HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-07-09 City Council Summary MinutesA
CITY
COUNC L
MINUT€S
Regular Meeting
Monday, July 9, 1984
CITY
OF
PAiO
ALTO
ITEM PAGE
viammar
Oral Communications 4 7 7 1
Approval of Minutes of June 4, 1984 4 7 7 2
Consent Calendar 4 .7 7 2
Referral 4 7 7 2
Action 4 7 7 2
Item #1, Santa Clara County Multiple Casualty 4 7 7 2
Incident Plan
Item #2, Ordinance re Amendmeni o the Municipal
Code (2nd Reading)
Item #3, Resolution Approving Supplement to the
Water Case Settlement
Agenda. Changes, Additions and Deletions
•
Item #4, Proposal to Limit Office Development in 4 7' 7 3
the CS and GM Zones
Recess to Closed Session re Personnel 4 7 8 6
Item #5, PUBLIC HEARING: Planning Commission
Recommendation and Recommendations of the Arastra
Citizens Advisory Committee for a Master Park Plan
for the Arastra Property
4 7 7 3
4 7 7 3
4 7 7
4 7 8 6
Item #6, Request of Councilmember Renzel re ACA 75 4 7 9 7
(Sher) - Amendment to Water Resources Policy
Adjournment:: 11:56 p.m. 4 7 9 7
1
8
Regular Meeting
Monday, July 9, 1984
The City Council of the City of Palo hl to. met on this day in the
Council Chambers at City Mall, 250 Ham l ton Avenue, Palo Alto at
7:35 p.m.
PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Renzel,
Sutorius, Witherspoon
ABSENT: Woolley
Mayor Klein announced that a special meeting was held at 7:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers for Historic Resources Board interviews.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS'
1. Harriet Mundy, Kenneth Square, Pennsylvania, reviewed some of
Palo Alto's history. In the 1950s, San Francisco Bay was
filled at a rate of 2,500 acres annually. In 1959,. when plans
were made to fill the flood basin, she became active in marsh
preservation, and in 1963, plans were made to fill in the
marsh for an airport, car park, condominiums, restaurants,
etc. Those plans were scotched, and the marshes were dedi-
cated as a wildlife preserve. The Baylands Interpretative
Center was dedicated in December, 1969 and the Bay Conserva-
tion and Development Committee (BCDC) was dedicated and made a
permanent commission in 1969. Palo Alto was a forerunner in
salt harsh preservation, and was called the "Golden City of
the Bay" as one of the few places giving access to the Bay.
The Baylands drew students from as far as Chico, and were
visited by tens of thousands of people. She left Palo Alto in
1977, but followed the news and read of the suggestion of a
lock from the launching ramp to the front basin tidal gate.
She was shocked because it would destroy the tidal action in
the whole inner has bor and drown 35 acres of inner marsh. The
Council voted in 1980 to let the area return to nature and
phase out the harbor in 1986, which was backed by the voters.
She read the letter from the Palo Alto Yacht Harbor suggesting
a new, larger than Interpretative Center, club building to be
put beyond the: PC&E line along the channel. The channel was
not dredged beyono the launching ramp and was narrow, and at
low tide it was almost all mudflat., Part of the marshes`. were,
'dedicated in her name in 1982, and if she made any lasting
contrib.'tion to the City, which she still considered home, it
was her work for the Bay marshes. The Yacht Club wanted to
build on the salt marsh dedicated to her, and she was dismayed
and appalled by the suggestion. By changing the natural flow
of the creeks and filling .in the salt marshes, the tidal prism
was changed. The channel would become unusable because of
silt, necessitating more dredging or abandonment of the new.
site. Salt marshes were productive and called "the salt
marshes of the sea," and were the most endangered and fragile
habitat on earth. Sheasked the Council to cherish and uphold
the decisions made for the area.
2. Nick Simon, 2035. Oberlin Street, said some years earlier the
City Council closed streets on. College Terrace to traffic.
The area where he lived was a _racetrack, cars went by at 50
miles an hour, on two wheels, down Stanford Avenue and
Oberlin. He wanted something done. 4e suggested Oberlin be
closed and that cars go dawn Harvard. At present a policeman
came once every six /aonths to check traffic and they were
tired -Of the situation.'
equally
3. Tony Spitaleri , 1125 Merrimac Street, Sunnyvale, President of
the Palo Alto Firefighters' Union, requested an increase in
pension for the retirees of approximately 185 percent to
exactly cover the increase in medical costs the Council placed
on retirees. The firefighters were upset because they were
not informed of the increase, nor allowed to attend the
Finance and Public Works (F&PW) Committee meeting to speak.
He received letters acid phone calls from retirees saying they
could not _afford the increase of $1,200 in medical costs.
They were on fixed pensions, some on half pensions because of
disability, and some had dependents. They were not informed
there would be a benefit change although the City charter and
State statute said they should have been. He had not had time
to call the City Council or staff because of family emergen-
cies. The firefighters were disturbed, and believed the in-
crease unjust and uncompassionate to the retirees.
MINUTES OF JUNE 4, 1984
Councilmember Bechtel submitted. the following corrections:
Pa a 4501, last paragraph, 1 i'ne 2, from "they housed many people„
were many occupants"; and line 3, from "there was an
large number' to "there were an equally large number."
Councilmember Renzel submitted the following corrections to Mr.
LaRiviere's statement:
Pare 4591, paragraph 9, line 11, "...which it was suggested could
go tlid.ough in clusters . of four to six, because they can launch at
the public launch ramp directly into deep water;" and line 17,
"salt water" should be "fresh water:"
Counciimember. Renzel submitted the following corrections to her
statements:
PaRe 4592, paragraph 4, line 1, "...that Mr. Peck was saying
th t... ; Line 2; 'salt marsh. Since, . "
Page 4503, paragraph 5, line 13, "circulation. If it was...
line 17, "...by definition would occasionally be contained for
spills."
MOTION: Mayor Klein moved, seconded by Cobb, approval of the
minutes of June 4, 1984 as corrected.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Woolley absent.
CONSENT, CALENDAR
MOTION: Councilmember Sutories moved, seconded by Levy, to
approve Consent Caleedar Items 1-3.
Referral
None
Action
ITEM •,1, SANTA CLARA COUNTY -MULTIPLE CASUALTY INCIDENT PLAN
3 SAT` z t1
Staff_.rerosmends that; the City approve the Santa Clara.
County Nuitiple Ca.suaity Incident. as. present .'
ITEM #2, ORDINANCE RE AMENDMENT TO .THE MUNICIPAL COD/ (2nd Read -
ORDINANCE 3546. entitled 'ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF
THE GIIT Air PALO ALTO AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF
CHAPTER 2.08 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
THE ENUMERATION OF THE DUTIES OF CITY AUDITOR, THE
CREATION OF A NEW DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND
THE REASSIGNMENT OF DUTIES FROM THE FORMER DEPARTMENT OF
BUDGET AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT TO THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT
AND MAKING CERTAIN CHANGES TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL
AND COMMUNITY SERVICES AND DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION
AND TO AMEND SECTION 2.28.120 TO AUGMENT THE
RESPONSIBILITIES: OF THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE" (1st Read-
ing 6/25/84, PASSED 9-0)
ITEM #3, RESOLUTION APPROVING SUPPLEMENT TO THE WATER CASE
The office of the City Attorney recommends that Council adopt the
resolution approving the supplement and authorizing the Mayor to
execute the same on behalf of the City.
RESOLUTION 6277 entitled 'RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF
THL ur FAO ALTO APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECU-
TION OF THE SUPPLEMENT TO SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND
MASTER WATER SALES CONTRACT*
Mt7TION PASSED unanimously, Woolley absent.
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS
None
ITEM #4, PROPOSAL TO LIMIT OFFICE DEVELOPMENT IN THE CS AND GM
.1.4~34 IBUSPR,
Chief Planning Official Bruce Freeland regretted the new ordinance
prepared by the City Attorney's office was inadvertently attached
to the old staff report.
Councilmember Renzel said when the atter was discussed, she
understood the intent of the continuance was to have the mora-
torium take effect for Architectural Review Board (ARB) approvals
as of the date on which it was continued.
Mr,'"Freeland said various points of view Were expressed by the
Council when the item was last considered. He heard no clear
directions to staff as tb the nature of the cutoff --whether it was
for approvals, applications, or, as was drafted, applications
acceptedaccepted as complete.
CouncilMember Renzel obtained confirmation from City Attorney
Diane Lee that there was nothing to legally prevent the Council
from adoptine such an ordinance. She asked how much office space
in those areas was approved by the ARB since the continuance and
how many other projects. would be exempted because they fell
between the time the Council continued the item on June 4, 1984
and the present.
Mr. Freeland said although he. was not entirely certain, he
believed few, if any, projects were approved during the interim.
Councilmembcr Witherspoon said the staff report referred to an
application submitted on June 4, 1984, which was incomplete, ap4
she asked for elaboration,
•
Mr. Freeland said the drawings were incomplete. The building had
a parking structure for which no details were shown, simply an
indication- of its location, Certain elevations of the building
M
r
1
were lacking. It was generally an incomplete application, which
was a fairly normal occurrence. Projects often came in that had
to be returned for additional drawings.
Councilmember Witherspoon understood the project was rejected as
incomplete, and no others were submitted.
Mr. Freeland said there were no other applications during the in-
terim period.
Councilmember Cobb followed up by asking if it was the only proj-
ect at issue in terms of the timing of the moratorium.
Mr. Freeland said he understood Councilmember Renzel to be talk-
ing of a different type of cut-off entirely, dealing with
approvals. If they were only talking of applications, there was
only the one project.
Counc-ilmember Cobb said he was speaking of the ordinance before
the Council.
Mr. Freeland agreed it affected only the one project.
Councilmember Cobb said the item was continued because of the
notice issue, or what was perceived as a lack thereof. He under-
stood the applicant in question was unaware of the Council's
projected action before the late Friday afternoon preceding the
Council's action, and Council was now discussing making its action
retroactive to that point. He asked how it compared with the
City's procedures in terms .of timing and notice for other similar
moratoria.
Mr. Freeland said the advertisement for the action was run on
Friday, June 1, 1984, the Friday preceding discussion by the Coun-
cil. It was a fact that the public would not have had the oppor-
tunity to see the ad with any more lead time than was suggested.
He deferred to Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken
Schreiber regarding the question of precedent.
Mr. Schreiber said moratoria generally were not public hearing
items, so no standard notice was: given to either property owners
or occupants, nor was there any type of display in the newspapers.
