HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-12-11 City Council Summary Minutes1
CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
-.----PALOA.LTOCITYCOUNCILMEETINGSAiiEBROADCASTLIVEVIAKZSU-FFEOUENCY90.1ONFMDIAL--- ---�
Special Meeting
December 11, 1989
special Orders of the Day
PACE
62-400
1. Resolution Expressing Appreciation to Ricardo 62-400
C. Cabarloc for Outstanding Public Service Upon
His Retirement
Oral Communications 62-400
Consent Calendar 62-400
2. City -Generated Hazardous Materials and Waste 62-400
Issues and Staffing Request - Refer to Finance
and Public Works Committee
3. Consultant Agreement with Brian Kangas Foulk 62-401
for Improvements at Intersections; Amendments
Not to Exceed $18,000
4. Contract with U.S. Elevator for Elevator
Maintenance and Repair; Change Orders Not to
Exceed $2,600
62-401
5. Consultant Agreement with Ernst & Young for 62-401
Development of a Records & Image Management Plan
6. Industrial Waste Regulatory Program Agreements 62-401
A 1989 Industrial Waste Control and Pretreatment 62-401
Enforcement Agreement with the City of Los Altos,
a Contributing Jurisdiction, Supplemental to the
Basic Agreement Dated October 10, 1968, as Amended
PALO ILLIO CST COUNCIL MEETINGS ASE AL30 CANLECASY ON NOWINNENT CNAINIEL 16
62-398
12/11/89
Amendment Two to Contract Restatement and Amend- 62-401
ment with the East Palo Alto Sanitary District
7. Consulting Contract with SAI Engineers, Inc. 62-401
for Electrical Distribution Systems Study;
Change Orders Not to Exceed $5,000
8. Ordinance to Fund the Open Space and Sciences 62-401
Division and Provide for Receipt of Program
Revenue from the Walter Hays School P.T.A. for
the Science Instruction Pilot Program
9. Ordinance Amending FY 1989-90 Budget to Fund 62-401
Arts and Culture Division and Provide Receipt
of Matching Grant Funds from the California
Art Council's Organizational Support Program
10. Final Subdivision Map, 1235, 1245, 1247 Alma
Street
11. Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map for Property
at 1515 El Camino Real, in Accordance with the
Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study
12. Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map for Property
at 531 Stanford Avenue, in Accordance with the
Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study
13. Ordinance Regarding Contracts and Purchasing
Procedure -Property Control
14. PUBLIC HEARING: Historic Resources Board
Recommendation Regarding the Demolition of
Category II Historic Structure Located at
545 Forest Avenue
15. Ordinance Amending the FY 1989-90 Budget to
Fund Emergency Medical Defibrillation Equipment
16. Council Mea rs Fletcher and Woolley Regarding
Provisions for Recycling
17. Council Members Fletcher and Woolley Regarding
City Procurement of Recycled Products
Adjournment at 10:37 p.m.
62-401
62-402
62-402
62-402
62-402
62.412
62-418
62-418
62-419
62-399
12/11/89
Special Meeting
December 11, 1989
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the
Council Chambers at 8:08 p.m.
Mayor Klein announced a Special Joint Meeting of the Pre -lent City
Council Members and the Newly -Elected City Council Members was held
in the Council Conference Room at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Bechtel (arrived at 8:15 p.m.), Cobb, Fletcher,
Klein, Levy (arrived at 8:10), Patitucci, Renzel,
Sutorius, Woolley
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
1. Resolution Expressing Appreciation to Ricardo C. Cabarloc for
Outstanding Public Service Upon His Retirement (504) (NPG)
MOTION: Cour"il Member Renzel moved, seconded by Cobb, to adopt
the resolution.
RESOLUTION 6841 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OP PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO RICARDO C.
CABARLOC FOR OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICE UPON HIS RETIREMENT"
NOTION PASSED 8-0, Bechtel absent.
QM COMMUI4I CATIONS
Ben Bailey, 305 Cotton Street, Menlo Park, spoke regarding Palo
Alto Police Department complaints process, and the State law which
allows the public an opportunity to attend complaint hearings.
Lisa MacDonald, 579 Emmons Drive, Mountain View, spoke regarding
a personal mugging and assault, and concern about safety in the
downtown area.
Edmund Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding Palo Alto
Harbor and Sea Scout Mariner base.
CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION: Council Member Sutorius moved, seconded by Cobb, to
approve Consent Calendar Items 2 - 13, with Fletcher, Levy
"abstaining" on Item 13.
2. City -Generated Hazardous Materials and Waste Issues and
Staffing Request - Refer to Finance and Public Works Committee
(1074) (CMR:580 9 )
62-400
12/11/89
3. Consultant Agreement with Brian Kangas Foulk for Improvements
at Intersections; Amendments Not to Exceed $18,000 (1010)
(C MR:522 :9)
4. Contract with U.S. Elevator for Elevator Maintenance and
Repair; Change Orders Not to Exceed $2,600 (81U-04)
(CMR:582:9)
5. Consultant Agreement with Ernst & Young for Development of a
Records'and Image Management Plan (129) (CMR:570:9)
6. Industrial Waste Regulatory Program Agreements (1122)
(CMR:579:9)
A 1989 Industrial Waste Control and Pretreatment Enforcement
Agreement by and between the City of Palo Alto and the City
of Los Altos, a Contributing Jurisdiction, Supplemental to the
Basic Agreement Dated October 10, 1968, as Amended
Amendment Two to Contract Restatement and Amendment, by and
between the City of Palo Alto and East Palo Alto Sanitary
District
7. Consulting Contract with SA1 Engineers, Inc. for Electrical
Distribution Systems Study; Change Orders Not to Exceed 0,000
(1101) (CMR:578:9)
8. ORDINARCE 3923 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1989-90
TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR THE OPEN SPACE AND
SCIENCES DIVISION AND TO PROVIDE FOR RECEIPT OF PROGRAM
REVENUE FROM THE WALTER HAYS SCHOOL P.T.A. FOR THE SCIENCE
INSTRUCTION PILOT PROGRAM" (1330-03) (CMR:575:9)
9. ORDINANCE 3924 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1989-90
TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR THE ARTS AND
CULTURE DIVISION AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE RECEIPT OF MATCHING
GRAFT FUNDS FROM THE CALIFORNIA ARTS COUNCIL'S ORGISNI ZATIONAL
SUPPORT PROGRAM" (1303) (C1R:574:9).
10. Final Subdivision Map, 1235, 1245 and 1247 Alma Street (300)
( MR:583:9)
62-401
12/11/89
i
11. ORDINANCE 3925 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO
MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING MAP) TO CHANGE THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION
OF. PROPERTY AT 1515 EL CAMINO REAL, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
CITYWIDE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION STUDY" (1st Reading
11/20/89, PASSED 9-0) (300) (NPG)
12. ORDINANCE 3926 entitled "ORDINANCE OF TEE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO
MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING MAP) TO CHANGE THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION
OF THE PROPERTY AT 531 STANFORD AVENUE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
CITYWIDE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION STUDY" (1st ?Reading
11/20/89, PASSED 9-0) (300) (NPG)
NOTION PASSED 9-0.
13. ORDINANCE 3927 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 2.08.180, REPEALING CHAPTER 2.30
(CONTRACTS AND PURCHASING PROCEDURE -PROPERTY CONTROL) AND
ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER 2.30 (CONTRACTS AND PURCHASING
PROCEDURES) AND ADDING CHAPTER 2.31 (PROPERTY CONTROL)" (1st
Reading 11/27/89, PASSED 7.0, Fletcher, Levy absent) (601-
02) (NPG)
MOTION PASSED 7-0, Fletcher, Levy "abstaining."
PUBLIC HEARINGS
14. PUBLIC HEARING: Historic Resources Board Recommendation
Regarding the Demol it ion of the Category II Historic Structure
Located at 545 Forest Avenue (300) (CMR : 5 84 : 9 )
Council Member Sutr.rius queried if staff could elaborate on the
concept of a Planned Community (PC) zone and if the applicant had
been encouraged by staff to consider pursuing a PC zone.
Chief Planning Official Carol Jansen said the application was
submitted as a preliminary to an Architectural Review Board (ARB)
review and was forwarded to the Historic Resources Board (HRB) as
a bed -and -breakfast under the definition of a lodging unit. Staff
conferred on the interpretation of the zoning regulations regarding
lodging units and determined it was not permissible to allow 28
units, conference facilities, and retention of the Historic
Resources home as a bed -and -breakfast; the zoning code did not have
a bed -arid -breakfast definition. Staff held discussions with the
applicants' contractor and architect regarding w.king a PC zone
application to proceed with the project as a mini -hotel; however,
the applicant chose not to pursue a PC zoning, but a town house
project. Economic revenue might be the only finding of public
benefit under the PC zone application.
62-402
12/11/89
Council Member Sutorius queried if discussions were held during the
preliminary process and again in November.
Ms. Jansen said the first discussion related to the bed -and -
breakfast application. Subsequent discussions related to the
possibility of a PC zone application for a higher density project.
The property was adjacent to Forest Towers and was not as sensitive
as many other properties. The discussions centered around a PC
zone application that eight include a higher proportion of below -
market -rate (BMR) units.
Council Member Sutorius queried what the effects would be if there
were a hold on demolition for up to one year, and if the applicant
would be in a position to proceed with normal application and
review processes.
Senior Assistant City Attorney Susan Case said the intent of the
code section was to allow time for negotiations towards saving the
house. The applicant could file the same application assuming
demolition of the building.
Council Member Woolley said she had given the owner, John
Woodworth, incorrect information when stating the property was a
Category II at a meeting of the Historic Resources Board (HRB) last
March; she checked the records after the meeting, discovered it was
Category III, and called Mr. Woodworth. She publicly apologize]
for the misinformation.
Council Member Patitucci queried if the designation was a mystery
to the property owner.
