Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-08-16 City Council Summary Minutes5 CITY COUI1aL MINUTES Regular Meeting Monday, August 13, 1984 ITEM PAGE Oral Communications 4 9 0 9 4 9 0 9 Item #1, Resolution of Appreciation to Sirge. M. 4 9 1 0 Clark Item #2, Resolution of Appreciation to James 1. 4 9 1 0 Stone Item #3, Resolution of Appreciation to Robert A. 4 9 1 0 Kerrie Consent Calendar 4 9 1 1 Referral 4 9 1 1 Action 4 9 1 1 Item #4, Agreement with Palo Alto Unified School 4 9 1 1 District for Use of Facilities for Sports Programs Item #5, Cable Legislation o Letter to 4 9 1 1 Congressional Representatives re HR 4103 Item #6. Memoranda of Understanding: Palo Alto 4 9 1 1 Peace Officers Association and local 1319, International Association of Fire Fighters Item 17, Planning Commission. Recommendation re 4 9 1 1 Application of None G. J. Binford -for Site and Design Review for Property Located at 3885 Page Mill Road Approval of Minutes of July "2, 1984 Item #8, Professional Development Sabbatical - 4 9 1 2 Lieutenant Parr Roskowski Item #9, Evergreen. Park Neighborhood Traffic Study - Evaluation of a Six Month Trial Traffic Control Plan Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions Item 110, Request of Vice Mayor Levy and Counci lr ember Woolley re Decorative Banners Item 111, Request of Counci lmerrrber Fletcher re Public Participation" _ in, Architectural Review Board: Reviews 4 9 1 2 4 9 1 4 4' 9 1 4 .. 4 9 1`5 ITEM! PAGE Yt'Y!� 1I Item #12, Request of Vice Mayor Levy, Councilmembers Sutorius, and Woolley re Names on the Arastra Property 4 9 2 0 Item #13, PUBLIC HEARING: Weed Abatement Charges 4 9 2 0 Item #14, PUBLIC HEARING: Planning Commission Recommendation re Zoning Ordinance Amendments to restrict the size of office developments to 5,000 square feet in the CS and GM Zones Item #15, PUBLIC HEARING: Planning Commission Recommendation re Appeal of Melinda Kay Lescher and Stanley G. Parry from Decision of the Zoning Administrator for property located at 1157 Hamilton Avenue Item #16, Request of Councilmember Fletcher and Mayor Klein re Moratoria and Zoning Change Exemptions Item #17, Request of C.ouncilrnember Bechtel and Mayor Klein re Restore Funds Affecting the State's Regulatory Programs for Hazardous Waste Item #1P, Request of Vice Mayor Levy re Measurement of Noise Levels Item #19, Request of Councilmernber Fletcher re Study of Route 101 Mass Transit Alternatives Adjournment: 10:35 pAm. 4 9 2 1 4 9 2 7 4 9 2 7 4 9 2 9 4 9 2 9 4 9 2 9 4 9 3 0 1 1 Regular Meeti ng Monday, August 13, 1984 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this day i n the Council Chambers at City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, at 7: 50 50 p.m. 1 PRESENT: Cobb, .Fletcher, Klei n, Levy, Renzel, Sutorius, Witherspoon, Woolley ABSENT: Bechtel Mayor Klein said a Closed Session re Litigation, held at 7:00 p.m. i n the Personnel Conference Room, took longer than planned. Mayor Klein welcomed Connie Balch, niece of Palo Alto City Clerk Ann Tanner, and her friend Jeremy Stephenson. Mayor Kl ei n said Palo Alto was seeki ng a way to honor the two Palo Alto High School graduates who won gold medals for wrestli ng in the XXIII Olympics, David and Mark Schultz. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Don Wilkins, 2142 Bel lview Drive, said Lot F, bounded by Florence, Waverley, Lytton, and University, served his hair- dressing salon for 13 years, and his salon had been in the vicinity for 15 years prior to that. Parks ng was .important to his business, and restricting parking at Parking Lot F night ruin his business. He had three years left on his lease at $1,700 per month and a $4,000 monthly payroll. Di rector of Pl anni ng and Community Env rorment Ken Schreiber had i nfonned him that some parking spaces would be dedicated to his cus- tomers, and he emphasized the need for parking spaces in that area. Although tucked away, the lot was busy, and Lot S would not better serve him because of the lunch program at the Senior Center. Parking on Waverley was almost non-existent, and a meter maid told him that people arranged car swappi ng and fine paying pools, which practice should be deterred. He believed suer practices might render the data used by the Council to establish parki ng incorrect. Mayor Klein noted that the applicant on Item 15, Public Hearing re Planning Commission recommendation for a modified variance of a second story building addition to 1157 Hamilton Avenue, agreed with the neighborhood's request for a continuance, and a motion might be made to conti nue the item for one week. Public testimony for Item 9, Evergreen Park Neighborhood, was concluded, and unless a motion to the contrary was made, the three cards received from the public would not be honored. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 2, 1984 Councilmember Witherspoon made the follows n9 correction: Page 4755, paragraph 1, line 20, change "rigged" to 'ringed" . NOTION: Counc1lmeeber Cobb moved, seconded by Witherspoon, approval of the minutes, as corrected. NOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. ITEM ai, RESOLUTION OF APPKtc IAtLON TO BIRGE M. CLARK (COU 5-9-4) MOTION: Councilmember Wool'iey moved, seconded by Klein, to adopt the resolution honoring Birge M. Clark; RESOLUTION 6294 entitled 'RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF IiiE CIIT OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO BIRGE M. CLARK FOR OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD' Councilmember Woolley said Birge Clark served on the Historic Resources Board (HRB) from June 1, 1980 to June 1, 1984, gave un- selfishly of his time, talents, and knowledge of historic preser- vation to assist in the protection, enhancement, perpetuation, and use of buildings in neighborhoods of architectural and historic significance to the cultural and aesthetic benefit of Palo Alto, and made a significant personal contribution. The City gratefully recognized his services and recorded its and its citizens' appre- el ati on of his outstanding service, and declared June 5, 1984 Birge Clark Day. His wisdom was appreciated by the new HRB, which he started so well. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. Mayor Klein presented Mr. Clark with the framed resolution. Birge Clark said Councilmembers dedicated more of their time to civic work than Boardmembers, and he thanked the Council for Birge Clark Day. He was 91 years old, but did not remember any other member having a day dedicated in their honor. He opened his Palo Alto office in 1922, and was the only architect for eight years. He was excited to have been Palo Alto's architect, and it was re- warding. The cooplimentary things said to him were usually reserved for an eulogy, and he was grateful to have heard them. ITEM rf2, RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO JAMES H. STONE (COU 5-9-4) MOTION: Councilmember Woolley moved, seconded by Klein, to adopt the resolution honoring James Stone RESOLUTION 5295 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE -CITY 0r 0 ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO JAMES H. STONE FOR OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD' Councilmember Woolley said James Stone servedeas Secretary of the HRB from June, 1980 to June, 1983 and as Ch ai rnan of the HRB from June, 1983 to June, 1984, and expended hundreds of hours on research for the inventory. A consultant made the architectural survey, and the historical data was done by volunteers, but Mr. Stone compiled Wore than half for . the 385 structures. As Secretary and -Chas rmen, he helped vet the HRB off to a good start, for which she thanked him. MOTION -PASSED unenimously. Bechtel absent. Mre Stone said it was a pleasure to work with. the . HRB . It was unusual to se-rve on a board when one of it.s members was the history with Which it dealt, and _he thanked the City staff, par- ticul arly Bob .Brown and Janet Freeland. ITEM $3.4 RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO ROBERT A. NERRIE .(COU 'S" --3774, T MOTION: Councilmember Woolley moved, seconded by Klein, adopt the resolution honoring Robert A. Nerrie, RESOLUTION 6296 entitled *RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF ALTO EXPRESSING. APPRECIATION TO ROBERT A. NERR IE FOR OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD". Councilrnember Woolley said Mr. Nerrie served as Vice Chairman of the HRB from thine, 1983-84, and was a representative to the Seismic Hazards Committee. The group, which had polarized opinions, held many meetings and brought a solution to the seismic hazards problem. The City was grateful to Mr. Nerrie for his participation. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Witherspoon, to approve the Consent Calendar Items 4.8. Referral None Action ITEM #4, AGREEMENT WITH PALO ALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR USE tl 4: Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to exe- cute the contract with the Palo Alto Unified School District in the amount of $36,477. CONTRACT Palo Alto Unified School District ITEM #5, CABLE LEGISLATION - LETTER TO CONGRESSIONAL Staff recommends that. Council authorize the Mayor to write to Palo Alto's Congressional representatives, urging support of HR 4103 as currently written, and the compromise between cities and the cable industry upon which it was based. ITEM #6, MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING: PALO ALTO PEACE OFFICERS Staff recommends approval of the resolutions amendi ng sections 1501 and 1601 of the Merit System Rules and Regulations regarding the Memoranda of Understanding. RESOLUTION 6297 entitled ' RESOLUT IOi1 OF THE COUNCIL OF rir71/1 a .O ALTO AMENDING SECTION 1601 OF THE MERIT SYSTEM RULES AND REGULATIONS REGARDING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND PALO ALTO PEACE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (PER 2-7) RESOLUTION 6298 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE` G I rr Of YALE ALTO AMENDING SECTION 1501 OF THE MERIT SYSTEM RULES AND REZULAT IOMS REGARDING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND LOCAL 1319, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS" (PER 2-2) ITEM #7, PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE APPLICATION OF IONE Staff recommends that Council dete..R . Pe the proposed addition will not have a sigr ficant effect on the environment and approve the Site and Design application, with conditions. 