Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-05-03 City Council Summary Minutes1 1 9 2 0 1`•9 2 1 1 9 2 1 1 9 2.1 1 9 2 1' 1 _9 2 1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CITY OF MMLO ALTO Regular Meeting Monday, May 3, 1982 LIIM Oral Communications Presentation by Cheryl Lathrop, Santa Clara County Highway Financing Task Force 1 9 1 6 1 3 1 6 Consent Calendar 1 9 2 0 Referral 1 9 2 0 Downtown Parki ng Structure Feasi bi l i ty Study - Referral 1 9 2 0 to Planning Commission and Finance and Public Works Committee • Stop Sign Update - Referral to Policy and Procedures Committee Cal trans Reports on Southern Pacific Stations Upgrade Referral to P1 anni ng Commi ssi on Acti on Ordinance re ITT Property Dedication (2nd Reading) 1 9 2 0 1 9 2 0 1 9 2 0 1 9 2 0 Reti red Safety Employee Benefit Improvement (2nd 1 9 2 0 Reading) Ordi nance re Sett i ement Authority of Li ability Cl ai s:s (2nd Reading) Ordi nance re Amendments to Zoni ng Ordi nance (2nd Reading) Ordinance re Modi fi cati on to PC Zone at 1766 Ernbarcadero Road (2nd Reading) Ordinance re =Modification to PC Zone at 690 San Antonio Avenue (2nd Reading) Ordinance re Human Relations Commission Term of. Office Reso1 uti on.-`Encouragi ng Equitable Settlement of a Lawsuit between the Sacramento Municipal :Uti l i t.1 es Di strict and the United State Government (CMR:241:2)" Officials for 1982 Softball Season-(CMR:239:2) ITEM, - Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions 1 9 2 2 Planning ,Commission Recommendation re City Council 1 9 .2 2 Proposed Changes to the Terrnan Specific Plan (CMR:24;3:2) Crescent Park II U'nderground Conversion. Award of 1 9 2 2 Contract for Utility Trench and Substructure (CMR:249:2) Recommendation re Anti -Trust Legislation (CFIR:245:2) 1 9 2 2 Santa Clara County Airports' Master Plan and 1 9 2 4 Environmental Impact Report (CMR:250: 2 ) Request of Counci lmembers Eyerly, Renzel and Witherspoon re Urban Lane Request of Counci lmember Klein re ResOl uti on of Support for KTEH Premiere Showing of Annie Adjournment to Executive Session 1 9 2 b 1 9 2 6 1 9 3 0 Final Adjournment 1 9 3 1 Regul ar Meeting Monday, May 3, 1982 The City Council of the City of Pal o Al t� met on thi s date in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 250 Hamilton Aveue, at 7:35 p.m. PRESENT: Bechtel, Eyerly, Fazzi no (arri ved at 7:35 p.m.), Klein, Levy, Witherspoon ABSENT: Cobb, Fletcher, Renzel Mayor Eyerly announced that the City Council would meet on May 5, 1982, for a special study sessi on regarding Cable TV. He al so announced that the Council would meet on May 6, 1982, for a special study sessi on regarding Ut i 1 iti es. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Dr, Harvey K. Roth, 3433 Kenneth Drive, spoke about a personal problem he has involving Greg Morris, a former City Counci 1 - member of Sunnyvale, and an attorney. PRESENTATION BY CHERYL LATHROP, SANTA CLARA COUNTY HIGHWAY i City Manager Bill Zaner said that the Santa Clara County Highway F.i nanci ng Task Force was a proj ect whi ch wa:_ devel oped at the County level . He said staff had not had the opportunity to work with Ms. Lathrop, but looked forward to the opportunity. Cheryl Lathrop, 321 Cowper Street, Palo Alto, said she was a mem- ber of the Santa Clara County Task Force an Highway Financing. She said that the purpose of the Task Force was to analyze the provisions of SB 215, as it related to gas tax funding for trans- portation purposes, and to recommend action on financing al terna- ti ves to improve the road and hi ghway system wi thi n Santa Cl ara County. She said. the 25 -member Task Force was created by the Board of Supervi sors in November, 1981, following the passage . of'. SB 215, which increased state tax on gasoline per gallon from seven cents per gallon to nine cents per gallon effective January. 1, 1983. She said SB 215 also provi ded the raising of revenues for highway and transporati on purposes `through an additional gas tax to be approved on a county byy county basis ; in one cent inter- vals. The members of the Task Force on Highway Financing were appoi ntei in February, 1982, and met for the first time in March. She said the Task Force had ,identi fi ed the :..magnitUde of the prob- 1 em concerni ng the fi nanci ng of the road and hi ghway systems in Santa Clara County and had proposed a preliminary recommendation to solve the problem. Presentations were being made to each of the 15 City Councils in the County to invite their views. She said that the probl ems , s i dents fi ed by the Task Force, fel 1 into two areas --maintenance financing needs to keep . the City and roads in usable condition, and capital financing needs for new construe - ti on for the preservation of right of way of transportation proj- ects which were identified in the 1979 Santa Clara Valley Corridor Eval uation Study which was adopted by the Joint Policy Committee of ABAi and the Metropolitan Transportation± Commission (MTC). Ms. Lathrop sai d that regarding maintenance, in 1981, Santa Clara County and cities spent $35 million. Based on a telephone survey of selected cities and the County, it was esti mated than an addi- tional $15 plus million should have been spent in order to ade- quately maintain the roads. She said that the MTC hod recently completed a study on road mai ntenance in the Bay Area which i ncl uded more detail on the road conditi ons and the mai ntenance needs , and which was included in the Counci lmeinbers' packets. Last year, funds for road maintenance were provided_ through the State Gas Tax in the amount of $23 million or the equivalent or $03.9 of the $.07 currently paid, and by city and general funds of $12 million to make a total of • $35 million. She said thaet. with the increase in State Gas Tax in 1983 of $.02 per gal 1op:, the cities and County would receive an additional $7 million which could be used to meet part of the unfunded mai ntenance which pre- viously could not be done. She said that left $8 plus million in unfunded maintenance needs. In Pal o .Alto in 1980-81, the expendi- tures for roadway maintenance were $2.1 million out of a total of $5 million for streets and highways. She said $2 mil'lion was recei ved as revenue from the gas tax. With the effect of SB 215, Palo Alto would receive an additional $187,000 next year. Ms. Lathrop said that another problem in Santa Clara .. County was that adequate financing was not available for those capital proj- ects which were put into the Santa Clara Valley Corridcr Ev al ua- ti`on Study. She said the amount of unfunded capital projects was estimated at $250 million. Speci fi cal ly, si x of the projects were route 237 conversion to a full freeway between route 17 and Lawrence Expressway; Route 17, the addition of one 1 ane in each direction from 101, the Alameda County line which would probably be for high occupancy vehicles; Route 101, wi den from four to six 1 anes in the vici nity of the Al um Rock interchange; Route 101, add one lane in each di recti on between Guadalupe Expressway and Lawrence Expressway as part of the Guadalupe Corri dor Project. She said those lanes would also probably be for high occupancy vehi cl es. Route 85, the West Valley Corridor, complete the right of way acqui si ti on; and route 85, complete the operati onal improvements from the southern end at Stevens Creek to Saratoga/ Sunnyvale Road. Ms. Lathrop said the Task Force briefly considered other financing al ternati ves to provide for the unfunded;maintenance and capi tal needs in Santa Clara County, which, included increasing the sales tax by one-htelf cent, which would produce $54 million` per year; `increase the property tax 10 cents per $100 . as essed valuation, which was esti mated to produce $10 ,mi 1-1 ion per year; special assessment di strict, payroll tax, a .local gas tax of five cents - per gallon which would produce $35 mi 1 lion year; and toll roads. The preliminary •;ecommendat i on. of . the Task Force to "finance :.the unfunded -maintenance needs -estimated at $8 -million-=-and the unfunded. regional capital needs of $250 mil -lion was a Santa Clara County Gas Tax of five cents per gallon. ` She said that five cents per- gallon would be split into 1.5 cents for the el ties and the County to use for maintenance and other road needs,,_ and the Split between . the cities and the County . Would - be based upon -road mi 1 e age. She ,said the formula was different ;.from. the current alloca— tion formula for the gas tax. She said 3.5 cents. would be for the regional highway projects with priority given to those projects, 1r the Santa Clara Valley, Corridor Evaluation Study. She reiterated that : five cents per ,.gal l -on would -genet ate $35 million- per 'year,. 1 r e. and with the split outlined by the Task Force, it would be $10 million for the cities and County maintenance needs, and $25 million for regional transportation projects. She said it would allow the unfunded capital needs to be met in ten years, and the maintenance needs would be met immediately. Transit projects were not included in the five cent tax. Cost per driver was estimated by the MTC to be $33 per year for a five cent gas tax. She said that assumed 20 miles per gallon of gas, and 13,000 miles per years. The benefit to Palo Alto woad be to receive an additional $465,000 or 4.61 percent of the total annually for use on road maintenance and other projects. She said that as a comparison, Mountain View would receive $380,000. or 3.78 percent; and San Jose would receive $3.9 million or 39 , percent of the revenues from the 1.5 cent tax. In order to implement the increase in the local gas tax in accordance with SB 215, over one-half the City Councils in the County representing more than one-half of the County's :popula- tion would have to approve the tax increase. Second, the Board of Supervisors must formally approve the tax increase and then the County must :enter into agreements with each city as to how the gas tax would be allocated. After that was completed, it would have to go to a vote and pass by a two-thirds vote of the public. She said that to conduct a vote in Santa Clara County by November 3, 1982 --the target date --the Task Force on Highway Financing must complete its recommendations by June 30. She said she had spoken briefly to Mr. Zaner, and he and his staff were planning to pro - vi de more information in time for the next Task Force meeting on May 6;1982. She said a work shop was planned by the Task Force for Council and City staff members to obtain further input. As a resident of Palo Alto, she wanted to represent the Council's views and would welcome input in order to do better. Mayor Eyerly asked for clarification that there were a variety of methods the Task Force had al ready studied for raising the neces- sary revenues and that they had settled on the gas tax. Ms. Lathrop responded that the gas tax was the tentative recom- mendation. Councilmember Klein said he was sympathetic ' wi th the vari ous road problems throughout the County, but was cynical about the ability of a two-thirds vote to be obtained. He asked if the Task Force had completed a survey which would indicate the pl\ausi bl a chance of obtaining a two-thirds vote. Ms. Lathrop said no formal survey: had been completed. Councilmember Witherspoon said she was concerned that one reason that the State and counties had problems with the financing of the. road systems was that the tax was based on per gallon. As prices of oil and asphalt skyrocked, revenues could net keep pace. She said it sounded as if, with the Task. Force's recommendation,- the same problem would occur, assuming inflation was not licked. Ids. Lathrop said the Task Force must recommend using the tech- niques of ` SB 215, and hadno choice in what they did. Counceilmember Levy said it :was mentioned that Mass transit was not a _ part of the Task 'Force, and asked if the Task Force had any flexibility to include mass transit in the five cents per ..gallon. Ms. Lathrop said yes. She said the .Task Force made the _. assump- titan that based upon the passage of Measure A, which was on the ba1'lot last -fall .regarding the Transit: Dl;strict, there would be no more funding going into :_transit . Some discussion _ took place regarding- the idea that after five years the =money:could be made available for transit projects, -Jim Cardwell, staff, Santa Clara County Transpdr:tation' Agency said that if the Task. Force's recommendations'were : acceptable to the cities and the County the funds could be used for capital transit . improvements. Counci lmember Levy asked if the capital projects associated with the tax would be i ai d out .for the November election, or would there be an annual decision made. Ms. Lathrop responded that the idea was to give priority to those projects which were identified as being in the Santa Clara Valley Corridor Evaluation Study, The money would first flow into those six projects, and those six projects would consume roughly $225 million based upon current rough_, estimates, and a contingency factor of $25 million. She thought everything- would have to be laid out very carefully. Currently, th cax was set up to ..go on forever, but she did not know whether that was right or wrong. She said it was set up to allow the cities and County to meet their -maintenance needs for the next ten years, and fund the capital projects. vice Mayor Bechtel said she was concerned about the passage of such a tax on a two-thi rds basis, and hoped that `the Committee would -seriously look into the prospect, .and try .to get a better reason. She thought it yowl d be a mi stake to Tut -something on the ballot if At were to lose terribly. Further, she was concerned about transit funding with the _current Administration elimination and emphasis on transit funding. She said that all the _studies she had seen indicated that there _was no way ' to move the peopl e who were commuting even if the roads were improved as planned with the existing transit System. Counci lrernber Fazzino said he thought there was no way that a two-thi rds vote would be achieved unl ess there was a cl ear commitment to mass transit in the County. He said he was much less concerned with the need for maintenance money, and did not think it would be a problem for the voters. His concern was with the capital projects. He asked how the proposed capital projects would fit into MTC`s long range transit plans. Ms. Lathrop responded that all the projects were approved by a Joint =M3AG and MTC Commission in 1979. Councilmember Fazzino said he would be concerned if there was not a . natural cutoff point for the funds. He thought the problem would be hard to solve politically in the days of post Proposition 13, and he encouraged including such a provision. Mayor Eyerly said that having read in the newspaper the decision of the Supreme Court regarding Proposition 13 relating only to property taxes and that the two-thirds did not hold on other types of taxes, he asked if the Task Force had a clear reading on what that meant if it went to a ballot measured Ms. Lathrop said no. Mr. Cardwell said that Senator Foran had indicated that the two thirds issue was not spoken to, and was before the decision.in Los Angeles. He said Senator Foran felt reasonably certain that two- thirds would be required without going to court over it. Mayor Eyerly said he wasp: always inclined to resist new taxes, and asked for an ; explanation regarding the lack of money. Mr. _Cardwell said that the County had done some background on how the mOney flowed from the source, He ; said there was State TransportationJImprovement Program In the preliminary stage cur: rently which would return_ to the County, _ under the provisions of the Fora►i bill (SB 215), at least 7a percent of all moneys gen- erated in that County. He said, . that; . preliminary transportation improvement plan. if adopted -`by the California transportation 1 8 Commission, would allocate over 100 percent of local funds over the next four years, which included State and Federal moneys. Locally, the 3.39 cents currently returned to cities -and counties was done under State formula. He said that in addition, the State spent about $5.5 million on State highways in the County. The Count: felt that if the preliminary - State. Transportation Improve- ment Plan was adopted, it would receive its fair share returned to source. Mayor Eyerly asked if. that .'elated to the new plan and were they receiving their fair share currently. Mr. Cardwell thought there was some question whether a lot of people had gotten their fair share from State Highway Funds. He said every attempt had been made on the part of the County, through State. and Federal lobbying, to return as much of the gas tax to the County of Santa Clara as possible. He did not have specs fi c dol 1 ar amounts., but sai d the effort was ongoi ng. Mayor Eyerly thanked Ms. .Lathrop and. Mrs Cardwell for their pre- sentation. CONSENT CALENDAR Counci 1rembei= Witherspoon removed Item 12, Resolution re Santa Clara Valley Water District from the Consent Calendar, and con- tinued for one week. MOTION: Counci 1member Klein moved, seconded -by Levy, approval of the Consent Calendar as amended. Referral DOWNTOWN PARKING Pt ti (: STOP SIGN UPDATE - STRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY - REFERRAL TO REFERRAL TO POLICY AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE CALTRANS REPORTS ON SOUTHERN PACIFIC STATIONS UPGRADE Acts on ORDINANCE RE ITT PROPERTY DEDICATI01jJ2nd Readi nq) ORDINANCE 3346 entitled ,"ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE V1 F LO ALTO AMENDING CHAPTER 22.08.. (PARK DEDICA- TIONS) - OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE ADDING SECTION 22.08.340 (JOHN FLETCHER BYXBEE RECREATION AREA ADD!- TIOt )" (1st Reading 4/19, Passed 9-0) RETIRED SAFETY EMPLOYEE BENEFIT IMPROVEMENT (2nd. Reading) ORDINANCE 3347 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE TITV OF PALO ALTO AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY. OF PALO ALTO AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC:. :EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM" ,(1st Reading 4/5,, Passed 8-0, Levy absent) ORDINANCE RE SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY OF LIABILITY CLAIMS (2nd ea. nn ORDINANCE _334B=-eft t)ed MORDINAECE OF THE. COUNCIL OF, THE LTO AMENDING SECTION 2.28.240 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE _ TO. AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY TO'.:. SETTLE; OR COMPROMISE CLAIMS OR ACTIONS:. ON BEHALF OF. ---THE CITY NOT TO EXCEED TEN THOUSAND ' DOLLARS WITHOUT : PRIOR, APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL" (1st Reading 4/12, Passed 9-0) r: ORDINANCE RE AMENDMENTS TO ZONING ORDINANCE 2nd Reading] ORDINANCE 3349 entitled "ORDINANCE OF. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE ZONING CODE (TITLE 18) WITH REGARD TO THE DEFINITION OF GROSS FLOOR AREA AND THE REGULATION OF RAMP WIDTHS" Alst Reading 4/19, Passed 9=0) ORDINANCE RE MODIFICATION TO PC ZONE AT 1766 EMBARCADERO ROAD 2nd ORDINANCE 3350 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING PC ORDINANCE NO. 2365 APPLYING TO PROPERTY KNOWN AS 1766 EMBARCADERO ROAD" (1st Reading 4/129, Passed 8-1, Renzel "no") ORDINANCE RE MODIFICATION TO PC ZONE AT 690 SAN ANTONIO n ea ORDINANCE 3351 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING PC ORDINANCE NO. 2592 APPLYING TO PROPERTY KNOWN AS 690 SAN ANTONIO AVENUE AND REPEALING PC ORDINANCE NO. 1400 APPLYING TO PROPERTY KNOWN AS 698 SAN ANTONIO AVENUE" (1st Reading 4/19, Passed 9-0) ORDINANCE RE HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION - TERM OF OFFICE ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE 'CO NCIL OF 7HE CITY a PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 2.22.020 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE TO CHANGE THE EXPIRATION DATE OF THE TERM OF OFFICE FOR THE HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION TO MARCH 31" RESOLUTION ENCOURAGING E UITABLE SETTLEMENT OF A LAWSUIT BETWEEN 1 a 1l Staff recommends that the City Council approve the resolution which encourages the Sacramento Municipal Utility District to resolve its legal dispute with the government in a manner which would preserve the benefits of the Central Valley Project for the publicly -owned utilities io California. RESOLUTION 6024 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CALLING ON THE SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT TO SETTLE ITS LEGAL DISPUTE WITH THE UNITED STATES OVER PRICES FOR POWER FROM THE CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT:(CVP)" OFFICIALS FOR 1982 SOFTBALL SEASON (CMR 239;2) Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the' Mayor to execute the contract with Robert Kocher and Scott Perry. AWARD OF CONTRACT Robert Kocher and Scott Perry MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzel, Fletcher, Cobb a 'ent. MOTION: Counci lMember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Levy, that Item 12, Resolution re ..Santa Clara Valley', Water District', be continued for one week. MOTION :PASSED unanimously, Renzel4 F1etcher,_Cobb absen 1 9 2 1 5/03/82 AGENDA CHANGES ei.pDITIONS ANI) I)ELEIIONS. Counci 1member Fazzi no added .Itent 22 re request- .for a staff report re Stanford University's "cop-out" re housing on Syntex site. - PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMENDATION RE CITY .COUNCIL PROPOSED CHANGES 1 1 1 Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber said that P1 anni ng Commission Chairperson Jean McCown -Hawk es had informed his office that she would not be able to attend tonight's Council meeting. He said the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed changes to the text of the Terman Specific Plan and unanimously endorsed those changes. The item before the Council was the Terman ' Specific Plan as amended at the last Counci meeting. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzi no moved, seconded by Bechtel, approval of the resolution adopting the Terman Specific Plan. RESOLUTION 6025 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF TT CI Y- F- PALO ALTO ADOPTING THE TERMAN SPECIFIC PLAN" Gene Wood, 673 Arastradero Road, said his request was included in the amendment; namely, that the wall on his side be erected at the same time as the Pomona side. He thanked the Planning Commission for forwarding its recommendation to 'approve that request. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzel, Fletcher, Cobb absent. CRESCENT PARK II UNDERGROUND CONVERSION - AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR Counci1member Witherspoon advised that since she resided in the district, she would not participate on the item, MOTION: Counci1member Fazzi no mowed, seconded by Klein, that the bid of R. Fl atl ari.d Underground Construction Company` be rejected as nonresponsi bl a and that the Mayor be authorized to award and exe- cute a contract based upon the bid of West Valley Construction Company, Inc, AWARD OF CONTRACT West Valley Construction Company, Inc. Counci lrnember Levy commented that he hoped that when the work was completed 'and the repaving was done, special attention would be paid to 1 eave smooth areas for bicyclists who used the part of the street that was generally repaved in an underground .conversion. Director of Utilities . Edward Aghjayan said he would follow up on the request. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 5-0, Witherspoon "not participating, Renzel, Fletcher, Cobb 'absent. RECOMMEN `.PION RE ANTI-TRUST LEGISLATION (CMR:2451,2) City Attorney Diane Lee said she had rec'ent'ly attended a League of Cal i forni a Cities . Attorneys' Secti on meeti O,g in _whi cn the hot topi c. of conversi on was the r'arni f1 cati ons of the Boul der deci'si on, and the possi bi l ity- that some- Of the spillage from ` that decision could have a chilling effect on local -government. ;She said 'that currently Palo Alto had no immunity under the Boulder :decision,- and it was important that . any change to that ima}un(ty come from the federal; arena rather ; than the state arena. She _ said it was ,!toped 'that in the coiling' years Congress would hd1 d hearings in. order to effectuate an immunity for local; government such as, state governments had. She said 'that given the 'broad natureJ oV Pal o Alto's r{esponsi bi: l i ti es for many aspects of m ni ci'pal aft airs , 1 .9. 2 2 x5/03.82-, 1 1 1 it was- felt that it was appropriate that local government have that immunity. She asked that the Council authorize the Mayor to write to the City's national representatives and express the City's concerns, and she would monitor the 1 egi sl ati on on the matter. MOTION: Counci U,iember Witherspoon moved, seconded by F azzi no, that Council: go on record expressing its concern over the implica- ti ons of the Boulder deci si on and that the Mayor be authori zed to write the City nati onal representati ves expressi ng that concern and aski ng for remedi al l egi si ati on. Further, that the C1 ty Attorney be assigned the primary responsibility for tracking the matter and keep Council advised as circumstances change. Counci lmember Kl ein emphasized that the item was a very si gni cant one that all cities across the country faced. He said he had attended several heari ngs and had much di scussi on with attorneys throughout the country when he attended the National League of Cities convention in Washington, D.C., and it was felt that a tre- mendous i ncrease would be seen in the amounts of lawsuits filed against cities using Boulder as the basi s for new theories by which plaintiffs could try and get lawsuits against cities. He thought the predictions_ of significant increases in legal 11a- bi 1 i ty for cities were not exaggerated and that a legislative solution was needed. He urged his colleagues that they not be limited to writing letters, and that _i t al so be mentioned to their congressional and state representatives when possible. Remeoi al acti on was necessary i n order to change the Supreme Court' s deci si on. Councllmember Levy said he would support the motion, but was con- cerned about the concept of anyone being in a monopoly position -- even a city. As he read the Boulder deci si on, the specific issue involved was an injudicious use of Boulder's municipal power. He said that when he was told that from that deci si on, a number of other judgments could be made that would be negative to the way_ a city had traditionally carried on its business, he was persuaded that the poi nt had to be clarified. He thought that as a general rule, no one sht ul d be i n a monopoly post ti on, and that the citizenry suffered when they only had one supplier of services in general. He thought it should only be done when the specific situation was absolutely required. Ms. Lee said that the problem with the Boulder decision and anti- trust l i ability for publ i c agencies was that traditionally the liability was imposed on people or agencies or businesses that were just that --businesses. She said those people, agencies and businesses were in the business of making money, not in the business of protects ng cl tizens of the communi ty from other citizens or businesses. As a local government, Palo Alto was in a unique position because of certain regul story powers which were used for the protection of its citi zens' For an example, she used garbage col 1 ecti on \sand sai d that Palo Alto : requi red that : garbage be collected by one .o1.l ector in order to protect its citizens from having too many trucks on the street, and to make sure that garbage was located in; `a central . place --to. protect the health, safety and welfare of , its citizens. She said it was not because Palo Alto -was in the business of making money. She thought Palo Alto had ='a somewhat different _ posture than a business entity, and that as ,a local government, Palo Alto was concerned about %rotec- t i np its citizens from certain types of price gouging. She said rates were s,et for certain kinds of things, and pale Alto was neither in the lateral or vertical chain of price ` fixing, yet the rates were set in order to protect its; citizens. She said that _ in no way did; Palo Alto, as an entity, profit from setting' those` rates. She clarified ,that she spoke in a regulatory capacity not. an' enterprise capacity. : There were many distinctions between the way government functioned and the npy private enterprise func- tioned. She thought that if -Congress-were going to consider those in . granting..: cities - even limited ` immunity, consideration might be -1 9 2 3 5/03/82 1 given to the City Council's concerns. Municipal attorneys were concerned that there were no distinctions being made whether it was a revenue producing situation or an .enterprise situation as a local government, or whether the city was acting in a- regul atory capacity. She said everything was covered under the Boulder deci- sion, and could have a chilling effect on the City Counci lT- posi- tion of trying to protect the citizens of the community because someone could come to the microphone and threaten with an anti-- trust suit. She said she was told by a deputy city `attorney of Santa Monica, who had been slapped with an anti-trust suit for their recycl i rig operation, that an economist had quoted an hourly rate to testify in an anti-trust suit of $500 to $1,000 per hour. She said the case involved a recycling firm that had not been in that community, but now claimed it wanted to come in; and, since it was subsidized by local government, it was anti-trust. She said it was not just that municipal attorneys were concerned about winning because it was thought that the cities would win most of the lawsuits, but rather the exhorbitant costs of not only the attorneys, but the experts, and of just fighting those lawsuits that could have a chilling effect on a lot of activities. She said she intended to keep the Council informed as time progressed of new developments in the area and al so to provide some suggested practices to limit the City's liability when possible. Mayor Eyerly said that Ms. Lee's comments had a chilling effect. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzel, Fletcher, Cobb absent. SANTA CLARA COUNTY AIRPORTS` MASTER PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Di rector of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber said that Santa Clara County had undertaken some years ago to prepare a County Airports' Master Plan, concluding an updated Master P1 an for the Palo Alto Airport. He said information had been forwarded to the Council last fall which included a series of staff recom- mendations for comments back to the County on that Plan. Comments included an endorsement of i ten\`s in the Master Plan as well as concern regarding some items which would expand the level of use at the airport such as a parallel taxiway and additional airplane tie -downs, and the concern being that those were inconsistent with City policies. He said that at that time, staff observed that the County had not prepared an environment review document of the Plan. Subsequently a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared by the County and reviewed by the City Council. He said Council sent comments to the . County which were included in a pro- posed final EIR, and which were included ,in a packet several weeks ago. He said the City's comments and the County's responses were also included. He did not feel all the responses: were satisfac- tory, but said that given ° the City's role of reviewing and com menti ng on the EIR and the County's obligation to respond, but not necessarily having to .,implement those recommendations, staff recommended that ethe Council ..move on to consider the Master Plan itself. - He Said the Master Plan was reviewed by the Transportation Commission's Modes Committee, and would be reviewed by the Transporati on Commission ..on Wednesday of ,next week, and would then go on to the -County Board of-•Supervi sor_-s in June. He. directed the bulk of the Council's attention to the recommenda- tions contained on Pages 7 and 8 of an October ,8, 1981 staff' report,' an item which was continued pending receipt of the environmental document. MOTION: Counci lmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Witherspoon to adopt the following staff recommendati ons and transmit them to Santa Clara County: (1) Deletion of the Second Runwa - Endorse ©eleti on of the second runway based on consistency wT.th adopted City policies in the Bayl ands Master Plan: (2) Paral l el Taxi wax. - Oppose a parallel taxiway that could, because of its i ngth and width, serve as a temporary runway. If an additl oiral taxiway is desired for safety reasons, it should be designed in such a way as to not serve as a second runway and an inducement to trai fling flights and minimize intrusion in open space areas. Any modifica- tion of the taxiway design should be returned to the City for City, Council review and comment prior to adoption of the Airport Master Plan; (3) Runwa Run -U Area - Support modification of the run-up area to improve a rpor sa _ ety; (4) Terni nal •Building - Support relocation of the terminal to F.B.O. site _ number three with the specific location of the building to be determined in consultation with the City; (5) 1 ncreased : ►i rcraft Ti e -Downs - Oppose increases i n ai rcraft ti e-dos="Tir i nconsi stent with the Bayl ands Master Plan, recent City Counci 1 policy and 1 ease provi si orbs estab- lishing .a maximum of 510 ti edowns (6) fixed Base Operator Site - Urge .deletion of F.B.O. #3, on the basis of Tnconsistency stency wi ter the Bayl ands Master Plan and because the level of commercial activity at the Airport does not support expanded commerci al aci ti vites; (7) Auto Parking Support development of additional automobi.1 e parking if needed to meet a current parking shortage and if loca- ted away from Embarcadero and Harbor Roads and near aircraft tie- down areas; (8) L andsca i n Support adds ti onal 1 and scapi ng al ong Embarcadero and ar o Dads in a consi derably 1 arger area than 1 denti fi ed in the draft Plan. All of the area al ong Embarcadero and Harbor Roads, except that needed for a relocated terminal and related parki ng should be landscaped; (9) Relocation of Drainage Channel - Support the relocati on of the c'" ra a e channel as a a a yTrelated improvement with the understanding that the area is not to be used for permanent aircraft tie -downs; (10) Future Use of Moffett Field - Reaf fi i m previous City Council actions 3,T ng T e e era governrnent to open Moffett Field on a limited basis for general avi ati on trai ni ng fl i ghts; (11) New General Av ati on Airport - Reaffirm previous City. Counci 1 encouragement to larlta Clara 'ounty, the City of San ;Lose, and the federal government to pursue development of a new general avi ati on airport `as an alter- native to increased activities at the Palo Alto Airport and other. existing fact 1 it es; (12) Inr act_ Management Pro ram ram- - Endorse the concept of an airport impatT measurerneni an cone system; (13) Environmental Review Reaffirm previous City Counci 1 concerns regar ny a nee .or an EIR that addresses a broader range of project alternatives and provides a more in-depth analysis of project impacts. George Gandschow, 168 Henderson, Sunnyvale, r.epresenti ng the California Aviation Council, said that concernl ng the Env i ron- mental Impact Report to the Santa Cl ara County, there were some items missing. He said that throughout all the studies which were made as far back as 1961, it was stressed that the airport had paid for itself no matter how it ° was added. The County records showed that the airport was always a plus item, in spite of the fact that it left out the County Floor of the personal _ property taxes that were levied against each al rcraft once a year. He said the rate was 1.5 percent of the fair market -:value. " The Hodges & Shutt report showed a total of $_-152,000 for the year 1980 and for 1978, _it was a little higher because of some more expensive air- craft which had Si rice moved on. He said the figures went up and down dependent upgn how many expensi-ve ai rpl ones were at the : air- port. He said the particular funding' went directly into the General Fund which was why it was not generally' accounted for in the standard fasi:i-qp as to the,. airport. Unless • someone actually went to the County ' 'Offices: and looked for it, it was _ difficult to find.' He said that was true throughout the StAte_. of California, and it was the :same rate applied all the way -"through the State. He said the $152,00 went into the General Faund, to. be applied, by State., law, to schools. He said at . one lime the °. division was 54 percent to schools, 33 percent to Welfare, and the rest went to whatever the State wanted to use it for. He said there were 395 aircraft on the waiting list for Palo Alto_ Al rport. The number had decreased because of the recession, people moved away, and because more tie- downs were added to the entire airport system throughout the County. He said that one -thing which relieved the waiting list was the fact that lights were now being put in at the South County Airport and it would remain that way as a 24 -hour facility from here on out so said the Board of Supervisor. 1 8 1 • MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzel, Fletcher, Cobb absent. RE_U EST OF COUNCILMEMBERS EYERLY RENZEE _AND WITHERSPi ON RE t1RBAN n.w.�.�rso�nwarrr�__. s. r�i.rou�e�s.�w..or..srures•.n.r�re.rr.rri.rr.r�r..�ri Council member Witherspoon said that along with the historical data being prepared for Council , _.it would be helpful to see in parallel the information received recently regarding the implications for traffic circulation generated by the proposed traffic parking in the Urban Lane area, so that .the entire matter could be seen in perspective. MOTION: Cbuncilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Eyerly, to direct staff to assemble the 1979 and 1980 information regarding traffic circulation in the Urban Lane area and to provide the information that the Planning Commission had in their minutes and recommendations which were to be returned to. the Council, but which had not arrived, and agendi ze the .item. . Mayor Eyerly said that the Parking Feasibility Study for the down- town area included a parking structure in the Urban Lane area on the Southern Pacific property. He said that he and Counc i l,nembers Renzel and Witherspoon had been interested in the Urban Lane area for some years, and seeing the proposed parking structure and at least surface parking in the immediate future in that' area, it would behoove the Council to look at the traffic circulation and zoning in the area both of which the Planning Commission had looked at, and which the Council never considered. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzel Fletcher, Cobb absent, REQUEST OF COJNCILMEMBER KLEIN RE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR KTEH Counci lmember Klein said he thought public television was a great resource, and Channel 54 was used in the local . schools. He. said it was of vital concern to the. Council . that federal funding was cut . back dramatically for :public television. Public television needed additional sources of revenue, and he urged the Council, to support the resolution. MOTION_: Counci lmember Klein moved, seconded by Fazzino, approval of the resolution. RESOLUTION _ 6026 entitled 'RESOLUTION OF ` THE COUNCIL OF /HE CIi`Y. O PALO ALTO IN SUPPORT OF KTEH AND= :ITS PRESENTATION OF THE "ANNIE" PREMIERE .BENEFIT" Counci lmember Witherspoon concurred : with Counci lmember Klein, and pointed out that she had noticed that Channel 54 delivered a lot= ` of "bang' for its buck" compared to other public television sta- .. t i ans around the, area. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzel, Fletcher Cobb absent. REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBERS KLEIN AND COBB RE CITY OF PALO ALTO Counci lmember Kl ei n sat d that si nce Counci lmembers Cobb, Renzel and Fletcher were absent, and since they were all vitally inter- ested i n the item, he felt the matter should' be continued. MOTION TO CONTINUE: Councilmember Klein moved, seconded by Bechtel, to continue to May 24 1982, and Manager to provide a copy of the Emergency Plan. Councilmember Faazino said he fully supported the motion. Mayor Eyerly said ;le would support the motion to continue. MOTION PASSED unanimously , Renzel , Fletcher, Cobb absent. Mayor Eyerly announced the need ° for an executive session following the meeting regarding personnel, COUNCI:MiEMBER FAllINO RE STANFORD DECISION RE HOUSING ON SYNTEX Councilmember Fazzi no said that nothi ng had bothered him more over the 1 ast couple of weeks , than the Palo Alto Weekly arti. c1 e describing Stanford's decision to pull back from its c ommi trnent for hnusing on the Syntex site. He felt the City had gone the last mile with Stanford on the issue of housiny, and the Council approved the Peter Coutts site additional industrial expansion in the i ndustrl al area and stood ready to support addi ti onal . housi.ng along Willow Road. He said that as someone who had strongly sup- ported Stanford's housing plans in the past, he was deeply con- cerned about Stanford's "cop-out" on the proposed housi ng for Syntex. He said that after every other site in the industrial park area had been rejected by local fi rns .and Stanford, Stanford had the opport uni ty to build some needed and i n nov at i ve housing in the industrial park area without greatly disturbing existing resi- dents. Instead the project was dropped. He said the newspaper. article alluded to the probabi 1 i ty, that Stanford trustees who had very 1 i ttl e. understands ng of day-to-day town -gown relations were at fault. He did not, know whose fault the decision was and would be surprised if the Stanford administration itsel f were respon- sible since they had, at least publicly, been supportive of the concept .previously. He hoped that Stanford would be more success- ful in the future instructing the trustees about the political reality of -housing in the area. He was concerned that the issue occurred a., few months before the City Council was to consider the Willow Road project, and was concerned that the Palo Alto Housing. Corporation had not expressed greater concern about the devel op- ment. MOTION: Couflci lmember Fazzi no moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that staff prepare a : re sol ution for Council regarding Stanford University's decision to withdraw housing proposed for Syntex site (Arastradero site): and hoping Stanford Uni versi ty wi 11 work with the City to develop other alternatives. Councilmember Witherspoon Said she shared Counci lmember - Fazzi no's concerns. She had never been a fain" of:. providing . housing in an industrial area. :' She agreed that it. was part of the bargain that Stanford was to provide housings and said she_, saw- other :--sites. around Stanford she would rather have housing on. She thought it ,-might be more to the point to pass a resolution of the City, Council stating that it- was ' di sappoi sited, that it was the • Counci 1's understanding that, housi hg .was to be provided' on that, site or another appr•opriate site, and- hit the matter head" on rather than asking sniff to find out what ;gent on in ,the trustees,' meeting. She proposed that : the motion , be a, resolution +ex press1 n the -City Council's unhappiness, re the Syntex ,site, : and that the Willow Read situation did not even have' to be Mentioned." i 1 9 2 7 5/03/82 Counci 1member Fazzi no felt that Counci 1member Witherspoon's sug- gestion was excellent. He thought it was important to have an explanation of what occurred, and said he only knew about the newspaper article. At that time, he felt it we it d be appropriate for the City Council to express its formal disappointment about the Stanford decision. He thought it was proper protocol to hear from a representative of Stanford at that meeting. He said he would ask for a staff report with the full intent of expressing grave concern about Stanford's decision, but that a Stanford representative should be provided the opportunity to speak. 1 Mayor Eyerly sai d he thought that Syntex was still obligated to provide housing. Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber said that in 1980, Syntex indicated that it had a verbal agreement with Stanford regarding a lease at 1050 Arastradero, and that the site would be available for housing. To that extent., Syntex said it would assist in trying to get housing on that site. He said that effort was dependent upon working out a lease between ;Stanford; as the property owner, and any organization constructing housing -- whether it be Syntex or the Housing Corporation, or Stanford itself,, Subsequent to that discussion during the update of the. Comprehensive Plan, Syntex processed a number of projects through the City which received mitigated negative declarations. He said the housing mitigation measure in those documents approved by the Architectural Review Board, and in some cases, the City Council, phrased the housing mitigation that' rather than a payment directly to the City at the time of the bui 1 ding permit, that the money would be applied toward reducing the land cost for 1050 Arastradero i f an aff;ordabl a housing development could be put together. The mitigated negative declaration also identified the Palo Al to housi ng Corporation and the Mid -Peninsula Urban Coalition Housing Fund as the developers of first choice for that housing, He said those two organi zati ons, Syntex representative., and Stanford staff, and sometimes several members of the Board of Trustees hel d eight to ten meeti ngs in .tee course of a year or more, which was a process to try and work out the details of the lease. He said any lease of Stanford land, or land in general, was a very complex document. The term of the lease, the value of the lease, the method of payment, and trying to bui ld affordable housi nr on Stanford land or anyplace else, required a very low front end land coat and some type of innovative payback on the 1 and value later oo as the housi ng was occupi ed and used. He sai d that unfortunately, .and despite the efforts of a lot of people -- especially Syntex who put in a lot of hours and really tried to put i t toget her -the detai i s of the l ease coal d not be put together. Stanford had certain conditions it felt were very important, and it appeared that those conditions were endorsed, if not generated by a committee of the Board,.. and those . details could not be ' translated ` into a housing project that woul d work economi cal ly. He said that at a breakfast meeting of all the. parties involved several., months ago, it was agreed that,: despite all the good efforts and intentions, -the details could not be worked out. At that point,, Syntex had; gene well beyond its obl i - cation i n ,the mitigated negative decl areti on to try and bring about housing since it edi d not have any direct control over the property owner. lie said its obligation; now was to pay the stan- dard mitigation payments when those projects were processed and received bui i ding permi te. He understood that there a would, be. no further discussions between Stanford and the ., Housing Corporati en apd - the U rban\ Coal i ti on.; Mayor Eyerly clarified that Syntexhad said that = the moneys that were to have been applied to Arastradero Road were -available' for use An other =.area. He" asked if the - money was coming -in and if there was any problem in that regard. Mr. Schreiber ; said that was correct, and said it was phrased in that manner because the City wanted - housing as the first choice, but realized that Syntex could not be put in a position of pro- viding housing on land on which it had no lease. Vice Mayor Bechtel asked how many potential housing units were being considered on the Syntex property. Mr. Schreiber responded that discussions ranged between 70,-80, 85 and perhaps 90 at the most. Vice Mayor Bechtel said the zoning. had remained housing so that if it was not feasible at this point to build housing, nothing would preclude Stanford from later determining that housi ng might be appropri ate. Mr. Schreiber said that the Comprehensive P1 an designation was multiple -family residential. The zoning was not changed, and staff had held off on processing the zoning change --there was an outstanding Council assignment to the Planning Commission --while the various parties tried to work out the details. He said that currently there was no sense of any development of the property, the Council had given the Commission an assignment to assess the appropriate residential development standards in industrial as well as commercial areas. Staff did not intend to pursue the zone change until the industrial and commercial zoning had been evaluated in terms of its residential potential. He said that would provide some additional information on the appropri ate density far the property. Vice Mayor Bechtel said she would like the Counci 1 to keep the parcel in perspective with the other major parcels that Stanford had under consideration. She concurred . with Counci lmember Fazzino's concerns, but hesitated to request staff to do an addi- tional written report. because it already had about 65 assignments. She thought that Council could at 1 east convey its disappointment to Stanford that the project could not be worked out, and its hope that Stanford would reconsider the site in the future, and that Council looked forward to working with Stanford closely and cooperatively on the Stanford West site. Counci lmerrrber fazzi no said he agreed with Vice Mayor Bechtel's thought, but not the tone, and said what she was suggesting was. much more pleasant than he wanted to be and what reality demanded He agreed that a verbal report was adequate, and that his motion would be that the Mayor be directed to send. a letter to Stanford expressing the City Council's disappointment .over the decision ;by Stanford net to pursue the housing on the Arastradero site. Counci lrember. Witherspoon asked if the parties could not.. agree on the ; terms of the lease because of Stanford's reluctance to set a precedent by creating housing in the industrial area, or was it strictly dollars and cents. Mr. Schreiber did not want to speculate on what the motives were behind the, various proposed lease conditions. He said the condi- tions- involved restrictions on tenure as well as payment` schedules —tenure being rental versus owner occupied --as well as the available of the housing after a certain ` time to the University, he said he was not in ° a position to speculate on the dri rl ng forces. Councilmember Witherspoon asked if staff would have felt that Syntex had fulfilled -` its _ obl i gati ans under the negative declara- tion if, its obl gations: were rolled in a housing project on another part of Stanford property. 1 1 1 1 Mr. Schreiber said that the mitigated negative declaration was signed and approved by the City and- rel ated speci fical 1y to 1050 Arastradero, He knew of no mechanism to go back and open up that type of document to try and translate those sets of conditions onto another site someplace else. He thought that Syntex had very clearly and forcefully .tried to fulfill the role it took on through those mitigated negative .declarations to try and facili- tate the provision of housing. He strongly recommended that Syntex'. role had been satisfied in that it should be in a position to make payments to the City and not tied into some other housi eg development. Counci l member Witherspoon said she thought the City should take the money and try and find some land. She did not want to cast blame because they were private negotiations between private par- ties and the City had no hand in them. She wanted Stanford to realize the Council's frustrati on that it had the dollars, but still.. needed the land, and that Stanford was expected to go the extra mile to help find it. Counci member Levy asked if the hang up was related to the devel- opment of low ,income housing versus market rate housing. Mr. Schreiber said he did not think the hang us was any one thing, but rather a combination of things. He said they were not talking about low income housing at any time. The actual costs would have been somewhere around $90,000 to $100,000 per unit_, and try to bring those units into the market at cost. He said it would have been affordable housing far below any market housi ng, but not low income housing. Counci imember Levy asked if there was any discussions to put mar- ket rate housing on the site. Mr. Schreiber responded that the discussions which occurred in 1980 during the update of the Comprehensive Plan, and subsequently picked up in the mitigated negative declarations, talked about affordable housing which was meant to be housing somewhat below market rate although not heavily subsidized low income housing. Mayor Eyerly said there had been some discussion from some of the Stanford people on the Mayfield School site, and it appeared to him that Stanford was open to suggestions and' were considering housing on the Mayfield School site. He thought that maybe a resolution or a letter from the Mayor might tie int& that or other available ground for consideration. .Mr. Schreiber said thet was correct, and that there had been some indications that the Mayfield site maybe made available for resi- dential use. He said staff recommended to the Planning Commission to initiate a public hearing to . change' the Comprehensive Plan designation tf - that site from School District Lands to Multiple - Family Residential. He, said the land was no i onger under the .con- trol of the School District, and multiple farn1 y residential would be the appropriate category. He said the public hearing by the Commission would be held on May 19, and -the Council -would receive the recommendati on someti me i n June.. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzei , Fletcher, Cobb absent. ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned to 9:00 p.m. executive session re personnel matters at FINAL ADJOURNMENT Final adjournment at 9:30 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: