Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-12-13 City Council Summary MinutesCCTV COUNCIL MINUTES ITEM Minutes of October 28 and November 1 Oral Communications Consent Calendar -- Action Items CITY Or- MLO 1110 December 13, 1976 PAGE 5 5 1 5 5 1 5 5 2 Resolution Authorizing City Manager to Pffe._t Certain Changes in Gas Utility Rates 5 5 2 University Avenue Area Offstreet Parking Assessment District Project No. 75-63 5 5 3 Adoption of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 5065 Skyline Boulevard, Site 6 Design Approval Application of John P. Chambers 5 5 3 5 5 3 230-280 Ventura Avenue, Zone District R-5 Tract 5953 --Final Condominium Subdivision Map(16 units) Application of Creative Environments 5 5 3 431 Waver.iey and 430 K,ipling Streets Preliminary Parcel Hap A Reversion to Acreage Application of Wallace R. McMiills Webster Block (Bounded by Addison, Webster, Channing and Middlefield) Reversion to Acreage 5 5 3 5 5 4 Approval of Stanford Annexation Igo. 19 5 5 4 Public Rearing: Light Rail Study Presentation by Santa Clara County 5 5 4 Resolutions Commending Architectural Review Board Retiring Members 5 6 5 Continuation of Agenda Items 14 through 21 to December 20 5 6 5 Stop Sign System Evaluation 5 6 6 Ad j ournment 5 80 530 12113176 December 13, 1976 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date at 7:40 p.m. in a, regular meeting, with Mayor Norton presiding. PRESENT: Beahrs, Serwald, Clay, Comstock, Eyerly, Norton, Sher, Witherspoon ABSENT: Carey (arrived 9:45 p.m.) MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28 AND SPECIAL 1 SPECIAL EXECUTIVE MEETING OF NOVEMBER MOTION: Councilwoman Witherspoon moved, seconded by Mayor Norton, that the minutes of the October 28 and November 1 meetings be approved. The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilman Carey absent. ORAL COMMUUHIC4TIONS 1. Tim Hawley, 3424 Thomas Drive, spoke as a member of Sea Scout Troop 51, SFS INTREPID, based at the Palo Alto Yacht Harbor. He reported that several years ago the seawall had washed out at high tide. Benches now help keep Sea Scouts above the six inches of tidewater that floods at high tide in time of full moon, Sea Scouts have to use a dinghy to get to their lockers when this occurs, for there is usually about two feet of water inside the lockers. He asked how the situation could be remedied. Mr. George Sipel, City Manager, replied that he was relieved to say the flooding was a problem of the Board of Supervisors of Santa Clara County. He said he would provide Mr. Hawley with a name of someone he could contact there. Councilman Berwald requested to make a motion that the City Tanager follow through on the matter of the sea wall and report to the Council on the outcome. Mayor Norton ruled that the emotion was out of order in the Oral Communications session; it would be In order in New Business. John Olmsted, 31570 Page Mill Road, said he wished to precs for a public hearing on a number of disputes and issues concerning the property known as "The Land" at 32100 Page Mill Road. He spoke as a neighbor to that property, saying that the 750 acres had special interest for Palo Altana as well as the Council. He said that area had been incorporated into Palo Alto in 1959, and be assumed many people did not know what "existed up here in the outer edges just within the border of Palo Alto." He said it was rural, and at the westernmost edge of Palo Alto, about fifteen road -wiles from Palo Alto Civic Center, with elevation ranging from 1750 to 2700 feet, including such of Montebello Ridge and the upper watershed of Stevens Creek, and ha asked that the Council affirm that no develop- ment should take place on that incredibly beautiful open space. He assorted that it was good to have a rural, 5 5 1 12/13/76 1 village community living on that land. He said he would like to have the City buy the property and lease certain Use rights to the present residents, those rights to be for the workshop barn, water rights for residents and agriculture along with unlimited grazing and woodlot rights. The present community had maintained the ecology and open space of the land for six years; about fifty year-round residents and thousands of visitors had enjoyed it annually. He felt the use was a valuable social experiment, and only by visiting could that fact be experienced. He outlined the social process and ecological precepts that had made the community a working reality. Mr. Olmsted gave reasons for the City to purchase the land, suggesting that after purchase it be zoned Clans K, experimental, for purposes of meeting housing code requirements, so that the City could continue its Open Land policy. He submitted detailed copies of his suggestions to Councilmeembers. 3. John Fredrich, 608 Channing Avenue, noted that the money for demolition of the houses clearing the way for the Webster. Wood project had been allocated, and he asked the direction the Planning Department was going to take, for in his opinion some of the houses were worthy of being saved. He had recommended last year to the Housing Corporation that there be more overview and participation on the part of staff as the project developed. He reported that 618 Channing, scheduled for demolition, was a very good house, for occupants had made improvement the City and County had been reluctant to make. He favored the "selective redemption" advocated by the Webster Study Group Report of 1973 and 1974. To destroy all the houses, he felt, might be "...a reckless disposition of community assets". Saving more of the houses could be some help in filling the need for low-- and moderate --income housing needs. CONSENT CALENDAR - ACTION IT S Mayor Norton asked if Counci.lmembera wished to remove items from the Calendar. Councilman Comstock asked that Item 8 (ABAC/MTC Santa Clara Valley Corridor Evaluation) be removed. Councilman Sher noted that he would not participate in Item 9, (Stanford Annexation No. 19), for there was a conflict of interest for him as a Stanford employee. Councilman Seahxa asked that Item 1O (Automated Circulrtion System for Librery) be removed from'the Consent Calendar. The following items remained for. :toting on the Calerdsr: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY MANAGER TO lEPFETCERTAIN CHANGIIS IN GA UTILITY RATES (CMR:537:6) RESOLUTION 5297 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF TUE CITY OF PALO ALTO PROVIDING AUTHORITY TO THE CITY MANAGER Ti) 17Fr T CERTAIN CUES IN GAS UTILITY RATES (SCHEDULE G-1)." 5 5 2 12/13/76 UNIVERSITY AVENUE AREA OFFSTREET PARKING ASSESSM.ENT"DISTRICT PROJECT No. 75-63 (CMR:536:6) RESOLUTION 5298 entitled "A RESOLUTION PRELIMINARILY APPROVING ENGINEER'S REPORT, AND FIXING TIME AND PLACE OF HEARING THEREON, UNDER DIVISION 4 OF ERE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE." RESOLUTION 5299 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF ENGINEER'S REPORT. RESOLUTION 5300 entitled "A RESOLUTION DESCRIBING PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, DIRECTING FILING OF BOUNDARY MAP AND THE RECORDATION OF NOTICE 0? ASSESSMENT." RESOLUTION 5301 entitled "A RESOLUTION APPOINTING TINE AND PLACE OF HEARING PROTESTS IN RELATION TO PROPOSED ACQUISITIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS, AND DIRECTING NOTICE." : AfalataLC Cris 1 CIA. ENVIRONMENTAL, ziatuy ACT .(CEQA ,UIDEL1NES (CM :541:6) The Council directs the staff to conduct the environmental assessment processes in conformance with the state guidelines for implementation of CEQA, as a amended. 5065 SKYLINE O.!L.EVARD i'TE 7 DESIGN APPROVAL APPLICATION OF JOHN P. CHAMBERS The Planning Commission, by a vote of six in favor (one absent), finds this project ere pt. from the requirement fox an environmental impact assessment, and recommends approval of the application of John P. Chambers for a Site .and Design District approval of a dwelling at 5065 Skyline Boulevard, subject to conditions listed it the Planning Department staff report of November 12, 1976, 230-280 VENTURA AV zU"EA ZONE punier R-5 TRACT 5953 ----FINAL CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISRZ MAP 16 UNITS) ltON NTS The Planning Commission, by a vote of stet in favor (one absent), recommends approval of the application of Creative Environments for a Final Condominium Subdivision Map (16 units) for property located at 230-28 ► Ventura Aven. e, Zone District R-5, Tract 5953. (An environmental finding is not required when reviewing a final map for conformity with a tentative map.) 431 WAVEItI.E'Y AND 430 RIPLING STREETS _ • a a ,l'Ai EI, MAP' - � I ON TO AMA" Atitlu mr�-- aerw wgem�3e IC.ATI YA1.I.ACE H. �McMl L The Planning Commission, by a vote of six is favor (one absent), finds no significant environmental impact, and recommends approval of the application of Wallace h. Mc-Milla for a Preliminary Parcel. Map (reversion to acreage) for property located at 431 Waveriey and 430 Ripling Streets. 553 12143/76 RESOLUTION 5302 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL, OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVING A REVERSION TO ACREAGE FOR PROPERTIES DOWN AS 430 KIPLING AND 431 WAVERLEY AND GRANTING AN EXCEPTION TO SECTION 21.20.140 (SUBDIVISIONS) OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE." ASTER BLOCK BOUNDED BY ADDISON WEBSTER, OHANNING AND MIDDLEFIELD) REVERSION TO ACREAGE (CMR:522:6) The Planning Commission, by a vote of six in favor (one absent) , finds no significant environmental impact., and recommends approval or a Preliminary Parcel Map to revert the Webster Block (bounded by Addison, Webster, Channing and Middlefield) to acreage. APPROVAL OF STANFORD ANNEXATION NO. 19 (a R:543:6) RESOLUTION 5303 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF APPLICATION FOR LAFCO APPROVAL OF STANFORD ANNEXATION NO. 19." MOTION: Councilman Beahras moved, seconded by Clay, that Council adopt the above items on the Consent Calendar. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilman Carey absent, Councilman Sher not participating in the Stanford Annexation Ho. 19 item and Councilma.n Comstock voting "no" on this item. ir. BL1G HEAI;IN: it�ii Rill PRESENTATION BY SANTA CLKB COUNTY Supervisor Geraldine Steinberg spoke to present results of a study by the County Transit District, for the Transit Board members had been asked to present the data from the study to each of the 15 cities in Santa Clara County to obtain citizen input. The study bed been commissioned in 1974 for a comprehensive traffic study completed at that time had projected that the number of trips taking place in Santa Clara County wil! have increased by.5O percent. In 1974 there were four million person trips per day, and that number is expected to rise by 1990 to six million person trips a day. The Transit Board had presented several ways of meeting the crisis of such an increase in trips when they appeared asking for Council support for the one --half cent sales tax propos.b. One ways is to expand the present highway system, another is extend the preeeut bussing, going from the present 500 to 1500 busses, which, even so, would "capture" only 15 percent of the riders. Another alternative was to purchase all of the non -urban Land which had the potential of being urbanised, which would forestall trip- akiteg, and another plan would be to build a system that would accommodate to future deemed*. The Trenait Commission had decided to pursue the plan to build men adequate transit system, and to that end had commissioned DeLeuw, C'atber to make a study. Five corridors were chosen for study for the reasons that the major part of the right-of-way ves already in public ownership and also that they paralleled areas that had been urbanized with the antici- potion that a transportation corridor would beer available in Wiest Valley. Among caber reasons the five corridors chosen for study tied in with the Southern Pacific Railroad. Ms. Steinberg referred to mcderne iz.d light -rail cars recently purchased by San Francisco. Anticipation was that if the light -rail plan were put into use those cars would be used. She introduced Mr. Lou Mantini, representative of the Santa Clara County Transportation Agency. ytr. )k, tini, the said, would introduce the Transit eocy's consultant. . 554 12/13176 Mr. Lou Aontini related some details of the project's planning context. A feasibility study of five major corridors was displayed on the slide projector: 1, DeAnza, running from end of Route 85 near Stevens Creek Boulevard to Vasons Junction; 2. the Blossom Hill branch ran from Vasona Junction to 1BM near Monterey Highway; 3. Vasona Branch, runs along existing Southern Pacific Railroad from Vasona Junction parallel to Winchester Boulevard into downtown San Jose; 4. the Monterey -Lick branch runs along Monterey Highway to branch off and run along the existing Lick branch of the Southern Pacific Railroad; 5. the Guadalupe branch runs in the existing Guadalupe freeway. All of the corridors, about 35 miles in all, come together in downtown San Jose, at the exieting Southern Pacific Depot, and there connect to the existing Southern Pacific line. He emphasized that the continuation of passenger service which that juncture provided was critical to the entire study. That the Southern Pacific would continue to operate and be upgraded was a strong, assumption. Also assumed was a subsidy for riders on Southern Pacific or other light -rail facilities within Santa Clara County. The light -rail, he again emphasized, was an extension of the existing Southern Pacific service. Objectives of the study were to furnish technical information upon which the Board of Supervisors, Cie). Councils and the people could make informed decisions. To make speci'ic recommendations was not the goal of the study: rather the objectives were to find whether or not a light -rail system was feasible, where a starter line should begin, and to fulfill federal requirements for project -level alternatives analysis --necessary to obtain federal funding. Mr. Montini defined light -rail as an old-fashioned trolley, high speed, high capacity, electrically operated, fixed guideways type of travel. The vehicles can be coupled, as with trains, operatable in the arterial part of the street, or on a grade -separated right-of-way- Alternatives from "do-nothing" to bus variations were corssidezed- He noted that BART was available in the most heavily populated part of the Bay Area except for San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties; at today's costs he said that looping the Bay with BART would cost between $2 and $3 billion, so that BART was no longer considered as a viable alternative. Rail systevs were the way the two counties could fulfill their regional transit obligations and still practice fiscal responsibility, he said. This study, he said, was an outgrowth of planning since 1964. A comprehensive plan in 1969 recommended a two -pronged approach: bus and rail rapid transit. Completion of rapid transit phase 1 completed in December of 1974 concerned itself with an overview of the total transit system in Santa Clara County. The DeLeuw, Cather study is a direct outgrowth of that, He referred to other lesser studies on the same matter, currently underway, with which this study was integrated. He said the PidTAP atudy, (Southern Pacific Railroad and Peninsula Corridor) wets nearing completion, and vas significant for it involved the upgrading of the existing Southern Pacific Railroad. The Board of Supervisors, he went on, had made a preliminary recor dation from Alternative D of the PETAP study which involved the upgrading of the Southern Pacific and provfaion of additional bus service on bath Bayshore and interstate 280. There had been some talk of re-establishing also the rail service from San Jose across the hills to Santa Cruz, the old "Suntan Special," as well as re-establishment of the old "Dell4onte Special" through South County and across to Monterey. He spoke of the A. /MTC corridor study, concetning itself with all of the transportation corridors in Santa Clara County, their relationship to Land Use, and how they satisfy federal requirements for a "systems level" alternative analysis. He underlined chat study's importance for regional land use and traaneportational policies, He concluded his comments to introduce Dale Dietrich also of DeLetw, Cather, along with Dave Minister, now with the Santa Clara County Transportation Agency, to present major findings of the light - rail study. Dale Dietrich affirmed Ma, Steinberg's statement about future travel patterns, that a growth in jobs would lead to a 50 percent increase 555 12/13/76 in person -trips by 1990. He said that in keeping with federal directives for mass transit undertakings many alternatives had been considered. He spoke of transit --modal alternatives, ranging from "do-nothing" to increasing the number of busses, with traffic modifications such as bus lanes and bus priorities --a b'asway alternative such as that in the El Monte area near Los Angeles being a case in point. "A broad spectrum of evaluation measures were defined and evaluated for this study," he said, alluding to numerous tangible and intangible factors involving both users and non -users of transit systems. These factors led to value judgments and conflicting points of view. He pointed to a drawing showing the trade-off factors involved leading to snaking a decision, each one as important a factor as the others, and he continued, summing up results of differing aspects of the study, showing that light -rail was projected to be the favored means of transportation, that the Guadalupe/Monterey highway corridor had the highest estimated patronage. In the matter of capital costs he said all the data presented represented a great deal of information that had been garnered, and therefore were only highlights. While light -rail was the most expensive so far as equipment cost, recovery of that cost from the fare box would be 20 percent, and other transportation would recover only about 15 percent. From an environmental standpoint, while none of the five corridors could be ruled out, there were some sensitive areas requiring special consideration, and provision for those areas was included ;n the calculations. Economic information was in two forms: primary and add-on benefits. For bus primary benefits were about .9, for parking costs and the like; the add-on benefits associated with second and third car ownership and containment of sprawl and non -work trip time oavings the benefit ratio approached 1.2, so that both light -rail and bus systems showed a similarly beneficial cost ratio. Benefit cost methodology, he said, had a number of limitations, and the addition of other measures was being considered; cost per passenger and capital systems coat showed light -rail cost was significantly higher per passenger. Operating and maintenance cost showed light -rail as most advantageous. Together the figures show the baseline system as the least expensive, therefore the next beat alternative. In the matter of subsidy per passenger, a recurring consideration, the subsidies for both systems were comparable --the light -rail system showed the least subsidy requirement. In considering goal achievement, such as improving quality of life, compatibility with general plan in land use development, energy conservation, maximum use of investment, citizen participation, one of the most salient was the goal of community acceptability and political support. People seemed supportive of light -rail, he said, and yet bus systems had much to recommend it in other Ways. He pointed out the ways to read the "trade-offs" section of the DeLeuw, Cather report. Sifting through much data he concluded that the report was to be considered a base for making decisions, not on an either/or base, rather on the base of how -such -and -where. Light -rail provided an alternative to investments in highways, and it was consistent with general plan, city and county goals. He closed his presentation with the final words of the DeLeuw, Gather report, which read, "...the choice is dependent on... the unique and special way the County perceives itself and the future toward which it wishes to move." Mr. Montini then called on Councilman Sher to speak on the plan as Palo Alto's representative to the Transportation Commis- sion. Councilman Sher said he found the whole -!latter of transportation difficult and complex. He said that the summary section of the report was available to the public there in the Council Chamber. The ultimate answer to which system would be chosen lay with the federal government, for they would provide 80 percent of the capital cost. Enuaereting the five alternatives, 1. do-nothing; 2. expanding present bus system; 3. preferential treetaant for busses; 4. buswayss; 5. light -rail; Councilman Sher said the choice rested with city councils, the County, and the residents of 556 12/13/76 4.. ,r the County. The Transit Board wanted responses on six policy issues from the people of the County, and he read from the report: Which transit alternative should receive top priority for commencement in concern with the 516 -bus plan? Where should the first usable segment of any approved transit alternative be located? What is the role of light -rail transit in Santa Clara County in solving transportation needs now and in the foreseeable future? Thoae first three questions, Councilman Sher noted, were specific questions; the following three questions were broader, Is there a willingness to consider modifications to current general plans and zoning laws which would reinforce transit in selected and mutually agreed upon areas? (Councilman Sher explained that this included the attitude towerd increasing population along the posed roues, which night conflict with Palo Alto's Comprehensive Plan,) Should innovative financing mechanisms, such as value capture, tax increment, or other techniques, be pursued so that new property values, at selected locations, can be partially assigned to help pay for the local share of the system? (Property values will. .increase, Councilman Sher pointed out, and the manner of taxing is open for 'change.) Should the West Valley and Guadalupe transportation corridors be preserved for future transportation options. ("....even though not used as outlined in this plan," Councilman Sher highlighted,) Councilman Sher refereed conduct of the discussion back to Mayor Norton, saying that after other :people had been heard from he would outline a time structure for getting answers to the County on the above six t.onsiderationa 1e said he had four friendly questions about the light -:ail system for c?tr. ?foutini> He asked, "Assuming we move toward light -rail —is light -rail thought of as the backbone of the transportation system in Santa Clara County?" and, he went en, what would happen to the busses? Second, if the light -rail section were implemented, would some of the busses then be freed so that same could implement the SAMTRANS and Palo Alto systems that Palo Alto wanted? He made note that none of the corridors being studied were in North County and he wanted to find out what benefits would accrue to North County from South County having light -rail. Third, relating to the intensification and densifica-- tiort of population along the pro used corridors, did Palo Alto have to address that ratter now? Should Palo Alto think now about modifying their general plans and zoning laws to support the transit system assuming sone of the light -rail would come to North County? Fourth, what is the range of alternative responses that have been made by other cities, and which Palo Alto could awake in turn, ranging, he supposed, from zero, to postpone the decision. Were preciaa answers needed? Mr. Montmni replied to the first question about light --rail being the backbone of the system, He said that his answer would be "no," for what was needed was a multi -modal system which would include, along with what was presently available, the initiation of buauays----iu short, an integrated system, with none of them being the backbone, or the least *portent, of the total system. Bikeways and pedestrian ways would also be a part, On the second question of a starter rail system 557 12/13/76 freeing some busses for North County, the answer could not yet be given. If the starter segment were .located in a corridor where there was an existing bus system the beessea would be redeployed, but where they would go is not yet known. Third, relative to intensification of popula- tion, no assumption about such intensification was made for the plan intended to take into consideration the general plans of all the cities. He said Palo Alto had already accommodated to the light -rail system by having the Southern Pacific Railroad within its environs. Fourth, the six questions had been for-,:.ulated with the idea of providing a common base for all the cities involved in the transit decisions. Some cities, he said, had replied question by question, and others had responded in generalities. He knew of only two formal responses from the 16 cities so far, and they had been positive, with the City of Santa Clara having taken a neutral position. Los Altos Hill, Los Gatos and Saratoga had responded positively, thus far. Councilman Comstock asked about the possibility of finding out in March of 1977 that there was not going to be any more Southern Pacific. Mr. Montini replied that the study would be in trouble then, for that was one of the assumptions basic to the study, though it was not out of the question that service cculd be provided in the Southern Pacific corridor by another agency. Councilman Comstock asked if the program had been structured so that should, at a later date, there be no rail corridor now provided by Southern Pacific, withdrawal from the plan could take place without serious financial corsitment. "What are our downside risks acid pro- tections?" he asked. Mr. Montini anavered that this study led up to a capital grant application to Urban Maes Transportation Agency (UHTA) for the detailed preliminary engineering toward a starter segment. LTMTA has said they will not even consider an application from Santa Clara County until after the corridor study progressed to where AUG/MTh are satisfied that the location of the starter segment is one of the major corridors in Santa Clara County. Mr. Montini said that a corridor study still had to be undertaken, and the results of that study would be contingent upon what happened in the Southern Pacific corridor. The corridor study was scheduled for completion in October or November of 1977. Ms. Steinberg interjected that if the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission 0TTC) found that there was consensual support for the light --rail, application might be made before October. Councilman Comstock said his basic question was where would the Peninsula resident be from a financial point of view if the light -rail system was half -built and than did not reach completion. Ms. Steinberg said that there vas very strong support for the Southern Pacific to continue, locally u well as in Sacramento, to, so that abandonment seed unlikely. Councilman Comstock said the Southern Pacific needed upgrading in order to make the integrated system work. Mr. Montini said that the upgraded Southern Pacific provided for headway. during peak hours, northbound a train every five minutes, southbound a train every 20 minutes. At present he said the service was a northbound train about every 15 minutes, and a southbound train every hour. Those figures, fro the PET.AP study, during off -hours, showed a train every 30 minutes each way. 5 5 8 12%13/76 Councilman Comstock referred to page 6 of the DeLeuw, Cather study: "Large increases in volume cannot be reasonably provided unless devices other than buses are used." He questioned also their statement "Sophisti- cated devices require long lead times for adequate community and intergov- ernmental decision --making," asking if the equipment being discussed was off -the -shelf, or, did they intend to "redesign the wheel," as BART had done. Mr. Mantini said the technology was "off -the -shelf." :Long lead time" referred to the length of time perhaps needed to decide, locally, what exactly was wanted. He continued that the long lead-time was eon -hardware related, for the equipment being discussed was the kind already in use in San Francisco, and indeed, throughout the world. Councilman Comstock asked Mr, Montini to clarify the statement about "long -lead time" making that more clear in the study report. Re then asked why the study reported that large increases in volume were seen as answerable using other conveyances than busses. Dale Dietrich, of DeLeuw, gather, explained that since the shady was hunting for an alternative to the automobile that something heti to be competitive, and the "choice" rider, that is, the rider most likely to choose an alternative to the automobile, did not find busses particularly attractive. Councilman Comstock said that since the study dealt with anticipated ridership along a specific corridor, Mr< Dietrich would then be talking about close -in patronage. Mr Dietrich confirmed that Councilman Comatock`s assumptions were corrects Councilman Comstock asked if the corridor selected had been chosen because there were some rights -of -gray available, or had the study found that people had moved into that area more than others, that is, unincorporated and otherwise undeveloped areas --he asked if the conclusions perhaps reached by the study would not set up a growth -inducing sit;nation by providing a major transportation horde. His final point questioned why the DeAnza line did not extend to Palo Alto, for Palo Alto was a major industrial employment center for people from that direction. He suggested the discussion should be about a complete system rather than a piece - by -piece system, and he referred to BAR: as a case in point, eaytng they built piece -by -piece and never got it done. Mr. Dietrich responded that the corridors which had been studied were selected by the transportation commission and the board. The reasons given for their choicee were that they were either existing railroad branchlfrtas, as with Vasona/Lick and the main Southern Pacific line, or they were existing planned transportation facilities, as was the case with West Valley and Guadalupe. Both West Valley and Guadalupe had been planned for many years', and development had occurred with those plans as a base. No freeways or other had been constructed, and the resulting congestion is very serious. Re said the rights -of - way from downtown San Jose to Almaden Expressway had practically all been purchased by the County or the State for the Guadalupe corridor; the sawn was true for the West Valley corridor. Summing up, the reasons for the choice of the corridors was that large portions of the rights - of -way were already owned or there were existing railroad branchlines-- so that a starter segment could be built with least delay. In the matter of "complete system overview," UMfA also required that it be done before application was made. All the major corridors would be identified, Mr. Dietrich said, and also all the corridors which required something more than highways or busses within the next fifteen years would also be identified. Dei.euw, Cather was betting that one of the five corridors would be within the Santa Clara County corridor study. 559 12/13/76 This was not a complete study, he said, but a study of light -rail feasibility within five corridors, undertaken with the objective of identifying a starter segment, Even with federal financing the area could only afford to bei?d somewhere between 10 and 12 miles of light -- rail. Councilman Comstock said the state was not likely to donate the rights -oft -way, and had the study estimated cost of building in - eluding the cost of the rights -of -•way, or had they obtained .a policy statement from the state making an exception in this case? Mr. Dietrich said there had been an assumption that the corridors would accommodate more than just a highway facility, and that it could also include light -rail. Councilman Comstock pointed out that in the case of the pedestrian overpass at Oregon Avenue, Palo Alto had aleo assumed they could use the highway overpass, and they had learned that at very high cost Palo Alto had to build a complete pedestrian -only overpass. He cautioned Mr. Dietrich and urged him to find out from the state whether or not those corridors would indeed be available for light -- rail. He went on to ask how many dollars had been spent to date on studies and analyses, and had they been grant or County dollars. Geri Steinberg, Santa Clara Board of Supervisors, replied that the figure was about $200,000, and that it was County money. Councilman Comstock asked if any estimate had been made of the coat beyond March, 1977a MS. Steinberg said application would be made to UMTA for the costs of the next engineering study which would provide federal funds. Mr. Montini added 80 percent of the funds would be federal. She said the questions helped her clarify details as well. Councilman Berwald referred back to the wetter of having some bosses freed up, and asked if the corridors under discussion were now served by the bus system, and would it not be possible to tell how many busses would be freed along those corridors. Mr. Montini responded that the corridors comprised some 35 riles of transportation whereas the light -rail would only build 10 to 12 miles, so that the number of busses freed would be contingent on where that starter segment would be built. He asserted that not many busses would be replaced with only 10 or 12 miles of light -rail. Councilman Berwald asked how many of today's dollars those 10 or 12 miles would coat. Mr. Montini replied that it would be somewhat over $1O0 million, with 80 percent of it federally funded, and that the cost of feasibility and engineering studies was included. Councilman Berra l d confirmed med that the five major corridors totaled about 35 miles, and he asked the cost of providing light --rail for all of that. Mr. Montini answered $267 million, adding that all of the costs were detailed in the final report and in the working papers. Dave Minister.of the Santa Clara County Transportation Agency said the costs ran to about $7 to $10 million per mile, irre- spective of corridor. Councilman Berwald asked if the figure included the cost of the land. Mr. Montini answered that it included the land iron the state, but not the land which had not yet been purchased. 360 12/13/76 Councilman Se m.'ald asked the time schedule for completing the first 10 to 12 miles and the time estimated to complete the 35 miles, Mrs Ho:itini answered that if "everything were to go perfect operations would begin in 1982 or '83." Councilman Berwald asked what portion of the projected millions of trips a day would be accommodated by the 10 to 12 miles, with, and without, the 516 busses --in other words, what would the total impact he on the assumed transit demand, specifically on the 516 -bus usage. Mr. Montini replied that projected number of riders would be 120,000, and that if the 10- or 12 -mile rail starter line were added patronage would increase by another 30,000 per day, amounting to a 15 or 20 percent increase- With both light -rail and the 516 -bus fleet about 3 or 4 percent of the total daily trips would be on transit. He emphasized that a start had to be made somewhere, and perhaps this was the place to do it. CoEanciinan gerwald addressed his last question to point four in "policy issues" of the DeLeuw, Cather report; "Is there a willingness to consider modifications to current general plans and zoning laws which would reinforce transit in selected and mutually agreed upon areas?" which he said tied in with the following question about "innovative financing," Rephrased, Mr. Be=rwa1d said, the question could be 'are cities willing to accept the growth -inducing effects of light -rail; or, alternatively, would cities be willing to accept artifically induced growth just to have financial solvency through transit patronage! He called Ms, Steinberg's attention to the Supervisors' Association favoring the Wilmington Plan, a plan to defer and to forgive taxes in order to encourage improvements. He said the light -rail proposal might be asking cities to accept an additional tax burden at the expense of diverting needed tax dollars away from other urgent ratters such as schools and housing. He thought that matter should be looked at before the plan went much further. Ma. Steinberg said that the Santa Clara County Transit District was asking each of the cities involved if they wanted to revise their general plan, not only to see if they wanted to increase the growth of the cities as much as to see if they wanted to change the location of some of the growth, for perhaps chey might want to intensify the growth about some of the stations and increase open space in desired areas. Councilman gertaEal.d said that if he were speaking for Palo Alto on those two concerns he would answer "no." He said he wondered, on the other hand, whet the County was doing to develop a transport - minimizing comprehensive plan. He said this plan did just the opposite, for it gave some induced growth. He suggeated that an alternative to transportation be given to the policy issues which gave communications and technology urban design alternatives. Councilman I3eahrs aaid that he had a long list of questions but in the interests of brevity he would only ask a couple. He asked about chzncs of upgrading the • Southern Pacific for in his opinion that was the only proposed service that would benefit Palo Alto. He aaid if the Federal Government was only building one-third of the light - rail it led to "dreams world" thinking: He thought someone other than the railroad would have to take on the expense of upgracing the Southern Pacific. Ms. Steinberg responded that the federal government would be paying for 80 percent of the light -rail system. 561 12/13/76 Councilman Beahrs said he had understood the federal government was only committed to one-third of the cost. Mr, Montini said the federal government had no commitment yet. Councilman Beahrs asked why 12 miles (one-third of the proposed light -rail) had been used. Mr. Montini ea1.d that the Board was at the present time trying to determine who would be committed, and to what extent. Councilman. Beahrs asserted that if no solid funds were available the entire discussion was "quite theoretical." Mr. Montini replied that the local funds, consisting of 20 percent, were available. Ms. Steinberg said there was no answer regarding the Southern Pacific upgrading at this time. She said the money would not come out of the local sales tax funds, and they felt it should come from the state or some other source; the recommendation of PENTAB to the legisla- ture, she continued, would not address the matter of finances. Councilman Beahrs repeated that the only benefit from Palo Alto's contribution of one-helf cent sales tax was a promise of the upgrading of the Southern Pacific service. Ma. Steinberg reminded Councilman Beahrs that with the addition of 300 busses there would-be a strong likelihood that the promise of a good transportation system would be fulfilled. Councilman Beahrs said he was very impressed with the amount of dedicated work that had gone into the study, but he had a very qualified anticipa- tion of the project becoming much, particularly, he said, in view of the "abysmal faili rc of BAkT," a system built at huge cost with large contributions of state and federal money, and also a half -cent sales tax, with a projected life of four more years for BART's usefulness. "It's all very dismal and dim," he said. Vice Mayor Clay asked if the 80 percent would be forthcoming if the system were toward other than light -rail. Mr. Montini replied affirma- tively. Vice Mayor Clay asked if another .ode of transportation might not have stronger priority were the data on which the study is based were to change during the next one to five years. Re said -busses appeared to have more flexibility than light -rail and thought -that might have weighed more heavily in the Commission's decision making than it had. Mr. Montini replied that the decision had not yet been Jude. Re confirmed that busses were more flexible ---he stressed that the purpose of the sting was to see if the cities of Santa Clara County were prepared to rake a commitment to a light -rail system, and recognising, that if that is done, lard -use within the vicinity of the light --rail syste~aa will change. That, he stressed, was the major issue on which decisions had to be made. Councilwoman Witherspoon said the Guadalupe corridor, if that were their final choice, made teens* to her, for it led to the airport. She asked if there were information in the corridor study showing that there we * demand within the corridor to go to the other end of the corridor. She said she had thought most of the commute patterns within the County were cross -county rather than patterns which followed the corridors. ifr. Montini replied that most of the study had led from Rapid Transit Development Project (RTDP) Phase 1 study. and that RTDP study had shown there was a heavy travel demand within those corridors. 8e repeated that the Guadalupe and West Valley had been planned corridors for a long time. The automobile traffic at peak hours on 280, 17,and Mocrerey newsy *bowed tbe heavy demands, wbirle vas not to say that tltsg mars the most heavily traveled. 562 12/13/76 Councilwoman Witherspoon asked if travelers were going to be lured off those heavily traveled roads if only part of their trips went on other corridors. Mr. Montini answered that the assumptions were that there would be an adequate feeder bus systems along with parking lots, so that people could transfer, and the certainty was that they would. Councilman E,er1y referred to the claim made about .light -rail when the sales tax idea was being sold, and the assertion had been that the light -rail plans would be completed --did the capital have to be raised ahead of the 1982-83 five-year period. Re wondered if the taxpayers would have to speak on the issue again in 1981, and whether or not the light -rail capital expenditures would covet the work that was to be done before that time. Mgr. Moneiei said that the half -cent program had set aside a certain amount for fixed rail, about 418 million out of the total. At that time the Board had only promised that they would make a feasibility study of light -rail= Councilman Ey-rly said that he did not have a good feeling about North County getting its share of the tax dollar. He said he would like to see what the North County provided in the way of a transportation tax -dollar breakdown; he said he would like also to see costs, at:d that with those sets of figures he would be better able co decide where he wanted to go. Ms. Steinberg said that under the present and projected 500 -bus system North County in general,and Palo Alto specifically, were getting a fair share so far as apportionment of the buses. So far as light rail is concerned it is true, she continued, that it would not be in North County --she returned to the statement that "we have to start somewhere," and she thought there might be some confusion as to the future of light -rail for the five corridors. The Bard did not intend, she said, that those would be the only five corridors to have light - rail, for it was quite possible that if light -rail were successful the system would be extended north. If North County citiea wanted light rail on El Camino or in Cupertino, it was conceivable that those could be other segments. The Commission did net want the same thing to happen with light -rail that had happened with Dial -a -Ride by putting a whole systsas in at one time. They wanted to do it by segments. Of course, she concluded, figures would shoo San Jose was getting more funds if that was where it was finally decided to put the first segment. Mayor Norton said he could not help but ask if public officers had to serve twenty years before any of it would be actually visible. Ms. Steinberg replied that it was rhetorical. Ms. Steinberg asked pereiasion to summarise: she said that the Council - members were not being asked to make a swift decision. December 15 had been at tentative date but she acknowledged that the first or aecoud veek in January would be a realistic time for the Comaissf.on to look forward to costa and suggestions from Palo Alto. She stood reedy to answer any further questions she said, and Palo ,alto's decision wee important to her for it would facilitate her own decision. NOTION: Councilman Sher moved, ae:o+nded by Norton, that the Council refer to the staff the six questions presented by the Detainer Cattier study, for any recommendations they sight like to milks, with a report on them to cause to Council at a meeting near the first week in January so that Councilcold take action. S63 12/13/76 Councilman Sher said that, speaking as Palo Alto's representative to the Transportation Commission, the full -action plan after the input of the cities will come to the Commission, which will then advise the Transit Board. He said preliminary recommendations could be made by the Council in advance of the results of the corridor study, but the more the City of Palo Alto could tell the County the better informed they could be in making their decision. Councilman Beahrs asked how the Councilmembers could get input from the voters on the tax problem and other issues they had heard about that evening. He said he thought the taxpayers were more involved then most of the Council. Councilmen Berwald said he would vote for the motion out of deference to the Council's hard-working representative, but he felt the questions were being referred to staff not for policymakiag decisions but asking merely for further thoughts. He asserted it was a policy decision, not a matter for staff to have major input on. Further, he noted that tonight's light -rail study presentation was a public hearing according to Councilman Sher, but he suggested setting a public hearing when Council was going to address the policy issues. Councilman Sher responded that he realized the Council would make the decisions, and that the staff would give background infore tioa. He hoped the next agenda would provide time for a public hearing, and noted that the public could apprise themselvea on the issues with the background material provided that evening. Vice Mayor Clay suggested that the Policy and Procedures Committee might be the appropriate place for the public to be heard. AMENDMENT: Vice Mayor Clay moved, seconded by Beahrs, that the report also be referred to the Policy and Procedures Committee. Ted Noguchi., Transportation Department, said that it would be difficult to get the report back to the Transit ieoerd by the time recommended by Me. Steinberg unless the Policy and Procedures Committee met in December. Vice Mayor Clay said he would set the first week in January as a target date for getting the report to Committee and back to Council. Me. Steinberg said that in her opinion► the public h&riag in the Committee war more important than immediate return of the report to the Transit Board, and she extended the time within which the report would be expected. Councilman Sher said that if the second to the amendment was agreeable he would suggest incorporating the amendment within the motion. Mayor Norton agreed. MOTION PASSED. The motion to refer the transit study by Ueteuw, Cather to the staff and also to the Policy and Procedures Committee passed on a u animoup vote. Mayor Norton thanked the representatives from the County, the consultant and Ma. Steinberg, and expressed the wish that people of Palo Alto *seas the iesuee which had been presented and which represented such time, effort, and money, and respond to the Council of the City of Palo Alto with their thoughts on the subject of light -rail. 564 12/13/76 RESOLUTIONS COMMENDING ARCHITECTURAL )REVIEW BOARD RETIRING MEMBERS MOTION: Mayor Norton introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Comstock, its adoption: RESOLUTION 5294 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO EDITH DOROSIN FOR OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF TFX ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD . " Mayor Norton spoke with appreciation of Ms. Doroeln's patience, thoughtful- ness and sensitivity in het painstaking attention to detail on ARB applications. Councilman Comstock agreed with Mayor Norton's comments and Cou:tcilman Sher noted that the ARB's loss was the County Transit Board's gain, and he expressed pleasure that Ms. Dorosin would now be able to participate in the County Transit Board's decisions. Ms. Dorosin accepted the plaque and resolution with the comments that she had had a "good three years" with the ARB, and voiced the hope that the ARE's work would begin to show some results. MOTION: Councilman Comstock introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Bervald, its adoption: RESOLUTION 5295 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FALO ALTO EXPRESSING. APPRECIATION TO CHARLES KIN?E,Y FOR OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD . " Mr. Kinney was not present to accept the resolution. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on a unanimous vote. The Council recessed from 9:55 to 10:15 CONTINUATION OF AGENDA ITEMS 14 throuxh 21. MOTION: Mayor Norton moved, seconded by Comstock, that Items 14 through 21 including old items 8 and 10 from the consent calendar of December 13, be continued so that they appear first on the agenda in the next regular meeting, December 20, 196 Vice Mayor Clay said that he thought the item on Stop Sign System evaluation would go more quickly than anticipated, for it had received unanimous passage at the Policy and Procedures Committee meeting, and no Countilme berm had objectoed. Ha said statements of 15 speakers were clearly given in the Policy and Procedures meeting minutes. He suggested seeing how fast the item was resolved before the motion to continue items 14 through 21 vas voted upon. Mayor Norton replied that even though the Stop Sign evaluation moved along quickly he would still be ready to end the meeting. Councilman Sher pointed out that a of the members of the Planning Commission were on hand ready to *peak on items 14 and 15 and Councilmembera might want to hear from them. Councilman Carey said that the proponent on item 17 felt some urgency in having the item resolved, that evening if possible. MOTION TO CONTINUE FALLS: The motion to continue items 14 through 21 failed on the following vote: AYES: Norton, Comstock, Eyeriy NOES: beahra, 8erwald, Carey, Clay, Sher, Witherspoon STOP SIGN SYSTEM_EVALUATION ( R: 513:6) Vies Mayor City said the Policy and Procedures meeting had discussed the Stop Sign System evaluation. Outlining the background briefly, he said a number of people in 1974 had complained about the stop sign situation its Palo Alto. A consultant had been hired to make the evalua- tien, TJKM, Planning and Transportation Consultants of Walnut Creek. Mr. Arnold Johnson of that company was on hand to answer questions. Vice Mayor Clay said that fourteen of the fifteen speakers at the Policy and Procedures Committee meeting had urged continuance of the present stop sign system. MOTION: Vice Mayor Clay, on behalf of the Committee, moved the Policy end Procedures Cs ittee recommendations to Council re the Stop Sign System evaluation: A) That the City retain the present stop sign system, that staff be directed to examine the need for greater stop sign and speed limit enforcement on City streets, that staff be directed to consider the possibility of conducting traffic studies for radar enforcement on streets where it would be helpful, after a period of police enforcement on those streets; Z) That staff be directed to develop traffic m.nagement solution for improving the level of peak hour traffic service and safety on Palo Alto's major arterial streets eyed return to Council with specific recommendations; and C) That there is no environmental impact ar a result of the Cosai t tees' s ac t toes . Mayor Norton pointed out that one of the major reasons for having committee meetings on these issues was so Council time would not be pre-empted with further attention to public input. He added that Councitaumbere read Committee minutes and that for further public hearing more often then not was an unnecessary duplication. With those cautiosr,ary words he asked that those members of the public who wished to speak merely summarize their thoughts. James Wagstaff, 3556 Ramona Street, asked that for reasons of safety and quality of life tha present system be retained unaltered. If changes were made he asked that they be made one stop sign at a time. Marla Rill, 3507 Laguna Avenue, spoke as a representative of the Barron Park Parente -Teachers Association. Sbs said residents of Barron Park did not pant any of the present stop signs removed or replaced by rt bt-of--sea► signs; one additional stop sign was wanted at the intersection of Laguna and Matadeerot residents of Barron Park wanted grater enforcement of stop signs. specifically on: Mastedero, Laguas:w, Pros Robles and M.ybelle, for they were streets which children often crossed. 566 12/13/76 R.J.Debs, 3145 Flowers Lane, said he wanted to appear before the full Council as well as before members of the Committee, so that the entire Council could have "the full flavor of what people have to say...." He stated he thought the stop sign study was used to open residential streets to increased motor traffic. He said he thought the study - limits had been very narrowly proscribed -.-the first consideration: being safety of children and "way down} on the list was the movement of traffic." And he felt the results of the study diverted traffic to residential. He noted that motorists had approved all but two of the one --hundred and one stop signs in the City, and those two signs were in the way of people coming from apartments in East Palo Alto downhill to a grocery store an Channing. He said atop signs discouraged traffic, he himself did not like putting his foot on the brake. He said the study merely bought time against the day when the additional 15,000 jobs promoted by members of the Council would be at hand. They.ha.d "to bear the cross on that," he said: He said the report was very distorted. "Leave our stop signs alone," he asked, "and don't put in those traffic lights and four-way stop signs=" People knew when there was going to be a green light and they went all the faster to rake it. He quoted one point he thought the staff had "hornswoggled" the Policy and Procedures Committee into approving: ...the staff is directing you... to ask staff to develop craf f is management solutions for improving the level of peak -hour traffic service and safety an Palo Alto's major streets network, and return to Ccuncil with specific recommendations. That statement he believed shoswed that the study was aimed at finding ways to move more and dense_ traffic down residential streets like Embarcadero and Middlefield. He to atked parenthetically on the twenty-year rumor that the "non -manmade trees" on Middlefield would be removed. He praised the traffic signals on Alma, and Hr, Noguchi's engineering, also the sensor traffic lights that forestall congestion because they "think." He felt outsiders, such as consultants from Walnut Creek who had no feeling for the specialness of Palo Alto, should not be brought in, and that in this case the study had merely promoted traffic on residential streets: Ellen Fletcher, 3543 Greer Road, objected to one statement of the report that btcycltets would appreciate fewer stop signs. Her response to roat was "Not at the expense of more motor traffic." Ethel Anderson, 360 Colorado Avenue, said she did not have expertise on specific traffic matters but she spoke about speed of motorists when there were no stop signs. She hsd lived on Colorado Avenue for thirty-seven years and accidents at Colorado and Waverley Avenues had been numberless. "Speed kills and of tea maiaas," she said, and aahe *eked Council to uphold the recommendation of the Policy and Procedures Committee. Johan Canyon, 270 Lelend Aveaaue, aatd he thought the fact that there were too many stop sigma in Palo Alto wee obvious even before the study, The study had shown that most motorists merely slated to a rolling stop. He emphasized hew much fuel would be saved if fir stops were required. He objected to residents requesting that their streets be blocked off yet maintaining their right to drive on other residential streets, He gave Mariposa and Cestiileja Streete as examples of that unfair practice. He alluded to the difficultisa the practice posed for fire and paramedic service; and the additional pollution added to the atmosphere by so many stop signs. He said many of the stop signs should be replaced by "yield" signs. David Jerorg, 4056 Park Boulevard, asked that a "guard and get" system of signs be used. Ha recalled that in 1972 before the street barriers were installed 1 ive children had been struck by automobiles in the Ventura Avenue area. He feat that in Palo Alto there was overwhelming support of the atop signa. 1 5 6 7 12/13/ 76 Gil Eakins, 3493 Greer Avenue, spoke for the Sequoyah Parents -Teachers Association. and he voiced parents' and teachers' concern that stop signs might be removed. Louis Road was primarily residential, he said, and since the installation of stop signs he knew that fewer motorists were "roaring through there so fast." He pointed out that there were rolled curbs on that and contiguoua streets which could give motorists the idea that the streets were wide enough to pass easily, but that was not actually true. He wanted to keep the reeeidentfal character of the streets by discouragio.g swift traffic. He felt the objective of the study had been obscure, but he wanted the results of the study to lead toward keeping Palo Alto streets residential in character. Councilman Eyerly referred to a recommendation by staff not adopted by the Policy and Procedures Committee, #2. Direct the staff to re-examine the need to retain the stop sign installations on collector streets. He asked staff to explain why they felt that directive was needed. Ted Taguchi, Director of Transportation, said that the consultant had wanted to re -assess atop signs on collector streets, and secondly staff had felt some concern about the "guard and go" concept, and about the spacing of stop signs. Councilman Eyerly explained that the cost of the study was aegligible-- about $2,000 and the bulk of the cost was borne by the grant. The consultant's report was quite different from what the staff recommended, and that the Policy and Procedures Committee had adopted ell but one of the staff recommendations, no one of which -spoke to the removal of stop signs in residential communities. Too many stop signs on collector streets led to dispersal of traffic to residential streets, which was now occuring, and which nobody wanted. He said he wanted staff to have another look at that, as well as the two- and four-way stop signs throughout the city. He said he was of the opinion that more four-way stops should be two-way. AMENDMENT: Councilman Eyerly moved that staff be directed to re-examine the need to retain stop sign installations on collector streets; and that two -and four-way stop signs throughout the City also be re-examined. The Notion failed for lack of a second. Councilman lerweid alluded to a comment that Council had removed the barriers fro the Comprehensive Plan. He asked staff for their obs*rvstion on that matter. Ken Schreiber, Assistant Planning Director, said the barriers were not removed from the illustrations in the Plan. One program discussed might have read "Discourage through traffic from traversing residential neighborhoods by using diverters, intersection chokers end stop signs." He said the wording had bsan modified to read, "...discourage through traffic from traversing residential neighborhoods." He referred to page 29 of the Plan which carried en illustration of the ways in which traffic could be discouraged, and intersections chokers were included. Councilman Aervaid mentioned that one o': the speakers bad *plied that the study hid been a anipulateed, and he asked staff if done felt aeneuverad into making arose* kind of a slanted report. In relation to the requested "chenge of direction," Councilmen De:reald said that only a few mks ago Council had votesd to endorse the Planning Commission and staff recommendation to discourage traffic through residential streets. He said it had been amply deemenstreted that imoolar as traffic vas facilitated on major streets it sass deterred from going into residential 566 12/13/76 streets. A letter to the Palo Alto Times had quoted directly from one traffic report saying "...improving the level of peak -hour traffic service and safety." The Times had left those words out, but they continued to be an aim of the Council. He noted that he had voted against having the study; he concluded his remarks saying he thought Couucll should approve the Committee recommendations wholeheartedly and enthusiastically. Councilman Comstock asked the staff how long it would take to develop traffic management solutions for improving the level of peak hour traffic service mentioned in part B of the recommendations, and what they would undertake to do. Mr, Noguchi responded that part B did not suggest to him any conflict with what had been adopted in the Comprehensive Plan, which had called for ",..minor operational improvements at intersections," and so forth, and he felt thoee projects would just continue to go forward. An example would be the intersection of Middlefield and Oregon, where congestion drove traffic to other streets He said that work with the County might lead to an improved signal system providing better left -turn phasing for the Middlefield traffic--operatiorat rather than physical changes, such as widening, Councilman Comstock said that he loved Palo Alto's stop signs; he thought they served the citizens of the City well: Councilman Sher said he did not think, cont:arsy to Councilman Eyerly, that this is the time to re -assess the stop sign system. Calling residential streets "collector streets" in no way obscured the fact that they were residential. Both residents and motorists accepted the system; the money for the study was in no way wasted, for the consultant's report demonstrated that the system works and there is no reason to change. He felt that part A would be adopted unanimously. On part B, he expressed confusion on the intent for he did not feel it was supported by what he had read in the consultant's report. Phrases such as "management solutions," and "improving of peak hour traffic service and safety" seemed vague to him and he had concern they might mean taking out stop signs or raising speed limits on streets like Eaabircadero which, while it was residential, was also a major arterial, as was the case for Middlefield, about which some discussion had taken place in the past about widening and taking out trees, which he did not approve of. He felt concerned about the possibility of widening Alma, even to the extent of turning it into an expressway with "appropriate" interchanges at Charleston and East Meadow with concomitant tremendous increases in traffic, which was once an actual proposal by the County. He feared that part 11 might be a "blank check" for the staff with coatly studies taken oe by an already overburdened traffic staff. He objected to staff inviting that kind of aaseignaeent. He urged Councilmembers to vote "no" on part B. Staff could bring to Council particular recommendations for particular intersections, and let them look at them one by one Mayor Norton asked staff if they interpreted part B as directing any of the projects outlined by Councilman Sher. Kr. Nog chi answered chat such had not been the intent of staff, but that the bread phrasing in part B could be construed in that way. Hs would not construe it that way himself, he said. Vice Mayor Clay said that part B also stated that staff will return to Council with specific recommendations, so that no matter hat ideas were evolved Council would see them before they were implemented. Se felt that would be a built -3n control. He sod the entire recommenda- tion, parts a, 1, and C, were before the Council, and as yet no on* 569 12/13/76 had asked that they be considered separately. Vice Mayor Clay praised the consultant for doing what he had been asked to do, and that the facts were indisputable. The majority of people asked about the stop signs had acknowledged that they were a nuisance but also that they wanted to keep them. Any installation of future stop signs should be very carefully considered. Mayor Norton said the motion concerning Adoption of recommendations A, B, and C was before them. He asked if Councilmembere wanted to vote on them separately. Receiving an affirmative he offered the vote on part A. LOTION ON PART A PASSED: The motion that the City retain the present atop sign system passed with a unanimous vote. MOTION ON PART B PASSED: The motion that staff develop traffic management solutions for improving the level of peak hour traffic service passed with the following vote: AYES: Seahrs, Berwa.id, Carey, Clay, Con :took, Eyerly, Norton, Witherspoon NOES: Sher MOTION ON PART C PASSED: The motion that there is no environmental impact as a result of the Committee's recommendations on the Stop Sign System passed on a unanimous vote, ADJOURNMENT Councilwoman Witherspoon asked if it would be possible to act on the proposal for purchase of Power Property before adjournment. &en Schreiber, Assistant Director of Planning, reported that on that day in a conversation with Mr nouns he had indicated that in his offer to buy the Power Property his tiae limits had become somewhat tighter than the January 17 he had initially indicated. Mayor Norton *eked Mx. Doug if he could wait until the next meeting for a decision, Receiving an affirmative answer Mayor Norton said that the matter would be Item 3 on the agenda on December 20. Councilman Sher said that the attorney on the Sorter wage--of-district scatter had said he would not be available December 20. He said he thought the item should rightfully be taken up that evening. Mayor Norton laid that people who felt adjournment should not take place should vote against his motion. Councilman Carey eaid that the Sater natter was for the Planning Commission, not the Council, in his opinion. Mr. Schreiber said that the El Camino moratorium specifically excludes P-C'e and that this Sorter matter had been filed before the Council imposed the aoratoriu*, and that therefore the toning matter could continue through the process. Vice Mayor Clay said that since the matter was not an urgent time - dependant scatter it could be postponed to a January sheeting. Mayor Norton asked the attorney to state his availability for the following Monday, December 20. The attorney said the matter could bat put over to Jansary; January 3 was a goad date for hi*. 570 12/13/76 MOTION: Mayor Norton moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that the Sater matter be moved to January 3, 1977. The motion passed unanimously, Councilman Berwald not participating. MOTION: Mayor Norton coved, seconded by Comstock, that unfinished items on the December 13 agenda be continued to December 20. The motion passed unanimously, Councilman Berwald not participating. The City Council meeting of December 13, 1976, adjourned at 11;15 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. December 20, 1976 - ATTEST: APPROVE: City Clerk ,/ /;J 571 12/13/76