The items re;\eived only the general notice received by City Coun-
cil agenda itemse and the notice procedures followed in early June
were not substantially different front past action. What might
differ was that the -`•.item was not discussed ahead of time publicly
until it was on the ,agenda. It was not a Council assignment to
staff, but a staff initiated item, so there was no public process
leading up to a staff report that people would have been aware
of
Councilmember Cobb said although his recollection of previous
moratoria was a little fuzzy, he believed there was more of a time
element involved for people in the process. In the current case,
they were making it retroactive to the first date it was brought
up so that for all practical purposes it was a surprise, with a
one working -day window. He found that somewhat unusual in terms
of the process followed in the past.
Mr. Schreiber agreed with Councilmember -Cobb's recollections with
respect to the past couple of yeari. There was less public
knowledge, as distinguished from public notice, in the present
case.
Councilmember Renzel said the Council could declare a moratorium.
on all construction, starting at the present point in, time,. with-
out regard to when projects were approved or who they were
approved by as long as they did not have a building permit.
City Attorney Diane Lei: said 11 Wds correct as long as the appli-
cant did not have d building permit and had not engaged in sub-
stantial construction nor expended substantial sums in reliance on
that permit.
Councilmember Renzel asked if comprehensive moratoria ._in the past
covered projects which applied for and received ARB approval, but
no building permit.
Mr. Schreiber said over the past six Years the Council's position
on moratoria tended to allow projects to go forward earlier in the
development review process.
Councilmember Renzel said she understood that, and the proposed
application was earlier in the development process than those
Council previously approved. It was an application verse's even
being agendized by the ARB.
Mr. Schreiber said it was early, and although not a moratorium,
the Downtown Parking ordinance contained the provision that proj-
ects which filed and received preliminary ARB review --which was a
preappl Ication stage. -were allowed to go forward. He believed
that was the earliest date possible.
Councilmember Renzel believed the proposed cut -oft date was fair
compared to what Council could propose.
Jon Parsons, 323 Maclane, said there was an- urgent need to get a
feel for wheredevelopment was going in Palo Alto. Council deci-
sions to go ahead with development would be the heritage of the
future citizens, and when developments were discussed, it was
essential to consider the future. Less than 10 percent of the
approved development i n downtown Palo Alto was currently utilized.
Many people opposed moratoria on a philosophical basis, but the
proposed moratorium was a breathing period to measure what was
going on. It did not neap no more buildings --only a halt to the
development sweeping the City. The moratorium was suggested by
City staff, not a bunch of - hot-headed residentialists, and the
moratorium should be expanded to the CC zone which encompassed
most of the Downtown area.
Bob Moss, 4010 Orme, said the Council was generally reluctant to
pass moratoria, but the proposed moratorium was necessary because
of past Council procrastination. Not only the people who spoke
that evening wanted a moratorium, so did staff and some Council -
members. It was a rarity for the staff to request a moratorium,
hut development was getting away from them, .and irrevocable harm
would be done to the entire community. if excessive office develop-
ment was not stopped immediately. The Council preciously set cut-
off dates to be the issuance of a building permit, but recently
stepped back from that legal guideline, which various City
Attorneys had called to the Council's attention. ,_There was no
legal or moral obligation to approve projects with ARB approval,
let alone a rough project brought to staff in an urgent rush to
beat the clock. The project, on Ash had no standing and should be
given no credence. He urged that the ordinance adopted be modi-
fied to read; "Section 1 notwithstanding, this moratorium shall
not apply to a proposed new office use for which a building pewit
has been issued as of June 5, 1984."_- The moratorium should be
extended to include the . CC District downtown, which was severely
impacted by approved office developments presently under construc-
tion. The approved projects over the past six .months. needed 2,000
more parking spaces than were built or allowed to be built on the
sites, and parking in the Downtown Assessment. District and on
California Avenue was =being lost, Traffic increased tremendously
and parking spaces decreased : during the east six months even
though the buildings were not het occupied. He urged Council to
adept the moratorium and the moratorium on office construction'of
over 5,000 square feet. in the CC zone.
7 5
9/84
Marilyn Mayo, 404 Oxford, favored the moratorium and asked that it
be extended. The issues were how things were perceived, politics,
and the Council image. There were two worlds in Palo Alto-- of-
fice and family --and she bel'eved Council lived in the -business
world, and forgot the family. The Council was said to represent
everyone in Palo Alto, but the developers were never there.
zens were forced to come and speak, and lost by attrition. The
developers were paid to come and the Council listened to them.
Richard Trainer, 3423 Cork Oak Way, did not support the mora-
torium. People who lived in and owned property in Palo Aito
should not. have to expect a moratorium to shut down their care-
fully made plans. -The City had many ordinances covering parking,
traffic, landscaping, heights, etc., and a further construction
impediment was unnecessary. The areas identified in the staff
report were run-down and needed improvement, but would not be
improved under a moratorium. There was already a six-month mora-
torium in the City, and the proposed moratorium was an exercise in
futility for a city with sufficient controls.
R. J. Debt, 3145 Flowers Lane, favored a moratorium. Earlier
Councils did not ask what kind of a city Palo Alto should be, and
allowed too much development. Two or three times as many people
commuted to Palo Alto as lived in town, and with more offices
there would be more traffic problems. The City would be swamped,
and its quality and serenity would be lost. No one intended to
move out including the Council , but the citizens should be asked
what kind of city they wanted. If staff asked for a moratorium
which allowed developments, under 5,000 square feet, to go
through . it should be granted. Developers of large sections, such
as the Maximart site, would engender. traffic and endanger a neigh-
borhood who could not afford to move out, and the only solution
was a traffic light that already impacted El Camino at rush hour.
He asked Council to extend the moratorium to the CC zone because
it was already an impossible area.
Anne Ercolani, 2040 Ash Street, referred to her remarks of June 4
and those of the previous speakerst She presented over 90
responses to an advertisement run in the Palo Alto Weekly request-
ing a moratorium, not only in the GM and tS zones but also Down-
town, which was on file in the City Clerk's office, and asked that
Council not allow more offices. If the Council had any questions
on the advisability of offices, it should vote for the moratorium
to prevent offices being approved in the interim. She asked that
the moratorium also cover the CC zone.
Philip Flint, 225o Santa Ana Street, favored the moratorium. In
the 1960s there, was a confrontation between those who wanted
development and those who did not, and he saw no plan in the
present development in Palo Alto. He ,did not follow City affairs
as closely as when he was on the Council, but saw no well-defined
plan that would allow the building to be appropriate to thelCity
and functional as a business area, with not too large an office
population toecreate further traffic problems --always the largest
single impact.' When he was on the Council in 1963, there were
seven plans for the downtown including the best ever plan, which
never went into effect because the downtown landowners would not
come up with their share of the money, Palo Alto would not
achieve planned business development until there was such a plan,
and he asked the Council to consider the planning aspects of com-
mercial business in the City. More was done on California Avenue
than ever in the downtown, and the best work in the downtown was
done by private business, who were different from the ..typical ab-
sentee landlords. Although the planning problem was not -the major
part of the issue, it was important, and Council should consider
more planning in the development. It was heading for an impasse
between the pro -development group and those who did not "' went to
see unplanned development. The Council should tall a halt to
development until it had a better hold,
penny eetrosian, 443 Ventura Avenue, urged. the Council to adopt
the moratorium as an emergency ordinance and accept the statt's
recommendation on the ineligible status of the incomplete applica-
tion because otherwise it would set a ruinous precedent for all
development proceedings. In the future, anyone could put a piece
of paper before the Planning Department and call it an applica-
tion, and it would be given the same status as bona fide applica-
tions. It was not fair to chose who spent time and money to pre-
pare proper applications, and placed an unfair burden on staff.
It was not in the City's interests to allow standards to be low-
ered, and she supported Bob Moss' suggestion that the grand -
fathering process be at the time of issuance of a building permit.
The application was on one of three parcels contiguous on the Ash
frontage, all under the ownership of the applicant. If the mora-
torium did not pass, all three parcels could be developed as one,
with at least 40,000 square feet of office building. The prece-
dent for the rest of the area was clear --it would cause a rise in
the cost of adjacent properties and jeopardize continued viability
of the small businesses. The Council could demonstrate support of
small businesses by pissing the moratorium, and she concurred with
the recommendations to include the CC zone. City Hall was 58,000
square feet, including the two floors for the police and the
eighth floor, and currently in the ARB process, was at least the
equivalent of two City Hails, which would go up in addition to
work now in process. The Council bent over backwards to be fair
to the public sector, but the public interest did not receive its
fair share. The Council had full discretionary power, and would
decide that night on the Ci.ty's future. She urged adoption of the
moratorium, with inclusion of the CC zone and that the grand -
fathering period be the building permit point.
Millie Davis, 344 Tennessee Lane, believed the proposal to limit
office construction over 5,000 square feet in the service commer-
cial and general manufacturing zones was a step in the right
direction. She preferred the Council consider additional restric-
tions because offices 5,000 square feet or less were still allowed
and many could still be built. The property at the corner of
Charleston and El Ca,!l i io would soon be developed. There were
about seven lots at that corner, and if each were allowed to con-
struct 5,000 square feet of office building, the total would be
around 30,000 to 35,000 square feet of offices. She said 40,000
square feet of offices would add 1,700 car trips per day, and it
would be around 1,500 more car trips per day at the corner of El
Camino and Charleston. Her neighborhood was concerned, and
recently discussed the matter with the Planning Commission. It
was hoped the Council would review the zone, but in the meantime,
unless the proposed moratorium was more restrictive, there could
be about six or seven plots of 5,000 square foot office buildings
at the corner she mentioned. She suggested additional wording to
the moratorium as follows: "For the next six months, a use permit
would be required for approval of any offices in the service com-
mercial and general manufacturing zones, and no permits would be
granted for office buildings greater than 5,000 square feet." The
provision would allow the public the chance to discuss the possi-
bility of atilt service commercial going in at that busy intersec-
tion. She asked Council to reconsider the possibility of includ-
ing the Downtown Community Commercial (CC) zone in the moratorium.
Last week, the Downtown North residents argued that their area
truly needed a park, and she believed those same arguments hel d
likewise for their need for neighborhood shops. There were luny
senior citizens and people of all ages in the most densely popu-
lated area in the City, and where could the need for neighborhood
retail shops be greater. She urged one of the five Counci l members
who voted against inclusion of the CC downtown zone in the mora-
torium to reconsider, and that a later meeting be scheduled for
discussion
Richard Jacobsen, 761 Southampton, was a developer, and in addi-
tion to having built office buildings± he was involved with Lytton
Gardens, Webster Wood, Birch Court, ° Crane Place and other
residential developments in the area and appreciated the staff's
concerns with regard to some of the development issues before the
City. He believed the planning issues were legitimate and 'ong
overdue in terms of being addressed, and personally shared many of
the concerns with regard to the downtown area. He was the appl i -.
cant, and said his application was pending for a 15,000 square
foot building, and might be affected by the retroactive aspect of
the ordinance. Over the past 12 months, the City enacted several
moratoria, and in every case, adequate -notice and public discus-
sion was given, ,and projects_ with applications into the City for
ARB approval at the time the ordinance was enacted were allowed to
go forward. He was informed by - City staff that it was the City
policy hecause it represented a fair and equitable approach•.to
property owners. His claneent application on file with the City
was scheduled for ARB review on July 19. While the -original-
application might not have been complete in every detail,' he
opined the drawings were substantially complete. Over the years,
he submitted many applications to the City for ARB approval, and
his experience was that no application was ever complete in the
strictest sense of the word. As a matter of business practice,
his drawings were always accepted by the City for review and addi-
tional information- was supplied as requested by staff while the
application was being processed. He had numerous applications in
his files where information was requested and furnished up to the
date of the ARB hearing. He believed the subject application was
substantially complete as originally submitted. The drawings were
circulated as originally submitted to City departments for review,
and additional information requested by the City was -quickly sup-
plied. The application was submitted June 4, the design drawings
ware being prepared for over a month, and ;Many thousands of dol-
lars were spent. He had progress drawings in his files and could
document his work. The moratorium was basically instituted with-
out notice, and some concern was expressed that if the project
was allowed to go forward=- it waold set a disastrous precedent for
future projects or moratoria. The contention was made that it was
not a bona fide application which was incorrect, and while he
admitted it was not complete in every detail he bel ieved -.anyone
placed in similar circumstances having spent $20,000 on prepara-
tion of working drawings, with a moratorium coming out of nowhere,
would have taken the same action. The concern was raised that unai
less the project was killed, 40,000 square feet would be built on
three adjacent lots, which was untrue. He had three adjacent
tots, but the application was for two lots. One lot was occupied
by another tenant with a iong.tei'm lease and there was no ability
to gain access for the development of that building. He realized
there were legitimate planning issues which must be studied under
the -current CS zoning, and he -,did not advocate nor ever make an
application for anything approaching the 2:0 floor area ratio
allowed in the' zone. He did not believe,throwing his project into
the moratorium was vital to the City nor in the public's best:in-
terests and was not consistent with past -City policy. Passage of
the retroactive portion of. the ordinance would be highly 'detri-
mental and prejudicial to the property owners he represented. die
believed his project was the only one. under consideration, that
there was inadequate not.i.ce, and turning down the project was a
change in business practice.o lie now had a complete set of draw-
ingsa a cOmp1ete application was.; on file with the City, and a
heating date scheduled. -His project was the only one in that .sit
uation, and' as explained to him, -the -reason for previously allow-
1-ng..those projects to proceed, was because the Council believed it.
was a fair and equitable procedure,
Mary+ . Ann Loughran, 11 71 Amarillo, #3, said ..she was .behooved by.
_having lots -of offices surrounding the torn i n . which she lived
because 'she was a. temporary . :se.cretary. :She grew up in a :small
town --.where twas i.naportarnt,"to have continuous buisiness .and :jobs
but she did -not 'see the need 1017410 Alto for more jobs. She sup-
'ported the , moratorium with serious consideration ---being -given to
what should happen when the moratorium was over.
John Mock, /36 Barron Avenue, was concerned about the traffic
problems near 280. He said traffic was backed up in: the morning
from Foothill almost to Deer Creek, and from Deer Creek almost to
280. It was only a matter of time before it backed up onto 280
and stopped 280 itself. One tried to avoid El Camino during rush
hour and as a consequence, there was the situation in Evergreen
Park where barriers were required. He commuted to Marin about
once a week, and drove 19th Avenue, and it took him between 11 to
15 minutes to get from one end of the City to the other on 19th
Avenue, and he challenged someone to do as well on El Camino.
Palo Alto was creating substantially more jobs than it housed,
which meant housing would be more expensive and higher density.
He was well paid, but could not afford to buy a house in Palo
Alto, and did not want to buy one of the glorified apartments. To
prevent Palo Alto's becoming like a financial center, he urged
that the Council include the CC districts in the moratorium.
Councilmember Witherspoon asked if a six-month moratorium was
still feasible for staff.
Chief Planning Official Bruce Freeland said staff envisioned a
several step process --the moratorium being the first, followed by
processing changes to the CC and GM zoning ordinances to pla :e the
same limitation of 5,000 square feet on the size of office build-
ings in the CS and GM areas. The moratorium would be a stop gap
until those changes, -to the CS and GM ordinances could be enacted.
Over the next one and one-half years, staff would do area studies
of each portion of town with CS or GM zoning. The CS and GM zones
might be changed again pending the results of those studies.
Councilmember Witherspoon clarified that although the Planning
Commission had not yet okayed it, staff was thinking in terms of a
fairly long commitment to a 5,000 square foot limitation.
Mr. Freeland said the rule might be in place for one and one-half
years.
Councilmember Witherspoon asked how many moratoria were currently
in force.
Mr. Freeland said there was a planning study in the Downtown area,
but no moratorium. The poly moratoria currently in effect were
on the Maxirnart site and the_ Gil zone along Park Boulevard, and on
the Weeks' property at 1681 E1 Camino Real.
Councilmember Witherspoon_ presumed the parking restrictions
imposed on -the Downtown and California -Avenue, which she con-
sidered a moratorium, curtailed development.
Mr. Freeland said they were actual changes in the :zoning ordi-
nance. The Downtown parking -ordinance had a sunset clause, which
in effect was similar to a moratorium.
Councilmember Cobb strongly supported the moratorium, but ques-
tioned the inclusion of the project under discussion as he did not
like to deal in "government by surprise." He preferred to explore
possible ways to exempt the project so the f gal moratorium would
be clean and send a clear signal as it would last longer than six
months. He previously supported the extension of the moratorium
to the CG zone downtown, and still believed the idea was good with
a caveat concerning remodeling the older structures - downtown
because of the seismic hazards issue, the small property owners
and the desire to preserve existing older structures. The new
larger . construction going id should be attacked, and it was
inappropriate to deal with the issue that e. ping since, only she
moratoriums was noticed to the public. He wanted to hear more dis-
cussion before enter•tklrting a motion, but was concerned about the
project in question as fairness was important. Strong measures,
such as a moratorium, hadto be scrupulously applied.
Council -member Bechtel said a number of people in the community
asked her why the Council allowed the present development. The
present construction met current zoning and did not even come
before the Council,, It was a result of previous decisions by
previous Councils on zoning and the Comprehensive Plan., Various
City Councils mistakenly believed a two-story _building in place
would remain, whereas it could easily be knocked down and replaced
by the eroximum the zoning allowed. It was timely and appropriate
to proceed with the proposed moratorium as drafted by the City
staff.- She supported the. inclusion of the downtown area.
MOTION: Councilmember Bechtel moved, seconded by Levy, approval
of staff recommendation (2) to adopt as an emergency action the
ordinance p1Acing a six-Wonth moratorium on office developMents of
5,000 square feet or more in CS and GM zones,
ORDINANCE 3547 entitled °ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CIIT OF PALO ALTO IMPOSING A MORATORIUM FOR SIX MONTHS
ON THE PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS FOR NEW OFFICE USES OF•
5,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE Its THE CS AND GM ZONES AND
DECLARING AN EMERGENCY" (Continued from 6/4/84)
Councilrember Fletcher asked if a moratorium in the downtown for
offices over 5,000 square feet would interfere with remodeling of
the older- buildings.
Mr. Freeland said it depended entirely on the terms of the mora-
torium. The type of ordinance staff drafted on CS and GM zones
would not hamper -existing office ,space being remodeled as office
space, but would interfere if there was some office and some
retail with the desire to convert the retail to office to make a
total of more than 5,000 square feet. A similar thing could
happen in the downtown area if the ordinance was similarly
drafted, but language could be incorporated to avoid it.
Councilnember Fletcher said she would like to see that happen as
downtown was where the huge explosion of office construction was
taking place. Most jobs were concentrated there and caused huge
parking problems. Increased assessments to the property owners
Would put an additional squeeze to pay for additional parking
structures with a constant game of catch up. The ti parking ordi-
nance for the downtown did not stop office.applications from com-
ing in. Several large office developments went through the ARB
process and were approved, with others coming in. The monthly
Santa Clara County Office Building Survey by Cushman and Wakefield
showed that since June, 1983, there was an increase -off' 556,500
square feet Of offices in _Palo. Alto. The Comprehensive Plan goals
were to discourage jobs in the City and traffic through the neigh-
borhood -s. The traffic on 1.01 was already at capacity, and projec-
tions of a 27 percent increase within the next few years was an
underestimate, aS the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
had not factored in the newer changes in the zoning north of
Bayshore, There were many reasons for a moratorium on office
buildings of over 5,000 square feet= and At would riot harm the
downtown, If a provision In the ,ordinance allowed renovations to
continue to make_ it apply only to new offices being constructed of
over 5,000 square -feet,
AMENDMENT: Cornci lwee er -Fletcher a.ovtd seconded by Renzel ,
to i nci ode the Downtown CC distritt ' -in the moratorium, but to
bring it back after the property owners . were notified and for -the
Council -.to consider -it retrnactive in 30 days.
Mayor Klein asked if Councflmember Fletcher's intention was to
continue the ordinance for soave specified period in order for
notification to be given to the affected property owners.
Counc i l member Fletcher said she wanted : to use the same process as
for the CS and'GM,,zones, to cover the Downtown CC zone only.
Mayor Klein believed the amendment should be a separate motion.
AMENDMENT WI'iHDRAWK
Councilmember Renzel concurred with Councilmember Fletcher about
the seriousness of the problem, and although _ i t was long in com-
ing, it was foreseer:, and Council was reluctant to deal with it
head on.' By dealing only with specific instances, they let a lot
of water flow under the bridge, and one of the Gloat constant com-
plaints, she heard from citizens was about the offices -going up
downtown. There was no reason for the Council, as `representatives
of the citizens, to permit it to continue. Although it was the
result of the mistakes of past Councils, failure to take action
would make it the present Council ' s mistake. They had to accept
responsibility and do something. The proposed moratorium would
allow time to deal with serious planning problems, yet permit the
reasonable development intended for the CS .and GM zones. It was
crucial --the streets were jammed, there was inadequate parking,
and an electricity problem. People were asked to turn off air
conditioners in summer, and the garbage dump was running out of
space. The serious problems were caused by increased development,
very little of which was residential, and the problem had to be
addressed immediately. She supported the motion, and would sup-
port a future motion by Coonci1member Fletcher. With regard to
the last application, the purpose of the hearing was to give
people adequate time to address the moratorium, not to allow them
to get a foot in the-door for an exemption.