Assistant Planning Official George Zimmerman said staff listed all
historic properties, with the appropriate categories, by address;
the 545 Forest Avenue property was listed as Category 11. HRB
revised the inventory in 1987-88. Reclassifications to the
inventory required a public hearing at HRB and Council levels, and
all affected property owners were notified. Since 1966, HRB had
held extended study sessions to establish dialogue with property
owners prior to formal public hearings regarding reclassifications.
Council Member Patitucci queried what the source of misinformation
was, and if the property owner had participated in the process.
Ms. Jansen said conflicting information was given to the applicant
regarding the historic resource category. The category was
clarified at the ARB meeting.
62-403
12/11/89
Council Member Patitucci queried if the conflicting information
came from within staff or if the staff information conflicted with
the information from Council Member Woolley.
Ms. Jansen did not believe Council Member Woolley had an obligation
to give the historic resources category information; it was a staff
obligation and staff gave a conflicting response.
Council Member Renzel queried if the property had already been
purchased at the time the advice had been given.
Mr. Zimmerman said the information was not provided at the time.
Council Member Renzel queried if it was an obligation of realtors
to disclose the historic categories when it might affect the
ability to develop the property.
Ms. Case was not familiar with real estate disclosure, but believed
an agent should investigate the status of an old property.
Council Member Renzel queried if Council had a provision to move
houses and provide utility support for the moving of wires.
City Manager Bill Zaner said if a house moving were to occur, staff
would make arrangements with the moving party, at their cost,
utilities were temporarily relocated and replaced to facilitate
moving as a normal course of business.
Council Member Renzel queried if the City had participated in
moving an historic structure which had public benefit.
Historic Resources Board Vice Chair Jonathan Gifford said a home
was relocated two years ago with a stay of demolition provision of
six months; the accommodations given by the City was a realization
that the process would take more time; not only to acquire more
property but to develop foundations, building permits, etc., to
rove the existing house to a new parcel. The only accommodation
given by the City in this instance was the additional time to
complete the process; variances might be required for daylight
planes and other setbacks.
Council Member Cobb queried if the problem was caused by tree -lock
in both locations.
Mr. Zimmerman said obstacles in moving a structure from one site
to another were the width, height, intersections, tree umbrellas,
and the location of the utility lines.
Council Member Cobb queried if staff had looked' at the house and
deemed it reasonable to continue repair.
62-404
12/11/89
Ms. Jansen said staff had no code inspection to verify the
condition of the home. The staff recommendation for the waiting
period was the HRB recommendation.
Council Member Levy queried if staff could find a satisfactory
public benefit in the original application for a bed -and -breakfast.
Ms. Jansen said it would be the obligation of the applicant to find
a public benefit.
Council Member Levy queried if the preservation of a Category II
structure was a public benefit.
Ms. Jansen said yes.
Council Member Levy queried if the message the developer got was
that preserving the house per se would be of satisfactory public
benefit or that in addition to preserving the house, he would have
to show some other public benefit.
Ms. Jansen said the developer was told that for a bed -and -break-
fast, public benefit would have to be shown to satisfy Council.
When ARB considered the development as a residential project, the
original proposal was changed frnm commercial to residential. ARB
exhibited a desire to see the structure retained or be incorporated
as part of the project.
Council Member Levy queried if the City had any standards for bed --
and -breakfasts.
Ms. Jansen said under the multiple -family RM-30 zoning it was
permissible to have 15 units or RM-40 would allow 22 units. The
proposal was for a 28-uni•t bed -and -breakfast retaining the existing
structure with conference facilities. Under the definition of a
lodging unit, it had never been interpreted that lodging unit would
constitute a bed -and -breakfast of that nature. A four to six unit
bed -and -breakfast had existed in a residential zone under the
lodging unit definition. The applicant was advised to either apply
under a PC zone as a commercial operation showing public benefit
or apply for a residential application, either under a PC zone, RM-
30, or RM-40 permissible project.
Council Member Levy queried if staff communicated with the
applicant where it made interpretations and guessed about what
Council approval was going to be so the applicant knew the
decisions were staff's best judgement at the time.
62-405
12/11/89
Ms. Jansen said yes, a number of discussions were held with various
members of staff and the process was not cut-and-dried in terms of
ordinance interpretation.
Council Member Levy was concerned because he often heard from
members of the public that staff had told them something as if it
were the final decision.
Mayor Klein declared the Public Hearing open.
John Woodworth, 301 Addison Street, said he proposed a bed -and -
breakfast design when he went to the HRB in February of 1989, and
HRB discussed what it wanted to see incorporated into the new
design. The house did not meet current building codes and safety
requirements; it protruded 10 feet into the daylight plane on the
side setback, had no earthquake -sure bracing, and lacked fire
blocks separating the vertical studs. No one recommended he
consider a PC zone classification. He was no longer interested in
constructing a bed -and -breakfast on the site, and if staff was
serious about a PC and increased density as part of the package to
save the house, he would like some specifics. He reduced the
number of units from 15 to 10 and avoided underground parking which
he found aesthetically offensive in a residential zone of medium
density. He had tried to find an acceptable project for the
property since February of 1908. He checked with the Planning
Director to avoid some of the surprises he encountered with the
Cowper Inn, which was also zoned RM-30, and intended to build a
larger bed -and -breakfast at 545 Forest Avenue. When the applica-
tion was rejected by ARB, he met again with the Planning Director;
condominiums or townhouses, rather than apartments or single-
family homes were recommended as the only choice for which a bank
would make a construction loan. John Northway was told by staff
that plans could not be turned in until after the moratorium
expired in October, 1990; another six -months would be required to
go through ARB, to get approval for a major subdivision through the
Planning Commission and the City Council, get a construction loan
approved, draw detailed plans, and get the plans through plan check
before obtaining a building permit and starting demolition. Two
more years would pass before the house could be demolished, making
a total of three years work on a seemingly straight -forward
project. If the purpose of the moratorium were to keep rental
housing, he complied by agreeing to contribute 20 percent of the
units to the BMR program, a considerable burden for such a small
project. If the site had been owner -occupied, no contribution
would have been required. If the purpose was to save the house,
it was unlikely because moving it was too expensive.
Council Member Levy queried when Mr. Woodworth began seeking a
recipient for the house.
62-406
12/11/89
Mr. Woodworth said when he found out the house was a Category I1
and that he would be required to build town houses instead of bed -
and -breakfasts during the ARB meetings in October, 1989. He
originally thought the house was a Category II when he purchased
it, but then he got conflicting information.
Council Member Levy queried if Mr. Woodworth had been working full-
time on finding a recipient since October, 1989.
Mr. Woodworth said yes.
John Northway, 437 Lytton Avenue, said there was a conflict
regarding the process the City would follow. Mr. Zimmerman thought
nothing could be processed until after the period of time placed
on the demolition process. Ms. Case explained that was not the
case and that a new application could be processed as of tomorrow.
Adam Norton, 555 Forest Avenue, believed the root cause of the
problem was that while rental prices were only slightly higher in
Palo Alto than in neighboring towns, current property prices were
so much higher that rents from the property did not pay the
mortgage, much less the upkeep; however, his economic need should
not be predicated on destroying one of the few Victorian homes in
the downtown area. Renovating the property back to its 1905 state
on a large lot would command a large price in addition to the
rental income from 555 Forest Avenue which was a unique building
in its own right of 1940 vintage with many unique interior
architectural features. The property owners had rights, but the
City also had rights to protect an individual from selling off and
cashing in on an unrecoverable piece of the City's common and
tangible assets. If every plot of land in Palo Alto were converted
co Sunnyvale -style townhouses, the property values would be
decreased.
Mayor Klein queried if Mr. Norton understood that the ordinance
only delayed the demolition for a year, and if he had any sugges-
tions regarding what might be accomplished during that year.
Mr. Norton understood the ordinance was a delaying sechanism but
wanted Council to hear his viewpoint and to investigate other
alternatives for developing the property while keeping the
Victorian house in place.
Nadine Sady, 555 Forest Avenue #14, concurred with Mr. Norton's
statements. Long-time residents kept the tranquility of the
neighborhood and unique architectural styles blended to make Palo
Alto an incredible City; demolishing the historic Victorian home
would be a saddening loss to the City. She urged Council to
consider the effects of the demolition on residents like herself.
62-407
12/11/89
Michael Price, 545 Forest Avenue, believed the proposed demolition
of the beautiful 1905 Queen Anne Victorian home by the owner
instead of restoring it was because it did not fit into his profit -
curve. The house must be revered, not razed. Future generations
would be affected; it was not progress to replace the original
character of Palo Alto with modern, expensive row -houses. Moving
the house was possible. Delaying demolition increased the odds of
finding a suitable investor and location for the house, so it
should be delayed to the maximum of one year. He invited Council
to tour the house before deciding its fate of demolition. The HRB
believed the house to be historically significant enough to
recommend a one year delay; it was the last significantly -historic
house on the block. He recommended the house either be removed or
left as is, but not destroyed.
Mary Bartnikowski, 545 Forest Avenue, could not believe Council
would consider destroying one of the first houses in Palo Alto and
the only one of its type, architecturally; there was no other house
like it. Fourteen families would be forced to find affordable
housing which was not available in Palo Alto. It was ironic that
"shacks in the neighborhood were being allowed to stand while the
historically significant Victorian home, the only one of its kind
in Palo Alto, was being threatened. The residents loved Palo Alto
as much as residents owning expensive homes in the City. Two BHR
units would not satisfy the housing needs of the 14 families living
on the property. The City of Palo Alto was forcing John Woodworth
to tear the house down instead of helping him with the original
plan of restoring the Victorian home. She failed to see how it was
better to tear the house down than approve a 28 -room bed -and -
breakfast hotel. Investing $100,000 to $200,000 in moving and
restoring on a lot of $300,000 was reasonable and feasible for
people who could afford to spend $600,000 for a house in Palo Alto.
