONORABLE HEKO WIERENGA, MAYOR OF OUR SISTER CITY OF ENSCHEDE, THE NETHERLANDS, THE HONORABLE HENK VAN DER VALLE, ALDERMAN FOR FINANCIAL AFFAIRS, AND JAN VAN DER PEEN, HEAD OF THE ECONOMIC AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT" MOTION PASSED unanimously, Witherspoon absent. Ralph White, Neighbors Abroad, introduced Mayor Heko Wierenga, Alderman Henk Van Der Walle, and Jan Van Der Veen. Mayor Levy presented framed copies of the Resolution toiether with a plaque commemorating the first official visit of Mayor Heko Wierenga and the distinguished visitors from Enschede. The Mayor_ of Enschede was appointed by the Queen of the Netherlands on recommendation of the Prime Minister. He hoped the plaque would. hang where it could be seen by residents of Enschede just as the gift they had given to Palo Alto hung in City Hall. He also presented the official Charter of the Sister Cities relationship. 6 2 5 8 9/16/85 Mayur Wierenya thanked Mayor Levy for his kind words and was pleased with the_ ur nimcue .'ote of the City 1 ..:,,.... . ..,.,. .� � ���� +. � �y WU��r� i i . He yrceied the City Council on behalf of the 39 -member City Council of Enschede, and all the inhabitants of his city. It was pleasarit for them to be in Palo Alto. The previous evening and that day they met many good friends which meant a relationship between Palo Alto and Enschede was not something written on paper but was a reality. He hoped in the future more people from Palo Alto would go to his city, and more people from Enschede would go to Palo Alto. He hoped Mayor Levy and the City Councilmembers would go to Enschede. When they were there they would need a City map, and he read a special one for Palo Alto. Enschede was an old city, more than 650 years old, and during the centuries it was a small town with a moat surrounding it and two main city gates. He presented the Mayor with the oldest map of Enschede made in 1560, more than 400 years ago. At that time it was a small city, but the streets on the map were still the mail streets of downtown Enschede. He also presented a key to the gates of Enschede which was also very old and used in the past when citizens wanted to enter during the niyht. The two yi fts were a symbol that the City of Enschede was open to Mayor Levy, members of the City Couec i l , and to all his friends in Palo Alto. Mayor Levy was honored, and said they would visit Enschede and have the map memorized beforehand, Until then, it would hang in his office in City Hall. ITEM #2, NEIGHBORS ABROAD PRESENTATION OF READER'S DIGEST SISTER CITIES AWARD (PRE 2-1) Patricia Sanders, President, Neighbors Abroad, had the pleasure over the summer of representing the City and the almost 500 mem- bers of Neighbors Abroad at the 25th International Sister Cities Conference. While she was there, she received the Reader's Digest Foundation Sister City International Award which \she formally passed on to Mayor Levy to be hung in his office aong with the two other awards which Neighbors Abroad won. They were very proud of it. Mayor Levy accepted the award on behalf of the City. He said Palo Alto won the award on two other Occasions and it was testimony to the outstanding work which Neighbors Abroad did to make the Sister City pro+tram a reality for Palo Alto, and to enrich Palo Alto by its relations with Palo in the Philippines, 0axaco in Mexico, as well as Enschede in the Netherlands. ITEM !r3 RrSOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO ROBERT LEE CLEVELAND (PER 4 - Mayor Levy said since Mr. Cleveland was not present that evening, Item #3 would be incorporated into the Consent Calendar. JNSENT CALENDAR Mayor Levy removed Item #12, Ordinance re Transmission Agency of Northern California. MOYIO1: Courcilme.ber Sutorius moved, seconded by Cobb, approval of the Consent Calendar. Referral None 6 2 5 9 9/16/86 Action ITEM #=i, RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION I-0 ROBERT LEE CLEVELAND (PER 4-2) RESOLUTION 6425 entitled `RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF fO ALTO EXPRESSING A?PRECIATION TO ROBERT LEE CLEVELAND UPON HIS RETIREMENT' ITEM #4} RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO DARET GALE BARCLAY (PER 4 -2j - RESOLUTION 6426 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF Tr -CITY 6F PRO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO DARET GALE BARCLAY UPON HIS RETIREMENT" ITEM #5, RESOLUTION OF. APPRECIATION TO LEANDER PHILIP AUBY (PER 4-2f RESOLUTION 6427, entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO LEANDER • HILIP AUDY UPON HIS RETIREMENT* ITEM #6, RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO PETER ROBERT TRALONGO (pER 4-2) RESOLUTION 6428 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THc COUNCIL OF THE CftY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO PETER ROBERT TRALONGO UPON HIS RETIREMENT" ITEM #7, NEWSPRINT RECYCLING (PWK 5) (CMR:506:5) Staff recommends Council approve the proposed contract with the Community Association for the Retarded, retrva;, ive to July 1, 1985 through June 30, 1986. OREEMENT - NEWSPRINT RECYCLING PROGRAM Community Association for the Retar=ded ITEM 08, EVALUATION OF ELECTRIC INCENTIVES PROGRAA - SELECTION OF CONSULTANT (UTI 3) (CMR:513:5) Staff recommends Council approve the PARTNERS evaluation agreeme t with Barakat Associates in the amount of $24,348 and authorize the Mayor to execute it. AGREEMENT Barakat Associates ITEM 09, ADDITION OF INTERNATIONAL CITY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION RETIREMENT CURPORATTON AS A PLAN ADMINISTRATOR FOR DEFERRED COMPENSATION (PER 2-3) (CMR:5075-1-- ctztf recommends Council approve the Resolution adding International City Management Association Retirement Corporation as a Deferred Compensation Plan administrator. No additional costs are incurred by adding this program. RESOLUTION 6429 entitled '.RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ESTABLISHING THE INTERNATIONAL CITY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION RETIREMENT DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN FOR ALL CITY EMPLOYEES' 6 2 6-0-- 9/16/85 ITEM #10 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (UTI /) (CMR:5516,5) Staff recommends Council approve the Resolution setting the date of October 21, 1985 for Public Hearing on an Urban Water Manage- ment Plan for the City of Palo Alto. RESOLUTION 6430 entitled "RESOLUTION OF TRF COUNCIL OF THE CITt OF PALO ALTO SETTING A PUBLIC `:lEAkING ON AN URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN AS REQUIRED BY PART 2.6 OF DIVISION 5 OF THE CALIFORNIA WATER CODE" ITEM #11, RESIDENTIAL CONSERVATION PROGRPM (ENV 9-5) (CMR:514:5). Staff recommends Council authorize the Mayor to execute a contract with Al; American Insulation .Cor..pany, for; thermal insulation and related ufeAt!lerizat,icn s'easur-e Lo condinue the Home Weatheriza- tion Program. AWARD OF CONTRACT All American Insulation Company MOTION PASSER anarutrously, Witherspoon absent. AGENDA CHANGES, AUDITIONS AND DELETIONS Chy Manager Bill Zaner said I nm #12, Ordinance re Transmission Agency of Northern California, dbecome Item #15-A. Counci lmember Fletcher adds Use of Transit Funds for Road Construction. ITEM #13, APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR TO DENY A USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR AN AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE (CAR DEALERSHIP AND REPAIR FACILITY) AT 3045 PARK BOULEVARD. (To be referred back to the P1anntng Commission for review of the revised traffic data and additional use restrictions) (Continued from 7/15/85) (PLA 3-1) (CMR:507:5) Loning Administrator Bob Brown said the item before Council was a request for a referral to the Manning Commission. There was difficulty in the Public Hearing notice for the item, and the City Attorney believed a Public Hearing notice was not necessary for the suggested referral, but the City Council could not take action on the item that evening due to the notice problem. The staff recommendation was a referral to the Planning Commission where the item would again receive public notice. MOTION TO REFER: Councilmember Klein moved, seconded by Woolley, to refer the item to the Planning Commission. Denny Petrosian, 443 Ventura Avenue, was involved with the issue the many times it went before the Planning Commission and spoke to the, referral to the extent she believed it was important the terms of the referral be made clear by the City Council. The applicant requested a restriction only on the number of employees, :tervice stalls, and number of shifts of service employees. It mentioned nothing about square footage nor floor area, and she believed that was the heart of what the staff was getting to. ;t It was a critical issue because without limiting the .square footage to what the shop was presently, the business could potentially be voluminous and, as stated in the staff report, take up more than its share of the on -ramp traffic. It was pror:,se. d to have as many auto trips on the on -ramp as the huge office building next door, and she did not believe that was the intent, which was why there was a conditional use permit required for auto repair shops, even though the area was for auto repair, which she supported, but it was s not for - "regional" auto repair which was what it would become. There were d lot of large developments there, and there Was property consoli- dation going on, which was why .floor area needed to be limited. 