Vice Aayor Levy associated himself with Councilmember Bechtel's
remarks about past Councils. They allowed the City, through the
zoning, to be developed to a far greater extent than anyone envi-
sinne4, particularly in the CS and GM zones. Office development
was thrown into the zones almost as an afterthought because it was
believed that if a zone was acceptable for general manufacturing
(GM) development, an office as a more benign use, should also be
allowed. In fact, offices were currently not necessarily more
benign because they were probably the most intense use possible in
town for traffic and parking. He agreed with the motion.
Although he was concerned about moratoria and "government by sur-
prise," the moratorium in question was hot complete and only
reduced the intensity of office use. It was a satisfactory way to
get a grip on what was happening downtown.
Mayor Klein strongly supported the ordinance before the Council
He agreed with Vice Mayor Levy that -the focus of the City in the
past was not office uses in the CS and GM zones. It would be a
shame to destroy the needed diversity in the zones by making them
either all office or a significant amount of office. The Council
had to remember that the zones would not stay as they were, even
if they passed the moratorium and there was no future office
development. It was necessary to throw cold water on the idea
that by zoning things could be preserved. State law, and federal
constitutional law would not allow the City to freeze things in
time. The community was very desirable, which brought many prob-
lems They had to be creative. to control the community in A bene-
ficial manner, and the economic forces that used properties did
not look good at present. Those who believed such forces could be
frozen by a moratorium were mistaken, and a City Council attempt
would be overturned by the courts at great expense. He supported
the moratorium, as they seeded the breathing space to plan for the
CS and GM zones and to revise the ordinances with regard to it,
but it would not necessarily produce the results desired by many:
speakers. The Council would do its best to produce a comavinity
they could be proud of 10 or 15 years hence. With regard to,'fair-
tress' and notice, he believed the issue before the Council )014s a
red herring. The community was not surprised and of the' v r1;ous
landowners who one month earlier complained of inadequate .notice,
only one was present that evening. He wondered what had _happened
to the rest. Such a moratorium did not need much advance notice,
and might even be counterproductive... When a moratorium was in.. the
i
i
offing, people had to accelerate plan production to get in before
the deadline. It was not in the interests of the City,,,and the
one proposal considered that evening did not meet any of the tests
for being in the pipeline. The Council had been very liberal, and
while he did not want to use all their legal authority to require
:the building permit stage before. grandfathering, he suggested all
future moratoria require applications to meet the same test, such
as -ARB approval, so no one could accuse the Council of changing
the rules mid -stream. He would not make an amendment to the ordi-
nance before the Council, but would attempt to agenda :fie for a
future meeting something along the lines of ARB approval to set a
clear rule for future moratoria.
Councilmember Cobb did not sense much support for his concern
about the one project at issue, and asked staff if the applicant
had any other channels through which to appeal the staff decision
about whether the application was complete.
Mr. Freeland said it was strictly an tidministrative function, not
one that went before the. City Council.
Councilmember Cobb asked if it would require a emotion to deal with
the application that evening.
Mr. Freeland said there was no question about whether the applica-
tion was complete for the purpose of ARB review.
Councilmember Witherspoon said she would not support a moratorium.
She favored the two motions passed at the earlier meeting, and
stood up for past Councils. Almost all of the current Council -
members were either on a past Council or Planning Commission. The
Council had not increased Toning in any part of town during the,
eight years she was associated with it, but consistently downzoned
in residential and commercial areas, and were continuing that
trend. The previous year the complaint was about condominiums,
not office buildings, The Council had not anticipated redevelop-
ment, and was lulled by the recession into thinking things would
continue as they had for three years. the zoning was as it was at
the last revision of the Comprehensive Plan when it was downzoned,
and the potential took off when interest rates decreased,. It was
appropriate to re-examine the allocation of office spaces around
town, but she could not support a moratorium. It was clear the
staff and Planning Commission recom;nendatiori would be for some-
thing around 5,000 square feet, but she did not understand why it
would take four to return to Council because only noticed
public hearings before the Planning Commission were needed for
zone eha! es before returning to the Council. She considered the
ruling for a moratorium to be panicky, and would not condone it.
Councilmember Sutorius agreed at the earlier meeting to support
the moratorium proposed by staff when it returned after the proper
notification. It was unchanged, andhewould support it. Some of
the discussion that evening ignored the reality of the California
Avenue study, which took much time and involvement and looked com-
prehensively at the CC and pedestrian zones and had an effect on
the CS and CN zones. Prompt and rational attention ensued when
the East Bayshore/Emharcadero study showed a high development po-
tential. A downtown study was in progress with local concerned
citizens, Planning Commissioners, and ARB representatives meeting
with staff regularly. After their recommendations were made, the
Council would take action. No one from the Downtown Study Commit-
tee appeared to propose that, the CC zone downtown be incorporated
into the moratorium, and'',staff did not believe the moratorium
needed . to cover the downtown area at that time He understood a
referral to the Planning Commission .would be forthcoming resulting
in an ordinance to establish a 5,000 square: foot limit on new or
remodeled additions of an office nature. Thee moratorium would be
a holding action!, and not a signal of permanent ordinance change.
The important .point was that the study areas be looked at indepen
dently . of other areas with the same zoning classification. The
4 7 8 2
7/09/84
purpose of the delay was to allow time to respect the individual-
ity of the various localities that might carry the same zoning.
The result could be creative, interesting and productive for
future development when the ordinance limitation was lifted and
substituted by individual tat.loring of what could occur in those
areas. The issue had many nuances, and the proposal was appropri-
ate. He supported it, but would not support incorporating the CC
zone.
Mayor Klein said Council was voting on an emergency ordinance,
which required a four -fifths vote to pass. With Councilmember
Woolley absent. a 7-1 vote would be required.
MOTION PASSED by ,a vote of 7-1, Witherspoon voting `ono," Woolley
absent.
Councilmember Fletcher said a member of the public handed her the
minutes of June 4, 1984, showing that Sam Sparck a member of the
Downtown Study Committee, requested_incluaion of the downtown CC
zone in the moratorium. In response to-Councilmember Sutorius`
comments, she was unaware that the Planniig Commission was
instructed to draft an ordinance to place a ceiling of 5,000
square feet on office development, but hoped the P i anni ng Commis-
sion had an open:hind and would return with a recommendation for
no more some, or more office space for the Council to consider.
She did not believe they were locked into the 5,000 square foot
number, which was put in -as a temporary 'moratorium ceiling to pre-
vent large office developments in the interim. The Council .spent,
more time on traffic problems than on anything else and much
staff time was spent on that. Irate citizens complained about
traffic in neighborhoods and controversial barriers were erected.
The projected increase in traffic on 101 would anean more traffi Y
through the neighborhoods and Council would have to deal with
more problems unless they got a handle on job creation.
MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved.. seconded by Renzel, that
staff notify the Downtown CC District property owners of the Coun-
cil's intention to adopt an ordinance placing a sic -month morator-
ium on new offices of 5,000 square feet or more in the downtown
and to return the ordinance to Council for action one month from
now, and the ordinance to be effective retroactive to July 9,
1984; 5,000 feet to include remodeling,
Councilmember Fletcher said the lack of moratoria in the
California Avenue area permitted developments to go ahead before
the effective ordinances to create an additional parking shortage
of approximately 600 spaces. In the East Bayshore area, develop-
ment was allowed to continue, and it created a terrible traffic
problem. Council was allowing:a slow, orderly process by placing
a holding action on new office space of 5 000 square feet or more.
Present offices would be allowed to stay or be renovated retail
would be allowed to stay or have new construction, and residential
would be permitted at all times.
Councilmember Cobb said the extension of the moratorium to the CC
zone was ,not noticed for that..evening, and he asked the City
Attorney if the Council's action was in order.
City Attorney Diane Lee said the proposed ordinance did not re-
quire any notice as it was not an amendment to the zoning code and
was not the application of an ordinance to specific property under
the zoning ordinance. The ,.instruction was to prepare an ordinance
the City Council -would consider at a later date. It was analogous
to instituting proceedings for w.icW;tne City Council would have a
resolution calling for a public hearing at a future date. By way
of that analogy she considered it : proper.
Councilmember Cobb asked staff about the situation typified by
Phyllis Munsey who owned a historic building planned for remodel-
ing and whiih 'he believed was an existing office_ structure. He
4 7 8 3
7/09/84
asked it the instructions before staff meant that the remodeling
could proceed, even if it added less than 5,000 square feet incre-
mental to what was already there.
Mr. Freeland said existing office space could be remodeled, but he
was not clear as to whether existing retail space could be con-
verted to offices once more than 5,000 square feet of offices were
on the site. Staff wanted clarification, or instructions to con-
sider the issue and report back on the options.
Councilmember Cobb said when the Council moved too fast it might
not think of all the permutations and combinations. Someone aright
- want to upgrade a historic or old building the Council preferred
to retain. Incidental to the process, the square footage might
not come out to the same, but by adding additional square footage,
they might be able to make it seismically safe. They might gain
some few thousand square feet in the process of saving an old
building, and Council did not want to discourage such remodeling.
It was important to preserve what was old in town, and Council had
to give people prepared to undertake such remodeling some economic
incentives and freedom of movement.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Cobb moved, seconded by Bechtel, to
amend the motion to specify that renovation of existing structures
will specifically be permitted with the addition of no more than
5,000 square feet of office space to existing square footage on
site at present time.
Councilmember Renzel clarified that by "incremental," if there was
presently 3,000 square feet of office space, an additional 5,000
square feet could be added. If an old building was demolished,
5,000 square feet of new office space could be put in, but if the
existing building remained, there could be a total of 8,000 square
feet.
Councilmember Cobb said the intention of his amendment was to save
existing structures. He believed it was completely consistent and
parallel to what was before the Council.
Mayor Klein asked ;f Councilmember Cobb wanted to place a time
limit to prevent people from making additions every other week.
Councilmember Cobb believed it should Se valid for the period of
the moratorium,
Mayor Klein clarified that the additional 5,000 square feet would
be.permitted once only during the period.
Councilmember Fletcher had no problem with the arnendmeet as it was
what she intended with her. motion stipulating new" office space.