The house would be worth more when all conditions were net. She
ranged Council to approve a full year's delay to enable more buyers
and better ideas for the property to emerge. Once Victorians were
deieoli.shed, an important part of the history was destroyed, so
emo1ition must be stopped. The home was liveable and beautiful
and most visitors commented on the beauty of the home.
David Miller, Redwood City, supported the comments of Mr. Price and
Mrs. Bartnikowski. Mr. Woodworth spent only six weeks in an
attempt to find a buyer who would do something with the home; most
homes were on the market longer than that in the current soft
market and December was a difficult month to attempt to sell real
estate. Fourteen families would be displaced because of one
investor's high -economic hopes. The ARB voted unanimously to grant
a one-year moratorium on demolition and staff concurred; six months
was not enough time to find a buyer and overcome obstacles. He
urged Council to support the ARB recommendation to place a
62-408
12/11/89
demolition moratorium on the property so other alternatives could
be found.
Stephan Crothcras, 3012 Ross Road, opposed the demolition of the
home, supported a demolition moratorium, and urged Council to seek
an alternative to demolishing the home.
Charlene Gliniecki, 3012 Ross Road, urged Council to extend the
demolition moratorium and provide more time for efforts to save the
building.
Mayor Klein declared the Public Hearing closed.
MOTION: Council Member Levy moved, seconded by Bechtel, to approve
delaying the demolition of the historic structure for eight months
until August 11, 1990, to facilitate: 1) Outright purchase of the
property by others; 2) Time for the structure to be moved to
another site; and 3) Time for developing alternative creative uses
of the property.
Cousnc i l Meter Levy said he used the eight -month t ime f rame because
it took into consideration the fact the owner had begun the process
of advertising the house and he could begin building before the
rainy season commenced. He believed the house was lovely and
worthy of preservation, and steps should be taken in an attempt to
preserve it. The delay of demolition would facilitate the process.
Six weeks was too short a time in the real estate market to sell
the attractive home. As to who should pay for the preservation of
the house, or any historical house, it was unfair to ask the owner
of the house to bear the total community price. If the community
was to ben3fitt the community should pay. The City could not pay
for the preservation costs for Category 11 houses throughout the
City. The compromise of delaying demolition and encouraging the
possible purchase and preservation of the house or moving the
structure to another site was appropriate.
Vice Mayor Bechtel supported a shorter time than recommended by the
E'RB or staff because the applicant was given conflicting informa-
tion and had tried to let people know about the availability of the
house, so eight months was a reasonable compromise. Six months was
too short a time period for completing a sale or moving the
structure. Council could only control demolition timing.
Council Member Renzel did not object to preserving
eight months, but preferred to see it go to October
time to find a location for the house.
Mayor Klein asked for clarification about what sight
the house for
25th to allow
months meant.
62-409
12/11/89
Ms. Case said the code referred to a one-year moratorium from the
date of the application for the demolition and that date was
October of 1989, so the longest period of time would be from
October of 1989 to October of 1990. She queried if Council Member
Levy and Vice Mayor Bechtel meant the eight months timeframe to
begin from the date of Council adoption, so the deadline would be
August 11, 1990.
AxEMMOINUT= Council Member Renzel moved, seconded by Klein, to
provide for a one-year demolition moratorium from the application
date of October 25, 1989 to the deadline of October 25, 1990.
Council Member Renzel said her intent was to also request informa-
tion from staff on ways the City might be of assistance in aiding
the possible move of the property. She believed the Woodworth's
had tried to restore houses in good faith in Palo Alto and had a
genuine commitment to historic preservation.
Council Member Fletcher queried Mr. Northway regarding how long he
expected the construction period to be for the project.
Mr. Northway said the construction period would be somewhere
between eight months and one year.
Council Member Woolley said she was instrumental in getting the
ordinance changed from the six-tanth period to a full -year period,
after the experience with the house on the corner of Ramona and
Homer, but felt responsible for some of the confusion and delays
put on the property owner, so she did not support the amendment.
Vice Mayor Bechtel opposed the amendment because the compromise of
eight months was appropriate.
Mayor Klein withdrew his second to the amendment.
AMMIDIENT PAILYD FOR LACE OF A SECOND
Council Member Fletcher supported the motion because much of the
construction might be completed before heavy rains began. If the
date were October 25, 1990, the rainy season might halt construc-
tion.
Council Member Cobb understood Mr. Woodworth's position and
encouraged members of the public who spoke to continue their
support and assistance in finding another site for the home.
Volunteer effort accomplished a great deal in Palo Alto, so their
efforts might make the di f ference in saving the house.
AMIMM)T: Council Member Patitucci moved, seconded by Woolley,
to change the ending date to Joe 25, 1990.
62-410
12/11/89
Council Member Patitucci favored in going from the date of
application which was the date most everyone was familiar with.
Council Member Levy selected the August 11, 1990 date because he
wanted to give all of the participants more time to try to find a
potential method of preserving the house, and allow the developer
to go forward with ample time before the rains started.
Mayor Klein opposed the amendment but supported the main motion.
He was troubled by the misinformation received by the applicant.
Council Member Woolley's letter was unfortunate, but she was not
authorized to speak for the City regarding the records. Council
should not be held responsible for oral advice by staff members.
Mr. & Mrs. Woodworths' record on preserving Palo Alto was exemplary
and was a factor in his decision. He understood the concerns of
the residents and supported them, but he also recognized an owner
had rights to develop the property. He was hopeful something could
be worked out. Volunteers would be needed to assist in finding
another site for the property or buyeta to renovate if the house
were to be preserved. He encouraged the residents to continue
working to preserve the landmark house.
Council Member Renzel said the August termination date would
probably not delay anything and the historic resources effort
hinged on mechanisms for preserving the structures; the tiae period
to seek an alternative site was one of those mechanisms. She.
opposed the amendment but supported the main motion.
AMENDNINT FAILED 2-7, Patitucci, Woolley waye. t
NOTION PASSED 9-0.
Council Member Fletcher believed the seller of a house in the
historic district should be required to disclose any historical
significance of the building allowable for a local jurisdiction.
Council Member Patitucci said the most recent disclosure laws for
selling a single-family property required that anything affecting
the value of the property gust be disclosed and a form was
provided.
Council Member Renzel queried if requesting that staff report back
on ways Council might be of assistance in helping to preserve
historic structures was in order.
Ms. Case said yes.
MOTIOMs Council Member Renzel moved, seconded by Fletcher, to
refer the item to the Historic Resources Board to report back on
62-411
12/11/89
1
ways in which the Council could assist in preserving historical
structures, e.g., assisting in the moving of the structure,
included, but not limited, to waiving fees.
Council Member Renzel said information had been presented on some
difficulties that were institutional, such as utility wires, tree
trimming, special street clearances, and other impediments to
moving significant structures. The staff report should include
ways the City might be of assistance in preserving historic struc-
tures.
Mr. Zaner said staff could study the types of costs the City might
be able to absorb; he would not anticipate a long, detailed
analysis.
Mayor Klein questioned if the motion indicated the City might pay
some of the costs of moving.
Council Member Renzel said waiving fees or requiring a differential
fee would be part of what the City could do. She was interested
in having staff study the options because it needed to be done.
The City might be able to offer inducements for preservation of
historic structures.
Vice Mayor Bechtel noted that Council Member Renzel was speaking
of historic structures, in general, while Mr. Zaner was speaking
directly about the specific house, and she believed the more
general concept was something she would support. The HRB members
should be involved in the total process.
MOTION PASSED 8-1, Sutorius "no."
PQ S CF OFFICIAL
15. Ordinance Amending the Fiscal Year 1989-90 Budget to Fund
Emergency Medical Defibrillation Equipment (1230-01)
(CMR1487:9)
Council Member Fletcher queried why the item was not referred to
the Finance and Public Works Committee (F&PW).
Fire Chief Robert Wall said the medical defibrillation program and
policy was passed at the State level and the County provided
guidance before moving ahead. Palo Alto was in the same position
as many other cities in Santa Clara County and were moving ahead
at about the same pace.
Mr. Zaner took responsibility for placing the item on the agenda
instead of referring it to F&PW . Committee. He reviewed the item
62-412
12/11/89
as an inexpensive, valuable, life-saving service to Palo Altans for
$60,000.
Council Member Fletcher queried if the support of the other
jurisdictions was relevant.
Chief Wall said the support at the County level was relevant. The
support of the County Emergency Medical Services health officer was
critical to new medical programs or skills to be used in the
County. Stanford Hospital also acted as a support which was
required such a program; Stanford, Southwest Mountain View, and
Palo Alto would work together in cooperative training efforts.
Council Member Sutorius said there might be an advantage to
coordinating the training among three sets of trainees.
Chief Wall said the cooperative training was a key point and a
number of cities acting in concert could cooperatively purchase
equipment, and obtain a better purchase price by utilizing volume
purchase. The sooner the equipment was available and training
completed, the sooner additional lives would be saved.
Council Member Sutorius understood the worth of the program as one
who had received the paddles at an appropriate time. He queried
if staff had explored alternate sources of funding and referred to
the letter contained in the packet (on file in the City Clerk's
office) from Stanford.
Chief Wall said when first studying how to fund the equipment, the
issue came up in communication with Stanford.
Council. Member Sutorius said the communication was in June, 1989,
and he queried if staff had tried to get the project going since
that time.
Chief Wall said yes.
Council Member Menzel queried if defibrillators were used prin-
cipally for cardiac arrests and if staff knew the approximate
lifetime of the machinery.
Chief Wall said the defibrillators were used principally for
cardiac arrests. The approximate lifetime of the equipment was
dependent upon the amount of usage. A similar type of defibril-
lator used by paramedics lasted for six or seven years.
Council Member Renael queried if additional charges were made for
the use of a defibrillator to offset the costs of the specialized
equipment.
62-413
12/11/89
Chief Wall said the charges would be incorporated into existing
charges for paramedic services and additional skills performed by
the first arriving engine companies.
Council Meaaber Renzel queried if staff had information regarding
the recovery rate of patients after defibrillation.
Michael Eliastam M.G., Director of Emergency Services at Stanford,
said the first paramedic program in Palo Alto was developed 15
years ago; important new technology was brought together at the
time which included a large, 40 pound, costly defibrillator. The
new technology provided a small, light -weight, inexpensive
defibrillation unit. The training required would only take four
hours and was relatively safe. The major issue of sudden -death
patients was heart and coronary artery disease which had become a
major epidemic among men and women. The program established a
method of putting defibrillators in higher volume because if
defibrillators were used earlier, there was a much greater chance
of survival. The City of Seattle had implemented the program and
20 to 30 percent of the patients left the hospital. The program
affected large volumes of patients. The paramedic training
included trauma, poisoning, burns, and other comprehensive acts at
a more sophisticated level and the paramedic was better prepared
to handle a variety of cases. He urged Council to support the
program for the benefit of the citizens of Palo Alto.
Mayor Klein said the staff report indicated the use of the machine
could save one additional life per year in Palo Alto and queried
if Dr. Eliasam agreed with the number.
Dr. Eliastam said the technology was foolproof and the equipment
worked. Rural communities did not do well with the same type of
equipment because of the great distances; but in an urban area such
as Palo Alto, the lives saved should increase by five per year.
Council Member Renzel clarified that in Seattle, 20 to 30 percent
of sudden -death syndrome patients were able to leave the hospital,
and queried if the staff report was correct in saying there were
only nine cardiac -arrests per year in Palo Alto.
Dr. Eliastam believed there was some type of coding error. He
estimated there were between 40 to 60 cardiac-arrestsin the Palo
Alto area per year.
Margaret Teufel, 1303 Lake Boulevarde was a manufacturing represen-
tative who had worked with a subcommittee of the Santa Clara Fire
Chief's Emergency Medical section for the past two years to get
regulations passed through Santa Clara County, (SCC). The first
program was approved last month and training was provided last
weed;. SCC was looking at a very comprehensive, total -package
62-414
12/11/89
concept addressing all major issues to increase survival rates.
The national average was one cardiac -arrest case per 1,000 people.
At that rate, Palo Alto could expect to have 55 cardiac -arrest
cases per year. In 1986, Palo Alto had 53 cardiac -arrests. The
program had been in effect in California during the past two and
one-half years. The survival rate from a cardiac -arrest in the Los
Angeles area was 13 percent during the one year study; however, the
area faced dispatch, traffic, and other communication problems.
With current training and equipment, Palo Altans could expect only
a 2 to 8 percent survival rate; however, with first responders such
as firefighters trained, the percentage should increase to about
20 percent. The impetus in SCC was the commitment to the com-
prehensive, standardized program which investigated all the major
issues such as dispatch, citizen awareness, initial training,
equipment, and quality assurance by building in a multi-tieeed
system with an overall medical director for SCC.
Council Member Sutorius queried if a volume discount on the
purchase of the equipment was available.
Ms. Teufel said yes. The fire chiefs from the cities in SCC were
hoping to get commitments from the cities to purchase the equipment
together at approximately a 40 percent savings.
Council Member Levy queried how many manufacturers of the equipment
there were and which company she represented.
Ms. Teufel said there were four manufacturers which had any type
of automatic equipment; only two of them met the standards set
forth by the SCC Fire Chiefs and only one met the total package
concept of being able to address all of the components of quality
assurance, the training, the equipment and citizen awareness
programs. She represented Lai dol.
Council Member Levy queried if the unit cost of approximately
$8,540 was a realistic cost.
Ms. Teufel said $80540 was the cost, initially, but the fire chiefs
requested a county -wide purchase to qualify for the 41 percent
discount, and as of last week, the cost would be approximately
$5,000.
Council Member Levy queried whether the cost would still be $5,000
if Council waited two months.
Ms. Teufel said yes.
MOTION TO=MR* Council Member Levy moved, seconded by Renzel,
to refer the item to the Finance and Public Works Committee.
62-415
12/11/89
1
ORDINANCE 3928 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1989-90
TO CREATE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL
DEFIBRILLATION EQUIPMENT"
Council Member Levy said the budget process should be followed and
the item referred to F&PM Committee to allow for more intense
questioning to occur. The issue was complicated because the
program looked promising on the surface, but he believed the
surface should be penetrated as much as possible. He was reassured
that other counties in the State had embarked on the program and
had success, but he believed in moving more at a measured pace and
reviewing items more carefully.
Council Member Renzel agreed with Council Member Levy and believed
that because the amount quoted by Ms. Teufel differed from the
budget amendment proposed in the staff report, it would not be
prudent for. Council to authorize an amount that was more than what
was needed. She was concerned the City was getting involved in
high-tech solutions which may be outdated next year. She believed
the program needed further evaluation in overall context.
Vice Mayor Bechtel opposed the motion to refer because she did not
believe any more information would be available to the F&PW
Committee. Eight machines would go a long way to helping Palo
Altans at a time of cardiac -arrest.
