Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-10-26 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MINUTES PALO ALTOCITYCOUNCiLMEETINGSARERFROADCASTLIVE VIA KM- FREOUENCY90.1 ONFMDIAL--- Regular Meeting October 26, 1987 ITEM Oral ` Communications Approval of Minutes of September 28, 1987 PAGE 58-371 58-371 1. Ordinance 3775 Amending Section 18.08.040 58-372 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Classification pf Property Known as 4047 El Camino Way from RM-2 and CN to PC 2. Public Hearing: Planning Commission and ARB Recommendation re Application of _ ARCO Petroleum for a Zone Change from RM-2 to PC for Property Located at 2996 Middlefield Road 3. Public Hearing: Planning Commission. Recommendation on the Appeal of Heidah Tabrizi re Denial of a -.Use Permit for a Day Care Center in Existing Single - Family Residence, for Property Located at 627 Arastradern Road r 4. Historic Resources Board Request for Endorsement of Department of Interior Standards for Renabilitation i. Santa Clara County Mortgage Revenue Bond Program: Resolution to Apply to the State of California for Mortgage Credit Certifi- cates 6. California Arts Council Grant for Master Class Program and Budget Adjustment for Shaker Crafts Exhibition 58-372 58-373 58-384 7. Landfill Gas Recovery System, Budget . 58-386 Amendment Ordinance and Maintenance Agreement ITEM 8. Golden Triangle Implementation Phase -- Approval of Cooperative Agreement and Budget 9. 1987-88 Annual Housing Assistance Plan for the Community Development Block Grant Program 10. Requestof Mayor Woolley re Cancellation of November 2, 1987, City Council Meeting Adjournment at 9:45 p.m. PAGE 58-387 58--390 58-390 58-390 58-370A 10/26/87 Regular Meeting Monday, October 26, 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: Bechtel, Cobb, Fletcher, Levy, Patitucci, Renxel, Sutorius, Woolley. ABSENT: Klein Mayor Woolley announced a video presentation re Historic Rehabilitation Standards was held in the Council Conference Room prior to the meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Edmund R. Powers, 2254 Dartmouth Street, said the need for a satisfactory arena for political discussion and debate was dramatically demonstrated by a recent inc. dent when segments of the local press with the greatest circulation refused to publish the proceedings of an Open Forum to which all Palo Alto City Council candidates were invited. One of the matters discussed was the aestruction of the Palo Alto Sea Scout base, and such information should- be available to the public by some means other than expensive advertising. If anyone wished to contest the matter of the Sea Scout base, he was willing to debate the matter with the stipulation that the debates be recorded, and the challenger have a written statement from the media that the matter would be properly published, and that it would be published by the Mercury and Times Tribune by next Monday. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1987 Council Member Fletcher submitted the following correction: Page 58-.325, first paragraph, second line, "issue and" should be "issue of. Vice Mayor Sutorius had the following correction: Page 58-315, item #2, first paragraph, fourth line,- confident4 should be "competent.. MOTION: Vice Mayor Sutorius moved,seconded by Pletcher, approval of the Minutes of September 28, 1987, as corrected MOTION PASSED unanimously, Klein absent. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Vice Mayor Sutorius moved, seconded by Cobb, approval of the Consent Calendar. 1. ORDINANCE 3775 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (THE ZONING MAP) TO CHANGE THE CLAS- SIFICATION OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS 4047 EL CAMINO WAY FROM RM-2 AND CN to PC" (1st Reading 10/05/87, PASSED 8-1, Renzel "no") (701-03/300) MOTION PASSED by a vote of 7-1, Renzel voting "no," Klein. absent 2. PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD (ARB) RECOMMENDATION RE APPLICATION OF ARCO PETROLEUM FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM RM-2 TO PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2996 MIDDLEFIELD ROAD (CMR:506:7) (300) Planning Commissioner Joseph Hirsch said the'height of the wall was reduced. from six feet to five feet, and it would be only three feet in height within 70 feet of the Middlefield property line. That was the only change made. Viqe Mayor Sutorius believed the suggestion on the wall change was appropriate. He -referenced drainage considera- tions, elevation changes, and the steep decline from the ARCO property to the driveway easement; and asked if the wail along that side, the landscaping, and any pavement changes were going to be level with approximately the eleva- tion of the existing service station building, or would they taper in the present manner. Chief Planning Official Carol Jansen said there had not been a _proposal indicating how that matter would be treated. Plans had to be submitted to the Public Works Department 30 days before the building permit, and staff could include those elevations changes, if any :were proposed, in that sub- mittal, if that was a concern of the Council. Vice Mayor Sutorius recommended staff do so. It was impor- tant to have.a record of the current elevations compared to what they would be, because it could suggest oo review there were drainage situations to take into account. That feature made the change in the wall all the more significant because the height . of the wall on tine access side would appear con- siderably higher because of the slope on the other side. 58-372 10/26/87 Ms. Jansen said staff would advise the applicant of the recommendation. Mayor Woolley declared the Public Hearing open. Receiving no requests from the public to speak, she declared the Public Hearing closed. MOTION: Council Member Cobb moved, seconded by Levy, to adopt the staff recommendation to approve the Planned Community Zone change by adopting the ordinance, including conditions and environmental findings. ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (THE ZONING MAP) TO REZONE THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS 2995 MIDDLEFIELD ROAD FROM RM-2 TO PC's Council Member Cobb said the small gift from ARCO at his place was -highly inappropriate even though it was of no significant monetary value. The gift would be returned. Mayor Woolley said the City Clerk would return all the gifts to ARCO the following day. Council Member. Fletcher saw no justification for rezoning the property for the purpose of operating a gas station at the location, in a residential neighborhood. There were other locations, and one vacant on Charleston had been a gas station and was out of the highly congested traffic part of Middlefield Koad. Considering the problem with traffic in the Midtown area, to encourage a use that generated up to 2,000 trips a day was illogical. She was not in agreement with the findings of the ordinance. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 6-2, Sutorius and Fletcher voting 4no,* Klein absent. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ON THE APPAL OP HEIDAH TABRIZI RE DENIAL OF A USE PERMIT FOR A DAY CARE CENTER IN AN EXISTING SINGLE-FtiMI tY RESIDENCE, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 627 ARASTRADERO ROAD (300) Commissioner Uirsch said the . Planning Como ss:on's recom- mendation was made almost purely on safety, factors. The site was considered tc oe totally inappropriate for a day care center. None.. of the Commissioners was adverse to clay cart: centers per se on Arastradero Road or in residential areas, but the particular site seemed poorly located. In particular, there was a bicycle lane on the south side of Arastradero, and no parking lane, virtually forcing people to park in the driveway. The morning after the hearing he saw one car make a dangerous move to exit the driveway.. almost in the face of fast-moving traffic. The incident was telling in terms of the potential safety problems associated with the particular use on -that particular site. Mayor Woolley declared the Public Hearing open. Heidah Tabrizi, 574 Arastradero Road, said the center already had 12 infants, and the appeal was for eight. more to make it financially feasible for her to operate. Child care was in great demand in Palo Alto. The Montessori method of education kept the children under control and occupied more than any other progessive educational approach. The nature of the Montessori school was congruous with the neighborhood characteristics, and other houses along Arastradero Road had semi --circular driveways. Landscaping would make the front yard attractive. The subject property was previously a residential care home for the elderly and had six bedrooms and five bathrooms. . The eight additional infants did not make the outside yard noisy, and they intended to build high sound -barrier fencing. The only hours children played outside were from.. 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon, and from 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., and they were not there during the evenings or on weekends and holidays. It the use permit was granted, they would make improvements to ease and aid the traffic, such as a semi -circular- driveway, a contract with parents to enter and exit from eastbound Arastradero, flex- ible hours for pick up and drop oft, and staggered scheduling. There would be a minimal increase in traffic. She was licensed at a previous location, had an excellent record, used some of the same staff, and received a fire clearance on October 7, 1987, which meant the house was in good condition. The licensing authorities- saw no problems with their getting a license which could take as long as six to eight months. Parents felt safe leaving their children in her care. Council Member Cobb asked if it was correct that. Ms. Tabrizi lost her lease at the Ohlone School site, or that. she was the low bidder there but declined to renew her lease. Ms. Tabrizi said both statements were correct. They put in a bid for five rooms when she had two partners. After they went through the bidding process and got the lease, both partners baked _ off. She could not carry on five rooms, so she personally put in a bid for three rooms and was over- bid. 58-374 10/26/87 r.� Flo Furuike, 1799 S. Winchester Boulevard, #109, with the State Department of Social Services, said the Environmental - Impact Assessment (EIA) indicated a minimum of three staff members would be required for the center, but assuming the program was licensed for eight infants and 12 preschool children, the State would require a minimum of four staff because they would also require a director on site. Also, the State Department of Social Services would license the program, not the, County Department of social Services. Ms. Tabrizi indicated the fire clearance had been granted, but they had not yet received' the paperwork. They requested fire clearance on August -3, 1987, and the process took a long time because they requested clearance from the State Fire Marshal. They, iri turn, gave the request to the local jurisdiction, who made their visit and returned that piece of paper to the State Fire Marshal in San Leandro for processing and final approval Ms. Ross,: the licensing evaluator, made one visit and her final visit was pending on receipt of ai), information, including the fire clearance. According to the licensing reports, Ms. Ross had not actually looked at the site and measured it. The State Department of Social Services was silent on parking, access, and noise because they eXpected the local jurisdiction toe regulate those items. Mayor Woolley asked if a minimum number of square feet was required per child or infant. Ms. Furuike said preschoolers required 35 square feet of usable classroom space and 75 .square feet of usable outdo play activity area. Infants required the same plus an additional separate sleeping area, and the square footage was not defined so long as it was sufficient for napping equipment and for staff to attend to the infants without blocking exits. In addition, they required kitchen and toilet areas, etc. Vice Mayor Su.torius asked for clarification on the different levels of care, different authorities of licensing, etc. Ms Furuike said the State had two categories of child day care facilities. One was family day care for no more than 12 children in a person's own residence, and they defined "residence" by the fact the person lived there. A family day care home for 7 to 12 children required not only the licensee or- the person living there but an assistant to be present whenever the children " were. The child day care center included infant programs, a preschool program, or .a child day care center, as well as the school -ago programs. The child day care program had no capacity limit, the person 58- 37 5 10/26/87 did not reside at the facility, and there could be as few as one or two children or as many as several hundred. The dif- ference was limiting 12 in a family day care home and the residency requirement. Vice Mayor Siktorius clarified the licensee would need an assistant if there were from 7 to 12 in a family day care home. Ms. Furuike referred to the individual as the licensee, and he asked if the licensing process was administered by the same level of government in each situation. Mr. Furuike said the licenses -for both family day care and child day care centers were State licenses; however, in Santa Clara County, the Santa Clara County Department of Social Services contracted with the State to perform the licensing functions for the family day care homes, although it was still a State license. Vice Mayor Sutorius asked if the function of ombudsman referenced in the record was related to the organization with which the City of Palo Alto was familiar and supported financially. Ms. Furuike said no, they were the counterpart of that program for children in child care facilities. There were two basic distinctions: One, she was an employee of the State Department of Social Services Community Care Licensing; and, two, not only did they mediate complaints on behalf of persons, they also provided information and acted as liaison for the child care community. Council Member Levy asked Ms. Furuike's title. Ms. U'uruike said she was the Child Care Ombudsperson for the San Jose District Office of the California Department of Social Services Community Care Licensing Division, Child Care Ombudsman Program. Council Member Levy asked if Ms. Furuike normally attended all such hearings. Ms. Furuike did not generally attend Council and Planning Commission weetings but was requested tomake a presenta- tion. Trudy Rutledge, d54 Miranda Green, represented the Greater Miranda Community Association comprised of about 50 families in the Miranda Road area who • opposed the Tabrizi Day Care Center at 627 Arastradero. There was no busing in the 58-376 10/26/87 morning and for the past five years there had not been a crossing guard at Gunn High School. The only crossing to Juana Briones Elementary School was located at the end of Mrs. Tabrizi's property.' They were concerned for the safety of the children who used the crosswalk. The children from the Miranda Road neighborhood needed to cross there and the cars who entered_ the day care center and then backed out into the Arastradero traffic constituted a safety hazard to the children using the crossing. The increase in traffic accidents on that section of Arastradero during the last several years was well documented. While their association recognized the importance of day care, the safety of the children should be overriding. John MacMurray, 4238 Los. Palos, opposed the day care center at the Arastradero location. The area -represented a trech- erous traffic situation in either direction trom a side street. He disagreed with the reports of minimal impact because people needed to make left turns into the driveway from westbound which blocked a whole lane of traffic. He urged denial. Marion Hill, 4270 Pomona Avenue, pictorialized the situation On Arastradero Road by a slide which showed the Tabrizi property at the intersection of Coulombe and Arastradero.. After the Jewish Community Center (JCC) went into operation, after the Terman apartments were built and after the traffic on Arastradero Road intensified . everai-fold, Arastradero Road became untenable. There was an average of about 20 accidents per year over the past three years. Although a minimal effect was claimed, it was wrong to exacerbate an already untenable situation because there were many children involved. The principal intersections at Coulombe, the JCC intersection, and around Gunn High School had created a number of accidents. People dropping off their children did so according to their work schedules and drop offs were not spread out over the day, and there were a large number of accidents during the rush hours. Most people involved in injury accidents were aged 10 to 19 years, and there would be an increase in that age group when Gunn was converted to a middle school. There were several traffic conflicts with left -turn lanes. All the conflicts and unexpected moves by cars in the particular intersection would.. make a .bad situation worse. Alan U. Sklar, 632.Fairmede Avenue, showed a video which was taped the morning of September 16, 1987, and memorialized the normal sequence for dropping off children at the 627 Arastradero site. The first car arrived at 7:24 a.m. The car pulled in and the driver got out and let small children out of the car or extricated infants from car seats. There was a delay of tour to ten minutes while the child was set— tled in. 1'ho parent then returned to the car, entered traf- fic and left. The delay period was importantbecause it was responsible tor the fact that several cars were often at the site simultaneously. At 7:26 a.m., a second car arrived; at 7:28 a.m.. a third car arrived. .There was no place to park so the driver hesitated then backed up into traffic finally parking in the intersection in front of a no parking sign on the sidewalk and in the bicycle lane where it remained for -the following four minutes. During those four minutes, a bicyclist approached the crosswalk from the left and might go around the car into oncoming traffic. Simultaneous drop offs Were the rule rather than the exception because of the delay while settling the youngster in. One car was parked on the grass. A mother returned to her a car while a toddler headed tor traffic. The mother picked up the child just as he stepped off thh,F! curb. The driveway was open to the street which made carpooling dangerous at the site because a parent could not safely supervise the drop off of toddlers and infants simultaneously. In exiting the drive- way, a car signaled left but made a right turn to get on the street, then a U-turn to achieve the westward direction, which was not unusual. There was only one existing parking space for staff located at the right side of the garage. The left side was converted into a room in 1983. Staff currently parked in front of other homes on Los Palos Avenue. Alice Sklar, 632 Fairmede Avenue, was concerned about the applicant's demonstrated noncompliance with City and State regulations. Complaints to the licensing agency were in the records in the Community Care Licensing Section in Campbell. The site was an inappropriate choice for a day care center. R-1 zones could b.e appropriate for day care homes of 12 or less children. Centers with over 12 children ,should be evaluated carefully for impacts on residents. Both the Zoning Administrator and the Planning Commission found the site to be -inappropriate for the proposed use. She urged their recommendations be upheld. Alan Tway, 2434 Alvin Street, was discouraged about the child care situation on the peninsula. The Good Neighbor School was one of the least expensive in the Palo Alto area at $409 per month. The driveway accommodated two cars. The traffic on Arastradero was a problem in terms of volume and speed. He agreed that -something needed to be done about the accidents and if nothing else. he urged that Council encourage the Police Department to enforce the speed laws during peak hours. Seventy percent of the drop offs was one 58-378 10/26/87 individual --not multiples. In 90 percent of the situations, there was adequate room in the current driveway. The pro- posed semi -circular driveway allowed forward entry and exit. The safest and easiest entrance was from across the street on Coulombe with the green light entering the driveway which alternative might well serve the site. He suggested any contract include that entrance be from Coulombe with the .green light and exit be by right turn only out of a semi- circular driveway onto eastbound Arastradero. Leonard Mott, 638 Fairmede Avenue, said his property adjoined the rear of the proposed site. He opposed the use permit. Robert Brown's conclusions were correct that the noise from the play area in the rear of the property was a potential detriment to the enjoyment of outdoor space on adjoining properties. Schools and churches were permitted uses in R-1 neighborhoods but the question was the appropriateness of the particular site for the use sug- gested. When Mr. Brown reviewed the decibel level, he pointed out that the 70 decibel noise level, which would result from the background -noise plus the presence of the children, represented noise five times greater than the 65 decibel level recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. The original noise report did not compare the ambient level of noise in the adjoining property backyards with what the noise level would be given the presence of the rear play area of children. Laura Welch, 4028 Laguna Way, used the day care center and did not see the hazards alluded to. Parents were cautious to ensure other children were not in them; line of passage when they backed out of the center. She believed the prob- lem was Arastradero Road. Stella Hearn, 650 Fairmede, said her original objections to the particular site for a day care center were strengthened by the evidence presented and by her own ongoing observa- tions. The auto, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic had increased since school opened and the difficulties were well documented. The City recognized that the "T" intersection was dangerous and assigned a crossing guard. It would be contradictory for the City to endorse the additional drop offs and other .activities which made the site more hazardous. She did not believe there was aneed for another. day care center in the particular neighborhood. Between El Camino and the cemetery there were three large day care centers, one small center-, and at least two small home care centers. She was concerned -about the_ applicant's violations of regulations. She favored day care center. -s: in the com- munity but when such a facility worsened an already 58-379 10/26/87 dangerous traffic situation and further disrupted the neigh- borhood overloaded with day care centers and high density housing, its location was inappropriate. While Ms. Tabrizi might be a competent teacher, her choice of procedures and property was unacceptable. She urged that the appeal be denied Richard McGowen, attorney, 4410 El Camino Real, Los Altos, was asked by the parents and Ms. Tabrizi to __see whether there. might be a solution to what was becoming antagonistic and somewhat vocal opposition to the operation of a legal day care center. While they welcomed the investigative efforts, it drew the attention of the Council, public, and media to the problems which existed not only with day care centers and their availability in the Palo Alto area but also the traffic problems. It was clear that eight infants would not create traffic and noise problems envisioned by the opponents. He believed the issue was eight infants in addition to the 12 existing. The State said it was legally permissible and if Ms. Tabrizi lived on the residence, it would be allowed. One acceptable condition might be to have the parents park their cars on Coulombe and walk the chil- dren across the intersection. He submitted a petition signed by neighbors, parents, and teachers who supported the day care center. Barry Gray, 508 O'Keefe Street, said his son attended the day care center and he supported issuance of a use permit. Regarding the 70 decibel noise measurement, he had problems with the usage of that measurement over the 65 decibel but did not believe the children playing outside for two hours a day would have that much of an impact. Regarding . traffic, he did not believe there would be enough of a difference to be applicable and it would not be settled by the granting or denial of the permit. It was a worthwhile establishment. Parvati Dutta, 573 Suzanne Court, spoke to Ms. Tabrizi's trustworthiness, strength, and sense of responsibility. Mary Jane Leon, 4028 Laguna Way, spoke to the need for reasonably priced day care centers. She was confused by the argument that an additional eight children would noticeably contribute to increased traffic on Arastradero. Dr. Michael Maurier, 646 Fairrnede Avenue, opposed the appeal. He had two •ehildrt n at Juane Briones School and walked against the traffic the long way around the block because it wa.s too dangerous to walk with the traffic. He had about a 12 foot margin for safety. He had three near misses at the day care center and he had difficulty seeing wheat conceivable traffic pattern could compensate for the 58-380 10/26/87 problem. The house was located in the middle of a congested intersection with many things happening. There were avail- able day care centers which were less expensive and he was troubled by the illegality of the current operator and about having her run such an operation. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme-, represented the Barron Park Traffic Committee, and was appalled by -the suggestion that traffic be diverted to enter the day care center by way of Coulombe, which meant, traffic would also be diverted down Maybell directly past the OH center at Briones where handicapped children were dropped off at the same- time of day._ An y encouragement of traffic relating to the day care center or any other use on Arastradero Road going along Maybell and Coulombe was totally unacceptable and it would be vigorously opposed by the Barron Park Association. Reza Tabrizi, 183'De1 Medro, supported the proposed use per- mit. Day care centers were permitted uses in R-1 neighbor- hoods. Regarding noise, the previous occupant, the residen- tial care for the elderly, was noisy during the night and odd times. At the school, children would play in the out- side yard for a couple of hours per day during business hours during the week --not on the weekends or holidays. He did not see how the additional eight infants would impact noise levels. The adjacent neighbors supported the day care center. Regatding access, he believed the proposed correct- ive measures would mitigate the majority of the problems. There were several aay care operations on Arastradero Road, and he did not believe the application should be turned down because of safety. By denying the permit for the additional eight infants, Arastradero Road would not become safer or less nioisy. since it would not be financially feasible tor the school to implement the proposed driveway or sound - blocking tences. Mayor Woolley declared the Public Hearing closed. MOTION; Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Patitucci, to adopt the staff recommendation to uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator to deny the application for a day care center. Council Member Levy understood the State law mandated that having 12 children was legal it someone was living in the residence, and the Council could not deny a child care facility that would have 12 _children. City Attorney Diane Northway said that was correct. 58-381 10/26/87 Council Member Levy clarified the Council was not in any way making a statement about the safety. Ms. Northway said absolutely not, the Council did not have jurisdiction to sake a statement one way or another. Ms. Furuike spoke to the fact that the State did not look into those issues either. She wondered who was looking at the issues if the City did not have the jurisdiction to look at the issues, and the State did not look at them. Council Member Levy said it might be that having 12 children was not safe either, but the Council had no right to deny use. Ms. Northway said yes. Council Member Levy concurred with Council Members Bechtel and Patitucci. Unfortunately, the location was very unsafe. He did not believe the facility would be intrusive in regards to noise, etc., but all the activity taking place on Arastradero Road in general, plus the location at a key intersection for a grammar school, pluts the traffic problems were likely to be increasing because of the current redesig- na.tion of Gunn to be a middle school, led him to believe the decisions made by the Planning Commission and the Hearing Appeals Officer were validly and thoughtfully made.,. Council Member Cobb. observed it was true the kind of a use was a conditional use in an R-1 zone --which was why it required a permit --but it was up to the Council to make a judgment as to whether the site was appropriate for such a use or not. They all agreed that day care was needed, but it did not follow that every site was suitable for day care. Hp had traveled the street and found it to be dangerous, and it would become even More unsafe when Gunn High School was converted to a middle school, if that course was followed. The location was very.poor for that kind of a traffic situa- tion. He did not like to vote against day care but did not see much choice, given the data. Council Member Renzel commented it was tragic the neighbor- hood had become so polarized about the issue. Where else but in a single-family area would they expect children's voices. Their schools were located in the hearts of single- family zones, day care facilities were permitted up to 12 children, and many homes used to have fouror five children. It was a sign of the "greying° of Palo Alto that they► no longer tolerated the sounds of children, and that was not a valid consideration in the circumstance. The documentation, however, of the difficult traffic movements_ in the area was sufficient to suggest they should not be adding peak -hour trips, particularly in the subject location.. For that 58--382 10/26/87 As corrected 11/23/87 reason, she would vote to uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator and the Planning Commission. Vice Mayor Sutorius knew the specific commitment all of the Planning Commission'.members had to the Comprehensive Plan and the work several of them extended on behalf of child care, and he knew it was difficult for them to reach the decision they did. At the site that afternoon, he observed the left -turn from Arastradero Road into the driveway by two parents picking up their youngsters. He observed the left turns off Arastradero by eastbound traffic going onto Coulombe, and he observed there was a lawn -maintenance truck parked on the south side of Arastradero adding to visibility problems in regard to eastbound traffic. He spent time out- side the home with several of the children watching them play' and talking about their Halloween costumes, and he apologized if he contributed to the noise that disturbed the neighbors. The choice was very difficult, but he had to agree with the thought., care, and concern given to the issue by the Planning Commission. It was up to the Council, as the Citywide Land Use and Traffic Study came forward, to give very special attention to the Arastradero situation. He did not believe the volume of traffic there was near the problem that the behavior of drivers, pedestrians, and bicy- clists was; and they would have observed they all needed to change their behavior. He would support the motion. Mayor Woolley agreed with her colleagues' comments. On the pro side, they definitely had a need for more day care, and the Council was looking at supporting a center in the down- town area. Two items did not contribute to either the pro or con side; one was noise, and she would certainly prefer the noise of 20 preschoolers to one teenager into heavy metal or rock bands. That was not an issue. Having recently walked along Arastradero--she was amazed at how bad the noise level from traffic was ----she could not give much weight to the prohlern of increasing the vbiume of traffic on Arastradero. On the con side, the parking was a significant problem at the site. If more of the site was paved over, that was not a solution because it became less compatible with the residential neighborhood. If more was not paved over, they had a problem of where the cars were going to park. Finally, the nature of the intersection was unique and tipped the scales for her in the direction of supporting the Planning Commission and the Zoning Administrator. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Klein absent. Vice Mayor Sutorius observed on Thursday, October 29, 19.87, in the Council Chambers, Senator Becky Morgan would be con- ducting subcommittee hearing:, on the subject of child care between 10:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. It would be a public meeting. MOTION: Vice Mayor Sutorius moved, seconded by Cobb, that it was the sense of the Council thatfollow-up with respect to the item not take a priority over other existing inspec- tion and compliance activity such that it would be given a higher priority than work commitments of the same kind that already existed. Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber informed Council that Ordinance Compliance Inspector Rich Cabrera said -the normal procedure was to send a letter to the operator formally stating the action of the City Council and indicating an intent to inspect the site within about 30 days. It was noted if the operator was occupying the site by that point, under the law she would be proceeding towards the_ State license without City approval. If at the end of 30 days, the issue was „ot yet resolved but plans were made and procedures were being followed, staff would not regard the 30 -day deadline as hard and fast but would work with the occupant; however, they would expect very good efforts being made to bring the situation into compliance Either by vacating the site or by occupancy. MAKER AND SECOND AGREED TO WITHDRAW MOTION 4. HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD REQUEST FOR ENDORSEMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR: REHABILITATION; (CMR:504:7) (702-02) MOTION: Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Cobb, to adopt staff recommendation to endorse the Department of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation to be used for buildings on Palo Alto's Historic Buildings Inventory. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Klein absent. 5. SANTA CLARA ..COUNTY MORTGAGE REVENUE BOND PROGRAM: RE `OLUTION TO APPLY TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR MORTGAGE CFREDIT CERTIFICATES (CMR:505:7) 01-04/ 404-01) MOTION: Council Member Patitucci .moved, seconded by Sutorius, to adopt the stadf recommendation to: 58-384 10/26/87 MOTION CONTINUED 1. Adopt the resolution authorizing the City Manager to mike an application to the State of California Mortgage Bond Allocation Committee (MBAC) for $5,000,000 in Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) Authority; and 2. Adopt the Cooperative Agreement with Santa Clara County authorizing the Office of the Housing Bond Coordinator to administer the Palo Alto Mortgage Credit Certificate Program. RESOLUTION 6651 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO APPLY FOR ALLOCATION OF MORTGAGE CREDIT CERTIFI- CATES" COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA AND THE CITY OF PALO ALTO Council Member Patitucci, the Council representative to the Housing Bond Advisory Committee (HBAC), said the HBAC studied the situation with the current tax law, which was the continuance of tax-exempt bond sales to provide financing for low- and moderate -income housing. The current pr=:gram was an alternate to that called Mortage Credit Certificates (MCC). Fortunately, the program might work in Palo Alto whereas the previous programs did not. He urged the Council's support and liked the idea that all the cities in the County and the County itself were cooperating. in the implernentatiQn. t Cnt2ncil Member Levy wanted to ensure no credit from the City was on the line in relation to the matter. Planning Administrator ' oby Kramer said there was none. Council Member Levy clarified all the Council was doing was approving the ability of the recipient to get a tax break in terms of their federtal and/or state tax. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Klein absent 6. CALIFORNIA ARTS COUNCIL GRANT FOR MASTER CLASS PROGRAM ANU BUDGET ADJUSTMENT. FOR SHAKER CRAFTS EXHIBITION (CMR:499:7) (701-03/1305) MOTION:, Council Member Levy moved, seconded by Bechtel, to adopt staff recommendation to: 58-385 10/26/87 MOTION CONTINUED ?. Accept the California Arts Council (CAC) Grant of $10,198 for the Master Class Program at the Palo Alto Cultural Center, and 2. Approve the Budget Amendment Ordinance accepting funds into the 1987-88 Arts and Sciences Division Visual Arts Program budget and adding $11,000 in revenue from the Shaker Craft sales. ORDINANCE 3776 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1987-88 TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR THE ARTS AND SCIENCE DIVISION AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE RECEIPT OF GRANT FUNDS FROM THE CALIFORNIA ARTS COUNCIL ARTISTIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND ADDITIONAL REVENUE FROM SHAKER CRAFT SALES" Council Member Patitucci said the item was the first of -- three -before Council which required fairly minor budget revisions. Because of his concern with the continuous modi- fication of the budget through the year, staff prepared a short report" (on file in the City" Cle'rk's office) showing amendments approved by the Council to date and the effects of the particular amendments. The report satisfied him, but the report might be useful for the Council. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Klein absent. 7. LANDFILL GAS RECOVERY SYSTEM, BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT (CMR: 508 : 7) (701-03/1113) Council Member Renzel asked given the recent movements of the stock market, was the cost adjustment for inflation also for deflation, or was it a fixed price which could only go up. Council Member Levy commented that the cost of stocks unfor- tunately was not a part of the cost -of --living index and did not affect their discussion of inflation. Council Member Renzel was just suggesting the state of the economy might take a .de fla t ionary. turn, and she asked • i f that applied to the issue as well as inflation. Assistant Director cif Public Works George Bagdon said the price was plus inflation. If the economy went in the oppo- site direction, the price would stay the same. 58-386 10/26/87 MOTION: Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Fletcher, to adopt staff recommendation to: 1. Approve the Budget Amendment Ordinance in the amount of $66,000 to maintain the landfill gas recovery system for FY.1987-88, and 2. Authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement with Laidlaw Gas Recovery Systems for $66,000 in FY 1987.88, $99,000 in FY 1988-89, and $99,000 in FY 1989-90, sub- ject to Council funding and a cost adjustment for infla- tion each year. ORDINANCE 3777 entitled °ORDIt1ANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1987-88 TO PROVIDE AN APPROPRIATION FOR LANDFILL GAS RECOVERY SYSTEM MAINTENANCE" Council Member Patitucci asked if there was any opportunity fear recovery of some of the costs through sale at some point. Mr. Bagdon said that was currently the subject of negotiat- ion with the present. developer. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Klein absent. 8. GOLDEN TRIANGLE IMPLEMENTATION PHASE -- APPROVAL OF COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT ' AND BUDGET (CMR:491:7) (701-03/ 1045/01) MOTION: Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Woolley to adopt staff recammentation to: 1. Approve the Golden Triangle Task Force Joint Implementa- tion Agreement; 2. Adopt the Budget Ordinance appropriating $25,000 as the City's share of the Golden Triangle Implementation Phase Year I budget; 3. Reaffirm the City's commitment to participate in the second year of the Golden Triangle Implementation Phase; and 4. Refer the draft Golden Triangle Transportation Demand Management (TDM) ordinance to the Planning Commission. ORDINANCE 3778 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL f OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1987-88 TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR PALO- ALTO'S PARTICIPATION IN THE GOLDEN TRIANGLE IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM! 10/26/u! MOTION CONTINUED Golden Triangle Agreement with the Cities of Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, and the County of Santa Clara Council Member Levy asked why the item was not included in the basic budget hearings. Mr. Schreiber said the City Manager's budget transmittal in April designated the item as anticipated during the year but without sufficient information to provide a precise estimate of cost. Ogler Golden Triangle TOM -related items covered under the same general comment place in the budget transmit- tal were likely to go to the Council. Council Member Levy supported the motion, but he commented in the budgeting procedure when there was a probability of a cost being incurred and an informed guess as to the level of the cost, some number should be in the budget that reflected those probabilities so the Council could have a better oven -- all grasp of the cash flow. Mayor Woolley believed the item was in the City Manager's message along with other items that were difficult to pre- dict. Council Member Levy said the items that were just in the City Manager's transmittal message tended to get washed out when the Council looked at the actual balancing of the budget. He believed the items should be in the budget in some way. Council Member Cobb said the amount of money put forth was uniform for all cities regardless of their impact on the problem. He asked if any consideration was given to scaling contributions e.g., by population or employment popula- tion. Mr Schreiber said the participation by jurisdiction in both Phase 1 when Palo Alto was not a participant, and Phase 11 when they were a participant, were on .an equal basis. There had been casual discussion but no real support for other formulas. - Council Member Cobb observed at some point, the issue might not goaway as easily. Council Member Fletcher asked about Santa Clara's status. 58-388 10/26/87 Mr. Schreiber said after the budget material was prepared by San Jose City Manager Gerald Newfarmer, the Golden Triangle Task Force sent a letter to the City of Santa Clara asking them to clarify their status, and the response was described as a polite, "No, thank you." The City of Santa Clara was no longer in any way a part of the Golden Triangle process. Council Member Fletcher asked if Mountain View was waiver- i ng, as indicated by a press report. Mr. Schreiber said the- City of Mountain View was not repre- sented at last Friday's Task Force meeting, and some clari- fication of their status was anticipated within the next month. Presently, Mountain View remained an active member. Vice Mayor Sutorius encouraged staff and Council Members Patitucci and Klein to ---do everything possible to maintain the participation of the other. member cities. The subject action was not only a commitment Or the current but also for the following budget year. They were committing to $50,000, and it became important that all members of the Golden Triangle participated so the organization met its commi tMents in a healthy fashion.. Council Member Cobb believed pressure should be put on the City of Santa Clara, to become reinvolved_ Santa Clara was a large part of the problem and it would take political leadership to ensure they were involved with the program because, it not, they would have a cough time solving the problem. AMENDMENT -Council Member Patitucci moved, seconded kiy Renzel, to direct the Mayor to send a letter to the City of Santa Clara expressing disappointment at their withdrawal and making it public that the Council hoped they would reconsider and reenter the process. Vice Mayor Sutorius encouraged the maker and seconder to phrase the amendment to give latitude to the Mayor. Staff, in consultation with Council Member Klein and Mayor Woolley, could phrase such a communication in the appropriate manner and to the appropriate cities. MAKER AND SECONDER OF AMENDMENT AGREED THE LETTER SHOULD BE SENT TO THE APPROPRIATE CITIES Council Member Bechtel said essentially they were encour- aging all cities to remain participants and encouraging any who were not to reconsider and rejoin. 58-389 10/26/87 Mayor Woolley clarified the letter should be sent to all cities involved in the Golden Triangle. Council Member Bechtel believed the City Manager, Council Member Klein, and Mr. Schreiber should be consulted. Council Member Patitucci believed the letter should go to the non -participating city, and any that were waivering, and all other participants should be copied. The letter should be a public statement. The Council joined the Golden Triangle because of other cities'-.involvment and would like to see it stay together. Mayor Woolley would appreciate latitude to implement the amendment in the most effective way possible. AMENDMENT PASSED unanimously, Klein absent. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED unanimously, Klein absent. 9. 1987-88 ANNUAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM (CMR:503.7) ( 412-02) MOTION: Council Meter Patitucci moved,` seconded by Cobb, to adopt staff recommendation to authorize staff to submit the 1987-88 Annual Housing Assistance Plan to the Department of Housing and Urban Development. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Klein absent. U.S Rt°gUEST OF MAYOR WOOLLEY RE CANCELLATION OF NOVEMBER 2, 1987 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MOTION: Mayor Woolley moved, seconded by Bechtel, to cancel the City Council Mooting of November 2, 1957. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Klein absent. ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned at 9:45 p.rr. ATTEST: APPROVED: Mayor 58-390 10/26/87