Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-12-13 City Council Summary Minutes1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CITY OF PALO ALTO Regular Meeting Monday, December 13., 1982 ITEM PAGE Oral Communications 2 7 4 1 Consent Calendar 2 7 4 1 Referral 2 7 4 2 Item #1, Lot J Parking Garage - Selection of Design 2 7 4 2 Consul tant - Referral to.._Finance and Public Works Committee Action 2 7 4 2. item 42, Weed Abatement Program 2 7 4 2 Item #3, Removal of City -Owned Trees and Stumps 2 7 4 2 Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions 2 7 4 2 Item 44, Finance and Public Works Committee 2 7 4 2 Recommendation re Belt Press Dewatering and Cogeneration Feasibility Study Item #5, Finance and Public Works (F&PW) Committee 2 7 4 5 Recommendation re Civic Center Structural Repairs and CIP 8`-27 and Civic Center Space Use and Possible Leasing Item` #6, Finance and Public Works Committee 2 7 5 4 Recommendation re Adult Crossing Guards Item 47, Pol ice and Procedures Committee Recommen- dation re. Evergreen Park Neighborhood Traffic Stud 2 7 5 6 Item #8, Grecian Mealth Spa - Trial Resolution 2 7 G 4 Permit Parking Program Item #9, Work Program, For City Council Assignment 2 7 7 1 to. Consider. a Comprehensive Plan Change .in the Area of El Camino Real Froui Park Boulevard ;,to Stanford Avenue Item #1O$ Bicycle Boulevard Demonstration Study 2 7 7 2 Evaluation Count i l members Cobb and ITEM Item #12, Request of Councilmembers Cobb, Levy and Fazzino re Development of a Long -Range Plan for Open Space/Recreational Uses of Surplus School Sites PAGE 2 7 8 3 Item #13, Request of Councilmember Fazzino re Gypsy 2 .7 8 3 Moth - Will Bring up on December 20, 1982 Item #14, Report of Mayor Eyerly re Meeting with 2 7 8 4 Stanford Board of Trustees on December 13, 1982 - Exchanye of Information Adjournment 2 7 8 4 2 7 4 0 A2/13/82_ Regular Meeting__ Monday, December 13; 1982 - The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:30 p.rn. PRESENT: Bechtel (arrived at 7:35 p .m.) , Cobb, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Renzel (arrived at 7:45 p.m.), Witherspoon ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. R. O. Deck, 3580 South Court, said he submitted a written communication to the City Council on November 8, regarding a proposed new police pistol caliber. -Fle obtained a test weapon, and loaned it, together with ammunition, to several friends who were police officers. One friend was a deputy sheriff, and when his apartment was burglarized, .the weapon was taken. The gun resurfaced in the mid -West, and the Palo Al to Pol ice Department was notified sometime ago that the gun had resurfaced. He realized that. oftentimes it took a while to get a weapon back because it was held as evidence in trials, but over 30 days had elapsed since his first inquiry to the Police Department, and he had received no response. Further, one of his neighbors had gravel along the edge of the public sidewalk, and _ children occasionally picked it up and threw it as his cats. - The stones could damage his lawn mower or break his windows, and he wrote a letter to the Palo Alto Police Department regarding the problem, and never received a response. 2. Bob Snowcroft, 1650 College Avenue, was a staff member of Friends of the Earth in San Francisco, and worked on a variety of agriculture related issues. He attended a press conference this morning which revealed the State's plans to spray eight different cities --seven of which were in Northern California —for the Gypsy moth. Palo Alto was one of the cities slated to be sprayed and 490 homes could possibly be sprayed beginning in late February. He advised that his files contained a lot of information that any City staff member was welcome to review. He requested that the City begin to study the matter and call for an environmental impact report. 3. Mayor Eyerly said that he received a call today from Marvin Lee of the ; Friends o.f the . Winter Cl ub. The Winter Club supporters did not want to stay at the Council meeting until all hours, and asked if they could express their support at the beginning of the meeting rather than wait. Mayor Eyerly said he approved the request. Marvin Lee, 1241 Harker Avenue, said that In view of the long agenda, and rather than ask the Council to move Item #11 forward, the Friends of the Winter Club believed it would be better to draw attention to the fact now that they attended the.. eeting, and supported Item #11, re the Winter Club. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Cooact l member Cobb moved, seconded by . K1 ei n, approval of the Consent Calendar. 2 7.4 1 12/13/82 Referral ITEM #1 LOT J PARKING GARAGE - SELECTION OF DESIGN CONSULTANT Action ITEM #2, WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM (CMR:598:2) Staff recommends the following Council action: I. Adopt the resolution declaring weeds to be a nuisance and determine that there will he no adverse environmental effect from the program; 2. Approve the amendment to the existing contract with Santa Clara County; and 3. Authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement amendment. .RESOLUTIOk 6080 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL ut fa CITY UP PALO ALTO DECLARING WEEDS TO BE A NUISANCE AND SETTING A HEARING" AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA AND CITY OF PALO ALTO FOR ABATEMENT OF WEEDS ITEM #3, REMOVAL OF CITY -OWNED TREES AND STUMPS (CMR:599:2) Staff recommends that the Mayor be authorized to execute a contract with Pied Piper Exterminators, Inc. in the amount of $.19,680 for trees and stump removal. AWARD OF CONTRACT Pied Piper Exterminators, Inc. MOTION PASSED unanimously. 'AGENDA CHANGES , ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS Councilmember Fazzino added Item #13, requesting a report from the City Manager regarding the Gypsy Moth Eradication Program. ITEM #4 ! FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION RE BELT • • Finance and Public Works Committee Chairperson Witherspoon said that the matter was complicated and that three interlocking decisions were involved. MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon for the Finance and Public Works Committee moved that the City Council , take the following actions 1. Accept the staff recommendations (cnntalned in CMR:565:2) and authorize proceeding with further feasibility studies on cogeneration and with the design phase of the contract for engineering services with CH2M Hitt; increase the contract amount of $60,314; and, authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement with CH2M California, ` Inc. 2. Further, that the approvals be contingent upon receiving written, approval from participating agencies in the Water Quality Centro' Plant to begin desi gm and constr ecti on phases of the Belt Press Rewatering Project. These funds to come from the `lectric Fund System -Improvement Reserver and be repaid upon sale of project bonds. 1 i ORDINANCE 3400 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF U ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1982-83 TO PROVIDE. ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A COGENERATION FACILITY AT THE WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT" AGREEMENT CH2M .Will California, Inc. Mayor Eyerly advised that a copy of the actual ordinance was not contained in the packet. City Manager Bill Zaner said that in some cases the ordinance was not attached to the packet material. However, it was in the material that went to the F&PW Committee, copies of which went to all Councilmembers. Staff suggested that an alternate procedure be used rather than returning the ordinance to the Council next week on the Consent Calendar, and that copies of the ordinance be distributed to the Councilmembers and if the Council approved the project, the ordinance could be adopted this evening as well. Counc i l member Fletcher said mention was made that the Council needed to make a policy decision on the Aquaculture Center for the design ptrase, and she did not believe that the F&PW Committee addressed that item. Director of Utilities Edward Aghjayan said staff was going to review the Aquaculture Center further. A liability issue was involved which deserved further study and no action was requested on that matter at this time. Mayor Eyerly asked the City Controller about the feasibility of the project and the bond issue the City Council would be approving tonight. City Controller Al Mitchell said his comments addressed the subject item and Item #5, F&PW Committee recommendation re Civic Center Structural Repairs and Civic Center Space Use and Possible Leasi og. Mayor Lyerly said that the matter was intertwined and that his comments could address both items. Mr. Mitchell urged that the Council proceed with the engineering of the Belt Press Dewatering phase of the project because the financing .of the phase, as recommended by staff, was sensible. He said that since the advent of Proposition 13, the City had been unable to issue general obligation bonds and relied on alternate methods for financing. The 'piggy back" concept of the build out on the seismic improvements of City Ha11. +here dealt with in Item 5, and the bottom line was an equivalent of about a $1,000,000 increase on the electric rate. He believed that pledging the revenue capacity of the electric utility as collateral of the bond issue was the only way to finance the project, and that other more reasonable alternatives were . not available to the Council. The reports dealt with a .lot of interfund rentals, etc., however, the Utilities l?epartrnent was not identified as anything other than another department of the City in the City Charter. New money was needed, and he saw that as being an increase of $4,000,000 to $5,U00,000 in the tax rate. The figure of $4,000,000 was used in the staff report. Mayor Lyerly asked if using the "piggy back" mechanism on the bonding in order for the _City to obtain oneys for the rehabilita- tion of City Hall would affect the City's bond rate. Mr. Mitchell said there was a lot involved in bond rating, and it would be judgmental to say that the bond rating agencies would not look at the "piggy back" concept. Those in the municipal bond business were sensitive to the fact that cities in California had been unable to issue G.U. bonds and were sympathetic to alternate methods of financing. He said the City was fortunate to have its utility revenue capacity to pledge because many other cities in California did not have one to pledge. The Calaveras Power con- tract was a good example of bond rating. That contract pledged a significant amount of ,electric revenue, and the bond market was becoming more favorable to the concept: The original estimates of bond service costs were dropping significantly, but he felt that the $5,000,000 en the City Hall build out of the project should be handled by about $600,000 to $700,000 in annual bond service or the equivalent of about $1,000,000 of the electric rate although it could be . spread out to the other utilities. Mr. Aghjayan clarified regarding the bond issue, that the amount attributable to the City Hall expansion, renovation or repair, was a liability of the General Fund and not of the Utility Rate payer or the utility funds. Even though it piggybacked a utility rev- enue bond issue, a mechanism existed by which that portion of the stream of cash flows attributable to the necessity of improving the building was directly charged to the General Fund on an annual basis. The utility rate payer would not be liable in the context of a utility rate increase to pay for improvements to the Civic Center except to the extent that it vas the responsibility of the utility user --those utilities used by the Utilities Department He deferred to the City Treasurer about the effect on the City's bond rating. Mayor Eyerly said the payment of the bonds were split between the cogeneration unit and the general fund. Mr. Aghjayan said that the entire bond issue must allocate where the funds were to go. In some cases, it was attributable to the cogeneration financing and was the direct responsibility of the Utility Rate payer. The City pledged the revenue stream of the entire utility operation, and there was no question that the City pledged to raise the rate of the utility user to: pay back the bond holder, which was the reason the bonds could be sold and at an attractive rate: However, the City also pledged its General Fund to pay back those payments attributable to the City' portion of the bond issue to the Utilities Department. City Treasurer Mark Harris said that last April, the City retained the services. of. E. F. Hutton to act as the .City's financial advisor on the cogeneration bond issue. At that time, staff was aware of the need for structural improvements and the potential build out of City Hall. L. F. Hutton asked what size issue the City could go for without having are adverse impact on the bond rating. At the time, it looked as if the City could float as much as $15 million and maintain its "AA" rating, and include any structural improvements and what was known about the cogeneration project. Since that time; bond interest rates had fallen a bit and staff's approach would now be to design the issue to obtain the highest rating possible. ,The inclusion of any structural improvements should .not adversely affect the''bond issue. MOTION PASSED unanf mansly. 1 1 2 :7 4 4 12/13/82 ITEM #5, FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS (F&PW) COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Kt CIVIC 4LNtU S'KU4"iUKAL o41.11(5 ANU 4iY tSL--Z1 RNLI 4,1Y1[. tLNIL' Counciimember Witherspoon said she would address the issue of the civic center repairs first because they had to begin immediately and could not wait until the bond issue. MO1ION: Counciimember Witherspoon for the Finance and Public Works Committee moved that the City Council take the following actions: 1. Adopt the recommendations of the Civic Center Structural Repairs, CIP 82-27 Report Nos. 1-5; 2. Adopt a budget amendment ordinance to proceed with the design phase including the procurement of the third elevator; ORDINANCE 3401 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE tITT OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL TEAR 1982-83 TO ESTABLISH AND PROVIDE FUNDS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 82-27 'CIVIC CENTER STRUCTURAL REPAIRS' AND PROJECT NO. 82-30 'CIVIC CENTER SPACE USE 3.. Authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement for $277,000 with Engineering Decision Analysis Company, Inc. for the final design stage of structural improvements to the Civic Center; AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT SERVICES CIVIC CENTER REPAIRS CIP 82-27 Engineering Decision Analysis Company, Inc. 4. Authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement for $30,000 with Ralph Larson and Son, Inc. for construction consultant ser- vices during the design stage of structural improvements to the Civic Center. AGREEMENT Ralph Larson & Son, Inc. 5. Authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement for $40,000 with Timesavers Technical: Services, Inc. and Information Processing, Inc. for support services during the design stage of structural improvements to the Civic Center;\and AGREEMENT Timesavers Technical Services, Inc. and Information Processing, Inc. 6. Authorize staff to execute change orders during the design stage of op to $53,000. 7. Adopt the Utilities Cogeneration Project Revenue Bond as the financing mechanism for the structural and space use improve- ments contingent upon the approval of the Cogeneration Project; 8. Appropriate $1,025,000 from the Reserve for Capital Projects Fund for early project Costs and direct staff to structure the revense bond issue for the Cogeneration. Project in a manner that fully covers the project including reimbursements to the Reserve for Capital Projects Fund. Expenditures of $350,000 for space ti i i tats oN, design services ' are contingent upon approval of the 'Cogeneration Projects. Counciimember Levy asked what would happen to the financing of the Civic Center if the cogeneratiun project bond was not approved. Further, he asked what assets _, of the City or stream of payments were being pledged. > 2 7 4 5 12/13/82 City Manager Bill Zaner said that if the cogeneration plant did not move forward, the Council would be faced with the issue of financing the structural repairs for City Hall from some other. source. The only source now available would be the City's reserves. He said staff arranged the package in such a way that while asking for Council authorization to do both structural work and remodeling, they have been separated sco that in the event something happened to the cogeneration plant, none of the City Mall remodeling work would be done.: Staff anticipated moving ahead with the structural work regardless of what happened to the cogeneration project. The building needed to be repaired, and prudent steps must be taken to ensure that it be done. Councilmember Levy asked what assets were being pledged. Real Property Administrator Jean Diaz said that part of the proj- ect would be financed through an accounting mechanism to be struc- tured financially similar to a lease. The Utilities Department would pay a fair market rental for the space they occupy from the Civic Center. That revenue stream would help to pay the General Fund portion of the debt service from the cogeneration plant bonding issue. There was no lease per se, but rather an accounting mechanism. It was a revenue bond from the Utilities Department. Councirmember Levy said he understood that the City of Palo Alto could not issue bonds, which was why it was piggybacking onto the Utilities Department. He did not understand the City's obligation and its security. Mr. Diaz said that not all of the Civic Center build out and structural repairs were utility obligations ,per se. A portion was attributable to the General Fund requirements. A share of the total debt service would be a General Fund obligation, and \ the General` Fund must pay back that portion allocated to it based on its pro rata portion of use of the Civic Center structure. That was done through the income stream from utilities from their occupancy and use of the building. City Attorney Diane Lee said that although the Utilities Depart- ment generated separate revenues and was accounted for separately, i twas a part of the City of Palo Alto. The City, could not lease space from itself, therefore, accounting was the proper mechanism by, which to allocate those revenues to the Utilities Department which it was entitled to have back, and insure revenues were prop- erly allocated to the General Fund. Councilmember Levy : asked if the City could raise . money to buy schools with a Util iti'es Bond issue. Mr. Diaz said it was important to clarify that a revenue bond was being used, which necessitated pledging revenue in order to pay the bond debt service, back. In this case, the City was using the revenue generated by the Utilities Department. Councilmember Levy clarified that the Utilities Department was guaranteeing the repayment of . the Civic Center structural improve- ments whether or not they were utilities oriented. Mr. Diaz said that was true; however, the City must be careful. In this case a definite relationship could be established between the Utilities Department and: the project. The Utilities Depart- ment relied on having space in City Hall, but were not so involved with school' :sites. It would be mOch more difficult to try abd justify the school site appl i catl`on: Councilmember;.Cobb asked about the issue of leasing versus use He understood that the Civic Center build out was consistent :with a private sector lease,of the space or use by the City, and he asked at what point the City would deal with the ` issue of whether to use the surplus space for City uses or as a revenue generator. Mr. Uiaz said that the moderate construction alternative provided the possibility for some private sector leasing. The information necessary to determine whether that was feasible would not be known until after the Space Use Master Plan was developed, which would occur once the design people were in, the structure was built out, and staff had a sense of what it had and how to organize people as a result of that space. However, the moderate construction alternative did not rely on private sector leasing as a critical component. Councilmember Cobb clarified that the moderate construction alter- native did not require modifications to the structure that might have to be undone in the event of a lease by the private sector. Mr. Diaz responded that there might be some additional costs for security and other items should the City decide to go with private sector leasing, but staff's philosophy was to preserve as much flexibility as possible whether the space was used for the City ,<ar private sector possibilities. The cost would be minimal in any event. Councilmember Fazzino said he had no problem with the concept of leasing to private agencies, but was concerned about moving ahead with the moderate construction because he believed the City was missing out on a long-term opportunity for private sector leasing and the potential for additional financial reward. He was con- cerned about moving ahead with the moderate construction alterna- tive before a master plan was in place with regard to the need for City Hall space by City employees. He asked when that information would be available. Mr. Diaz said the proposal attempted to blend the required struc- tural repairs and build out together as much as possible, in order to achieve maximum efficiency and save money. The design people would assist staff in putting together the timing issue. He believed that the Council had to make a philosophical decision about whether private sector leasing ..was critical or whether care should be taken to organize the City in the best and most efficient way possible for it to take care of its business. The philosophy behind the moderate construction alternative was to accommodate the City's current and estimated future needs, Private sector leasing might be a possibility, but that was only in the event that space was left over with private sector poten- tial. He said the maximum construction alternative would entaf l a significant marginal increase in expenses because it involved building out the eighth floor. That was would be very expensive and the impact on the organization would be severe. The City would have to concentrate on freeing up the most marketable space for the private sector leasing --the tower .area. That would mean splitting up a lot of City functions, and moving them into places that were not as efficient for the different kinds of City -opera- tions. The distinctions between the two alternatives were impor- tant. Staff believed that under the moderate construction alter- natives, there could be some potential for private sector leasing that would increase the revenue side Of the picture if that was the Council's desire. That would not be known, however, until the master plan was in placed. Councilmember Fazzino clarified that tonight's Council decision would lock them into the moderate construction alternative regardless of the Master Plan. Mr. Diaz responded that the maximum construction alternative could always be pursued in the future. It involved building out the eighth floor and possibly some reallocation of people, but nothing in the moderate construction alternative prohibited the City Council from proceeding with the maximum constrictions alternative in the future. 2 7. 4 1 12/13/82 Councllrnember Fazzino said that much heavier .construction costs would be involved if .the City held off with the maximum construc- tion alternative. He believed that if the City had a plan over the next five or ten years for utilization of space in City Hall, the Council should move ahead now with that proposal. He was con- cerned that. Council was precluding the opportunity for long-term financial benefits for the City by going with the minimum con- struction alternative at this time. Further, he was concerned that the City's staff needs over the next five years 'might have been overstated in the report. He said he played basketball in the_ tower many times, and with some creativity it coul d be ideal for a restaurant use. He was concerned that moving ahead with the moderate alternative would meet the immediate City staff needs, but was not creative and visionary in terms of the use of the entire City Hall five or ten years down the road. He was of a mind to vete against the motiom unless he was convinced that he would have an opportunity to review the Master Plan proposal for utilitization of space fairly soon to evaluate whether it made sense to move ahead with a maximum rather than moderation construction alternative. He asked if there was a continuum of construction with respect to both the moderate and maximum alternatives or were they two enti rely separate capital intensive kinds of projects? Budget. and Operations Analyst Bob Woods said the moderate and maximum construction alternatives were- not necessarily two com- pletely different projects. If the Council decided to increase the construction somewhere down the road, the Director of Public Works could change the scope of work by contracts, but it would not require significant changes in terms of engineering except that the initial structural design work --not now contemplated for the eighth floor --would have to be performed. Regarding the master plan, he cautioned that the project was an involved one, and from design to completion of build out could take as long as three years to complete. A lot of changes were necessary and a lot of relocations and realignments would be involved. Experience had shown that it was not good practice to try and project needs two or three years into the future, and design space as such because new priorities would develop, and the Council could find that those projected needs were no longer accurate. He said that staff adopted "open office "planning" in order to achieve flexi- bility in._ design. If the City committed itself now to renting out a fixed amount of space, and in a couple of years found that new priorities demanded an increase in service by staff, the Council could be faced with having committed itself to lease space to a private agency and having to lease space outside of City Hall to meet City needs. Difficulties were involved with determining now how the space would be divided. Councilmember Fazzino clarified that if the Council chose the moderate construction alternative, and at some point in the future decided to change to the maximum construction alternative, it could do so without having to start from scratch or undoing what had already been done. Mayor Cyerly suggested that the Councilmembers focus on the motion before they: He clarified that. the Civic. Center structural repairs would be voted on first, but said it was appropriate to address the entire situation now. 'Mr. loner said lit was true that nothing would prohibit. the City 'f rom building out the eighth floor --which was t;,: . Hain difference between the ,moderate and maximum construction. a1 4ernative--at some time in the future. _ Howevrer, he pointed out that the City would probably not have' a financing mechanism available to do so in the future. If the Council was inclined to build the entire building out, which would cost another $400,000 beyond the moderate alter- native, now was the time to make that policy decision because, a financing mechanism ' was available; to., wit, the cogeneration project. That project would not be around in two. three or four .years to piggyback on 2 7 4 8 12/13/82 1 1 1 Councilmember Renzel said she agreed that financing was the major difference in the two alternatives. She had reservations about the concept of leasing out parts of Palo Alto's government space to private agencies because of security, problems and possible con- flicts of interest. She supported the F&PW Committee recommenda- tion and believed that the project was a complex one which involved both structural and expansion work. Staff would need the maximum flexibility to work with all usable space during -that time, and she believed the issue.'would be complicated by pro- ceeding further with plans for building out that would require renting that built out space for revenue generation. Councilmember Cobb said his profession involved this --precise issue with a rather substantial amount of .space in the Industrial Park. He pointed out that because he was involved in subleasing space from the master lease in the Industrial Park, his overhead divi- sion made more money than some of the line organizations even when he had a lease -he had to pay the difference on. He did riot_ think the Council should be at all afraid of lease because it was a way to -generate new revenues for the City that could help with things like school site purchases, etc. He opined that it was a poten- tial revenue source that could be for whatever duration the City chose, and could probably .return its investment in two or three years and be profitable after that. He was troubled that the Council was .-lot looking at that option to make some money out of the building rather than having empty space which was of no use to anyone. Councilmember Levy asked to be reassured that the cost of ,expan- sion within City Hall was the same as, or less than, the cost of acquiring space outside City Hall. He believed that $2.5 million was a large expenditure for the amount of space to be gained. Mr. Diaz responded that staff ' projected rental rates for the kind of office space to- be found in City Hall in the next couple of years to approach $25 per square foot per year. That was for fully serviced utilities, janitorial services, etc. Councilmember Levy asked what it presently cost to build space? He calculated that the cost of the City's build out was $213 per square foot, and he asked how that compared with the general prevailing prices in the community. Mr. Woods said he did not have -the exact figures for construction costs oer square foot, but using_ .the figure of $175 per sgiare foot peer year; a five year lease at $25 a square foot would be $225. They were talking about a permanent addition to the building to last about twenty or thirty years, and if that were amortized over the twenty or thirty .years, the figures - were small. Councilmember Levy said that the prevailing costs in the community today were considerably less than $25 per square foot. He said that the cost of the proposed expansion was: $213 per square foot, and perhaps the efficiencies to be generated by having City staff located in the tower were worth the expense of the building out. However, if the City could buy property elsewhere in town for $100 per square foot, tie needed justification to spend $213 per square foot in City Hall. Before he could approve the project, he needed to be satisfied that someone had looked at comparative costs. Mr. Diaz said he believed it was approprlate`to use the rough shell costs because whether City Hall were built out, or space purchased elsewhere, the space would still have to be finished off. He calculated the cost for the rough shell for the moderate construction alternative to - be about $89 per square foot of building space. The maximum construct -ion alternative would cost about $94 per . square foot of new space. Building space elsewhere would involve purchasing new land, which- was very expensive in Palo Alto« -probably about about $75 per ;square foot -in the downtown area. He did not believe it would be possible= for the 2 7 4 9 12/13/82 Corrected 3/14/83 City to build replacement facilities of 17,000 to 19,000 for less than $100 per square foot. Councilmerber Levy said staff estimated 40 to 46 new employees, of which 23 were estimated for Utilities, and roughly another 20 would be employees of the City. He did not believe the City had the money to expand its operating budget in that manner. He asked what the estimate was based on. Mr. Woods said the estimate was arrived at by surveying the various departments and ascertaining their histories, and projec- tions for several years into the future. They were talking about occupancy in three to five years. Mr. Diaz said that although the information obtained reflected Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives of the City Council, staff also looked at other goals and plans seen by staff a_ s being criti- cal to the community ---such as cable television. He said crime prevention was a new program, and was likely to have space needs. They were already occupying the "A" level classroom. Utilities was . a growing area, and that department was always coming up with new programs and new ways of doing business. New technology was being developed all the time. Staff did not just take the word of the various departments, but rather looked at the City's goals, the Comprehensive Plan, and tried to filter those responses. Councilmember Levy asked if any costs, other than the $2.5 million contained in the report for building out, would be reflected 1 ater. Mr. Woods responded that the $2.5 million figure represented "finish costs," which included carpets, lighting, and things of that nature. Desks and file cabinets would be purchased as a part of the normal program costs --and as a new person came on board, the costs would be contained in the operating budget for that person as was the procedure currently. Mayor Eyerly commented that following. Proposition 13, the F&PW Committee recommended that the Council support a staff _assignment to address the possibility of leasing out extra City Hall space. That report was presented to the F&PW Committee, and was still there because they were unable to surmount the parking problem that would occur if space in City Hall were rented. City employees who currently parked in the Civic .Center garage had not used enough carpooling or other modes of transportation to free up some spaces for renters. Since •parking was not available for pos- sible renters, it could be necessary for the City. of Palo Alto to join the assessment district, which presented another stumbling block in, terms of renting any space in City Hall. If Council were inclined to proceed with the maximum construction alternative, he believed the parking problem must be addressed before finally corning to grips with the situation. Counci member Witherspoon asked if Council could keep its options: open for the maximum construction alternative by indicating a desire to pursue that concept and proceeding to sell the bonds. She. asked if the bonds could be paid off with the $400,000 if it was determined, two years down the road, that building out the eighth floor was not feasible. Mr. Harris said that any bond issue required that 85 percent of theproceeds be expended within three years. He believed the City would be on a tight schedule to do so as it was, but could work it out. If the extra $500,000were not spent within the required: amount of time, ` those bonds would either have to •be retired " or some other use found, but the money could not be 'kept in limbo 1 1 Councilmember Witherspoon said she realized that, .but believed that if the City intended to fully explore the maximum construc- tion alternative, and did not want to delay the bonding project, it could go ahead and sell enough bonds to cover that eventuality. If the City did not proceed, and the money was not spent i n three years, it could be used to retire the bonds. Mr. Harris said that could be done, but cautioned the Council that whatever the decision, the money should be used for identified projects. He said that although the City's financial advisor indicated no problem, there was a practical limit of what the City could issue in bonds. The bond financing should go to projects that made sense. Vice Mayor Bechtel said she supported the moderate approach as recommended by staff. She opposed the maximum build out at this point because she believed that Council's .major efforts should be directed towards the structure and safety of the building. if it happened that some space needed to be added, that was fine, but she did not believe that the total amount --including the eighth floor --was need. She agreed that there were parking concerns as outlined by Mayor Eyerly, as well as concerns regarding the appro- priateness of leasing out government space. She was further con- cerned about going for the maximum build out, and having Council change its mind a year or two hence. It was a waste of money, in her opinion, because the consultants were being hired now and would be required to know how many square feet of building to design for. If the Council changed its mind a year or so later after the building was designed for the maximum, all that time and money spent by the consultants would be wasted. Regarding the comment that the City would lose its financing mechanism if it did not act on the maximum construction alternative now, she said it might lose this particular mechanism. That space was not needed now, and the 46 potential additional employees mentioned by staff could be on each department heads "wish list," but might not be the number of employees Council would approve. The Council now had a project it could piggyback onto as a financing mechanism, but in ten years, the atiditonai 2,200 square feet of space might be needed, and another fi narcing mechanism might be available. Councilmember Klein said he agreed with Councilmembers Bechtel and Renxel. He pointed out that in his experience, a rental value of $25 per square foot downtown was the current market value. Fur- ther, he supported the moderate rather than maximum construction alternative because he believed there was an inconsistency in use between private and public enterprise. That inconsistency could be bridged, but it would be better bridged if the building was designed for the dual use from the start. He did not believe that City Hall was constructed for that use, and to try and da so would cause the City to spend a lot of time trying to sort out the dif- ferences between public and private use, and make changes in City functions in order to accomodate the private sector people who would be in the building. He did not believe that was a good long-term policy. He said mention had been made that construction costs for the build out would be too high, and perhaps the City should look elsewhere. An efficiency of use was attained by having everyone under the same roof. Spreading people around downtown would probably prove to be inefficient within a short period of time. One reason he supported the moderate build out-- even with no additional employees --was because the . building was. presently inefficient. He believed the building cost a lot of money, and recent studies indicated that spreading people out did not provide for as good an organization. People only communicated with each other when working close_together. He believed the City, Council wanted the City eiipl oyees to meet and talk with each other. He hoped the build out would improve the working conditions for City employees and their ability to communicate with one another, and enable the City to have a better run organization and get by with less employees rather than 46 more. Councilmember Cobb said that based on his own investigations, staff's numbers were correct --both in terms of building costs and. rental market values. He was concerned about the fact that now may be the Council's only chance at a financing mechanism in the near term to do the kinds of thi ngs to enable the City to generate some income. He did not believe the problem of mixing uses could not be resolved. There were a lot of ways to deal with the security and mixing, and the tenant could be another government agency. He believed it would be sad to have empty space in City Hall and not use the opportunity to generate revenue to help with ,other public "goods," such as school sites.. He asked if now was truly the time to act in terms of a financing mechanism. Mr. Laner said he not believe another funding mechanism was on the horizon in the near term that would allow the City to perform the proposed alteration on the building. The Council was undergoing the same debate that staff underwent --discussing the same security issues and the fact that the building was adequate at best for public purposes, and was not designed for the mix. Staff con- cluded that a modest, prudent step should be taken --the moderate construction alternative --based on the factors presented to Council. Councilmember Renzel said that with respect to possibly over - bonding the moderate improvements and later not following through with the greater remodeling, that those funds had to be paid for during the interim.. Councilmember Fazzino said he agreed with. Councilmember Cobb. Every two or three years the creative possibilities for use of space in City Hall were allowed to slip by. . He guaranteed that the issue would be discussed again in two or three years time, and he believed the City was missing out on a potential money-maker. The building was designed and developed at a time when tremendous employee growth ---beyond even the present growth --was predicted. That degree of employee growth had not occurred, and now was the only possibility of a financing mechanism fur a long time.,, He believed his colleagues were kidding themselves if they believed they coul d come up with somethi ng el se during the next fives or ten years --which was a long time in terms of potential revenue loss for the City, given the prospects for financing reward with the maximum construction alternative. Further, the inefficiency of the building itself --the plaza wind tunnel, the unused top floor, and the practically unused mezzanine area --could be turned aromnd to the City's advantage with sensible, rationale and some creative t inking about private leasing,. He recognized that the moderate approach would pass, but believed the Council would live to regret the decision when the City was more strapped for money, and turned to City Hall to see what kind of revenue could be achieved through the use of the building. He seriously doubted that City Hall would be used to any greater degree then than now. He was dis- appointed because he believed the moderate construction alterna- tive was a short term solution to a recurring problem. Councilmember Levy said that based on the discussions had so far, he would vote against themoderate- and maximum construction alter - ,natives. He was not convinced that the amount of money involved was worth the risk of committing that money. They were talking about $2.5 million, combined with interest, for an annual expendi- ture of $300,000 or more. That money, was :to be spent to add space to the building that he was not convinced was necessary. Regarding the maximum alternative versus the moderate alternative, he believed the maximum alternative simply represented more risk. He did not think the Council should take either of the risks. Mayor Eyerly, clarified that the motion before the Council ``deal t with the Civic Center structural `. repairs only, .,and had nothing to do ` with the use. -of space. MOTION PASSED Unaalaoysly: 2 7 5 2 12/13/82 MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon for the Finance and Public Works Committee moved that the City Council adopt staff recom- mendations 1-6 as amended, on page 19 of ;the Civic Center Space Use and Possible Leasing Report as follows: 1. Adopt the Moderate Construction Alternative, as defined above, as the preferred plan to meet current and estimated future space needs, and the financing therefor; 1 2. Direct staff to pursue financing of the project through: a) Piggyback project costs, including the design costs and costs to resolve immediate acute pr=oblems as estimated below, onto an upcoming Utilities Department Revenue Bond Issue, e.g., the Cogeneration Project; b) keimbursing Utilities Department for the nonutiiity por- tion of the project debt service; and c) Annual appropriation of rental charges for the Utilities Department use of space within the Civic .Center; 3. Direct Public Works to prepare an addendum to the Engineering Decision Analysis Company (EDAC) agreement for the structural/architectural services to implement the Space Use report improvements;. A. Direct staff to analyze lnhoase versus contract interior design consultation and report back to the Council with a recommendation (estimated contract Interior Design .Consultant cost - about $60,000 to $75,000); 5. Authorize staff to take steps to relieve existing acute crowding (estimated cost $40,000) when funds have been received from the issuance of bonds; and 6. Direct the project team (staff and consultants) to develop a master plan including specific space allocations, phasing and time schedules for implementation of the plan. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 6-3, Cobb, Fazzino, Levy voting ono.'_ Mr. Zaner clarified that in the Council's earlier action, the budget amendment ordinance was adopted unanimously. He believed that a few Councilmembers had expressed concern because the ordinance included the remodeling items. He clarified that Councilmember Levy intended to vote against the remodeling, which would have been done by voting against the budget amendment. Councilmember Klein suggested that the Council move to reconsider, continue the item as one ordinance, and if a. Councilmember wanted to be recorded as being against Project. 82-30, they could move an amendment to record their votes. The motion would then stand unamended, and the Councilmembers could vote on the entire ordi- nance again. Mayor Eyerly said that Councilmembers Cobb, Fazzino _ and Levy were willing to let the budget amendment ordinance go through with a unanimous vote as long as the record reflected that they did not approve in their own minds the fund for the Civic Center Space Use, Project 82-30. ITEM #6, FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION RE MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon for the Finance and Public Works Committee moved that the City Council approve the staff recommendation contained in CMR:463:2 for an increase of $3,508 to the Police Department budget to corer the cost of one new adult crossing guard position for the remainder of Fiscal Year 1982-83 and the adoption of the budget amendment ordinance. ORDINANCE 3402 entitled 'ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE 611T UP PALU ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL TEAR 1982-83 TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ADULT CROSSING GUARDS" Councilmember Fletcher asked for an explanation of Table 2 on the addendum to CMR:463:2, and whether the first col umn,, "Elementary Age Pedestrians," meant the actual number of pedestrians cros- sing. - Associate Planner Gayle Likens said that the intersection safety index had different criteria which were evaluated on a scale of one to five. Each column-- "Elementary Age Pedestrians," "Mix, of Junior and Senior, High Students," etc --was evaluated on an intersection by intersection basis. A scale of five points could be given for each criteria, five being the most hazardous. It was not the number of elementary age pedestrians shown on the Table, but rather the value assigned to the intersection based on .the safety index. For exampl e, regarding the the number of elementary age pedestrians, a value of one would he 20 children, and a value of five would be sixty or more children. Councilmember Cobb said the F&PW Minutes reflected that a comment was made regarding the two rotated locations, and asked if the add it;onal crossing guard would eliminate that type of rotation. He was concerned that an intersection was considered bad enough to have a crossing guard, but the crossing guard was there only part of the time. When his own daughter was young and crossing the street to go to school at the old Ohl one site, heremembered going by the interjection just after a child was killed. He believed that if an intersection was dangerous, it was dangerous all , the time. Small children did not know enough to make the type of dis- tinction that "today the crossing guard is not here and I better be more careful." He was bothered by the site rotation and .hoped i t could be el iminated. Sergeant Ed Austin, Palo Alto Police Department, said that the rotational system was done out of need. Three locations needed crossing guards and there were only five guards. A police depart- ment officer often assisted in solving the problem when the money was available.' Since that time, six crossing guards were used, and the rotational: basis: was no longer needed. Vice Mayor Bechtel said she was glad that staff worked to get crossing guards --even on an interim basis -- to those key intersections. She was - bothered by the fact that .it- was m -id- December, schools had been open since September, and . the need for c ros l ng guards at :some of the i nteresecti ons had been known sl nee that time. She asked what could be done in the future so make certain that crossing guards were allocated on an interim basis and available when . school started. Di rector of Transportation Ted Noguchi said one problem was the fact that staff . was trying to key in with the start of school and the enttre activity was delayedbecause of the process set up for the. City/School Traffic Safety Committee. Staff would try and expedite that, process as much as possible. He -pointed out that it was question. of being ab1e to anticipate which h schools were planned for closure by the School Di str..ic t, and works nib out . the crossing locations in that regard. 2 .7 5 4 12/13/82 Vice Mayor Bechtel believed that the processes of the City/School Traffic Safety Committee were the key. She suggested that the community be kept abreast of the meeting schedules, and that staff work through expeditiously in order for the process to be con- ducted smoothly and not in a fashicn designed to 'frustrate and alienate members of the community. Sylvia Martinez, Ohlone Traffic Safety Committee, 794 Allen Court,. advised that she was available to answer questions for the Council. Councilmember Fletcher asked whether the Student Traffic Patrol Programs were still in existence. Ms. Martinez said some schools had junior traffic patrols, but in the case of Ohlone, complications of the intersection and the fact that it was so far away from the school that they could not be supervised by adults, made that response inappropriate. Councilmember Fletcher asked whether Palo Verde School had a junior Traffic Patrol Program. Ms. Likens said she understood that each individual school chose whether to administer the Junior Traffic Patrol Program, and that the PTA was involved in terms of funding for the uniforms, etc. She said that Palo Verde School did have Junior Traffic Patrols adjacent to the school on both ends, but not at the corner of Lewis and Loma Verde where a guard was placed. Councilmember Fletcher.. said that when she was PTA Chairperson, there was an active Junior Traffic Patrol, and the children did not cross Lewis and Loma Verde, so there was no need for a guard. She asked if that had changed, which would explain the need for a crossing guard? 1 Carol Sampson, member of the Palo Verde Parent -Teachers' Association, said that the junior traffic patrol was located directly in front of the school. Since the Lewis and,.. Loma Verde intersections were so far away from the school (about . one and one-half blocks) the children were not allowed to go down that far to cross with the other children. It was against school. policy because it was dangerous to go that far away from the school. She said that Los Ninos and Sequoia Schools had been merged together, and " a number of children now came down through the Lewis and Loma Verde intersection. The adult guard was needed there because of the tremendout amount of traffic. Councilmember Fletcher said she knew that: the children had not crossed at Lewis and Loma Verde-, during years gone by because the traffic patrol -existed in front of the school Ms. Sampson said that the children were now coming from all dif- ferent directions because of the Los Ninos community and were crossing both Loma Verde and Lewis in all four directions. Children were going down Lewis, and across Loma Verde, to go up to Ohlone also. Councilmember Fletcher said she •Teas concerned because other inter- sections ;were more dangerous it her opinion. This afternoon she. saw a_ little child ceossi ng the. tracks on Alma Street alone coming. from school at East Meadow.. That intersection was tremendously busy, and. the _intersection of Lewi s and East Meadow was much more busy than the Loma ,Verde intersection. She believed there might' be a presumption that whenever a particular intersection was brought to the Council's attention, there was no way to 'say.` no, because all of the intersections were dangerous. Ms. Martinez said it was important .to, recognize. that the Traffic Safety Committee looked at "all intersections.- The -crossing guards- were allocated according to the number of children that used an intersection. An intersection might not qualify because it did 2 7 5 5 12/13/82. i 1 not have 20 children using the intersection, but could be a dan- gerous one nevertheless. The matter should be of ongoing concern and not crisis oriented. The situation had ,changed tremendously in Palo Alto --there were no longer neighborhood schools, children bicycled long distances, and some children had to cross arterials. She said everyone needed to look carefully at the childrens' safety. She has seen a couple of very near misses involving children. A lot of the problems stemmed from an enormous number of violations in the City, and carelessness of drivers. An educa- tion program was needed for the children, bicyclists and adults. In many cases, it had been observed that the children were better pedestrians than the adults were motorists. The intersections with crossing guards had been identified as having the greatest potential of danger, not that they in and of themselves were inherently dangerous. She said it was impossible to have crossing guards at all corners, and it was important to identify the dangers throughout the City. Further, it was important that the Committee receive its proper status. Mayor Eyerly asked if the crossing guard requested would replace junior traffic patrols. Mr. Noguchi said no. He believed that the junior traffic patrols MP) were generally located fairly close to the schools. Some of the locations being discussed for crossing guards were fairly remote from the school sites themselves. He used the example of Lewis and Amarillo, which was somewhat removed from the school site. Although it was patrolled by a three-way stop, stop signs were associated with more violations than signal lights. For that reason, stafff bei S eved there was, a Greater need for an adult guard at stop sign locations, than at signal light locations. Regarding the Charleston, East Meadow and Alma locations, those appeared to be relatively hazardous locations on the surface, but in fact, were reasonably safe from the standpoint of what was done in recent years. Cuuncilmerber Levy said 'e appreciated the benefit of working with members of the PTA who were concerned with traffic. He commended the PTA for their investigation and evaluation of the intersec- tions, and was comfortable with the recommendation before the Council. He further commended Mr. Noguchi and his staff in thei r work with the members of the PTA. He agreed with Mr. Noguchi that whenever a school closure was possible, it was necessary to anti-- cipate in the Spring what would likely happen in the fall.. He believed that the process should be reversed --that the City perhaps overdo its preparation for crossing guards in ,September because of the greater movement of children at that time and the fact that the children themselves were less aware of the new routes they would be taking. He suggested that perhaps later in the year, the City could reduce the number of crossing guards. MOTION PASSED unanimously.. ITEM #7 POLICY _ AND PROCEDURES : COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION RE Councilmember. Levy said .that the Policy and Procedures (P&P) Committee had a long meeting on the subject, and had a substantial turnout from the neighborhood. He believed that the staff memo, dated December 9, 1982, well reported the conclusions reached, and he quoted from that report. "The Committee noted that the public commentary did not indicate a consensus for any barrier plan, but that speeding, especially on Park Boulevard was a problem agreed upon by a majority .: of the evening's speakers Committee members vo1ed a Strong desire to have a situation created where drivers would find it more convenient to use E1 Camino Real and California and Cambridge Avenues than the Evergreen neighborhood routes for access to the California/Mayfield shopping area and to other_. points such as Oregon- Expressway." 2 7 6 6 12/13/82 MOTION: Councilmember Levy on behalf of the Policy and Procedures Committee moved that Council instruct staff to develop structural and enforcement techniques to reduce the speed on Evergreen Park streets, and especially on Park Boulevard; further, that staff be directed to work with CalTrans to improve the travel time between El Camino Real and Park Boulevard and California Avenue in order to encourage motorists to use El Camino Real rather than to cut through Park Boulevard and the Evergreen Park streets. i 1 Councilmember Levy commented that a California Avenue study was now in progress, and the Committee asked that staff be particu- larly cognizant of the need to include the effects upon the sur- rounding neighborhoods, and Evergreen Park in particular, as they evaluated the California Avenue study. Councilmember. Cobb said that regarding the impact on the Transportation Department work program, the final paragraph of that section stated "In order for the Transportation Division to proceed with the new phase of the Evergreen Park Study, commence- ment of the Barron Park Study would have to be delayed once again until completion of this new phase....a new Evergreen Park Assign- ment, including working closely with the neighborhood, could begin in February, 1983, and be returned to Council no earlier than the end of August, 1983." He clarified that the February and August time schedules were only if the Barron' Park Study were again delayed. Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber said that was correct. Councilmember Cobb asked when the Evergreen Park Study would begin and he completed if the Barron Park Study were not deferred again. Mr. Schreiber said that once staff became involved in studies, the alternatives, and items to be pursued seemed to unfold when pro- ceeding with the study and working with the neighborhood. The Evergreen Park study had continued for about two years, and if anything, Barron Park would be at least as complex if not more so. He said it could take anywhere from nine months to two years. Councilmember Cobb said the implication appeared to be that the Evergreen . Park Study was in series either ahead of or immediately behind the Barron Park Study. Mr. Schreiber said that some years ago, the Council established a priority listing, and Evergreen Park was placed ahead of the Barron Park Study. CUUNC_IL RECESSED FROM 9:25 .r. TO'9:35 p.m. Joe Ercol ani , 2040 Ash, thanked the Council for providing Evergreen Park with a hearing before the Policy and Procedures Committee, He said that from reading the staff report, those who had not attended the P&P Committee meeting would probably conclude that the issue was speeding. He clarified that the issue was through traffic in Evergreen Park —not speeding. The Evergreen Park Neighborhood Association backed a plan '.that called for bar- riers to eliminate the through traffic, and any _ opposition .,was with respect to the barriers. He said it was clear that after the P&P Committee meeting, the only street in Evergreen Park that was considered to be a collector street was Park Boulevard, yet staff estimated that 40 percent to 50 `percent. of the cars on those streets —Stanford, Ash and- ._College —were, . through traffic. One shortcut existed through Evergreen Park, which involved .Stanfordt Ash, College and Birch, and he believed it was neglected at the Committee meeting. A lot of time was _ spent on Park Boulevard and dealing ' with the . amount of traffic - un that street, but not too much time was spent on the amount of traffic on Stanford or along 2 7 5 7 12/13/82 the shortcut. At the meeting, Mr. Noguchi noted, before barriers were installed in College Terrace, that about eighty percent of the traffic in College Terrace did_ not originate or have a desti- nation in the neighborhood. A Transportation Division member recently estimated that forty to fifty percent of the -traffic on Ash did not originate or have a destination in Evergreen Park. He said that if he could be guaranteed that once the level of tra,fic for nonresidentia traffic reached eighty percent on Ash a barrier might be installed, he would be. willing to accept the additional traffic. It was estimated that -about 830 to 1,000 cars travel on Ash Street each day. If 1,000 ears went` along Ash Street daily, it worked out to be approximately one car every ten seconds for two hours and forty-seven minutes. He said everyone lived on a residential street, some on cul-de-sacs, and some in neighborhoods protected by barriers. He: did not think that the amount of traf- fic in Evergreen Park was acceptable, and supported any measure to try and cut down on the amount of through traffic on the internal residential streets. He supported having the Evergreen Park Study completed before any other action was taken. Anne Ercolani, 2040 Ash, said that the P&P Committee primarily addressed the issues of speeding and the status of Park Boulevard, :°hich was a collector street. She agreed that the other neighbor- hood streets were pretty much overlooked. All of the other streets were local, and the Comprehensive Plan defined a "local street" on Page 25, as those which provided access to adjacent properties only, such as, the residences on Ash or Stanford ---not through traffic. She spoke to an employee of the Transportation Lepartment to ascertain how many vehicle trips per day were con- sidered typical or acceptable for a local street. She was advised that no firm number existed, but that 1,000 trips was generally considered to be the a maximum on a local street. A 24 -hour traffic count was made on Ash in October, 1980, which revealed 800 trips, and it was probably about 900 now. The Stanford Avenue number was approximately 1,500 trips, and College Avenue was approximately 1,700 both of which exceeded the 1,000 trip figure. She was advised that approximately forty percent to fifty percent •of the trips on those local streets were probably to or beyond California Avenue. Everyday for the last six weeks she had been home, and daily. she saw all kinds of delivery trucks, not to mention the automobiles. the minutes of the P&P Committee meeting indicated that staff did not feel those numbers, or the percentages, were an abuse of the streets. She believed that hal f the traffic .being through traffic on local streets was an abuse of the street and an abuse of the purpose for which they were defined. The first transportation objective. in the Comprehensive Plan was to protect residential. neighborhoods from through traffic —especially commuter traffic She urged the Council to attempt to meet that objective in Evergreen P.ark and consider options :to eliminate or at least reduce through traffic on the local streets which were being used as a shortcut from El Camino Real , California Avenue and beyond. Since the heaviest through pattern of the local streets was Stanford, Ash, College, Birch, she hoped the Council' would consider some means to close Birch at College to eliminate the problem, or perhaps some sort of closure or some other measure at Ash. She urged the Cauncil 'to take immediate action. --If the Barron Park Study was done _ fi rstek neither neighborhood will have accomplished anything except the study. She urged that Evergreen Park be completed before moving on to whatever else was neces- sary. David Gleason, .396 Stanford Avenue, President -of ..the Evergreen Park Neighborhood ghborhood _`Association, thanked the City: for the hearing at the P4P Committee sleeting, and: thanked' the Committee and Police Department for the increased' enforcement of speeding laws on Park Boulevard. iie said some people had expressed an opinion that the traffic probl era in evergreen Park was a matter of convenience, but he believed it was the fear of too Much traffic, its impacts, crime, and the deterioration of a heal thy- and viable neighborhood. He believed that the reason for the fear was well founded. Since 1980, 114,000 square feet of development had been approved, which would create something like 425 new Jobs. The numbers were sig- nificant, and Evergreen -Park was a neighborhood three blocks by four, and California Avenue was not much more than four blocks long. The City was studying the parking assessment formula for California Avenue, however, the City was considering purchasing the Keystone Lot, which had about 46 parking spaces, and would cost the City somewhere in the neighborhood of $1,000,000. He could see $1,000,000 buying 40 places doing little to accommodate 400 new employees. Further, an additional 90,000 square feet of development was proposed for California Avenue, and there would thousands of new shoppers and customers. The Evergreen Park resi- dents saw a situation of massive numbers of traffic flowing through their streets because of the lack of access Many people believed that :barriers were an extreme alternative, and he agreed. He supported the motion and urged the Council to consider the long term view. Barriers might ultimately be required in Evergreen Park because through traffic must be eliminated in order for the neighborhood to survive. Harry Press, 1623 Escobita Avenue, said he was not a resident of Evergreen Park, but lived in the next. neighborhood. He commended the P&P Committee for its thoughtful , moderate, and intelligent proposal regarding Evergreen Park traffic. He believed that the motion before the. Council would help to ease the understandable and logical concerns of the Evergreen Park residents. The plan, in its moderation, was feasible, and could make the area safer by cutting speed, and thus traffic. Because the proposal was moder- ate, the streets did not need to bE blocked., He was glad to hear that Mr. Gleason did not bel ieve there was a need for blockage now. Many speakers at the P&P Committee meeting were residents of Evergreen Park and against blockage of their streets. He believed that a blockage would harm the California Avenue merchants, in the neighborhood shopping area. Everyone would be impacted because they would be forced to drive further, use more gas, and pollute the air more because it would take more time to get to the neigh- borhood shopping area. Everyone used neighborhood streets every- where --even Evergreen Park residents used residential streets throughout the rest of Palo Alto. The point was that the streets belonged to everyone --everyone paid taxes, and it was not fair to have streets for only those who lived on therm. It could not be both ways --everyone had to share. He urged the adoption of the motion. �,.. Marilyn Mayo, 404 Oxford, said she was very concerned about gov- ernmental process. She hoped that the Council acted on the proce- dure recommended by the P&P Committee, and attended the meeting to be sure. She was concerned because at the beginning of the P&P Committee meeting, speakers were asked to keep within, the general ideas, speak regarding the concept of the entire neighborhood. and not to repeat one another. Those who were concerned about being at the meeting until 1:00 a.m. did not waste time repeating each other and, therefore, not everyone present spoke, When she heard comments like. 15 people spoke in support : and 14 spoke in opposition. she was concerned because of those who did not speak. Tonight the Barron Park issue kept coming up. She hoped the Council would complete the Evergreen Park matters before starting on something else. Will Beckett, 4189 Baker Avenue, Chairperson of the Barron Park Traffic Committee, . said his committee had been involved in traffic studies internally _i n" Barron. Park and had been talking with the City for greater than back" to 1979. There had been several turn- overs in the Barron Park Traffic Committee, and' fear members had been involved since the beginning. Many Councilmembers : could remember when the _traffic committee was formed, and the fact that he had been involved: since . the beginning. Many ' things had been accomplished over the years, but the intersections at El Camino had been an issue for a long time. The Barron Park Association 2 7.5.9 12/13/82 i did not want to set Council priorities, but requested that .a date be set to begin the Barron Park Traffic Study especially since they had waited at least three years. He said that the Barron Park Association knew what the problems were since they had been studying the problem for a long time. He did not believe the study would take that long, the only problem being the fact that Barron Park had substandard streets in terms of size and curbing. Audrey Poulter, 1731 Park Boulevard, said that although the Ever- green Park residents were grateful that over 100 tickets had been issued as of November 30, 19€I2, the speeding continued in their neighborhood. It appeared that more speeding was being done by smaller trucks --particularly City pickup trucks, and Jerry's - Towing and Service Auto --in addition to the ones mentioned at the P&P meeting. With. the new truck sign at Park Boulevard and El Camino, fewer barge trucks had been on their streets, and another truck sign would be placed on Park Boulevard near the Co-op. They were pleased to get the first signs so quickly. She said that Pacific Ready Mix, Caps Cement, unmarked gasoline trucks, and unmarked large trucks still used their streets rather than El Camino, and late at night, large truce:s still cut through Ever- green Park. The traffic survey in Evergreen Park revealed . that the majority of residents were concerned about reducing through traffic, and the possibility of being ticketed had not deterred people from using those streets. Some solutions presented to the P&P Committee included Park Avenue being made into bike lane, Southgate and Evergreen Park being considered as one, and Park Boulevard near El Camino being closed. The residents were open to other suggestions to reduce through traffic in their neighborhood. It was reassuring to knew that Park Boulevard was now on the Police Department's list of priority streets, ,and that monitoring on a daily basis would continue. She asked why speeding was con- sidered to be a new phase of the Evergreen Park study. If through traffic was reduced, most speeding would stop. David Schrom, 302 College Avenue, Chairperson of Evergreen Park Traffic Committee, said he was discouraged and represented a lot of other people who decided to stay home tonight because they were too discouraged after three years of letters and meetings. He said that there were 60 people from Evergreen Park at the last meeting who advocated the elimination of through traffic in Ever- green Park. After taking a poll of the neighborhood as was requested by the Committee, 51 percent of the residents cast their vote in favor of complete elimination of through traffic in the neighborhood on behalf of a single plan --not because it was the only plan or the best plan, but because it was what everyone agreed on. He .looked at the numbers for Southgate where 33 per- cent of the residents agreed on a plan after the trial of several plans, and 51 percent in Evergreen Park agreed on a plan without any trial, They asked,: the Council to consider setting a policy objective that specifically called for the elimination of traffic in Evergreen Park by a fixed date at some point in the future. That was done knowing that the request was unusual , and : at the same time they felt that :without such definite numbers and dates, they were left to anticipate an endless growth of traffic and an endless decline of the things they appreciated. They looked around ,the City and wondered how many neighborhoods were similarly situated and being asked to tolerate more and more. If the Council did nothing tonight except approve the staff .recommenda- tion, the, Evergreen Park Association would continue -to wonder. He asked the Council to take some action about where the floor was. T .ey felt the request ,. was fair, and a request that would give other ` neighborhoods gui dance when considering their own , circum- stances. furthcr, it would provide the staff with guidance when the planned what kindsOf measures were':appropriate. The Associa- tion was indifferent to what methods were used, but preferred those that -were least inconvenient to the residents of the neigh- borhood. They. wanted the throPgh tra-ffi c to be el iminat id.. 2 7 6 0 12/13/82 Ron Sutton, 384 Stenford , emphasized the idea of through traffic in their neighborhood. Their neighborhood was small, and he believed there should be some vehicle available to modernize the neighborhood. The fact that the neighborhood was old and restricted to its street pattern did not mean they should fall victim to any traffic patters that the street pattern would allow. He suggested that a way be found to modernize the neighborhood, and that the neighborhood be allowed to close the streets it saw fit. 1 i Renee Stapleton, 214 Oxford Avenue, thanked .the P&P Committee for the time and thought put into the Evergreen. Park traffic problem. Although she did not feel that the suggested mechanisms would actually discourage traffic on Park Boulevard, it was a beginning. Further, she thanked Carl Stoffel for his work and suggestions, and for following through on such things as putting the sign at the end of California Avenue to direct people to the Oregon path. She did not want to see the Council put off any further action for a couple of years while , completing Barron Park. She realized Barron Park had problems, but said it was ridiculous to have a. two-year study and then do nothing about it. Geoffrey Thompson, 41b Oxford, asked the Council to continue with action in Evergreen Park and not switch to Barron Park. He said he started out as being firmly against barriers in Evergreen Park, but after witnessing the City's inaction in terms of controlling the development of California Avenue and its respective impact, he felt there was no choice in order to protect the quality of the neighborhood. He believed the residents had the right to a quiet neighborhood, and he was offended by Mr. Press who suggested that the streets not be cl osed. He supported hi s nei ghborhood receiving assurances as to the level of traffic to be expected as a limit. The traffic level was not terribly excessive now, but he did not see anything but growth for the future, and wanted a con- trol mechanism .i n place before it became a terrible problem. Mayor Eyerly believed that the recommendation of the P&P Committee was good. The instruction for staff to come up with the necessary structural and enforcement techniques to reduce the speed in Ever- green Park streets w*s a viable one, as was asking CalTrans to do whatever was possible to coordinate the signal s' at E1 Camino at Park Boulevard, Stanford Avenue and California Avenue. He strongly supported the Committee recommendation. Councilmember Cobb believed there were two overwhelming reasons for going ahead with the items. There were serious problems of through traffic in Evergreen Park that must, be addressed,,. and the effort needed to be coordinated with the . California Avenue Study and the activities in that area in order to deal with the area as a whole and complete it on a reasonable schedule. He thought something needed to be done to get the Barron Park study off dead venter, but preferred to deal with it as a separate issue at a different meeting. AMENDMENT: Coanci 1 member Cobb mowed, seconded by. Menzel, that the words 'land through traffic" be added after the word 'speed' ` in the first part of the motion Counci1member Levy said he was concerned that the staff report implied that it would take a new phase of the Evergreen Par's Study to implement the reduction of speed particularly on Park. Avenue. He asked what was envisioned in terms of time, what elements could be implemented directly, and what elements would return'. to Council. Mr. Schreiber responded that there would be two major methods of trying to reduce speed- -oneof which was the enforcement of speed units, whi Ch had ; al ready begun. The other woul d be to make modifications. thin the roadway itself --striping, flower pots, `r any number of other - structural ch-anges. Those structural types :o 2.7 6 1 12/13/82 changes would have to come back _ to the Council. In terms of the "next phase," staff intended to indicate that the development of those techniques would be worked on by staff and the neighborhood, with staff returning to Council with a recommendation. Councilmember Levy asked when the recommendation for structural changes would return to the Council. Mr. Schreiber responded that it would probably take until the end of next summer because unless the community was carefully involved, working with the neighborhood on those types of issues, in terms of what intersections would be modified, and where cer- tain other changes could be made, could result in another lack of consensus or another .set of disagreements. Staff wanted to make a careful effort to in4ol ve the community and bring that forward to the Council for consideration. Councilmember Levy said he could not suggest another way to pro- ceed, . but was dismayed that they were talking about another nine months before even considering what to do. The amendment spoke to reducing speed and through traffic, and he asked how that was seen as changing the thrust of the original motion. Mr. Schreiber responded that it was not a major change. Staff sensed from the Committee meeting that the concern was with through traffic. Taking longer to get through Evergreen Park would become a disincentive to through traffic. He understood from the amendment that staff would not go back and look at bar- riers and more of those types of plans. They were looking at reducing through, traffic within the confines of the committee recommendations on structural modifications and enforcement of speed limits. Councilmember Levy said he was comfortable with the amendment and motion, but uncomfortable with the timeframe. Councilmember Klein was concerned that barriers were sneaking in' by looking at the actual words of the motion, as proposed for amendment. tie did not want that at this time. The key language was that the staff was instructed to come up with the necessary structural and enforcement techniques to reduce speed and through traffic. Barriers were structural, and he wanted it clarified that barriers were not part of the study at the present time. AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT: Councilmember Klein moved, seconded by Bechtel, that after the word "structural' in the first part of the motion, that (not including barriers)" also be added. Councilmember Cobb said he believed that the discussions in the P&P Committee clearly established that other ways, short of bar- riers, would be looked -at first. He believed that the amendment to the amendment was .not necessary given staff's understanding as well as his own. Vice Mayor Bechtel commended staff for their _quick ;. response . to the Committee's recom endation regarding enforcement of. speed laws., She did not believe that the first amendment was necessary because the way to reduce through traffic Wass to increase travel times and make it more difficult to get through. Staff was asked to work with CalTrans to see if the >traffic signals could operate in such a way that El Camino traffic would;: move more rapidly and, there- fore, be more attractive than Park Boulevard or the other residen- tial streets of Evergreen Park --including the Ash, Stanford and Birch shortcuts which had been described. Further, she believed, as a former resident of Barron Park, she was aware of the traffic concerns there, but felt the Council= needed to finish one study before beginning another. She was appalled at the possibility of the study taking : an .additional nine to twelve months She believed that some of the techniques for reducing speed which had been described as "structural'," col d be done tomorrow without any 2 " Z• 6 2 12/13/82 opposition from the nei ghborhood-- such as edge stri pi ng to reduce apparent lane widths. She could not imagine anyone being opposed to that, but flower pots on the other hand would take more discus- sion. She hoped that the entire package would not be delayed, and that parts of it could be done quickly prior to resolution of the more controversial sections. She cold only support the amendment with the understanding that they were trying to reduce through traffic by making the route less attractive, but that permanent barriers were not being considered at this time. Mr. Schreiber said that staff would move ahead if mechanisms such as striping could be done rapidly and without Council authori za-. ti on. The time estimate related to .physical modifications, and with that, staff would be required to juggle three factors --1) a limited amount of available staff time; 2) a large number of other assignments-- particularly the California Avenue Study which staff did not want to delay in order to rush into doing work in the neighborhood; and 3) the need to work with the neighborhood espe- cially with regard to structural modifications. Those changes would alter peoples' driving patterns, what they saw out their livingroom window, and how their intersection was treated. Staff bel ieved it was necessary to work with the community before coming back. Counciimember Fazzino said the process had moved along at a "snail's pace." Two years ago, when the Council decided on the Cox -Keller project, a commitment was made to the neighborhood to quickly resolve the traffic problem. At that time, Council pon ti f icated greatly about how the City would move in and resolve the problem as quickly as possible even though any effort to immedi- ately enact a measure was rejected. He bel ieved that the P&P Committee recommendation, if immediately implemented, could begin to end the through traffic problem even if the commitment to do so was at least a year late. There was no question that the issue was tied into development in the California Avenue area, which was why the Council committed itself to traffic mitigation measures as a part of the Cox-Rel 1 er project approval. Further, there was no question that the parking problem would be exacerbated when the new office building occupi ed the old, gas station site on Cambridge Avenue. He hoped the California Avenue planning study would find measures to reduce development in that area which. had much to do with the through traffic problem along that corridor. He applauded the El Camino measures, but bel ieved that only the kinds of structural and enforcement techni ques all tided to at the P&P Comm ttee roeeti ng coral d real i sti call y., begin to al 1 eviate the through traffic problem. He understood the intent of Council - member Kl ei n' s proposed amendment, but felt i.t would be .ea -sy to take the, plunge and swear .off the posslbil.ity of barriers forever. He did not necessarily support, barriers, but was not .as afraid of them as many other people since . he lived in ,College. Terrace and barriers worked there. He believed it would be inappropriate and unfairly limit the staff to move ahead and tell them that Council and staff could never consider the :possibility of barriers. He hoped that Council member Kl ei n' s amendment would be rejected. He bel ieved _that. Council member Cobb's amendment was clear in terms of the kinds of:. long- term onforcemer.t: and structural measures that needed to be taken in the areas, and that staff should- have a run at it. He had little confidence in staff's second report, and. said it was unfortunate .: that. the City ; staff had set one neighbor- hood against ,:another, in: -terms of ti*eframe and ,.ability to have their problems resolved. The Council : had :gone around .and around on the issues in Barron Park, and he believed they should have been resolved two years ago. The Court_#1 had been around and around with the neighborhood in Evergreen Park, and he believed those problems : could have been handled by the Planning' Department - long before the downtown permit system which had taken so much staff time over the past.._ one and one-half years. ` The issues were on the table with regard to Evergreen Park, and -he agreed that the measures could be implemented as quickly as possible He believed it was a bureaucratic : problem that staff would need an additional 1 nine months to a year to begin implementation of the project, and only if Council held off on another neighborhood planning project in town. He believed that was ridiculous when considering the actual work before the staff with respect to Evergreen Park and the Barron Park neighborhood. He encouraged the Council to support the P&P Committee recommendation --.which was a start —and to support Councilmember Cobb's .very reasonable amendment. Councilmember Fletcher said that the original recommendation from the P&P Committee made it plain that through traffic must be dis- couraged by making it more cumbersome to traverse the route. She believed the amendments were unnecessary, and that staff had the message as was seen by the various alternatives outlined. She thanked Mr. Beckett for his graciousness in letting the study go ahead, and the Barron Park Study be delayed again. She was also aware of how many years that study had been around, and hoped both studies would be completed expeditiously. Councilmember Renzel believed that the P&P Committee recommenda- tion was good, and that the amendment proposed by Councilmember Cobb was al so appropriate. She believed the staff report clearly outlined what was expected in terms of physical techniques for reducing speed, and hopefully through traffic, and did not wish to limit staff from considering the possibility of a barrier if it were necessary at some location. She would vote against the amendment to amendment, favor the amendment, and support the main motion. AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT PASSED by a vote of 5-4,•Fazzino, Renzel, Bechtel, Cobb voting "no." AMENDMENT AS MENDED PASSED by a vote of 7-2, Bechtel, Fletcher voting "no." MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED unanimously. ITEM #8. GRECIAN HEALTH SPA TRIAL RESOLUTION PERMIT PARKING Mayor Eyerly asked how many families were impacted by the Spa parking on residential streets. Assistant Transportation Engineer Carl Stoffel responded that at the worst time probably about the 15 to 20 families closest to the Spa both on Park Boulevard and Park Avenue were impacted. MOTION: Councilmember Klein moved, seconded by Fazzino, to implement the trial residential permit parking program in the vicinity of ' the Grecian health . Spa authorized by Council on September 27, 1.982, and adopt the ;,Budget Amendment Ordinance and the Resol uti oval Permit Parking Ordinance. ORDNANCE entitled `OR111NiNCE OF : THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY ALT® AMENDING THE BUDGET ,FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1982-83 TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR A TRIAL RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PARKING - PROGRAM NEAR THE GRECIAN HEALTH SPA" ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled °ORDINANCE OF THE tanuti. ur "i iE Ci rr r TAUT ALTO ADDING CHAPTER ; 10.46 TO. THE PALO ALTO ,MUNICIPAL .CODE ESTABLISHING ` -A RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PARKING AREA IN CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE SOUTNGATE. AND EVERGREEN PANK NEIGHBORHOODS'' Councilmember Renzel asked if colored ink osr, number stamping would be used to; keep the permits from being duplicated easily. Mr. Stoffel said that nothing soph i stocated was planned for the temporary program. It would be si mf l er, to the type of temporary_. Permits issued now for people to park in the City Hall lots or for . 2 '7 6 4 12/13/82 1 1 the City's construction people, and would probably be magic marker ink on cards. Staff was working on the assumption, given the. relatively small size of the - area and the fact that most of the homeowners had a vested interest in keeping the permits safe, that the program would be almost self -enforcing, Councilmember Renzel asked if the program would be easy to evalu- ate if the temporary permits proliferated. Mr. Stoffel said the program was also self -enforcing because resi- dents could see who was parking in front. If, for some reason, an invalid permit was used, and a car parked everyday in front of someone's house and never received a ticket, a resident would won- der why that person parked . everyday, went to the spa, and never received a ticket. Those kinds of complaints would be received by the Police Department for action. Councilmember Renzel said that the program, as structured, had an automatic 50 -day expiration date, and if the CoUnci 1 wished to continue the program, there would be a 45 -day gap for the program to continue. She asked if the program could be structured for the 60 -day expiration, with a 45 -day winding down period ,so that either way a new ordinance could be enacted to provide for a con- tinuous operation of the program. City Attorney Diane Lee said that when implementation of the pro- gram was discussed, part of the problem was that the ordinance was written and structured to be a temporary program. That mechanism would probably be recommended for change, and the question of fe.:s, etc. would need to to be addressed for anything beyond that duration. Having the ordinance "sunset" after 60 -days was intend- ed to allow consideration of some of those factors, and how to structure the program on a permanent basis. The sunset could be changed to 9O days, but the Transportation Department and Police Department might foresee some problems in doing that. Councilmember Renzel said that if the proposed program were suc- cessful, the Council would want it to stay in continuous opera- tion. The details regarding passes, etc., would have to be worked out by staff, and she did not think the Council would be concerned about what color paper they were printed on, etc. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Bechtel, ` to amend Section 4 of the ordinance for it to expire after 105 days with Council revi e+ at the end of 60 days. Councilmember Klein recognized Councilmember Renzel's point, but believed the Council needed a period of time in which to analyze. the program, and the neighborhood could operate for a 45 -day period without the ordinance in order for the City to do so. He pointed out that the amendment should include some additional money because the money mentioned in the staff report and budget amendment were designed to cover only 60 days. If more money were not appropriated for enforcement, the ordinance would be rentered meaningless. He would oppose the amendment, City Manager Bill Zaner pointed' out that should Council decide to. extend the ordinance to 105 days, there was no way to shut off the ordinance, and it would be enforced until the ordinance expired. Director of Planning. and Community Environment Ken Schreiber . fol 1 owed up by ' saying that = i f the amendment passed, the'budget ordi- nance would, have to be modified to cover enforcement by. the Police Department. Councilmember :Witherspoon -sai=d she was worried abort:` money. The permit system would Cost`$1,000 for ,60 days, and the ticket'. reve- nues would „not be much. She asked how much the City would be out - of -pocket' -=annually. Af -'the permit program, were instituted 'perma- nently. Mr, Zaner pointed out that there would be no permit revenue during the trial period. Council member Witherspoon said she realized that, but even if the program were instituted permanently, the revenues would be dimin- ished. She asked about the costs annually if the program were in- stituted as outlined? Mr. Zaner advised that a revenue estimate had not been done for an entire year. He pointed out that permit costs . normally did not cover total enforcement costs .because the price of the permits would be placed quite high. The permit costs normally covered the costs of issuing them. Counci1member Witherspoon asked if it would be fair to . say that the program would cost $20,000 per' year more or less? Since no one knew how much the program would cost, she believed her point was well . taken. While she empathized for the 40 households with the intolerable Grecian Health Sp.a problem, she could not in good conscience go ahead with the program. She believed there were other neighborhoods in other areas of town with comparable prob- lems, and she was not convinced that the program would make the problem go away. Counci1member Kenzel clarified that a 105 -day ordinance, with a 60 -day review, would remain in effect and would be enforced. She asked if the ordinance could be rescinded after 60 days, if the Council decided not to continue with the program because it was unsuccessful. Ms. Lee responded that an ordinance repealing an ordinance would take 45 days to become effective after first reading. David Gleason, President of the Evergreen Park Neighborhood Asso- ciation, 396 Stanford, urged the Council to approve the resolu- tion. He reminded the Council that the matter had been before them several tines, an.d he hesitated to estimate how much the problem had already cost the City. If there was a better solu- tion, it had not been suggested. He said he would personally ,be appal led if the resolution aid not pass. He realized that finances were a consideration, but the problem had been a thorn in everyone's side. He believed the program could resolve the prob- lem, and urged the Councilmembers .,to .give it a, .try. Audrey Stewart, 1731 Park Boulevard, said the neighborhood was pleased with the trial residential parking plan_ for the Grecian Health Spa The parking problems of blocked driveways, litter, noise, strangers in the area, and no parking for the residents continued to be a problem six days a week. She said that every- time the spa had a new membership drive, the neighbors were inun- dated with __cars and careless drivers. During peak hours, it was discouraging . that only five to six cars .were -parked on the west side of El Camino. The fire lane inside the spa garage was con- stantly blocked by cars during peak hours, and patrons seldom responded to pages. She asked if it would be possible to have the initial warning period reduced to one week rather than two? The spa could take the responsibility of posting signs since they did not encourage their members to park - oh El Camino. She asked if more than one warning to an individual would result in a ticket? She was concerned - about how long it would take ' for the trial to begin, and whether "a new ordinance would be required after the 60 -day trial.. Staff required four weeksto evaluate the program, and she asked if the evaluation could commence before the trial time ended. She asked if the spa could move its;;garage entrance/ exit to El, tamino in ' order to make the corner of El Camino and.;. Park. Boulevard safer and less cong€sted. During peak hours, she suggested that no right turn be allowed onto Park Boulevard - from El caw he. The Police Department had been good about responding to the .neighborhoods problems, but were busiest from: 4:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. when the residents needed them most. She hoped the 2 7 6:b 12/13/82 Council would adopt the program and that the residents near the Grecian Health Spa would be given a few hours of relief from the noise and parking problems. They appreciated all the hard work done by staff. Ed Turley, represented the Grecian Health Spa, 1650 Zenker Road, and said he was concerned about the comments made by Council - member Witherspoon and Ms, Poulter. Grecian Health Spas acquired its present location in July, 1981, and was completely unaware of the problems associated with the property and the European Health Spas. The courtesies of Mr. Stoffel made them aware of the prob- lems, and he personally met with representatives from the neigh- borhood and the City. Over the past 18 months, the spa had com- mitted to Mr. Stoffel and the neighborhood residents, to dis- tribute a map indicating the areas recommended for parking-- pri- marily the west side of El Camino north of Park Avenue. Further, the spa agreed to post signs in its facility identifying that parking area and establishing a good neighborhood policy. The spa printed maps, and saw to it that every member received one when a membership program was purchased. Signs were posted in the facil- ities, and a sign was posted in the garage with an area pointing to the left where additional parking was available. The spa con- tinually made announcements .throughout the course of their busi- ness day to the patrons many of which were residents of Palo Alto. Further, he provided Ms. Poulter and Mr. Stoffel with, his office telephone number as wel 1 as his home tel ephone number. He person- ally committed to Ms. Poulter and Mr. Stoffel that if any of the spa's employees parked in an area designated .to be "off- limits," they would be terminated. He said he had received no telephone calls from anyone other than Ms. Poulter, and 60 percent or less of the calls he received over the last 18 Months related to park- ing. He attempted to convey to Mr. Stoffel and the residents that the spa recognized the problem and was doing their best to work with it, but it appeared that no matter what was done with respect to their efforts, feeble as they might have been, the residents were not satisfied. A problem existed in the entire area, and there was a tremendous amount of traffic. The spa was a commer- cial business, with a significant capital investment in the facil- ity. While they realized that their patrons were the cause of some of the problems, he believed the ordinance was clearly de- signed to single out a one business enterprise within the area. He was aware of other permit parking programs implemented= in the City, but believed that the Evergreen Study only addressed one business --the Grecian Health Spa. Other areas in downtown Palo Alto had much the same probl em, but the same type of a program had not ;been implemented. He concurred with the need for a comprehen- sive solution to the problem, and did not mind being a part of the program. He was concerned, however, that the Grecian Health Spa was the only business in the area being singled -out. He pointed out that the estimated cost was 57,000 during the first 60 days, and assuming those figures were accurate, that would be over $40,000 per year, or $1,000 per household per annum. The members of the Grecian Health Spa were no different than any other parking Public, and he was sure that many-Councilmembers, as well as staff, had found an occasion when they were pressed for time and needed a place to park. The spa could direct its patrons, but could not takethe burden of forcing them to park someplace. The Council's action, if the ordinance was adopted, would have a seri- ous detrimental effect on the spa's business to the point where the spa would have _'to broach the subject df being forced to pro- tect its business and seek some sort of,,in v<active relief. He did not believe the proposal was the solution to a problem which was knowingly widespread within the area, and that as a result of the ordinace, anyone else other than the spa would be impacted. He did . not believe that was fair or '`a . solution. The _ ,spa had put forth a sincere effort internally to try and accommodate the > people in the area,' and he was sorry about their location. He ` wished the spa . had 150 parking places because the spa had more important things to do in their world than trying to accommodate the neighbors. He realized it was a problem, but everyone had those types of problems, and sometimes, one :-had -to try and live within the boundaries of. them._ He was not beyond eseekiee some sort of solution, and asked if the spa would receive any of-- the permits. The spa was a property owner, and had frontage on Park Aveneee He asked if the City was -talking about funding $7,000 for a period of 60 days, and if so, what solution would it provide other than the harm it would do to the Grecian Health Spa. In how many other residential areas In the City of Palo Alto had tuch _an ordinance been proposed. The -spa had tried to bring the problem to the attention of its patrons, and he strongly . urged that the Council review the legal ramifications. of such an ordinance, and at least discuss it. It would put the spa in such a corner that it could not continue. Ms. Lee said it was incumbent upon her to advise the Council that the ordinance did not address a particular business. It was ad- dressed to a particular area with a problem. The Council :was authorized, under Section 22507 of the California Vehicle Code; to adopt such an ordinance specifically. She believed it was an ap- propriate and valid ordinance for the Council to address. Councilmember Levy said he believed that the amendment contained an appropriate time limit. Any trial program needed at least a 60 -day effective period in order to be evaluated. It took the general public, who was much :less aware of the problems, a while to accommodate themselves, and he believed that 60 days was a fair amount of time. If, at the end of 60 days, the Council went back to the status quo whi 1 e evaluating the program, and then decided that the program was worth continuing and reinstituted it 45 days later, tremendous consternation would have been caused to the af- fected residents and users by starting, stopping and starting again. He believed that 105 days would enable the City to insti- tute the program and evaluate it while it was still ongoing. If the Council then decided to keep it going or abolish it, it could be done. He believed that was the proper way to implement a trial program with the least disruption. Extending the program to 105 days would necessitate some extra- expense, but it would be minor. If the program happened to be less enforced during the second 45 -day period while it was being evaluated, so be it. He believed that in terMs of disruption to everyone involved, it would be better to have a 105 -day program. Mayor.. Eyerly did not support either ordinance. The figures pre- sented by staff were for the trial period of 50 days. The $7,000 figure included $3,000 worth of signs, and he estimated that the yearly :cost would be in the neighborhood of $20,000 to $25,000, dependent somewhat upon the permit income. He believed it was .in- appropriate for that type of expense -tor one neighborhood to came basically from the City's General Fund. It might help those limited number of residents immediately impacted, but in turn would disrupt the parking of residents: who lived a bit further away. He believed the ordinance would set a precedent, if enacted, and the Council would hear about the same problem in other neighborhoods which abutted commercial buildings and commer- cial zoning. He did not believe the proposal - was the proper way to attack the problems of parking for residents abutting those types of commercial buildings. Most of the residents concerned about the parking probably ptrchased their horses after the fact- after the commercial entity was there. He did not blame the resi- dents for wanting to improve their neighborhood and., do away with commercial parking on their streets, ;,out believed the Council needed to address whether they wanted -those - businesses to contin- ue, or whether the business areas abutting some of the residential homes should be rezoned . and amortized out. ` He would not support the motion or amendment Councilmemher Fletcher said she would wholeheartedly support the program If ' she believed it would work. She believed : it;Agoul d help .,only those limited properties very close to the Grecian Health Spa, and the parking problem would move. The program would then 1 1 have to be expanded with a commensurate increase in necessary funding to address the problem in a meaningful way. She did not believe ft was realistic to believe that those residents not now impacted would accept the permit program. She would not support the ordinance. 1 1 Councilmember Renzel said .she supported the program, and urged that the amendment also be supported. As best as she could deter- mine, the only ongoing costs _ were those of enforcement of cer .the initial GO -day period. The field surveys were related to deter- mining whether the program was working. The permit administration was the one-time issuance of permits, and unless there were some sales or changes of ownership, it should not require any addition- al outlay. She believed they were talking about a $ 1,200 cost for the additional 45 -day protection if the Council chose to go ahead with the permanent program. She ,urged her colleagues to support the amendment and main motion. Councilmember Klein said he was convinced that the amendment was appropriate. Councilmembers Klein and Fazzino incorporated amendment into main motion. Mayor Eyerly advised that .the budget amendment and Municipal Code change would be voted on separately. FIRST PART OF MOTION ADDING CHAPTER 10.46 TO THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE PASSED by a vote of 5-4, Levy, Eyerly, Fletcher, Witherspoon voting "no." Mayor Eyerly asked what would happen if the budget amendment ordi- nance failed. Mr. Zaner said the ordinance would still be enforced. Councilmember Fletcher said that at the end of the 60 -day period, assuming the budget amendment failed, the cost would expand because the area would be expanded. She asked how far Mr. Zaner could go without a special budget amendment. Mr. Zaner responded that staff had sufficient funds to implement. the ordinance --get it in place, put up the signs, and begin the enforcement. At that points if Council did not provide additional funds, the ordinance would be enforced along with all other traf- fic ordinances at the same level of service. Staff would enforce the ordinance as it did all other ordinances adopted . by . Council. Council had provided him with the authority to put the ordinance into effect --to put up signs, painting, striping, and get. the per- mits moving. Those funds addressed by the budget amendment could be handled outside of the budget amendment if necessary. SECOND PART OF MOTION TO ADOPT ` A BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE FAILED by a vote of ' 5-4, Levy, Eyerly, Fletcher, Iitherspoon II voting `no. Councilmember Fazzino clarified that if the Council moved ahead with the trial proposal, Mr. Zaner would ' spend money from his dis- cretionary budget. -If,.: at the end of the trial period, Council. did not approve the budget amendment ordinance, the money would not be there_ for ai permanent program. In essence, unless a Coun- cilmember changed his or her mind, they were talking about an ex- penditure of dollars for a trial program which could likely not become permanent Mr. Zaner Said that ;was correct: Councilmember Fazzino ` said he had, always supported the program, but was not interested in wasting, City dollars. He did not .2 7 6.9 12/3,.3/82 believe it was fair to spend $7,000 on a trial program unless the money was there for the permanent programs. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Eyerly, recon- sideration of the the ordinance adding Chapter 10.46 to the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Councilmember Cobb said he, would not support the motion to recon- sider because the results of the trial might be so impressive that one of the four Counci lmembers who voted negatively might be per- suaded to change their minds. Councilmember Renzel said she concurred with Councilmember Cobb. Councilmember Klein asked what type of vote would be required if it were on the books, and the City Manager wanted to put some money in the budget for enforcement during the normal budget peri- od next Spring. He believed it would only take five votes to pass if it were part of the normal budget process. Mr. Zaner said that was correct. Councilmember Klein did not believe that Councilmember Fazzino's concern was well taken. He urged Councilmember Fazzino to recon- sider his position because the worst that could happen would be an ordinance on the books which would not be funded for three or four months, but could be in the 1983-84 fiscal year with the current votes. The gap period would be unfortunate, but hardly fatal to the program. He believed that if the merits of the program were there, it should be supported. Councilmember Levy said he was concerned about whether the program would be properly evaluated. He asked if there would be any change in the evaluation of the program and in the reports back to the Council given the fact that the budget amendment was not passed. Mr. Zaner said that staff would proceed with the program just as if the budget amendment was adopted. Councilmember Levy asked if there would be any change in anything else being done.. Would the $7,000 come out of some other pro- gram. Mr. Zaner said there would be no effect on other programs. A bud- get amendment was needed for two reasons: 1) the cost was sepa- rate and unusual, and 2) it was the: leading edge of a great cost beyond the City Manager's authority. He said his authority ex- tended to. $10,000, and the program would use up most of that authority. - Once they reached the $ 10,000 limit, Council :rust ap- propriate the funds. Councilmember Fazzino requested that{, the motion to reconsider be withdrawn. Mayor Fverl y, the second to the motions said the situation :was one of not having the necessary six votes to pass the budget amendment ordinance.. He believed that if the Council wasgoing to activiate a program, they should be willing to vote approval on the budget amendment ordinance, which meant six votes. He believed it was foolish to enact an ordinance to take expense without those six votes. MOTION TO RECONSIDER "YITHDRAWM Councilmember Fazzino asked if it would be possible to allow the trial project to begin three months before the commencement' of the new fiscal year in order to alleviate the loss of funding - prob- lem, Ms. Lee said it would be possible to begin the program in March or April. Council passed the ordinance, .and normally it would come back for second_ reading in two weeks, and become effective 45 -days following that date. The ordinance could be changed to provide an effective date. 1 Mayor Eyerly asked if there would be an opportunity at second reading for Councilmembers to change the effective dates, etc. MOTION: Counci1member Fazzino moved, seconded by Fletcher, rec©nsi derati on of the ordi nance adds Fig Chapter 10.46 to the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Councilmember Faizino clarified that he did not want to start a program, stop in March, and start again in July. He wanted the program to . be 'started once, and have smooth sailing and funding for the program. To do otherwise would be a waste of City money. He wanted to eliminate the program tonight, and, have the program start in the Spring, continue for three months, and have the five votes necessary in June or July to continue the program. That appeared to him to be the responsible way to go. Councilmember Klein believed that the City was being put to extra expense by bringing up the matter again in the Spring. He urged that once the motion was back on the floor, an amendment be made to specifically set the effective date. MOTION TO RECONSIDER PASSED BY a vote of 5-4, Renzel , Eyerly, Cobb, Klein voting "no." Vice Mayor Bechtel said the ordinance . was again before Council. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fazzino _ moved, seconded by Bechtel , that the effective date of the ordinance adding Chapter 10.46 to the Palo Alto Municipal Code be March 15, 1983. AMENDMENT PASSED by a vote- of 7-2, Eyerly, Witherspoon voting 'no." MOTION ADOPTING THE ORDINANCE AS AMENDED passed by a vote of 5-4, Lucy, Eyerly, Fletcher, Witherspoon voting 'no." ITEM #9, WORK PROGRAM FOR CITY COUNCIL ASSIGNMENT TO CONSIDER A Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber said that the land use, comprehensive plan amendment assignment tied in with the - issues - that came up earlier with respect to the. Grecian Health Spa. Staff ..intended that the matter be referred to the Planning Commission. A number of work items had to be done, and the Comprehensive Plan change would have .a lower priority than follow up to current assignmentss such as, the College Terrace Study,, Downtown Retail, California" Avenue Study and the disposi- tion of school sites, Staff recommended that if Council directed that a study of the area be initiated, it would be placed in one of the secondary .priority groups. Staff understood : that Council intended -staff to start with, the, spa property, . extend. down Et` Camino, taking all the commercial frontage to Stanford Avenue, and not go beyond Stanford --on one side, and not. pick up the,:. service commercial property on the other tide .:'of :.Park:. Boulevard, Mayor Eyerly.:asked if ;it- was: logical for the thrust ' of :the motion and, staff study to be- -AO-- protect -.the rsesldenti al areas and <z stop the= rezoning at Stanford." Me= believed it would be more -logical tor- the rezoning :to, go to College lair~, Stere ter Si dthat i ` or rati.- desl red that the ern#"re area be l_oolted dt :: 4n° terms of, ,,t lee" residenti-or; toarmerzi-al interface, .: it would be most logi:caah to _go=- to _College and" t_o .pick :up the Week`s ,property'<ons the 2.0t her side of -Perk Boulevard. 2 3 -7'1 12/13/82! Corrected 3/14/83 1 1 Mayor tyerly said he -believed it was logical to take in a larger area for the study. Councilmember_Renael said that when she made her initial motion, ft was with respect, primarily, to the Grecian Health Spa, and it was expanded by other members of the Council She believed that Stanford Avenue was a logical stopping point because a =traffic signal was there which divided the traffic flows and patterns as they affected the neighborhood, and which made. a difference as to where traffic was inclined to enter a neighborhood. Since it was unlikely that the land uses would change in the - area, Council should put the matter in a Group. 3 - Time Available Class. MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Fletcher, that the study be given "Class 3 Time Available" priority, MOTION PASSED unanimously. ITEM 110, BICYCLE BOULEVARD DEMONSTRATION STUDY EVALUATION Cliff Chambers 1837 Bryant Street, said he supported the Bryant Street Bicycle Boulevard. He believed it met the objectives of keeping a steady state of traffic in the area while increasing bicycle usage. He believed it provided an opportunity for alter- native modes, both downtown and of the Southern Pacific depot, and was generally a good idea. There was al of of concern about speeding on the street initially, and about the bicyclists safety. Those had not been problems in the area, and he fully supported the staff recommendations to continue the bicycle boulevard. James Yurchenco, 4102 Southerland supported the bicycle boule- vard.. . He lived in south Palo Alto and used the boulevard every day to get to work.. He believed the idea was good, and those interested in putting in more stop signs on the street would defeat the purpose of the bike boulevard. He believed there were more than enough ways for automobiles to get downtown, and that the alternative means of transportation .had proven benefits in terms of reducing energy uses and air pollution. Dave Uggla, Chairman of the Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC), 2235 Raimar, said that as mentioned in the staff report, the PABAC established several .criterion for evaluation of the bicycle boulevard and reviewed the results of the study with respect to them. Based on the established criterion, the Commit- tee found no negative impacts of the boulevard, and significant positive impacts. The Committee supported affirmative :considera- tion of the bike boulevard. He said that if the Council found it desirable to reconsider certain specif y creatures of the bicycle boulevard on the basis of public input, the Committee emphasized that the current implementation and concept shouldnot be lost in the interim. The Committee was willing to work with staff regard- ing any possible changes. _ 0n the other hand, the Committee believed that the bicycle boulevard looked good as -it was. Jim Gibbons, 320 Tennyson Avenue, said he supported the ,concept of the previous speakers in terms of wanting a safe and desirable way for . bicycles to travel. He cycled back and forth .from Stanford University, but did not share the eAthusi asm with regard to the City staff report. He said the date in the report indicated that'. there were 230 bicycles on Bryant, and that the traffic was moved from Middlefield and Alma to Bryant. In:, his opinion, that result was _ commendable,-. however, .tie died .not :_.believe barriers were; ns eded toAccomplish accomplish that result. The same thing could`'be accomplished by: -defining lanes on ; Bryant the same as on .,Cowper‘, and_ little concrete barriers- would make it even .safer. Further, the data collected __to i analyze how wail/ the barriers worked was taken in Nay and October, not in August or Jaeuay.. That data tended to high- 1 igh_t the, conclusion : of tha report.., If the data were taken . in 1 1 August or January, it would be much less persuasive, but those who lived cl oseby the barriers always had the constant hindrance to access, etc. With regard to the bike traffic, he quoted from page 3 of CMR:580:2 that "although bike ridership has thus increased markedly along that route, some weaving through neighborhoods and use of adjacent streets .still occur. Personnel hired to conduct the October bike count specifically noted that many cyclists head- ing toward Palo Alto._ High turned off Bryant after the little bar- rier," Anyone who rode that street on a bicycle would attest to the fact that much of the traffic came off of Lowell , turned right on Bryant, flooded the entire street at Bryant, and went out to Coleridge and turned or Emerson. He liked having the bike lane, but did not understand why it was necessary to devote the entire street to bicycles. Regarding the vehicular count, the staff report did not mention the actual data. A letter to the residents said that the traffic on Tennyson had increased by 300 cars per day.' He said the actual data did not reflect 300 cars per day, but 300 cars in the 12 hour period from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Furthermore, the 300 cars was not taken from zero because there were 500 cars to start with. As a result of the barrier, the net result was that the traffic on Tennyson was now 820. cars in the 12 hour period from 7:00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. That was 70 cars per hour --more than one per minute. Tennyson :was now a major. thor- oughfare in that part of town, and it was not a street designed for that kind of traffic. He urged that the Council consider those facts carefully before proceeding with the staff recommenda- tion. He preferred to see a measurement made with regard to speed as opposed to opinions collected. He believed that vehicles were traveling faster on Bryant, and turned both ways on Tennyson. The report stated on page four, that fewer complaints had been received regarding the increased speeding on Bryant and other neighborhood streets. He believed that the accident probability had increased on Bryant, and that the speeds were higher. He urged that measurements of that fact be made before adopting the staff recommendation. Further, a lack of complaints did not pro- vide an accurate measurement of dissatisfaction regarding access problems. He preferred to see the Council and staff members pro- ceed by offering questionnaires to the affected residents. Those could be responded to by the residents; and the City would receive a more valid assessment of the residents opinions. He was impressed with the increased bike traffic on Bryant, and that it was a. desirable result. He recommended that the present barriers be removed, that conventional techniques be used for defining the bicycle lanes on Bryant, and that those be experimented with for a while to see if they accomplished the same _ ob j,ec ti ves without presenting the residents with the same serious traffic problems. Martin Clinton, 2217 Bryant Street, said that the boulevard appeared to be working well. The - increase in cycling was remark- able considering the relatively short distance of the boulevard and the fact that it did not link any two obvious origin and des- tination points: He asked that the Boulevard, in its present form, be kept in tact, and that emphasis to on extending the boulevard concept and reviewing the details of stop signs and bar- riers. As bicycle use increased, Bryant would become the natural route for theta, and the cars would automatically avoid it. Few motorists liked to drive amongst a large number of bicycles It might well be `that the speeding, which was originally a problem, had dropped simply because there were a lot more bikes on the street. He stressed that' the Council's primary objective should be to increase the ease of use -of bicycles north and south in Palo. Alto. That objective should be kept in mind when considering�:,iny details such as stop signs, etc. He urged that the concept be :extended. Diana Lewiston, 1849 Newell was a member of PAYBAC, and a part time teacher of bicycle education, and said that part of her effort as an instructor in ._bicycle education was to help students understand why Palo ,Alto's bike lanes and sidewalk 'bike_ paths were 2 7 7 3 12/13/82 not safe. She said it was a fundamental design problem that con- tradicted basic traffic principles. The five basic traffic prin- ciples were as follows: 1. Right on the right; 2. Slower , traffic toward the curb --faster traffic nearer the center; 3. At intersections, traffic divided according to direction of travel. Right turning traffic nearer the right curb, straight through traffic in the center of the land, and left turning traffic near the center line. 4. Yield to cross traffic from a minor to a major street or at a stop sign or signal; and 5. Yield when changing your line of travel. _ She said that people who rode bicycles on the sidewalk or who stayed in the bicycle lane to the intersection, but. intended to go straight or turn left, were in the wrong position in relation to other traffic as there was conflict with right turning traffic. The conflict between right turning motorists and straight through cyclists was the single most common accident type in Palo Alto. The benefit of the bicycle boulevard was that the concept of the boulevard eliminated that type of conflict because the cyclists were riding in the traffic lane where they belonged. That factor was the overwhelming reason for retaining the facility. She believed that the average cyclist using the boulevard did not ap- preciate the advantage of using the street as any other vehicle user. They did not think of themselves as vehicle users. Perhaps their main reason for riding on Bryant was that there were fewer stop signs. She believed that installing more stop signs would destroy the nature of the route, and that the unwarranted instal- lation of additional stop signs would do potentially more harm than good because of motorists noncompliance. Dan Epstein, 358 Tennyson Avenue, said he generally agreed with the boulevard concept, but believed there should be other alterna- tives than changing the nature of their streets. His street was becoming a thoroughfare with a large increase in the number of cars, and it was dangerous to the large number of children who were used to playing in the street. He believed the Council should address the large number of cars suddenly flooding Tennyson Avenue. Gouncilmember Fletcher said that minimum impediments made Bayshore Freeway, Alma Street, El Camino, and Middlefield Road the mai n traffic arteries. There were few stop signs and traffic . lights.,,. and those streets were practically impossible for use by the average bicycle rider. Bicyclists_ were drawn. to El .Camino Real. and Middlefield Road for the same reason as cars --because of the limited number of stop signs and traffic lights, but those streets had extremely high bicycle accident rates. Bicycles were rele- gated t=; the streets with .stop signs at every other block, which hindered smooth bicycle riding. Taking out the barriers on Bryant and simply painting in bike lanes would create an automobile speedway The purpose of the barriers was to give a smooth ride, with a minimum of stop signs, and without attracting. automobiles. She saw no other alternative than to have the traffic barriers. NOTION: Coptic i l member Fletcher moved, seconded by Levy, approval of the staff recommendations as follows 1. Designate eryaat Street between ._Churchill ' Avenue and Meadow; Drive as a permanent bike boulevard within the framework = of Palo Alto's adopted bikeways master plan;. 1 1 2 7 7 4 12/13/82 NOTION CONTINUED 2. Authorize continued use of the temporary barriers at Lowell and El Verano until such time as staff is able to return to Council with permanent design details for permanent barriers; 3. Direct staff to work with PABAC to develop an overall plan for a network of bicycle boulevards in Palo Alto within the frame- work of currently established project priorities within the Transporation Services Program of the Transportation Division; and 4. Palo Alto should make application to the Metropolitan Trans- portation Commission for TDA Article 3 funds to construct a new bicycle bridge across Matadero Creek. The existing pedestrian bridge does not conform to state bikeway design standards for bridges with shared pedestrian/bike use. The preliminary cost estiaate for a new ten -foot wide bridge is' $26,000 to $30,000. Staff would need to return to Council with a specific grant proposal prior to submitting an applica- tion to MTC. Counc i l member Fletcher said that the number of bicyclists drawn to the bicycle boulevard in the short period was impressive. When she was in the hospital, one of the nurses who lived on Rengstorff in Mountain View, advised her that she was often tempted to drive to work, but since the bicycle boulevard was implemented, she was so drawn that she left her car at home. She road her bicycle to Stanford Hospital through the streets of Palo Alto. Counc i l member Levy said his personal experience and observation in using Bryant and the cross streets, reflected that the bicycle boulevard concept was successful , and the staff report confirmed his observation. He believed that the benefits of having a bicycle boulevard were that it was safer, quieter, faster, and a more comfortable envircna.ent for the bicyclists. All of the values and benefits were positive to the community. However, the bicycle boulevard disc divert more auto traffic to nearby streets, and it inconvenienced nearby residents who were required to go around barri ers\\ He believed that both disadvantages were rela- tively minor, but appreciated their di scomfbrt to the neighboring residents. A relatively small amount of traffic was diverted to nearby streets, and the traffic counts indicated that those streets were still regarded as neighborhood streets. Regarding the inconvenience for the motorists in going around the barriers and adopting a different route, he recognized that it was an everyday inconvenience, but believed it was relatively small when considering the val ues and benefits which accrued to a large num- ber of residents and students. The street happened to be a well selected one because a large number of students used in when going to Palo Alto High School. He .suggested that the bicycle boulevard be extended both north and south. He believed that when it ended on its northern edge, most bicyclists were going to continue taking Bryant Street up to the downtown areas. There should be a way to continue it on Bryant Street •rather than diverting the traffic to Waverely. Further, special attention should be given to the paving on Bryant Street because a tricyclist sensed ti(e paving more than a motorist. There was a four-way stop sign at Bryant and California Streets, and he believed the stop signs on Bryant Street should be eliminated to make Bryant even easier for the bicyclists. He commended staff for the manner in which the test was conducted, and' heartily endorsed the aduent of a good bike boulevard on Bryant Street. Councilnember Cobb said that Ite , 2 of "III on Page, 6 of CMR 580;2, spoke about the application to do something about the bicycle bridge across Matadero Creek. He understood the language to mean that something should be done, but, yet it was not one of the staff recommendation. :He asked why it was not included. in thi` staff recommendations. 2 7 7 5 12/13/82 Mr. Noguchi said that item probably should have been included in the recommendations, but was not because staff would be returning to the Council anyway with a specific plan for. the application- to the MTC for the funds. At that time, he said Council would have the chance to weigh the merits of that bridge. AMENDMENT: Coancilmember Cobb moved, seconded by Levy, that Palo Alto make the -application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for TDA Article 3 funds to construct a new bicycle bridge. across Matadero Creek. The existing bridge does not con- form to state bikeway design standards for bridges with shared pedestrian/bike use. Thepreliminary cost estimate for a new ten - foot wide bridge is *26,000 to $30,000. Staff would need to re- turn to Council with a specific grant proposal prior to submitting an application to MTC. Counc,ilmember Cobb said that his son used the bridge with a moped, and had commented about the dangers to small children who tried to go to El Carmelo School on the bridge, while people on mopeds went in the other direction. One of his son's friends almost had an accident which involved a small child due to icy conditions. He believed it should be a priority item because mopeds used the nar- row bridge, and it was dangerous to small;, children. Further, calls he had received from people who lived in the neighborhood made a large point of that particular issue. He said there were potential consequences with bicycles not having to stop, but did not know to what extent '];he Council could address them. He believed that some of them presented potential safety hazards, and should be addressed one way or another. It appeared that the City had made for some good short runs for cars between the bar- riers, and residents advised him that vehicular speed had in- creased, and that was in conflict with the entire purpose of the bicycle boulevard to allow bikes to operate like vehicles. Fur- ther, he had been advised that children tended to feel that since the street was theirs, they could meander all over it. When cars tried to go a little faster, and young children on bicycles, with- out the same judgment as an adult bicyclist, used the .entire street- rather than a defined bike lane, a potential safety hazard was created. He asked staff to comment. Mr. Noguchi se i d that regarding " the stop signs, he was concerned about removing the stop sign at Bryant Street and California to the extent that California Avenue was a collector street and was so designated on the Comprehensive Plan. It carried more traffic than Bryant Street, and to put a stop sign on that main street was unusual because a motorist on the main street would believe he had the right of way, and yet would have to, stop and yield to the minor street. That was not a safe traffic engineering measure in his opinion. Regarding speed, measurements were taken south of. Colorado on ..Bryant and the 85th percentile was measured at 30 miles per your`. The average speed was -2.5 miles per,. hour. Councilmember Cobb said that children using the bike boulevard in a certain way and traffic moving at 25 to 35 miles per hour Struck him as being potentially dangerous. It might help to post the bike lane in such a way that both the vehicular and bicycle users understood that it was not the same as a bike lane on a con- ventional street and that they had to conduct the operation of their respective vehicles according. He thought that some unique signing was necessary to get that point across Mr. Noguchi said that regarding the speeds on the street as related to its use for bicyclists, staff found _ that the 85th'per centsle speeds were similar to the other local streets around the area.. He did not, bel ieve that 8ryant> Street., was;, ofmore serious consequence than the other` streets. 1 1 Councilmember Fazzino said he opposed the bicycle boulevard six months ago for many of the same reasons that he still did. He did notbelieve the boulevard promoted coexistence of bicycles and automobiles, which was the basis of an excellent bicycle program over the past ten years, and had caused increased traffic on streets like Tennyson. Although most people found solace in the fact that staff deemed the program a -complete success, he believed that a careful look at the data in tho appendix of the report, would reveal that the program had not been a success. In his opinion, the boulevard was a terrible inconvenience for local neighbors, and many of them had spoken to him during the past few months with clear opposition. The present nature of the boulevard lead bicyclists toward dangerous intersections like Embarcadero and Bryant, and as mentioned by Councilmember Cobb, the bridge problem had been raised as a serious concern by neighbors. Fur- ther, after walking the area and almost being knocked over by a couple of bicycles and one car, it was clear to him that both bicycles and cars were traveling faster which was inappropriate in an urban environment. Given the fact that it was a surburban en- vironment and not a country road, it was important for both bicyclists and automobiles to be forced to stop at stop signs on their voyages throughout the town of Palo Alto, and that was why he believed a bicycle boulevard was inappropriate for the communi- ty. He was strongly opposed to the establishment of bicycle boulevards around town • unless strong support was voiced by neigh- bors in those areas for that kind of action. He did not believe that support was evidenced in the subject area, but rather that it was shoved down the neighbors throats and thus the lingering resentment about the program. He believed that the current boule- vard and the effort to increase boulevards around town flew in the face of the City's bicycle education program the intent of which was to develop a safe system for automobiles and bicycles to travel on the same streets. He woul d oppose the motion to make the program permanent. Vice Mayor Bechtel said the last part of the motion was to direct staff to work with the PABAC to develop an overall plan for a net- work of bicycle boulevards, and she asked if a similar one with barriers, etc. was envisioned. Associate Planner Gayle Likens said staff wanted to keep an open mind when looking at other streets, and wanted to look at each one independently if a network proposal were developed in conjunction with the Bicycle Committee. Staff would look at each route and the appropriate traffic controls measures to be used on that par- ticular route and return to Council with an overall plan, but not necessarily having Bryant as the absolute pattern for future routes. Mice Mayor Bechtel said she had a problem with the recommendation, and also voted against the program six months ago. She believed that a bicycle boulevard was a place designated for bicyclists in order to have a minimum of stops. Five stop signs were removed, and two barriers were installed to discourage cars from traveling rapidly. Some other members of the :Council stated that a through street, or collector street such as Middlefield, was attractive because it contained a minimum of stops. It was also attractive because cars coming .from alternate streets had to stop. If the Council did something as drastic as removing all of its stop signs at all intersections except for ° those abutting arterial streets, barriers would not be needed, they would simply have easy through flow. Many other cities had survived nicely with one quarter of the number of stop sighs as Palo Alto. She was struck by some of the comments concerning the time of the study -questioning whether it was seasonal. She would be interested if the, figures would ';stand during = the. rains. She::. was not ready to designate permanent barriers for the area, but would be happy to designate, it as a permanent bicycle bouelvard without them. She, was bothered by the fact that traffic on Tennyson had almost doubled during the trial period. The statistics revealed that the bicycle traffic on Bryant had not doubled, and that bicycle traffic had increased on other streets as .well .i 7' 7 12/13/82 SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Vice Mayor Bechtel moved, seconded by Cobb, to continue to study the issue of the bicycle boulevard for an ad- ditional six months in order to obtain a Winter variation. Councilmember Renzel said she would oppose the substitute motion and support the main motion. She believed that City had a Compre- hensive Plan policy to try and encourage bicycle boulevards. The test had proven successful as an alternative route for bicycles, and she was concerned about the increased traffic on Tennyson. She hoped that as time went on, people would recognize the bar- riers on Bryant and seek the closest route to arterial streets without constantly detouring at that point. Mayor Lyerly agreed with Councilmember Renzel ' s comments. Councilmember Fletcher asked staff how many notices were mailed about the meeting to the residents in the area of he bicycle boulevard. Ms. Likens , responded that notices were sent to 1,200, residents, which was the total number of residents within a one block radius of the bicycle boulevard route from Churchill to: El Verano. In addition, everyone who attended the public meeting prior to the installation of the boulevard was sent a copy of the staff report. Councilmember Fletcher said that out of 1,200 people who knew that the item would be discussed tonight, the Council had heard from four --two were in favor of continuing the project, and two were not. She did not believe that indicated an overwhelming co ”rn in the area about the project. She made .at least one trip oti the bicycle boulevard each day and had seen so few cars that it trust have Laeen difficult to obtain any speed reading whatsoever. She had not yet come across a speeding car. She did not mean to imply that it never happened, but Bryant Street was least hazardous of all the streets she traveled. She was concerned about the mopeds on the pedestrian bridge, and .commented that State law prohibited motorized vehicles from using that type of facility. She thought it would help if signs were installed that said; "no motorized vehicles permitted." The City could not expect mopeds not to use the bridge if no signs were posted prohibiting it. Councilmember Cobb said he seconded Vice Mayor Bechtel ' s substi- tute motion because he did not want to oppose the bicycle boule- vard completely, He .was concerned because on one hand short runs of four and five blocks had been created by removing the stop signs and cars could go faster, and on the other hand the signs said that it was a bicycle boulevard --not a bike lane --where bikes could use basically the entire street. He believed a safety time bomb was ticking away, and some child would get hurt, or killed, before the City realized' sthat the elements were working against each other. Because the safety issue was unresolved, he was un- comfortable making a permanent decision. If the safety issue could be resolved, then he could support a bike boulevard. Until the issue was dealt with, an additional study was a reasonable compromise position. Councilmember Klein . said that the earlier remarks of Mayor Eyerly, Caunci lmembees Renzel and Fletcher expressed his views He believed the boulevard was working well There were many dif- ferent modes of transporation in the community, and bikes could not be totally separated from cars. Thus, some problems would .be around forever. He was pleased with the bike boulevard, and would support the main motion. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED by a .vote sf 4-5, Bechtel, CObb,. Fazzi no, .Witherspoon voting 'aye.. AMENDMENT: Vice Moyor , Bechtel i eved, permanent barriers sot be installed. 1 seconded by Fazzi tie, tat Councilmember Renzel clarified that the temporary barriers would remain in effect, and asked for what period of time. Vice Mayor Bechtel said it was recommended by staff that the bar- riers be made permanent after receipt of further information regarding the Supreme Court decisions. Mayor Eyerly clarified that the amendment intended that staff not do any design work on the permanent barriers. Councilmember Renzel said that. as it now stood, when it was clear that permanent barriers could be erected, staff would go ahead with the those designs, and return to the Council with the design. She could not support Vice Mayor Bechtel's amendment, but could support having ,etaff return to the Council at the point it was determined that permanent barriers could be erected for a deci- sion about whether to go ahead with the design phase. AMENDMENT THAT STAFF NOT PROCEED WITH THE DESIGN OF PERMANENT BARRIERS FAILED BY A VOTE OF 3.6, Fazzino, Bechtel, Witherspoon voting 'aye." AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Renzel, that signs be erected at Natadero Creek Bridge re No Motorized Vehicles." AMENDMENT PASSED unanimously. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED by a vote of 6.3, Cobb, Fazzino, Witherspoon voting 'no." ITEM #11, REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBERS trur saiwasour COBB AND FAllINO RE WINTER Councilmember Fazzino said that Council had historically supported the Friends of the Winter Club efforts to continue operating in Palo Alto. The Winter Club was having serious problems relocating to the proposed site east of Bayshore and unless some help was im- mediately forthcoming, their efforts to relocate would fail, At the same time, he and Councilmember Cobb recognized the limita- tions in City finances and wanted to look at other ways in which the City could support the Club in its fundraising efforts. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Cobb, to direct staff to evaluate the Winter Club's request for a City loan consistent with established City loan policies. Councilmember Fazzino clarified that the intent of the motion was to receive a report from staff regarding to possibility of the Friends of the Winter Club qualifying for a City loan under the criteria" established by the City with respect to loans. Councilmember Renzel asked about the amount of the proposed loan. Councilmember .Fazzino said he was unaware what the specific re- quest would be. He wanted to obtain a statement of , the need from the Friends: of the Winter Club for evaluation by staff in light of City loan policies. Councilmember Renzel said that communications previously received from the Winter Club indicated needs ranging from $165,000 to $250,000. Councilmember Fazzino said he warted to avoid placing a specific amount before the Council:° because he wanted to .avoid endorsing a specific amount. He simply asked that the Friends`' of the Winter Club proposal., be forwarded to the City staff -for consideration He further requested that City loan policies be' used as criteria_. in evaluating the proposal. 2 7.7 9 12/13/82 Councilmember Renzel said the latest communication from the Winter Club indicated that they would attempt to stay in their present location rather than move to East Bayshore. She understood from Councilmember Fazzino's presentation that they were still attempting to move to east of Bayshore. Marvin Lee, 1241 Harker Avenue, responded that the current effort of the Winter Club was to stay at its present location. Councilmember Renzel said she understood that the present location was unaer a zoning amortization. She asked what effect that would have if the Council pursued financial support for the Winter Club to remain at its present location before the planning and zoning issues were addressed by the Planning Commission and Council . Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber said that information available to staff tonight was that the Winter Club became a nonconforming use in 1978 and were under a termina- tion provision which would go into effect in 1993. The owner of the property had corresponded with staff .and the Council indi- cating his desire to redevelop the property in 1993. He was not aware of any particular assignment to staff or the Planning Commission on the particular piece of property other than the planned community zone for century liquors which was reviewed by the Planning Commission. Councilmember Renzel clarified that in order for the Winter Club to remain at its present location, the amortization period would have to be extended or eliminated. Mr. Schreiber said the current facility could remain at its present location until 1993, and be maintained and repaired, but could not be expanded. Mr. !Harker said he believed the Winter Club was made a conforming 'use, and that an ice skating facility could remain at its present location indefinitely. Mr. Schreiber said the Winter Club was issued a use permit in 1967 as a neighborhood recreational use. The zoning fdr° that property was changed in 1978 when the City adopted a new zoning ordinance. The zoning which now applied to that property did not allow neigh- borhood recreation. It allowed outdoor recreation, but not neigh- borhood recreation. He said that if a termination provision existed, it would not kick in -bnti1 1993. Councilmember Cobb said the motion asked for an evaluation not for something that related to a particular measure. However, everyone was aware of the amounts of involved, and the period of time which the Winter Club coul d remain at its present location before the property owner wanted to do something to collect his property and act upon it. ..The genera, constraints on the problem were clear and staff understood the problem well enough to make an analysis. Alison Lee, 1241 Harker, said she supported the motion that staff report on the request of the Friends of the Winter Club. The Winter Club hoped to continue at its present location, and that the valuable_ resource could be maintained. She believed that the Winter Club's little, plot of land was so intensively used that it almost overshadowed any other spot of land in the co amuni ty. She urged support of the motion.. Barbara Reid Brown, 707 -Charleston Court, said she supported the Winter Club. The facility was - unique because` 3t :was. outdoors, and would be difficult to replace _. The volunteers wls od to`- raise funds to continue the Winter`-: Club as the "Friendshlp' Pavil l fon" after the present- owners retired, and with the : help of the City, the fundraising would probably succeed. She said ,:it would be easier to keep the present facility and upgrade it than to start all over with a more expensive facility. = He.' family had skated 2 7 8 0 12/13/82 for a long time, and she remembered in the turbulent 1960's that there were moments when the Sunday night family skating was the only time the six members of her family were happy and relaxed at the same time. It was a valuable community activity, and she urged that it be continued. Douglas L. Spatten, 105 Walter Hayes Drive, supported the pro- posal. He said his family had grown up with the Winter Club, and had lived in Palo Alto since 1959. All of his children skated there and it would be a shame that future children in Palo Alto night not have a similar experience. Marvin Lee, 1241 Harker Avenue, said the Winter Club made an ef- fort to relocate on public land because they were confronted with the fact that the present location was extremely valuable. They believed that by moving to public land they could avoid high costs and charges to children who use the facility. Those fund raising efforts were unsuccessful. Since that time, the owner of the land had made an open offer to the City of Palo Alto to exchange land. The owner indicated to the Winter Club that they could look for- ward to a long time use of the facility. The Winter Club . had also been anxious to move to another facility because Mr. Williams, in operating the facility and knowing that it was going to come to an e,nd, had allowed the plant to be fully depreciated, and it would be extremely expensive to replace. Since that time, the Winter Club received two indications of more help down the line. One builder indicated a willingness to reconstruct and build the facility at cost, and Hubbard and Johnson offered to supply all materials for the reconstruction at cost. The Winter Club had also tried to move because it was believed that a larger facility would make it possible to recoup whatever funds were necessary to run the facility as a legitimate concern, and that it would be attractive to people in other portions o.f ice skating and for other types of activities. He was looking 'forward to the move to help solve other social problems in the community. The Winter Club had built a major barrier between themselves and East Palo Al to, and the relocation would have made it possible to draw the two communities together at a recreational place. He sti 11 believed that would be a fine thing to do and was sorry that the wealthy community contributors were unable to see that as being important. The Winter Club approached Stanford University and 65 foundations in the community, and was turned down in every case. In one case, they were turned down and the foundation immediately gave a grant to Stanford University of some $20 million. Palo Altans had to do things on their own, foundations did note look to the community to support projects because the community was regarded as fairly wealthy already. He believed the motion was a good one, and would give the Council a chance to see what the Winter Club could do, and: give staff a chance to ask the hard nosed questions that should be asked. It would indicate to the community that the Council was anxious to see the facility remain. Mayor Eyerly asked if the Winter Club was suggesting that the City make a gift of the land order to have it as an asset. Mr. Lee said he was suggesting that the City discuss the offer made by the owner of the property. The Winter Club was planning to negotiate with the owner of the land for the lowest possible rent. Mayor Eyerly asked what -security the: Winter Club would have if the exchange did not come about. Mr. Lee said the facility would be full' repaired. The Winter Club did not expect the City to put money into a facility that remained as it currently was Mayor Eyerly 'asked what security the Winter Club would pledge if it received a loan from the City. 2 7 8 1 12/13/82 Mr. Lee said the. City 1 oan policy spelled out collateral and security, but also spelled out public service. The Winter Club planned to provide a public service. Mayor Eyerly asked if the Winter Club could repay the loan within the . current amortization period if the City went along with the proposal. Mr. Lee did not believe the loan could be repaid out: of operating funds. The loan would have to be repaid from fundraising. He believed the Winter Club could demonstrate that that could oe done over a period of time. He said he disagreed with the interpreta- tion of the amount of time available --and believed the land was available for an indefinite period of time. Mayor Eyerly said he believed Mr. Lee's request was for a capital improvement project to be funded by the City. Mr. Lee said he spoke in support of the motion to have staff examine the proposal in depth. Mayor Eyerly said it sounded like an expensive capital improve- ment. Councilmember Witherspoon said she believed the motion was pre- mature. She did not believe Mr. Lee knew what he was asking for, what his landlord would ask for, or even who his landlord would be if he exchanged land with the City. She did not see how staff could evaluate a loan when the amount, collateral, cash flow, and financial plan for its repayment were unknown. Until Mr. Lee knew exactly what he wanted, and how to make an application under City procedures, she believed that the motion was premature. Further, she had serious problems with the City's loan policy. The City had never been in the loan business, and could not afford to do so now. She was only aware of two previous City loans ---the one to the Palo Al to Housing Corporation, and the other was the guarantee of a loan for the Lytton Gardens group. In that case, the City guaranteed the loan, but Lytton Gardens obtained its loan from a commercial bank. She believed that if the City was going to go into the loan business, it had to be as hard nosed as any banker and she did not believe;. any part of the proposal would stand up to any kind of scrutiny by any financial institution as currently structured. She would not support the motion. -Counci 1 member Cobb reiterated that the motion was for an evalua- tion --not an approval. Further, he strongly supported the Winter Club, and would do anything reasonably possible to see to it that the function remained. However, as stated in the memo, the City had a policy on loans, and the Winter Club must be asked to meet the test of that policy within reasonable bounds. The motion would open the door for discussion and to try and find a way for it to be done if the test of established City policy were met. Council member Fletcher said she al so believed that evaluation by staff was premature because there was nothing to :.evaluate yet. She believed that a proposal should be received by the City first, with a financial and the long range plan for repayment, Vice Mayor "Bechtel agreed that adequate information was necessary. She encouraged the proponents of the policy to uring that informa- tion to the staff with a concrete proposal. She would support the motion because she wanted to see , the Winter Club remain if pos- sible, but was concerned ° about an actual loan of City funds. She believed that the Friends of the Winter Club must answer a lot of questions regarding their lease arrangements, how long they would be there, and how the proposed loan would be paid back. She said she spent a little time with the present owner and founder of the Winter Club who advised her that the attendance figures were about 40,000 per year now. In the 1950's •`hen there were a few more Children in the area, they had an attendance of about 50,000 per 2‘7 8 2 12/13/82 1 year. There were about 400 people currently taking lessons. The owner said he had been most pessimistic in estimating the amount of money that would need to be extended on the repairs for the Winter Club, and that the actual dollar amounts to keep the ice skating rink in operation were much lower than those originally projected. Counci:lmember Klein supported the motion, and hoped the Winter Club would be able to remain and proiide useful service to the community. However, there were many things he wanted to remain in the community, but as a Counci l member, could not vote to finance them, If the City of Palo Alto financed everything that was use- ful in the City, the budget would have to be 20 or 30 times as much as it was. The voters had given the message to all levels of government to pair back what it supported --not expand it. The areas expanded must be carefully chosen because the City did not have the resources- to do everything it would like. He said it was not enough to say that the Winter Club was good and useful to the community --it must meet the further test of how the expenditure of funds by the City of Palo Alto to the Winter Club would stack up against all the other demands made upon the City given its limited resources. He was shocked regarding the land exchange idea. The City had not received ,,any official letter from the owner of the land, and he did not believe the City would negotiate through the newspaper about something like that. He urged the land owner to take on a much more businesslike attitude because the City could not move on the basis of newspaper stories. He was further con- cerned about a loan from the City being detrimental to the Winter Club's fundraising. If the Club's potential doners had the idea that the City would bail them out of the funds necessary to sus- tain the Winter Club, perhaps they would not come forward with gifts. Counc i l member Renzel said she was concerned about referring a vague request to staff until a concrete proposal was seen. It appeared that the zoning matter had not been clearly resolved, and she did not want the City to precommit itself to tame zoning issue before it was properly heard before the Planning Commission and City Council. She would not support the motion until such time as a concrete proposal was received. Councilrember Levy said he believed the motion was straight for- ward, and he had no problem supporting it. It asked that the City staff evaluate the Winter Club's request, and in relation to its consistency to the City's established loan policy. The Winter Club would have to submit a specific request, and the City had a loan policy which the Winter Club must meet. Mayor Eyerly said it was obvious that there was no current request from the Winter Club, and that there were a lot a problems with any request that came in. Several Councilmembers had complained about the slowness of staff response to Council assignments, and one of the most valuable resources to the City was its staff and staff time. He believed it was foolish to spend more staff time. on the matter given the amount of information received. NOTION PASSED ' by a vote of 5 -4 , Renzel , Eyerl y, Fletcher, Witherspoon voting.uno." ITEM *112 REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBERS COBB, LEVY AND VAllINO RE D'EY1L uNb-KRJ(A, YLA NOTION: Cooncilnember Levy waved, seconded by Fazzl nog to continue tae 'OW shti l Demober 2004982. MbTIdW PASSED b .. SO ITEM #13 7-2, tecbtel;, Wi thersPoon Ifeti ng _REQUEST OF COUNC ILMEP4BER FAZZINO RE GYPSY MOTH - WILL 2 7 8 3 12/13/82 ITEM #14, REPORT OF MAYOR EYERLY RE MEETING WITH STANFORD BOARD OF • Mayor Eyerly said that he and City Manager Bill Zaner had a dis- cussion with and made a. presentation to the Stanford Board of Trustees today. They attempted to establish a better communca- tion and create a feeling of cooperation with Stanford on projects that were acceptable to the City and economically feasible for both parties. ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned at 1:06 a.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: `ty Cler Mayor