Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-05-07 City Council Summary MinutesA 1 CITY COUNCIL MII1UTEt Regular Meeting Monday, May 7, 1984 CITY oF. MEC) FIUTO ITEM P A u E ilemenseir Ural Communications Minutes of March 19, 1984 minutes of March 26, 1984 Consent Calendar heferral Action Item #1, Ordinance re CN Regulations (2nd Reading) Item #2, Reroofing of Animal Shelter Item #3, Park Improvement Ordinance Greer Park Restroom and Security Lighting Item #4, Embarcadero Road/East Bayshore Frontage Road, Improvements Item #5, increase in Contingency for Terman Site Improvements Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions Item #6, Bike Locker installations in the Business Uistriets Item #7, Finance and Public Works Committee Recommendation re leas Rate Relief Approval Item #8, Finance and Public Works Committee Recommendation re Finance Consultant for Lot J Item #9, California Avenue Area Parking Study Item #10, Civic Center Structural Repairs, Award of Consultant Services, Agreements, and Award of Construction Contracts for the Construction Stage Item #11, Undergroundierg ;Christine Drive as a Condition of Ross Road Development Itom #12, Consideration of Legislative Proposal to Create a Santa Clara County Traffic Authority and Authorize a Half -cent Sales. Tax for Highway Construction Item #I3, Request of >Cauncilmember Woolley for Resolution ilonoring 8i rge Clark Mayor Klein re June 11, 1984 City Adjournment: 10:20 p Council Meeting 4 4 8 9 4 4 9 0 4 4 9 0 4 4 9 0 4 4 9 0 4 4 9 0 4 4 9 0 4 4 9 0 4 4 9 1 4 4 9 1 4 4 9 1. 4 4 9 1 4 4 9 1 4 4 9.2 4 4 9 3 4 4 9 3 4 4 9 7 4 5 0 0 4 5 0 2 4 5 1 2. 4 4 8 8 5/7/84 Regular Meeting Monday, May 7, 1984 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this day in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 25U Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, at 7:36 p.m. PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Renzel, Sutorius, Witherspoon, Woolley URAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Ernest Weeks, 1681-91 El Camino Real, had a copy of his request made at last week's meeting for serious consideration of a problem with his property, to which he received no response, and said he was available to discuss the matter during oral communications. Mayor Klein responded to a complaint from the audience, and said Mr. Weeks .was free to address the Council during Oral Communica- tions since his item was not on the agenda. 2. Cathy Taylor, 227 Waverley Street, was a Palo Alto resident, and spoke regarding the Downtown. Park North project and the need for housing in Palo Alto. The area was moderate income housing, and she was concerned about saving the homes. The area ganged since the project was planned, and there were many new homeowners who might not want a park in the area, :she wanted to change the plans as they presently stood. 3. Lasana _Taylor, 227 Waverley Street, wanted more information about the uowntown Park North project; how long they could stay in the housing; whether a park was to be built; and when. Mayor Klein said the Council .could not respond, but a staff member would respond to there. 4. Christine Rudin, 235 Waverley Street, said regarding the Down- town Park North decision, she was told the homes were scheduled for demolition in 1985 to uild a park. The park petition was circulated in 1980, and ehe facts were distorted. She lived on Middlefield at the time, and the people who cir- culated the petition did not disclose the existence of houses on the block. The petition asked whether condomiums should be erected or a park put in, and it frightened homeowners in the area. It should have been clear that there were existing homes which would have to be torn down and its people relo- cated. The best use of the land was duplexes or four- plexes for the elderly on the existing lots between the houses as in Webster Woods, to create a multi -generation block. The area was two blocks from a main bus linewhich provided easy access to four major grocery stores, Stanford Shopping Center, San kntonio . Center, and it was within walking distance to the Senior Center. The Human Relations Commission Was looking for space for low-income housing for the elderly, and the people of Palo Alto should be able to decide on the issue from clear and fair facts. 4. Ptah X Si k i Ronald F. Bennett, 524 Middlefield Road, had an Application to Present a Late Claim Against the City of Palo Alto, rejected previously because it was filed late. 5. William -Conlon, 360 Bryant. Court, spoke on the proposed Down- town Park Worth. For two years he and his wife rented in the neighborhood, and although his house was not scheduled for 1 1 1 4 4:8 9 5/07/84._ demolition, they planned to hey a house in Palo Alto, and believed the houses contributed to tree charm and character of the neighborhood and were important to maintain. They were familiar with the park and had other friends who used the com- munity gardens. lts use was limited as a park compared with the need for housing; the block was fairly small, and years before, people who played volleyball there caused complaints from residents. The houses that were there provided social purpose and charm and were worth keeping. MINUTLS OF MARCH 19, 1984 Councilmember Fletcher submitted the following correction: Pa e 4332, last paragraph, second line, change the word "moni- ''"""'tb "monetary." MOTION: Councilmember Renzel proved, seconded by Witherspoon, approval of the Minutes of March 19, 1984, as corrected. MOTION PASSED unanimously. MINUTLS OF MARCH 25 , 1984 Councilmember Renzel subn:it,:ed the following corrections: Par a ry4374, paragraph 6, line two, to read "permit similar uses." Pa a 4387, paragraph 5, line five, insert the word "new" before MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Sutorius, approval of the Minutes of March 26, 1984, as corrected. MOTION PASSED unanimously. CUNSEti CALDWAA MOTION: Councilmember Cobb moved, seconded by Witherspoon, approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Sutorius asked to be recorded 1, Ordinance re CN Regulations. None Referral Action as voting "no" on Item ITLM #1, URUINANCE RE Ct>t REGULATIONS (2nd .Reading) (PIA 7-9) ORDINANCE 3533 entitled °ORDINANCE OF TnE COUNCIL OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CM) REGULATIONS REGARDING SIZE OF OFFICE USES" (l st Reading 4/23/84, PASSED 8-1, Sutorius 1 no ) Il LM #2 , RLRUUF INu OF ANIMAL SHELTER (SAF 3-2) (CMR :250:4 ) Staff recommends that Council: 1. Authorize the Mayor to execute a contract with Roofing Associates, Inc. in the amount of $18,943; and 2. Authorize staff to execute change orders up to $1,000, if required. AWARD OF CONTRACT Roofing Associations, Inc. 4 4 9 0 5/07/84 ITEM Ft V PARK IMPROVEMENT ORDINANCE UnLLn r l- P F RESTROOM AND • • Staff recommends that the Cuuncil approve the park improvement ordinance for the construction of a restroom and security lighting within the existing developed park. ORU INANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled 'ORDINANCE OF THE ',WADI ALTO APPROVING AND ADOPTING PLANS FOR A RESTROOM AND SECURITY LIGHTS IN A PORTION OF JOHN LUCAS GREER PARK' ITIM #4, ttmiksARCAuLIW RUA+. ;LAST BAYSHORE FRONTAGE ROADS IMPROVE — Hit. s Staff recommends that Council: 1. Approve a Budget Amendment Ordinance to increase -the appro- priation for CIP 8;-29 by $90,253, and increase the estimated revenues for receipt of developer funds. in the amount of $90,253; e. Authorize the Mayor to award the construction contract for improvements at Embarcadero Road/East Bayshore Frontage Road, CIP 83 -?9, to Anza Engineering Corporation in the amount of $78,481; d.nd 3. Authorize staff to execute change orders to the construction contract of up to $11,772 (approximately 15 percent of the contract amount). AWARD OF CONTRACT Anza Engineering Corporatior. ORDINANCE 3528 entitled 'ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1983-84 TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Ho. 83-29 'EMBARCADERO ROAD/EAST bAYSHURE FRONTAGE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS' AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE RECEIPT OF FUNDS FROM HOLY ICK, PEARSON AND MOZART'" ITEM #5, INCREASE IN CONTINGENCY FOR TERMAU SITE IMPROVEMENTS Staff recommends that Council approve: 1. An additional $10,0}0 contingency authorization to the design contract with Wilsey and Hams and - e. An additional contingency authorization of $40,000 to the construction contract with Saldivar Construction, Inc. - MOTION PASSED unanimously, with Sutorius voting 'no,' on _Item #1) Ordinance re CN Regulations. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS None - - ITEM #o, -BIKE LOCKER INSTALLATIONS IN THE BUSINESS DISTRICTS u Councilmember Woolley asked whether the bicycle lockers installed in the down-to,a and California Avenue areas were utilized. Associate Planner tayle Likens said -the lockers in both business districts were located at the SP depots. There were 14 lockers at the university Avenue depot-, and 20 at the -California Avenue depot, where Caitrans had another 38. They were utilized 100 percent, and a waiting list existed at both locations, 4 4- 9 1-- 5/07/84- MOTION: Councilmember Bechtel moved, seconded by Witherspoon, approval of the budget amendment ordinance to provide funding for bicycle locker installation and for receipt of funds from the Metropolitan Transportation Agency. ORDINANCE 35'29 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE ti t T ur rho ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1983-84 TO ESTABLISH AND PROVIDE FUNDING FOR CAPITAL !MPROYEIIENT PROJECT NO. 83-30 'BICYCLE LOCKER INSTALLATION' AND TO PROVIDE FOR RECEIPT OF FUNDS FROM THE METROPOLITAN TT',ANSPORTATION AGENCY' MOTION PASSED unanimously. ITEM #7, FINANCE & PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION RE GAS • Mayor Klein said the ordinance before the Council differed from the one attached to the staff report and included changes recom- mended by the Finance & Public Works (F&Pic) Committee. City Manager Bill Laner said his response was not contained in the packet because he was out of town, but it was forthcoming. The staff report further explained his letter and the factual basis for the staff and F&PW Committee recommendations. They were for- tunate rate relief was granted by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) It worked to the City`'s advantage, and staff was able to recommend an increase in the established