Council Member Fletcher queried if the Palo Alto paramedic services
covered Stanford, and if Stanford would contribute towards the
costs.
Chief Wall said Stanford University campus was serviced by Palo
Alto's paramedic program. Stanford contributed through the fire
services contract and would pay the appropriate percentage.
Council Member Fletcher queried how the billing would operate.
Mr. Zaner said the billing was part of the Fire Department's
budget, and Stanford paid approximately one-third of all fire
services costs.
Council Member Sutorius queried how Section I or II of the
ordinance should be modified.
Mr. Zaner suggested Sections I and II of the ordinance should be
left, as is because if in the process of the procurement, the price
was lowered, the balance would remain in the Fire Department budget
and would return to the reserve at the end of the year.
62-416
12/11/89
Council Member Cobb opposed the amendment but supported Council
Member Levy's statement regarding the budget process. Saving
lives, however, was of immediate concern, and people had expressed
concern about emergency equipment. He wished the emergency type
items had been anticipated and included in the budget so the
process could be adhered to.
Mayor Klein agreed with Council Member Cobb and opposed the
amendment because a two -month delay could cost a life. While he
favored sticking to the budget process, the potential loss of a
life was eminent. The staff report was confusing to the Council
and the numbers were misleading.
Council Member Levy said if the item were to return from the F&PW
Committee on an emergency basis, there would be a saving of 30 to
45 days.
MOTION TO REFER TAILED 4-5, Levy, Patitucci, Renzel, Woolley "aye."
MOTION: Vice Mayor Bechtel moved, seconded by Fletcher, to adopt
the Budget Ordinance as amended to reduce the amount from $69,320
to $45,000 and to reduce the reserve respectively.
Council Member Patitucci said the maneuver was a typical attempt
to get the City to act out of normal sequence. Earlier on the
agenda, there was a referral of another position for the hazardous
materials; typical of what Council got midyear in the budget
process which would not stand up if compared with other items. If
the item was so important, the Fire Department should replace
something else so the total cost remained the same and life-saving
items took a priority. He was concerned that there was one
supplier for the entire County. He did not believe the item should
be referred to F&PW, but defeated. The way wake sure budget items
came before Council only at the budget hearings was to deny midyear
budget amendments.
Mr. Zaner said there was no attempt to deceive Council or circum-
vent the F&PW Committee. If the item was of such great concern to
Council, he recommended it be referred to the F&PW Committee to
decide whether the item was appropriate.
Council Member Levy queried if the $1,650,030 in reserves was at
the right level.
Mr. Zaner said there was no magic number. Reserves were maintained
depending on the size of the General Fund. He did not consider
the number to be abnormally high or low. It was about where he
anticipated it to be.
62-417
12/11/89
0
Council Member Renzel agreed with Council Member Patitucci and
believed lives could be saved in many ways; education, proper
driving instruction, drugs, prenatal education. She did not
believe Council should feel compelled to vote on a midyear budget
item that would save lives without looking at other ways money
could save more lives within the framework of the proper budget
process. She opposed the motion, but favored the cutback in the
dollar mounts.
MOT/ON PISSED 6-3, Patitucci, Menzel, Woolley "no."
Coup=ILA MATTERS
16. Council Members Fletcher and Woolley re Provisions for
Recycling (1420)
MOTION: Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Woolley, to
direct staff to develop an ordinance that would require the
provision of space for recycling materials in all new multi -family
and non-residential developments.
Council Member Fletcher said some townhouses might not need the
provision, and encouraged staff not to take it literally as all
multi -family because it may not be needed in some situations.
Council Member Woolley said each individual unit did not need
space, but spaces needed to be provided to accomodate many uits
n a project.
MOTION PASSED 8-0, Patitucci absent.
17. Council Members Fletcher and Woolley re City Procurement of
Recycled Products (1420)
MOTION: Council Member Woolley moved, seconded by Fletcher, to
direct staff to determine the categories of recycled products which
can be utilized by the City and to recommend a procurement
preference policy.
Council Member Fletcher said the City of San Jose had used good -
quality, reasonably -priced, recycled paper with success for five
years; however, in acme instances, rollers in the printing
machinery had to be loosened to enable the paper to feed through
properly. To reduce costs, the City of Berkeley eliminated all
colored paper and purchased paper jointly with surrounding cities
to obtain a discount for larger quantities. The City of Palo Alto
could save money by using white recycled paper with a yellow border
instead of yellow paper for legal items.
MOTION PASSED 9-0.
62-418
12/11/89
ADJOURNMENT: The
ATTEST:
meeting adjourned at 10:37 p.m.
APPROVED:
Cit Clerk / Mayor
14;6_844 -
NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with
Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 2.04.200(b). The City Council
meeting tapes are retained in the City Clerk's Office for two years
from the date of the meeting, and the Finance and Public Works
Committee and Policy and Procedures Committee meeting tapes are
retained for six months. Meti ers of the public, may listen to the
tapes during regular office hours.
62-419
12/11/89