Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-05-18 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MINUTES Regular Meeting PALO ALTOCITYCOUNCID.MEETINGS AFtrilefipAt1 lTL'' 3IVIQSU-FREOUENCY90.1 ON FM DIAL ITEM Oral Communications Minutes of April 20, 1987 1. Presentation by Youth Council 2. Resolution of Appreciation to Palo Alto Youth Council Consent Calendar PAGE 57-213 57-213 57-213 57-214 57-214 3. Memorandum of Agreement, Local 715, 57-215 Service Employees' International Union 4. Consultant Agreement with Morrison-Knudsen 57-215 Engineers, Inc. 5. Contract with Redwood Plumbing Company, 57-215 Inc. 6.. Contract with Pied Piper Extertinators, 57-215 Inc. - 8. Rejection of Slip Energy Recovery System 57-215 Bid from Rosendin Electric, Inc. fl mendm,nn t to iiA ar-rious Ma t.Pri al s Storage 57-215 Ordinance Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions 57-216 10. Contract for 1987-88 with Council tor .the 57-216 Arts Palo Alto and Midpeninsula Area a Community Box Office . 57-212 5/18/87 ITEM PAGE 11. PUBLIC HEARING: Planning Commission and 57-216 Architectural Review Board Recommendation re Application of B. H. Bocook for Zone Change for Property Located at 630 Lytton. Avenue 1._ P[1RLIC HEARING_ Planning Commission Recommendation re Modification to Fence Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance 13. Planning Commission Recommendation re Application of Arthur Erickson. Architects for Site and Design Approval for Property Located at 630 Los Trancos Woods Road 14. Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board Recommendation re Application of the City Council for Site and Design Approval for Property Located at 3201 East Bayshore Frontage Road 14A. (Old 7), Contract with Sun Ohio to Reclassify Oil in Substation Transformers to Non -PCB 57-220. 57-223 57-227 57 228 15, Request of Council Member Ellen Fletcher. 57-229 re Smoking Ordinance Adjournment at 9:05 p.m. 57-235 r 57-212-A 5/18/87 Regular Meeting Monday, May 181 1987 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:35 p.m. PRESENT: ABSENT: Cobb, Bechtel, Fletcher, - Klein, Patitucci, Renzel, Woolley Levy, Sutorius .ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. A representative of International Group Organization for. the Disabled, P. O. Box 824, Menlo Park, registered her complaint about El Camino Ball Park. MINUTES OF APRIL 20, 198`? Council Member Renzel had the following correction: Page 57-94, third paragraph, sixth -line from the bottom, -word "they" should be "we." MOTION: Council Member Cobb moved, seconded by Klein, approval of the minutes of April. 20, 1987, as corrected. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Sutorius absent. 1. PRESENTATION BY YOUTH COUNCIL (702-04-01) Christopher Ferris said the Palo Alto Youth Council was the youth sector of City politics and a facet of the Human Relations Commission. There were 17 members of the Youth Council and each year approximately 50 people applied for membersLip. -_Most activities were geared towards wholesome community activities for the youth of Palo Alto. The Pizza Festival raised approximately $1,000. The Vortex, a dance club on California Avenue, also now had -youth nights. He referred to the resource booklet which contained telephone numbers for Suicide Prevention and other crisis numbers which teenagers might- not otherwise be able to locate. Some programs in., which the Youth Council participated included the Bicycle Safety- Commi ttee 3 --- "Just. Say No;" and "Safe Ride,' which `service drove teenagers. home if they felt incapable -of driving.:- A telephone number was provided each month s0 people could- call and get a description of the youth activities -for the month. 57-213 5/18/87 Adam Brownstein referred to brown -bag seminars which involved Stanford students speaking to seniors about the transition from high school to college. The Youth Council was a strong proponent of the Vortex which opened its doors to students occasionally. Each Sunday in the summer there would be under 18 social events. In the fall, there was talk of the Vortex opening up a youth only night club at the Cubberley campus, which the Youth Club supported, He thanked the City Council for its strong interaction. Mayor Woolley thanked the Youth owner of the Vortex, contacted her to work with the Palo Alto Unified they could put a program in place for the fall. Council. David Seigal, and they were endeavoring School District to see if 2 RESOLUTION 0N? THE C0[INCT€ OF. Tug CITY OF ..�L. .. PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO THE 1986-87 PALO ALTO YOUTH COUNCIL (702-04-01) MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Woolley, approval of Resolution 6608. Mayor Woolley commended the members of the Palo Alto Youth Council who contributed their time and energy toward repre- senting Palo Alto youth as members of the Youth Council and for their many successful programs. On behalf of the City Council she presented copies of the resolution honoring Hilary Adler, Sally Barry, Samantha Baskind, Jacob Bricca, Adam Brownstein, Alexandra Dumas, Chrostopher Ferris, Karen Gibbs, Elizabeth Heilman, Jonathan Herzenberg, Beth Holzer, Jennifer Jang, Vivian Lin, Daniel_ Nyser, Bry Sanders, Pam Thagard and David Warren and acknowledging appreciation for their many contributions to the City of Palo Alto during their terms to the members of Palo Alto Youth Council. NOTION PASSED unanimously,. Levy, Sutorius absent. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Woolley removed Item 7, Sun Ohio contract, at the request of a member of the public. .NOTION: Council !ember Patitucci moved, seconded by Pletcher, approval of the Consent Calendar. 3. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT LOCAL 715 SERVICE EMPLOYEES' INTERNATIONAL UNION SEIU TAT (CAR: 68:7 ) RESOLUTION 6609 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 1401 OF THE MERIT SYSTEM RULES AND REGULATIONS" RESOLUTION 6610 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADOPTING A COMPENSATION PLAN FOR CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL (SEIU) AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 6389 AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NOS. 6401 AND 6534" 4: CONSULTANT AGREEMENT WITH MORRISON-KNUDSEN ENGINEERS, INC. FOR SUPERVISORY CONTROL. AND DATA ACQUISITION REMOTE TERMINAL UNIT INSTALLATION--- DESIGN —AT PARK BOULEVARD SUBSTATION AND SWITCHYARD (1101) (CMR: 263: 7 ) Staff is further authorized to execute change orders to the agreement up to $7,000. 5. CONTRACT WITH REDWOOD PLUMBING COMPANY/ INC. FOR REPAIR OF SCRUBBER SYSTEM AT WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT (1122-01) (CMR:261:7) Staff is further authorized to issue change orders up to $15,000, b. CONTRACT WITH PIED PIPER EXTERMINATORS, INC. FOR STREET TREE PLANTING (1015) (CMR:264:7) Staff is authorized to execute change orders up to $3,000. 8. REJECTION OF SLIP ENERGY RECOVERY SYSTEM BID FROM ROSENDIN ELECTRIC, INC. (1122-01) (CMR:262:7) 9. AMENDMENTS TO THE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STORAGE ORDINANCE (1440-01) (CMR: 267:7 ) RESOLUTION 6611 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP PALO ALTO REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 6570 WHICH ASSUMED RESPONSIBILITY BY THE CITY FOR IMPLE- MENTING CHAPTER" 6.95 OF DIVISION 20 OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HEATH AND SAFETY CODE" ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO REPEALING SECTION 5 OF ORDINANCE NO. 3716, AN. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO, AMENDING PORTIONS OF TITLE 17 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE" 57-215 5/18/87 MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Sutorius absent. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS Assistant City Manager June Fleming announced that Item 7 would become Item 14A. 10. CONTRACT FOR 1987.88 WITH COUNCIL FOR THE ARTS PALO ALTO AND MIDPENINSULA AREA (CAPA) COMMUNITY BOX OFFICE (Continued from 5/04/87) (1304-01) (CMR:237:7) MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Woolley, approval of the contract. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Sutorius absent. 11. PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATION RE APPLICATION OF B. H. BOCOOK FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM RM-5 (HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT) TO PC (PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 LYTTON AVENUE WITH ADJACENT WEBSTER HOUSE (300) Mayor Woolley declared the public hearing open. Gary A. Worth, 305 Lytton Avenue, said the requested zone change would merge 630 Lytton Avenue with an adjacent lot at 401 Webster Street in order to provide 12 additional parking spaces at Webster House. In 1983, the consensus was that approximately 75 percent of --the residents would not drive being in the age group of approximately 74 years. They budgeted 20 parking spaces; and, as it turned out, the population was in the range of 82 years and 75 percent drove. The result was 4 open spaces. The recommendations of the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board (ARB) were incorporated into their drawings. Council Member Fletcher referred to the promise of providing City parking permits for six of eight employees who drove. She asked whether the six employees worked the day shift or odd hours. Mr. Worth said most, if not all, worked days. Council Member Menzel asked about the issue of security. Mr-. Worth said the issue arose, in _ the first Planning Commission hearing and was resolved through the ARB and the second Planning Commission hearing. Essentially it involved taking the rolling gate and moving it back approximately 57-216 5/18/67 four spaces so that any guest could simply drive off of Lytton Avenue into the parking lot. The problem was the general public would use the parking spaces if not con- trolled. When guests went to Webster House, there was a circular off-street park or share area and, people could announce themselves through an intercom system to the office who viewed the area, be handed a magnetic pass card, take a right turn on to Lytton and a right turn into the parking lot, activate .the gate, secure the parking and drop off the card when they left. To leave the gate open was unaccept- able because Webster House guests would be unable to park there and it would always be in an adversarial towing situa- tion with cars illegally parked. Council Member Renzel asked about visibility when people left the parking lot. Mr. Worth said the landscaping was low and there was a large ramp between Lytton and the gate so there was nothing to pressure a person to exit quickly. Council Member Renzel asked whether visitors would realistically use parking spaces behind the gate. Mr. Worth was certain visitors would use the spaces. !MOTION: Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Cobb, to adopt the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board recommendation to approve the application of BS H. Bocook for a zone change frcm RM-5 to PC, to include property located at 630 Lytton Avenue with adjacent Webster House, for use as a surface parking lot with the following conditions and findings: Conditions: 1. Allowable uses shall be limited to parking for the adjoining housing project at 401 Webster Street. 2. The developer shall obtain approval and recommendation of a parcel map merging the subject property with the adjoining property known as 401 Webster Street prior to finalization of the building permit. 3. The developer shall obtain approval of a final landscape plan by the. Architectural Review Board prior to issuance cf a building permit. 57-217 5/18/87 MOTION CONTINUED 4. The operator of the residential development for which the proposed parking is ancillary shall provide parking permits in City parking lots for all project employees who regularly drive to work and who are not accommodated by on -site parking, and shall limit on -site parking spaces for residents to no more than 28 spaces. 5. Abandoned driveways shall be replaced with new sidewalk, curb and gutter in conformance with City standards. 6. All work done within the City right-of-way shall require issuance of a street opening permit from the Public Works/Engineering Department. 7. Final grading and drainage plans shall be submitted to Public Works/Engineering Department for review at least 30 days prior to Building Permit application. 8. Fire extinguishers shall be required for the parking area. Fire sprinklers shall be required if the proposed structure exceeds 1000 gpm fire flow. 9. Construction shall begin within six months of the rezoning approval by the City Council, and shall be coopleted within mix months of the issuance of a building permit. 10. Of the 32 parking spaces on this site and the adjacent Planned Community zone, three of the surface parking spaces shall be labeled for guest parking with staff providing the appropriate Ordinance wording for the City Council. Findings: (a) The site is so situated, and the use or uses proposed for the site are of such characteristics that the application of general districts or combining districts will not provide sufficient flexibility to allow the proposed development in that multiple family residential districts do not allow parking as a principle use and the parking is intended to be ancillary to an existing planned community development 57--218 5/18/87 MOTION CONTINUED (b) Development of the site under the provisions of the (PC) plant -led community district will result in public benefits not otherwise attainable by application of the regulations of general districts or combining districts in that the project will provide 12 additional parking spaces, which are not required, but are needed by the adjoining residential project which presently relies upon on -street parking for employees and guests. (c) The use permitted, and the site development regulations applicable within the district are consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, and are compatible with existing potential uses on adjoining sites or within the general vicinity in that the project will provide needed off-street parking for an adjacent residential development and will provide a visual break between two 1 high density cesiaeriicsm� developments. ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING ORDINANCE 3437 AND AMENDING SECTION 18.08.40 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (THE ZONING MAP) TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS 630 LYTTON AVENUE FROM RM-5 TO PC' Council Member Fletcher had a problem with the City sanc- tioning an employer providing funds for people to bring their cars to work in the downtown area. It was not in keeping with what the Golden Triangle Task Force was working towards. AMENDMENT: Council Member Fletcher moved to amend page 2, Section (d) of the ordinance, second line, to replace "shall provide parking permits" to "shall provide transit passes." AMENDMENT DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND Council Member Cobb said henceforth all projects for senior housing with minimal parking would have to be a lot more realistic than was previously the case. Council Member Renzel concurred. She suggested the present elderly generation might have grown up with cars and would not let go as easily as was the case 10 or 20 years ago. MOTION PASSED unanimously,, Levy, Sutorius absent. 57-219 5/18/87 12. PUBLIC HEARING: MODIFICATIONS PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE PALO ALTO FENCE ORDINANCE AND ZONING ORDINANCE (237-01) (CMR:269 :7 ) Planning Commissioner Pam Marsh said the fence ordinance was a source of ongoing frustration for Planning Commissioners, planning staff and applicants over the past few years. The decision -making process which governed the granting of fence exceptions was different from any other application process in the City and was viewed by all as being unduly compli- cated. Last fail, a Planning Commission subcommittee evaluated the ordinance and its recommendation with a couple of minor staff changes was before the Council. The recom- mendation was for minor changes in the kinds of fences that would tae' legal and not subject to exception in the City. It was believed that a more liberal ordinance would limit the number of residents who needed a fence exception. If a fence exempti..on was still necessary, the. second part of the recommendation was that the resident would be subject to the normal variance process. The Planning Commission believed the variance process was relatively well understood by resi- dents throughout the City and was by far, the most appropri- ate process to invoke in the case of fence .exemot-ie s. TO THE Counc' i l McmbeL Klein asked whether a procedure could be established similar to what the Planning Commission recom- mendation with the exception- that appeals would not be to the City Council but rather the Planning Commission or ARB would be the final. decision -making authority. City Attorney Diane Northway said appeals to the Planning Commission or ARB would not be possible because the City Charter provided that all boards eand commissions were advisory. Unless the matter was retained in the hands of an individual City official; an appeal had to go to the City Council if it went through the commission., Council. Member Klein queried whether that was the reason for the current procedure where the final authority was a City official. Ms. Northway said that might be the reason. Mayor WOoliey declared the Public Hearing open. Receiving no requests from the public to speak, she declared the Public Hearing cicded. 57-220 5/18/87 MOTION: Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by aechtel, to adopt the proposed ordinance amending Titles 16.24 (Fence Ordinance), 16.48 (A.RB Ordinance), and 18.90 (Zoning Ordinance), including adoption of the negative declaration. ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled *ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING CHAPTERS 16.24, 16.48 AND 18.90 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING FENCES AND FENCE. VARIANCES" Council Member Cobb asked how the liberalizing changes sug- gested by the Planning Commission could be incorporated to leave the authority with the Planning Department except in exceptional circumstances. Ms. Northway said the liberalizing procedure was contained in the regulations which were not the subject for an appeal. She was not sure she would consider applying for a variance in order to get an exception a liberalizing procedure. A variance could go to the Planning Commission who could be advisory to some other City official. The ARS was advisory to the Director of Planning. Chief Planning Official Carol Jansen said one of the goals of the amendment was to eliminate the number of fence excep- tions to the Planning Commission and back to the staff level. Since the recommendations were considered, staff presented the change in the ordinance to the public and in staffs opinion, the liberalizing aspects would cover the majority of the fence exceptions applied for in the past. Most were interior side and rear yard requests for increases in height. The 14 or 15 applicants talked to at the counter all said they would wait until after Council took action and would. be satisfied with a 7 -foot interior side or rear yard fence height. Many of the requests were tor special gates and posts column treatment for fencng that normally saw a 4 -foot height. Staff did not anticipate a lot of fence exceptions on appeal. AMENDMENT: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Cobb, that a procedure be established whereby the matters were initially heard by the Zoning Administrator to the extent there was any dispute and any appeal gent to the ARB and the final decision -making authority would be the Director of Planning and Community Environment. Ms. Jansen said the ARB did not review anything in single- family and the vast majority of fence exceptions were single-family. 57-221 5/18/87 Council Member Klein recognized the inconsistency but if there was any dispute, citizens should have one opportunity to appeal to a group of citizens not part of the administra- tion which was why he selected the ARB. Mayor Woolley hesitated to support the amendment although she sympathized with the fact that Council did not want to see fence exceptions. The Planning Commission subcommittee wrestled with the matter and explored various avenues. She was willing to try the procedure and if Council received fence exceptions, changes would be needed. The purpose of the- recommendation was so Council would not have so many exceptions because most would be taken care of through the liberalization of the basic rules pertaining to fences. She preferred not to make the first inroad to _the ARB's dealing with single-family housing and take a chance that Council might have to consider a couple. Council Member Fletcher agreed with Mayor Woolley. She did not believe the appealswould be very complicated or hotly disputed, She expected they would not take much Council time. Ms. Jansen said in many of the exceptions taken to the Planning Commission the appellant never showed up. Council Member Renzel concurred with Mayor Woolley and Coun ;il Member Fietcner_=_ She believed raising the fence, height to seven feet meant every new fence would be at that height which was unfortunate. Anything beyond seven feet was extraordinary and should be brought forward so Council was aware of the problem in the community and could dete r - mine whether it was something Council wished to see happen in the community. Since staff advised there would be few exceptions, it was worth giving a try as recommended. Council Member Patitucci asked how many cases might be seen in the course of a year. Ms. Jansen said last year there were approximately 25 appli- cations. 4 little less than halt went to the planning Commission. The exception process was such that one just had to write a letter in opposition. Mayor -Woolley said the process for an exception would. be difficult enough so unless there was . a good reason for an exception someone would -not pursue it. Shy: asked about the fee. Zoning Administrator Bob Brown said $225 for residential projects and $400 for commercial/industrial. 57e222 5/18/87 Mayor Woolley. aaked about the fees under the current process. Mr. Brown said the fee was $75. Council Member Patitucci believed if the Planning Commission unanimously favored the process, it was worth a try. If Council ended up with lots of .fence variances, the process would need to be changed. Council Member Klein did not -believe the fee was relevant because it could be changed to be at the sale level as a variance. With issues ranging from cable television to Calaveras to close to a $100 million budget, Council could ill -afford spending its time on fence appeals. Based on neighborhood disputes regarding zoning, they were not short items and generated a lot of emotion. Raising the possi- bility that Council might receive fence appeals was a mis- take. Council could not be ,involved in every single item in the community and had to trust other people to make appro- priate decisions. AMENDMENT FAILED by a vote of 2-5, Cobb, Klein voting "aye," Levy, Sutorius absent. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Sutorius absent. 13. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE APPLICATION OF ARTHUR ERICKSON, ARCHITECTS FOR SITE AND DESIGN APPROVAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 LOS TPANCOS WOODS ROAD (300) -. MOTION: Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Patitucci, to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation to approve Site and Design application with the following findings and conditions: Findings: 1. That the project will not have any significant environ- mental impacts, in that the project is designed to miti- gate the impacts of proposed site grading, and disrup- tion of site coils and retain existing trees; 2. The proposed design will ba orderly, harmonious, artd compatible with existing and potential uses of adjoining property, iA that the proposed use and improvements will be similar to other uses in the area, and the project has been carefully sited to screen the project from adjacent uses; 57.223 5/18/87 MOTION CONTINUED 3. The project will maintain desirability of investment in the same or adjacent areas, in that the required on -site improvements, landscaping and construction standards governed by the current Uniform Building Code (UBC) or other current codes will assure a high quality of development; 4. The proposed design will observe sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance, in that the selected location and terraced design of the residence help to limit unnecessary disruption of the site and tree removal, and measures incorporated into the project will repair previously developed portions of the site, after demolition activities are completed; 5. The proposed use will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, in that the proposed residential use and related improvements conform to the intent of the Open Space Controlled Development designation to allow limited -residential development on larger sites to mini- mize physical impacts of development. Conditions: 1. The new residence shall meet all pertinent requirements of Title 24, State Energy Code. 2. A detailed grading and drainage plan shall. be 'submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval 30 days prior to application for a building permit. All roof drains shall outfall to paved surfaces or . drainrock, or other protected areas, approved by the Department of Public Works. Construction details for any proposed energy dissipaters or other erosion control devices shall be submitted with the detailed drainage 3. Prior to application for a building permit:, a descrip- tion of any necessary public utilities easements shall be recorded. Evidence of suchrecordation shall be sub- mitted to the Building Department at the time of filing for the Building Permit. 4. All topsoil from areas to be graded shall be removed and stockpiled for reuae after grading is completed. 57-224 5/18/87 MOTION CONTINUED 5. Prior to issuance of a building permit submit a detailed soils report prepared by a qualified geologist. Such report shall include recommendations for site demolition activities, new, grading and construction methods and necessary erosion control measures. The report shall also address recommendation regarding construction of the proposed pond. Such report shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of a building Permit. 6. All grading and development on the site shall conform with all aspects of the preliminary and final project soils report recommendations. The project soils engi- neers will be required to certify that the grading was done in accordance with their recommendations, prior to finalization of the building permit. 7. No grading will be permitted during the rainy season (October 15 A- April 15) without approval of the Public Works Department. 8. An automatic fire sprinkler system will be required for the residence. Separate permit and plans must be reviewed by the Fire Department. 9. The new structures shall conform with all the require- ments of Appendix E, as amended, of the current Uniform Fire Code for structures in the hazardous fire area. A Class 'A" or equivalent fire retardant roof will be required. 10. Prior to issuance of a building permit, submit a final landscape plan and irrigation plan to the Planning Department for review and approval. The plan shall include the common and botanical names of all species used, number, size, type, location and spacing of all plant materials.. The plan should also include specifi- cations for maintenance of the existing trees during. construction, particularly the oaks, and recommendations for soil mixes or other measures needed to assure ade- quate and continued coverage of denuded slopes. The final landscape plan shall specifically address measures necessary to assure continued health of oak trees bor- derino the proposed pond. The final landscape plan shall include details concerning the location and con- struction of all proposed landscape improvements. The approved landscape plan shall be installed prior to 57-225 5/18/87 MOTION CONTINUED October 15 of the construction year. Minor modifica- tions to the plan may be made during installation, sub- ject to the Planning Department's approval. The final landscape plan shall reflect the followings All site pathways proposed shall be constructed of gravel or grass; b. The plan shall be revised to reduce the amount of lawn area proposed, and shall limit the lawn area to the area immediately bordering the proposed house and lap pool. The lawn areas proposed adjacent to the driveway and existing library shall instead be seeded with *native- type" grass seed and function as a continuation of the meadow; c. Use of the Arbutus unedo (Strawberry tree) shall be limited to the areas in the ill -mediate perimeter of the residence. 11. A septic tank system shall be provided for the project, subject to the approval of the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health. Prior to applica- tion for a building permit, submit a letter or set of building plans to the Building Official from the Department of Environmental Health, stating that a specific design for such a septic tank system has been reviewed and approved for the site. 12. All power connections, and relocation or modifications of existing power lines shall be performed at the developers expense, subject to the approval of the City's Utilities Department. 13. The construction contract shall provide for periodic watering of site soils and spraying of trees to keep dust generation at a minimum. Frequency of watering shall increase in periods of greater wind (above 15 miles per hour), or upon request of the Public Works Department. 14. A tree species eucalyptos giobulas shall be eliminated from the plant list and replaced with a less invasive substitute. 15. Additional planting shall be provided to screen the residence from view from Portola Valley Ranch. 57.226. 5/18/87 MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Sutorius absent. 14. PLANNING COMMISSION AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATION RE APPLICATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR - SITE AND DESIGN APPROVAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 32.01 EAST BAYSHORE FRONTAGE ROAD (30U) MOTION: Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Cobb, to adopt the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board recommendation to approve a Master Plan for the Municipal Service with the following findings and condi- tions: Findings: 1. The project will not have any significant environmental impacts, in that the Master Plan is intended to improve the appearance and circulation of the site; 2. The proposed plan will be orderly, harmonious, and com- patible with existing or potential uses of adjoining property, in that the Plan enhances the visual com- patibility of the site by screening it from the Baylands; a. The project will maintain desirability of conducting business in the adjacent area, in that the on -site improvements, landscaping, and construction standards governed by theUniformBuilding Code will assure a high quality of development; 4. The proposed design will observe sound ri eiples of environmental design and ecological balance, An that the proposed landscaping materials and design will be in conformance with the adopted Baylands Master Plant list; 5. The proposed use and plan will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, in that it is consistent with the Baylands Master Plan and the proposal is a con- tinuation of an existing use and within the Public Facilities designation. Conditions: 1. That the MSC Master Plan be given Site and Design approval with the understanding that there will be phasing of the improvements consistent with the City budget process. 57-227 5/18/87 MOTION CONTINUED 2. That the phasing of the improvements to the MSC shall be assessed individually through the CIP and ARB process (as indicated) at the time that the improvements can be funded by the City. 3. That the widening of East Bsyshore Frontage Road, to accommodate turn pockets into the MSC, be considered at the time of specific Frontage Road improvements to the Main Gate. 4. That all aisle ways and intersections in the storage and fleet parking lot be properly. signed to avoid circula- tion problems. 5. That the- plants and berms at the driveway entrance be designed to allow site clearance for automobiles and bikes and be reviewed by the Transportation Division at the time of the Final Landscaping Plan Council Member Renzel understood specific improvements would be reviewed for site and design within the context of the Master Plana Mr. Brown said that was correct. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Sutorfas absent. 14A. - (OLD 7) , CONTRACT WITH SUN OHIO TO RECLASSIFY OIL IN SUBSTATION TRANSFORMERS TO NON -PCB (1 101) (CMR:252..7 ) Michael Uaun, 383 Country Brook Loop, San Ramon, represented U.S. Pollution Control, ,Inc., a nationally recognized hazardous waste management company. They recently submitted a bid on the job to reclassify PCB transformers and tendered. it to Purolator Courier the day before the bid was due. Because of an Federal Aviation Administration shutdown of the Oklahoma City Airport, their bid was received late. He had documentation that their bid was tendered on time and that they guaranteed 11:00 a.m. delivery and the due time was- 3:00 p.m. He requested their bid be considered as it was the low bi.d , by $12,000 and the other bid proposed to treat PCBs within the City limits of Palo Alto. U. S. Pollution Control proposed removing the PCBs to a remote location in northwestern Utah where the PCBs in the mineral -Oil would be destroyed, which they believed to be a much safer process. 57-228 5/18/87 Council Member Patitucci asked about the policy for late- arriving bids. Ms. NorthwaYT used a sports analogy, ioe, "when the starting gun went off, all the runners had to be in the blocks, and if they were not in the blocks, they could not compete." All bids had to be in at the time of the bid opening. "If there was some reason for someone not being at the race, they did not get to participate regardless of whether it was their fault." MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Patitucci, approval of the staff recommendation as follows: 1. The Mayor be authorized to execute a contract with Sun Ohio in the amount of $76,200 to reclassify the oil in substation transformers from PCB contaminated to non -PCB; and 2. Authorize staff to execute change orders for additional work in the amount of $3,800. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Sutorius absent. 15. REQUEST OF COUNCIL MEMBER ELLEN FLETCHER RE SMOKING ORDINANCE (1400) MOTION: Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Klein, that the City Attorney be directed to prepare amendments to Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 9.14 to ind1ude the following prohibitions: 1. Retail stores, including Laundromats, print and copy shops, and other enclosed businesses open to the public, excluding areas in said establishments not open to the public, all areas within retail tobacco stores, and eating establishments already covered in Section 9.14.080; 2. All enclosed areas available , to and customarily used by the public in all business and nonprofit entities patronized by the public; 3. Polling places; and 4. Bus lines, bus and train shelters, and inside the Palo Alto Caltrain Depot. 57-229 5/18/87 Council Member Fletcher said the City Attorney pointed out to her that polling places were under the jurisdiction of the County on voting day, and the transit agencies were outside the City's jurisdiction.' She was advised that it was possible to ask the appropriate authorities to grant the City authority to institute regulations. She urged the items be left in the motion to be explored further by the City Attorney. Council Member Klein had a problem with No. 2 because it seemed to be a repeat of No. 1 and vastly expanded. The ordinance included specifics and to then say "all enclosed areas available to and customarily used by the public in all business and non-profit entities" included everything in Palo Alto except private homes, Ms. Northway was also concerned about No. 2 in that there was some duplication with the office workplace regulations. She viewed those regulations as a compromise worked out with the seg.nents of the community that were regulated and one area which was part of the compromise and intentionally not regulated was lobbies. Just about every other common area was either no smoking or a partial smoking. AMENDMENT: \rVY o. 41 to delete Item 2. Member v t II1 ,"r't'su, i3C4:uilueu uy `.6.}C3►?, A representative of the international Group Organization for the Disabled, P. O. Sox 324, Menlo. Park, was concerned about warehouses, and referred to the San Francisco warehouse fire last year which killed 16 people. Janet Stone, Education Director, American Cancer Society of Santa elara County, 836 Seale, supported strengthening the ordinance. She. commended the Council for considering the revisions. A survey released that morning reflected the majority of Californians favored stronger no smoking ordinances for businesses, industry and in public places. [Nelson Blechman, 443 Ferne Avenue, commended the Council for its proposal to strengthen the smoking ordinance. He suggested the ordinance might ban the sale of tobacco to people born after 1950 so that by the year 2000 there would be no smokers. Council Member Fletcher referred to lobbies and said the present ordia ance gave employees the right to declare the immediate area a no smoking area. When visitors went ;to an insurance agency or some other office and had to wait in the_ waiting area where there were several secretarial people, 57-230 5/18/07 there might be some control over the employees, but the cus- tomer going in had no control over other customers. She could not undet:'stand why there might be opposition to pro- tecting people stuck in those situations. Lobbies were left for smoking in the office workplaces so employees would have somewhere to go. She was not referring to large office buildings where there might be an occasional customer, but rather the local lawyer, real estate agent, travel agents, etc., similar to a retail establishment where one had to go in and spend a certain amount of time. She urged the amend- ent be defeated. • Most people were bothered by smoke and the number of people who emeked in California was far fewer than nationwide. She did not see why the, majority had to put up with the pollution caused by a few people in the small enclosed areas. Ms. Northway pointed out a current provision which banned smoking in "indoor service lines" which could cover part of the situation where people were in a common area and in line or in close proximity to someone else where it would be uncomfortable for someone if someone else was smoking. Council Member Klein supported all efforts to enact stronger anti-smokinr7 ordinances, and he commended Council Member Fletcher for bringing the matter before the Council. _He did not believe their cause was furthered by using language he found to be sloppy, inconsistent, overbroad and ba,sically at odds with ordinances already on the books and it gave the opponents on such issues an opportunity to criticize. He believed Council Member Fletcher's ideas were readily accom- plished by what was on the books. He did not want Council to get in the position of not being as clear and concise as possible, which was why he reluctantly proposed the amend- ment. He wanted Council to be on the side of the angels in aright and proper way. Council Member Patitucci sympathized with the problem Council Member Fletcher addressed, but also understood Ccwcis Member Klein's concerns regarding the language. He quelled whether there was a defined term which covered ''waiting areas" which would identify places where people were kept waiting where it was not their choice. Ms. Northway said in most cases it would be the person's choice because they could always patronize another business. She ':believed Council needed to be more precise in what was sugge.''ted. Lobbies and waiting areas were all the same, there were just• different circumstances, and sizes of lobbies or waiting rooms, how many other people were in the waiting room might be a factor to consider.' 57-231 5/18/87 Council Member Patitucci asked whether it was possibl , building on ;,existing language for waiting, lines, to draft language de£initionally more precise. Ms. Northway was concerned" -about enforcement if they got into how many people were in the waiting room, lobby, or reception arca, its size, etc. Most of the other provisions were self -enforcing. Mayor Woolley understood "other enclosed businesses open to the public" would include insurance agents, travel agents, beauty shops. Ms. Northway said the legislative intent started with the Council. When decided, she ' would put it into words. Council Member Fletcher modeled her motion after the Americans for Nonsmokers Rights, and preferred to have the intent of the ordinance reflect Mayor Woolley's under- standing. The current ordinance spoke to lunchrooms and -- lounges in the workplace, and said two-thirds of the space - had to be set aside for nonsmokers in places greater than 650 square feet, but if they were -less than 650 square feet, smoking was prohibited. She suggested that might take care of the small place. She had no intention of intruding on the large Hewlett-Packard type building, Ms. Northway queried whether Council Member Fletcher might prefer to use square footage rather than in addition to the nature of the business because it might be another factor. A large manufacturing operation with a lobby would not be included even though it had offices. She suggested Council might want to go in the direction of dealing with size as well as usage. She did not know what the cutoff would be, but if Council gavkl direction, she would try and find one. Council Member Fletcher suggested "enclosed businesses open to the public of square footage up to 650 square feet." She received a call from the police inspectional division who asked whether she intended to include cardrooms. She believed cardrooms should be an exception. Mayor Woolley did not believe the motion before the Council.. was precise enough. MOTION TO CONTINUE: Mayor Woolley moved, seconded by Klein, to continue the matter. 57-232 5/18/87 Council Member Cobb was concerned about the procedure. He wanted Council's lawmaking to be structured and legally defensible. If Council's purpose was to deal with enclosed places, profit or nonprofit, where the public did business and it could be defined in some general, sensible way, then an ordinance could_be drafted and exceptions could be drawn out. The way to make a law was to find out what problem needed to be solved, and in the subject instance he gathered it was smoking in places where people did business, then spell out the nature of the problem, and define the solution which addressed the problem for all areas where it existed. He supported the continuance and hoped Council Member Fletcher might have some guidance so the proposal could be returned more structured. Council Member Fletcher believed she was precise. In terms of bus stops, she was bothered by people smoking and had to get out of line and she could not use a bus shelter because people sat there smoking. Council Member Fenzel concurred with Council Member Fletcher. She understood the motion was a referral to the City Attorney to request that an ordinance be`,,drafted and returned to Council in which case it was like a continuance and Council was expressing its preferences. Council ►Member Fletcher said the motion was for the City Attorney to draft an ordinance. Council Member Fenzel said if Council Members each expressed concerns, and she concurred with the concerns as outlined by Council Members Fletcher and Patitucci with the small waiting areas, it seemed to her the concept was clear. She was agreeable to a size limitation as suggested by the City Attorney and believed the other categories, i.e., polling places, bus lines, etc. were also clear. She did riot see a problem except with respect to item 2. Council Member Klein said the issue was a good one, but he did not believe Council served itself well by enacting good laws in a poor manner. Council did not delegate to the City Attorney the responsibility for making policy. She required more precise guidelines to do her job. Square footage limitations had to be defined. Council Member Fletcher needed to provide more guidance especially with regard to items 1 and 2 and in terms of where the amendments fit with. what was done into the office rules already on the books.' He supported the continuance. He was willing .to support items 3 and 4 although he knew the City did not control polling places and bus lines as compared to busses and .trains. 57-233 5/18/87 Ms. Northway queried whether a "bus line" meant the trans- portation system or people standing in line because the term "bus line" was used in two different ways. Council Member Fletcher clarified "bus line" meant waiting lines. Council Member Cobb was also not bothered by items 3 or 4, but was concerned the list started out with laundroma ts, etc., and it seemed to him Council either needed to provide a specific infinite list or else say "enclosed places of retail business" and describe them in some sort of legally appropriate manner. If Council was concerned about lawyers offices, he queried whether they be listed without listing advertising agencies. If the problem was a waiting room situation, it should be spelled out because it then became a generic law rather than one which happened to specify the things which came to mind when the law was made. Council Member Patitucci concurred with the need to clarify the instructions to the City Attorney. He queried whether the matter might be discussed in the Policy and Procedures (P&P) Committee and Council would just see the actual ordinance. Mayor Woolley said it was possible but Council Member Fletcher was free to consult any other Council Member, If the matter went to committee, there needed to be something to refer and she wanted to see something more along the lines of what Council Member Cobb indicated. She preferred generic terms rather than just picking out certain busines- ses. If it presented a problem at the Council level, it might be a good move. Council Member Bechtel believed it was advisable to continue the matter for a couple --of weeks and for Council Member Fletcher to return a memo to Council with a copy of the existing ordinance attaehed to ensure no duplication. She believed parts of the existing ordinance affected retail establishments although she did not know to what extent they affected waiting areas. Council Member Fletcher assured Council she reviewed the existing ordinance and there was no duplication in her proposal. Service lines were different from common areas, and the only place :she could think of in town where there was a service line was at the bank and there ' were signs all over the bank which said "No Smoking" in accordance with the Municipal Code section. She did not intend to write the ordinance but rather to provide examples of what she had in 57-234 5/18/87 mind when she listed the various establishments. She did not intend tor the particular words contained in her memo to go into an ordinance but rather to illustrate the kinds of establishments she wanted covered. She believed she was precise and provided direction to the City Attorney. She requested Council Members put suggestions to her in writing. Council Member Renzel hoped when the item returned, Council Member Fletcher would relate her amendments to the permitted uses in the zones where retail stores were allowed which might provide a more clear example consistent with current ordinances and might make enforcement easier. Council Member Fletcher checked with Mr. Schreiber and he could not come up with a definition. Mayor Woolley asked that applicable ordinances from other cities also be attached in order to show how Palo Alto was overtaken. MOTION TO CONTINUE PASSED by a vote of 6-1, Renzel voting Eno," Levy, Sutorius absent. ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned at 9:05 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: Mayor 57-235 5/19/87