reserve. It provided an opportunity to transfer from the Gas Fund to the General Fund an appropriate amount of money representing about a 12.S percent return on investment. In previous years the (as Fund ran a defi- cit and was supported by the General Fund. They were on firm footing for about a year, and the money would enable the Gas Fund to expl ore additional gas supplies if necessary, have a good reserve, and make decent transfers into the General Fund. MOTION: Councilmember Cobb for the Finance and Public Works Committee moved approval of the staff recommendations regarding gas rate relief as follows: I. Adopt the budget amendment ordinance providing for the fiscal year allocation to the Systems Improvement Reserve to be increased from $0.022b/therm sold to $0.043/therm sold, repre- senting an increase in that reserve of $725,000, due to rate relief received January 1, 1984; 2. That the rate relief received in excess of $725,000, namely $4'5,000, be applied to the General Fund in order to achieve a 12.5 percent return on the rate base for fiscal year 1983-84; and Direct staff to indtcate the specific amount of $0.043/therm in the budget a*endareft ordinance. ORDINANCE 3530 entitled °1ORD INANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE t t z T ur YALI) ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1983-84 TO DECREASE THE ESTIMATED GAS PURCHASES IN THE GAS UTILITY AND TO INCREASE THE RESERVE FOR SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT AND THE ESTIMATED -TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL FUND IN THE GAS UTILITY" Councilmember Cobb said the motion transferred a portion of the additional moneys resulting from the PUC decision to the General Fund at the rate of 12.5 percent using the City's enterprise fund method of calculating those transfers, and assigned the balance to a Systems Improvement Reserve or "SIR,," He noted the change in the ordinance clarified that the amount of money to go into the SIR was based upon a rate of $0.043/therm of gas rather than a specific dollar amount. The Committee discussed whether the SIR should be open-ended for the excess moneys or whether at some 4 4 9 2 5/07/84 point there should be a tri a a er which would result in rata relief rather than a continued build up of the SIR, and that more con- sideration should be given if the SIR grew beyond the point neces- sary. Mayor Klein asked whether the decision allowed the City's rates to be lower than Pti&t's. Manager, Rates A Regulations, Randy Baldschun, said the PUC had no regulatory j uri sdi cti on over the City's retail rates, and the Council could make rates above or below those of PG&E. Council should consider what PG&E might bring up in future rate pro- ceedings if the City's rates were lower because PG&E consistently argued that Palo Alto should nut receive any rate relief because it was at the expense of PG&E rate payers. mayor Klein clarified if Palo Alto had a lower rate than PG&E, it would provide PG&E with a good argument to the PUC that the rates being charged to the City were too low. Mr. Baldschun said that was correct. Mayor Klein clarified legally the City could charge a lower rate, but politically the answer might be no. Mr. Baldschun said that was correct. Counci l member Woolley believed everyone wanted to stay within the intent of the preference clause and that the 12.5 percent return was reasonable. She asked for a progress update in terms of im- plementing the Price Waterhouse recommendation that the City apply a formula based on a reasonable rate of return when making trans- fers. Assi star-nt u i rector of Utilities Marc Harris clarified that the "preference clause" dealt with the purchase of electric power and had nothing to do with the purchase of gas power.. Eventually, staff wanted to recommend lowering the City's rates beyond those of PU&E' s gas utility, but until the City was i ndeper;dent of PG&E to some extent as a supply source, it could not be done for rea- sons similar to those previously outlined. In terms of the Price waternouse Study, staff would make recommendations in the 1984-85 budget with regard to establishment and i mpl ementati on of an ac- counting system to provide ` ahe necessary data for the full blown utility enterprise methodology, but until then, the City used its current accounting records to provide a proxy once in total com- pliance or consistent with what the private sector used for its accounting system, MOTION PASSED unanimously. ITEM #b, FINANCE ANt) PUBLIC WURK.S COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION RE MOTION: Counci_ l ®ember Cobb for the Finance and Public Works Committee moved regarding the financial consultant for Lot 41, approval of the staff recommendations to proceed with negotiations with Rauscher Pierce Refsnes, Inc. and to negotiate with Bartle Wells Associates in the event an agreement is not reached with Rauscher Pierce Refsnes, Inc. . MOTION PASSED :unanimously. 1Tti /3, CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA PARK ING STUbY (PLAN b-3) Louhci l member Renzel said that during _the.. California Avenue Study and with respect to potential square footage, Council was told that under present zoning, about 100,000 square feet could • be built; and under vroposed zoning with a 2:5 floor area ratio, 4 4 5/07/84 there could be about 20,000 square feet built. The City adopted a floor area ratio of two, and page 4 of the report said 348,000 square feet office space could be built. She asked to which zon- ing it related. Transportation Planner David Fairchild believed it was left over from the previous drafts of the report which referred to current zoning. Councilmember Renzel referred to recommendation No. 3 on page 10, which said the most recent previous use should be used to calcu- late parking requirements for current vacant buildings, and new buildings ready for occupation should be assessed at the lowest of the optional possible uses, and asked why. Mr. Fairchild said the recommendation followed the same logic as used in the downtown solution to the same problem. If the choice was between two slightly different uses in terms of their Wilbur Stith parking generation, the one which generated the least was chosen. Councilmember Renzel clarified the .assessments took place once a year, .:;rid figures would be modified to reflect the actual usage as soon as the building was occupied. Mr. Fairchild said the formula would be reassessed annually for all uses. Councilmember Sutorius said page 21, point 3, spoke to residential development, and looked to a new formula and financing. He asked how maintenance would be affected by residential development, and whether residential development would participate in, any way under the recommendations. Steve Casti l l enjo, Attorney with Jones, Hall, H•i l l & White, bond counsel consultant throughout the process of deriving the new California Avenue Parking Study, said in terms of maintenance, it was possible to utilize the new formula dependent on the equity of handling maintenance for the parking needs. The City had out- standing facilities within the district which were assessed annu- ally upon a present formula, and there might be: a change dependent on the will of the Council for new construction or for application to the present facilities on an ongoing basis bringing new facili- ties on-line as built. The potential effect of the Jarvis 3 ini- tiative was still under study and might put severe impediments into utilizing assessme'rt financing for maintenance a,t least until the legal air was cleared in'that regard, but Council had flexi- bility dependent en how the formula worked. Councilmember Sutorius referred to pages 29 and 30, the monitoring process and change of use, and asked if it was intended to be ap- plied on a case -by -case basis. For example, the use on an exist- ing building changed and resulted in a greater parking requirement and greater parking deficiency, and he asked if it would trigger the monitoring process. Angus Mcuonald, of Angus McDonald. & Associates the City's consul- tants, said the change would be on an annual basis, not instanta- neous. When the assessment was made, it would be on the use which existed at the time, the the idea that the financial burden would be continuously self-cor-recti ng. A vacant building would be assessed on the last prior use. Councilmember Woolley said page 21 of the report spoke to residen- tial development, and paragraph three under point 3, said new development would be exempt from on -site parking requirements for one-half of the first floor. area ratio. She asked how that worked, and whether the theory held true if the :development was not entirely residential. 4 4 9 4 5/07/84 Hr. 1'1cuoildld sdid under the consensus recommendation, it held true under a mixed use or entirely residential development. counci llaerber Woolley asked if the parking requirements for one- half of the first floor was based on one space per bedroom. Mr. McDonald said yes. Councilmember Menzel said the projections on commercial space ex- pected to be built in a 10 year period during the California Avenue study were lower under current zoning than under proposed zoning, and on page 4 of the report before the Council, an in- crease of 348,u00 square feet was expected including projects already approved, but not yet built. About 167,000 square feet was approved but not yet built, which was much more than previous- ly expected, and she asked what changed. Mr. Mcuonal d could not explain the higher number because all ac- tions were to stabilize or lower projections made prior to the council's most recent action on California Avenue. If there was a higher number on the table, he would have to clarify the figure and get back to the Council. Stephen Avis, ].b4 S. California Avenue, current president of the California Avenue Area Development Association (CAAUA) and Chair of the California Avenue Area Parking Assessment Committee (GAAPAC) , a citizen committee, thanked the many property owners, City staff and Angus Mcbonald for their interaction on the deci- sions which were adjusted, readjusted and eventually finalized into a consensus. Discussions ranged from long time concerns of California Avenue property owners to special case situations of brand new owners of land set for development. The net result was an approved assessment formula before the Council, and the CAAPAC received a nod of approval for that formula from the owners of over 60 percent of the properties to be assessed. The need to develop additional parking in the district was evident, and with council approval, through the unique formula, there would be equi- table means by which .to pay. The Committee members and property owners in the California Avenue Area Parking Assessment District requested that Council approve a policy supporting the use of the new formula and give the go ahead to continue the process to pro- vide needed parking in the district. MUTIUM: Councilmember Cobb moved, seconded by Renzel, to adopt the staff recommendations as follows: 1 e Approve in concept a new assessment formula for the di stri cti s future bond sales, as described in the April 1984 report by Angus McDonald and Associates (!The Consultant Report ), and direct staff a'd the Parking Committee to use this assess rent formpl a for planning all future district -parking projects; 2. Direct staff and the Parking Committee to explore possible alternative sites for the provision of new public parking spaces in the district; and 3. uirec_t staff to enter into discussions with property owners and • businesses in the assessment district, as -well as with bust messes i n the Stanford Industri ei Park for the purpose of establishing a possible noontime shuttle bus service between California Avenue -area business district and the- Industrial Park workplaces, as recommended in the consultant report. 1 ounci 1memmber Cobb said he was surprised at ,the sense of ambiva- lence regarding the Keystone lot, ..and asked Mr. Avis how he saw the Council proceeding in that area. Mr. Avis salt! the Keystone lot was determined to be an Important factor in the California Avenue area because it represented any parking spaces which were used but not a 'part of the assessment 4 4 9 5 5/07/84 district. Sometime, it would be beneficial for the district to acquire the lot, but the process and time frame ware undetermined. CAADA spent many months working with Jean Diaz on the process and were waiting to see how things went. Losing the parking spaces to development would create a loss of parking spaces presently being used and would be an additional burden on the district. Councilmember Sutorius supported the recommendations, but was troubled by the wording on item #2 to "direct sta ;'f and the park- ing committee to explore possible alternative sites and to deter- mine the feasibility of each al ter.hati ve site for the provision of new public parking spaces in the district." He asked for an interpretation from both staff and Mr. Avis. +fir. Avis said one way to provide additional parking was to double - deck existing parking lots. Sometimes there was a question as to which lot was best suited for parking, and it depended on noontime traffic whether it was the end closer to El Camino or the end closer to Park Boulevard. A couple of smaller lots which were not utilized as much were also being investigated. Mr. Fairchild agreed. A critical feature of the wording uas "ne;,r public parking." A previous justification for the acquisition of Keystone was because it would be precluded from development and kept as the existing arivate parking use for the public. The change in wording implied Keystone as a site for a multi -level structure, and its preservation as the existing surface parking at the site was no longer justified. Councilmember Sutorius interpreted the statement more narrowly than either Mr. Avis or Mr. Fairchild, but supported their inter- pretation. To him, ";alternative" meant something else, and he read in the potential for a narrow interpretation. The potential existed to identify a s.euation where a smaller lot did not lend itself to a structure and be subject to trade for consolidation of another existing lot where the combined size made it appropriate for some other consideration. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Sutorius moved, seconded by Cobb, to change the language in point 2) to read: "Direct staff and the Parking Committee to explore possible supplemental and/or alter- native sites and to determine the feasibility of each such site or combinations thereof for the provision of new public parking spaces in the district. AMENDMENT PASSED unanimo-;sly. Councilmember Cobb strongly believed the Keystone lot had to become a parking structure. He saw no alternative and wanted to make it a City policy. He asked staff if the new regulations for the California. Avenue area would protect the City from losing the space to development. Mr. McDonald said with no acquisition protection could not be guaranteed; it could only be guaranteed through purchase. Councilmember Cobb was not prepared to make a formal move, but despite the language added under point (2), the Keystone lot was important, and to lose it to development and lose the prey nt parking slots would be a disaster. Councilmember Renze) asked if staff could procure a long term lease on the Keystone lot to protect it until the City resolved whether to purchase it. She asked.if that was done before in any location with- respect to parking lots, and its cost. Mr. Fai rchl l d ,said staff could look into a lease. The City had a third party lease on an interim lot on the Southern Pacific land next to the Holiday elnn, and although not specifically Mentioned, the ,possibility was l ncluded in the repertoire. . 4 4 9 6 5/07/84 AMENDMENT: Councilmember Menzel moved, seconded by Witherspoon, to add point (4) to direct staff to explore the possibility of a long-term lease on the site. Councilmember Renzel said she wanted staff to explore a lease mechanism for five to ten years to allow the Council to determine whether to acquire the site sor parking. Councilmember Cobb suggested an alternative to a long-term lease might be to purchase a right to first refusal on it. He did not know if it could be done without a lease, : but < was interested in the simplest way to protect the City. rir. Mcuonald suggested that staff be instructed to take reasonable measures to preserve an option to acquire the Keystone lot. louncilmember Renzei agreed that a more general motion was preferable to consider means by which to preserve the City's option for possible acquisition in the future. Councilmember Witherspoon agreed Mayor Klein said the proposed reworded amendment would add a fourth item to direct staff to explore all alternatives to allow the Council to keep its options open to ultimately acquire the Keystone site. Councilmember Renzel believed Council should look to acquisition at some point in the future, but it was not presently the highest priority. In the interim, she wanted staff to negotiate with the owner for a long-term lease or a right of first refusal to preserve the City's option for some reasonable period of time. Hr. Zaner was concerned that such a motion might send signals to the owner of the property about possible future City action, which might have legal implications. The instructions in the reworded amendment were broad and clear enough and did not signal possible future City intentions for which it might be held accountable. AMENDMENT REWORDED AS FOLLOWS: 'ADD POINT (4) TO DIRECT STAFF TO TAKE REASONABLE MEASURES TO PRESERVE THE OPTION TO ACQUIRE THE KEYSTONE LOT AND PRESERVE THE PUBL I : PARKING THERE." AMENDMENT PASSED unanimously. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED unanimously. Mr. Hcuonal d thanked everyone involved in the process, and agreed with Mgr. Avis that it was long and difficult. He informed the Council that Ms. Vandertack, who ran his Palo Alto office, had relocated to New Guinea. Councilmember kenzel said she was impressed that there was no opposition to the change in the assessment mechanism. It was a credit to the people who worked on the consensus. mayor Klein agreed. It was a job well done by all concerned. He thanked Mr. Avis and the members of his group for their fine participation and cooperation. ITEM tlU., CIVIC CENTER STRUCTURAL REPAIRS, CIP B -27, AWARD OF t'Va , f C fit. cOWSTRUC11L`q( STAG (P WK 1= ui rector of Public Works David Adams said the staff report was lengthy, but thorough. Edward Ugarte, Supervising Engineer, and lseor'ge bagdon would answer questions. • Vice Mayor Levy said item 7, on page 7, showed a substantial dif- ference between the accepted bid and the engineer's original 4 4 9 7 5/07/84 1 1 1 estimate. He understood a siyr i ficant part of the the contingency the bidder assumed in having to pe conditions which made final costs difficult to ga if there was a way in which the City could assure by having the bid on a time basis, with the Ci time put into the work. Mr. Bagdon said staff intended to explore the contractor, after the bid was awarded, way to reduce costs in that fashion. Vice Mayor Levy asked about the total con the total elevator installation project. Mr. Bagdon said for the installation of out maintenance, staff estimated about they went to Council. The shuffling o ifica.tions would cost $365,000 in tot and installation of the third elevat for the other work. Councilmember Sutorius referred to Engineer Services Amendment, and =charged for certification: occurred at the correct site; o tract,iacluded structural repo and specifications. Therefore certify "that each disbursers actually completed." ::e was the financing process, but that did the analysis work vide( the plans and specif struction administration. for construction manageme accounting, which worke City's administration undue ano unecessary ch Mr. Uagdon said it r 'professional service done. It was a comp were not in the pl certified as bei n Such changes were check the work of Councilmember S fy that precis tor, who was through the was readily tional $27, Mr. Bagdo 20 hours would co sure it pants referr tecnn the It vic difference was rform work- under uge. He wondered e that contingency ty supervising the hat possibility with to see if there was a ract cost with Otis for the third elevator, with - $400,000 the previous time f the elevators and the mod- al --$295,000 for the purchase or, and approximately $70,000 item 2, Approval of Independent understood the City could not be a) that the structural repairs r (b) that the construction con- irs in accordance with EDAC plans , the entire $27,000 fee would be to nt was for legitimate project work aware of the requirement as part of questioned paying so much to a firm over eight years on the building, pro- ications, and would carry out the con - There was a contract with Larsen & Son rat services for work performed and cost d with and reported frequently to the lanner and designer, and he asked if an arge was being assessed. eferred to 20 hours of work per month for a to ss;gn off as an engineer that the work was lex project, and many changes would occur that ans and specifications, which would have to be g necessary to complete the structural work. hard to envision, and the engineer would have to three contractors during one and a half years. utorius said the construction manager would identi- ely and coordinate with the construction administra- EUAC. The information was being reviewed regularly process already established. Since the information available, he questioned the City's paying are addi- 000 for certification. said it was negotiated over a period of time, and the was based on the assumption that the construction manager ordinate the work between the three contractors to make was done sequentially and least disturbing to the occu- and users of the building. A-,techni cal question would be ed to the designer, LUAC, who would look at it from both the ical aspect -.and whether it would perform the strengthening of building being funded by the certificates of participation. would be hard to find another consultant to provide that ser- e for a lesser cost when he knew nothing about the repairs. ourici 1 member Sutorius clarified that he questioned the charge to the organization of $27,000 to certify that thework was :legiti- mate and properly clone for a building LUAC designed, issued plans and specifications for, and coordinated with the construction manager. If it did the full job and was supplemented by the con- structido management °service and by the City, who .would continue 4 4 9 8 5/07/84 to approve progress payments and control the activities of the consultants and contractors throughout the project, he believed it was unnecessary. In the major contract, staff proposed some items be deleted to reduce costs, but some added items were not proposed for inclusion, such as the painting of the building, He asked whether it was anticipated the painting would be done in the future under a different contract at a lesser cost than that of the successful bidder, or whether it was removed to keep the costs down. Mr. bagdon -said after analyzing all the bids and costs as compared to the budget, staff preferred to delay the decision. Non- inclu- sion in the current project did not preclude future work. After the repairs, staff could decide whether it was necessary to paint the building, and negotiate a change order or go to a separate cuncontractor. �� He deferred to the legal department that by signing the .certification, it meant CLJAC incurred further legal liability for which the City might have to pay. Senior Assistant City Attorney Anthony bennettt said there was some additional exposure because it would certify to the lender that all work was done. In effect, although they would be working with the construction manager, they also had to look over his work in order to certify to the lender all the work was done. The bank required that an independent engineer make the certification, otherwise it would not finance. He understood the point, but said there was also exposure on EUhC' s part for responsibility to the lender. Councilmember Sutorius said he understood it was an actual cost, and hoped the format and process devised to perform the work would be as expeditious as possible so that on a billed actual cost basis, it would be considerably less than $27,000. Mr. bagdon said staff would track all the costs separately in the project, which would be a job, but which would provide a handle. MOTION: Counc i l mearber Witherspoon moved, seconded by Sutorius, to adopt the staff recommendations to approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the eight items which include Award of Consultant Services, Agreements, and Award of Construction Contracts for the Constre_ tion Stage, and authorize staff to execute change orders during the construction stage. ADDENDUM Engineering Decision Analysis Company, Inc. (Construction Administration Services) ADDENDUM Engineering Decision Analysis Company, Inc. (Independent Engineer Services) ADDENDUM Ralph Larsen and Son, Inc. CHANGE ORDER Otis Elevator Company AMENDED AGREEMENT Otis Elevator Company CONTRACT S. . Amoroso Construction Company, Inc. CONTRACT Westbay Steel, Inc. CO$TkACT Power -Anderson, Inc.. 4 4 9 9 5/07/84 MOTION PASSED unanimously ITEM ail, UNUtkuROUNU1N1 CHRISTINE URIVE AS A CONDITION OF ROSS Mayor Klein said in contradiction to the title, staff recommended that an Underground Utility District not be provided. 1 1 Councilmember Witherspoon said the estimates made the cost to the homeowners on Christine Urive expensive, and asked if they ws;re consulted in terms of getting rid of the poles at that cost. Director of Utilities Richard Young said etaf f did not make full contact with all people involved: There was some contact, but he was unaware how many were contacted, or their names. Councilmember Witherspoon asked if the people were made aware of the opportunity to address the Council that evening to state their views. She believed $5,000 per household was high because the Crescent Park costs were considerably less. Undergrounding bene- fited a neighborhood, and the homeowners shouldhave the option to say whether they wanted it. Nr. Young said the option could be pursued to a final conclusion. Other factors impinged on the item, and the homeowners would be asked to bear 5U percent of the costs. Councilmember Sutorius said he also would have asked whether home- owners were consulted. Future undergrounding would not be cheaper for them, and there was undergrounding from where the existing overhead coostruction terminated on Christine Drive at the turn, and an enlarged district could not be anticipated to include more residences to lower the cost. Mr. Young said he was not totally familiar with the area, but if the job was done, it weuld probably go into Christine Drive itself so there would be an opportunity to attach from both sides. It could also pick . up on the other side of Christine Drive. The por- tion of the right-hand dog leg on Christine going north would have access to the right side of the street also, which he believed was still overheaded. Councilmember Sutorius asked for clarification. After making a right turn at the junction from Ross onto Christine, there were seven property owners served by backyard feed from the Ross Road school site area. At the dog leg and from that point forward it was undergrounded on the right. He asked if properties could be picked up at the same time on the left-hand side to reduce the cost, Mr. Young said yes. Councilmember Sutorius asked whether the number of subscribers was doubled or tripled by including the other side of the street, and how the project costs shown in the memo for the right-hand side only might be influenced, Mr. Young understood $80,000 was for the basic main substructure area that would be the street frontage. The $1,000 represented the lateral connections on a privateproperty and modifications to the individual services such as meter boxes. Councilmember Sutorius asked for "clarification that regardless of whether: they chose to put the substructure on the left or right- hand side of the street, it would cost approximately $80,000 for both sides Mr.. Young said although there was some incremental distance to reach across tie street to the opposite side, it was the basic cost. 4 5.0 0 5/07/84 Councilmember Sutorius understood t►he logic, but believed Councilmember Witherspoon's question was fair, and suggested she make a motion. co►uncilmember Menzel believed it was appropriate to continue the item until the Christine Uri ve residents eligible for the under- grcundi ng were asked if they were willing to 'gay ttie cost. If so, it presented an opportunity worthy of exploration, particularly if the new development was also to be undergrounded. It would be a real asset to the neighborhood. MOTION TO CONTINUE: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Klein, to continue the item and for staff to explore reactions of Christine urive residents to costs involved. Mr. Young asked if the homeowners on the other side of the street should be questioned in terms of a larger district, or only those impacted by the school property change. Counci l member Renzel said homeowners on the school property side should first be contacted to determine their reaction .to the dollar amounts. If the responses were reasonably favorable, the homeowners on the other side of the street should be approached. They were close enough so that if they worked on the street to underground, it made sense to include then. The decisions of the people abutting Ross Road school might be affected by whether there were savings in a larger district. After consideration, she wanted to see the question explored for the whole Christine Drive district. Councilmember Witherspoon recommended that the staff report, with a cover letter from the City Manager or the Director of Utilities, be mailed to the potential people in the district, explaining the pros and cons and soliciting opinions. There were presently seven properties, and she believed 60 percent, or two-thirds of the people in a district could petition for undergroundi no. She did not want to extend the district so that the cost-effectiveness was lost; but it might be cost-effective for the main substructure service 14 homes if the size of the capacity did not have to be n`creased. Possibly none of the property owners would want it, but if she were a property owner, she would like to have a say. They were lovely homes, and although $4,000 appeared steep, in proportion to the house value it was not a lot of money. Mr. Young said he was somewhat unfamiliar with the local regula- tions, but understood for a local benefit project, certain length requirements and coverages had to be addressed, and that the distance involved was still short of that called for in the regulations.. Councilmember Witherspoon asked if that would be the case if the other block were included, making two City blocks. Mr. Young said it was still one block in length. Mayor Klein said if Council desired, it could waive the rules for any particular project. Councilmember Sutorius said he did not believe that would be necessary. Regulation 18 stated the local benefit criterion ..was. for the project to include at least one block or six