8/13/81 ITEM #8, PROCESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT SABBATICAL LIEUTENANT PAM Staff recommends that Council confirm approval of a professional development sabbatical for Police Lieutenant Pam Roskowski. Pam's salary and benefits will continue throughout the period of the leave; there are no other costs to the City associated with the request. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. ITEM #9, EVERGREEN PARK NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC STUDY - EVALUATION OF n e nu . rom / Mayor Kiein said Council received additional correspondence on the item, including the letter from various groups who indicated a desi re to work out an ag reement. Councilmember Cobb asked about feedback on the issues he asked staff to consider the previous week. Assi stant Transportation Engi nee r Carl Stoffel considered openi ng Park Boulevard to two-way traffic just beyond College Avenue, thus allowi ng Bi rch to be opened one-way going south, with restrictions to prevent the through traffic from penetrating the neighborhood by al 1 owi ng them to loop around, and al though it could be done for commuter traffics it had two significant disadvantages. If Park Boulevard was opened to two-way traffic, residents would perceive i t as an entry point into the neighborhood, but would get caught in the same loop. Park and a part of College would have to be opened to commercial traffic, but residents would be unable to use it because it would channel out of the neighborhood. They would still have to enter via El Camino Real. There was also a strong possibility that techniques to prohibit movement into the neigh- bo rhood--two new one-way streets in the neighborhood, a signing restriction or a half --barrier sayi ng "Do Not Enter" --would be lia- ble to violation. He did not believe the alternative world work well, and could not see a way out for the residents. Mayor Klein said Council received a letter dated August 11, 1984 from a variety of peo0e who testified on the Evergreen Park prob- lem, including Mac Larsen, President of the Palo Alto Co-op; David Schram, Chai gran of the Traffic Committee of the Evergreen Park Neighborhood Associ ati on; Betsy Holmes of Peni nsul a Scientific; Lois Johnson, Richard Lyon, Admi nistor of the Wesley United Methodist Church; James -Masi k, a priest at St. Al oysi us; Bob Kovi nsky, Director of California Avenue Area Development Agency (CAADA); and Ann Masik. The letter stated that meetings were held on August 9 and 10, 1984 to reach an agreement between the diverse views on the traffic control treasures in Evergreen Park, and requested that Council not take action on August 13, and direct staff to work with interested citizens to seek a more responsive solution to the needs of residents and business people within and near Evergreen Park, and specifically to consider items set forth in the letter. They asked that steps to implement those purposes be undertaken immediately and pledged full cooperation. He was pleased to see people meeting to find some compromise goal more acceptable to a greater number and believed it was appropriate to conti nue the 'item to allow them to find anacceptable solution for presentation to the Council. He clarified that he neither endorsed the letter nor any of its parts, and that such a conti nu- ance in no way implied the solution would . be acceptable to the Council. The citizens were not appointed to any committee, but their concern and. interest was shown over a period of time. If a solution could be fond to command the support of a greater number of people, it would be in the best interests of the neighborhood, the California Avenue businesses, and the entire community.- Staff believed September 17, 1984 would allow sufficient time to work out a solution. , 4 9 1 2 8/13/84 MOTION TO CONTINUE:' Mayor Klein iaoved, se�unded by Cobb, to continue Item 9, Evergreen Park Neighborhood Traffic Study, to September 17, 1984. Councilmember Cobb said he was also encouraged by the letter be- cause the signees ranged from Chai rman of the Evergreen Park Asso- ciation Traffic Committee to the California Avenue business peo- ple. He talked with the neighborhood and supported their cause, but also talked wi th the Cal i fornl a Avenue people, who showed a willingness to work with the residents to achieve a solution that would near ag reement with all. He wanted to give the group every chance for success. The issue was difficult and created divi- sions, not only in the neighborhood. but also in the communi ty at large, and any solutions to reduce such divisions would bri ng the Council ahead. lie encouraged the citizens, and hoped the spirit would be projected to produce solutions with which all could be happy. He said the public discussion raised concerns about the businesses on Park Boulevard one block the wrong side of the existing one-way barrier. It would help if their problems could be solved without getti ng away from the goal of solvi ng traffic problems in the neighborhood, and he asked if inovi ng the barrier one block would resolve the problem. Another problem was with regard to getti ng people, and particul arty senior citizens, back from California Avenue into the neighborhood. A possibility would be to make Sedro Laneone-way goi ng back i n< The neighborhood was unique with a .unique problem, and he hoped the committee would recognize that El Camino was near, saturation from traffic. People looked for escape routes and found Park Boulevard, which would grow until it, too, reached saturation, which would be the even- tual control on the amount of development allowed on Cali fo rni a Avenue, although then it would be too late to solve the problem i n the neighborhood. The issue had to be considered before it grew out of control. Councilinember Renzel concurred with Councilmember Cobb, and asked if the status quo would remai n until further decision by the Coun- ci l . Di rector of Planning and Community Envi ronment Ken Schreiber said any change would need Council direction. Vice Mayor Levy said everyone was relieved to see the request for co nti nuance. It was a difficult issue because of the many differ- ent viewpoints and because emotions . ran high, as shown by the tes- timony, and staff survey. The Everg reen �ierk Traffic Study began in 19?1.O, and was entering its second Olympiad. Many conflicting proposals were seen, and it was time the City Council-- the proper group and the only one elected to represent all residents --acted. No other group of individuals, no matter how well-meaning, could attempt a solution, although it was proper that the neighborhood and community contribute to the decision. Continuing the item meant all who already spoke would feel obliged to return to com- ment on new proposals, as they did for the past four years. He did not believe anything new would be learned, but reluctantly supported the continuance, mainly for the sake of a unanimous vote Although the item was bei n9 Conti nued, he emphasized it did not imply endorsement of any _ elements in either the staff report or the letter. It showed a desire to obtain as many views on the tabl e as possibl e to make the most i nformed judgment. Councilmember Sutorius feared a suit being filed by the American Broadcasti ng: Corporation agai nst the Ci ty of Palo Al to for cutti ng into its viewership during Council meets ngs, The decision to de- cide was the most important one a Council could make, and if par- ties addressi ng an issue from different. interests and.. concerns could coalesce to produce a mutually supportable solution, it should be all Owed by the governs erg body. He eraphasi zed that input could not predict the outcome. Although elected . to office in January, he attended all previous meetings on ` the subject and 4 9 1 3 8/13/84 1 collected a sizable altiourai, of literature to avail himself of the different opinions. It was important that the conclusion provide an effective, safe, convenient, two-way access between the Ever- green Park neighborhood and its extended neighborhood, the Cambridge and California area, and one way might be to restore Park Boulevard to .two-way directional traffic. There were many measures, some of which we re given a t ri al , others that were approved, such as the traffic ci rcle at Park Avenue and Park Boulevard, and those with which they had not yet come to grips. He referred to the traffic undulators to meet the original object- ives of reducing overall traffic i n the overall neighborhood. Stop signs, crosswalks and undulators would give safe access to the park, and nothing could be safer than stopping a car from crossing. The Council might not arrive at a final conclusion to meet all wishes, but the continuance would ensure that Council took every step to get the best advice and opinion, and allowed the ci ti ze ns to partake in shapi ng the Pi nal deci si on. However, the decision was for the Council to make. Mr. Schreiber understood the motion allowed citizens to work to- gether to attempt to come up with a solution. W i thi n that frame- work, he remi nded the Mayor of staff' s limited resources, primari- ly due to vacations and holidays. Staff would have relatively little time to devote to the subject and would not be active mem- bers of the g roup, but would be available to answer questions. For significant parts of the period, both he and Cari Stoffel would be- away, and no other staff member had substantial back- ground in the area. Any active analysis of proposals would have to be made by staff from Tuesday, September 4 through Friday, September 7, so proposal s from the group would have to be given to staff early in the morning of Tuesday, September 4, and staff would try to provide information at the Council meeting. He and Mr. Stoffel would finish the report on September 12, to meet the reproduction deadline for the Council packet on September 13. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS Councilmember Fletcher added Item #19, re Study of Route 101 Mass Transit alternatives. TEM #10, REQUEST OF VICE MAYOR LEVY AND COUNCILMEMBER WOOLLEY RE R"nrivi -BANNt ( .. 1 , Vice Mayor Levy said that during the candidate interviews for the Visual Arts Jury (VAJ), Ionia Mac neiI, now a member of the VAJ, suggested an outreach activity to sponsor a design contest to create decorative banners. The recent use of banners for the Olympic soccer games at Stanford made everyone aware of how attractive and positive an i tens they could be, and the City Attorney's office and the VAJ endorsed the concept of banners. MOTION: Vice Mayor Levy moved, seconded by Woolley, to direct staff to work with the Visual Arts Jury, Architectural Review Board, and Chamber of Commerce's new Retail Coordinating Council to explore design, use, cost, installation, and legal implications of decorative banners, including the following criteria: 1. That decoration be the main purpose of the banners; 2. That the banners be made of cloth; 3. Consideration be given to the height pf the banners above the street; 4. Their 10 ation; and 5. Any banners would, exclude signs from light standards. The purpose of the motion was to differentiate banners- from signs, and di1OW tanner's with decoration criterion, as opposed to signs with a communicative criterion. The assumption was that banner approval should ultimately rest with staff and the Architectural Review Board (ARB). Councilmember Renzel asked if the City would install the banners, or if the motion was only enabling legislation to allow private groups to decorate. She asked how a resolution would be reached if two private sets of people wanted to i nstall banners simultane- ously. Vice Mayor Levy said those items were not yet addressed, and would form part of staff's report back to the Council. Councilmember Fletcher referred to page 2 of the City Attorney's report, which said the ordinance would allow a temporary sign on public property for any noncommercial purpose. She asked if the word "nonpolitical" should also be i ncl uded. City Attorney Di one Lee said there was no legal way to do so. The thrust of Vice Mayor Levy's suggestion was that by taking banners and ;raking _them distinct from signs, the problem would not arise. The banner would have to meet certain criterion, and the category of sig nage referred to was not likely to do so. Councilmember Woolley said the Chamber of Commerce was eager to participate in the program, which was particularly desirable as its new retail committee i nvolved all the commercial areas in the City so that no specific area would be focused upon. Councilmember Sip+torius hoped the proposal would be given ARB review wi thout fi rst returni ng to the Council. Vice Mayor Levy agreed. Councilmember Re nzel said the moti on did not direct staff to work specifically with the City Attorney's office, and presumed the motion was within the constraints of the memorandum. Mayor Klein said assignments to staff always included relevant staff members, and the subject case would include the Gity Attorneys staff. 14s. Lee said her office had discussions with ie Mayor Levy subsequent to writing the memo resulting in different approaches to the problem. The memo was correct as far as it went, but they were ,row looking into possibilities to do further thi ngs. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. ITEM #1I, REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBER FLETCHER RE PUBLIC PARTICIPA- tY IE.w ISM1D Htrr rleOnt1 nueo rrrrrrrTrtnrgt Councilmember Fletcher said her original menfl was inadvertently not sent to the ARB, and it was under the false impression that she expected all meetings to be held in the evenings. She clari- fied that she hoped a method could be worked out so that items the publ is was arm nari ly not interested in --store front'. remodeling, sign changes, etc. --were considered at morns ng meets ngs, while the many projects citizens could address only at the ARB level because they did not reach the Planning Commission and the Council could be dealt with at eveni ng meeti ngs. There was a mechanism whereby projects could be referred to the P1 anni ng Commi ssi on and the ARB, but she was aware .of-. one that was not referred, in spite of a citizen request. Many citizens were able to address their con- cerns at eveni ng meetings onlyt and si nce the ARB met twice a month, one rao rni Fly meeting coul ci be held to discuss routine items and one evening devoted to items i n which neighborhoods might have. At?318ft an interest. She wanted to explore a mechanism to separate the different types of issues, and two ARB members with whom she spoke were willing to discuss the possibility. Citizens were interested i n projects on Park Boulevard, and a 48,000 square foot new devel- opment proposed at the corner of Alma and Everett was unlikely to reach any evening meeti ngs. A letter to the Council spoke of the burden to the applicants i n attending eveni ng meetings, but rather it was a burden on the citizens to attend during the mornings. Many projects impacted traffic and neighborhoods, and residents worried about massiveness, height, and proximity to their homes of the structures. Those issues were addressed at the ARM meeti ngs, and the public should have an opportunity to comment. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Renzel, that staff work with the Architectural Review Board to explore and develop methods by which i teas of impact to the residents can be heard at eveni ng mueeti ngs. Councilmember Cobb understood that Councilmember Fletcher did not intend to schedule bpecific evening meetings, but rather to seek ways to accomplish such meetings to provide for neighborhood in- put. Councilmember Fletcher said she wanted some nonjudgmental mechan- ism set up to trigger evening meetings, and hoped the ARB and staff woul d come up wi th a formul a. The written suggestions by some ARB members that more notice be given were excellent, and she hoped they would be followed up. Mayor Klei n said the latter poi nt was not a part of the motion. Pam. Marsh, 327 Wave rley, participated in the ARB review process when she and her neighbors discovered that a 1 arge office block was planned opposite their homes. Some ARB actions were far- reaching and had a significant impact on citizens' lives. The ARB made decisions on height, set -back, basic bulk, content —retail or office --as well as architectural style. Any such decision affected the neighbors' .lives and property value, and public par-- ticipation i n the ARB process was important but not simple because of .the logistics. The agenda was not publicized, and no notice was given to surrounding residents or property owners when an item was up for preliminary or final AR8 review. She learned about the but i di ng opposite her by accident; she was not notified by the developer. No mechanism existed for updati no i nterested -people, and as of Thursday, the building in question would have appeared before the ARB four times and she had to constantly phone the ARB .office to keep up to date. The ARB meetings were held at 8:00 a.m. on Thursday morni ngs, and were i nconvenient. One morn- ing could be taken off work, but not four. Content and logistics were intertwined, so the logistics should be changed to allow cit- izen participation or the rights and responsibilities of the ARB drastically narrowed so that more projects were passed directly along to the Planni ng Commission and Council . Participation in the City process was not easy and requi red i niti ative, and Council should make it as easy as possible for people who wanted to parti- cipate in matters that affected them. Tony Carrasco, 4216 Oarl i ngton Court, .spoke for the ARB as its Chairman. When the ARB l ast discussed the issue, it ag reed with most things stated by Pam Marsh. The Board 'struggled with the issue for the past year, and a process was instituted to send projects to the Planning Commission and the City Council which were beyond the scope of the ARB, and to give notification i n the newspaper of the agenda proposed for the next meeting. Those two procedures gave some safeguard to refer sensitive projects for zoni ng requirements to reduce the square footage of a building. The ARB :.was not a board of zoning . adjustments to dec ree square footage cln a massive scate.. The members all agreed that public i nput i nc reased the quality of design,., especi ally in such matters as commercial projects abutting reesidenti al neighborhoods, or hi gh-densi ty residential proj projects next to 1 ow -density neiyhbor-- hoods: The ARB recommended a process so that at the discretion of the Di rector of P1 anni ng and Chairman of the ARB an eveni ng meet- ing could be held for projects abutting sensitive