Councilmember Sutorius asked staff how they would treat an appli-
cation such as the one described by Councilmember Cobb, which went
beyond the shell of the ,existing building and would become an ARB
application because the exterior was affected. He was concerned
about the ARB requirement in the main notion, and whether the
amendment adequately removed it from the thread of the main mo-
tion.
Mr. Freeland heard no mention of the ARB in the main motion. He
believed Councilmember Sutorius referred to the cut-off date for
applicatiOns received for buildings previously_ approved, but
nothing in the main motion clarified the cut-off point
Councilmember Sutorius supported the amendment, but asked about
the specifics of Mayor Klein's proposal.
1
Counci l member Sutori us supported the amendment, but asked .about
the specifics of Mayor Klein's proposal.
AMENDMENT PASSED unanimously, Woolley absent.
Councilmember Renzel resided near the downtown, and believed the
moratorium was imperative. The parking requirement on the down --
town did not significantly slow down the pace of activity, and
many hundreds of square feet of office buildings went through the
ARB process since the parking,'requirement was enacted. Only seven
percent of the office space approved during the past year was cur-
rently occupies, and there were already tremendous parking prob-
lems downtown. She had to hunt for a parking space downtown, and
it was not healthy for the businesses_ in town to al iow the situa-
tion to continue without ensuring the planning process went
through properly. She supported the moratoriums
Mayor Klein said he_ resided near the downtown and opposed the
motion because he was concerned about where the downtown was
going. The Council appointed a broad based Downtown Study Commit-
tee consisting of the Planning Commission, members of the ARB, ad-
jacent neighborhood and citizens at large, and members of the
downtown business community, which he hoped had creative and help-
ful ideas. There was a substantial difference between the pro-
posed moratorium and the one enacted earlier that evening. The
City had a fa i.rly clear idea of where they were going -with the CS
and GM zones, but not the CC zone.. A few months earlier the Coun-
cil enacted a restrictive ordinance on downtown development to
dramatically increase parking requirements which Councilmernbers,
downtown residents, owners, and the local papers referred to as
the next best thing or even the same as a moratorium. New devel-
opments had to meet the parking requirements, and although it
would not solve the problem, it would not add to it. Some people
hoped a moratorium would freeze all development downtown, but that
was i 1 1 ega 1 . There would continue to be office development but
the Downtown Study might affect the way it was developed, ,and it
would not turn into single family lots nor be frozen. The pro-
posed moratorium was alot as clear to him as the one on the CS and
GM zones. Moratoria were dramatic and should not be taken light-
ly. They caused much disruption with unpredictable results, end
were not a panacea. He did not see what a moratorium would accom-
plish, worried about thee deletorious effects, and would. vote
a(jainet the motion.
Vice Mayon Levy agreed with Mayor Klein and said much was done to
slow groweh in the downtown Brea, and it was important to continue
the study-` to develop a Comprehensive Plan for the total downtown
area... Al t4 eugh the area was strong presently, .it was fragile in
that the city wanted to develop a diversity, and had to be careful
to ensure the total economic strength of the downtown survived so
that each element could survive, Interjecting into the .planning
process with temporary ordinances would interrupt the corrprehFen-
sine planning, and he agreed a .moratorium in the area was quest-
ionable, and would vote against the motion.
Councilmember Cobb believed in consistency and fairness, and that
most of the arguments in support of the previous moratorium were
valid. The City wanted breathing space, and he did not see how
one developer could be treated differently from another. For con-
sistency and his concern for whet went ',cn, downtown, he would vote
in favor of the motion. The traffic was mind -boggling, and park-
ing was a problem. He believed the outcome would be the same as
before, and if the '?lotion passed, he wanted full and adequate pro-
tection provided for people who tried to preserve and maintain
existing structures downtown'. especially the .older ones. They
were part of the City's heritage, and disincentives -should not be
given to small property ;Owners who tried todo something positive
and worthwhile. He would insist upon such protection before
voting on the final moratorium, should it return to the Council.
t/39,81?
Councilmember Renzel said regarding whether the present moratorium
satisfactorily dealt with the parking issue, nothing was yet built
under the moratorium, and although much was approved, no one. knew
how it would function once built. The exemption included a motel
which previously required 300 spaces, and was now only required to
provide '70 spaces, across the street from -I parking garage, not
yet built, that would net some 227 new spaces. Theoretically,: all
of the new parking spaces financed by one project were exempted
from the moratorium. She supported the moratorium. -
MOTION AS AMENDED FAILED, 4-4,. Klein, Levy, Sutorius,
Witherspoon voting °no", Woolley absent.
Councilmember Renzel suggested a. motion to specify that projects
which received ARB approval were exempted from the moratorium.
Mayor Klein said it would be earl iamentari ly incorrect.
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION RE PERSONNEL FROM 9:40 .rn.to 10:00 p.m.
ITEM #5, PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS AND
:4)
Mayor Klein apologized that the previous item took so long, but it
was important. He was concerned about the lateness of the hour,
and that Council tried not to make,irnportant decisions late at
night when fatigued. Item 5 would take a long time because many
people wanted to speak, but if the item was not completed before
12:30 a m. , he would move a continuance to the following Monday,
July 16. Since a full agenda was planned that evening he would
suggest the Council meeting start at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmember Sutorius confirmed the July 16, 1984 meeting would
be held despite the Olympic torch lighting ceremony.
Zoning Administrator Bob Brown said the staff report (CMR:355:4)
dated June 28, 1984 had a figure omitted from the "bare bones"
development cost for "Improvement to Ranger Residence" of $20,000,
which brought the total cost to $385,000.
Plannin'O Commissioner Jean McCown referred to the Arastra Citi-
zens' Advisory Committee report and the recommendations and
minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of May 9, 1984 and
said members of the Committee could answer questions about their
recommendations. The differences between the Committee and the
Planning CoirOiission were contained in the list attached to the
minutes. No Planning Commission motion for disposition of. the
Reimer house won majority support, and the Commission was unable
to make a recommendation, but it aired the various_ •issues
involved.
Barbara Merritt, Chairperson, Arastra Citizens Advisory Committee,
said the staff report guided the Council towards certain deci-
sions. She believed thee stable and hostel were set up to fail as
an idea, and the Committee members all questioned the high cost of
the improveaient estimates. No lessee could : take over the, _build-
ings unless certain improvements of no substantial financiafe cost
were made, The committee believed the hostel was an appropriate
use for the house and property becaluse it was 'inappropriate in a
park to use the house as a single family dwelling and demolition
would be a waste. Kith regard to the 77 acres, the Committee was
directed to create a park with low -intensity use and minimal cost
and it recommended the current use be retained for horsesand open
space.
Vice Mayor Levy thanked the Planning Commission, staff, and :the
,, Arastra committee for thei r`: work. The Council carefully read the
illuminating material, but he was confused about the costs The
$385,000 cost was the low end, with $1 million as the high end,
and he asked if they represented the figures Council would, have to
work with under the different plans.
Mr. Brown said the $385,000 was the "bare bones," minimum cost to
just open the park to the public, and did not include substantial
trail improvements nor many recommendations made by the Citizens
Advisory Committee, including improvements to the hostel, stable,
etc. The figure of approximately $1 million represented the total
park development as recommended by the Committee, and if Council
also considered the Planning Commission recommendation to create
an off -road bicycle path the length of Arastradero Road it would
cost about $1 million more. Two members of the Public Works staff
were present to discuss the specifics of their cost estimates.
Vice Mayor Levy asked what sum development work for the equestrian
and all-purpose trails would add to the bare bones figure of
$385,000 if essentially done on a volunteer basis.
Mr. Brown said completion of the entire trail plan would add a
proximately $350,000.
Vice Mayor Levy did not see much discussion of the concept of
voluntary or public groups doing much of the trail work, and asked
if it was a feasible concept. Staff was often reluctant to have a
large amount of volunteer work that might be difficult to manage.
Mr. Brown said the concept was feasible despite some concerns
about liability. The last staff report to the Planning Commis-
sion discussed the possibility together with the experience of the
Mid -Peninsula Open Space District with volunteer labor It was
found to be helpful, particularly in gaining a feeling of owner-
ship of the trails by the various user groups, although it did not
substantially reduce trail construction costs. The material costs
and those of trail consultants and provisions were substantial,
and although volunteer labor was helpful it was not the only
costs of trail construction.
Vice Mayor Levy asked who owned and was responsible for.
Arastraoero Road.
Mr. Brown said it was a public road. The majority of the road was
within Palo Alto's jurisdiction with portions within Los Altos
Hills, unincorporated Santa Clara and San Mdteo counties.
Vice Mayor Levy clarified that Palo Alto was entirely responsibe,,e
for maintaining or widening Arastradero Road and that. no Stag►
funds were available. He asked how much extra traffic could be
expected when it was opened.
Mr. Brown said there could be:.,as such as a five percent increase
in traffic. Staff anti�'cipated''much of the traffic would be eques-
trians riding to the property or pedestrians with_access from ad-
joining Los Altos Hills.
Vice Mayor Levy clarified that any change in Arastradero Road it-
self would have a five percent increase in traffic.
Mr. Brown said changes; would primarily increase the safety for
bicyclists rather than substantially increased traffic.
Vice Mayor Levy confirmed the desire to exclude "mountain bikes"
because they were too venturesome, went oft the trails and might
damage the rest of the park. He asked if there was a clear
definition of a "mountain bike."
Director of Parks and Open . Space Management Larry White said his
definition that -a "mountain bike"' was motorized ,:yet with general
disagreement.
Mr. Brown said ,*mountain .bikes" were discussed at the last meeting
of the PlaningCormission and were considered to be all -terrain
bicycles with a sturdy frame and shock absorbers. They were
intended for Of -road use, and had large knobby: tires, etc , but
were strictly pedal -powered.
4.:7 8 7
7/09/84
Vice Mayor Levy clarified that to open the park and upgrade the,.
trails would cost between $500,000 to $700,000.
Mr. Brown said Council could open the park during the dry season
to the public, with a parking lot and basic ranger supervision at
a cost of approximately $400,000, not including any improvements
for the hostel.
Councilmember Bechtel .asked about staff's figures for the minimum
cost to open the park. She compared a minimally developed low -
intensity park use with the open space properties with which sh
was familiar, and said the Open Space District started with park-
ing lots for two or three cars, no advertising and minimal inten-
sity, As facilities were gradually added, they were able to ex-
pand. The Montebello Open Space project cost $100,000 for the
parking lot, trails, and fence, and she did not understand where
staff got the figure of $385,000 because the parking lot alone was
estimated at $230;000.
Mr. Brown said staff believed =it was necessary to have a fully
operating parking lot when the park opened, as was the case when
the Montebello Open. Space preserve was opened to the public. That
parking lot was under discussion at the Planning Commission and
Council for approximately two years. The parking lot in the area
designated by the Citizens Advisory Committee and endorsed by
staff had a number of problems --substantial drainage work would be
necessary since the area was swampy. A creek crossing was also
involved and a bridge would be; necessary. Due to poor visibility
on Arastradero Road, acceleration and deceleration lanes along the
sides of the roadwere necessary and that would require removal of
many eucalyptus trees. Those three factors, when added to the
parking lot construction, brought the figure up to $230,000.
There were problems with the site and all others the committee
reviewed.
Assistant Director of Public Works George Bagdon said the cost of
the parking lot itself was only a small portion of the total cost.
The major cost was widening Arastradero Road to include the accel-
eration/deceleration lanes and for the drainage and removal of
trees. Construction of the actual lot would cost approximately
$30,000 to $35,000.
Councilmember Bechtel said the breakdown was not given in any of
the staff reports. She was concerned about overbuilding to obtain
the ultimate park when they wanted a low -intensity park.
Mr. Bagdon said the parking lot world be grave's with 35 spaces.
City Manager William Zaner said the Committee and Councilmembers
shared staff's concerns about costs. Staff made a careful analy-
sis to ensure they were not giving a guestimate, .and spent much.
time with the Engineering Department refining the costs. The
'estimates were available, with the detail work. Staff was con-
vinced their facts and figures were accurate and were prepared to
defend they:. The detail could be provided if. desired
Mr. Bagdon clarified that they were not talking about development
of even schematic plans. They only had concepts, and were conser-
vative with the figures. He admitted the cost might be reduced as
they developed more finite plans.
Councilmember Cobb asked whether the parking lot could be relo-
cated to avoid the enormous road improvements.
Mr. Brown said two locations, both off Arastradero Road, were con-
sidered. Neither the Committee nor staff *anted to locate:, the
parking lot further into the park ►here it, might disrupt other
activities. The proposed location was in the southeastern corner,
the other at'the„ hairpin turn on Arastradero Road, in the center
of the park, which was level and involved substantial drainage
a. s +.i a� w had s p !fin i
problems _ f t low and a �;.ri ng ,�bo,.: ; t . Ti;e visibility
on Ar. stradero Road was much poorer although the parking lot would
-be-more visible and would not offer as pleasing an entry into the
park. A possible parking lot location was off John Narthens Lane
near the stable, but they did not want to bring so much -traffic
along the Lane.
Councilmember Cobb said various community members believed volun-
teer help could substantially reduce costs. • It was unclear from
the reports what the differences were between what the citizens
and staff believed ,.ould be accomplished through volunteer work,
particularly with regard to cost. Approximately $400,000 was
quoted as the minimum cost to open the park to the public. He
asked if the date was still set in the early 1990s, and what in-
terim uses the park could have.
Mr Brown believed if a funding source was available, the park
could open in 1986. Plans could be created within the coming
year, returned to the Commission and Council as part of a site and
design review, parking ordinances approved and construction com-
menced during 1985-86.
Councilmember Cobb asked if volunteer work might be used to bring
the $385,000 down to the point where it had the effect of being
additional money.
Mr. Brown said it was possible to use volunteer help to reduce the
costs somewhat. The Citizens Advisory Committee paid for a trail
consultant to discuss the location of trails and construction
techniques who was familiar with foothill trail construction. He
said volunteer help would be beneficial in removal of poison oak
or other vegetation but not for routing trails or use of machinery
where necessary. A substantial part of the cost of the equestrian
trails was for material such as gravel, and erosion and drainage
facilities which would probably have to be designed and closely
supervised in the field by thee Public Works staff. The majority
of the costs could not be reduced but some of the labor could.
Councilmember Cobb asked for a ball park percentage figure by
which the $:385,000 could be reduced by volunteer work.
Mayor Klein did not see much work in the list that could be done
by volunteers since two-thirds of the cost was the parking lot.
Mr. Bagdon said work- such as trail clearing could be done by
volunteer labor, but he preferred that culvert building, etc. be
contracted. He did not believe it made sense to split costs up
from the administration standpoint, and off the top of his head
believed the maximum reduction would be 10 percent.
Mr Brown said the figures did not include any trail construction
costs. The idea was -td open the park and allow the use of.exist-
ing roads and trails during the dry season only. :No winter use of
the trails would be allowed because of erosion, and the $300000.-
$358,000 figure' was the ultimate cost ofs providing. trails: after
the park was' open, ewhich construction wo',ld commence. as money
became available. Volunteer labor codid assist in building those
trails,'bute..the initial cost of $385,000 did not include any trail
constrUction.-
Councilmember Renzel asked why staff and the •Planning Commission
rejected bicycle parking near the barn She asked why
the Arastra
Citizens Advisory Committee's suggestion tf: put some spaces rear:
the barn was rejected.
Mr. Brown believed the-rIcommendaton was five spaces at the barn
area
Mayor Klein declared the public hearing open.
Barbara Wein, Executive Director of American Youth Hostels (AYH),
Golden Gate Cooncil , 680 Beach Street San Francisco, said the AYH
was part of an international federation with over 300 hostels in
the United States and 5,000 hostels worldwide. The Golden Gate
Council, a 25 -year old nonprofit organization, was interested in
operating a hostel on the Arastra lands to reciprocate hospitality
abroad: The AYH offered opportunities for travel and outdoor
education and recreation through simple safe low-cost overnight
hostel accommodations supervised by -resident managers for coopera-
tive living and interaction. the house on the Arastra parklands -
ideally met the 10 -year plans of; the AYH, and was assessed `by an
architect to .require minimal renovations. The operation was via-
ble and could start almost immediately. Being on or near a net-
work of bicycling `trails' made it ideal for use by !oral residents
net-
work Y I 1 1 1 V 1 M 1 1 ..1 f l 1 / use L by cal V / residents
J l Y fi I I V J
for hiking and cycling together with foreign and American tour-
ists. No smoking, alcohol, or illegal drugs were allowed and
there was a curfew and daily chores to help .,maintain the hostel.
Her recent letter to the Council explained that local residents'
fears about increased traffic were unnecessary. Another rural
hostel with 50 beds had an average of four cars during the week
and 10 to 12 on the weekend, and the proposed hostel would have 30
beds. The building was ideal for community use, the Arastra Citi-
zens Committee unanimously favored the hostel, and staff concluded
that of all the community uses proposed, the hostel would have the
least impact on the parklands and neighbors. The City of Palo
Alto would be a part of an international network of fellowship,
and local residents would have a beautiful place for an overnight
experience, daytime meeting or conference. The facility was on
One level and could easily be made wheelchair -accessible. New
programs of the Golden Gate Council would add to the cultural; ed-
ucational and recreational opportunities. She read from a letter
from a handicapped seniors group who recently had a trip to the
Pialeon Point Lighthouse hostel, where they were given care and at-
tention by a friendly staff. Such trips offered a social service,
staff was competent and the facilities were clean and well
stocked. Informal talks on history and ecology were appreciated'
and staff coped with emergencies. She asked the Council to sup-
port the hostel.
Councilmember Fletcher asked if the 50 -bed hostel had 12 cars on a
weekend
Ms. Wein said that was an average number when the hostel was full.
Counci lmember Fletcher asked if 8 to 10 spaces would be enough.
Ms. Wein believed it would although it might prove insufficient
for a day meeting in the facility with many people using indi-
vidual cars. It would meet the hostel overnight use as some would
arrive on foot, some by public. transport, and many by bicycle.
Bill Smith, 1873 Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto, used the Arastra prop-
erty as a horseback rider through the Los Altos Hills Horsemen's
Association, and saw no reason to spend $400,000 to open the 4rk..
1t was long in operation when he joined in 1966 without s ending
that sum. The horse riding community developed many trails during
an earlier period, which were kept open by volunteer efforts.
From riding extensively, he knew they were not fancy, all weather
,trails, but.. they tried to go around Wet spots, otherwise they did
not use the trail and _ he preferred : to keep it that way. Trails
should not be carved, as they did more ecological damage than was
done in all previous years. He proposed getting together with
staff and walking the trails to see what could be done on a volun-
tary basis to make them useful.' They would not haul in blue rock
to make an all weather trail because most of the trails in place
were good, and would be until the rains came. Hikers and eques-
trians .did not need fancy trails although bikes and four-wheel
drives from Foothills Park were, another .patter. .Basic trails from
the entrance to the barn and ---back on, foot or horse were there and.
only needed, brushing out.
Ar.tern s Gineton, 28014 Hatoma Road, Los Altos Hi 11 s, represented
the Santa Clara County Intergover nmeniel Council (IGC) irai l s and
Pathways Committee and supported the recommendations of the
Arastra Citizens Advisory Committee. She asked Council to retain
the large house as a hostel to complement the excellent trails
system and low -intensity park use. It was the first house they
found in 10 years that specifically met their needs in terms of
size and location on publicly owned land and it was in excellent
condition. As a one -level house with access to the outdoors, it
was suited for the handicapped and elderly, near Palo Alto, and
easily accessible by bus and bikes, and would meet the needs of
local residents and travelers to meet others in supervised, inex-
pensive _overnight accommodations. The house would provide a rest
stop, public telephones, educational and environmental education,
etc. in supervised areas. Safeguards and concerns for the road,
and impacts on neighbors could be taken into consideration in the
contracts. The IGC would not support widening the road, as recom-
mended in the staff report, and if the Fire Department considered
it sufficient, it should meet the hostel's requirements with
little improvement. The projected daytime use was mainly for Palo
Altans, but the hostel itself would benefit the community. The
IGC supported the trails and pathways recommendations of the
Arastra Committee as modified by the Planning Commission and
presented for Council approval. They supported the high priority
given in the staff report to an Arastradero Road bicycle path, and
suggested it be incorporated into the Article 3 funding as a joint
project for Palo Alto, Los Altos Hills and Santa Clara County.
She urged the house or; John Marthens Lane be leased for hostel
use, and suggested possible funding for the park by a park bond
issue. She read into the record a statement from Mr. Harding,
President of the Western Wheelers Bicycle Club which endorsed the
plan to convert a house on the Arastra lands to a Youth Hostel.
It would provide a needed service to touring cyclists who wanted
to visit Palo Alto and Stanford and would complement existing hos-
tels on the coast. The location was a good combination of scenic
setting and convenience to the urban area, and was near Alpine
Road a well used bicycle route. The Club was a Palo Alto based
organization of over 500 members interested in all forms of
cycling.