hundred feet. It was bUU feet as is, and the .staff report said the area met the requirements for a local benefit project. Mr. Young corrected himself and said the general benefit had a two block requirement. Vice Mayor Levy said he went through several undergrounds ng proj- ects before, and believed they were of tremendous benefit, although much controversy wao aroused in the area where it was to 4 5 0 1 5/07/84 occur. there was little understanding on the part of citizens in the area, and it was not a small undertaking when it got going. The report indicated that pole removal would be somewhat easier row than when the school site was developed, and he asked how much easier, and how much would be saved by doing the work now. Mr. Young said he cou',d not give an answer in raw dollars at that point, but in terms of access, the school site was to be cleared and staff could get to the poles by rolling trucks directly up to them --it would be a simple, easy access job. Much more care was necessary when removing poles from a fully developed, landscaped ground since they could not be laid flat. Vice Mayor Levy clarified that it applied to the Christine Drive homes. Mr. Young said staff was concerned with.. the seven properties ser- viced by the three poles. Vice Mayor Levy asked for a guess about how much money might be saved. It sounded as though it might be a fair amount. Mr. Young believed the savings would be mostly in time. The equipment required would be about the same, but if care had to be taken, the man hours involved would be more. Vice Mayor Levy said Council was learning that time was ar; expen- sive commodity. Mr. Young said with back property service, if the opposite side, of the road wanted to enter the district, there would still be poles in their backyards to serve the houses on the other block in the opposite direction, and it would not be beneficial for the houses on the other side of the street to join in. Vice Mayor Levy said he supported the suggestion to investigate further because he wanted to get a better fix on how the City and residents might save by doing the work then. There might be enough savings to warrant the work. Mayor Klein said the staff report mentioned a cost of approxi- mately $1,000 per household for the service conversion, and he heard higher figures from the homeowners in Crescent Park --the latest neighborhood to have undergrounding. He asked staff to check on the figure because he heard reports of double and triple that amount. If the Christine ?)rive people were -to have a say in the matter, they should be given the most up.to-date numbers available. MOTION PASSED unanimously. ITEM #12, COHSIUERATIOH OF LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL TO CREATE A SANTA rrAR -tOUi TY TRAM C-eUTI TTY AND TUTITIOTTE A I LT A.T Mr. Laner said attached to the memo was information received from the sponsors of the measure. They asked for a representative from the Manufacturers' Association, and Miss Dorosin was present to comment. The measure was to have been introduced into the legis- lature, and might have already moved through one of the commit- tees. tdie Uorosin, a Palo Alto resident, represented the Manufacturers`. Group, and said spot legislation was introduced on Thursday, which would be amended and detailed out during May. A meeting for Mayors and City Managers was held the previous Monday, at which 12 of the;15 cities were represented. A presentation was made of the research on legal institutional and financial issues and ques- tions were asked. The Council packet contained a letter which described the issue and answered questions, but Mayor Klein and 4 5 0 2 5/07/84 Moir. Zaner attended, and could answer questions and give opinions. she asked for input regarding City concerns, and safd there was a time factor to get the matter on the November ballot --the Board of Supervisors had to place it on the ballot by A"gust 10, and Palo Alto legislation would have to be approved that evening. A poll of one percent of Santa Clara voters indicated that 68 percent favored specified roadway improvements, and she hoped each city would participate. Councilmember Witherspoon asked whether the composition of the committee could be changed. ris. Uorosin said it could be changed, although it would have to be part of the legislation. Councilmember Witherspoon said her paranoia stemmed from eight years of having San Jose run everything the County proposed. Five County supervisors would sit on the committee, with the Mayor and two Councilmembers from San Jose, and it would leave only three places. The project Was limited and the committee would not have a lot of say; but she would feel better about urging her friends in the North County to vote for it if the representation was more broad. It might affect the Transit District and some other trans- portation agencies, but a little should be given to the rest of the County. Ms. uorosin said the message would be conveyed, and it might be helpful if the Council suggested criteria for the composition of the committee, or a basis or formula for representation. Councilmember Cobb shared the paranoia, and was concerned because the nature of his business meant he often fought traffic and was careful to go places at the right times because it was unreachable at certain times of the day. Improved roads would be nice, but he. agreed with Councilmember Witherspoon that the overwhelming bias and political power of the new decision -making body would focus in San dose and areas which approved too much development. Palo Alto was fighting problems of too much development, and roads would end up wider for more cars which would encourage more developmeot, a higher level of congestion, and a circle to its present state. The power to make the decisions would be vested in those people who made the political decisions which caused much of the present congestion, and there was already too much development and much more than the roads could handle. Ms. Ooros i n said the concern was real, and as a transportation planner, she was aware that a new highway generated a certain amount of traffic, but it also drew traffic away from local roads. The community concern about commute traffic on local roads would see some of it go back to the corridors where it belonged. The County was initiating the Transportation 2000 process intended as a mid to long-range planning process to incorporate land use, and consider the land use on the books for all cities, transit and transportation networks in the County, and come up with some ideas. Some tough decisions were needed, but she believed the process would take off and be a forum for some of the Council's concerns. The Manufacturing Group shared those concerns, and she planned to attend the Santa Clara Council meeting the following day regarding an E Inc on additional development. Every city wanted its tax dollar, but Palo Alto got in early. There was pressure to reduce development, and she did not believe roads would generate more development. They would handle existing traffic, and some additional future traffic. It was seen as a 10 year, one shot project to improve those roadways already on a highway priority list. There were no surprises —routes 101 and 85 were on the planning books for 25 years; and route 237 was receiving federal money. It might get more money which would reduce the amount of local money needed. 4 5 0 3 5/07/84 Councilmemher Cobh asked whether Council would be tied to the pro- posed structure if Council gave, its approval that evening. Ms. uorison said no. She was soliciting input, and it was appro- priate for Council to approve everything except the Committee and its composition; that composition should reflect a certain percen- tage from the North County; suggest another formula or merely that not so many should be from San Jose. She had ten days to three weeks to gather and incorporate input from the various cities. The intent was a broad based, community supported effort. People and groups would, do everything possible to achieve a workable solution. Counciiri,.:mber Renzel was concerned about the use of u sales tax which was unrelated to traffic. Once it was ratcheted up, she questioned whether it would ever be brought down. In view of its structure, it might automatically drip after 10 years; but, poli- ticians might present another measure in 10 years to go before the voters to maintain the current tax rate, and it might go on indef- initely. She asked if another result was foreseen. r s.. 0ornsi n said it was a concern, and one reason for looking at a lu year ".'sunset." ouri ng that time, sufficient money could be raised by the sales tax to get out of the funding gap which cur- rently existed for those roadways. The State, by County formula, would provide from $300 to $400 million over the next 10 years for roadways, and approximately one billion dollars were needed to complete the roadways with a l ew extra commuter lanes. By bring- ing in local money, State money would be freed for other projects. It was hoped for completion in 10 years and to go back to the voters. She did not know how to predict 10 years, but it was done on best faith, and whatever reasonable legislation one could get. H lot of things were happening which indicated that any move for- ward to resolve the transportation problem was needed then. Councilrnember Renzel said Council was being asked to buy into a "pig in a poke." State legislation was desired, but its exact nature was unknown. There was a proposal, which Council did not, completely approve, but if it were bought into, Council signaled its support for something similar, which might return in a form it aid not like at all. She was nut prepared to buy into it that evening, but preferred to wait until it was known what it was getting into. Ms. uorosi n asked what Council had to lose by putting the matter before the voters. (Gounci lraember Renzel said the point was that Council was being as%e4 to approve an idea not formulated in detail. Putting it to the voters was one thing, but for the Council to put its weight behind the idea before it was formalized was inappropriate. She was concerned about the regressiveness of the sales tax and the fact that the poor were hit the hardest, and dollars should be devoted to transit and alternate means of transportation --not roadways. Ms` 0orosin said Counci lmember Renzel wade some good points; but the legislation would be returned to the Council as it progressed. It was the best they could do then, but as it firmed up during the month, a cop; of the legislation would be sent to each city. Counci 1 member .Renze1 said: t nunci 1 approval would help the legisla- tion go through, di t„‚ ssi. re she wanted that. Mr. Zaner said he did oo;,,,_ war:' I'`he Council misled. - 8e' had serious misgiv► ys about the proposal , _ : : -*?th he and the Mayor attended the meeting the previous Monday aro_,expressed reservations.