HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-05-22 City Council Summary Minutes Special Meeting May 22, 2000
1. Study Session with Library Advisory Commission re New Century Library Master Plan..........................................................166
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS..........................................................166
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m...........................................................166
1. Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for Public Art Commission..........................................................167
2. Presentation of the PTI Award..........................................................167
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS..........................................................167
APPROVAL OF MINUTES..........................................................168
3. Ordinance 4635 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing an Amendment to Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System (Inclusion of Employees Performing Duties of Fire Fighting, Fire Prevention, Fire Training, Hazardous Materials, Emergency Medical Services or Fire or Arson Investigation Services Within the ‘Local Fire
05/22/00 90-162
Fighter’ Classification)”..........................................................168
4. Ordinance 4636 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 2.10 [Cable Television Systems – Award of Franchises by City Council] to Regulate Cable Television Systems and Open Video Systems with Respect to 1) Occupancy and Use of Public Rights-of-Way, 2) Establishment of Franchise and License Requirements, 3) Customer Service Standards, and 4) Minimum Requirements for Construction, Operation, Maintenance and Repair”..........................................................169
5. Ordinance 4637 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Classification of Property at the Intersection of El Camino Real and Page Mill Road Known as 3000 El Camino Real (Palo Alto Square) From PC Planned Community 2533 to PC Planned Community”..........................................................169
7. Proposed Pole Attachment Fees..........................................................169
8. Approval of Software License and Services Agreement, Amendment One to the Software License and Service Agreement and Enterprise License Addendum with Oracle Corporation Inc. in the Amount of $551,336 and Approval of Municipal Payment Plan Agreement with Oracle Credit Corporation..........................................................169
9. Ordinance 4638 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1999-00 to Accept a $16,118 Grant from the California Arts Council and to Provide an Additional Appropriation for the Community Services Department of $16,118”..........................................................169
10. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and O’Grady Paving Inc. in the Amount of $1,772,887 for the 2000 Street Maintenance Capital Improvement Project #18670/18971..........................................................169
11. Request for Authorization to Increase the Amount of the Existing Contract for Legal Services with the Law Firm of
05/22/00 90-163
Miller, Canfield, Paddock & Stone, P.L.C...........................................................169
11A. Modification of Subdivision Agreement for Wisteria Condominiums, 4114 Goebel Lane and 579 Vista, Tract No. 9128..........................................................169
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS..........................................................170
12. Conference with Labor Negotiator..........................................................170
13. Conference with Labor Negotiator..........................................................170
14. PUBLIC HEARING: The Palo Alto City Council will consider an application for a Zone Change from Downtown Commercial Service Pedestrian Overlay (CD-S)(P) District to the Planned Community (PC) Zone for property located at 800 High Street, to allow demolition of an existing 17,632-square-foot manufacturing building and construction of a new 48-foot-high, three-story mixed use building, including 26 residential units, 48,030 square feet of office space, 2,379 square feet of retail space, a subterranean parking garage and related site improvements; a variance for a portion of the third floor residential area that exceeds the City’s height requirement; and certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report for the project..........................................................1711
15. PUBLIC HEARING: The Palo Alto City Council will consider a request by Bergtraun-Evard Architects, AIA, on behalf of the Goldman family for Site and Design review of construction of two residences on two adjacent parcels located at 3220 and 3230 Alexis Drive having a combined total area of approximately 3.2 acres within the Open Space Zoning District...........................................................171
16. PUBLIC HEARING: The Palo Alto City Council will consider approval of Site and Design, Variance, and Environmental Impact Assessment applications by the City of Palo Alto Community Services Department for a visitor information center Gateway Facility – APN 182-35-041, including office and meeting space, storage areas, public restrooms, and associated
05/22/00 90-164
site improvements on City-owned property within the Arastradero Preserve open space area. The Variance will allow a reduced setback from the provisions of Section 20.08.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Environmental Assessment: A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project in accordance with CEQA Guidelines...........................................................189
17. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1999-00 to Provide an Additional Appropriation of $30,000 for a Feasibility Study in the Planning Department Relating to Train Whistles..........................................................189
17A. (Old Item No. 6) Ordinance Adding Chapter 9.06 to Title 9 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Prohibit New Construction or Replacement of Wood Burning Fireplaces and Appliances..........................................................189
18. Presentation of Top Five Council Priorities for 2000/2001..........................................................191
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. to a Closed Session...........................................................193
19. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements..........................................................193
FINAL ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m...........................................................194
05/22/00 90-165
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Conference Room at 6:05 p.m. PRESENT: Beecham, Burch, Eakins, Lytle (arrived at 6:20 p.m.), Mossar (arrived at 6:40 p.m.), Ojakian ABSENT: Fazzino, Kleinberg, Kniss SPECIAL MEETING 1. Study Session with Library Advisory Commission re New Century Library Master Plan Library Advisory Commission (LAC) Chair Tom Wyman made a short presentation summarizing the work of the LAC during the prior year to prepare the report and its key recommendations. Six of the seven commissioners were in attendance. Vice Mayor Eakins thanked the LAC for its diligence as a new commission and its work developing the report. Council Members asked questions including: how the LAC determined public desires and the number of people involved; what the added costs were and duplication involved in having two Resource Libraries; what options were available if all the proposals were not funded (including extending the timeline for implementation); whether there was support in the community for a bond measure and would the LAC be willing to work in support of one; and, consideration made of the Chinese library resources in south Palo Alto. Beth Bunnenberg, a community member, spoke regarding the desirability of a local history room in an expanded Main Library. Vice Mayor Eakins announced that Council discussion of the plan would begin with the Policy and Services Committee, at which time the City Manager would price out the cost of the plan and outline policy issues to be considered. The potential of a bond issue to address library construction costs would be discussed by Council as part of citywide facilities funding and surveying of public support for a bond measure. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Ben Bailey, 600 Homer Avenue, spoke regarding the big 3 m.p.h. bicycle/stop sign caper (#6 of 50), and the two-minute gag rule of Mr. Benest. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
05/22/00 90-166
Regular Meeting May 22, 2000 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 7:03 p.m. PRESENT: Beecham, Burch, Eakins, Fazzino (by teleconference from Washington D.C.), Lytle, Mossar, Ojakian ABSENT: Kleinberg, Kniss absent. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 1. Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for Public Art Commission MOTION: Council Member Lytle moved, seconded by Fazzino, to interview only the new candidates and not the incumbents, and to ask Vice Mayor Eakins to appoint a subcommittee to interview the candidates. MOTION PASSED 7-0, Kleinberg, Kniss absent. Vice Mayor Eakins announced that the subcommittee would consist of her and Council Members Mossar and Ojakian, and the interviews would be held at 5:30 p.m. on June 5, 2000. City Clerk Donna Rogers announced that Judy Gittelsohn and Barbara Mortkowitz received four or more votes and would be interviewed. 2. Presentation of the PTI Award No action required. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Joseph Hirsch, 4149 Georgia Avenue, spoke regarding the Jewish Community Center, Terman Community Center, Palo Alto Unified School District. Public Art Commissioner Brigid Barton spoke regarding Art in Public Places. Ben Bailey, 600 Homer Avenue, spoke regarding the big 3 m.p.h. bicycle/stop sign caper (#6 of 50), and the two-minute gag rule of Mr. Benest. John K. Abraham, 736 Ellsworth Place, spoke regarding public limits ordinance.
05/22/00 90-167
Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, spoke regarding streamlining City Council meeting procedures. Ed Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding politics. Kathy Durham, 2039 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding school traffic calming. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme Street, spoke regarding oral communications. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Council Member Mossar moved, seconded by Ojakian, to approve the Minutes of April 3, 2000, as corrected, and April 10, 2000, as submitted. MOTION PASSED 7-0, Kleinberg, Kniss absent. CONSENT CALENDAR Vice Mayor Eakins noted she would not participate on Item No. 8 due to a conflict of interest. Council Member Ojakian was appointed Temporary Presiding Officer for the purpose of signing legal documents relating Item to No. 8 - Approval of Software License and Service Agreement, Amendment One to the Software License and Service Agreement and Enterprise License Addendum with Oracle Corporation Inc., in the Amount of $551,336 and Approval of Municipal Payment Plan Agreement with Oracle Credit Corporation. Council Member Mossar noted she would not participate in Item Nos. 4 and 5 due to conflicts of interest. . MOTION: Council Member Mossar moved, seconded by Ojakian, to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 3 – 5, 7 – 11A, with Item No. 6 removed by Vice Mayor Eakins to become Item No. 17A. 3. Ordinance 4635 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing an Amendment to Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System (Inclusion of Employees Performing Duties of Fire Fighting, Fire Prevention, Fire Training, Hazardous Materials, Emergency Medical Services or Fire or Arson Investigation Services Within the ‘Local Fire Fighter’ Classification)” (1st Reading 4/24/00, PASSED 9-0) 4. Ordinance 4636 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 2.10 [Cable Television Systems – Award of Franchises by City Council] to Regulate Cable Television Systems and Open Video Systems with Respect to 1) Occupancy and Use of Public Rights-of-Way, 2) Establishment of 05/22/00 90-168
Franchise and License Requirements, 3) Customer Service Standards, and 4) Minimum Requirements for Construction, Operation, Maintenance and Repair” (1st Reading 5/08/00, PASSED 8-0, Mossar “not participating.”) 5. Ordinance 4637 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Classification of Property at the Intersection of El Camino Real and Page Mill Road Known as 3000 El Camino Real (Palo Alto Square) From PC Planned Community 2533 to PC Planned Community” (1st Reading 5/01/00, PASSED 8-0, Mossar “not participating.”) 7. Proposed Pole Attachment Fees Resolution 7968 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Utility Rate Schedule E-16 of the City of Palo Alto Utilities Rates and Charges Pertaining to Unmetered Electric Service” 8. Approval of Software License and Services Agreement, Amendment One to the Software License and Service Agreement and Enterprise License Addendum with Oracle Corporation Inc. in the Amount of $551,336 and Approval of Municipal Payment Plan Agreement with Oracle Credit Corporation 9. Ordinance 4638 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1999-00 to Accept a $16,118 Grant from the California Arts Council and to Provide an Additional Appropriation for the Community Services Department of $16,118” 10. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and O’Grady Paving Inc. in the Amount of $1,772,887 for the 2000 Street Maintenance Capital Improvement Project #18670/18971 11. Request for Authorization to Increase the Amount of the Existing Contract for Legal Services with the Law Firm of Miller, Canfield, Paddock & Stone, P.L.C. 11A. Modification of Subdivision Agreement for Wisteria Condominiums, 4114 Goebel Lane and 579 Vista, Tract No. 9128 MOTION PASSED 7-0 on Item Nos. 3 and 9-11A, Kleinberg, Kniss absent. MOTION PASSED 6-0 on Item Nos. 4 and 5, Mossar “not participating,” Kleinberg, Kniss absent. MOTION PASSED 6-1 on Item No. 7, Lytle “no,” Kleinberg, Kniss absent. 05/22/00 90-169
MOTION PASSED 6-0 on Item No. 8, Eakins “not participating,” Kleinberg, Kniss absent. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS MOTION: Council Member Mossar moved, seconded by Lytle, to continue Item No. 16 to a date uncertain. MOTION PASSED 6-0, Fazzino, Kleinberg, Kniss absent. MOTION: Council Member Mossar moved, seconded by Eakins, to remove Item No. 17 to be included with the 2000-2001 budget process in June. MOTION PASSED 6-0, Fazzino, Kleinberg, Kniss absent. Vice Mayor Eakins announced that Item No. 14 would be removed from the agenda at the request of the applicant. Council Member Mossar said the Council received an e-mail from Herb Borock regarding removal of the item and asked the City Attorney to address his concerns. City Attorney Ariel Calonne said the applicant was asked to withdraw his application due to those same concerns. The application was withdrawn so the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) timeline was stopped and no longer a concern. The purpose for withdrawing the application was to preserve all the rights of the City. CLOSED SESSION This item may occur during the recess or after the Regular Meeting. Vice Mayor Eakins announced that the Closed Session would be heard at the end of the meeting. 12. Conference with Labor Negotiator Agency Negotiator: City Manager and his designees pursuant to the Merit System Rules and Regulations (Jay Rounds, Ruben Grijalva) Represented Employee Organization: Palo Alto Fire Chiefs Association Authority: Government Code section 54957.6 13. Conference with Labor Negotiator Agency Negotiator: City Manager and his designees pursuant to the Merit System Rules and Regulations (Jay Rounds, Lynne Johnson, Susan Ryerson, Brad Zook, Tom Merson)
05/22/00 90-170
Represented Employee Organization: Palo Alto Peace Officers’ Association (PAPOA) Authority: Government Code section 54957.6 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 14. PUBLIC HEARING: The Palo Alto City Council will consider an application for a Zone Change from Downtown Commercial Service Pedestrian Overlay (CD-S)(P) District to the Planned Community (PC) Zone for property located at 800 High Street, to allow demolition of an existing 17,632-square-foot manufacturing building and construction of a new 48-foot-high, three-story mixed use building, including 26 residential units, 48,030 square feet of office space, 2,379 square feet of retail space, a subterranean parking garage and related site improvements; a variance for a portion of the third floor residential area that exceeds the City’s height requirement; and certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report for the project. (Continued from 9/21/99 Item removed at the request of the applicant. PUBLIC HEARINGS 15. PUBLIC HEARING: The Palo Alto City Council will consider a request by Bergtraun-Evard Architects, AIA, on behalf of the Goldman family for Site and Design review of construction of two residences on two adjacent parcels located at 3220 and 3230 Alexis Drive having a combined total area of approximately 3.2 acres within the Open Space Zoning District. The primary residence would be a 13,400 square foot single-family residence, including a three-car garage plus five uncovered parking spaces, and site improvements including a lap pool, turning court and terrace areas, for 15,063 square feet of impervious area (building and paving combined). The second residence would be a 3,359 square foot single-family residence, including a four car garage plus two uncovered parking spaces, and site improvements including a pool, turning court and terrace areas, for 5,043 square feet of impervious area (building and paving combined). Environmental Assessment: An initial study has been prepared, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration is proposed in accordance with CEQA guidelines. Council Members Burch and Lytle met with the architect, reviewed the model, and visited the site. Council Member Beecham met with the applicant. Council Member Ojakian met with the applicant and landscape
05/22/00 90-171
architect. Vice Mayor Eakins met with the architect, landscape architect, and owner, viewed the model, and visited the site and Vista Hill. Chief Planning Official Lisa Grote said the proposal was for two houses on two lots in the Open Space (OS) district that required a site and design application. Because the two lots were being developed together, an Architectural Review Board (ARB) review was also required. The ARB recommendations from that review were included in the staff report (CMR:230:00) along with the Planning and Transportation Commission recommendations. The development requirements for single-family homes in an open space district were different than the typical single-family district such as R-1. The primary difference in an OS district was improvement coverage at 3.5 percent rather than an impervious house coverage requirement a maximum house size. That requirement included the buildings and other types of impervious coverage which could be driveways, decking, and other types of amenities or features on the site. There was also a height limit of 25 feet and a two-story limitation rather than a 30-foot height limit, which was typically found in a R-1 district. In the application, the two combined houses had a total impervious coverage of 20,000 square feet; 15,000 square feet for the larger of the two houses, and 5,000 square feet for the smaller of the two houses. As part of the settlement agreement decided in 1979, the site allowed up to 30,000 square feet of impervious coverage for both parcels, which was within that 30,000 limit at 20,000 square feet. A primary question raised with regard to the application was what was considered impervious and what was considered permeable. Staff considered a portion of the driveway permeable because it would absorb up to 21-inches of rain per hour, which the Public Works Department staff agreed. Although it was a room of stone that had portions that were not permeable, the portions around the driveway were. The height limit was another main difference because the OS district had a 25-foot height limit. The zoning ordinance definition for terraced or stepped buildings allowed height to be calculated per section of the building, and at no point did a section of the house exceed the 25-foot height limit. The garage would be completely underground with the garage door only being visible, so the garage would not be seen as part of the perceived mass of the building. The application went through a preliminary ARB review prior to the application for site and design. As a result, many changes were made and were included in the drawings before the Council that evening. The Planning Arborist looked at the revised landscape plan and recommended approval with the Valley Oaks and Coast Live Oaks screening the majority of the buildings. Staff concluded there would not be a significant adverse impact environmentally because of the screening. The materials and colors were of a natural color and would further reduce the visual impact. The ARB, Planning and Transportation Commission, and staff recommended approval of the application.
05/22/00 90-172
Council Member Mossar said 21-inches of rain per hour was worse than rainfall in Hawaii. She recalled reviewing the hillside residential applications over the past two years, and the Council was told in heavy rains that no surface was permeable. Ms. Grote said there was additional information from both staff and the applicant that could be given to the Council. No one expected 21-inches of rain in an hour. As long as there was eight feet of gravel at the base of the surface material and the stone and what surrounded it, it could absorb up to that amount. Council Member Mossar clarified Valley Oak trees were deciduous and asked whether the trees only screened sometimes. Ms. Grote said Valley Oaks grew taller than Coastal Live Oaks and had a lacier crown but screened a greater portion of the building when in full leaf. Sometimes during the year when the leaves dropped, the trees would not screen as much. Council Member Mossar asked the Planning Arborist how many months a year the Valley Oak was leafless. Planning Arborist Dave Dockter said Valley Oak would be leafless about three months out of the year. The branch characteristics had an upright and taller growth pattern than Coastal Live Oaks, which were broader. Alex Bergtraun, applicant, 947 Industrial Avenue, understood from the site was a sensitive one. The clients of the project, the Goldmans, understood the most important thing to do was group the two sites together, creating a cluster development in order to minimize the impact on the site and its surroundings. He believed because the Goldman’s went through the process, that unanimous approval was attained from the ARB and the Planning and Transportation Commission. They were not asking for variances but simply trying to create a home for the Goldmans to raise their family. Tito Patri, landscape architect for the applicant, 15 Vandwater, San Francisco, said the foundation concepts were twofold: clustering and a forestation screening. The two basic elements of the forestation screening were Oak Woodland and Redwood Riparian. He referred to a graphic on the screen; specifically the grasslands that were kept artificially open through grazing and currently a systemic discing in order to control fire hazard. Other areas of the park would show where the grazing was taken off and that the Oak Woodland was beginning to encroach into the grasslands; a natural process called succession. Another element was the pattern of the Redwood Riparian vegetation. The two vegetation communities were being jump-started randomly by planting them in various sizes and carrying an arm of Oak Woodland from the east side of the slopes to the west side of the buildings, and a group of oaks on
05/22/00 90-173
the top of the knoll. The second arm that extended from the head of Arastradero Creek was the Redwood Riparian. The trees were layered. The random spacing in varied size was ecologically conservative which meant the forest would be healthier and would survive more easily than a hedge-type of screening approach. The broken pattern of leaf masses and the shadows caused by the trees would blend with the elements of the house that used natural earth materials. The line of existing oak trees to the east of the site and the additional Oak Woodland trees that would be planted on that site would exceed the roofline. Gregory Evard, applicant, 947 Industrial Avenue, said the project existed at the end of a cul-de-sac. The scheme was to cluster the buildings together to create a single cohesive project. Great lengths were taken to nestle the building into the hillside. The use of garden roof on the lower portion of the project facing the Vista Point was incorporated to cover those areas and would be planted with various vegetation. The building form directly echoed the top of the knoll. The radial came from preserving the top of the knoll, pulling off the edge, and clustering it together with the guesthouse. Illustrated in the model was the connection of the proposed planting with the existing planting. The site from the Vista Point showed large plant mass to the foreground to the right and the large plant mass beyond was to the foreground. The proposed tree mass linked the two, putting the house at a clearing at the edge of the meadow. By clustering the two together a few excellent things happened: 25 percent less driveway than previously approved, and because the two projects were pulled together, the driveway was pulled out 100 feet outside the environmentally sensitive area of the creek and riparian corridor. There was 30 percent less impermeable area in the project than was previously approved. Amenities were being shared on both sides. They were also able to pull the houses off the knoll and saddle as previously planned. Mr. Bergtraun said they tried to create an earth tone, natural material pallet that would blend and recede into the site. A stone material was selected for the lower portions of the building, a natural wood for the window system and eave line, and a heavy textured slate for the roof. Some of the recreational areas around the pool would be paved with natural sandstone, and the garden roof would be planted with natural plant mass. Mr. Evard said they were sensitive about the view from Vista Point as was brought up in an earlier Planning and Transportation Commission meeting to look carefully at the type of glass to be used. The glass was studied carefully, and a type of glass was found that was almost completely anti-reflective. Council Member Mossar asked about imperviousness. Mr. Evard said the way the material was presented was the way the test showed which accepted 20 inches of rain per hour. It was used
05/22/00 90-174
in Europe on tarmacs and other places where it was critical. Council Member Mossar asked whether calculations were done with the actual ground underneath. Mr. Evard said it was important to have the proper substraight, which needed to be engineered specifically for the project. They were confident the material would perform as it was supposed to. Council Member Burch said there was a new slate product that provided a portion of the homes energy and asked whether that option was considered. Mr. Evard said that option had not been explored. Council Member Burch asked whether there was any concern given to the use of recycling gray water produced by the units. Mr. Patri said there were water resources issues such as reinjecting runoff waters and a series of something the equivalent of septic trenches. They worked with gray water and filtration and using the gray water in the landscape. Council Member Burch said the applicants were environmentally conscience, and he wanted to extend that as much as possible. Vice Mayor Eakins declared the Public Hearing open. Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, referred to a letter the Council received at places requesting a continuance because the Council did not have the complete public record. The Council did not have the verbatim minutes from the ARB or the verbatim minutes of the preliminary review before the ARB. For example, one applicant commented on preserving the knoll, and he recalled one of the ARB members state the knoll was being cut into substantially. He was also concerned about the 3-stories and the 35 feet. He displayed an advertisement for the Rima stone which used the word “permeable” in three places, but the pattern showed how large the stones were compared to the space in-between. If the entire site was covered that way, it would be 100 percent permeable, which was not true. The Public Works Department had not run any tests on the products. There was a conflict between what was required for permeability and what was required for the geotechnical report for stability. He believed the City should require a transfer of the extra 10,000-square-foot entitlement for impervious coverage to be used for the driveway and to have an irrevocable agreement that the extra 10,000 square feet would not be used for floor area. Because the model was so small, comparing how big the building would be versus where it actually would be was difficult. Additionally, what the vegetation would look like was difficult to determine. Other issues in his letter dealt with height, erosion, and sediment control that was needed after completion of the project, the material sample for the
05/22/00 90-175
stone was just a fragment rather than how big the stone and what the spacing was, there were no conditions for the particular materials and colors of the stone, and the landscaping conditions were inferior to previous projects on the site two to three years prior. If protecting the view from Vista Point was important, then enforceable conditions would be needed. A performance bond should be required as was previously recommended in prior projects and, the project should exist without fencing between the project and the public land. He did not want the project not to have fencing between it and dedicated parkland as a reason to prevent people from using that dedicated parkland, which was the 66-acre common area of the subdivision and the adjoining 22-acres to the south. The landscaping needed to be established as well as irrigation plans. John Baca, 484 Oxford Avenue, did not understand how the Council could continue to make decisions approving projects that would add to the cumulative degradation of the environment in Palo Alto. He mentioned he sent in a letter on April 26, 2000, regarding the project and had not seen it in the information. Vice Mayor Eakins recalled reading the letter in the e-mail version and if received early, would have been distributed in the document letters from the public. Mr. Bergtraun said the Council needed to look at the overall communal effect of the project. For over one and one-half years, a great effort was put into the project so it to see how the project could work perfectly in the neighborhood and work for their clients at the same time. The permeable materials were looked at the first week of the project. A study was done with the Fire Department to ensure that the material would work for the fire trucks. The tests were studied with respect to the permeability. The material came from Germany, a country where rain was a real concern about impacting on airport tarmacs. Germany found the material to work with the right base underneath getting 21.25 inches per hour. There was nothing in Palo Alto similar in terms of hourly rainfall. Regarding the three stories that Ms. Grote commented on, because of the findings from the preliminary ARB meeting, the garage was dropped an extra floor specifically to have less impact on the site. The irrigation and grading plans were conditions that would be met prior to the building permit. Much time was spent on the model and specifically went tree by tree to make sure it was right on target with everything due to the sensitivity of the project. With regard to fencing, they tried to stay away from fencing and suburbanization of the site. Vice Mayor Eakins declared the Public Hearing closed. Council Member Ojakian disclosed that he had discussed the project with former Mayor Jean McCown.
05/22/00 90-176
Council Member Mossar understood that the manufacturer and the Public Works Department agreed that the permeable surface could absorb 21-inches of rain per hour, and a caveat was added to use the appropriate substrate. She assumed that eight inches of gravel would be put underneath, but at the base of the gravel was the substrate that existed in the hills, and she asked where the water went. The substrate would not absorb water at that rate. Mr. Patri said all runoff waters would be treated similarly to a leach field system where runoff from a roof would be directed to a series of leach lines. Any water from the driveway would be treated in the same way. Council Member Mossar said apparently there was not yet detailed engineering, it was only in concept. Mr. Patri said that was correct. Planning and Transportation Commissioner Phyllis Cassel said the Planning and Transportation Commission approved the project unanimously but had some of the same concerns as the Council. The applicant was clever by combining the two sites and nestling the project into the hills in order to build a large unit. The unit would be pleasant and attractive and would be seen from Vista Point, and the vegetation would take many years to mature. The design fits the site and all the rules and regulations. Vice Mayor Eakins asked for advice with regard to Mr. Borock’s comments about the public record being incomplete. City Attorney Ariel Calonne said there was no legally compelled action. The proceeding was de novo, meaning from new, and to carry that to its extension, none of the lower materials would be needed. The issue for the Council was whether it felt comfortable about what information it had as to what the ARB did. If the Council was comfortable, he felt the Council did not have to continue or take any other action. Ms. Grote said the ARB action minutes were included as an attachment. Also, there was a summation of the preliminary ARB review in the ARB staff report, which specifically stated what the ARB raised as issues and concerns as part of the preliminary review Vice Mayor Eakins asked whether the information lacked calculations. Ms. Grote said with regard to erosion and sediment control, there were preliminary plans and conditions 18-21 that addressed those issues. There were no calculations on the permeable surface done as yet because those were test cases and preliminary review. That absorption rate was calculated for each site, so the calculations were not done for the proposed site as yet but would be.
05/22/00 90-177
Mr. Beecham said the project was innovative, sensitive to the surroundings, and strongly superior to what the City had already approved on those sites. He welcomed the design to that area. MOTION: Council Member Beecham moved, seconded by Fazzino, to 1) approve the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project for the properties located at 3220 and 3230 Alexis Drive (Attachment 5, CMR:230:00); and 2) approve the proposed project, based upon Site and Design findings (Attachment 3, CMR:230:00) and subject to the recommended conditions of approval (Attachment 4, CMR:230:00). Findings for Approval Site and Design Review 3220 and 3230 Alexis Drive 3230 Alexis:99-D-5, 99-ARB-149, 99-EIA-29 3220 Alexis:99-D-6, 99-ARB-150, 99-EIA-30 1. The project will be constructed and operated in a manner that will be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites.
The proposed project improvements will be sufficiently screened so as not to impact the future neighbor’s privacy or enjoyment of their property, and when the tree plantings are mature, the project will eventually be substantially screened from Vista Point in Foothills Park. 2. The project is designed in such a way as to ensure the desirability of investment, or the conduct of business,
research of educational activities, or other authorized occupations, in the same or adjacent area. The project will maintain desirability of investment in the same and adjacent areas, the proposed design and size of the residence and related improvements are generally consistent with the existing residences on Alexis Drive and the construction of the residences will be governed by the current Zoning Code, the Uniform Building Code and other applicable codes, to assure safety and a high quality of development. 3. Sound principles of environmental design and ecological
balance will be observed in construction of the project. The proposed dwellings have been designed to be consistent with the Open Space Development Criteria adopted by the City Council to mitigate the impacts of development in the foothills area of the community. The proposed design will follow existing topography. The project, which includes implementation of the Mitigation Measures, will not create
05/22/00 90-178
significant environmental impacts as indicated by the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project.
4. The project is in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. Policy L-1 of the 1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan states, “Retain undeveloped land west of the Foothill Freeway and Junipero Serra as open space, with allowances made for very low-intensity development consistent with the open space character of the area.” The residential construction is not in conflict with this policy. The project is in compliance with the goals and intent of the Comprehensive Plan, since the project meets the Open Space Development Criteria. Findings for Open Space Criteria 3220 and 3230 Alexis Drive 3230 Alexis:99-D-5, 99-ARB-149, 99-EIA-29 3220 Alexis:99-D-6, 99-ARB-150, 99-EIA-30
1. The development should not be visually intrusive from public roadways and public parklands. As much as possible, development should be sited so it is hidden from view. The proposed construction will be visible from Vista Point in Foothill Park. The project is sited toward Alexis Drive to minimize the visual intrusion upon Foothill Park, and the houses are nestled into the more recessed portion of the hill. Significant screening vegetation and earth mounds are proposed to partially screen the structures and access driveways from Vista Point in Foothill Park. The proposed trees, when mature, will provide a softening of the development, as shown on the visual study submitted with the application. The visual impact of the homes will also be minimized by the use of natural building materials and earth tone colors. The model and story poles will assist in a visual determination by the Planning Commission, Architectural Review Board, and City Council as to the impact of the proposed development. 2. Development should be located away from hilltops and designed to not extend above the nearest ridgeline. The footprints of the two homes are not located on top of the knoll or on top of the ridge. The simple roof form of the larger residence follows the slope of the adjacent sloping grade. However, the structures may be seen above the ridgeline from the vantagepoint of lower elevations. Again, the story poles will assist in a visual determination. 3. Site and structure design should take into consideration impacts on privacy and views of neighboring properties. The adjacent undeveloped property to the north, 3210 Alexis Drive, is located approximately 46 feet from the northernmost edge of
05/22/00 90-179
the larger home, and 96 feet from the easternmost edge of the larger home. The smaller house would be set back approximately 102 feet from the 3210 Alexis parcel. Due to the siting of 3210 Alexis on the north-facing slope of the knoll, the primary view for that property will be to the north. In addition, the existing oak trees on 3210 Alexis, the proposed earth mound and tree plantings on the subject property will mitigate views of the proposed structures from 3210 Alexis Drive. 4. Development should be clustered, or closely grouped, in relation to the area surrounding it to make it less
conspicuous, minimize access roads, and reduce fragmentation of natural habitats. The proposal is for cluster development into a single complex. The mass of the larger home is set into and along the natural contours of the site. The buildings are clustered together in the direction of Alexis Drive, which allows the retention of undeveloped area on the westernmost half of lot 8, and allows a reduction in the total driveway area. An access easement proposed across 3230 Alexis Drive allows a reduction in the number of driveways, and the proposed 12-foot wide driveway would be of permeable earth tone materials and required turnouts would be turfblock.
5. Built forms and landscape forms should mimic the natural topography. Building lines should follow the lines of the terrain, and trees and bushes should appear natural from a distance. The use of split floor levels and below grade floor levels for the buildings which roughly follow the slope of the knoll and saddle ridge is responsive to the natural topography. The proposed grading on the site would rearrange the slopes of these natural topographic features to provide additional screening. The simple roof forms would follow the natural topography, and the house would step back in the direction of the slope. The roof over approximately 1,995 square feet of basement living area will be a “garden roof,” planted with meadow grass or similar vegetation, to mitigate the mass. It will be difficult to simulate a natural vegetation growth pattern from a distance, since the existing knoll and saddle ridge are devoid of trees. However, the landscape plan provides ample tree plantings to provide screening where feasible. The extensive plantings would be native species with “finger-like” extensions into the site. 6. Existing trees with a circumference of 37.5 inches, measured 4.5 feet above the ground level, should be preserved and integrated into the site design. Existing vegetation should
be retained as much as possible. No healthy trees are to be removed from the site. There is no vegetation on the knolls or valleys of the site, only along the southerly perimeter. The Arborist Report has been evaluated by the City’s Planning
05/22/00 90-180
Arborist, who has suggested the removal of four Pines that are in average to poor health along the property line. 7. Cut is encouraged when it is necessary for geotechnical
stability and to enable the development to blend into the natural topography. Fill is generally discouraged and should never be distributed within the driplines of existing trees. Locate development to minimize the need for grading. The cuts proposed for submersion of the garages and basement areas are encouraged, because they enable development to blend into the natural topography. The other cuts proposed between the two homes do not appear to be made for geotechnical stability, but to provide for vehicle access and level outdoor recreation areas. The proposed fill is proposed for screening purposes (sloped areas adjacent to the guest house and upper parking area), to level out the driveway slope for smoother access across 3230 Alexis Drive, and to provide a level terrace area adjacent to the guest house. The sloped area to the west of the guesthouse is designed to provide screening of the filled terrace area. 8. To reduce the need for cut and fill and to reduce potential
runoff, large, flat expanses of impervious surfaces should be avoided. Impervious surfaces are used only for retaining walls, utility enclosure areas, pool coping, and concrete steps. Semipervious surfaces are proposed for the poolside terraces and other large flat expanses adjacent to the two houses. 9. Buildings should use natural materials and earthtone or subdued colors. Natural building materials in earthtones are
proposed. All proposed building materials are natural, in earth tone colors that will blend with the surroundings.
10. Landscaping should be native species that require little or no irrigation. Immediately adjacent to structures, fire retardant plants should be used as a fire prevention technique. An extensive native planting plan and irrigation plan is proposed. The conditions of approval will ensure the use of fire retardant plants in the final landscape design. 11. Exterior lighting should be low-intensity and shielded from view so it is not directly visible from off-site. The hardscape and landscape plans submitted with the application indicate these policies will be observed. The residences will create additional light and glare, but window coverings will minimize light spill from the rooms to the outside at night. The project is conditioned such that any landscape lights will be directed down to avoid any impact upon surrounding property and open space lands.
05/22/00 90-181
12. Access roads should be of a rural rather than urban character. (Standard curb, gutter, and concrete sidewalk are usually inconsistent with the foothills environment.) The access roads are proposed to be permeable "Rima" paving in an earth tone color, with no curb, gutter or sidewalk. 13. For development in unincorporated areas, ground coverage should be in general conformance with Palo Alto's Open Space District regulations. The project is within the City limits and meets the O-S (Open Space) zoning regulations. Conditions of Approval 3220 and 3230 Alexis Drive 3230 Alexis: 99-D-5, 99-ARB-149, 99-EIA-29 3220 Alexis:99-D-6, 99-ARB-150, 99-EIA-30 Department of Planning and Community Environment Conditions
Planning Division 1. The plans submitted for Building Permit shall be in substantial conformance with plans dated 1/14/00, except as modified to incorporate the following conditions of approval and any additional conditions placed on the project by the Planning Commission, Architectural Review Board or City Council. The following conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover sheet of the plan set submitted with the Building Permit application. 2. The approved building materials and color scheme shall be shown on the building permit drawings for all buildings, patios, fences, utilitarian enclosures, and other landscape features. 3. Any proposed exterior lighting shall be shown on the final construction drawings and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Palo Alto Planning Division. All lighting shall be minimal and shall direct light down and shield light away from the surrounding residences and open space lands. 4. All new windows and glass doors shall be of a non-reflective material. 5. The sloped planting area near the dining room lanai of the primary residence shall be enlarged to accommodate the three proposed large trees, to ensure growth of these trees to mitigate the impact of the building. Adequate soil volume shall be provided. 6. The project will be reviewed by the Architectural Review Board, Planning Commission and City Council to ensure that the
05/22/00 90-182
potential aesthetic impacts will be mitigated by the project's screening features, which include tree plantings and earth mounds. 7. If during grading and construction activities, any archeological or human remains are encountered, construction shall cease and a qualified archaeologist shall visit the site to address the find. The Santa Clara County Medical Examiner's office shall be notified to provide proper direction on how to proceed. If any Native American resources are encountered during construction, construction shall cease immediately until a Native American descendent, appointed by the Native American Heritage Commission of the State of California, is able to evaluate the site and make further recommendations and be involved in mitigation planning. 8. All mitigation measures identified by the Fire Department to address fire hazards on this site must be incorporated into the design. 9. The applicant shall provide a professional survey report as to the proximity of the creek swale to the project, and include the required 100-foot setback line on the site plan. No structures, impervious surfaces, outdoor activity areas or ornamental landscaped areas are allowed within the required setback. 10. Bordering the project, there are hillside edge trees and fence line plantings of non-native pines and Coast Redwoods along the property line fence. Of these, potential impacts may be only to the fence line trees. Because of this potential, staff requests a certified arborist assess the health, longevity and retention value of these trees for City review. There are four Pines (39-12) the arborist report identified as requiring removal due to beetle infestation. The applicant shall coordinate with Foothill Park rangers to coordinate the removal of these trees in conjunction with the development project. 11. On the southern visual exposure of each house, the applicant shall explore switching tree species from Valley Oak to Coast Redwood, to achieve timely rooftop screening (also recommended in the applicant’s arborist report.)
12. The applicant shall record a tying agreement, in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney, restricting the sale of one parcel without the other.
13. Prior to the submittal of Building Permit application, the applicants shall submit a proposal for semi-pervious terrace areas in detailed plans showing exactly which of the semi-pervious areas will be permeable and which of the semi-
05/22/00 90-183
pervious areas will be impervious, such that 50% of the area will be permeable. No area represented as permeable paving in project plans dated 1/14/00 shall be converted to impervious paving unless an equal are of impervious paving is converted to permeable paving.
Building 14. All new construction will be required to comply with the provisions of the most current Uniform Building Code (UBC), portions of which are directed at minimizing seismic risk and preventing loss of life and property in the event of an earthquake. 15. Lighted address sign must be seen from the street. Public Works Department Public Works Engineering 16. A formal site drainage plan produced by a qualified civil engineer shall be presented with the Building Permit submission and must be approved by Public Works before permit issuance. The Permittee is required to submit a drainage plan showing existing and proposed drainage of the site. This plan should show spot elevations of existing and proposed grades that show how drainage patterns work. Existing drainage from adjacent properties shall be maintained. Show how drainage from the buildings and hardscape will be directed. The drainage plan must also show roof water access. 17. Grading activities west of Interstate 280 are restricted to the time between April 15 to October 15. This time may be further restricted to adjust to seasonal rain fluctuations. If construction, especially grading and landscaping, will not be completed prior to October 15, an erosion control plan will also be required for presentation with the Building Permit submission. Exposed earth surfaces shall be watered frequently, during the late morning and at the end of the day, with frequency of watering increasing on windy days. Spillage resulting from hauling operations along or across any public or private property shall be removed immediately. Overfilling of trucks by the contractor is prohibited. Trucks shall be covered during the transportation of demolished materials from the site. 18. A soils report shall be submitted with each building permit application. This project shall address both the compaction associated with the grading and the highest projected groundwater level. Pumping of groundwater will not be permitted.
05/22/00 90-184
19. The applicant is required to meet with Public Works Engineering (PWE) prior to submission of the Building Permit to verify the basic design parameters affecting grading, drainage and surface water filtration. The Applicant will be required to submit a conceptual grading and drainage plan for PWE approval. In order to address potential storm water quality impacts, the plan shall identify best management practices (BMP's) to be incorporated in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPP) that will be required for the project. The SWPP shall include both temporary BMP’s to be implemented during construction and permanent BMP’s to be incorporated into the project to protect storm water quality. The PWE approved conceptual grading and drainage plan shall be incorporated into the building permit plans. 20. Any construction within the city right of way must have an approved Permit for Construction in the Public Street prior to commencement of this work. This statement must be located adjacent to the proposed work on the site plan. 21. An ingress/egress easement must be provided by the 3230 Alexis property and in favor of the 3220 Alexis property for the driveway access to 3220 Alexis. This easement must allow unlimited access to 3220 Alexis both on the surface and subsurface utility installation. This easement must be recorded and run with both parcels. This easement shall be recorded prior to the issuance of any Building Permit for the proposed project. Utilities Department
Utilities Engineering - Water, Gas & Wastewater 22. All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto Utility Standard Specifications and the utility Department Standard Conditions. 23. The applicant shall submit a completed Water-Gas-Wastewater Service Connection application (load sheet) for the City if Palo Alto Utilities. The applicant must provide all the information requested for utility service demands (water in g.p.m., gas in BTUPH, and sewer in g.p.d). 24. The applicant shall submit improvement plans for utility construction. The plans must show the size and location of all underground utilities within the development and the public right-of-way, including meters, backflow preventers, fire service requirements, sewer cleanouts, and any other required utilities. 25. All water connections from Palo Alto Utilities must comply with requirements of California Administrative Code, Title 17,
05/22/00 90-185
Sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive. Contact Morris White at 650-496-6972, City’s Cross Connection Control Inspector, to determine the type of protection required to prevent backflow into the public water supply. 26. Utility connection charges must be paid prior to the scheduling of any work performed by the City of Palo Alto. Utilities Engineering - Electrical 27. All electric utility design and installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto, Electric Service Requirement Manual, 1999. 28. The electric site plans must show the size, location of all new installations and equipment along with all utilities in their vicinity (WGW, Telephone, Fiber Optics, etc.). These plans may be developed by a field survey with City underground inspectors/Engineering estimators. Call 496-6965 or 586-4534 to schedule a field meeting. 29. Applicant shall provide and acquire all Utility easements as required for the properties as above. Generally, minimum 3 ft. clearance from all three sides and 10 ft. clearance from operating doors shall be required for any padmount transformers. All locations of any equipment shall have to be accessible at all times for the maintenance/operations staff. 30. Though no conflict is apparent at this time for this project with the existing City Electric plans or facilities in the general location shown, the customer/property owner shall have to modify or adjust the final design for any unforeseen changes in Electric service configuration or any Capital improvement project(s) by the City in the area. Fire Department 31. The plans meet the requirement for a fire access road 20 feet in width with 13'6" vertical clearance, weight access (60,000 lbs.) and turning radius (36 ft. inside) requirements of fire truck, all-weather, reaching to within 150 feet of any point on the first floor exterior but that field verification shall be required during grading. 32. Building permit plans shall show a fire sprinkler system that meets the requirements of NFPA Standard No.13D - 1996 Edition. Fire Sprinkler system installations require separate submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Building Permit plans will not be approved unless complete sprinkler coverage is indicated.
05/22/00 90-186
33. An approved underground water supply shall be provided for the sprinkler system, and shall meet the requirements of NFPA Standard No. 24 - 1996 Edition. Water supply system installations for fire protection shall require separate submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau. (PAMC 15.04.084) Fire Department approval will be withheld until Utilities Department and Public Works Department requirements have been met. 34. Additional hydrants must be provided to make a minimum of 3 hydrants available within 500 feet of the point on the access road closest to the structure (fire supply shall be designed to provide a combined flow from the hydrants of not less than 3,000 gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20 psig) 98CFC903.4.2. Delivery of building materials to the site will be prohibited until the hydrants and adequate water supply have been provided. 35. Tree Limbs and other vegetation shall be kept clear of the structure in accordance with Appendix II-A of the 1998 California Fire Code. No tree shall be planted closer than 10 feet to any point on the exterior of the building. 36. The entry gate shall be widened to accommodate a fire truck and keyed for Fire Department access or a Key Box shall be provided. Contact Fire Prevention Bureau at 329-2184 for details. Council Member Fazzino said although the City would prefer the site to remain as pristine open space. The reality was the owner had a right to develop it; and within those development parameters, the proposal was excellent and better than the previous proposal. He was pleased with the way the two sites were combined using the hill and landscaping proposal. He supported the motion. Council Member Lytle said the City was fortunate that the owner had the values and the resources to provide such a sensitive design. To reassure some of the public as to the size of the house, most of the houses on the hillside that caused such visual impact were 3,500 square feet. A comparable design to the Goldman proposal was the 1,500-square-foot Fenwick house of the same size, which was virtually invisible because the plan was graded into the knoll. The lower the homes could be built into the ridgeline using the right types of materials, the better the outcome could be within the City’s rules. She supported the motion. Council Member Mossar would not support the motion. She could not accept the negative declaration presented by staff. The project and team of designers had worked hard and were committed to making the project compatible and environmentally sensitive. The Council had special privileges of review in open space areas for
05/22/00 90-187
residential, and it was the Council’s job to protect and preserve those open space lands as limited and valuable resources. The parts of the project that concerned her had not yet been evaluated. The mitigations for the project were much like mitigations in other projects in open space areas in the last couple of years which were dependent upon future studies, permitting processes, watch-dogging, and the good will of the current and any future owner or tenant. Council Member Burch supported the motion. He said it was a large home on top of a hill, and the designers had done a gorgeous job of making the most of the project environmentally, using the right materials, and building it into the hill. He would prefer the City owned the land; but since the City did not, the project was the best that could be done given all the circumstances. Council Member Ojakian supported the motion. The applicant was sensitive to the situation. There was a long history about that particular hillside and legal battles. There were buildable lots and because of that, there were entitlements with the land and someone had the right to build something there. The question became whether that something was tasteful and fit in with what was happening on the hillside. Ms. Lytle’s comments were appropriate. All sizes of houses were on the hillside. Some had worked well because of the applicants’ sensitivity, but some worked poorly. He appreciated that the applicants would be using native plants, had a good forestation screening project, and that the units would be clustered. Vice Mayor Eakins believed that the design team and the owners had done an outstanding job of making an inspired design, beautiful materials, garden roofs, and landscaping. However, looking at the story poles from Vista Point, she could not support the motion because the bulk and mass were so large that the foreground would be dominated by the large house. All the landscaping and sensitive materials could not overcome the inevitable visual impact from that sensitive part of Foothills Park for such a large main structure. MOTION PASSED 5-2, Eakins, Mossar “no,” Kleinberg, Kniss absent. Council Member Fazzino left the meeting at 8:45 p.m. 16. PUBLIC HEARING: The Palo Alto City Council will consider approval of Site and Design, Variance, and Environmental Impact Assessment applications by the City of Palo Alto Community Services Department for a visitor information center Gateway Facility – APN 182-35-041, including office and meeting space, storage areas, public restrooms, and associated site improvements on City-owned property within the Arastradero Preserve open space area. The Variance will allow a reduced setback from the provisions of Section 20.08.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Environmental Assessment: A
05/22/00 90-188
Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project in accordance with CEQA Guidelines. Item continued to a date uncertain. ORDINANCES 17. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1999-00 to Provide an Additional Appropriation of $30,000 for a Feasibility Study in the Planning Department Relating to Train Whistles Item removed to go with the Fiscal Year 2000-01 Budget in June. 17A. (Old Item No. 6) Ordinance Adding Chapter 9.06 to Title 9 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Prohibit New Construction or Replacement of Wood Burning Fireplaces and Appliances Martin Bernstein, P.O. Box 1739, came to the Council as a practitioner of architecture and said that families in historic homes were requesting masonry wood burning fireplaces which was consistent with the character of the homes. From the published census data from the March vote regarding historic preservation, a majority of historic property homeowners voted for the ordinance because they cared about the character of their homes. At the last Council meeting, several Council Members requested additional information about Rumford-type fireplaces. That data was scientific regarding the efficiency of Rumford fireplaces and was included in the Council packet. He requested different exemptions to the ordinance for the Council to consider under Exemptions that exempt from the chapter shall be: 1) Rumford-type wood burning masonry fireplaces; 2) existing wood burning masonry fireplaces that were damaged from natural disasters such as earthquakes or floods; 3) existing wood burning masonry fireplaces in homes he remodeled; and 4) existing wood burning masonry fireplaces. He added a new proposal for the Council’s consideration: exempt from the chapter Rumford-type fireplaces in properties listed on the Historical Inventory. He read off a list of organizations that were Rumford fireplace advocates. He urged the Council to exempt Rumford fireplaces in order to allow families to experience that special character that came from a wood-burning fireplace. Jim Buckley, Rumford Fireplaces, said he designed clean burning and efficient historic fireplaces. He referred to Director of Planning and Community Environment Ed Gawf’s concluding remarks of instructions to the Council regarding the amendment of the ordinance for certain types of fireplaces, that the wood burning appliances that did not meet Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) certification did not appear to be a basis for doing so. He believed that was not a true conclusion. He attended the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) public hearings, and the 05/22/00 90-189
BAAQMD’s recommended all stakeholders and public speakers opposed the model ordinance. The issue was there was no objective performance standard set. There were a number of possible appropriate fireplace standards: the Washington standard and one in California that was almost complete which tests results would show there were some masonry fireplaces that were as clean as EPA burning wood stoves. He urged the Council not to ban fireplaces without an objective standard. Michael Gersick, California Hearths & Homes, said he felt the Council had already indicated its disposition on the matter. He requested that the Council acknowledge on the record that it understands that EPA certification bore no relationship to fireplaces. Fireplace emissions could not be measured using the EPA certification process. He particularly thanked Council Member Beecham, who was the only Council Member among the six who was willing to meet and discuss the issue of what the role and responsibility of a locally elected decision-maker should be. Tommie Mayfield, principal Air Quality Specialist for BAAQMD, San Francisco, said a memo was sent to the Council that outlined the BAAQMD’s position. In the public hearings that occurred with respect to the woodsmoke model ordinance, there was opposition to the BAAQMD’s position on the Washington State standard and also on equivalence. That position had not changed. In 1998, the BAAQMD did not think the test protocols were appropriate for the Washington State standard and, therefore, were not accepted. A certified laboratory did the testing, OMNI Laboratories, which tested wood heaters. Wood heaters were different from fireplaces. Subsequently, with respect to the BAAQMD, when a test facility that tested wood heaters was looked at, the test protocol was evaluated in accordance with the EPA method for wood heaters and not for fireplaces. Therefore, the BAAQMD would not want to accept a test protocol that applied to fireplaces. There was no performance standard for fireplaces, and BAAQMD worked with the Northern Sonoma Air Pollution Control District (NSAPCD) which had much history in the matter to develop a test protocol, not a certification. In the past NSAPCD had not accepted the Washington State test protocol which was why it was currently working on a test protocol. Without any kind of reputable preliminary information, no statement could be made that the data being developed by NSAPCD would show that fireplaces could be clean burning. The information was forthcoming, but NSAPCD could not comment on what the information would show until it was in print. With respect to Mr. Gersick’s comments, the NSAPCD agreed there was no EPA certification process. Council Member Ojakian said there were other local jurisdictions that passed similar legislation and asked if there were any issues over that.
05/22/00 90-190
Ms. Mayfield pointed out that Los Gatos and Petaluma had an ordinance since 1992 with no reportable problems; Northern Sonoma had an ordinance since the early 1990s without problems; and since 1999 Dublin had 120 units already subject to the ordinance without any problems. Mr. Bernstein said during the Council meeting on May 1, 2000, when Council Member Kleinberg was preparing to make her motion to exempt Rumford fireplaces, Mayor Kniss and Council Member Fazzino were in attendance and ready to approve the exemption. His observed that those three Council Members were not in attendance that evening. Director of Planning and Community Environment Ed Gawf said the way the ordinance was crafted, staff tried to balance the different interests that were in question. The ordinance applied to new fireplaces that were constructed in new structures. The ordinance allowed existing houses or structures that were demolished or remodeled to continue to use the wood burning fireplaces including historic houses. The applicant was required to bring in the plan for the new house or structure at the same time that a demolition permit was requested. Also required was a gas line be extended to the fireplace to make more feasibility in the future. There was much discussion on the different approaches to the traditional wood burning fireplaces and whether air quality standards were needed. Palo Alto relied upon the BAAQMD to give it recommendations and advice on how to address the issue, and staff tried to craft an ordinance that was fair but also one that moved the City toward addressing that issue. MOTION: Council Member Mossar moved, seconded by Beecham, to adopt the ordinance. Ordinance 4639 entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Chapter 9.06 to Title 9 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Prohibit New Construction or Replacement of Wood Burning Fireplaces and Appliances” (1st Reading 5/01/00, PASSED 9-0) Council Member Beecham understood that the EPA did not currently have plans to certify fireplaces and his expectation was the EPA was not likely to do that. He felt the environment was so dense that absent romanticism, the public in general could no longer afford to have wood burning fireplaces. The ordinance was a small step in reducing what was a severe issue for some people. He was happy to support the motion. MOTION PASSED 6-0, Fazzino, Kleinberg, Kniss absent. REPORTS OF OFFICIALS 18. Presentation of Top Five Council Priorities for 2000/2001 05/22/00 90-191
City Manager Frank Benest provided a brief summary of the City Council retreat held on May 15, 2000, to accomplish two objectives: to identify five key priorities for the 2000-01 fiscal year; and to explore how the City could work smarter by streamlining how the Council conducted its business and various administrative processes. In terms of priorities, the Council reviewed almost 40 key projects and initiatives and selected the following five priorities: Long Range Financial Plan to identify the means to fund the rehabilitation of existing infrastructure as well as the construction of new infrastructure over the next 10 years; 2) Joint Master Planning of City/School Facilities to include developing and implementing a process with the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) for long-range planning for facilities to accommodate both education and community service needs; 3) Zoning Ordinance Update to consist of completing the Work Plan for the update by the end of FY 2000-01 and initiating public involvement in FY 2001-02; 4) Infrastructure Management Plan to recruit and hire staff to implement the Plan developing standards and procedures and initiate first year projects; and 5) Residential Traffic Calming to include a prioritization system for projects and completing the first year of projects. In addition to identifying the five top initiatives, the Council explored a variety of streamlining suggestions. The purpose of the streamlining effort was: to free up Council time and energy in order to focus on community values and long-range planning; to enable staff to work smarter in terms of becoming more businesslike and customer friendly; and ultimately to create an organization of culture that better promoted risk-taking and innovation. The Council strongly supported the direction; and after discussing all the streamlining recommendations, the City Manager and City Attorney committed to return with the specifics required for implementing the suggestions for Council review. Council Member Mossar said her memory of the retreat was that the Council discussed a number of opportunities for streamlining, there were a number of questions and issues to be explored, and the Council was interested and felt cooperative in working with the City Manager to move in those directions. There was neither consensus nor action taken around any of the streamlining initiatives. She understood the streamlining issues would be explored and appreciated the City Manager’s willingness to explore those with the Council. Council Member Ojakian hoped that something could be explained to the public about the five priorities selected, which would not downgrade or stop some of the other projects from being done. Mr. Benest said the commitment by staff was that the other 35 initiatives would continue to be worked on and would move forward. There needed to be a focus on the part of the Council and staff on
05/22/00 90-192
the top five and would be held accountable for those top five. Staff would have a much bigger view of what would be accomplished in the upcoming year and would move forward on all 40 initiatives, but the focus and commitment would be on the top five. Council Member Ojakian wanted the public to know what was said in the retreat because somehow people were interpreting it in other ways. Council Member Lytle was pleased with the outcome of the retreat, and the City Manager’s summary characterized her impression of what she wanted to see occur. There were a few items of controversy, most of which everyone was willing to work with. She felt Mr. Benest responded well to those concerns and was enthusiastic. She received many calls applauding the fact that measures were being taken, things would move forward in a more streamlined fashion, and priorities were identified. She thanked Mr. Benest for his effort. Council Member Burch thought the retreat was positive. He had occasion to speak with members of the public who read articles in the Palo Alto Daily News about the City Manager’s style going counter to the Palo Alto process. In his view, the meeting was congenial. He appreciated the fact that Mr. Benest had hit the ground running, was asking the Council to set priorities, and felt supportive of what Mr. Benest was trying to accomplish. He shared with Council Member Mossar that the City could try things out, and if the Council did not like what was happening, things could be pulled back. He wanted the public to know that the City Manager was a unanimous selection of the Council, and he believed Mr. Benest was doing a good job. No action required. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. to a Closed Session. The City Council met in Closed Session to discuss matters involving labor negotiations as described in Agenda Item Nos. 12 and 13. Vice Mayor Eakins announced that no reportable action was taken on Agenda Item Nos. 12 and 13. COUNCIL MATTERS 17. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements Council Member Beecham requested that the meeting be adjourned in memory of Fred Eyerly. Vice Mayor Eakins asked staff to name the Tower Well Garden in honor of Fred Eyerly. 05/22/00 90-193
FINAL ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. in memory of Fred Eyerly, former Mayor and Council Member of the City of Palo Alto. ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 2.04.180(a) and (b). The City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are made solely for the purpose of facilitating the preparation of the minutes of the meetings. City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are recycled 90 days from the date of the meeting. The tapes are available for members of the public to listen to during regular office hours.
05/22/00 90-194