6 2 6 I 9/16/85 Mayor Levy did not believe Council could refer the item on the basis suggested by Ms. Pe resid=.e; therefore, her comments were out of order. Councilmember Fletcher said according to the agenda, the referral to the Planning. Commission was foe review of the revised traffic data and additional use restrictions. She asked whether the Plan- ning Commission was free to consider square footage or whether it needed to be an amendment to the motion. Mr. Brown said the Planning Commission would consider the square footage of the use, and the appellant proposed a reduction'Nin the square footage of the building from the first time staff saw the application. CuuuLihueuber Klein said the words of his motion were specific because of his strong belief that when items were referred back, the hands of the advisory panel could not be tied. As far as he was concerned, his motion had no restrictions on what the Planning Commission should consider. The words he used were, "Refer this matter back to the Planning Commission," which was the entire matter of the request of BMW for an appeal of the uecision of the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Commission would give Council its best advice, and then Council would take action on it. City Attorney Diane Lee needed to state what kind of constraints Council was operating under becausethe item was not "noticed" and because it was a "quasi judicial hearing." They talked about the limitations on what Council could do and decide, and that was not the time Council could decide. Therefore, giving direction could be an indication that Council had, in fact, decided. Council's responsibility when they got the item, because it was a quasi judiciel hearing, was to make a decision based on the evidence before it. She strongly recommended the motion be approved as made. Councilmember Renzel concurred with Councilmember Klein. She would procedurally support the referral, but hoped it was in no way construed by the Commission as any kind of judgment with respect to any of the issues there. MOTION PASSED unanimously, iditherspoon absent. ITEM #14, ORDINANCE RE CITY-WIDE MORATORIUM - R-1 SUBSTANDARD LOTS (2nd Readiny) (Continued from 9/10/85) (PLA,3-16) City Attorney Diane Lee said at the previous week's Council meet- ine when the item was continued, she was asked to prepare language which would make the item an emergency. She believed it was slz-t- ficient if that was someone's intention as part of a motion, to refer to the oriyinal ordinance before Council on August 19, which had all the appropriate language in it. Counciliember Sutorius said when the matter was before the Council the previous week, he abstained and reported a question as to a potential conflict of interest which was referred to the City Attorney. Subsequently, the City Attorney completed her research and responded that a conflict of interest did not exist. The nature of the matter, and the reason he raised it, was because he and his wife were quarter -interest owners in a home in Baeron Park in which one. of his daughters, her husband, and two of their grandchildren r-esAed. It was because of that ownership interest he was concerned whether or not he had a conflict of interest inasmuch as one of the dimensions of the lot came under the sub- standard definition. Because of the City Attorney's response, he was free to,participate that evening. 6 2 6 2 9/16/85 Ms. fee asked thet the record reflect the reasons tor no conflict. ender Opinions and Rulings of the Fair Political Practices Commis- sion, residential property, if one dirt not own more than three units, one was considered to be part of tie puol is generally. Given the number of lots being talked about, and Mr. Brown told her somewhere between 500 to 1,000 lots might be affected, that was the basis of the decision that Councilmember Sutorius could participate. Councilmember Renzel asked the City Attorney how many votes were required for an emergency ordinance, Ms. Lee said seven. Councilmember Bechtel was absent from Cae m9Ptiny in Aii0iict w ! en the item first came up, and asked for clarification of the ration- ale for the December 31 date. She understood the Planning Commis- sion was looking at that issue and she asked if the timing was still valid. Director of Planning arid Community' Environment Ken Schreiber believed the tuning was still valid. If Council took action on October 7 when they received the Planning Commission recommenda- tion, it was sufficient time to adopt regulations and have there effective prior- to December 31. If it was adopted later the year and Council wished to extend, that option could be pursued. Counci'►member Bechtel clarified the Planning Commission already acted. Mr. Schreiber said yes, and Council would receive the recommenda- tion on October 7. e Courrcilmernber Renzel asked if when Council received the Planning commission reco meneat ion, it could be adopted on an emergency besi s by a four= 1 1 f' hs vote. Ms. Lee understood the Planning Commission's recommendation would be for a study. Given the fact that Council would not have any ordinance before it, she did not see how it could be adopted as an emergency. MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Fletcher, approval of .the ordinance, ORDINANCE 3637 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF DEMOLITION PERMITS AND BUILDING PERMITS FOR SUBSTANDARD LOTS IN R-1 DISTRICTS IN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (1st Reading 8/19/85, PASSED 5-2, Levy, Woolley "no," Bechtel, Witherspoon absent) Bob Moss, 4010 0rme, was disappointed the previous week when Coun- cil did not pass the ordinance and was even more disappointed with the rationales given for it. He and many other people in the com- munity did not believe that since a -building permit on one lot was already issued, it negated the .reed for the ordinance because there was a need to look at development on substandard R-1 lots. He was surprised to hear that staff believed there might be as many as 500 to 1,000 substandard lots which might be affected by such an ordinance. If therewere 500 lots, then - it was a signi- ficant City-wa'de issue which required consideration, review and action. Time after time City Council waited until after things happened and then reacted, and reacted late and sometimes badly. Council had before ite an opportunity to stop the progression of unfortunate occurrences before it was too late. Council had an opportunity to step back, take a look at the problem, and decide how to address it. If the Planning Commission only requested a further study, then there was all the more need for a moratorium while the study went on. If there was a significant problem, and 6 2 6 3 9/16/85 he relieved enough people testified to thei uffr ct, then Council should stop and address it. It was unfortunate the ordinance was not adopted as an'emergency ordinance in August. It was beyond time to adopt the ordinance at present. He agreed with one state- ment made by Councilmember Klein the previous week, that tye two - month period until December 31 might not be enough time to make a siynifiicant difference, therefore, he suggested the ordinance be adopted for a period of one year. He did not believe it would take a year to get a recommendation back from the Planning Commis- sion, and act on it, and Council could always rescind the ordi- nance once it took appropriate action. It was important that appropriate action be taken and the first step was to stop the clock and address the issues, to look at some of the ways over- development in R-1 lots and R-1 neighborhoods.could be prohibited, and to recoyn►ze it was a city-wide issue -and that needed city- witla attention immediately. Mayor Levy said the ordinance before Council ,was a moratorium until December. 31, 1985. It was printed on the agenda as a one- year moratorium. - Cou nci lmember Sutorius said at an earlier meeting on the subject, Mr. Moss provided a listing to Coueei 1 that was researched by an associate of_his that had to do with lot size data from new house building permits issued,- January 1, 1984 to August 11, 1985. He asked if Mr. Moss had an opportunity to further review the list ant: whether the significance of the data was modified by the fact that a "substandard lot" by description in the pending ordinance meant a lot with a width less than 50 feet or a depth of less than e3 feet and an area less than 83 percent of the minimum,_ area required by the zoning. As he reviewed the list previoesly sub- mitted, he only found four instances which fell under the substan- dard definition on which Council was acting. He reading of the material sueygested a total_ of 88 building permits issued; thatthe list represented ones that were carefully researched, and he had no reason to doubt it. He queried whether the magnitude of the problem, and the likelihood of negative occurrence in the period between then and receipt of the Planning Commission recommendation which, as suggested, might turn out to be a recommendation for a study, was so critical that the action of a moratorium was some- thing Mr. Moss continued to strongly en"^rse. Mr. Moss believed the figures were pretty close. eHis recollection was something on the order of five percent of the lots would fit the "or" designatie . The original designation was "and," so it only had to meet one of the three conditions. When made to Meet two of the three conditions, it --obviously made it more restric- tive. Under the more restrictive terminology, the difference in percentaye of affected lots went from something like 12 to 15 per- cent to about b percent. His feeling since he had not looked at every lot in the City, was that Council was yoing to see a higher percentage in the lots which went before; it 'over the next :year because there was going to be more infi l 1. development happening. People were going to be developing lots which, in -the past, were considered totally unbuildable because of the desirability of. housing in Palo Alto and the fact that they could get- a high return for a low cost investment. He believed the actual percerr`- : taye of applications in the coming year :would . probably lee on the order of twice. It was still` a relatively small number,e 8 to 12 percent, not 20 L o 25 percent, but he was 'surprised at the number of houses that were built because six years ago the total -number of single-family Tots -that supposedly still existed in Palo- Alto was less than 209, avid almost 200 houses were built in just the last year -and -a -ha i f. Some were surplus school sites --that did not exist as building lots five years. before, but he believed it was still a serious City-wide problem that should be_addressed at th-e same time the Planning CoMrission -and Council addressed R-1 devel- opment. standards such as floor -area ratios. in general. He supported the ordinance and a moratoripm and still believed a one- year moratorium was more appropriate. 