` \ He was most concerned about changing the;representation on the policy board. h r~e should be no question n anyone's mind --they were creating a brand new agency, and he was not satisfied he could say 4 5 0 4 5/07/84 what powers the agency would have, and was nut sure whether the proposed legislation was clear. If anyone believed there would be a substantial change in the representation of the agency, they were mistaken. The County and San Jose would have a dominant voice in the agency-- i t might be changed slightly, but the City Council should not expect to see great changes in the composition of the Committee. mayor Klein believed roads were necessary and liked the idea of a mechanism to provide them. He was concerned about the haste with which the proposal was moving forward, and particularly its fail- ure to be tied to land use controls. Transportation should not be considered in isolation because it was necessary for consideration along with land use matters, and he was disappointed it was not done. It was now enough for members of the Manufacturers' Group to appear before the Santa Clara City Council with regard to an L IR . Closely guarded land use controls by individual cities had to be modified, which item the County considered for more than 10 years, and he did not believe it coxrl d allow any one city to have a development policy totally at odds with the rest of the County and expect the rest of the County to pay for the development poli- cy with vastly expanded and new roads. It was an opportunity to move more slowly to develop a land use policy, in conjunction with th the transportation policy, and have rational thought behind it so there would be an intelligent limitation on growth, particularly from Sunnyvale southwards. He referred to what was presently going on in Santa Clara, and without appropriate controls, in 10 years, Council successors would be faced with the same problem, and a new sales tax to expand routes 101 and 237 to accommodate the still larger growth which would have occurred. He hoped ener- gy would also be expended on a lane; use policy --riot just a focus or transportation. Ms. uorosin said it was impossible to expand route 101 or 237 fur- ther because it would entail the purchase of land on which there were buildings. In Mountain View a developer took iss'ie with the City because he was told the City needed to preserve a rig,t of way, and he wanted to construct a building there. Further expan- sion of those two routes was unrealistic, although other roadways might be expanded. She agreed that land use was an issue, and Transportation 2000 seemed nebulous, but it represented a process fur the cities to be involved. She regretted the lack of time, but November appeared to be a window. If Jarvis 4 passed, local communities would need a two-thirds vote to pass any legislation. If two years hence they wanted to improve roads but there was in- sufficient State money, the opportunity for similar action would have passed. The gas tax would generate $6 million for each one cent increase and to generate a comparable amount of honey would mean a 10 cent increase. Mayor Klein said his. Dorosin made one of his other points. He believed the main effort of industry and the Counci 1 should be to defeat Jarvis 4 in November. Ms. rlorosi n said along with the rest of the State, they would be interested in beating Jarvis 4. Councilrnember Bechtel said the Council was being given informa- tion, but did not have to take a position. It might be more ap- propriate to do_ so at a later date as things evolved. Ms. Uorosin said Council might be more comfortable when further legislation was available, or at some other point, and it was not necessary to take a position that evening. Counciimember Bechtel said she frequent•l,y used highways 101 and 280, and some of the worst congestion was in Palo Alto. It was impossible to get onto 101 after 7:30 a.m. between Page Mill and San Antonio Road, and she took Middlefield through Mountain View past Stieriin Road. It meant using Palo Alto and Mountain View 4-5 0 5 5/07/84 residential streets to avoid 101 where the one and a half miles -from Page Mill Road to San Antonio Road was bumper to bumper, stop and go, from 7:30 to 8:30 a.m. Ms. Dorosin concurred. She had commuted to San Jose for 10 years, and it was supposedly a reverse commute between Embarcadero and where route 85 started, but on three out of five mornings it was bumper to bumper. Councilmember Bechtel said many of the people causing congestion on the roadways worked in Palo Alto where there were three times more jobs than housing units. Although Council was rethinking the amount of growth to be allowed, rezoning and being responsible, the situation existed, but not housing. People traveled far dis- tances to get to Palo Alto, and she understood that any improve- ments on 101, 237 or 280 would be commuter lanes. Ms. Oorosin said Highway 237 had commuter lanes to be opened in September; 280 was scheduled to have eight miles of commuter lane in two years; and commuter lanes were being discussed for 101. She was not with Caltrans, and made no guarantees. Mayor Klein said if he understood the proposal correctly, no money went to 280. Ms.. 0orosir said that was correct. Route 280 was Interstate, and eligible for State money. Councilmember Bechtel referred to 280 because it was a commlit?r lane and a continuation of the network. Councilmember Woolley found the measure to be a creative means of raising money in spite of Proposition 13. She would have wanted it used in designing Measure A because she believed raising money for children's education more important than raising money for cars to move faster. She believed Council was going in the wrong direction, and would more enthusiastically support a similarly designed method to raise money for mass transit. The last comment about commuter lanes was interesting, and if there were guarantees that money would be spent to expand or widen the highways for that purpose, she would support the measure. Ms. Dorosin said commuter lanes for 237 were on the books, and it was assumed that commuter lanes were being discussed for 101 - between Lawrence and Guadalupe Expressways as part of the State Transportation Improvement Plan. A one-half cent sales tax was already devoted to transit. light rail was goin5 in and MTC, was making studies in the Fremont corner and the SP/101 corridor to consider an appropriate rail system. Caltrans and the other coun- ties were also involved. She agreed that mass transit was needed, but it had funding. .The one-half cent proposed tax would be designated for roadway improvements. Councilmember Fletcher said it was no secret she believed the pr.o- posed tax was a terrible idea. The sales tax was regressive and hit large families, who were usually the poorest, the hardest. To. say it was impossible to raise the gas tali sufficiently to cover the cost of roadways was to hide the true cost of driving. It should .be put up front, to let people know how much it cost to drive, and would be the best incentive to get people to use and support mass transit and make it a viable system. There was a half -cent sales tax for transit, but there were insufficient funds to install the types of rail lines that would really work. If sufficient money existed to install a BART system around the Bay, or even a vastly upgraded SP, with trains- seven minutes .apart dur- ing midday and f,! r minetee apart during rush hour, adding to the roadways would be unnecessary. Enough people would be drawn into the transit to leave the roadways available for -people who found transit inconvenient. The East Bay proved that people used trans- it,. and would be required to have double and triple -decked road- ways if. BART were not in place. Transportation 2000 was about to get under way, and the Transportation Commission was told that _ it As Correct e4 would not deal with land use. If the Council approved imposing a - tax, it would imply approval of the three top projects Ms. Dorosin explained to her over the phone, which were 237, 85 and 101. She did not believe the Council went on record as saying it wanted two extra lanes on 101 --that would put the cart before the horse. Route 85 was undergoing an alternative analysis to make an objec- tive decision on the type of transportation for it. All options were to be considered, and they might decide a freeway was not the way to go. By implication, approval of the tax meant the Councf l wanted a freeway there. A rail study was about to be undertaken by the MTC. The Comprehensive Plan emphasized reduction in auto- mobile use. The old solution to transportation was no add more concrete to the highways and freeways, which temporarily relieved congestion. The developments on the books, plus those possible due to North Bayshore area zoning, meant more congestion on 101 even with added lanes. They would then be further back unless money was. put into something with a much higher capacity such as rail. If the tax went through Santa Clara would be .the only county on the west coast with a seven cent sales tax, which` would affect the retail vitality. People would not be drawn to shop in Palo Alto if they could go across the county line and save a one- half percent sales tax, especially for the big ticket items. When she set up house in Palo Alto she bought big items such as a washer, dryer, carpets, etc. in San Mateo County _whose sales tax was one-half percent less. Ms. Dorosin said the 10 year expiration date was not yet written into the legislation, but even if:it were, building extra lanes, especially commuter lanes, would require money for the California Highway Patrol to enforce the high occupancy vehicle use of them. The more money committed to such lanes, the greater the -term financial commitment to thy'. long-term CHP for enforcement. There would also be added maintenance. In terms of drawing traffic from local roads, more highways would add more traffic, and eventually drivers would return to the local roads. People needed feasible alternatives to using roads, and the make. up of the agency was top heavy with San Jose representa- tion. San Jose wanted to increase its representation at the Transportation Commission by four additional Commissioners, and legislation was introduced in Sacramento to accomplish that goal. If the agency was established, it would have five San Jose mem- bers --three Councilmembers and two Supervisors. A drastic shift would be required for fair representation. Also, that money would be spent to ban bicycles. On expressways where commuter lanes were installed, bicycles were banned; and also, 237 would e"en- tually become a --full freeway and bicycles would be prohibited. If it went through, she wanted a proviso that nothing be built with- out assured bicycle access. NOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Ren zel , that the Palo Alto City Council oppose the half -cent Sales Tax. Ed Meese, 126 Walter Hays Drive, arrived during the middle of the discvssion4 but emphasized some points made by Councilmember Fletcher. When he first came to Santa Clara County, Bayshore had traffic lights, but he never moved faster on it than he did now during rush hour, which indicated the proposed: solution would be out of date in 10 years. The only solution was light rail and BART system "extension, and he totally opposed the proposed one- half cent sale" tax. Peter Giles, president of Santa Clara County Manufacturers' Group, 786 East Meadow Drive, heard most of the Council meeting on the radio. Ms. Dorosin covered most points adequately, and did not ask Council tb take a position. A number of cities in the County had the question under advisement, and in each case where he appeared, the Council took input,, discussed the matter, and deferred a decision to give the', matter time to gel and be .dis- cussed. It was a significant regional problem, and his orga.hiza- tion was supportive and instrumental in getting funds for ;=nearly 4 5 0 7 5/07/84 Corrected 6/11/84 $500 million of light rail in the County. If the MTC pion went forward and the Federal Government funded the request, a further $760 million light rail was planned. The possibility of a BART extension into San Jose and eventually looping the Bay was excel- lent. Because of the constraints and the need to serve the east counties first. BART could not extend into Santa Clara County within 'e0 years. Tens of thousands of people who worked in Palo Alto lived in San Jose and further south and east. The average commute was 40 hours per month, and it took as long to get from south San Jose to Sunnyvale and the North County jobs as to go from Stockton during a noncomrrrute hour- It was a serious problem for the rest of the County. Some good points were made on transit and the fact that it was not an ultimate solution. Most of the plans were designed .20 or 30 years ago, but never carried out because of lack of funds and/or political consensus. It would be a County -wide self-help effort, and he urged the Council to take the question under advisement. Staff had insufficient opportunity to look at it, having received it the previous Wednesday. As a resident and a representative of the Manufacturers' group, he urged the Council to register its concerns. The matter was in a delicate stage, and he believed Palo Alto had much to gain. The Council should look beyond the City to some of the needs of the southern and eastern parts of the County. He appreci i ted the time, and urged Council to proceed with cacti on before making a final decision. 1 1 Alcos Szoboszlay, 1346 Sierra Avenue, San Jose, said he commuted by train to Mountain View, Menlo Park and San Carlos. He spoke against the sales tax increase because it was a direct subsidy to the automobile driver. The County tried to discourage auto usage, as was shown by the increase in transit usage and encouragement of ride -sharing. The proposed sales tax ran counter to recent County policy. It was not a users' tax as the Manufacturers' Group saide-it taxed everyone, noncar drivers as well. The i1anufecturers' Group rejected user taxes such as a gasoline tax, an automobile registration fee, and an employee tax proposed by the Mayor of Santa Clara. He proposed a tax be made on employers in the County based on the number of parking lots to tax those people directly benefiting from a car commute. A general sales tax hit everyone, and a ..gasoline tax hit people who only used a car for shopping. The people who benefited from road widening should be those who paid for it --the commuters or their employers. The employers could be. taxed on the number of parking lots, and an employee who did not use a car to work could be given a refund or 4 transit pass in lieu. Councilmember Cobb said there was omethine tragically wrong with a system when a two-thirds vote was required to educate people,' but only -a 50 percent vote was needed to impose, a tax for automo- biles. Be agreed with Mr. Giles that no position should be taken that evening, and that it should be taken under advisement. During the process, Council should communicate strong feelings to the people behind the measure to improve on what he considered to be badly . flawed so the Council could support i t. Proposition 13 passed because people ranted C'to reduce property taxes and did not see its flaws, but.now they suffered for it and carried. horrible burdens. `Supporting a flawed measure meant it would return to haunt the Council. he lived with the traffic on 101 due to the business he was in far. the last year. At was terrible, and even elf there were alternative transportation means, the roads would still have to be improved because of the unbelievable development In the South County. He urged that a position not be taken that evening, -and preferred to see if something court be dope to make the eesenti al improvements, to the roads and cure- the existing flaws. The structure of the proposed new policy ,entity was badly flawed —too much ' power was invested In . the wrong place and it did -not recognize the needs any requirements of some cities such as Palo_ Al to that were smal 1 er Tbut had to live with the problems more di red ly. He strongly agreed with Bay -or Kl ei-n that any measure to improve the roads had to be tied to land use planning with 4 5 0 8 5/07/84 restraints otherwise they would deal with the matter again in 10 years at a higher level. de wanted to see investigation of other ways of finarcing. The sales tax might be partially appropriate, with perhaps a mixture of sales tax and gasoline tax. Even as one who used a car a lot, he aid not believe financing entirely, through a gas tax was a terrible idea. He wanted to see the mes- sage transmitted so something the Council supported could result since the roads badly needed improvement. Councilmember Bechtel agreed it was sad that a two-thirds vote was required for a school measure, Measure A was approved by a major- ity, bnt did not pass. She also agreed that Council should review the matter more closely, and not jump on or off the bandwagon that evening. Councilmember Bechtel said she could not set a date on which to continue the item, but suggested it be in August, after the Board of Supervisors put it on the ballot. Hr. Zaner said the rules contained a procedure called "postponing indefinitely," which meant the i leni (.:uui d be removed from the table at some future time. SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO C0P4TIt4UE: Councilmember Bechtel moved, seconded by Cobb, to postpone the item indefinitely. Mayor Klein said to postpone an item indefinitely was the same as killing an item. Mr, Bennetti said the correct use of postponing an item indefi- nitely was when the intent was not to vote on an item at all. However, Counc ilmernbers were free to reagendize items at any time. Councilmember Bechtel confirmed that she wanted to move to con- tinue the item to an indefinite date, and it could be returned at the appropriate time. Mayor Klein clarified that Councilmember Bechtel was moving to postpone indefinitely Councilmember Fletches''s motion for the Council to go on record as being opposed to the sales tax. Since under the Palo Alto rule the motion to postpone indefinitely was the same as killing l ling it, it would leave the decks clear for any . . � _ motion on the positive side of the proposal to be considered, or to say nothing. Councilmember Renzel opposed the substitute motion. She had fun- damental problems with the concept of using a sales tax to fund road improvements. It was indicated that road improvements were already on the maps for future implementation. People now using the roads were inconvenienced, but because of the difficulties and slowness in land use controls, and in the absence of a clear indi- cation that such controls were in effect, she believed in the long-term people would be faced with the same inconveniences on a larger scale. She recently attended a regional planning committee for the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), where there. was much discussion about Sonoma County which was creating a whole new town outside current jurisdictions, completely contrary to the whole idea of consolidating devel opmeot around existing urban areas. Pressures for such development s occurred everywhere within county jurisdictions because of the tax problems , which issue was addressed straight on with clear land use planning. The County Board of Supervisors was not doing that, and were faced with the potential of current and faster road improvements with the propos- al that would only facilitate developments further and further away. As indicated, people were willing to suffer an inconve- nience to corae to ,jobs, and vice versa. It was a clear problem, and she was sure all regional and Palo Alto planning always con- tained a lot for everyone because of the political process and its nature. It was full of Compromises, and she did not believe Council could rely on land use plans currently in effect or in process to be effective in 10 years. She preferred not to use a regressive tax to fund an acceleration of road improvements before she saw land use controls, opposed the substitute motion to post- pone indefinitely, and supported the main motion. Vice Mayor Levy said the Council opposed the proposal as contained in the memo before the Council from.. the ad hoc working group dated May 1, 1984, and had to find the most effective way of communicat- ing the Council's opposition and