Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-07-21 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCI L MINUTES ITEM Consent Calendar Action Item #2, Contract for Health Plan Item #3, 1985 Utility Revenue Supplemental Resolution Amending Resolution. Item 14, need Abatement Program Regular Meeting July. 21. 1986 Cost Containment Bond Issue •- the 1985 Series Item #5, Urban Ministry: Contract tor Fiscal Year 1986-87 to Provide Administrative Programs for the Homeless Item $6, Planning Commission Recommendation Application of Colin A. Palmer for Site and Design Review at 931 Laurel Glen Drive r n a Item #7, Public Hearing: Planning Commission Recommendation re Application of S. Jeffrey Rosner for " a Preliminary Parcel Map at 1235 College Avenue Item #8, Public Hearing: Planning Commission Recommendation re Application of David Larimer, Jr. for a Preliminary Parcel. Map at 2284 Bowdoin Street Item #9, Public Hearings: . Planning Commission Rec'�mcendation re Application of G. D. and Valerie R. Robinson for Preliminary Parcel Map at 644 ri a ybe l l CITY OF - MI 0 ALTO PAGE 7 4 8 4 7 4 8 4 7 4 8 4 7 4 8 4 7 4 8 5 7 4 8 5 7 4 8 5 7 4 8 5 7 4 8 5 7 4 8 5 7 4 8 2 7/21/86 ITEM Item #10, Public Hearing: Planning Commission Recommendation re Application of Shell Oil Company dor Modification of PC District 1643 for Property Located at 1161 Enbarcadero Road Item flit Public Hearing: Planning Commission Recommendation re Modification of the Subdivision Ordinance to. Permit Staff Approval of Substandard Lot Mergers in Connection with the Study of Substandard R-1 Lots in College Terrace PAGE 7 4 8 8 7 4 9 6 Item #12, Public Hearing: Planning Commission 7 4 9 8 Recommendation re Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Item #13 (Old #1), Lease for Facilities at Ventura 7 4 9 8 School Site and College Terrace Library 7 4 8 3 7/21/86 Regular Meeting Monday, July 21, 1986 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date it the Council. Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:40 p.m. PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Patit:ucci, Renzel, Sutorius (arrived at 7:45 p,m.), Woolley Mayor Cobb announced a Special Meeting to interview candidates for the Planning Commission was held in the Council Conference Room at 5:45.p.m. CONSENT CALENDAR Vice Mayor Woolley removed 1, Lease - for. Facilities at Ventura School Site and College Terrace Library. MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved, secOnded by Woolley, approval of the Consent Calendar. Action 2. CONTRACT FOR HEALTH PLAN COST CONTAINMENT (PER 2-5) (CMR:388:6) Staff rec mmends Council authorize the Mayor to execute the agree- ment vith Pacific Review Services for administration of a cost cci tainment program for City Employee and Retiree Health Plans. AGREEMENT ADMINISTRATION OF COST CONTAINMENT PROGRAM FOR EMPLOYEE AND RETIREE HEALTH PLANS Pacific Review Services 3. 1985 UTILITY REVENUE BOND ISSUE - SUPPLEMENTAL RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1985 SERIES RESOLUTION (FIN 6-1) (CI R: 399:6 ) Staff recommends Council approve the supplemental resolution amending the 1985 Series Resolution Number 6454 formalizing changes requested by Moody's.Investors Services. RESOLUTION 6540 entitled 'A SUPPLEMENTAL RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 4454, ENTITLED IA SERIES RESOLUTION AUTH I Z I 8' ISSUANCE OF A PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $12,200,000 CITY OF . PALO AL.'TO, CALIFORNIA UTILITY REVENUE BONDS, 19$S sum A, (AIMUSTABLE CONVERTIBLE EXTSNPABLE SECURITIES --A W e ° ' 7 4 8 4 7/21/86 4. WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM (PWK 5-2) (CMR:400:6) Staff recommends Council determine there will be no adverse environmental impact from this action and adopt the resolution declaring weeds to be a nuisance. RESOLUTION 6541 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO DECLARING NEEDS TO BE A NUISANCE AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING" 5. URBAN MINISTRY: CONTRACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1986-87- TO PROVIDE ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAMS FOR THE HOMELESS (SOS _9/PLA 2-1) (CMR:405:6) Staff recommends Council approve the contract with the Urban Ministry for fiscal year 1986-87. AGREEMENT ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAMS FOR THE HOMELESS Urban Ministry of Palo Alto 6. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL, WITH CONDI- OF THE APPLICATION OF COLIN A. PALMER FOR SITE AND DESIGN APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 931 LAUREL GLEN DRIVE (PLA 3-1) TIONS, MOTION PASSED unanimously, Sutorius absent. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS City Manager Bill Zaner said 1, Lease for Facilities at Ventura School Site and College Terrace Library, would become 13. 