Bob Moss 4010 Orme, endorsed recommendations 1 through 5 7
through 9a, 10 and 11 on page 12 of CMR:355:4, dated June 28,
1984. He opposed the .use of the house as a youth hostel because
he believed it would be too intense for the area. The Council's
adapted policy was that when City --property was used for other than
a City :purpose- there should be a fair return. With an estimated
value of $500,000, .a fair return of 10 percent would-be $50,000
annually in rent or kind, which was not viable for the -hostel on
top of the capital improvements required. He urged that Council
direct staff and Planning Commission to study park dedication for
the 77 -acre property, and not sell it off or leave it in limbo.e A
park was an appropriate use and since everyone favored keeping it
as open space, it was irregular to not dedicate it for parkland.
Should the house be undedicated aft - t' P4bliee vote and sold, the
proceeds might be used to accelerat. completion of the park
Should the electorate :decade to not undedicate the house and the
adjacent one acre, it could be used . for a -park ranger and a nature
center. The Arastra Citizens Committee and public_ :;aid several
times that the .house would be an ideal location for Palo Altans to
a• meet as public facility, and he believed it a poorpoore place to
Meet. . The flatlands' would be better---traf fie was lower and more
easily reached > also by children on- bicycle A Meeting _place in
the foothills was not,a good. idea and did not add anything to -the--
community,.
M,arjor-ie ,Poke, ,10 Arastradera Road . did not want the traffic ::on
John -Marthens Lane to increase appreciably,.- _. - There_. were._ eight
houses an the road, and_, al though she did net have access to the
lane, her property abutted on i.t, and she could hear the traffic:
It -would be expensive-_ to widen the` lane, and . would have
considerable impact. She favored improvement for bicycle traffic
on Arastradero Road since it had constantly increased over the
past 10 years. She regretted it was unrealistic to close it to
four-wheel traffic, and her dream of an off -road bicycle trail
would be worth considerable effort on the part of all jurisdic-
tions involved. The Arastra property was used and would have
increased use in spite of the comment that it would not be in use
until 1990. Palo Alto was responsible for preventing environ-
mental damage and making sure it was safe and protected.
Robert Hill, 2950 Alexis Drive, lived for 30e years in Palo Alto,
the last IS of which was close to the Arastra( property. Palo Alto
was a well planned city because -of the harassment the Council bore
at Council meetings. He -Was a neighbor who encouraged building
the park as rapidly as possible and only asked that bicycles not
share paths with people and horses. He volunteered to help pay to
build the'park,
Ernest Arbuckle, 12 Arastradero Road, said the only access .to his
home was via John Marthens Lane. When building his home there 29
years ago he ran the r'oadgrader to build the lane, and maintained
the read when the -County would not. The lane was named after the
owner of the house being considered for a hostel, and was totally
unsuited for additional traffic. When Palo Alto put the stable
in, traffic increased, and five of the six residents whose only
access was through Marthens Lane were present that evening, It
was a narrow, steep read through a canyon with a sharp blind
curve and overhanging trees. Cars overturned on the curve and
the expense of widening it to meet County regulations was not men-
tioned. He had it widened somewhat, and Council had a letter
citing the regulations and questioning the legal basis on which
the City could use the lane for its purpose. The figures did not
indicate what would be done to the 1,700 feet of. Marthens Lane.
Expensive work to cut down a number of trees, dig out one side bf
the road and fill in the other would be necessary, -and it would
desecrate the environment, which Council was against. By-negotia-
S ing with the County, the residents were able to save most of the
trees. The traffic would increase five -fold with a hostel and a
large stable at the top especially if the hostel accommodated
meetings. For safety reasons, the road could no longer .be used
for access to residents' homes. The -Council should familiarize
itself with the letter outlining the problems and the County regu-
lations regarding the width of the road, and consider the cost to
the City of a major alteration to the lane, which.would destroy
its beauty* The residents were= all worried it would no lonsg r be
a safe entrance to their homes. Hostels were great, but the loca-
tion was not right. Only automobile traffic: or a young person on
a 10 -speed could reach it, and the lower road would have to be
widened and included in the cost estimates
Sylvia Semen, 3380: Middlefield Road, Executive Director of the
Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC), said her Board of Directors
supported recommendation 13a on page 13 of the staff report of
June 28, 1984 that the 77 acres not be dedicated as public park-
land, but that staff be directed to study using all or 0 portion
of the parcel for housing development with the proceeds earmarked
for Arastra Park development and/or off site development of low or
moderate income housing. Moneys from the sale of the site for 51
units of housing could be well -utilized for low to moderate income.
housing on the flatlands, and if Cot/hell did not want to sell it,
she urged the site not be dedicated.
Jobst Brandt, 351 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto was concerned about
exclusion of mountain bikes from the park. Mountain bikes could
not be easily defined. He toured the area with th,e Citizens
Advisory Committee and the trail advisor cycling from the barn at
the top of the hi ll , across the meadows, the . valley and up to the
vista point , then . cycling back straight down the hill. He was
afraid his bike would beexcluded as it could go almost anywhere a
mountain bike could. There was a tremendous fear of the bikes
but they should -first find out if they caused a problem before a
b k e veto f..n ♦ J_ Mountain
bikes
}.
�iirir.�t uri all -terrain bicycles was made. i°ii.iliE�ii,dtti ulice5 .►1dU
an il l ruche, but were nut d problem.. He did not want a $i million
bike path along Arastradero Road although it would be nice to have
the bikes off the road. People driving by strongly suggested he
get off the road and -use a little trail put down 10 years earlier
that was never mended. Palo Alto had many expensive bike paths
that he did not use because they were not smooth and were incon-
venient. The Baylands trail crossed driveways with a one inch
drop Off and crossed dangerous places with trucks, and he pre-
ferred cycling on Frontage Road. Cyclists liked good straight
roads, not little bumpy trails. Arastradero Road -was not as dan-
gerous as some believed. The dangerous part was between 280 and
Gunn High School because of the blind curves, no shoulder, and
fast cars. He commuted over Arastradero Road regularly, and found
it pleasant. The visibility was good enough to give cyclists a
fair shake, and he would like larger shoulders on the road.
Bob Davis, 22 Arastradero Road, lived on John Marthens Lane. He
bought the property 20 years ago and built his home 12 years ago.
The Lane was a dirt road, and he and his neighbor paved it of
their own accord. There was no strong base to support traffic, so
horse trailers and traffic caused potholes, The City did not fix
them, so he and his neighbor did. He favored hostels and a park,
but increased traffic would cause a hazard and the road would not
stand it. It was a steep, gravelled- hill, and ,would cut bicycle
tires. The barn increased use of the' road four or five times, and
he asked how staff would support the base rot.k and fix the road.
He submitted a letter from his neighbor's, George and Laverne
DiGino, 16 Aradstradero Road, which was on file in the City
Clerk's office. .
John Mock, 736 Baron Avenue, was associated for 12 years with the
D.C. Power Laboratory directly across from the Arastra property
and a block away from many of the trails. The Planning Commission
recommended that the 77 acres not be d-..'icated to parkland, but
moved to remove that land from part of the Arastra Citizens Advis-
ory Committee and part of the study. He understood that meant the
Planning Commission had insufficient information to make a good
decision on the property. He believed the 77 acres should be
reserved, and agreed with the. Corr:niiiee"s recommendation to dedi-
cate the land as parkland to keep an open space corridor and main-
tain a country atmosphere for drivers on Arastradero Road. He
walked the.. area and found the trails constructed by previous
equestrians adequate for an open space area. The .entire trails
system did not need to be done immediately, as only parts required
some work to make them =,sable during the wet season, particularly
if horses were restricted, and to connect them, mostly in the
parking lot area. Hikers would not have much impact, especially
if sloping areas were appropriately treated and he asked Council
to not close pedestrian access to Foot►hi l lls Park . before it became
a problem. He walked from one area to the' other although barriers
were needed to prevent horses and vehicles entering the park.
There was much opposition to the hostel during the Planning Com-
mission meeting, and the nongravel parts of the parking lot should
not be used during the. rainy season. If any land was sold
it should be the large house, as it was the least park -like of all
the facilities and most suitable for undedication. The house was
assessed at $445,000. to $500,000 which would cover the opening
budget of $385,000 and leave reserves for contingencies the park
was already used and people parked on the sharp curve, which was
dangerous. The space had to be protected not just closed off.
He hoped the park would be', opened boon and without much expense.
t i z Sprenkle, 13701 Paseo Del Roble, Los Altos Hills, owned resi-
dential property adjacent to the Paseo Del Roble easement which
was to be used as a publ tc access to the-Arastra property. She
asked Council to eliminate the recommendation contained . in the
Planning Commission: report on the Arastra Park Plan dated March
30, 1904, for a connection from the Arastra property to the trail
easement on Paseo Del Ruble. Throughout the Planning Commi sivu $
report, reference was rnade to a connection to the trail easement
on Paseo Del Roble which would create a secondary access to the
park and be totally unrestricted access through a sub rban neigh-
borhood. The Planning Commission report stated that trails were
kept away from adjoining properties by at least 300 feet to mini-
mize increased noise lerels from increased human activity. It
also stated that the trail connection to the Paseo Del Roble ease-
ment would have a slight noise impact on that. property because all
the homes were located only 22 and one-half feet from the public
access easement to the Arastra Park. The. gate to link the ease-
ment to the Arastra trail connection was only 155 -feet from her
home, and because of the close proximity.of the public park access
to her.. home, she believed the reference to a slight noise impact
was grossly understated. Additionally the trail and access proxi-
mity appeared to be in direct conflict with Palo Alto's concern
for minimizing impacts on adjoining - property. Page 26 of the
Planning Commission report considered the environmental impacts of
a possible -future trail connection from Alexis Drive to the
Arastra Park, and in addition to other concerns, it mentioned the
parking and noise impacts that would affect future residences at
the end of Alexis. The report continued to state` that reMovai of
the trail connection from the plan ;would eliminate the potential
impacts, aid also in the case of Alexis Drive, she believed the
removal of ail the trail connections from the plan would similarly
eliminate those potential impacts. As residents of Santa Clara
County and frequent users of; many of the parks and trails they
had no intention of disrupting extensive trail system existing in
the area. Besides having a negative impact on their home and
neighborhood, they believed the park access from their street was
unnecessary to the continuity of the county trail system,_
According to the report, there was already a perimeter equestrian
trail, and the Arastra trail paralleled Arastradero Road and pro-
vided an offroad trail connection to the Los Altos Hills and
Portola Valley equestrian trail systems Further the report
stated on page 8, that the trail system on the Arastra property
could function without the connection to the Paseo Del Roble ease-
ment, but inaccurately stated that the Paseo Del Roble easement
would allow equestrians from Los Altos Hills to have access to the
Arastra Park without having to ride along Page Mill Road. One
could not reach Paseo Del Roble from Los Altos Hills without using
Page Mill Road. Further, the trail connection on the Palo Alto
side of the easement included a marshy creek area Which was formed
by the winter rain runoff from the Palo Alto Country Club, and the
report stated the trail should avoid marshy areas. Regarding
security, since they resided in Los Altos Hills and the park
ranger would be employed by :the C i t.y\ of Palo\ Alto patrolling 500
acres, she foresaw awkward jurisdictional problems regarding law
enforcement of any problems related to the park and access via Loft
Altos Hills. Her neighborhood recognized the potential for serl -
out problems to materialize ..i f a secondary access was placed on
Paseo Del Roble. Of the 52 families living in the immediate area
of the access on Paseo Del Roble, 48 signed a petition opposing
its use. They asked that the trail connection- to the trail ease-
ment on .Paseo Del Roble which would create a secondary access to the Arastra. Park be -eliminated.