6 2 6 4 9/16/85 Ua'vid Stritmatter, 363 Whitclem Place, said if the proposed mora- torium prevented urrtier -people from going through what they went throuyh, it would be -a blessing. He did not know what Atetook to stop something unwanted from happening in one's ow;, backyard, and the cava! ier attitude of an architect regarding their oak tree --- they called it "theirs" because it was so big and beautiful. He said, '0h, by the time it dies, the foliage that we plant will' have grown up and replaced it." That did not go iri his book; a beautiful oak_ did not take second place to the average Palo Alto shrub. Bill Armstrong, 363 Whitclem Place, said on July 22, 1985, he pro- posed to the Council the best -way to deal with the improper devel- opment of -substandard lots was to require a variance to build on them. Many-neighboriny communities had the requirement, and the nrZcethirn a ffnr'ied rit i "nc o f a Ai ven nel gh3rorhood a proper forum to voice their opinions and/or objections. Further, the case of Horn v, County of Ventura mandated that when property values, fire and public safety were involved, citizens had a right to notifica- tion and a public hearing. A variance requirement that ,provided such notification and a hearing was the law of the land. The neighbors were never notified thate,4293 Wilkie Way- was changed from a de facto public! faell ie pI mn!es ctatinn of 40 years stand - my to a legal residential lot. The Palo A;tu Fire Code required a 2U -foot wide access to flag lots; it said nothing about substan- dard flag lots, -which 4293 ;iilkie Way was. Their neighborhood was 9i ve,% no notice, near did it seem to have any. say in the matter that the Fire Marshall was urged to grant an exception in that case and allow only 10 feet. The wording of the Fire Code that allowed that exception used the ,word "may," spelled m -a -y, not m -u -s -t. He queried why every arbitrary interpretation of every possible loophole got resolved in favor of the developer. When they pointed out tie lot was further reduced by 207 square feet in 1954 by an easement to the Santa Clara Valley Water District, thus by zoning ordinance bscominy illegal, they were told the intent of the words "further reduced" meant further subdivided and did riot ap-ply. He believed "further reduced" meant further reduced, and was not sure ne could envision any possible way one could sub- divide a substandard lot. When the initial setback variance granted. to Mr. Schnoor was under appeal, he queried why the under- yround gas, electric, and water meters were installed as if thce outcome was a fait accompli. In spite of their inquiries, they were unable to find out who authorized the installation and paid for it. In spite of the opposition from the entire neighborhood and the unan'mous vote ag-.inst the project by the Planning Commis- sion, he asked who verbally assured Mr. Schnoor and Mr. Fleming that, "There is no problem. You'll get your building permit." Those were the words to Mr. Kahl er , by Mr. Fleming. That encour- eyed tie City of Los Altos to continue to 'Ignore their 14 months of letters and verbal requests for a meaning to discuss buying the lot and encouraged Mr. Fleming to ,make :the eleventh hour .purchase. He believed the Palo Alto City staff created ;the mess. Someone seemed bound and determined to get a .building an the, lot. Without the encouragement, Los Altos might have listened to reason and let the:three neighbors buy:the property at a fair price. The then Los Altos City Attorney suggested that without the moratoriuM their backs were against the wall. Without emergency status there was a time w_indowe through which the building permit .might be threaded. If -the house was bui t, it would necessarily have the same general shape from Mr, Kohler's perspective as a two-story mobile home and, eccording to Arborist Barry Coates, of Los Gatos, a magnificent old valley oak would die. Their only recourse was litiyation. He urged. the Council to` pass the ordinance on an emergency basis, and in the time afforded by the action, have the planning Commission study„ the variance requirements to build on a substandard. lot., and -change the Fire Code to provide notification and public input if -an exception was being considered, 6 2 6 5 9/16/85 Royer Km er, 4291 wi lkie Hay, said the eritire situations frus- trated him as uue who den i i. wi i.ii LU'i iiiy ui u iriaii..es 1ri {. L i e, con- tinually. He read zoning. ordinances up and down the Peninsula, analyzed them with City staffs, and it boiled down to a difference of opinion between the City staff and the way he read the zoning ordinance. He believed his lot was unusual in one s nse in that there was a house pending construction, but there were several other lots in the City with the same situation that people were not even aware of. When he received a varian;e in 1979, the Zoning Administrator at the time referred to the lot behind him as the public utility lot, and not as an R-1 zoned lot, so he was sort of fooled by the staff several years before. He believed it was unintentional because at that time there was a pumping station on the lot. He encoiira {'. Council that a moratorium at that time seemed a simple matter which would, give them all time to sit back and study what was happening there. The developer for the lot behind his :house aid not seem to be in anv hurrv: to :build on the tot and had not resubmitted revised drawings. A moratorium might give time to sit back and take a look at substandard lots and how they affected everybody. There were seven lots around the partic- ular lot; a total number of about 20 and 25 people, of which about half were children, so the impact of the douse would be definite. There were unin., to hP rare vnir.n in and out of the substandard access route, and there were small children living on each aide of it. There were points in the Zoning Ordinance that were not answered fully in his opinion, as wc11 as other people with whom he had conferred. A moratorium at that time was appropriate. Councilmember Fletcher asked if an exception was given for the width of the driveway or whether it was a legal driveway. Mr. Brawn said the access way of the present driveway was 10 feet wide. If the lot was to be developed, it was up to the developer to request such an exception from the City Fire Chief, He noted, however, the exceptions for single-family dwellings on flag lots were common. The far.t of the matter was the City's subdivision ordinance only required a 15 -foot wide access way to a newly created flay lot, so the fact that the Fire Code stipulated 20 foot with the provision for an exception for single-family homes, the exception was granted routinely in the creation of flag lots. Councilmember Fletcher asked to the extent that they were 10 feet. Mr. Brown said no --to the extent they were 15 required by current ordinance. In the case of 10 feet, there were flag lots somewhat near Wilkie Way which were created with 10- or 12 -foot access ways. They were somewhat older, but were created that way. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved seconded by `Renzel, that the ordinance ba considered an !emergency. Mayor Levy called on the City Attorney for direction. Ms. Lee suggested Council consider the amendment a Substitute Motion and a complete motion. If it did. not pass as an emergency with the required vote, it was their practice that if it received a majority of five votes, it would be passed for second reading as a regular ordinance. Mayor Levy believed the avoidance of procedural -morass was a noble motive. i 6 2 6 6 9/16/85 SUb5 t tTUTE MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Renzel, approval a the ordinance, ac;a declaring an emergency. ORDINANCE 3637 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE. CITY OF PALO ALTO IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF DEMOLITION PERMITS AND BUILDING PERMITS FOR SUBSTAN- DARD LOTS IN R-1 OISTRICTS IN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY" (1st Reading 8/19/35, PASSED 5-2, Levy, Woolley "no,* Bechtel, Witherspoon absent) Courul lmember Fletcher asked staff about an advisable length of time before the Planning Commission recommendations returned to Council and whatever action Council took became effective. Director eof Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber said the Planning Commission considered the issue of amending the zon- ing ordinance to establish regulations for single-family lots. Their recommendation was the ordinance not tie amended at that time. Council would have that recommendation on October 7. In previous discussions with Assistant City -Attorneys and other City staff, staff believed on October 7, Council if it wished to amend the zoning ordinance, could request an ordinance be returned to Council —it would not have to rei.ui n t.0 iii r IQfiri!ny Commission because the Planning Commission had already considered the sub- ject. If that was the case, 'the ordinance could be adopted by late October, and if that was the case, the ordinance would be effective by the middle of December, which was the reason for the December 31 termination of the moratorium. If, on October 7, C..uncil decided to take a different course of action --more study, refer back to the Planning Commission, or whatever, Council still had sefficient time to amend the moratorium to extend it for however lone seemed appropriate yiven the discussion of October 7. At that point, the December 31 date was still valid. • Councilmember Renzel urged her colleagues to consider not just the number of substandard 1o'ts which might have problems,' but the serious impacts of the kinds of development that occurred on those lots to their neighborhoods, and the fact it struck people right where they lived. It was critical that Council ensure the City's zoning ordinance had sufficient protections se that when and if substanaard lots were developed, t'eey did not create an undue bur- den on *tie remaining property owners. The fact that the City saw two instances that year and, according to Bob Moss' statement, perhaps last year five or six other properties would have fallen under the moratorium, dial not address the fact that as time went on and there were less and less properties to develop, the City would see more emphasis by developers on less than ideal sites. It was time for Council to address the problem and she urged her colleagues to give serious consideration --those who were either changing their votes or had riot been in favor of the moratorium -- to supporting the motion. Councilnrembee Bechtel gave the issue a lot of thought and did not like planning by moratoria. She believed there were exceptional circumstances and wished the Counci lmembers always had -the fore- sight ,o do long-range planning to the extent they could avoid being in a situation where they were forced to adopt an ordinance such as that before them. On October 7, even though the Planning Commission would recommend no action, and she agreed with, then concerning floor area ratio, there were other standards that could be applied. She was amazed about a 10 -foot driveway, for example, or access way. She happened to have a 9 -foot wide driveway on a long, skinny lot, and 9 feet was narrow. It was difficult to have some access because certain kinds of vehicles simply could not fit down such a driveway. For that reason, she urged those who pre- viously voted in opposition to the,, motion to reconsi d . It was for a short time, and she was not cortaritting to extending beyond December 31. It would inconvenience few people, and she urged her colleagues to adopt it as an urgency item. 6 2 6 7 9/16/85 Cw .fin nw C � 1. �. tt 2 _ � � ounc _ �, o be Sutorl us . asr.el for ,.1 ar- i f icat r vin regar=d Sri+ Council's vote that evening. If the substitute motion received seven affir- mative votes, it would pass on an urgency basis as a first read- ing. Ms. Lee said with seven votes, the ordinance became effective immediately. Councilmember Sutorius asked if Council would act upon it again at a later time. mF. Lee said no. Councilmember Sutorius clarified it was ,substituting for the second rEadiny. Ms. Lee said no emergency ordinance needed a second reading. It became effective immediately upon adoption, which would be that eveniny 1f it got the requisite number of votes. Councilmember Sutorius asked if the concept of a variance approach for substandard lots was included in the Planning Commission dis- cussions. Mr. Brown said no. Substandard lots were not singled out. The. Planning Commission first looked at all single-family lots, new construction and additions, and at the last meeting, it focused more on the new single-family subdivisions. Councilmember Sutorius said if a variance approach fur substandard lots were a loyical thing to do, whether October 7 would be the first time it was mentioned. Mr. Brown clarified Councilmember Sutorius spoke to a variance that would determine whether a substandard l of were buildable at all. Councilmember Sutorius said it could also make conditions particular application„ for the Mr, Brown clarified a variance request could render the lot un- buildable lot. Councilmember Sutorius said yes. Councilmember Klein supported the substitute motion. He was con- cerned about the effectiveness of the ordinance if it did not pass on an emergency basis because it would not go into effect for another yU days. On balance, it might accomplish some small bit of good, but nowhere near as much good as if it passed on an emer- gency basis. Mayor Levy said he did not support the moratorium on first read- ing. He believed moratoria jeneral ly were not good City policy. The question was whethe- to have a moratorium in the subject instance. He reviewed thr particular plans that might be affected presently by a moratorium thinking not only about.,, those specific plans but about others than might come in, He opined that even though the lots were' substandard," the current building standards in effect for substandard lots protected the neighbors generally as well as the standards for regular standard lots. Since the setbacks side and front were the same For substandard lots as they were for standard lots, they actually represented a larger per- centaye of protection, and the same actual protection as for stan- dard lots. Percentage lot coverage was the same for a substandard lot, whi cr meant a smaller lot had smaller coverage. The area of concern tb:thim was the height limitation. 'Putting in a 30 -foot high building on a substandard lot would be more of an imposition than that height of a building on a staldard lot. He questioned whether 30 feet was proper as the height for R-1 zones. In .terms 6 2 6 8 9/16/85 of passing the moratorium or an emergency moratorium, the plans he saw did not have buildings anywhere near that height, He believed the standards now in place were satisfactory enough such that a moratorium was not needed. Otherwise, the logic would then follow that whenever changes of law were being considered, they should be preceded by a moratorium, He did not believe that was proper planning for a community. Councilmember Fletcher was coipelled to use the Wilkie Way lot as an e>`ampl e. The particular lot was an odd shape and because of the large setback required from the creek, the design was an elongated skinny building perpenilicular to the adjacent home, which in effect made a wall-like effect when viewed from the adja- cent home or homes. It was an unusual situation, but on the other hand, it was a substandard tat, and there might be many others like it. In the particular instance, she believed it would be an extreme hardship to the neighbors to permit it to go forward. She urged Council support of the motion. Councilmember Renzel said for those disinclined to support the • moratorium, it was a standard planning tool to preserve options while planning. It was an important thing to remember. The fact that Connell was slow on the draw ii{th respect to the problems v • V the draw • ♦ i V •1 • L J'I •- V - -V the 'I I V V 1 L111J facing the community and as a result did not anticipate the kinds of problems being experienced, did not make the planning worse than if Council anticipated the problems at the time. With respect to, the zoning criteria protecting people adequately with respect to 'substandard lots, she said particularly with respect to flay lots, it was not the case. Flag lots were apt to be the type of lots Council saw more and more. They did not benefit from frontage on a public street the way a normal lot did which was the reason the City required 15 percent extra site on a flag lot. They theoretically allowed for guest parking, but did not invite guest parking except in front of the neighbors' houses. The fact that the access ways on flag lots did pass by the neighbors was also a significant factor in terms ,of how it was handled. She believed all those factors were not given adequate protection by the City's current zoning ordinance most particularly when, for example, a flag lot was a substandard lot. She urged Council con- sider how they would feel if the building was over their fence. Councilmember Woolley was having a_difficult time deciding how to vote. She strongly agreed the problem of bulk and mass on all R -I lots needed attention, which was happening. She had difficultly using a moratoriu0 considering the magnitude of the problem. She realized it was a judgment call, but to her the magnitude of 'the problem was not that great. She. had more difficulty because she believed from the comments heard that Council was really talking about the need for an emergency ordinance because Council was zeroine in on one property. Mayor Levy clarified the motion before she Ccuncil was an emer- gency moratorium, and if it failed as an emergency, it would still be before the Council as the second reading where it required a majority vote to pass on a second reading. SUBSTITUTE NOTION PASSED AS A SECOND READING by a vote of 6 - Levy, Woolley voting 'no," Witherspoon .absent. Mayor Levy clarified the ordinance was passed for second reading as a regular'ordinance. It was not en emergency ordinance. NOTION: Councilmember Sutorlus moved, seconded by Fletcher, regarding the materiels. Council Sri I l rocei;ve; for .the October 7 Council Meetings, that staff be directed to -include copentary and recommendations pertaining to applicable variance procedure as it would 4APPIy to construction on substandard lots, ,t 6 2 6 9 9/16/85 Councilmember Renzel asked whether such a prop4a1 appropriately needed to yo .through the Planning Commission, and if so, would it not be more e-xpeditious for Council to refer the matter to the Planniny Commission for consideration so that it might return to Council with a recommendation on whic:, Council could act. Ms. Lee said the Planning Commission had the substandard lots and intensification of residential items for a long time and had a couple of hearings. The f4ct-that someone did not bring up the matter of a variance did not mean the urea was not studied. If everytime Council came up with an idea that perhaps the Planning Comrnissiorp did not speak to in a tail, they referred it back to the Council, they would yet into a situation where procedures were - being elongated unnecessarily. Generally, the Planning Commission studied the issue, and the ietiia was ei_fh standare 1nt.5 and what- to vV� and what to do about them,- and they did not come up with a variance as the solution. She did not believe .it had to return to the Planning Commission. Councilmember Renzel said when staff returned with a discussion and recommendation -with respect to such a proposal , she asked if it would incorporate an ordinance for Council to adopt or whether Council would then nave to instruct that an ordinance be pre- pared. Ms. Lee said there were so many options in the situation, it was impossible for staff to even gue „ about what the ordinance would con0i n. Councilmember Renzel clarified there would be another time period for Council to do something. Ms. Lee said yes. Councilmember Fletcher understood Mr. Schreiber to say the Plan- ning Commission did not single out substandard lots for discus- sion, but rather R-1 lots in general without focusing on substan- dard lots. Mr. Schreiber said the Planning Commission reviewed the Council's request to look at R-1 lots, standard and substandard. Councilmember Fletcher did not remember giving direction to the Planning Commission from the Council singling out substandard tots. Mr. Schreiber said Council did not. Council requested the Plan- ning Commission look at all R-1 lots. Councilmember Fletcher was under the impression it was an item the Planning commission had not considered as a subject in itself. She be:ieved it was a proper referral to the Planning Commission. Mayor Levy said there was a motion before the Council and the City Attorney believed it was proper. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Witherspoon absent. ITEM #15, NOISE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (ENV 5) (CMR,504:5) MOTION: Vice Mayor Cobb moved, seconded by Ren,zel, appro;a1 of the ordinance. ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUCH. OF TOE CITY Or PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 9.10,.060(d) OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE TO CHANGE< THE NOISE REGULATIONS TO !ROHIBIT CONSTRUCTION BEFORE 9:00 a.m. ON SATURDAYS' 6 2 7 0 9/16/85 �a Levy asked i i City M�,�or ��� �cI � � the received any complaints i'e-tai=il iey the current Saturday regulations. City Manager Bill Zaner said yes. '.s he recalled, it was how 'the item: got to Council. Mayor Levy clarified there was only one complaint. He asked how long the ordinance was in effect. City Attorney Diane Lee said 1972. Mayor Levy clarified that since Mr. Zaner was City Manager, only one complaint was received. ir. Zaner said that was correct. - Mayor Levy said everything Council did had the effect of increas- ing the cost to construction. If there was but one complaint, he was reluctant to support the motion. Councilmember .Fletcher said she had at least one other complaint since she was on the Council when there was construction on Colorado. She also seemed to remember hearing verbally from the residents ot the Presiaent Hotel. She believed .it was perfectly reasonable to permit people to sleep until 9:00 a.m. on a weekend morning. Councilmember Renzel also knew from constituents of hers near a major project they endured and still endured months of 8:00 a.m. and earlier than 8:00 a.m. construction noise for which they had to issue complaints during the week. If they endured disturbances five days a week, it seemed to her that giving an extra hour to residents on Saturday mornings was not an undue burden. Councilmember Bechtel said Council might only have received one formal letter in the recent past concerning the item, but it did not mean there were not lots of people who contacted Council - mem- bers individually or who called the Police Department where the complaints might not have all been registered. She agreed with Councilmembers Fletcher and Renzel it was an item that warranted Council action. MOTION PASSED by a rote of 7-1, Levy voting "no," Witherspoon absent. ITEM #15-A (OLD ITEM 12), ORDINANCE RE TRANSMISSION AGENCY OF NulYHERN CALIFORNIA (UTI 3-1) CMR:518:5) Mayor Levy removed the item from the Consent Calendar because he wanted to be sure about the City's liability. The staff report indicated it was possible that staff, on its own, could approve a indebtedness fortheCity in connection with Project Agreement No. 2, and that only if it could not be worked out to staff's satis- faction, would they return to Council. The ordinance itself clearly stated in Section 4 that neither the payment of principal of the indebtedness nor any part thereof nor interest shall con- stitute a debt liability or obligation to the City nor did the ordinance commit the City of Palo Alto to enter into any project agreement. Before approving the matter, he asked about the City's liability in connection with Council approval of the ordinance, and clarification that any City liability would return to Council in a separate ordinance. Director of Utilities Richard Young said that was correct. The issue as placed before the Council was an authorization for the Transmission Agency of Northern California ;:(TANC) to act in doing their financing. In order for the City to participate in that financing, it would have to approve a project agreement which --would be known as Project Agreement No. 2, which would have to return to the Council for approval 6 2 7 1 9/16/85 F'M 3 +EJ1+-. _S-li� .M+i.��::�F.�[...{ •rri.^��l �Ki y • • rE s..3'. MOT!O : Mayor Levy moved, seconded by Sutorl us, approval of thie ordinance, ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF flit .0 - u- ALTO AUTHORIZING THE TRANS- MISSION AGENCY OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS, MOTES, AND OTHER EVIDENCES OF INDEBTEDNESS" MOTION PASSED unanimously, Witherspoon absent. ITEM #16 LANDFILL GAS LEASE AND OPERATING AGREEMENT WITH CAMBRIAN ENERGY SYSTEMS (UT f 4 . (CMR :426:5 ) MOTION: Councilmember Cobb moved, seconded by Bechtel, approval of the agreement. LANDFILL GAS LEASE AND OPERATING AGREEMENT FOR CONVERSION SYSTEMS BETWEEN CAMBRIAN ENERGY SYSTEMS AND CITYOFPALO ALTO Councilmember Rer,zel said when the matter was before Council pre- viously, she asked what capital facilities were apt to be built. She was told they were minor pipeline things that came up out of the gi oui i every so often, dnd she wanted to confirm whether the City anticipated any major constructions in association with the project. Director of Public Works David Adams said there would be a small venerating facility. He introduced Evan Williams, President of Cambrian`Eneryy Systems, who would respond to any questions. Councilmember Menzel wanted to know now big a "small" generating facility was and where it was apt to be located. President of Cambrian Energy Systems Evan Williams said the cur- rent plans were next to the wastewater treatment plant. The building size would vary depending upon the amount of gas avail- able and the kind of equipment necessary to convert it, which would not :.e determined until they actually got into the project. A rough approximation vould be an 8,000 to 10,000 square foot building constructed in accordance with City environmental and Building Department requ1rements. It would probably be consistent with the type of construction at the City's wastewate treatment facility because it was similar to others facilities they oper- ated. Councilmember Renzel asked about the typical height. Mr. Williams guessed at 20 feet. Councilmember Renzel asked if any stacks were required. Mr. Williams replied no. The stacks normally on the facility could be exhaust without any great height. Councilmember Fletcher asked how many years out Cambrian projected gas would be produced in the closed landfill. Mr. Williams said .the .,landfill would be closed eventually, but there was an ongoing deposit of refuse and the half life of land- fill gas was approximately 17 years, so r thee would be generation of gas for quite a period of time. Currently,- if nothing was done, the gas rfoul d build up. Cambrian tried to turn that problem into something that created revenue for the City and also con- trolled a current environmental hazard. Councilmember Sutori us said 5,000,000 BTU's of gas per hour was to be delivered to the wastewater treatment plant. He clarified the vas went by pipeline to the wastewater treatment plant and would be used to burn sludge so gas bypassed the ' electric generation, 6 2 7 2. .9/16/85 He a.iced w174c a h),0UU,U0U STU delivery per hour, or up to that figure, did to the cubic feet of gas available to generate elec- tricity and therefore revenue to Cambrian which was shared with the City. . Senior Engineer, Roger Cwiak said he could not answer on a square footage basis, but in terms of dollars, the 5,000,000 BTU's per hour translated into about $250,000 a year in offset _gas cost at tine tra trnent plant. Five million BTU's an hour, 50 therms an hour, taken on v365 -day year c el4 offset the current price of gas the treatment plant paid. He calculated it would be about 254,0410 in gas savings to the treatment plant. Councilmember Sutorius asked if since 5,000,000 was at the head enri -nf the retrrverv' nrnrerr figures the • r r , the � � yti� c.a in ci�� royalties ##1 par graph 13 of thR staff report, "Total revenues could range from $2,700,U00...to $3,700,000" Mere before or after diverting the gas for heating. Mr. Cwiak said after. Councilmember Sutorius said the revenue potential already accounted for a significant annual savings in gas purchase for the waste treatment. Mr. Cwiak said yes. Councilmember Sutorius clarified Cambrian would get the lease, but the intent was to 'assign it to Pacific Lighting. He asked why the City was not dealing with Pacific Lighting. Mr. Williams said it had to do `with Cambrian's relationship with Pacific Lighting., Cambrian Energy Systems was an independent com- pany, but fog the past five years was under exclusive contract to provide marketing and negotiate all of the procedures they went through to date for Pacific Lighting Energy Systems, which was a wholly -owned subsidiary of Pacific Lighting Corporation. Pacific Lighting Corporation was a $5 billion, New York Stock Exchange company which owned its largest subsidiary, Southern California Gas Company. It began in San Francisco about 100 years ago. Cambrian had about 40 projects which were done exactly that way. The lease would be assigned to Pacific Lighting Energy Systems, which was the substance Council looked to for the implementation of a project that would go for many years. Mayor Levy said on page 3, under Royalties, it indicated that during the first five years, the City would receive 15 percent of the gross, which could be expected to be $120,000 to $160,000 a year. Beyond the fifth year the City would receive 20 and 33 percent of the gross, which should be at least a third more, and perhaps as muc!n as double as he understood it, but the numbers indicated it was only a matter of 15 percent more. Could that be explained. Mr. Cwiak said if the price of electricity exceeded ten cents per kilowatt hour, then the City's royalties could go up.to a maximum of 29 percent. The City. could,only receive 33 percent of the amount over 10 cents per kilowatt hour. Mayors Levy clarified that during, the first five years the City wouid get 15 percent of the gross. Forgetting About the 33 per- cent or- the 29 percent beyond the fifth year the City would get 20 percent of the gross or more. Twenty percent was a third more than 15 percent.,which meant beyond the fifth year the City should get at least a third more .than that received for the first five years. Mr. Wi l l iams said the answer was yes, it . went up to 20 percent. mayor Levy was right, it went up a third more up to the 10 cents. The business had many uncertainties. The City had one experience 6 2 7 3 9/16/85 with the landfill before where one of Cambrian's competitors went in, developed and elected not to proceed. There was more refuse in glace, and Cambrian hoped its testing would determine that there was an economic project. They had other landfills of that size, and one was currently being developed in Santa Clara, Assuming there was sufficient yas, Cambrian succeeded, through the cooperation of the City's Public Works. Department, in cbtainfng a siyned agreement with Pacific Gas & Electric for the purchase of power under what was known as a standard offer tor a contract, which was a contract approved by the Public Utilities Commission and guaranteed the purchase of electricity at an increasing rate over 10 years. If Cambrian had an economic pr, ect, it was for- tunate to have a guaranteed contract to purchase electric power produced by the facility at the equivalent of about $30 a' barrel oil up to maybe $50 a barrel oil. Cambrian was in .a fortunate situation at least for the first 10 years of that contract, and he did not believe those numbers were reflected when Mr. Cwiak pre- pared the report. Despite Mayor Levy's observation that there was an increased royalty rate over the first five years, which was the period Cambrian allowed to recover its capital, the City also had to factor in --assuming gas continued to generate at a constant rate --an increasing energy price or which that royalty would be based. The City won twice. Coui3.ilmember Renzel commented with respect to Site and Design Review, she Hoped there would be some input early on with - respect to the sensitivity of the area. The type of project was always finalized for Site and Desi y s Review and there was no opportunity to protect the area in which it was located, so she hoped staff would bE sensitive to that. Councilmember Fletcher was pleased to see the project go forward. Another benefit was a reduction in the cost of the gas that Palo Alto used, and had to buy presently from PG&E, for the waste treatment plant, which was considerable. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Witherspoon absent. COUNCIL RECESSED TO A CLOSED SESSION RE PERSONNEL FROM 9:40 p.m. TO 1U:U5 p,m. ITEM 017 ARASTRADERJ) PRESERVE BARN REROOFING',(PLA 9) (CMR:505:5) MOTION: Co ncilmember Bechtel moved, seconded by Sutorius, to adopt staff recommendations as follows: 1. Authorize the Mayor to approve the budget amendment adding $15,30© to the existing CIP 84-30, the Arastradero Implementa- tion Plan and reducing the Reserve for Capital Projects by the same amount; 2. Authorize the Haycr to execute the contract with Morrell Roof- ing for $15,263; and 3, Authorize sti=ff to execute change orders not to exceed $2,237. AWARD OF CONTRACT Worrell Roofing. ORDINANCE 3638 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL. OF THE ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1985-1986 TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.. NO. 84-30. 'ARASTRA IMPLEMENTATION PLAN" KOTIOM PASSED unani.ees4i. Witherspoopi absent. 6 2 7 4 9/16/85 ITEM #18- RFV!FW OF THE INITIAL STEM;'. OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY tiUSPITAL"S THIRD NURSING PUO (PIA 10) (Ci4R:508:5) Director of Planniny and Community Environment Ken Schreiber com- mented foe the record the City received that afternoon, from the ;ioverrior's Office of Planning and Research, the result of the State review of the environmental document. Because it was a hos- pital project, it needed to go to the State. It was sent out to a -variety of State ayencies, none of which had any comments to suamit on the document itself. As far es the letter in the packet frum the City of Menlo Park (which is, on file in the City Clerk's office), he asked the record to reflect theletter indicated that the author had difficulty obtaining the appropriate ,findings anal basis for the negative declaration. The findings were on Page 3-6, the basis for the negative declaration was the text on Page 3-7 through 3-27, which were the explanations for t;te "yes" and "maybe" answers in the initial study. In the third paragraph, the author indicated the environmental review did not discuss how the mitigation measures would ameliorate potential impacts, which was covered on Page 3-7 through 3-27. The author also commented on the lack of evidence that the mitigation measures would, in fact, be implemented. Implementation of mitigation measures went with the project. The item Council had was a referral from the Zoning Administrator; the only City action was the Use Permit, and again hospitals were under the control of the State of California for issuance of Building Permits so there was no required design review. The Zoning Administrator sent the design application and environmental document to the Architectural Review Board (ARB), who finished their comments, the Planning Commission and the Coun- cil. The implementation would go with the Use Permit Public Hear- ing, scheduled later that week. The staff report noted the intent to impose mitigation measures a3 part of the Use Permit applica- tion. The fourth paragraph suggested that the environmental docu- ment for the Hospital Modernization Project, which Council took up more than a year ago; be adopted by reference. Staff saw no need to do that. The applicable mitigation measures were callea out in, the document and stood on their own without reference or adoption of the previous document. With reference to Page 3-23, a contra- eictory statement, the author was correct, there was a typograph- ical error and that material was corrected on a corrected page submitted from the consultants in the Council packet. Councilmember Fletcher asked where the new Children's Hospital was in the process, and whetr2r it would be before Council subee- yuently or was included in some of the actions already taken. Zoning Administrator Bob Brown said it would be a subsequent application. There was an indication the building would be located somewhat to the east of the third pod, but there were no details at that time. Councilmember Fletcher asked if the project would go through the regular City review or whether it was comparable to the process where it was nct subject to Council's regulations. Mr. Brown said it would be subject to a Use Permit, and depending upon the level of impacts identified in the environmental review process, it was possible that a negative declaration similar to the one before' Council, would be referred to Council on that proj- ect as well.' If the level of impacts were So significant to war- rant an E IX, then the Elk process would go through the Planning Commission and City Council. Councilmember Rerizel referred to the first page of the —staff report, and the discussion that parking could not exceed 95 per- cent occupancy at any time or it .could result in a noticed public hearing before the Planning Commission. and Council. She asked what would happen if that occurred 6 2 7 5 9/16/35. Mr. Schreiber said if parking was in overly short supply, the intent of the condition was to place the applicant in a .position of at least public embarrassment --having to face a publIci hearing on the issue. What woull flow out of that public hearing would br information on how the applicant proposed to provide the addr- tional parkiny needed to increase the relationship of supply to demand. Councilmember Renzel said experience was that at 3:00 p.m. it was hard to find any kind of a parking space at the Medical Center, and she queried how the City could expect that situation to improve. Mr. Schreiber referred the specifics of the narking plan to the applicant: Stiff (thsQrveri there were certain times of the ray when parking was tight, but the typical problem was people had difficulty findiny a parking space conveniently located during those periods. There was always some.oarkiny available although it might not be in exactly the right location. The applicant could respond in more detail to their substantial plans for pro- viding more parking. Livia Garwood, Hospital Modernization Project Manager, said the Hospital established a parking plan for the entire Medical Center campus, which essentially went up to Campus Drive, along Blake Wilbur, and encompassed the Medical Center at large. Stanford worked out a decision tree with which staff was familiar. As each project went on line, the Hospital recognized how many parking spaces were required and took the next step in the decision tree. ..".1 thouyth she agreed with Couec i lmember Renzel that at certain times of the day there appeared to be no spaces, the Hospital had done surveys and presently had a surplus any time of the day. However, Stanford recognized that additional projects were coming on and were adding a 1,000 car parking structure which would give, about a 200 to 300 space surplus. At any given time, the Hospital restricted what kinds of parking different people used oniqg to the Medical Center. The public needed o) recognize that while there might be spaces, they might not be available to the public, but rather to visiting physicians, etc. As stated innumerable times, the Hospital was more concerned about parking than the City would be because the Hospital served such a great population and did not expect they would ever get to the 95 percent. There would be so many complaints- when they hit 90 percent that it would be addressed well before that. The Children's Hospital was expected to go to Council in late 1985 or early 1986. Construction was expected to start about the summer of 1987. l Mayor Levy was interested in the location of the parking struc- ture. He understood\ it was going to be an 800 -car structure. Ms_ Garwood said it was a 1,000 -car structure because it replaced a ZOO -space. surface parking. The net would be BOC additional spaces. The location was the vicinity of the County side of Quarry Road. It was not in the City. Counc i l memb€r Sutorius referred to the decision tree anA the asso- ciated - enarios, and said Attachment 6 was a two page attachment at the ;.ail end of the study, with a Staging Scenario through 19;0. He asked Ms. Garwood,if they were on that scenario. Ms. Garwood said the -Hospital was on that scenario and, in fact, added to it. It was now to the year 2uu'0, and the reason Council was not given the :updated version was because it- had not gone through all of the approval process that the. Stanford community. had. They were presently_ l;ooking :about to the year •2000., Councilrember Sutorius ;noted in September, 1985 on that staging, the psychiatric relocation would occur and there was a displace- ment si t uar i on and the cumulative situation was a +28. He asked if that was where the Hospital was. 5 2 7 6 9/16_►R.5 Ms. Ga►•wr,od sa i i yes, they were about- .six to eight weeks off the schedule as- published. Stanford expected to have Oat sequence starting in late October. Counci;anember 5utorius said when he revisited the Hoover area in. condunetion with the item, he did not go over on Pasteur, and asked if the median was presently being used. Ms. Garwood said no, there was parking t1ong the curb, but the median was not beiny used for parking. It was a suggested way_ to yo, but as long as the University could keep the balance, that was what they looked to do. Councilmember 5utorius clarified they were keeping the balance and avoiding use of the median. Ms. Garwood said exactly. The Hospital's goal was to stay at about 90 percent as opposed to 95 percent. Councilmember Fletcher said the material indicated ample parking at the Hoover Pavilion. She queried whether a use change from in -patient to -out -patient required a few more parking spaces. Mr. Brown said based on information in the initial study, the anticipation was there might be fewer cars going to the site in that the numner of visitors would decrease substantially as the in -patient uses were phased out. Page 3-17, in the left-hand corner, showed an indication of 289 visitors anticipated in the current situation and, after the switch to the more out -patient, administrative office functions, 89 visitors; a` decrease of approximately 200 trips was .anticipated. Councilmember Fletcher opined that when the patients themselves came and went, it seemed to increase the need, but if that was the analysis, she guessed it was correct. She clarified the City had no enforcement mechanism if the 95 percent parking was not adhered to except to held a public hearing which would be the final action of the City. Mr. drown said that was correct. The City would hold a public hearing and ask Stanford to address the problem by encouraging them to move on to the next portion of their parking plan. Mayor Levy was not satisfied that employment at the hospital would not. escalate. The data in the report showed an escalation over the years, and within the last couple of years, a modest decline. The rationale used was high costs made it absolutely necessary to reduce manpower. Those were not convincing arguments to him as costs of medical care had always been high. There were complaints over and over and he assumed the medical profession was constantly watching costs and there was an ongoing battle. Sometimes it was necessary to raise employment as new health techniques were devel- oped and sometimes the same advances in health care allowed for reduction in employment. He was not convinced the current think- iny, which was reduced employment, was so pervasive the City could plan for the next 20, 30, or 50. years based on the ;last 18 months or eo of policy. He welcomed more convincing logic that employ- ment would not increase, or some suggestions on how the City could assure that employment would stay at _:a manageable level. Ms. ;3arwood said if the. Hospital Director was present, he might do better at convincing th'e Council:; Since the Director joined Stanford about two years ago, one of his goals was cost .:contain- ment. By reading the local press, Council would not there was considerable effort for hospitals to join the competitive world. As people found the cost was high, all hospitals worked on a mar- keting effort. The only way to achieve it was to have excellence plus competitive costs. If Stanford', as, well as all the other hospitals' around, wanted to continue to attract patients --she was 6 .2 7 7 9/16/85 talkino about the ordinary patient, not the acutely -ill patent who went to Stanford, as opposed to anywhere else, because that was where they got the most acute care --they had to be competitive. One of the few ways hospitals could cut costs was by cutting the largest portion of . the budget, which was directly employees' salaries. That was Stanford's goal, and they achieved it for the past two years and intended to continue to try to do so. She was not sure anybody could guarantee there was some form acceptable to the City and Stanford saying, "We will not employ more than X people." Mayor Levy said that was his point --for the past two years, and prior to that employment went up by about 1,200 employees over the preceding eight years. Ouriny the next several years there would be an increase in the area in the average age of the population. He assumed the amount of health (.are woul i also increase because the aged needed much more health care than those who were still youny. He asked if that would mean a substantial increase in the hospital population and perhaps in employment. Ms. Garwood was an architect, not a doctor, and could not appro- priately answer the question. One of the reasons Stanford was doing the modernization was because they knew they had to have a hospital to physically provide the kind of atmosphere that Stanford believed it could provide with the kind of doctors, nurses, and staff they had. That was the whole goal of the modernization. She returned to the fact that if it was an acutely ill patient, Stanford would get them. If it was an elderly per- son, not acutely ill, who needed hospitalization, the competition was such, depending on their ability to pay, that Stanford would ;ove to think every older person in Palo Alto who became ill would ye 40 Stanford. They could not say that would happen, but would be ready and prepared. Stanford did not intend to increase its license. It presently had 663 licensed beds, wlii ch was what they were building towards. The present staff could monitor a 663 -bed hospital. Mayor Levy asked about the techniques available to the City to control employment, or to get a handle on employment at Stanford. He assumed the 95 percent parking standard was the only one avail- able. Mr. Scnreiber said given the size and complexity of the main Medical Center facility, he was unsure the type of techniques the City might consider with a smaller facility would be appropriate. It was possible to try to establish some type of Use Permit con- dition which applied to the third pod. He noted that a year to a year and a half ago ,-taff struggled with the same problem with which the Mayor was struggling. It was a legitimate problem. In doing the traffic analysis for the original Hospital Modernization Project (HMP) application, which was approximately 350,000 square feet of space versus the approximately 80,000 square feet present- ly before Council, staff heard all the arguments and ultimately understood and accepted it. However, in the traffic analysis, staff assumed employment growth of one-half percent per year, rather than the decrease, so the gap between the City and Hospital's projections was significant. The employment growth still did not generate traffic impacts anything close to being significant at any critical intersection. In spite of it, a series of intersection traffic mitigation measures were incorpor- ated into the_ NMI) ;3 year in recognition of the overall growth of traffic •in the area add the overall impact of the Medical Center. The City did not find, even with what they called reasonably worst case employment projections, continued growth over a base of sev- eral years ayo which discounted the decrease of the last couple of years, any type of significant problems. 6 2 7 8 9/x;5/85 MOTION; Vice Aalyor-Cobb moved, seconded by Klein, to adopt the staff recommendation re use permit conditions previously contained in Use Permit 84 -UP -13, and the following other areas: 1. . Requiring submission of final landscape Oians including loca- tion of bicycle parking, to the Architectiral Review Board for review and comment; 2. Requiring provision of Class .I bicycle parking facilities for the third pod addition in conformance with zoning standards (ore bicycle space for each 15 patient beds, or seven spaces for 100 bed =) 3. Demolition of the Administrative Annex and Hemodialysis Unit building within a specified time period after occupancy of the Third Pod; and 4. Placing limitations on intensification of use of the Hoover Pavilion, based on amount of floor area devoted to specific functions or overall employee density. Mayor, Levy asked whether Council should specify the time period tor demolition. Mr. Schreiber said the example in the staff report was purely that. Staff would appreciate concurrence with the concept and preferred to work out the numbers with the applicant. Mayor Levy asked about the limitations on intensification of use of,Hoover Pavilion. Mr. Schreiber said it was the same situation. If the concept was acceptable, then staff anticipated the Zoning Administrator would work it out with the applicant. Councilmember Renzel supported the motion, but was concerned about continued intensification ;n the corridor. It was worrisome to her that so many th:.gs were happening at., one time, and Council had not experienced the impact of any of them while approving other ones going forward. It was a serious situation as it, was an impacted corridor. She knew from visiting patients in the hos- pital there was a problem of access to the Medical Center and was concerned about what would happen to the buildings that were vacated as the Medical Center was occupied, and believed the City wanted to be certain there were not intense uses going into the buildinys at Children's Hospital or Heaver Pavilion. Certainly no more intense than what was there presently, and hopefully less because of the pressures on the corridor. NOTION PASSED unanimously, Witherspoon absent. ITEM #19, AuREEMENT FUR JOINT PARTICIPATION IN INSTALLATION OF UNUERGI(UUNU FAO -TIES - WELCH ROAD PASTEUR DRIVE (UTI 8, (CMR:496:b) City Manager Bi l i Zaner pointed out there would be no competitive biddiny on the project. It Was a Stanford project and the City was essentially "buying in." He was concerned Council had before it a $75,000 budget amendment, and wanted to ensure Council under- stood the City was purchasing space in the trench _from Stanford and not doing a project of its own. . In .addition, the staff report showed a ;figure of $74,000; the agreement with Stanford showed $75,000; and the budget ordinance also showed ;74,000_ Staff recommended all the figures read $75,000 which made the . agreement consistent with the budget amendment. . Mayor Levy asked if that included the contingency. Mr. Zar'er said yes.. 6 2 7 9 9/16/85 NOTION: Councilmember Bechtel moved, seconded by Fletcher, approval or the ordinance and agreement. ORDINANCE 3639 entitled 'ORDINANCE OF THE CuUNCIL OF THE - CITY DF ?n1.0 ALTO " r.RENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1985-86 TO PROVIDE AN APPROPRIATION TO THE ELECTRIC UTILITIES FOR UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION" AGREEMENT FOR v3INT-PARTICIPATION - INSTALLATION OF UNDERGROUND F_►_C!L TIee Stanford University MOTION PASSED unaniuoesly, Witherspoon absent ITEM #20, REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBER FLETCHER RE USE OF TRANSIT FUNDS FUR ROAD; CONStRUCTION (PLA if -5) Councilmember Fletcher apologized for not having advance notice of the item. The County Board of Supervisors was' asked by the Santa Clara County Manufacturing Group to make haste in constructing commute lanes on the County expressways. When she asked at the Transportation Commission where the funds would come from, the answer was primarily from trans?t half -cent sales tax. She per- sonally was disturbed that it could happen. Evidentally, it was legal to do so because the lanes would be used by buses, cars and van pools, but she did not believe t!. ,t was what the voters had in mind when they were promised the money would be used for transit. Furthermore, the Federal and State governments were pulling back in subsidizing transit, and the County was going to find itself in quite a fix before long if all the money was spent on roadways. if there were such large surpluses, she suggested it be spent on transit and reduce traffice thet way so the congestion would be relieved in a positive manner rather than adding lanes. It bothered her that there were plans moving ahead for an acceptable rapid transit system in the 101 transit corridor where the SP presently ran, and a lot of money would be needed for that con- struction to make it happen. She was upset abeet the thought of using transit funds to build lanes on the expressways. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Renzel, that Council transmit the message to. the County Board of Supervisors that Palo Al t_o opposes the use of transit funds for roadway con- struction. Councilmember Woolley asked if there was any discussion in terms of adding commuter lanes, which in and of themselves were an excellent,'idea, to converting some of the present lanes to com- muter lan s. Councilmember Fletcher replied it was not a possibility, and the County used as an example the experience in Southern California where fit was tried once and did not work. Unfortunately, that project was a fiasco, poorly implemented and might ha?.e worked if it was allowed to.. There was a the.nry about it and so it was overturned and the lane reverted to a regular lane. The County consistently held it up as an example of what not to do, and there was no way the County would take away a lane and make it into a commuter lane. Councilmember Woo'lley was under the impression that San Tomas' Expressway had a lane converted. Councilmember Fletcher said it was added. The commuter lanes required intense enforcement to make them work, and the County hired California Highway Patrol (CHI). She knew the first alloca- tion was for ibJU,U00 for Sap 'T,omas ,alone, That was also transit funds, so it was an escaiatiny'- system that would be implemented. The question of commuter lanes was a separate natter. What she was addressing was the funding source. 6 2 8 0 9/16/85 Councilmemher Ren el urged support of the motion. Council sup-. ported the or some other form cf transit in that corridor 45 their one 'lope of some. kind of a serious transit solution to the gridlock faced in the future. It would clearly take a lot of money to bath acquire and run t.hv syste", and to .use the. transit �+ to use transit 11 J 1 Y funds for road construction was sr abuse of the public trust ;jade when the public voted for what was called a "transit tax." Councilmember Sutorius asked whether Councilmember .Fletcher knew if the process was such that the next day's action was equivalent to somethiny like a first reading, or was the next day '`it" ,as far as a "yes" or "no" decision on the subject. He asked because he had difficulty understanding the subject sufficiently, to know whether urgent action was appropriate on Council's part. If the next day was a day of discussion and review, and then' a period of time elapsed before an action took place, then he appreciated the opportunity for cogitation time, and elaboration on the record before voting. Councilmember, Fletcher understood the previous Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors at their meeting received a letter from the. Santa Clara County Manufacturiny Group requesting it be done. The Board of Super- isors ask both the Steering Committee cf the ':Ti ans- eortation 2000 and the Transportation Commission for comments for the Board to take action on September 17. The title on the Trans- it Board Agenda, which was the Board of Supervisors, was "Consider Commute Lane Network Implementation," then the staff suggestet two possible actions: a) Refer to the Transportation Commission T 2000 and Transportation Agency staff for recommendations. She personally believed it only referred to which expressways, the schedule. b) Authorize Clerk of the Board to agendize the recom- mendations for Transit District Meeting no later than December 10, 1985. When the Board commenced discussions, she believed a strong message was important because they would probably eithee accept or reject in concept whether it was a good idea. She believed sub- sequently they would discuss the details of implementation rather than the concept. Councilmember Sutorius understood Councilmember Fletcher's point about takiny action at the head end,.,but found himself unqualified to transmit a message at that paint. In view of the "A" or "B" actions under considerations he believed there was time to supply the. Council's communication and would not support the motion as worded. Mr. Zaner understood the Board would look at a referral to deter- mine whether an environmental impact report (E,IR) should be done as the first step toward putting a project togethert and the pos- sible funding sources not limited to the Trae0i: Reserve account perhaps including FAU money or some other fund. From that per- spective, Councilmember Fletcher's suggestion that there might be some value in transmitting a message to the County at an early date that the Palo Alto City Council would not favorably look upon the use of the half -cent transit money for roadways might be appropriate. It was somewhat early to determine whether Council would ultimately support some type of commuter lane project because it was not known whether there would be one, but it might be appropriate to say that if they proceeded, Palo Alto preferred it be funded by some source other than the transit money. Councilmember Bechtel said there was no question in he mind moee commuter lanes in Santa Clara County were needed, and there ' wat also no question the half -cent sales tax, earmarked and designated for transit, should not be used. The issue was the appropriate use of the money the voters supported and designated for transit. It was a policy is ve;.and she was not sure Council would get any more information on the issue. It was appropriate for Council to state as -gulch as it would like to see some HOV lanes, the proposal was not the w.ay to go about getting them. 6 2 8 1 9/16/85 Vice Mayor Cobb sold lie had the same problem as Councilmember Sutorius. If thA_ motion was more general and advisory and asked the board to not make a precipitous decision, and to refer the matter to the appropriate organizations and back to Palo Alto with the facts as to why they warted to make that type of decision, he would be happy to support it. He haced making a decision when he did not understand the details. Councilmember Renzel asked if Alma Street and Foothill Expressway were part of the County Expressway system, and whether the City expected it would occur there. Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber said Foothill Expressway was a County facility, and he assumed it was part of the County Expressway System, since it was designated as such. Alma Street was a local street. Councilmember Fletcher said the matter was referred to the Trans- portation Commission and T 2000, and both groups did not object to the transit funding for the project. Nothing would he gained by requestiny further referral. Mayor Levy bel ieved Council was ai rep.;;; on record In support of HOV lanes, but should strongly urge the Board of Supervisors to find alternative sources of -funding rather than using transit funds. He believed that type of language would not mean Council went on record specifically opposed to the use of transit funds at that time, but was asking-, as they began the exploration, to strunely search for alternate sources of funding. He asked if that language might be more acceptable to Vice Mayor Cobb and Councilmember Sutorius. Councilmember Sutorius said as the City Manager expressed how the motion might be phrased, he perhaps used the same words, but the tone was better to hi h. It recognized a concern the ,Palo Alto City Council wanted to share at the early stages of the thinking as to the buurce uf funding, and it did not seem as explicit as the motion before the k:ounc i l . Mayor Levy believe the language was to urge the Santa Clara Board of Supervisors to use alternate sources of funding for HOV lanes rather than the use of transit funds. SUBSTITUTE NOTION: Hager Levy moved, seconded by Fletcher, to communicate to the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors that the Palo Alto City Council strongly urged the board of Supervisors to seek alternate sources of funds for the HOV lanes rather than transit funds, Councilmember Renzel asked that the letter also express the Coun- cil's concern of the voters supporting that transit funds be used for track -it. Syr. Zaner said staff normally triad to make its transmission to the County and other jurisdictions as simple and straightforward as possible and try to follow the wording ur the Council's motion as closely as possible in order to not read into the letter some- thiny Council did not intend. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Witherspoon absent. AAJt1URNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION RE PERSONNEL Council adjourned to a.closed session re personnel at 11:00 p.m. FINAL ADJOURNMENT Final adjournment at 11:10 p.m. 6 2 8 2 9/16/85 ATTEST: City APPROVED: 6 2 8 3 9/16/85