7: PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE APPLICATION OF S. JEFFREY ROSNER FOR A PRELIiINARI PARCEL.MAP, WITH EXCEPTIONS, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1235 COLLEGE AVENUE (PLA 3-1) Mayor Cobb declared the public hearing open. Receiving no requests from the public to speak, he declared the public hearing closed. . tot TIC4E: Councilmember Bechtel moved, seconded by Fletcher, to adopt Planning Commission recommendation finding this application for a preliminary parcel map to combine toeslots, and thus create a lot .which remains substandard in width and area, will not have an adverse environmental impact and find that: 1) There are special circumstances er conditions affecting the property in than it is within a subdivision created before City zoning requirements established a minimum width of 40 feet and a .ainiau=e area of 6,000 square feet for1-1 lots, but the property has functioned as a single 55 --foot wide, 5,750 square -foot lot for many years; 7/21/86 NOTION CONTINUED 2) The exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner in that the owner should have the same rights to develop his property as the owners of neighboring parcels do; 3) The granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in that it will be larger than other lots created by the 1891 subdivision and will, in fact, be of benefit to the other property in the territory in that it will eliminate two very substandard lots; 4) The granting of the exception will not violate the requirements, goals, policies, or spirit of the law in that the new parcel will be similar in wise to other R-1 lots in Palo Alto; and 1 Approval of the preliminary parcel map. NOTION PASSED unanimously, SutoriUs absent. 8. PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE APPLICATION OF DAVID LARIMER, JR., FOR A PRELIMINARY PARCEL MAP) WITH AN EXCEPTION, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 224 BOWDOIN STREET (PLA 3-1) Mayor Cobb declared the public hearing open. Receiving no requests from the public to speak, he declared the public hearing closed. NOTION: Cocnc .1. eaber Bechtel saved, seconded by Levy, to adopt Planing Commission recommendation finding that this application for a preliminary parcel map to combine two lots, and thus create a lot which remains substandard in width, will not have an adverse environmental impact and find that: 1) There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property in that it is within a subdivision created before City Bening requirements established a minimum width of 60 feet and a minimum area of 6,000 feet for R-1 lots, but the property has functioned as a single 50 -foot wide lot for many years; 2) The exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a smbstaetia2 property right of the petitioner in that the owner should haves the samerights to develop his property as the owners of neighboring parcels doe 7 4 8 6 7/21/86 NOTION CONTINUED 3) The granting of the excqeptioj will not be detrimental to the public .welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in that it will be larger than other lots created by the 1891 subdivision and, in fact, will benefit the neighborhood by eliminating two very substandard lots; 4) The granting of the exception will not violate the requirements, goals, policies, or spirit of the law in that the new parcel will be similar in size to other R-1 lots in Pala Alto; and Approval of the preliminary parcel map. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Sutorius absent. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE APPLI- AND VALERIE R. ROBINSON FOR A PRELIMINARY AN EXCEPTION, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 644 (CMR:403:6) PUBLIC HEARING: CATION OF G. D. PARCEL MAP, WITH MAYBELL (PLA 3-1) Mayor Cobb declared the public hearing open. Receiving no requests from the public to speak, he declared the public hearing closed. NOTION: Councilsoember Fletcher coved, seconded by Levy, to adopt Planning Commission recommendation finding that the appllcetion for a preliminary parcel map to divide one parcel Into two, and thus create a second flag lot with access over an easement, will not have, an adverse environmental impact and find that: 1) There are special circumstances or conditions . affecting the property in that the only available access is over a 3b -foot wide easement; 2) The exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoy - Went of a subetantiel property right of the petitioner in that the sect parcel is very large, there is adequate space for tO0 parcels, and historically there has only been one sea** of acres*; 3) The *ranting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in which the property is situated, in that the new house to 44, built on Parcel 2 will be screened from the adjacent , nperties fronting on Maybell Court by existing , Urge trees; 7 4 8 7 7/21/86 POTION CONTINUED 4) The granting of the exception will not violate the requirements, goals, policies, or spirit of the law in that the proposed new parcels will meet all of the requirements for lot size and dimensions, and the existing 30 -foot wide private driveway is comparable in size to some public streets. Approval of the preliminary parcel map with the following condi- tions: 1) A non-exclusive easement be granted to Parcel 2 for access from Naybell over the 30 -foot wide. driveway; 2) An easement be granted to Parcel 2 for access over Parcel 1; 3) The existing electric pole line on Parcel 2 be relocated at the owner's expense and public utility ease rents be adjusted in accord with the location of the new line; 4) The existing gas meter on Parcel 2, which is serving Parcel 1, be relocated at the owner's expense; 5) Any house located on Parcel 2 be limited to one story and a maximum 20 -foot height measured to the peak of the roof, and this restriction be included in a recorded deed restriction; and 6) The side yard eetbeck on the southerly side of Parcel 2 be established. at ten feet, and this restriction be included in a recorded deed restriction. NOTION PASSED unanimously, Sutorius absents 10. PUBLIC TEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATION RE APPLICATION OF SHELL OIL COMPANY FOR MODIFICATION OF PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC) DISTRICT 1643 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1161 EMBARCADERO ROAD (PLA Mayor Cobb declared the public hearing open. Marvin.Lee` 1241 Harker Avenue, said the item came as a surprise to the neighbors in the Embarcadero Road area, particularly the speed with which the item moved. The service station at the corner of Embarcadero Road served an area east of Middlefield Road for many years. Several families had older cars which needed service. Across the country generally the oil companies were shutting down service stations, converting them to fast service stations where people pumped their own gas. The community given an opportunity to discuss the issue fully. That year Council had 71.21/806 been involved in many problems, a dominant one being the ARCO station on which people focused their attention. The residents in the area around Embarcadero did not notice a major change being proposed by the Shell Oil Company in the layout and service offered by the station in question. The question was raised by two members of the Planning Commission, but the public present was notified only by letter to those immediately surrounding the station, and the newspapers paid little attention to the proposed changes. Probably Council believed the neighborhood had an oppor- tunity to discuss the issue, but it had not. While they appre- ciated the plight of the oil companies and Shell's interest ..in changing its format, they believed Shell Oil Company would not want lingering resentment in the community for conversion of a station to a fast -service which would essentially eerve through traffic and not be intimately connected to the need!, of the com- munity. It was in the interests of the City Council to ensure the discussion took place on as wide a basis as possible, and to recognize the system had not worked in the subject case. He was asked by several neighbors to place the issue clearly before Council, and to ask them to postpone the issue until the fall Cliff Perry, 310 N. Bayshore, was employed by Carroll Resources Engineering and Management, the representative for Shell Oil in the action. His company worked with the City's planning staff since the previous November, and there were several public hearings on the matter. Shell Oil Company was interested in updating the property and did not want Council t.o table the issue until the fall which would put the project out of the construction season for the year. He requested Council approval. Mayor Cobb asked if getting the lights dimmed at closing time and for the balance of the evening was a condition. Mr. Perry said the lights were designed to be contained under the canopy. Mayor Cobb asked if air and water aisles wouldbe available. Mr. Perry said air: and water were designed into the project. Councilmember Levy received a telephone call from a member of the Disabled Awareness Task Force who was concerned because self- service stations generally did not serve disabled people. He asked if the law said a disabled person must be served. There was only one individual at a self-service station who generally did not leave the kiosk to serve a disabled customer. He asked for comment and what the Counci: could do to ensure the disabled within the community were served. Mr. Perry was not an attorney, but represented many major oil com- panies, and he found about 80 percent of the present motoring pub- lic bought self -serve and 20 Percent full -serve. The subject 7 4 8 9 7/21/86 station was no exception. There were ten fueling positions, two of which were earmarked for full service. Full service would be available at least during normal business hours but might not be available after dark for security reasons. Since an independent businessman operated the station, the operator determined the exact hours of full service. Councilmember Levy was reassured. He asked the City Attorney if any laws applied. City Attorney Diane Northway did not know. Councilmember Sutorius said the arrangement of the kiosk effec- tively limited the amount of area available for sales, and existing conditions in Palo Alto limited the types of sales that could occur. He asked what the intent was regarding sales, dis- tinguishing between oil and cigarettes, candy, etc. Mr. Perry said the intent was to provide automotive necessities such as oil, transmission fluid, etc. The station was not a mini -market. Councilmember Sutorius empathized with Jon Schink, a member of the Architectural Review Hoard (ARS), who voted against the issue because of concern about the entryway. t•Ie realized the canopy was given much attention and appreciated the improvements made over time, but there was still a lot of bulk. He asked for an archi- tectural opinion as to the value of canting the apron of the canopy so it tilted slightly outward at the lower edge, from the standpoint of visual appearance. Mr. Perry said Shell Oil Company submitted three alternative designswhich were not acceptable during discussions in the plan review operation. The public required a canopy and a feeling of security. Some cities liked a lot of bulk in a canopy. They attempted to make a floating, cloud -like structure which was not perpendicular or completely rectangular but had some interesting angles originally brought about by the setback requirement along Embarcadero Road. The porcelain -enamel material used was a waffled sheet which reduced reflection and gave .character to the panels. Councilmember Sutorius clarified Mr. Perry believed canting the canopy slightly at the lower edge would not improve the appear- ance. Mr. Perry believed canting would change the canopy architec- turally. The architect .was not present. If the canopy was canted, the building would also need to be canted to make, i t architecturally acceptable. Canting the buildings might create a problem of vehicles flitting the cant. 7 4 9 0 7/21/&6 Councilmember Renzel shared Councilmember Levy's concern that disabled people in the community might hays difficulty finding a location to purchase gas in the future. She asked if there was a willingness on Shell's part to commit to a condition in the PC zone that at least one of the islands be maintained as a full service island. Mr. Perry believed as long as a sipr;ificant. percentage of the population purchased full serve gasoline, ,there would be no need to legislate. It might be against the e ty's best interests to have a station close to a freeway with an attendant going in and out of the kiosk in the later hours of the evening where he might be vulnerable to a security problem. A well, -lighted, major - traveled street such as El Camino Real was different, and Council might wish to consider that as a specific location. Councilmember Renzel asked what Mr. Perry saw as the solution if the market declined to 99 percent self -serve and 1 percent needed full serve. Mr. Perry believed oil companies were a lot more socially respon- sible than perceived by the public. He believed a portion of their facilities would be -available for service to the disabled. Councilmember Renzel gathered Mr. Perry did not see a major security problem during the day with providing assistance to handicapped people. Mr. Perry said Shell operated about 4,000 stations around the country for many years, and in spite of recent changes, had no trouble in most of the stations providing service in the western marketing region. • Mayor Cobb declared.. the public hearing closed. Planning Commissioner Helene dheeler referred to one of the public comments and said there were five prior public meetings to discuss the item. • The Planning Commission held three hearings on the item: the .first on January 29, 1986, continued to February 26, 1986, there was an ARB meeting on March 20, 1986, returned to the Planning Commission on May 26, 1986, and the ARB again on June 5, 1986. Zoning Administrator Bob Brown said the application had many public hearings and good participation from members of the neigh- borhood. The City was almost -up against the six-month .state- imposed deadline on processing the application. The next week's Council meeting would be the last meeting available for staff to have a decision by Council within the six-month time frame. He did not believe the City had the ability to postpone the matter until the fall. 7 4 9 1 7/21/86 NOTION* Councilnember Bechtel moved, seconded by Klein, to adopt the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board recommendations for approval of the proposed PC Zone amendment, subject to the following conditions: 1) Hours of operation shall be limited to 6200 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Puel deliveries shall be permitted during hours ,hen the site is not open for business; 2) All site activities shall coeply with the provisions of Title 17 ( Hazardous Materials Storage) and Chapter 9.10 (Noise) of the Palo Ai to Municipal Code; 3) All improvements and development shall be substantially in accordance with theapproved development plans, with all applicable codes and ordinances, and with the requirements of the Director of Public Works/Engineering, the Director of utilities, and the Chief of the Palo Alto Fire Department; 4) The western driveway obeli be designated as an 'Exit Only" and the eastern driveway shall be designated as an "Entrance Onlyo u with the exception that the fuel delivery vehicles may use the exit for access during hours when the site is not open for business; 5) A street opening permit shall be obtained from the Public Works/Engineering Department for all work done within the public right -of -may; 6) The finished floor elevations of the cashier's kiosk shall be at least one -foot above the highest ground, unless another elevation is approved by the Department of Public Works; 7) A permit shall be obtained from the Palo Alto Fire Department for all underground atoeags. A Hazardous Materials Plan and Hazardous Materials Inventory Statement shall be submitted with the permit application; 8) Fire extinguishers, as approved by the Palo Alto Fire Deportment, shall be required on site; 9) Fuel pumps nest bet rcated within view of an attendant. Attendants' primary duty *ball be the supervision of the dispensing of flammable materials; 10) The existing sidewalk alOng the site's West Bayehore Road frontage shall be extended to the site's northern property line; sad 11) Development Schedule - Construction shall begin) within six (6) months of Council approval and be completed withi Aix (6) months of the issuance of a building permit. 7 4 9 2 7/21/86 MOTION CONTINUED ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE f'AUNNIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING. SECTION 18.08.04.0 .OF THE PALO ALTO. MUNICIPAL CODE (THE ZONING NAP) TO MODIFY 'PC DISTRICT 1643 FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS 1161 `EMBARCADERO ROAD"' Councilmember Fletcher believed state legislation mandated handi- capped persons dust be served. She asked if the present PC mandated full service at the gas station Mr. Brown said no. Councilmember Fletcher wanted to cover the handicapped and preclude the posting of less -restrictive hours than might be in the state law. She was concerned there might not be general awareness of the regulation and handicapped persons might not want to assert their rights. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher roved, seconded by Renzel, that full service shall be available at least from 6g40 a.m. to 8:00 l.m. for handicapped persons except as otherwise covered by State aw, and the applicable law shall be prominently posted." Councilmember Klein said he would vote against the amendment. He was not opposed to the principle if Council had proof of the prob- lem. All Council had before it was one telephone call to Councilmember Levy. No representatives of the handicapped com- munity spoke, and Council had not heard from the Disabled Awareness Task Force. He did not like an amendment that could have a significant economic impact without more testimony. Council should take action if there proved to be a problem, but the amendment should apply equally to all gasoline stations in Palo Alto and not just to a . particular station. It was unfair to impose an economic hardship just because the applicant was before Council that evening. Councilmember Renzel also heard from the member of the Disabled Awareness Task Force who had a high degree of credibility. The problem was serious for wheelchair -bound people at a self- service gas station when nobody_ served them. They had a choice between making a scene and not being able to get service. The fact that Council had not heretofore required such service was perhaps a shortfall on Council's part. One reason Council had a 'Disabled Awareness Task Force was to bring that kind of problem to their attention. Imposing such a condition after the fact on all gas stations in town would be difficult. Council had an oppor- tunity to impose the condition as they had the approvals before them. The issue would arise again with other gas stations. 7.4 9 3 7/21/86 Council should recognize the needs of the disabled people in the community and attend to those needs while they had the oppor- tunity. The station intended to have full service on two of the ten fueling positions; therefore, the amendment did not penalize Shell with respect to their current plans. To suggest handicapped people .should drive to the most well -lit street with a gas station to find the security of an attendant on duty_ was not being aware of the needs of the disabled in the community. / Councilmember 'evy said the PC allowed the facility to operate between 6:00 .m. and 11:00 p.m, but did not say the facility had to be operat d between those hours. He asked the City Attorney if the amendment was interpreted to mean to the degree the station was open between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., full service would be available to the handicapped between those hours. lis. Northway said yes. Councilmember Levy sympathized with the amendment. He did not believe economics were a hardship because the applicant intended to have full service during approximately those hours. The appli- cant could return to Council through the PC should they need to change the policy. It would be ,more of a hardship if' Council applied the condition to all stations in town without a present need to do so. He was called by a member of the Human Relations Commission, who was previously a member of the Disabled Awareness Task Force, and spoke for the Disabled Awareness Task Force. Because the application was a PC, ,Council had the opportunity which was unavailable with other stations. Council owed the dis- abled citizens of the community the assurance that service vas avail,ble to them. Councilmember Sutorius understood Councilmembers Levy's and Fletcher's awareness and interest, but believed Councilmember Klein stated the issue fairly and properly. If Council intended to take action, ft should be uniform and consistent. It was incumbent . upon Councilmembers to bring forward on a future agenda t•he intent to evaluate ordinances with respect to the hours of full -service availability for the handicapped as a uniform subject. Mayor Cobb agreed with Councilmembers Klein and Sutorius. He believed the condition made sense, but should be imposed City- wide. That would be fair and provide the kind ofservice desired by the amendment. He trusted a Councilmember would carry the matter forward. Councilmember Renee' asked if a City-wide law applied to all gas stations, whether it was possible to require such service be available upon enactment off the law or whether the law would only apply as stations applied for modifications to Site and design Review Use Permits or PC zones. 7 4 9 4 7/21/86 Ms. Northway said if the City had a law that required service to the handicapped between certain hours, it might be possible. If the law was preempted by state law, there would be no need for the regulation. Council did not need to do the law in terms of a Land Use requirement. The law could become effective upon enactment of the ordinance. Councilmember Renzel understood Councilmember Fletcher's amendment required service be available insofar as service was not otherwise required by state law. If state law governed, Council's only requirement would be the state law be prominently posted. The requirement was reasonable and fair. She was concerned they would have difficulty enacting a City-wide ordinance that would govern Council should take advantage of . opportunities to review gas stations as they arose. Councilmember Fletcher believed there was a state law, but did not know for sure. For the record, the phone call she received that afternoon stated the person just became aware of the issue, other- wise it might have gone through the process of being reviewed by the Disabled Awareness Task Force. Councilmember Klein believed the amendment would be an injustice to normal Council processes. The City was famed for the thorough- ness with which it explored issues. The issue had net gone before staff, Council had zero input from the industry and;, did not know whether there was a state law. There might be people with a dif- ferent view, and Council should hear them. There was no.emer- gency. The City Attorney ,aid a City-wide ordinance would be effective with respect to all gasoline stations, but Councilmember Renzel spoke as if that answer were the reverse. A City-wide ordinance was the way to go if the problem was shown. He believed there was an economic impact. If the particular station found it uneconomical to operate full -service islands, the operators were at a disadvantage if they had to apply for an amendment to the PC, which Council might deny. Their competitors during that period, if not permanently, had the advantage of reduced labor costs. He did not understand why Council would want to put the particular stations at a disadvantage. All the gasoline stations should play on the same level which was the way for a democratic institution to go. Councilmember Levy believed the amendment was the right thing to do for the disabled of the community. Council had the ability with one PC to act on the particular station. The amendment would not be a particular hardship because it was what the station pres- ently intended to do. The fact the application was a PC presented a .hardship to the station; the fact Council was .limiting the hours, etc., put the station in a different competitive environ- ment from their competitors, but that was the nature of planning for a community. There might not be a present City-wide problem because a significant number of stations offered full service, but as the environment changed, the problem might become more acute. It would be unfortunate if the environment changed so ;:uch .Council had to impose a City-wide ordinance. Perhaps if Council looked at the individual station, it could help ameliorate the problem before it became so acute. 7 4 9 5 7/21/86 Al UMDME$T FAILED by a vote cif 4--5, Renzel, Bechtel, Fletcher, Levy, voting "aye." AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Renzel, that sir, water, and restrcoom facilities be accessible to usto- ■ers during hours of operation. _AMENDMENT PASSED unanimously. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Fletcher, if there are applicable State laws relative to handicapped require- ments, those regulations should be posted. Councilmember Klein asked the meaning of "applicable State laws." Councilmember Renzel said "applicable State laws" meant if there was a law requiring handicapped people be served, that law be posted. AMENDMENT PASSED by a vote of a-1, Sutorius voting "no." MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED unanimously. MOTION: Councilmember Sutorius moved, seconded by Renzel, to direct staff to investigate the contents of existing State law regarding full service of gas stations to the handicapped, and to share the information with the Disabled Awareness Task Farce and report back to the Council. MOTION PASSED unanimously. 11, PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE MODIFICATION OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO PERMIT STAFF APPROVAL OF SUBSTANDARD_LOT MERGERS IN CONNECTION WITH THE STUDY OF SUBSTANDARD R-1 LOTS IN COLLEGE TERRACE (PLA 3-8) Planning Commissioner Helene Wheeler said the problem was the potential for significant intensification of development in the R-1 neighborhood. One solution was: a mandatory merging of parcels. The Planning Commission discovered 300 to 400 parcels would be affected by themerger provision entailing a significant number of staff, . Planning Commission, and Council hours to say nothing of the controversy she assumed would develop. The Planning Commission recommended a gentler approach which would be fairly effective in protecting many of the present single-family houses which straddled lot lines. She said combined with the actions Council already took regarding tearing down larger single-family homes and replacing them with two smaller acmes, and easing of the administrative process the Planning Commission recommendation would afford, much the sage goal wowed be achieved less paintul1y. 7 4 9 6 7/21/86 Zoning Administrator Bob Brown noted Councilmembers received at their places a copy of the environmental assessment for the Qrdi- nance change (on file in the City Clerk's office). Couocilmerber Renzel said one of the underlying assumptions in the recommendation was only about 700 square feet of building could be built on the 25 -foot wide lots with a single story, and therefore, remodeling existing structures that straddled lots became more economic than demolishing and rebuilding new houses. She heard full basements were being built slightly above ground level so the basements co.uld have windows thereby achieving .two stories, one partially below ground and one above ground which doubled the amount of square footage. She asked if that could happen and if such a basement doubled the amount of buildable space. Mr. Brown said yes, the ordinance pertaining to substandard lots exempted the, basement area. The plans the City saw recently for basements contained windows in some instances. In most cases, bedrooms and common .living areas were not located in the basement, but workshops, sewing rooms, family rooms, etc., often were. It was possible to build a partially -depressed basement. Councilme per Renzel asked to what extent staff believed the ability to build the basement in a usable space with windows would affect the decisions of property owners about demolishing one house and building two. Mr. Brown opined it was more advantageous economically to build a standard single-family home which could be two stories ar.l potentially maximize the R -1 allowances rather than buil structures a good portion of which were below grade. Councilmember Sutorius said the moratorium expired September, 1986. Be asked how much staff effort was involved if Council accelerated the expiration, presuming Council passed the ordi- nance; and the practicality of the effort from the standpoint of how much earlier the expiration would be. Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber did not believe *_.here would be a problem if the moratorium expired before September because the City still had substandard lot regu- lations in place. To have the moratorium expire earlier would take an ordinance action by the Council. He deferred to the City Attorney whether such an ordinance could be added to the ordinance presently before Council or whether a separate ordinance was needed. Councilmember Sutorius said if Council took positive action on that evening's item, the question remained whether it, was neces- sary for the moratoriva, ordinance to wait until September to expires City Attorney Diane Northway said the ordinance did not become effective for 45 days; therefore, she saw no point in doing another ordinance to deal with the moratorium. The moratorium ordinance • would expire about the time the present ordinance went into effect. Mayor Cobb declared the public hearing open. Receiving no requests from the public to speak, he declared the public hearing closed. MOTIONS Vice Mayor `Woolley moved, seconded by Sutorius, to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation for modification of the subdivision ordinance to permit otaff approval of parcel map applications proposing merger of four or fewer substandard R-1 lots where the degree of noncompliance is not increased. ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL. QF THE CI'I7 QF PALO ALTO AMENDING TITLE 21 (SUBDIVISIONS) REGARDING THE MERGER OF FOUR OR FEWER SUBSTANDARD R-1 LOTS' Councilmember Renzel said with regard to lots generally thr ughout the City, the ability to merger etc., was a good one, but she was concerned about the potential for major neighborhood changes within College Terrace. It Council passed the ordinance because it believed economics of the little basement houses was inferior tc the economics of one large . house on a merged lot, and it turned out not to be the case and the fabric of College Terrace eroded, she asked whether Council could enact a new ordinance to address the problem. Ms.. Northway said yes. Mr. Brown said staff would continue to monitor construction on substandard lots. To return with a change to no longer exempt basements would be fairly simple. MOTION PASSED unanimously. 12. PUBLIC NEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE (PLA 3-8) Mayor Cobb said staff requested the item be continued to August 11, 1986. MOTION. TO CONTINUE* Mayor Cobb moved, seconded by Woolley, to continuo the item to August 11, 1936, City Council meeting, NOTION PASSED unanimously. 13. OLD #1 LEASE FOR FACILITIES AT VENTURA SCHOOL SITE AND COLLEGE TERRACE LIBRARY (SOS 1-1) (CMR•396:6) Vice Mayor Woolley did not disagree with the premise .of the lease which. . avoided the double transfer of funds because the proc . as seemed inefficient She asked for clarification on the public record concerning the amount of funding Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) would receive in the current year. The staff report (CMR:396:6) stated, "During the term ..of the former lee_se, PACCC received a yearly grant under the Comprehensive Child Care Program. Agreement, and then used a portion of the grant to pay the monthly 7 4 9 8 7/21/86 rent to the City. Staff j;Loposes to eliminate the double transfer of funds by reducing the grant by the amount of the annual rent." The amount of rent was stated as $64,800 for Ventura and $9,800 for part of College Terrace, which totaled about $75,000. In the recently -adopted budget, PACCC had a decrease of .5 percent which would be about $2,000 rather than $75,000. She asked for clarifi- cation from staff why the budget showed .5 percent decree -3e. Manager, 'Real Property William Wellman said the lease negotiations were not completed prior to 'completion of the budget amendment, and the budget was reduced in actuality by $30,000 which was the amount of the previous year's rent. The 1985-86 budget was $395,474, reduced by the .rent of $30,000, and brought the base to $365,000, the budget PACCC began with. The figure was increased by .5 percent --the typical increase for the subsidies --which brought the budget to $383,000. An increase for a special subsidy for lower -moderate income families of $12,000 brought the figure up to $395,000. The rent was excluded from the budget altogether in the current ar. Vice Mayor Woolley clarified if the base was considered to be $365,000, since that excluded the rent when the contract was made 'out as opposed tu the figure actually used, instead of a .5 percent decrease PACCC would receive approximately . an 8 percent increase in funding. Administrator, Human Services Margo Dutton said yes, if there was no consideration for the rent, PACCC would have been granted approximately an 8 percent increase. MOTION; Vice Mayor Woolley moved, seconded by Sutorias, to adopt the staff recommendation to authorize the Mayor, to execute the Lc*sa with PACCC for their continued use of the Ventura School site and a portion. of the College Terrace Library:. LEASE Paco Alto Community Child Care Councilmember Levy asked how staff would advise Council of what the equivalent rental would have been. Assistant City Manager June Fleming said the information would be provided' in the budget the following year when staff went to Council with the contract renewer„ Councilmember Renzel did not want to lose track of the fact a cash transaction had become almost a barter transaction. She hoped a record System would be kept. MOTION PEED unanimously. 7 .4 9 9 7/21/86 1 ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned at 8:45 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: 7 5 0 0 7/21/86