Robert. Coppock, 2104 Lexington Avenue, San Mateo, spoke as the
President of the Golden Gate Council of the . American Youth
Hostels, and realized the decision of the City. Council was compli-
cated and difficult. Five hostels were presently being operated
in the , Say Area in conjunction with the Golden Gate National
Recreation Area, Coast Guard, and the State of. California all of
whom were pleased with the operations. It was found that a .chain
of hostels supported themselves because each .encouraged people to
go to the other.. Regarding vol unteers . he worked in San Mateo -:
County and San McDonald Park , which had a Horsemen's Association
build trails from scratch using the weekend prisoners for help.
Building trails was so mechanized a lot of the work could not be
4 7'9 4
7/09/84
done by hand, and a large part of trail building could be done
quicker and more effectively mechanically than by using volun-
teers. In Proposition 18, money was set aside for volunteers.
The State of California provided the materials and_the Youth
Hostel Association provided the volunteers, and much work was done
and state dollars were stretched further. If the Council decided
the hostel would be an appropriate use of the house and property,
he assured that Palo Alto would receive a hostel with which it
could be proud and one which could be -provided at a minimal
expense because of the reliance on volunteers. If C:ouocil decided
the hostel use was incompatible with the Arastra property, there
were people .who wanted a hostel somewhere in Palo Alto, and he
hoped a viable spot could be found.
Kay _Reimer, 6 Arastradero Road, said her property fronted an
Marthens Lane, and she seconded the comments of Messrs. Arbuckle
and Davis. Several times they attempted to state their case as to
the inadequacy of John Marthens Lane to serve as anything but a
rural road access to a limited number of private residents. Since
the lower 1,700 feet of the Lane was within Santa Clara County --
not the City of Palo Alto, they identified specific County stan-
dards which applied and required significant widening and addi-
tional right-of-way provisions for access to the commercial
operations of a hostel or horse boarding facility. Mr. Ted
Carl strum was engaged to research the ownership and land use
issues which were in question, and all of that information was
submitted to the Council because it was believed that the original
committee report and subsequent staff analysis failed to properly
focus on the problems of John Marthens Lane as an access to future
commercial uses. She did not attempt to dictate to the Council
what it should do on its own land, and would not comment on the
hostel since she was sentimentally attached to the house, but she
was opposed to an access route using John Marthens Lane because
past usage, state of the current improvements and status of
easements and county'. road standards all would be violated if the
traffic load generated by the standard commercial utilization of
the house and the barn on the property was directed towards John
Marthens. She lived in the area for 21 years and walked around
the entire area, and could not sae any difference between the
topography of the land of the proposed parking lot and the
topography of the land at the curve. She requested that any
expanded commercial activities on the Arastra property be
conditioned on providing separate access to Arastradero Road
within the limits of Pale Alto.
Rosemary Young, 26 Arastradero Road, agreed .with the Council view
as she first read it in the Arastra Park report "...to `create a
low intensity and minimal cost park with emphasis on natural and
open space amenities" and believed the area was ideal for the
individual hiker and the small groups to enjoy. To lease the
house for a hostel and the barn for a commercial horse operation
would totally; ruin .the quiet in the foothills. A profitable
hostel would require 40 beds' and a profitable horse barn would
require at least 80 horses. The combination of traffic in direct
users and support people would be overwhelming for the area. She
asked that the quiet open space be left for everyone to enjoy and
than the hostel and horses be put where they would also be
appropriate.
Larry Faber, 3127 David Avenue, said the Citizens Committee Report
requested the formation of a second committee to try and find -a
trail` up around the Palo Alto Park to connect the Arastra property
with the Los Trancos Open Space which would _.rate an open trail
system from the parking lot all the way to the ocean. He believed
it would be a_-. mistake to destroy the .barn if a leasing agreement
could not be worked out and it lowed like a set up to get rid of
the barn. Of the Committee's three recommendations he preferred
the lease idea. If : that was impossible, it should be run with
contract personnel with salaries covered by the fees from the
horses. Council. received a request from Snyder Davis to talk
about getting something going. They talked about a large, much
needed facility in the area, and he suggested that Council not
reject the proposal but allow them to present a detailed proposal
and see if it could be worked out. The proposal should not be
rejected out -of -hand but followed through to make sure a good
deal was not passed up. He supported Mr. Smith's comments about
using volunteer help, and wanted to discuss with staff how the
volunteers could be of assistance. He personally put in culverts
in Wunderlich and Huddart Parks and built water bars and water
di verters The Trail Information and Volunteer Center on Park
Avenue gathered volunteers work for trail maintenance and building,
and could supply more expertise on trails maintenance and con--
struction than there was in the whole City of Palo Alto. Trails
did not have to . be all weather nor 10 feet wide --40 inches was
plenty for both hikers and equestrians. There should be no prob-
lem to closing them in winter.
Sandra Page, 1529E Arastradero, resided in the house in question.
It was a wildlife refuge for all types of animals. She lived for
four months in youth hostels in Europe, _and people smoke& drank;
arrived during the night and banged on the doors all night long
for admission. She was convinced the house was not suitable for a
hostel. It would be wonderful to turn it into an interpretive
center for hikers, but it was impossible to reach by bicycle. She
had,to take hers down -the hill in her car to' ride it. A black top
path would be necessary for bikes. Mountain bikes went all over
the place. - and would harm the wildlife. The amount of land for
deer was restricted and herds were dwindling and sickening with
parasites because people were moving in. The -area was wonderful,
and people should be allowed to hike there and enjoy nature, but
it was a fire hazard. She wanted to protect the animals, and said
there was little unspoiled land left in the Bay Area.
Jim Opfer, 3115 Bandera ?rive, said he walked much of the land
himself and noticed the cigarette butts on the hill and the burnt
grass along Alexis Drive. If the usage of the land were
increased, the City could not provide the necessary fire protec-
tion, and he had not heard that issue addressed. He also believed
that Palo Alto did not serve the area well for police protection„
Unless there was a significant policy change, the area. would -not
be policed better. The land appeared to be targetted for use by
many people outside Palo Alto-, and Council should worke towards
self --funding to protect the natural -beauty. The main value of the
building and stable was -the location ' They should be eliminated
to bring the area back to its natural state to be enjoyed by
people from the City.
Robert Stutz, 25310 Elena Road, Los Altos Hills, said the Paseo
Del Roble easearent was thoroughly reviewed by the Los Altos Hills
Pathway Committee, the Planning Commission and the Council. Their
recommendation and decision was to keep the . path open as the
safest and most logical entrance from Los Altos -Hill's- to the park --
lands. Los Altos Hills completely endorsed the idea of the park.
Mayor Klein declared the public hearing closed. Due to a .heavy
agenda and .staff vacations, he, suggested the item be continuedfor
two weeks.
MOTION Mayer Klein moved, -seconded by Levy, to continue Item 5
to July 23, with meeting .to connence at 5:Otll pro,
Countilmember Bechtel . obtainedconfirmation that the heavy July 23
agenda warranted commencing at 6:00: p.m.
Council member Sutorius asked staff to follow up on :traffic projec-
tions, particularly for John Marthens Lane, to evaluate the poten-
tial that a category 3 classification - for the lane would be
required by the County if a hostel was operated, and for election
requirements particularly with regard to the tieing element.
4 7 9 5..
7/09/84
Ms. Lee said she would confer with the City Clerk on when an elec-
tion wni.,ld have to he called to consolidate 'it with the -Statewide
and County elections to be held in November. If a November, 1984
election was required, an ordinance would have to be before the
Council by August 6, 1984 showing the parameters of their .desired
action.
Mayor Klein pointed out that a hearing had to he scheduled for the
Downtown Park North item.
Counci'member WitheFrspoon left the meeting ^11:50 p.m.
Councilmember Bechtel asked staff to prov-ide'a more detailed cost
breakdown for the next meeting, and more information for an alter-
nate route to the barn aree from the big bend. She was particu-
larly concerned becau`o people had a tendency to go to the highest
point. If they had to park on Arastradero Road they would use
John Marthens Lane, which would impact it. The Open Space Dis-
trict had problems in similar access situations, and people did
not like to walk as far as they should.
Vice Mayor Levy was unclear about the timetable He asked -the
City Attorney if it was too' late to include the item in the
November election.
Ms. Lee said it would not be possible unless the Council was will-
ing to call several special meetings --one that week, and a second
during the week of Au=,lust 6 --and to direct her to immediately pre-
pare a resolution establishing a hearing for protests concerning
the portion of the park the Council wanted to remove from park
purposes.
NOTION PASSED unanimously, Witherspoon, Woolley absent.
ITEM #6, REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBER REVEL RE ACA 75 SHER
' NUMEN 1 Eb 1 CT
Councilmember Renzel was concerned about the movement in
Sacramento to export more Northern California water south. There
was a serious concern about the deletorious effects it would have
on the San Francisco Bay and the large mount of wil►11 ife it sup --
ported as well as on the quality of the drinking water.
Assemblyman Sher proposed a constitutional amendment to protect
the fresh water sources at their origins before any exports were
permitted,
NOTION: Councilmember !teazel moved, seconded by Sutorius, that
staff prepare a formal resolution supporting ACA 75 and return it
to the Council for adoption and for use throughoutthe legiststive
process.
Councilmember Renzel said her motion was somewhat consistent with
the Council's previous action opposing the plan proposed because
it offered no protections.
-NOTION PASSED unanimously, Witherspoon, Woolley absent.
ADJOURNMENT
Council adjourned at 11:56 p.m.
ATTEST:
aettlebie
APPROVED:
4 7 9` 7
7/09/84
1