zones. The motion was adequate to allow a proposal with which everyone could be happy. Bob Moss, 4010 0rme, said letters from ARB members Linda Ludden and Virgil Carter suggested that better public notification would enable more citizens to attend the ARB meetings. He lived closes bus; could not attend all ARB meetings, and was unable to stay to hear al 1 items of interest at the previous month's meets ng because he had to go to work. It was not only a question of proper not fication--people who worked outside Palo Alto lost most of a day's work attendi ng an ARB meeti ng. Mr. Carter said the morni ng meet- ing was sometimes overflowing, and some of those attendees still waited at 11:00 a.m. to hear an item scheduled for 9:00 a.m., but were Mostly applicants, lawyers, etc., not members of the public, who rarely numbered more than four or five. Jon Schi nk and Tony Carrasco said items f requently warranted public input, and Mr. Schink suggested an eveni ng meeting for the Hoover School site. ARB actions had a di rect impact on traffic a.ild parki ng, and affected the neighbors who had no opportunity to comment under existing procedures. The ARB was the only body who reviewed proj- ects fitti ng existi ng zoni ng, and often addressed issues beyond design that bore upon planning and land use issues, the bulk of the building, traffic, neighborhood impacts and compatibility with adjacent properties, all of which would benefit from community in- put. The public often made useful aesthetic comments on develop- ments —he heard no public approval of the Midas Muffler building, which received ARB approval. The next ARB calendar included minor modifications to the housing at the Te rnan site, and although a member of the Termian Working Group, he was not informed that the issue would be on the agenda. The project had great interest to the public, who was not notified. He preferred not to see the process left purely to the discretion of the Chairman of the ARB and the Di rector. of PI anus ng because i ssues might be addressed differently at different times. There should be a uniform method for projects to undergo more intensive public review, which ground rules should be established by staff, ARB, public,, and the Coun- cil. If a project did not go before the public, the Director of Planning and Community Environment could show that certain ground rules established and reviewed by the Council were not met and that there was di>cussion in a public meeting. He urged that Council adopt the concept and send it to staff for study. Virgil Carter, 941 Emerson, said public awareness and participa- tion in the ARB proceedings was critical and desired. The ARB resolved on disc retionary night time meets ngs, based on the recom- mendation of the Director of P1 anni ng and Community Environment and the ARB Chair. At its last annual meeting ,with the Council, the ARB recommended expanded notification proce ures, and a motion was made to increase public awareness and participatior and >for staff, with ARB input, to return to the Council with a recommenea- tion. Different jurisdictions had different meeti ng times fLr their Councils and committees, etc., so the main ingredient was public awareness of the time of the meeti ng Notification was not a part of the motion, but was a part of the solution. Plight time meetings would increase the time span for hearings and increase staff, notification, and 0plication costs. They were not as .sig- nificant as more opportunity for public involvement, but would be part of the price. To maximize public participation, he hoped Council, would consider additional ways of notifyi ny the public of items of special interest other than a weekly notice in the news- paper. The Council should requi re qualitative criteria stipulat- ng that a certain percentage of the meetings be public, 'regard- less of whati was on the agenda. 4 9 1 7 8/13/84 Anno .Ercol ani, 201+0 Ash, was glad counci lmember Fletcher raised the item for Council consideration. She fully concurred with Ms. Marsh and Mr. Moss, and hoped the Council would take action to correct the current problems. Jon Schink, 420 Lowell Avenue, a member of the ARB, said a major failure in the system was noti fl c ati o n. At the 1 ast ARB meeti ng he calculated that clients paid over $2,000 per hour for their staff . The City was al so wel 1 represented at that meeti ng with four or five staff members. They were resources that went into the process, and were important. The ARB had a large volume of business, and the last meeting had 25 items and lasted until 1:30 p.m. The system worked because it was dynamic and moved quickly. Staff gave quick answers and the ARB talked with the applicants. The ARB was reasonable and speedy and b rought all the resources together i n one morni ng. Eveni ng meeti ngs might increase the cost of the process to a point where it might begin to fail . He asked the Council to look closely at the question of how to utilize City staff and applicant resources. The . successful process required the ARB to first focus on the design professionals and the City staff r The foil owi ng ev a ni ng the ARB woul d meet with the community living around Hoover school because as part of the p rocess, the ARB requ i red, and the appl icant ag reed, that an evening meeting be held. He assured the Council that the ARB was sensitive to comniu ni ty interest. The concern was notification, and how a system should be designed to notify the public. He encouraged the Council to focus its concern on that one point --how staff could design a method of notification that was fair to the applicant, reasonable in staff costs, and considered the citizens' concerns for their neighborhoods. Councilmember Cobb asked whether the long hours devoted to ARB meetings discouraged possible candidates. Mr. Carrasco said the time consumi ng aspect of the ARB was a deterrent to excel lent architects. Eveni ng meeti ngs demanded almost double the amount of time, and he knew of one present •ARB member who could not conti nue under those conditions. Councilmember Witherspoon agreed with the intent of the motion, but from the ARB input and consideri ng issues that went before it, she concluded that notification, not the time of day, was the issue. The point was well taken that 99 pe r•cent of the ARB work involved professionals and their clients who were accustomed to working during the day. Persons forced to pay a i awyer to attend an evening meeti ng would face a real additional fi nanci al burden, The Council should find a way to increase the notification process and possibly set a fixed time for certain items in which the pub- lic was known to have an interest. Budget hearings .that had a tremendous impact on the City were almost exclusively attended by staff and committee members, and she questioned whether all the public went to all meetings. She expected to see a few people who were concerned about certai n items i n thei r neighborhood, or in an item such as Hoover school, so such a. meeting could either be scheduled l n the evening or noticed for a certai n time during the day. She supported the motion to re-examine the 'matter, but was not ready to consider havi ng, every meeti ng, or even certai n meetings, in the evening. She noticed that items were regularly continued at the request of the applicant, and often ` the design professionals did not show up, and the item was continued. if an item was held in the evening, and, had to be continued or held over, havoc was thrown into the entire schedule of items that went that evening to fill up the agenda, and was unfair. An extra- ordi nary meeting would be in order, but the ARB was advisory to staff, not to the City Councile, nor the Planning Commission. An item such as the office building going up across the street from Ms. Marsh was basically a zoning and planning Issue. The design of the building had little .impact on the value of her property. She preferred to keep the matter on a professional level, which meant 90 percent daytime meetf ngs. x/13/8 Councilmember Renzel said tha public was articulate about the need for facilitating ARB evening meetings. It was generally cl ear which issues generated a fair amount of public input, and some of the issues of which Councilmember Witherspoon spoke could be handled by ensuring the applicant's availability for an evening meeti ng to avoid a continuance, Projects were not usually of such significance or with such direct impact on the public as to gen- erate much public input, but when they did, the public had a right to a good hearing, and Council should not make it more difficult than necessary. In the absence of a zoning change, the public had to work with the procedures in pl ace, and if the ARB was the only procedure, they should have the right to use it. Councilmember Woolley supported the motion, but did not believe the ARB was a political forum. She urged the ARB to use its new process of referring such projects to the Planning Commission, especi ally i n the case of zoning. She favored an evening rneeti ng for one issue such as the Hoover School, which might be better than having a whole agenda during an eveni ng meeting. Councilmember Sutorius supported the motion for staff, in consul- tation with the ARB, to make a recommendation to the Council, and agreed with the referral and notification process. Discretion now existed and was exercised for the fi rst time on the Palo Alto Central and El Camino Way projects. Evening meetings were impor- tant and sensi tive, and would conti nue to be scheduled when appro- priate. The ARB held public meeti ngs, not public hearings, and i t was ei nfai r to say it violated some of the precepts involved in a public hearing. Public input was valuable, but in California and in the Bay Area the first and second components in the cost of housi ng or any construction were the land and the governmental process, including the review and permit process. The Council should strive for ways to not drive up the costs that reverted to the purchaser. Mayor Kiel n supported the motion. There was a tendency to turn the ARB into a poi i tical body, which was not its intent. The ARB was only 10 years old and was without a parallel in most communi- ties. In earlier times, and in most communities, a building -could be erected if it met the zoni ng requi reme nts . The ARB was a good idea, and he supported its creati n. Proper notification was one problem, and another was that the -'ARB might be requi red to bear a burden it was never intended to carry. He supported the motion because he believed some improvements along the lines of public participation Were in order. Councilmember Cobb associated himsel f with Mayor KI ein's remarks, end said he wanted to see the Council move toward discretionary process, at least i n3ti ally. He believed the evening ARB meetings would prove the exception, rather than the rule, and the handling of the Hoover School site seemed to be the way things should be done. If it could be codified or formalized by a policy state- ment, it might be sufficient to ensure the public was properly served and the integrity of the process mai ntai ned. Councilmember Fletcher did not want the criteria for items to be heard duri ng the eveni ng meeti ngs based sol ely on whether they were i n neighborhoods or abutti ng neighborhoods, as a neighborhood could be impacted by traffic from a project :further away. Two lists could be made, one of items clearly of no public interest, the other of items that aright be. She believed ARB consideration of the Stanford Shopping Center parking lot expansion might be an item. of public interest although it did not fit into an^y, one category, it sounded innocent, but such an action precluded options for the Willow Road extension It would have been appro- priate to allow people an opportunity- to addressthe question. NOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. 4 9 1 9 8/13/84 ITEM #12, REQUEST OF VICE MAYOR LEVY, COUWC ILMEMBEks SU T tilt iUs ANU ul'EK I V t;o nt un ed t roni 7777747 ouncilmember Woolley said she, Vice Mayor Levy, and Councilmember Sutorius wanted to exami ne the names associated with the Arastra site before they became familiar through usage. MOTION: •Councilmember Woolley moved, seconded by Sutorius, to direct staff, in conjunction with the Palo Alto Historical Associ- ation, to review the Arastra site and, as appropriate, propose or confirm names for Council approval. Councilmember Fletcher welcomed and appreciated suggestions for names from the Palo Alto Historical Association (PAHA), but the Arastra property was so known since at least 1970 and she was not sure it needed another name. Its present name should not be ex- cluded from consideration solely because it was known as such. It was not like building a new subdivision where there was no prece- dent. Mayor Kiel n said no name was excluded as the motion stated "to propose or confi rrn names." Vice Mayor Levy took issue because although it was called the, Arastra property since the Sunset Petroleum Company so named it, it was not necessarily the best name for such +i 1 arge and signifi- cant park in the City. He welcomed PAHA review of that particular name as well as any other names that might exist for various land- marks. Councilmember Renzel believed a similar referral was made with respect to the Mullen properties and other publicly owned proper- ties in the foothills, but did not recall receiving a response. She suggested that referral be reiterated as the properties were more or less adjacent. Assistant City Manager June Fleming did not know about the Mullen property, but said there was a procedure in pl ace for nami ng prop- erties and facilities, which included the involvement of PAHA. She would check on the Mullen property, but as a part of the over- all Arastra assignment, staff would return, according to its pro- cedures: and would go through PAHA to recommend names. Councilmember Renzel wanted confi nnation that a referral was made on some of the- other footni 11 properties, otherwise Council might at some poi nt have to refer the other. properties, It might be app ropri ate, i f not al ready referred, to i ncorporate into the motion the Mullen property of approximately 80 ac res and the ease- ments from the Hewlett subdivision, etc. MAKER AND SECOND OF THE MOTION INCORPORATED THE FOLLOWING LAN- GUAGE AFTER THE WORDS THE ARASTRA -SITE,' "THE MULLEN PROPERTY, AND OTHER CITY -OWNED PROPERTIES.' MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. ITEM $13, PUBLIC HEARING: WEED ABATEMENT CHARGES. (PWK. 5-2), Mayor Ki ei`n decl area that it was the time and pl ace set for a pub- lic hearing on the resolution for charges -levied for weed abate- ment on private property under the agreement with Santa Clara County, and asked that the record show that notice of the hearing was given in the time, •manner, and form ,provided in Chapter 8.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. City Clerk Ann -Tanner confirmed she received no written objec- tions, )4 9 2 0 8113/84 Mayor Klein declared the public hear! ng .open. i;ccci i ng no requests from the public to speak, he declared the public hearing closed. H2 asked the record to reflect that no one appeared or filed written objections against the charges for weed abatement performed i n accordance with the Municipal Code and under the Weed Abatement Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and Santa Clara County, and that any resolution passed by the Council on the mat- ter would reflect the finding. MOTION: Cou nci l membe r Suto rios moved, seconded by Cobb, adopt the resolution re Weed Abatement. RESOLUTION 6299 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF InTrrfTrmOrgra.0 ALTO CONFIRMING WEED ABATEMENT REPORT AND ORDERING COST OF ABATEMENT TO BE A SPECIAL ASSESS- MENT OF THE RESPECTIVE PROPERTIES HEREIN DESCRIBED* Councilmember Fletcher asked who was responsible for the parki ng strip where the street trees were. Director of Parks and Open Space Management Lawrence White said when a private property was adjacent to the parki ng street, the owner of the property was responsible. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. ITEM #14, PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE LUri1NV UKU1 !MARC L AFEND19ENTS l o RE' 1 RIC1 i HE S Iz Ell7rErrIMITSTtrimiruvu TS DARE 1-tt1 iP4 ttL Ls nu 'Grp' Chief P1 anni ng Offici al Bruce Freel and said the staff report to the Pl anni ng Commission raised the question of buildings with multiple sites and office functu s serving other sites which, if all were on the same site, would be considered accessory offices, but, when located on individual sites, were considered to be offices and subject to the limitations proposed. The condition existed in the GM zone, and if it existed in the CS zone, staff was unaware. In the Council packet was an undated letter from Ford Aerospace & Communications Corporatation requesting that the change not be put in pl ace at that time. Only one area along San Antonio Road remained in the City under GM zoning not scheduled for hears ngs to another zone. Whenthe item was considered by the Planning Comm# ssi on, staff was advised to give the San Antonio Road GM area a high priority when moving ahead with the special studies that were to take place, Staff .proceeded on the study, and was fairly well into the data collection and analysis phase. Because of the probl em of the multiple site uses, it was possi bl e to exclude the GM zone from the action before the Council that evening on the strength of the ability of staff and the Planning Commission to complete th GM area study first and bring the resul ts, hopefully withi n the six months the moratorium on the. area was in effect or soon thereafter. One possibility, if the Council was concerned about the problem of multiple si to uses, and which appeared to. exist for the GM zones only, was to limit the GM zones out of the zone change so that staff could deal with it duri ng the moratorium time period i h al i probabi 1 lty. Coun+ilmember Woolley asked about the order of the various studies= Mr. F reel and said a complete schedule was not established. Staff believed the areas most pressing were the GM area on the San Antonio Road and the CS area along Lambert off El Camino Real. The latter was up in the air because of the recently concluded Maximart study and was under various moratoria for a' while. It was important to reli\eve the anxieties in that area, and requests were also received from the Charleston Meadows Association to put a high priority on the CS zoned area can El Carpi no near Charleston, which staff would place on a':.second o`r third priority basis. Staff hoped to make an overall data collection of all those areas so that as new ideas were tested for one area, they could have an idea of how they might impact other areas. Councilmember Woolley asked why staff suggested it be put into the zoning ordinance instead of having a longer moratorium Mr. Freeland said staff believed it would take one and one-half years or more to complete all of the studies, which went to the end of the possible extensions of moratoria. .In order to complete all of the studies, staff might need more time, and it was neces- sary to complete the study for the CS zone. If there were a lot of GM areas, he would feel the: same about that.. Councilmember Woolley asked what time frame staff would consider reasonable if Council considered a sunset clause for the ordi nance in order to achieve the same sort of thing as with a moratorium only tor a longer period. Mr. F reel and believed two years would be reasonable. Councilmember Fletcher asked for clarification regarding exempti ng the GM zone from the ordinance. She asked if staff would then suggest the moratorium be kept i n pl ace i n the GM zone. Mr. F reel and said yes. The bel i of was that staff coul d probably complete the one area study within the time period of the mora- torium. Councilmember Witherspoon said there was nothing to prevent a com- pany from renti ng office space i n any zone in town because office space was at a premium, as Council limited the new offices that could be built, and because of where office space was rented for the use of the executives runni ng the busi ness, there would be the same problem of the ancillary use. She asked if the problem woui d really be solved by exempting the GM zone, and believed Council was accommodating a company that happened to group its offices around the Fabi an Way area, and there might be others i n town that were not as smart as Ford and did not realize what was happening. Mr. Freel and agreed it could be more prevalent than staff was aware. Ford Aerospace was contiguous parcels, and if one visited the site and did not have a map of parcels, it would appear to be one operation, which was unique. It was a campus -like groupi ng of structures which happened to not be under the same ownership. Staff found the same situation with the Faci of a Meat Company, located on the other side of San Antonio Road to the south. That fi rnr had about four or five parcels of 1 and not all under the same ownership. Their office was on one parcel and freezer buildings were on the other parcel s. The office clearly only supported the immediately contiguous parcels, and they wanted to expand the of- fice. Councilmember Witherspoon asked if it would be appropriate to pro- pose some kind of procedure where someone under the limited cir- cumstance could appeal the restriction. Mr. f reel and said i niti alley staff was gol ng to prepare a proce- dure, Tike a use permit, to handle such ci rcumstances, but the more it was considered, the more staff became uncomfortable. They were individual parcels of and, not necessarily under the same ownership, and it was somewhat awkward to allow a building to be built on one parcel and tie it to another parcel that might be under .different ownership where its future was unknown. The City could find itself having allowed office buildings that were meant to support an industrial use across the street, and severed from that industrial use, the City would have to be wi 11 i ng to ,say the structure could not be used. II aright be passible: to solve the difficulties, but staffwould review it during the study. 4 9 2 2 8/13/84 Councilmember Witherspoon clarified that there might only be two cases in town, and staff was not worried about bei ng over=whelmed by office space that may or may not be used in ten years by the same firm. She urged that staff find some way, and said she would rather err on the side of bei ng equitable to those busi ness that were in town for a while. Councilmember Cobb asked when the Charleston Meadows study would occur. Mr. Freeland said if staff completed the San Antonio Study, it would have the ability to star;: another in about two to three months, and would start a new one every three of four months. If the Charleston Meadows Study was made second, staff would start it in the fall; if third, it would start around Christmas. Planning Commissioner Mark Chandler poi nted out that in acti ng on the matter, the Commission did not view it as an arbitrary exten- sion of a moratorium or partial moratorium forever, but rather as an affi rmative policy statement that the types of businesses the City was hopi ng to encou rage to p reserve in the CS and GM zones would be forced out if significant office construction were allowed. Consistent with that affirmative policy statement, the Commission recognized that there would be situations where fine tuni ng was necessary and hoped the forthcoming staff studies would provide the vehicles for addressi ng those. Mayor Klein declared the public hearing open. Julia Michael, Manager, Long- range P1 anni ng, Ford Aerospace and Communications Corp., 3939 Fabian Way, said Ford was not trying to fight the intent of the proposed ordinance change, but believed certain exemptions might be warranted. Ford had a campus -like complex of over 20 facilities on several parcels of land located on both sides of Fabian Way and around East Meadow Ci rcl e, and for the past couple of years had plans to build a new facility on the 4.6 acre lot on the west side of Fabian Way. Ford had a 50 year lease on the site, and the facility was needed in service by late 1986 or early 1987. The proposed ordinance change would adversely impact its plans for the facility and its ability to conduct busi- ness officially. It appreciated the fact that the City staff already did the evaluation of the San Antonio GM area, and was prepared to continue to work with the City staff to ensure that Ford's situation got fair hearings. It believed that such fair hears ngs. could best be achieved over the next several months within the constraints of the six-month moratorium passed by the City Council on July 9. Ford understood that the San Antonio GM area was the only GM area remai ni ng in Palo Alto, and because of the unique situation, and in view of all other arguments pre- sented, Ford. requested Council consideration of not passing the proposed ordinance change at that time, and alternatively sup- ported Mr. Freel:and's recommendation that the San Antonio GM zone be excluded from the ordinance. In either case, the San Antonio GM zone would remain subject to the moratorium currently i n effect, and Council could make a final decision on the San Antonio GM zone upon completion of the City staff study currently under- way. Dan McUanney, 4100 Campana:Drive, represented California Pacific Commercial Corporation, who owned property in the referenced GM zone si nce 1957 when approximately 1.00 acres were purchased imme- diately north of San Antonio .Road and west of Bayshore Freeway. Subsequent to that purchase, approximately 20 acres were sold to Philca, which was Ford Aerospace's predecessor, and the area between Fabian and San Antonio now housed Ford's mai r► admi nistra- tive and manufacturing buii di ngs.: Much of the remaining property was currently leased to Ford, and together they worked closely with the City to develop and mai nt Ain an attractive setting. As a private resident and homeowner in Palo Alto, he shared the con- cerns of Cal ;Pacific and the City Council in controlling the employment and traffic growth associotcd with the pr-oliferatioil of new office development. Under the existing moratorium, all new office development was halted pendi ng further study on the impacts of current zoning. He believed passage of an overly restrictive ordinance then would unnecessarily formalize a prohibition on of- fice development prior to such study and analysis. Given the unique location and traffic characteristics of the GM zone in question, they would heartily support Mr. Freel and's recommenda- tions that the zone be exempted from the proposed ordinance as it was now governed by the moratorium under which proper investiga- tion and evaluation could effectively take place. Jean Olmsted, 240 W. Charleston, understood a letter was included in the packet from the Planning Department which requested City Council permission to review the Traynor property zoni ng after the other CS areas in the City were studied. It was unknown how long it would take to complete those studies, or what steps toward the development of the property might be taken during that period. The— neighborhood did not want to agai n be in the position of appearing before the City Council too late. She believed further delay was unfair to the Charleston Meadows residents and they hoped the zoni ng study of the Traynor property woul d not be post- poned. Anne Ercolani, 2040 Ash, was concerned about the exception for accessory uses, and what happened when they were no longer acces- sory uses, and whether the City would have any control. Other- wise, she supported the ordinance especial ly since it was only intended to be temporary. Jim Hal i burton, Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce, said the Chamber was aware of the Council's i nterest in preventi ng the widespread conversion of sites in CS and GM zones to office uses. While the area studies authorized by the Council were being completed, the Chamber was also aware that given a very heavy agenda, the City staff might not be able to complete the target studies within the time constrai nts of the recently imposed moratori um. Normal lye i t would appear to be a better policy to complete the appropriate studies prior to the enactment of regulating ordinances, and was especially . so when it was understood that whatever limitations imposed might be made more or less restrictive dependent upon the results of the study. With specific regard to the GM zone, . it appeared there was only one rel ati vely compact area which would be affected by the ordinance, and the area was largely occupied by Ford kerospace and had some use patterns which required separate consideration. It further appeared that one or more additional firms i n the same area might have similar use patterns. The staff recommendation that the GM designation be deleted from the pro- posed o rdi nonce seemed a reasonable al to rnati ve. The existing moratori um currently protected the area from office development, find its compact nature supported a relatively simple study process and its use patterns suggested possible different restrictions than for the various CS zones. The Chamber welcomed the opportu- n1ty to be involved in those and other studies which were designed to regul ate 1 and use rel aced to buss ness .development. Bob Moss, 4010 0rme, said the Barron Park Association wrote about the CS zones along E1 Camino Real, specifically addressed the Traynor property . at Charleston and El Camino, but was interested i n getti ng the. other CS zoned property between Charleston, Arastradero- and .Lambert reviewed and reevaluated, but not to the exclusion of any other projects already on the agenda. With specific regard to the office space i n the CS zone, there was an intensive review of office space in the CH zone, which was simil ar to the CS _`zone, and as pointed out by Mr. Chandler, the City studied office uses in commercial zones, their desirability, and the amount of office space which was: reasonably likely to cause discomfort. He believed the 5,000 square foot threshold was a fair assessment of what w'rs believed to -be a realistic limit for office space in the CS zone, and: saw no reason to defer adoption of the ordinance. With regard to the GM zone, there was a need for some sort of limitation in office use, but he did not know whether 5,000 square feet was appropriate in that zone because it was a different type of use compared to the CS zone. If in the next couple of years a particular property owner or applicant found a need to request a rel axati on, there could be a specific application which could be reviewed by the Planning Commission and Council on its own merits. He said the GM area along San Antonio was at the south end of town, and was different from other areas, but when Mayfield Mall was converted to office space, all inter- sections would be adversely impacted, so there was a problem even though it was on the fringes of town. Once that area became con- gested, it would spill over traffic into the adjacent residential neighborhoods. He suggested the ordinance be adopted, and the fi ne to ni ng allowed to p rog ress 1 ate r. Mayor Klein declared the public heari ng closed. Mr. Scheiber clarified that staff did not suggest the Charleston/ El Camino area be the last CS area studied. There were probably five or six special studies for the CS area, and staff's letter to the Charleston Meadows Associ ation indicated that unless di rected otherwise by the Council, staff would proceed to do the GM Zoned area along San Antonio fi rst; then the Lambert CS zoned area; and staff intended to take up the Charleston/El Camino area the rd. MOTION: Councilmember Cobb moved, seconded by Renzel, to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation for the zoning ordinance amendments to restrict the size of office developments to 5,000 square feet in the CS and GM zones. ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE rrtrifirTriTr-irraturir-Pirintrrf T0 AMENDING CHAPTERS 18.45 (SERVICE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS) AND 18.55 (GENERAL MANUFACTURING DISTRICT REGULATIONS) O► THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE TO LIMIT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF CERTAIN OFFICE USES" AMENDMENT: Councilmember Cobb moved, seconded by Witherspoon, to incorporate a two-year sunset clause. Councilmember Cobb said the ordinance was designed as a fix to an immediate problem, but he was not convinced it was the right or ultimate fix. A specific sunset clause in the ordinance meant the studies had to get done, and without the sunset clause it was too easy to forget and not necessarily do the best possible job. Councilmember Fletcher opposed the amendment. The ordinance was reasonable and changeable at any time. The Planning Department was assigned the .vari^its studies, and would return with recommend- ations, and Council would have an opportunity to make changes if necessary. She looked upon the ordi names as good ones, and did not particularly want to see them expire. She saw no point i n having a sunset clause, and automatically renewing the ordinance at the end of the two-year period. Councilmember Renzel concurred with Councilmember Fletcher. The Pi anni ng Commi s';,i on was concerned that the City not create a situ- ation where office competition drove out the kinds of uses which_ the City needed, and for which the City had the GM and CS zones. She believed it made sense to have the limitation, and a sunset provision would likely encourage the kind of speculation inland that was already being seen. It was better to... have the zoni ng perceived and intended to be permanent until such time as a sub- sequent Council saw the need to change the di recti on, Councilmember Woolley perceived the reason for passing the ordi- nance had something to do with the fact that the City could only have a moratorium for a maximum of 18 months, and it was one way to ensure no bul1di ng took pl ace, in terms of offices, beyond, 4 9 2 5 8/13/84 5,000 square feet until the City could complete its studies. She supported the amendment and looked upon it as ':xt ra insurance that *the Council's intentions became a reality. The City was talking about studyi ng five areas in terms of three to four months, and four months would multiply out to 20 months. If the Council put in a sunset clause of 24 months, she did not see it as i nterferi ng with the study, but rather as ensuring the studies were done. Vice Mayor Levy would not support the amendment, and if Council wanted to provide an incentive to complete the study, it should speak directly to it. Further, with a sunset provision, he envi- sioned a sloppiness at the time of the sunset provision. Council would have to act at that time to do sornethi ng to either extend it or specifically and knowi ngly let it 1 apse. He was concerned that nothing might be done, and it might lapse and provide an oppor- tunity for development simply because of an oversight. He pre- ferred to have an ordi nance in pl ace and take steps to change it in an orderly mariner. Councilmember Sutorius supported the amendment for the reasons cited and because it emphasized the temporary/permanent nature. He intended to participate in detailed studies that ended by in discrete deferral nations of the epp rop ri ate change to be made in the .,:;Moos zones as they came up for their i ndivi dual area studies. AMENDMENT PASSED by a . vote of 5-3, Fletcher, Renzel, Levy voting no," Bechtel absent. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Cobb moved, seconded by Witherspoon, to delete Sections 4, 5, and 6 re GM Zone from the ordi nonce. Vice Mayor Levy supported the amendment. Councilmember Renzel confl rived that staff was confident that the studies would be completed within the moratorium period. Mr. F reel and believed staff had a good chance of conpl eti ng the study within the six months. He never liked to promise, and said staff would have to return with ordinance changes to go through the Commission and Council, and whole new districts might be in- vented. He kn';w the i niti al staff work could be completed quick- ly, but did not know what the timi ng might be for the public hear- i #i process. Councilmember Ren1e1 assumed that if staff got bogged down, Coun- cil would be aler'te` and there would be time to enact the ordi- nance with respect to GM or extend the moratorium. AMENDMENT PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent, Councilmember Cobb was concerned about the Traynor property, and that area of the CS zone generally. He was concerned about the sequencing of the study because of the development threat. He wanted to see that one moved up, but was reluctant to make it a formal motion, and asked for a staff reaction. He was concerned because he bel leved the development threat might .be more immi rent there than i n some of the other areas. Mr. Freeland said staff would adjust the schedule as Council saw fit:. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. 4 g 2 6 8/13/84 ITEM #15, PUBLIC, HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE APPEAL DI MELTN1 A KAY I Mayor Klei n said the neighbors most concerned wrote a letter to the Council to request a continuance of one week, and the appl l- eant called and said it was agreeable. MOTION TO CONTINUE: Mayor Klein moved, seconded by Levy, to conti nue the item to August 20, 1984. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. ITEM #16, REQUEST OF. COUNCILMEMi3ER FLETCHER AND MAYOR KLEIN RE Councilmember Fletcher said each time Council enacted a moratorium or zoning change, appeals were received from developers or prop- erty owners who wanted to proceed with projects already set in motion and the debate was inevitably at what point to cut off grandfathers ng or the exemptions for specific parcels and proj- ects. On many occasions, Council used the ARB preliminary review process as a cut off poi nt, but she quoted from a comment made by Mr. Freeland in the Council minutes of March 26, 1984, regarding the problems. He was "...concerned about the importance that pre- iimi nary review was assumi ng through the grandfather clauses, which should not be the case. It (ARB prel imi nary review process) was strictly a service of the ARB to advise an applicant at an early stage of the design development and was not approval nor a formal review." The prei imi nary design review was not a required procedure, and only about 20 percent of developments went through the process. It was not bi ndi ng on either the developer or the. ARB and was not reviewed by staff as to conformity with existing zoning or regulations. It would be more equitable if the cut off poi nt was at the time when the ARB al ready gave approval , and she suggested that Council take up Denny Petrosi an's suggestions that the ordi nance include the effective date of any cut off. MOTION: Cou nci lmembe r Fl etcher moved, seconded by Klein, to di rect the City Attorney to draft appropriate language for the Municipal Code to exempt projects which have received Architectur- al Review Board and/or use permit approvals from moratoria and zoning changes with the effective date for those purposes being the date such moratoria or zoni ng ordi nance changes first appeared on the City Council or Pl anni ng Commission agenda, whichever occurs first. Vice Mayor Levy asked about the difference i n terms of time between submitting a regular application to the ARB and receiving an approval. Mr. Freeland said they were running five to six weeks for a com- plicated project between the date of its submittal to the Building Department counter and when it ;night receive a favorablQ rProm- mendati ors from the ARB to the Di rector of P1 anni ng. Vice Mayor Levy asked. how much work was al ready done on a project at the poi nt the application was submitted. Mr. Freeland said =the drawings submitted were not drawings that could be given to a contractor, and did not contai n the detailed structural specifications. They were complete as to elevations, floor- plans, and were checked internally by the Building Depart- ment as to zoning, but not as to zoning structural codes, and were reviewed by the Utilities Department, Public Works for drainage in the area, and the Fire Department. The el aborate drawl ngs were not usually done until after receipt of ARB approval because they were expensive to produce. 4 9 2 .7 8/13/84 Cuuncili€lei€fiber Sutorius asked staff to elaborate on the response about the degree of detai ! and cost. He said the materi al s sub- mitted to the City, i n order to be considered a valid application and to begin the review process of ci rcul ati ng around the various departments, involved precise, detailed information that required a lot of architectural design consideration, and a determination by a client as to what they intended to put on the piece of prop- erty. Mr. Freeland said that was true. The drawings :submitted were much more than a cartoon, but less than the blueprints that a contrac- tor could take outto the job site. They were at the point where the dimensions and appearance of the building were fixed and the next step would be how many two-by-fours, and where they were to be located. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme, was pleased Council was di scussi ng the issue of the point at which a building was given a vested interest because of past controversy and confusion. He believed Council - member Fletcher's request was a step in the right direction, but suggested the g randf athe ri ng begi n when a bui l di ng permit was issued— not just when the project was approved by the ARB. Legally, the Council was not requi red to let a project go forward until there was both the issuance of a building permit and sub- stantial construction. He believed it was realistic to not get into the substantial construction issue because of the legal tan- gles as to whether di ggi ng a hole in the ground constituted sub- stantial, or whether a foundation had to be poured, etc. When a project went to the ARB, it was not always in an acceptable condi- tion, and he could cite exampl es where detailed d rawi ngs and el e- vations were presented and turned out to have two elevations on one side of the building and no elevations on another side. If the project was not a PC zone, it might receive the same sc ruti ny, and it was possible that a project could be approved that was not at the poi nt of going in for detailed drawings or a building per- mit. There were some problems with the ARB procedure as presently structured, and if an item was controversial, it may or may not get appropriate input. He believed that i n order to give everyone a fai r chance, and with the understandi ng that an ARB approval had a one-year sunset and there was a sunset for builcii ng permits, it was more appropriate to wait until the bui l di ng permit was issued. At that poi nt, the developer actually had fi nanci ng, lined up construction, had detailed drawl ngs proposed, and was serious. He saw proposed projects go through the ARB stage, but the developer turned around and took the zoning and approved pi ans and sold their to someone el se. He suggested that was not truly getting a vested interest in the project and basically created a capital gains position. He urged that the ordi nance make the cut off date the issuance of a building permit. Counciimember Renzel recognized the proposal was an improvement over the practices Council exercised with respect to some of its more recent moratoria, but believed Council must consider that moratoria : tsel f was a drastic action and usually took place in the face of perceived needs to inspect the City's zoning to see whether appropriate, and usually because a great deal of activity was occurri ng which narrowed the planni ng options. Mr. Moss cor- rectly poi nted out the,, current legal parameter that the cut off point was when a valid building permit was issued and substanti al construction commenced, and she had difficui ty narrows rig the Council's ability to set the cut off point of moratorium at its ultimate limit if necessary. She believed Council must remember that when it set a moratorium, it was because of a perceived'seri- ous need to evaluate .zoning and that the ability to do so would be severelyhampered by the degree of activity. The only reason the problem: existedcurrently was because Council responded to special interests who wanted to be exempted from moratorium and was lib- eral with where it established cut off poi nts. She preferred to see the. Council 'have its full legal ability if necessary. "- " i - In response to the comments ��+a,j{yr- Klein supported the i��ti[.#Ufl. p offered by Mr. Moss and Councilmember Renzel, there was no need for the Council to go to the full extent of the 1 aw--the law only established an outer limit, and it was up to the Council to decide whether it wanted to go to that extreme. He believed Council - member Suto ri us questions indicated that getti ng .the ARB approval was not a trivial act on. the part of any applicant and that a great deal of effort was expended, and balancing those interests back and forth indicated it was an appropriate place. The public would be protected, if Council saw a moratorium was appropriate, and an applicant would be protected as well. Though an applicant would have expended a certain amount of funds, it would not be near the funds an applicant would have expended to go all the way to the bu i 1 di ng permit process. MOTION PASSED by a rote of 7-1, Renzel voting "no," Bechtel absent. ITEM #I7, REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBER BECHTEL AND MAYOR KLEIN RE ATE (sAu 5) Mayor Klei n said he and Councilmember Bechtel got their signals crossed because in furtherance of earlier Council actions, he had al ready sent out a letter to the Governor and the State's l egi sl a - tors with regard to the matter, and there was no need for further action. ITEM #18, rt1LL L REQUEST OF VICE MAYOR LEVY RE MEASUREMENT OF NOISE Vice Mayor Levy raised the item at the request of Bob Debs who suggested that Palo Alto's noise ordinance be modified based on new developments in noise measurement technology. He understood that when the City's noise measurement ordinance was enacted, the state of the art was the measurement of averages, and now they were better able to measure peaks. Be believed the concern with noise should be the concern about the peak since it reoccurred fairly often and could' be extremely i rritati ng, and it should be the measurement if possible. MOTION; Vice Mayor Levy moved, seconded by Cobb, that staff be di rected to review Palo Alto's noise ordinance and make recommen- dations to take best advantage of avail able technology. Councilmember Renzel said one of the major complaints from citi- zens was the intermittent noises for which measurements could not. be readily taken by the Police Department i n attempting to enforce the ordinance. Intermittent noises were more distu rbi ng than con- stant background noises, and si nee there appeared to be some tech- nology to measure the intermittent, high noise levels, ' it was a step forward for Palo Alto to see'; whether it might incorporate such technology into its ordi nance. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel absent. ITEM #19, REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBER FLETCHER RE STUDY OF ROUTE 101 Counci larember Fletcher said the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) recently undertook a study of the ,.route .:1O1 mass transit alternatives. The enabling legislation made it clear that the legislature intended to study improved rail transit in the corridor, but because, of federal regulations, the MTV: study must also consider higher occupancy vehicles types of things Among the suggestions was that 101 be double decked. There was a lot at -stake in the study, and it would also involve possible BART exten- sion, or partly extended,\only as far as the airport and hooked up, to either Peninsula Rail or a new rail lime The last of the three pubs lc hearings would .be held at 7:30 p.m. i n the Sunnyvale 4 9 2 9 8/13/84 Council Chambers, 456 West Olive Avenue, Sunnyvale. Shc hoped the meeti ng would be well attended. Any comments could be di reefed to the MTC i n w ri ti ng if peopl e coul d not attend. ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned at 10:35 p.m. ATTEST: City Clerk • APPROVED: 4 9 "3 0 8/13/84