how to proceed. He agreed the policy board composition was poor; the use of the sales tax for the measure was wrong; and the construction of more highways, or additions to ecurrent highways should be tied to comprehensive planning for land use and transportation. He believed the proper action would be to go on record in opposition to the specific plan developed by the ad hoc working group on the Commuter Relief Sales Tax Measure. The Council should make the basis for its opposition clear to its constituents and those in :acramento and elsewhere who were working on it. If they wanted to return, with alternative ways of solving the problem, Council could then comment. He agreed that if Council did not go on record in opposition to the proposal, it might be construed as being in favor, and he did not want to do that then or perhaps ever. The motion before the Coun- cil to table the issue indefinitely was unwise, and he opposed it. The main motion related specifically to the use of a sales tax for the purpose, and while he agreed that a sales tax should not be used, if Council discussed the main motion after rejecting the substitute motion to table, he would request a more specific motion rather than simply use the sales tax as a hook. The Coun- cil would want to go on record in comprehensive opposition to the particular plan from the ad hoc working group. Councilmember Fletcher referred to the substitute motion, and reiterated Ms, uorosi n' s remark that the legislation was intro- duced to the legislature, who awaited the cities' responses. It was introduced on short notice due to the time factor involved in the November election, and without hearing from the constituents of the County affected. A position should be taken then while the legislation proceeded through its normal course in Sacramento. It was important to take a stand, otherwise Palo Alto would be listed as neutral or having no interest. It would carry a much more direct message to the legislators if Palo Alto took a position one way Or the other. Mayor Klein supported the motion, and would support a 'motion to agendaze the matter in the near future. He was willing to agen- di ze i t for May 21 or the first meeting i n June 1984, depending on how things developed. It was inappropriate to hide under parlia- mentary procedures, and. Council owed it to its constituency to take a position on an item of such import. It was important to respond positively and negatively because there was a problem with the highways, and something must be done. He did not favor the approach before the Council, but might not always be opposed. He hoped the Manufacturers' Group and the other proposers would use the Council's comments to fashion the proposal along the lines mentioned. He associated himself with Councilmember Cobb's com- ments with regard to land use, and urged Council to support the motion, to wait to see what happened over. the next few weeks and then return the item when Council could hopefully respond more positively to a bill more in keeping with Pa 1 o Alto's philoso- phies. . Couniilmewber Bechtel concurred. She made:: her substitute motion to postpone indefinitely only because she could not set a specific date, and it was premature to,,set a date then. The Council should first get more information and not act hastily. She encouraged her colleagues to vote for the substitute motion to postpone, and take a position at a later date. 4 5 1 0 5/07/84 Councilmember Sutorius associated himself with the remarks of Vice Mayor Levy and Mayor Klein. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED by a vote of 4-5, Klein, Bechtel, Cobb, Sutorius voting Faye". Councilmember Renzel suggested that Councilmember Fletcher reword the motion to more closely reflect Vico Mayor I Pvy's suggestion in opposition to the specific proposal. MOTION RESTATED: Oppose entire proposal Mayor Klein said the proposal before the Council set up the authority, imposed the sales tax, set forth the board and which roads would be built, and he asked for clarification that the motion opposed the entire proposal. Councilmember Fletcher said her original motion addressed only the sales tax because there would not be any authority if the. sales tax did not pass. It was all tied together, but since she could not endorse any portion, her motion opposed everything. Councilmember Witherspoon understood and sympathized with Vice Mayer Levy's recommendation that Ccunci l at least go on record in opposition to the three recommended solutions. She believed there was a problem and agreed with some of the roads proposed for repair, bet disagreed strongly with the composition of the com- mittee, and that a sales tax was the right way to go both politi- cally and philosphically. There were other parts of the proposal in terns of the process, etc. about which she was uncertain, such as how long the authority would be in effect and what other jobs it would take on when it received money and power. She agreed it was a County -wide problem and probably should have a County -wide solution. She understood the motion on the floor disagreed with everything in the report. Councilmember Fletcher said Council dirt not agree with the spe- cific proposal, and she did not believe Council needed to go into every aspect because it made its comments and the message was getting through to the Manufacterees' Croup, who was part of the group making the proposal. The trout making the proposal knew what aspects Council addressed, and she did not believe it needed to be made i n the moion. Mayor Klein said Council's reasons were clearly stated if it went on record in opposition to the proposal. Councilmember Coop was not satisfied by taking negative action because ,,Mere was a problem which needed to be addressed. He pre- ferred that Council say it could not support the proposal in its present form because of its particular concerns, but recognized the problem, and wanted the legislature, Manufacturer's Group, and all concerneo., parties to deal with the issues raised to arrive at a proposal it could support. Councilmember Bechtel agreed with Councilmember Cobb that it would be a mistake to just say no without any positive input. It would be better to set out the specific problems and to try and get them resolved. Mayor Klein agreed with the.. comments made by Councilmembers Cobb and t..echtel. He would not support the motion because it was pre- mature, and Council could not afford to put its heads in the sand. There was a problem in the County which must be addressed more comprehensively than the present proposal. He preferred that people have the chance to work things out rather than go on record in opposition early. Councilmember Hehzel clarified that the three points raised by Vice Mayor Levy were the concerns about the use of the sees tax, 4 5 1 1 5/07/84 composition of the board, and land use controls. Sales tax was fundamental to the proposal because it was the only tax which could be raised on a 5U percent vote, and it appeared to be'struc- tured such as to be unappealing to those who found sales tax to be the wrony taxing mechanism. Council was told by the City Manager that it was unrealistic to expect the composition of the board to change in the course of the legislative process. She doubted that in the next few weks or few years Council would see land use con- trols enacted that were required. to safeguard an investment that might be made in expanding the roads,, and - i t was- unrealistic to expect that Palo Alto would have any additional information or sanctions to provide the necessary assurances in terms of land use at some future point to deal with the issue. She believed the taxing mechanism and composition of the board fundamental to the proposal were faulty, and she encouraged Council support of the motion. Councilmember Fletcher said if the motion passed, other motions could be made to address the various reservations or new solutions Councilmembers might have. Next week's agenda would contain a request for support or opposition to a resolution now going through the legislature to MTC to conduct a comprehensive rail study in the corridor, which she believed was the ultimate solu- tion because it had such a higher person capacity and would better address the problem in the long range than a few extra lanes on the highways in the County, plus it was much cleaner air -wises If Council voteo to oppose the particular plan, there were still op- portunities to address the problem. AMENDMENT TO RESTATED MOTION: Vice Mayor Levy moved, seconded by Fletcher, that the Mayor be authorized to communicate to the City's legislators and Ad Hoc Working Group that its principle op- position to the proposal is focused on the policy board composi- tion, the use of the sales tax, and that the proposal is not tied to comprehensive land use and transportation planning. AMENDMENT PASSED by a vote of 8-1, Sutorius voting "no.'s MAIN MOTION TO OPPOSE ENTIRE PROPOSAL AS AMENDED PASSED by a vote of 5-4, Klein, Bechtel, Cobb, Sutorius voting 'no." ig14,141#13, R.QUEST OF COURCILMEMBER WOOLLEY FOR A RESOLUTION hb ' IS i K L L AR1C-711=3'' ` Counci 1 member Woolley said Mr. Clark made outstanding contribu- tions both as an architect and as an historian:. Palo Alto had nine properties on national register, and three were designed by dirge Clark. No other architect in Palo Alto could make that claim. As an historian, he produced documents on College Terrace, Mayfield, Kathleen Norris, and Lucie Stern; and was generous about documenting i nforma ":ion on the owners and circumstances of the commercial buildings which he built. It was appropriate for the Council to honor the Palo Alton whose work was so much a pert of the City's fabric. MUTION: Councilmember Woolley Moved, seconded by levy, that staff be directed to prepare a resolution declaring June 5, 1984 Bi rge Clark Day. NOTION PASSED unanimously. MAYOR KLEIN RE JUNE 11, 1984 CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Klein commented on the possibility of moving the City Coun- cil meeting of June 11, 1984 to June 12, 1984, to allow as many Councilmembers as possible to attend the League of California Cities meeting on June 11 and 12 in Sacramento. he believed those meetings were important and urged as many Councilmembers as possi- ble to attend. Two items scheduled for discussion were financing of local governments and Jarvis 4. 4 5 l 2 5/87/84 ALJJOU UMLUT Council adjourned at IU:2U p.m. MTTL ST : APPROVED: