Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-12-20 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MIE1UT€s CITY o� PALO ALTO Regular Meeting Monday, December 20, 1.982 P A G Oral Communications 2 7 8 7 Minutes of September 27, 1982 2 7 8 8 Minutes of October 4, 1982 2 7 8 9 Minutes of October 12, 1982 2 7 8 9 Item #1, Resolution of Appreciation to the Palo 2 7 8 9 Alto Tennis Club Consent Calendar None Referral fiction Item #2, Officials for 1983.83 Basketball Season Item #3, Resolution Providing Authority to City Manager to Effect Certain Changes in Gas Utility Rates Item 14, Ordinance Extending the Demolition Permit Moratorium in College Terrace for 45 Days (2nd Reading) Item #5, Solar Energy Leasing (2nd Reading) Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions Item #6, Request of Councilmenbers Cobb, Levy and Eazzino re Development of a Long -Range Plan for Open Space/Recreational Uses of _ Surplus School Sites (Continued from 12/13/82) Item #7, Public , Hearing: Planning Commission Recommendation; re Application of the Palo ..-Alto Housing Corporation for a Tentative Subdivision Map. to Divide Property Bounded by _ Birch Street, Grant Avenue and Sherman Avenue Item #8, Public Hearing: _ Planning Commission.; Recommendation. re 'Application of Robert and Naze Cavallero to Change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and for a `:Zone Change for Property Located at 3163 3197 Middlefield Road 2 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 2 7 9 0 2 7 9 0 2 7 9 0 2 7 9 0 2 7 9_:0 2 7 9 0 2 7 9.2. 7 ! 3 T 8 5 1_ '/20/82 ITEM Item #9, Public Hear)dg: Planning Commission Recommendation re Proposed Amendment of the Sub- division Ordinance to Provide a Process for Amending Tentative Subdivision Map Approvals for Condominium Conversions Item #1O, Appeal of the Cowper Hamilton Building, Inc. from the Decision of the Architectural Review Board to Deny Approval of the Design for a 17 -Unit Condominium Development Proposed_ for 721-745 Webster Item #11, Request of Councilmember Fazzino re Gypsy Moth Spraying Item #12, Request of Councilmember Fazzino re Downtown Parking Management Plan Item #13, Request of Councilmember Levy for Staff Reports re Open Space/Recreational Uses of Surplus School Sites Item #14, Cancellation of December 27, 1.982 and January 3, 1983 Meetings Adjournment PAGE 2 8 1 0 2 8 1 6 2 8.2 0 2 8 2 0. 2 8 2 0 2 8 2 0 2 8 2 0 Regular Meeting Monday, December 20, 1982 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:40 p.m. 1 Mayor Eyerly announced that Committee met at 6:00 p.m., which commenced at 6:30 allocation. the Finance and Public Works (F&PW) and the Council had a work session, p.m., regarding Human Resources PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Fenzel Witherspoon ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Niles R. Moseley, 3830 Page Mill Road, protested the possible closure of Page Mill Road for any . length of time. The resi- dents were advised that the road would close for two to four weeks, and that Highway 9 or Woodside .Road would be alterna- tive routes. He said the commute would take an extra one to one and one-half hours per day, or an extra forty to sixty miles, and that the City's request was unreasonable. He realized that the road needed repair, and suggested that the road be left open for residents of upper Page Mill Road only and closing it to all other traffic. 2. Tom Harrington, 4201 Page Mill Road, said that a minor slip- page started last January during the big storm about one and one-half miles above Foothills Park on Page Mill Road. The City did a good job keeping Page Mill Road up during the last difficult Winter, and put asphalt over the slippage. The road should have been repaired last summer, but was not. He said the City decided to wait until it started raining again, then dig a 30 foot trench under the road and start repairing it. Half the road was starting to slip away. He did not agree with the City's soluti-on, and believed the road should have been cut more into the hi l l , thereby removing one of the curbs. There was room for one lane to be kept open on Page Mill Road. He suggested that Council direct staff to have the residente considered and that the road be kept open at least one way. - ,He said the road was closed for the convenience of the contractor, but he believed the convenience of the citizens should prevail. 3. Ptah X Siki, Roni Bennett, 524 Middlefield Road, said he heard that the City of Palo Alto was contemplating a.: sale of the land known as Central School in Crescent Park for development purposes. He said the zoning map indicated that the land was zoned public facility, and that zoning should be maintained.; Students were turned away from colleges because of the lack of space, and he ``suggested that a college be opened there. 4. Bob: Moss, 4010 Orme, commented regarding the Human Services Plan. As a member of the public, and someone who provided human services as an officer of a couple of organizations in the City, he . attended about a third of the ..meetings, and pro- vided more information to the City Council. He applauded the general concept of the " plan, but believed the Council was seriously disadvantaged because they lacked detailed minutes of what went on at the HRC meetings : as was the case with the. Planning Commission minutes when the Comprehensive Plan, wa disCussed and amended. He beleved -minutes- would provide -the Council with a better flavor : about what happened,` -how it`, happened and why, and regretted _that., the Commissions did not receive that level of detail. He -.pointed out .that "previously; the HRC talked; about allocating resources in order : 10 make funding r'eeommendat i ons and act as a' sort Of "mini* budget committee, but realized early on that the functionwould not 1 1 be appropriate for the Commission. He emphasized that the Commission was not trying to tell the Council how to allocate budget money, and it was not necessary to tell the Council whether field of service (a) was more worth than field of ser- vice (b). Any particular field of service was ranked in that manner, and he suggested that if the Council reread the report with that in mind, they would have a different sense of what the Commission was trying to do. He agreed that perhaps the fields of service should be tuned, and suggested that if the Council spoke individually with members of the HRC to try and obtain a better sense of what happened at the meetings, they would gain a better appreciation of what the Commission was trying to do CityManager Bill Zaner said that the City had an ongoing repairs project budgeted for Page Mill Road. It involved stabilizing the hillside at a particular turn on Page Mill Road quite a distance above the. Foothills. Park entrance and east of the Los_Trancos entrance. He said that soils tests and geological studies had been done in order to properly know how to stabilize the hill upon which the road was sitting. Last Friday a slippage of the hill occurred, and he presented photographs which showed the actual condition of the roadway. Staff opined that the roadway was a hazard to the Public safety, and the travel way was now reduced to less than one lane. A sheer precipitous drop off now existed from the pavement down: below, and staff had considered a variety of alternatives in an attempt to solve the problem --including cutting into the hillside and making it one way travel. The road remained a hazard for public safety, and was consequently closed. He esti- mated that it would take two to four weeks to repair the road dependent upon the weather. If it rained, and the weather con- tinued to be wet, it would be difficult .for the contractor to bring in the necessary fill. He said the slippage was like the slides being read about and dean on Highway 1, but the roadway happened to be perched out on the edge of an embankment. Further, closure ofthe road was not for the convenience of the contractor, but rather the public's safety. The contractor had instructions to work seven days a: week, . and the City was sparing no expense to get the roadway repaired. The City also wanted the roadway back in service as fast as possible. Mayor Eyerly suggested that if any Councilmember wished to address that subject tonight, it should be added to the agenda during Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions. Mayor Eyerly announced the need for two possible executive ses- sions --one regarding litigation and one regarding personnel to be held during the break and at the end of the regular meeting respectively. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 27, 1982 �wnrl i r�.rrirter� rr. ■ .w��.rri nrrs���r���— -_ - - - - Vice Mayor Bechtel submitted the following corrections: Page 2543, eighth paragraph from top, second line: Change the cord "clear" to "clearing s Pa: e 2544, second paragraph from the top, third line 5� ence' s1ould be "sense." Page 25.55, fourth " paragraph from the bottom, the word "the. fourth Councilmennber Fazztno' had the following correction Page 2560, second .\to last.'paragr-a b e ete the word "aspects.° "The word line Delete fourth line from ,the bottom: MOT1 Nt °Cdasciiwenber Fletcher "moved, seconded by Fezt1ne, apprera1 of the 'finites of Septe er-'21, 1982, is corrected. -2 T 8 8 12/20/82 MOTION PASSED unanimously. MINUTES OF OCTOBER h2 MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Cobb, approval of the Minutes of October 4, 1982 as submitted. MOTION PASSED unanimously. MINUTES OF OCTOBER 12. 1982 1 1 MOTION: Councilaeeber Fletcher moved, seconded by Klein, approval of the Minutes of October 12, 1982 as submitted. MOTION PASSED unanimously. ITEM #1, RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO THE PALO .ALTO TENNIS CLUB MOTION: Counci lmeaber Cobb, moved, seconded by Ey+Orly, approval of the Resolution of Appreciation to the Palo Alto Tennis Club. RESOLUTION 6081 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CIT? OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING ITS APPRECIATION TO' THE PALO ALTO TENNIS CLUB FOR RAISING TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS TO HELP RESURFACE THE PALO ALTO HIGH SCHOOL TENNIS COURTS" Councilmember Cobb said he believed the Palo. Alto Tennis Club made an impressive and significant contribution to the community by a private organization. The contribution be- refitted everyone_ who enjoyed and participated in the sport of tennis --most particularly the young people of. Palo Alto High School. He noted that the "Daly courts were in such poor condition at the time the. Tennis Club made the .contribution that some people were concerned that they might be too dangerous to play on. Given the financial pressures of the school district, it might have been difficult for the courts to have been improved soon enough to save them. He said it was an example of the kind of generic contribution that would have to be made by more groups in .other special interest areas as the difficult effects of Proposition 13 came to bear on cities who tried to maintain the same kind of community as Palo Alto. He believed the resolution was an opportunity for the Council to provide an official thank you to some caging citizens. MOTION PASSED unanimously. Harry Anisgard, President of the Palo .Alto Tennis Club, said that the Club appreciated the City's gesture. He introduced Marcelo Canelas, who was instrumental in accomplishing the fund-raising activities. Mr. Canelas thanked the City Council for the resolution, and said that raising the money for the "Pa1y" courts was a rewarding experience. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTION: Counci lmea er.., Fazzin®_; move seconded by Bechtel., approval of the ConSeet Calefdar. Mayor- Eyerly asked to ,b►e recorded as voting "no," on Item 04, Ordinance .Extending the Demolition Permit Moratorium in College. Terrace. 2 7 8 9 12/20'82 ITEM #2 OFFICIALS FOR 1983-83 BASKETBALL SEASON (CMR:613:2) 'Staff recommends that the City Council approve the amendment to Contract No. 4263. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. 4263 FOR OFFICIATING 1982-83 BASKETBALL GAMES Robert Kocher and Scott Perry ITEM #3, RESOLUTION PROVIDING AUTHORITY TO CITY MANAGER TO EFFECT Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution autho- rizing the City Manager to adjust gas rates as required on a timely basis to avoid any loss in Palo Alto's gas utility revenues as a result of PG&E's rate increases. ESOLUTI©N 6082 entitled 'RESOLUTION. OF THE COUNCIL 1H arrlr PALO ALTO PROVIDING AUTHORITY TO THE CITY MANAGER TO EFFECT CERTAIN CHANGES IN GAS UTILITY RATES (SCHEDULES G-1 AND G-50) AMENDMENT RESOLUTION NO. 5982' ITEM #4, ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE DEMOLITION PERMIT MORATORIUM IN Y n e a di n ORDINANCE 3403 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF HE CITr , w PALO ALTO EXTENDING FOR 45 DAYS THE MORATORIUM ON ISSUANCE OF DEMOLITION PERMITS FOR ALL RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES IN THE RM-3 ZONE OF COLLEGE TERRACE BETWEEN CALIFORNIA AVENUE, STANFORD AVENUE, EL CAMINO REAL AND WELLESLEY STREET! (1st Reading 12/6/82, Passed 8-1, Eyerly voting 'no.") ITEM #,6, SOLAR ENERGY LEASINC 2nd Reading) ORDINANCE 3404 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNC;.IL OF LOALTO ESTABLISHING A MUNICIPAL SOLAR UTILITY PROGRAM AND ESTABLISHING AN INTENT TO REQUIRE THE LEASING OF SOLAR ENERGY .DEVICES" (1st Reading 12/6/02, Passed 9-4) MOTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly voting "no," on Item 14, Ordinance Extending. the Demolition Permit Moratorium in College Terrace. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS Councilmember 'Fazz1no. added Item #11, Request re Gypsy Moth Spraying. Councilmember Fazzino added Item #12, Request re Downtown Parking Management Plan.. Councilmeier- Witherspoon said that the Finance and Public Works (F&PW) Committee_: selected Arnold M. Porter as a consultant on the Cable Television Project. ITEM #6 VEST OF . COUNCILMEMBERS C0BB .EVY AND FAllINO. RE NOTION ._ Coeavi l*ember Cobb moved; ; seconded by F azziao, . that the Planning r' Commission study the issue of potential open space/ recreational' c nsegeapces of , the:: possible future" sale of Jordan, Wilber, and Cabberley -sites ,and begin development of a comprehen- Sive long-range play for. the ',Pen some/recreational, uses ,of Pale(' Alto School sites, with :parroticelar attention to Jordan,.; Wilbur and' Cubberley. '2 , .T 9 0 12/20/82 1 1 Councilmember Cobb commented that the Council had recently made important and tar -reaching decisions regarding the disposition of the surplus elementary school sites. The staff reports made ref- erence to the potential open space and recreation consequences of possible 'uture sales of either Jordan, Wilbur, and/or Cubberley, and there was some linkage between the disposition of the elemene teary school sites and the larger sites. Accordingly,, he and r'ouncilmembers Levy and Fazzino believed that the Planning Commission should study the issue and begin the development of a comprehensive long-range plan for the open space/recreational uses of the Palo Alto School sites. He recognized. that staff had accumulated a lot of studies and a considerable amount of data over the years, and he viewed the assignment as an opportunity to pool that information in one report to give the public a chance to react, to better understand the information, and to give both the Planning Commission and City Council the chance to see the forth- coming decisions with regard to the elementary school sites in a larger and more complete context. Councilmember Witherspoon said she would oppose the motion. The Council had done at least three studies regarding the future closing of school sites, and she believed the City was well- supplied with policy decisions. She did not think it was neces- sary at this time to plan any further than had been done in the last month, which was to buy approximately $1,000,000 worth of recreational fields from the closed sites on this year's list. Councilmember Klein said he concurred completely with Councilmember Witherspoon, and would not support the motion. Vice Mayor Bechtel said she believed the motion was premature. She applauded long-range planning, however, the City could not long range plan in a vacuum. At some point the City would need to acquire additonal open space lands, but the School District indicated that it would take another ten years before a decision was reached regarding Cubberley, Jordan or Wilbur. She did not believe the City was, ready to tell the school board which schools to close or keep open. She would not support the motion. Councilmember Renzel said she supported the motion. The City Council recently referred the School District's proposed closure sites to the Planning Commission, and they had to decide on those individual sites more or less in a vacuum. She believed it made sense for the City's primary planning group to look at what the Council wished to see happen on the school sites in the community and to better prepare the City for when those sites were declared surplus. Councilmember Levy said he. supported long-term planning, which by its essence meant to try and deal with a number of uncertainties. It meant not planning in great detail, but planning an outline. The School District had said that in approximately five years, it would likely close a middle school. The two middle schools now open were each about 20 acres in size, contained many community facilities,, and were worth a lot of money, or would cost a great deal of money to keep in service He believed that for those reasons) it was important for the Council to have .a five-year plaer with respect to the City's needs in terms of the two middle schools, and loOk further beyond another five years to Cubberley as well. That did not mean a _:long and intensive study, but rather a general; study and looking ahead five years to .see what it would mean in terms of City resources to continue to pew -fide , the seri i to and space to the citizens. He supported that type of a plan, _ and would support the motion. Mayor Eyerl y concurred with Counci l mebers : Witherspoon, Klein and Vice Mayor Bechtel. He said the:, information had already been presented by staff in , several different reports. The financing had not been addressed because it was not known when the sites would be on the market for consideration. Counciliiiember Fazzino said he agreed with Counci lmembers Cobb, Levy and Renzel. He,believed that staff was being asked to move the Council beyond what had become a reactive node with respect to the way in which school sites were handled. When the issue of potential elementary school sites was before the Council a couple of weeks ago, he encouraged the Council not to proceed with great haste in acquiring each of those sites even though it seemed appropriate to move ahead with them for use as recreational facilities. Further, he encouraged the Council not to rush into a decision with respect to the development of Eleanor Pardee Park because he saw a number of sites around town, like the large scale. sites on the order of Jordan, Wilbur and Cubberley, as an Integra part of a long-term recreational plan. As the Council continued to look at elementary and other schools placed before tnem for possible purchase, he believed it was important to have a long. term sense of which sites were needed for recreational purposes.' Without that information, the Council's decisions would be ill- informed. The motion asked staff to move one step beyond where it was, take the current data and incorporate what was likely to happen over the next five or ten years at the School District office and tell the Council how those decisions could fit into the City's long-term recreational plan. That type of responsible planning process would preclude the Council from being forced into hasty decisions with regard to each site before them, and he encouraged Council support of the motion. Councilinember Renzel commented that while the assignment spoke to open space and recreational uses of surplus school sites, the City looked at it primarily,in terms of acquisition. The City would have a planning function with respect to all of the closed school sites at some point in the future, and whether or not the City acquired them, it was important for the Planning Commission to look at them in that context. Councilmernber Fletcher said she opposed the motion at this point because the City had not received any indication from the School District which additional schools would be closed. She would support asking the. School District for more notice than before when: school sites would be put up for sale. MOTION FAILED by a vote of 4-5, Fazzino, Renzel, Levy, Cobb voting °'aye." ITEM #7, PUBLIC HEARING: PLANTING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE Mayor Eyerly commended the Palo Alto Housing Corporation for its work on the matter. Planning Commission representative Ellen Christensen said the Planning .Commission was pleased to pass on a; unanlmo'is recommenda- tion for approval. Mayor Eyerly declared the public hearing open. Receiving no requests from the public to speak, he declared the public hearing closed. MOTION: Vice Mayor - Bechtel moved, seconded by Fletcher, to adopt the ►lae tttg,.Com*itsioe recommendation to'`approve the app11 cation of the Peio Alto Housing Corporation for tentative subdivi- sion approval t°e' divide property bounded by Birch. Street 1, Grant Avenue and Sherman Avenue into 40 condominium" units, PASSED onanimeas1y, 1 1 ITEM #8 PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE E 1 1 FTEZU RflAQ T�MR • • Mayor Eyerly said that the City Council had received, by mail and by telephone calls, a .mirage of input from the community. He had 25 cards from the neighborhood in support of the planning Commis- sion recommendation which were received after the Council packet went out. He urged that in view of the input already received, and the lengthy Planning Commission meeting, that the public have sympathy with the Council when addressing the matter. Planning Commissioner, Ellen Christiansen, said that the Commis- sion voted 6.1 to support the continuation of the neighborhood serving use at the site. The application had widespread neighbor- hood support as well as broader community support, and the Commis- sion believed that the uses were restricted under the PC zone to uses that met the neighborhood needs* The project worked to improve circulation in the area, and the Commission hoped that the appearance would he improved. A lot of time was spent concerning the access ways, the landscape buffer between the proposed project and the adjoining property behind Loma Verde. The Commission was comfortable that the access question was resolved, and said that a good landscape buffer was provided for any residential project that might go in behind. The consensus was that there would be a significant amount of new housing in the area, and that the proj- ect provided an important neighborhood center which should be con- tinued. The Commission supported the project, and did not believe that other landowners would be encouraged to come in for a similar kind of change. Zoning Administrator Bob Brown said that the Assessor's Parcel numbers mentioned in the staff report prepared for the Planning Commission, dated September 24, 1982, should be changed to read 127-51-25 and and 127-53-1. Further, the map attached to the ordi- nance as Exhibit "A," was incorrect. The area in solid red was removed from the PC and would remain an RM-2 zone, and was cur- rently under a parcel map process to merge with the residential property adjacent to it on Layne Court. That area would become the access easement to the property shown as 713-715 Loma Verde. That would do away with the existing access easement to that com- niercial property. He said a question had been raised concerning the legality of notice for the site since addresses were listed as 3163 through 3197 Middlefield Road and excluded 3147 Middlefield, which was currently occupied by a parking lot for the Century Stores. The 3147 Middlefield address no longer existed and would. be removed from the City's base maps. The parking lot was included in the PC zone. Mr. .Brown presented some information to the Council regarding existing comme-ci a1 space for each of the uses .and the square footage. City. Attorney Diane Lee said that the staff report to the Council Provided for the Commission to include a condition which required renegotiation- of the ingress/egress easement according to the terms of a certain agreement between Mr Hagan and the applicant prior to the effective date of the PC zoning, The :City 'Attorney's office looked into whether an effective date of an ordinance could be conditioned on something such as the agreement of two private parties, and it could not be done. Page 3 of CO:614:2, Condition No. 11. provided that .the easement "be recorded prior to construc- tion which would take place in May of next year. If construction was not"'commenced at that time, the applicant `'would na't be in cum- pliance with the ordinance, and the City would be in. a_pasitian to revoke,the-permit: Ms. Christlensen said that the City Attorney's office appeared to have accomplished the desires of. the Planning Commission if it could not be tied to the actual enactment of the PC ordinance. The idea was to resolve the easement question because it was tied to the entire issue of landscaping and provided a landscape buffer for any residential development that might go in behind, and help resolve an access problem that had been an issue between the two parties in the past. Counci lrnember Cobb asked about the hours of operation for the Century Liquor Store. John Heller, an owner/operator of the Century Liquor Store, said it opened at 7:00 a.m. and closed at 11:00 p.m., Sunday through Thursday, and closed at 12:00 midnight on Friday and Saturday. Mayor Eyerly declared the public hearing open. James Hagan, Attorney at Law, Palo Alto Square, represented the applicants, Hobert and Hazel Cavaliero. He said the applicants had presented a substantial and attractive plan for the develop- ment, and that some of the concerns had been resolved. The appli- cants learned that they still had strong and -valuable public sup- port for the development. He appreciated the Council's considera- tion of the matter. Mayor Eyerly said originally he understood that 500 square feet were to be included for grocery sales within the Century Liquor Store, which was later raised to 700 square feet. A grocery store was needed in the area, and 700 square feet appeared small to address any type of grocery supply. Mr. Hagan said the shelving was set up in the store such that it was hard to isolate one use from another. For example, toiletries and sundries and other things were sold as well as groceries. Initially, a downward limit of 500 square feet was proposed for groceries, and the Planning Commission requested that it be raised to 750 square feet. He believed they were talking about the mini- mum amount to be allocated for grocery sales --not the maximum. The intent was to carry what the public needed and wished to have. So much space was allocated in the store for the sale of. alcoholic beverages, sundries and groceries. They did not intend to expand the sale of alcoholic beverages, but anticipated that the sale of other items would be expanded with the renovation of the buiIdin9. Mayor Eyerly asked if, in view of the wide range of supplies found in grocery stores, the applicant would have any objection to limiting space for liquor sales more evenly. Mr. Hagansaid he would confer with his client. Counci lmember Cobb said that Mr. Hagan's 'letter of December 6, 1982, implied that the laundromat might not :remain in the facility. Mr. Hagan said the Century Stores, intended that the laundromat remain. Mr. Caval-,lero,., the owner, had conferred with A. J.'s Cleaners, and he . understood that : an agreement had been worked , out. under which the cleaners would remain. Counciline* er Cobb sold he gathered that it was the; Century: - Store's intent not to take over the entire site* Mr. Hagan said that was correct.:: The building was constructed in two pieces -;the Piece : on they; �north end: was ' "Century :.Stores," and.: the _``piece on the south end housed both A. J » `s Cleaners, Landro-. fat,t plus -Jatt.kson's- Catering, and:Richraaid•,Donuts-.: In `:order .:to 'comply with tne:plan;-the Century Stores would have to demolish approximately 2;000 square feet- at, the south end in which Richrald' 1 Donuts existed. The owners contemplated that Century Stores would remain within the current confines, and an octangular piece would be put in the middle in order to join the building in a more aesthetic architectural style and other uses would be in there-- i.e., donuts or a delicatessen. Counci linember Cobb reiterated Mayor . Eyerly's question about whether the applicant would object, as part of the restrictions, to some boundary on how large the Century Stores component of the entire operation could be consistent with the kind of structure contemplated currently. Mr. Hagan said he would have confer with his client regarding Councilmember Cobb's question. Regarding Mayor Eyerly's question concerning the allocation of space, the applicants did not intend to diminish the space being used to sell groceries and sundries, and he believed it would be unfair to request that Century Stores diminish its current sales area estabished for the sale of the other products. Mayor Eyerly said that staff had advised that within the 7,500 square feet of Century Stores, 4,600 square feet were designated as liquor sales, 700 square feet for grocery sales (and which included sundries, etc.), and 2,200 square feet were designated for storage. George Witheck, 2411 Bryant, represented a group of people who lived south of California Avenue who were fortunate to be able to walk to both the California Avenue Shopping area and Midtown Shopping area, which included Century Liquor Stores. His wife and the wives of his neighbors refused to walk through the California Avenue' Pedestrian Underpass under Alma Street and the railroad tracks to shop at the Ca?\ifornia Avenue Shopping Center because of the objectionable four—letter words written on the walls, and insulting references to the minorities of the City of Palo Alto. The people of south Palo Alto were fortunate that the Midtown Shopping area was within walking distance, and requested that the Council not do anything to take -that shopping area away. Jean Mooers, 3163 South Court, said she had lived in the Midtown area for 25 years. The people in the area would have to go great distances if A. J.'s Cleaners and the laundromat were no longer at the present location, and she urged the Council to provide zoning for the services drastically needed. John Horan, 2563 Cowper, said he supported the Planning Commission recommendation. -James -F. .Koch, 575 Tyndall Street, Los Altos, was the Managing general partner for the majority of the :block between _Middlefield .and Loma Verde Place, specifically 713, 715, 725, 727, 729, 731, 733, 745 and 751' Loma Verde. LHe said that some 15 years ago after the City adopted Ats Comprehensive Plan, it was decided that the block was to .be residential. -That ,promise was made to the people oaf that area .:Now, n,_ a flurry of political actions, the Council was considering the rez9ni.ng` which_ 'would break that promise, and as an adjoining property owner,' that action would hurt the value of his property. He asked if some future City Council "would change _the mostrecent rez:on.i,ngs,- in order ` to ,meet the Connprehen .s<iv.e Plan, and then change -.those those when their -.amortization periodexpired. He suggested. that favoritism and .political fear governed the City of Palo; Alto. Unless the Council kept ;prior promises and reje-cted the Planning :Conmission`recomMei=€dation, he' doubted. that, hi`k area would eiier again -trust City `government. `He said that _ a` colored rendering_ ,o? property owners who :signed ;_.the petition indi cated some' -of his .properties colored in, .and the requested, -that -they be "deleted, Mrs C. Earle 1253 Byron Street, ;greed ,the Council - to retain the Much needed community services on Middlefield Road. 1 1 Harry Johnson, 2710 Middlefield Road, said he was a businessman in the Midtown area for 25 years, and a resident of the area for 12 years. He firmly believed that the application should be approved because the services were,very important for the area. Nancy Cole; 1745 Fulton Street, represented herself as a consumer and Puppet Studio Theatre, a nonprofit corporation in Palo Alto. She said that the quality of life in Palo Alto had not been addressed. and she believed. that, Century Liquors represented what had been for so long in Palo Alto. She grew up in Palo Alto, lived in New. York City for 12 years, and had been back in Palo Alto for 12 -years dealing with Century Liquors. New York City was comprised of a lot of little neighborhoods as was Palo Alto. Those neighborhoods were very important and personal because citi- zens were addressed as individuals and not just consumers. There was a quality of graciousness about the people at Century Liquors who helped the Puppet Studio Theatre with its nonprofit endeavors. She was impressed by the architectural dramings, but did not care if the stores were rebuilt because she believed they had a quality Palo Alto should keep. There was something attached to the fact that it was a liquor store, but the store offered a service and kindness that should be retained in Palo Alto. Michael Moyer, 430 Sherman Avenue, was the architect on the proj- ect. He pointed out that significant improvements had been made to the project in terms of traffic safety, landscaping, and archi- tectural character of the building. He said he was available for questions. Councilmember Renzel said she understood from the staff report that the 900 square feet allocated for administrative offices upstairs was being taken off of Rich's Donuts. A few minutes ago, she heard that 2,000 square feet of Rich's Donuts would be removed. She asked whether 1,100 square feet was being replaced or whether an net loss of 1,100 square feet of building area would occur. Mr. Moyer responded that about 2000 square feet of area at the south end, at the corner of Loma Verde and Middlefield, were being removed from the project. He said the net total square footage of existing and new would be the same, and that the addition of the second story and some ground floor at the tower trade up for the lost area at the corner. Counci lmember Renzel asked if part of the octagon was ground floor and not second story so that there was only 900 square feet on the second story. Mr. Moyer said that the second story etas intended to be a maximum of 900 square feet of administrative space for the Century Stores. The balance would be storage. Councilmember Renzel clarified that there would be 2,000 square feet built on the. second story. Mr. Moyer o i d that., numer was slightly high, and that something slightly ` under the 2,000 square foot nu ber: would be more accurate. , -. The tower itself was about 700 square feet, and the balance of the additional second story space was really mezzanine space housed under _ the existing parapet line. The only visual impact to th4 street was the tower itself Cotnci lnerrter Renzel.. asked how much total space was expected for the ground floor retail space. gr..: Moyer said : a total of 3,800 square fee t of;;general business area was in the taller building at' the south end of the complex. Other area -s were designated for groceries and possibly- the donut shop which were �tc included " in that number. - Vice Mayor Bechtel asked if the existing usages would continue during the remodeling. Mr. Moyer said the cleaners would be relocated towards Loma Verde potentially,; and he expected some down time for them. Vice Mayor Bechtel said that as she understood the drawings, that the whole section of the present general business usages would be changed. 1 i Mr. Moyer said that the actual interior plans had not been finalized at this point, but the exterior wall plans were being renovated, and that some interior renovations would take place internally at the south end of the projects Vice Mayor Bechtel asked if,there would be an effort to provide some sort of relocation or alternative space during the remodeling period for those businesses who planned to continue. Mr. Moyer said he suspected that due to the nature and extent of the construction, there would definitely be some downs time where space was riot available during the construction activity -- particularly at the south end where there was d significant impact to the building. Councilmember Renzel asked how long some businesses might be down. Mr. Moyer said that a six-month construction period had been projected, and he believed the project would be completed within that time. Paul Jackson, 975 Colonial, owner of Jackson Catering, said he had conferred with Mr. Cavalier°, the owner of the building, and with John Heller, the manager of the building, recently. He said the children who used the services had not been addressed, and he urged that the Council act to retain the current services. Jackson Catering was .the first major business endeiVor of he and his wife, and they had been very happy with their location. It was intended that Jackson Catering be retained and they planned to stay if the Council approved the project. Mayor Eyeriy asked if the remodeling had caused .Jackson Catering to negotiate a new lease with the developer. Mr. Jackson said he had not been able to negotiate a new lease because it was not kno 4 whether the Council would approve the project. Mr. Cavaliero had advised him that if the project was approved, he would consider retaining Jackson- Catering but that certain financial obligations would have to be considered together with the remodeling and upgrading of the building. Mayor Eyerly clarified that if the zone change was t approved by t Council, Mr. Jackson's lease would have to be renegotiated. Mr. Hagan said that the exact down ties were unknown because, the interior plans ,were not completed, and those plans would govern the down : time to a great extent. The exterior revisions would probably not cause any shut downs, but the interior, renovations would. _ Moving A80 Cleaners and -Laundromat would : entail a lot of plumbing to be moved, and he envisioned that a shut : down would occur for the laundromat, but did • not know' whether,the cleaners would be affected. 'Every effort would ; be made to , minimize the down times, and the owners of the businesses would be cooperated with to ensure operation to the fullest extents possible during ,e the period of revisions. Regarding the changes., ,in square footage allocation for liquor sales, it was hard • to talk in terms': of square feet when lineal feet waS the important factor in -dis- playing food merchandise.- The tower 'was to be built 'directly adjacent to the Century' Stores area and would become an intrical part of it. All of that area --about 700 square feet --was being committed, and together with the amount of footage and some changes to enlarge the entire area for a delicatessen, grocery, and related items would increase the space to approximately 1,500 square feet. Some square footage would remain in storage, and the liquor and alcoholic beverage area would not be materially changed. The added space directly accessible to Century Stores would be committed to the grocery and sundry items. Mayor Eyerl y asked how much total square feet would be devoted .to the sale of grocery and allied items. Mr. Hagan said their figures indicated 2,800 square feet in the Richmaid Donuts and Jackson Catering area, and 2,200 square feet in A. J.'s Quick Clean area which totaled 5,000 square feet. Century Stores contemplated, under its revised drawings, 3,800. square feet on the ground floor for general business not connected with Century Stores. By removing the Richmaid Donut 2,000 square feet at the end, Century Stores had a net loss of about 1,200 square feet: Councilmember Renzel said there was currently 7,500 square feet for the liquor store --4,600 square feet in liquor, 700 in groceries, and 2,200 in storage. She asked if some of the storage was beneath the area proposed for administrative space and storage. Mr. Hagan said there was no storage was beneath the tower. The area beneath the tower was intended to be part of the delicatessen area or grocery sales area. He said it might be part of Century Stores or a separate entity. It was currently thought of as being either a delicatessen, grocery or donut type activity. Mr. Moyer said it was intended that Century Stores would manage the area as a whole. Councilmember Renzel said she gathered that the cleaners and laundry would move further south into the 3,800 square feet labeled general business. She asked if A. J.'s and Jackson's Catering were to occupy the whole space, Mr. Moyer said that some storage space was included in the 3,800 square feet which was used by the Century Stores. Councilmember Renzel said she was not familiar enough with the interior or Century Stores to know whether moving the groceries and sundries into the tower area would increase the area in the store. currently known. Obviously, 700 square feet of the store was currently devoted to groceries. Mr.; Moyer said it was thought that the combined areas for grocery might be as much as 1,500 square feet., One way to look at the area ` was to consider the existing sales area devoted to i i quor and grocery activity.- A number of 700 square feet had been discussed as' being devoted to groceries, and that area was specifically. devoted to that activity. Significantly more areas of counter space projected into the sales area which were.., in part groceries. He said it was not intended that the existing service area devoted to liquor would change. The existing amount of grocery area would be expanded somewhat, and perhaps up to 1,500 square - feet, of space a portion .of' which might be in the "octagonal tower on the first floor, Councilmember Renzel asked if it would building or only in the tower area. Mr. Moyer said it would perhaps go towards,' the -,back of the -building. It was hard to" be specific because no interior plans yet existed. The general ideas regarding usages were be"fore'. the, Counci 1 1- together with the square footages related to those uses. 2 7 9 8 12/20/82 _ Corrected 3/21/83 1 Councilrnemb er Renzel, asked whether the statement that the new facility would have 3,800 square feet of general business meant 3,800 square feet of general business other than Century_ Stores, and whether it included the tower area. Mr. Moyer- said it. meant 3,800 square feet of general business other -than Century Stores, and did not include the :tower area. It was up to the point where the tower began. Mr. Hagan said -that in order to clarify the issue with respect to Cleaners, they would only be moved about four feet. A.J.'s had asked for more space in order to expand, but in.order to retain Jackson's Catering Whose space was contiguous, A.J.'s eould not be given any considerable amount of additional space. By and large, A.J.'s would stay in ..exactly the same spot, and Jackson's would stay where it was, Councilmember Cobb said he had heard talk about good handshake agreements in terms of the continuation of things like A.J.'s Cleaners and Jackson's Catering Service, and the outpouring of people in attendance at the Council meeting was partly in support of Century Stores and partly in support of the other stores. He asked what assurances the City had that rents would not be esca- lated to the point where neither A.J.'s, Mr. Jackson or anyone else could remain after the construction was completed.. The people supported the application, and he asked what assurances they had of continuation and not being priced out of the store. Mr. Hagan said he did not know what kind of guarantees could be given because they .had not been able to formulate what could occur.. When the application was first made, the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board made quite a few changes regarding what would be done and the cost. He believed it was fair to say that some adjustment in rents would occur with an improved piece of real property. His client intended to try and make adjustments on a .ratio perhaps of how much money was spent on the square footage someone occupied, and have the rental over a period of the lease reflect the unproved quality' of the space being rented. It was intended to maintain a favorable environment for thosebusinesses already there because they had been partners for a long time. He believed the best guarantee in terms of his client's intentions was past history. When the applicant had a clarified picture about what would happen on the property and had the interior drawings costed out, they would .attempt to work out leases with Jackson Catering and A.J.'s Cleaners. Those busi- nesses were the applicant's principal concerns because they were presently tenants. The only other present tenant was Richmaid. Donuts, and it was known that Ricnmaid Donuts would not be there because _that end of the buildingwould be demolished in order to make room for additional parking. He believed. it was impossible to draw leases at this point. Coufci lmember . Klein failed to understand why leases were not nego- tiated contingent upon City Council action. There Was a reasons able expectation that the Council would act similarly to the Planning Commission recommendation. Mr. Hagan said Council action was not the only problem --there were the interior drawings necessary that were not prepared. Counclme er. Klein said the main condition of a lease ; was the, rent and: number of -years. He asked if there was anything to pre, vent the applicant from providing 1etters of intent or some type of commitment with regard to those :items err Hagan said the applicant could respond to such a request :if the Council made it a .condition of approval. The applicant was not trying to be evasive and had worked hard and spent:a lot of money trying towork the proposal out, 2 7 9 9 12/20/82.. 1 Councilmember Klein said he was concerned about Mr. Hagan's response because they both knew that many leases were entered into before buildings were built.. Mr. Hagan said that was true, but whether one of then► would advise a client to do so was a different story. Counc.flme er Klein said it was done all the time. Me. Hagan said that might be true, but it depended upon the terms and conditions. Councilmember Klein, said he was concerned because he believed there were ways it could be done. Kate Cole, 3064 Middlefield Road, said_ she appreciated >the Council's looking at the human services which were offered in the location. She ..did not know how far the drive to eliminate ser- vices and put in housing would go down Middlefield, and said there was an emergency medical facility across the street from her house that she hoped would stay along with Jackson's superior sand- wiches, the laundry:,, and Century. John Essa, 3067 Middlefield Road, said he worked for Century Stores from last February until two weeks ago, and that he had never had a more helpful or better boss. Mr-. Cavallero and Mr. Heller would do anything for. .their employees, tenants, neighbors or customers. Almost all employees of Century Stores lived in Midtown, and almost all of then had several children. He hoped all the stores would remain in business. R. J. Oebs, 31,45 Flowers Lane, said he had lived .one-half block from the site for 16 years, and in Palo Alto for 26 years. He found it interesting that after all of the hearings and discus- sions with the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board that the Council needed to know the division of interior space in order to. make a decision. He said if it were him, he would put off the decision until the interior plans were completed because the applicant was fighting for a rezoning without giving. the City any good reasons to make the decision. He believed that Council approval would violate a land use plan put in place 15 years ago. He pointed out that across the street was all residential, and allowing strip commercial to continue and accepting the, idea that it was the anchor of Midtown, the Council would have strip commer- cial all the way down to Loma Verde and probably beyond. He was concerned that Council approval of the recommendation would set a precedent for one person, and would open the door for other commercial properties to ask for the same_ privilege. The small businesses had .no guarantees that they would not be priced out of the location, and it suggested that if Century Liquors was to be the anchor for its little corner, that Council adopt a resolution prohibiting any further commercial zoning along that strip. Robert Cavel hero , applicant, said that in answer to Counci lmember Klein's questions regarding lease negotiations, he had an extensive conversation with two of hit tenants today and: believed they had,. arrived at an acceptable formula. The tenants were advised that the difference -between the additional cost on : a ratio basis would have to. be absorbed partially by him, and. any special equipment or fixtures would be absorbed by the tenants. He had no problem, with a`=letter of intent, and suggested that perhaps Councilmember•, Klein formulate it. Glenn Raggio,-730.---Sutter,_ said he did. --;not recall the definition -of` Midtown being followed by the -author De He had,,:worked for -Century,;$tor�es for:, five years, :.and',bel-1eved that:: ir.:Cavallero Wand- John Heller were the most .honorable men hti_ had-0-Ver., known.- Five -years ago, the: -grocery section wes_much smaller, than it currently was_. arod 'a t ha -d" gr-own with .community:' need He- . had,: not heard .._ Bauch. _discussion. about the - charities Mr. avallere continually 2:8'0 0 12/20/82 1 contributed to. He was a single parent with two daughters, and • said he could not imagine what it would have been like without a man who allowed him flexibility, time, and who cared when one of his children -were sick. Being on the inside looking out, one missed the heart of what was happening. T.he community support voiced was an example of the last 20 years of service,- and he had little fears about what might occur tomorrow or five years from now. On behalf 'of the employees of Century Stores, he thanked Mr. Cavallero and Mr. Heller for their support throughout the years no matter what. happened__ tonight, Mayor Eyerly declared the public hearing closed. Mayor Eyerly said he originally felt the area should be continued in housing, but having received so much support and input from the community, the Planning Commission recommended a PC zone to limit the type of business within the remodeling of the building. He believed that was a good step forward, but not tight enough for him. The Council must limit the total either retail or ground floor space of the liquor store and he expected that Council 1 needed to spell out its desires specifically of that PC zone. Counci lmember Renzel said she had followed the project since she was a Planning Commissioner and Century Stores applied for a modi- ficaton to their building, which was approved. At that time, she made certain that Century Stores understood that they only had nine years left on the amortization from the time those improve- ments were made. She had felt that the residential uses proposed for the area should be continued, and that the commercial be con- solidated further up. in Midtown. Clearly, there was a strong showing of neighborhood support based on the current uses. If the rezoning resulted in a change in tenancy to a hardware store or something else, which might be more lucrative than a laundromat, the neighbors would not get what they bargained for and neither would the City. In this case, tenants were ready for the space when made available, and appeared to fall in the categories of a laundromat, cleaners, and food services of one sort of another. She suggested that the initial uses, proposed under the PC ordi- nance, be limited in scope and approximate size to those currently in existence. She did net think the owner would suffer any hard- ships because he intended to lease the space to those existing uses, and the tenants had expressed their interest`in remaining. She asked staff how restrictive Council could .be in a PC zone could the amount of uses and square footages be specified. City Attorney Diane Lee said that. had been done by the Planning Commission to some extent alreadyby condition No. 2 on Page 2. She believed Council could be fairly restrictive in terms of limiting uses --not to individuals --but to types of usage and square footage as long as the total square footages did not appor-- tion more or less .than what existed. Zoning Administrator Bob Brown cautioned that the figures provided to.. the City. Council were provided by the applicant's architect late this afternoon and might not be completely exact. If Council wished ' to put limitations on existing area, staff could have precise figures by the time the ordinance- returned for second reading. Counci lmember- Renzel clarified 'that If ;,Counci 1 limited=‘ those uses, ,and -five years from now, the tenants moved out,: "a - PC amendment would ,,be required to addany new uses; Mr. Brown said that was correct. C.ouncilmember Renzel asked' if it would involve a lot of.. physical planning if it: did not involve a great deal of _ exterior remodel Age 2 `$ a 1 12/20/82 Mr. Brown said that condition #8 provided that the modification of users alone would only be reviewed by the ;Planning Commission and City Council. If the modification involved physical structural changes, the entire process, including the .Architectural Review Board, would be required. Councilmember Renzel said she was riot prepared to make the motion, but would support one if amended to limit the uses. The neighbors expressed their concern about retaining the uses within walking distance of their.:homes, and she believed the physical facility was smaller than a physical facility for a condominmium develop- ment which could be built there. The 30 foot setback in the rear would be ample, compared to some of the other setbacks -the Council had seen of ten feet for a three story building so that the neigh- bors would receive some additional benefit from the PC -that they would not receive from an adjacent residential property. The location was on a major collector street and did not present a traffic problem to an interior neighborhood. She believed that the services were the kinds people would walk to as opposed to gas stations where people typically stopped while driving. She believed there was some distinction between the subject property and other properties that might be apt to come forward. Councilmember Witherspoon asked if an alternative to zoning the property PC would be to extend the amortization period. Mr. Brown said there were no provisions in the zoning ordinance to extend the amortization period. Councilmember Witherspoon asked what the land • would revert to if for some reason the PC was not economically viable or- lapsed under a new owner. Mr. Brown said the property would have to be rezoned, but would carry no preference. There would be an underlying Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation which Council was being sought to change tonight to neighborhood commercial. Councilmember Witherspoon what would happen to the property if it was zoned PC, but kept the underlying land use designation of residential. Mr. ° Brown said it would be difficult to make a finding that the PC would be in conformance with that type of land use designation. Councilmember Levy said he was one of the two. Councilmembers who originally brought the :natter before the Council and recommended action to .keep it a neighborhood shopping area. .After reviewing all of the Planning Commission and City Council hearings, he still felt that action should be taken. The City planning concepts evolved over the years as the City did, and he did not believe it was necessary to isolate use areas with large chunks of residen- tial separated from large chunks of commercial. He believed the City could have a carefully planned small neighborhood shopping area such as the subject one and maintain the quality of life. As the "residents had made, clear, the quality of life for that neigh- borhood was better with the existence of that neighborhood -shop- ping center which was currently on a human scale, and the recom- mendations of the Planning Commissionworked to keep it that way. The Council needed assurances that the residents would be pro- tected, and the Planning Corraission recommendation with a couple of ch4n9es _ would do that. He . commented that the Council was zoning the land --not'.:_ the present owners, and occuoant%. He a ppreo i ated and - .personally share) the comments made about the ,stores y: proprietors and service now located there.- He hoped those people would continue in that location for some years to tome The Council needed to make certain that their intents were con- tinued. Further, he did - rot intend that the rezoning be any precedent about any further changes on Middlefield. He was satis- fied with the remaining_ zoning on Middlefield, and did not 1 consider the proposed change as the anchor of the shopping area north of it or as the beginning of any kind of rezoning whatso- ever. He believed it was essentially proper that most of Middlefield be residential and it was not his intent to do any further rezoning. As a general rule, he believed that Palo Alto should not have more commercial, and that the subject action was a unique exception. MOTION: Councl lmember Levy moved, seconded . by Fazzlno, to adopt the resolution approving a change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from Multiple Family Residential. to Neighborhood Commercial and the ordinance changing the zoning from RM-2(N) to PC for properties at 3163-3197 Middlefield Road with the following conditions: 1. That hours of operation for all uses on the site be limited from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 Monday through Thursday and 6:00 a.m. to 12:0O midnight Friday and Saturday daily excepting food preparation, merchandise stocking, and cleaning of the premises which may occur during hours when the uses are not open to the public; 2. That allowable uses be limited to the followings a) Liquor Store limited to the existing retail square footage currently devoted to liquor sales; b) Cleaners, laundry, and/or laundromat; c Delicatessen and/or catering service; d Doughnut Shop; e Hardware store; f Bakery; g Bicycle sales and/or repair shop; h Shoe repair shop; i Candy or ice cream store; J) Flower shop; k) Administrative office space and facilities ancillary to. permitted rases; l Retail Grocery Sales; Storage space when ancillary to permitted uses; 3. That a minimum of 750 square feet of floor area of retail grocery sales, including household, toiletry, medical, and similar items, be provided on site, either accessory to a per- mitted use or as a principal use; 4. That administrative facilities be limited to a maximum of 900 square feet of floor area for the entire development; 5. That wheelchair ramps shall be reconstructed at the Middlefield/Loma Verde and Middlefield/Layne Court intersec- tion at the applicant's expense to comply with City standards; 6. That a drainage plan be submitted . for approval to the City Engineer prior to approval of a .building permit; 7. That street tree well . openings along Middlefield Road between Loma Verde and Layne Court shall he enlarged and additional street trees planted as required by the City Parks Department at the applicant's expense; 8. That modification of allowable vises shall be reviewed only by the Planning COMMISSION and City- Council. Physical cba°nges to the site shall be reviewed in the normal manner set forth in Chapter 18.68 or Chapter 18.99; 9. Utilities shall be undirgrounded at the -owner's expense in conjunction with local utility undergrourding which will occur upon redevelopment of properties along Loma Verde Avenue, At presortt,°''atillty ;conduit shall be extended underground from the service point at the rear of the building to a service. point along Lora _Verde Amu* as recommended by the Utilities Department -2 8.0 3 12/20/82 �t_ MOTIONCONTINUED 10. Directional shields shall be installed on all perimeter free- standing light fixtures; 11. The ingress/egress easement existing along the rear of the subject property shall be altered in substantial compliance with the terms set forth in the agreement between James Hagan and James Koch dated November 16, 1982. The documents required to a4complish this change of easement shall be recorded with the Santa Clara County Recorder prior to the beginning construction date. ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READIAA entitled 'ORDINANCE OF THE 2:WnI:IL Ur Int WY- ur ALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (.THE ZONING MAP) TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS. 3163 - 3197 MIDDLEFIELD ROAD FROM RM-2(M) TO PC" RESOLUTION 6083 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF irwr-riri OI PALO ALTO AMENDING THE PALO ALTO COMPRE- HENSIVE PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO BY AMENDING THE LAND USE.DE$IGNATION OF PROPERTY AT 3163 - 3197 MIDDLEFIELD ROAD" Councilmember Fazzino said he cosponsored the issue six months ago, and was pleased with the Planning Commission recommendation. The zone change proposal did not represent a last minute flurry of activity as some believed, but was an effort strongly supported and promoted by neighbors in the area for, a long time. He was amazed by the amount of interest in the issue as he walked door to door during his reelection campaign last year. He believed the proposal preserved the neighborhood commercial usage and estab- lished a number of measures to protect the neighborhood from traf- fic, late night. noise, and garbage problems. Ft was important to recall the context of the zoning issue 16 years ago. Oregon Avenue south homes had recently been removed, and people in the area were fearful ..of continued disenfranchisemente;. from the City's political process and of additional commercial industrial growth in the area. At the same time, homes for moderate income people could be built on the Century Liquor site wit -bout any _ special Housing Corporation proposals, and apartments --trot condominiums were also possible, People ,like Bob.Debs and George Desposito were commended for their efforts to preserve the residential flavor of the area at that time within the context of that political era. Since that time, apartments; ceased -to be built, industrial uses were eliminated in the area, commercial growth was checked, and the advantages of . neighborhood commercial uses were recognized by many of the neighbors to be an important and intangible item. He believed that the loss of Channing Market a couple of years ago convinced everyone that the issue• was an important one, and .that Council must be careful in each individual neighborhood. In lieu of Century Stores, it was likely that neighbors would get high priced condominiums and an additional density with the attendant problems of -.noise, traffic and congestion. He supported any motion to protect the existing uses --the cleaners, caterers, and the grocery aspect . of 'the liquor stores, but with serious concerns . °,about unduly limiting usage unless a proposed use was not within the parameters of a neighborhood use or if larger amounts of trlff is and noise could result from that proposed use, He could live with most' of the proposed uses,- and agreed with Councilmembe'r= Levy's . comment regarding the card and gift shop. He -was surprised to hear that 90 percent of the speakers bought sri 1 - and bread from Century Stores, and said it would have been nice 'for- someone to admit that they bought wine and liquor. He believed _ the motion was fair, ad that.. the . cont a ols and limits met the concerns of the = neighborhood while allowing for the continued neighborhood use of the property. He encouraged Council ' support 12'8 0 4 12/20/82= As Corrected 3/21/83. Councilmember Fletcher clarified that Council was not acting to single out one particular, property owner or businessperson, but rather _out to an outpouring of support for the particular use. The Council must be responsive to the citizens of Palo Alta, and could not ignore the requests of 6,500 or 7,000 people who wanted to retain the particular use. She would have been con- cerned about retaining the use if the immediate neighbors had expressed concern about being negatively impacted, but a petition signed by almost everyone supported the use. The City had only heard opposition from three households in the particular area, and while there was some negative impact, it was more than balanced by the support from the rest of the community. The parking which faced Loma Verde would be somewhat mitigated by the landscape berm, but there was no other way to relocate the parking. The Layne Court people would be more protected than they were previously, the driveway was eliminated, and the lighting objected to would be shielded. She would support the motion. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Cobb ,coved, seconded by Renzel, that the hours of operation for the Century Stores in Item #1, of the motion, be 6:00 a.m. to .11:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight Friday and Saturday. COUNCILMEMBERS LEVY AND FAllINO INCORPORATED AMENDMENT INTO MAIN MOTION. Councilmember Cobb said that when the matter was first sent to the Planning Commission he suggested a couple of amendments because they helped to preserve the small uses. One amendment was to pro- vide necessary protection to the nearby residents, particularly those who lived across the street on Loma Verde. In his opinion, the City had done a reasonably good job in the landscaping portion. Further, he was concerned about guaranteeieg to the greatest extent legally possible that the uses of the property continued with the kinds of neighborhood uses currently retained on the subject property and protected against significant use changes that would not be acceptable to the community as a whole. Councilmember Levy had suggested limiting the liquor store to a particular amount of square footage. He was concerned about the practicality 'of that suggestion since the store seemed to have a commingled activity within the balance of that one store. AMENDMENT; Councilmember Cobb moved that .the maximum space to _be occupied by the liquor/grocery store component of the dsvelop- _ent shall be limited to 60 percent of the total developed part of the site with the balance of the site devoted to multiple uses. Councilmember Cobb believed that guaranteed at least three uses, and helped to create a situation where the smelter uses could remain. He clarified that the 60 percent figure was based on the data provided by staff. Councilmember Levy said he would be in favor, of an expanded gro- cery use. He was more concerned that the City not have a large discount liquor complex occupying the site, which was why he spe- cifically limited the amount of liquor sales. Councilmember Cobb said it was possible that instead of a large liquor store, one would get 4 large grocery/sundries operation which had a liquor operation as an aside. Again, the outpouri,ng of public .sentiment was to preserve very specific neighborhood uses, and , he believed the Council had to carve out enough space in thePC to ensure that those uses remained. AMENDMENT FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. 2.8 0 5 12/20/82 s Corrected 3/21/83 Councilmember Renzel specifically wanted to designate 800 square feet fer the laundromat and 1,400 for the dry cleaners, with the remaining space to be devoted to a delicatessen, catering service or doughnut shop, and that those be the only uses permitted under the PC ,ordinance. Those uses would permit all the uses spoken to by the neighborhood and the owner of the proposed development. The only difference was that instead of being able to automat- ically shift to the other uses, they would require Planning Commission and City Council approval. There were ready tenants for all of the uses and space in the first four uses plus the ancillary administrative space, and the amendment would not put in those other uses as rent competitees. She believed rents would be the ultimate determiner for who t e tenants would be. She did not wish to create that situation at this time. AMENDMENT: Councilmeaa►ber Renzel moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that the permitted uses be limited to a liquor store, cleaners, laundry and/or Laundromat, delicatessen and/or catering service doughnut shop,_ administrative office space and .facilities Ancil- lary to permitted uses, retail grocery sales, and storage space when ancillary to permitted uses. Further, that a minimum of 800 square feet be devoted to the laundromat, and 1,400 square feet be devoted to the dry cleaners, with the remainder to be allocated to the various food services. Councilmember Witherspoon said she would support the amendment, but not the vain motion. Although she as not a participant in the early fights for a Comprehensive Plan, people did so in order to know what to expect in the City, and she needed better cause than what she had tonight to go against the Comprehensive Plan. The City Council made a commitment to the neighbors and the com- munity that the area was to be residential, and the Council turned down a popular commercial use on Loma Verde not too long ago des- pite the hundreds of cards and letters received in support of it. In that case, the Council stuck by the Comprehensive Plan, and said no commercial on Loma Verde --that the commercial uses there would be amortized out for residential. She hated to see rezoning become a popularity contest, and was concerned with the present proposal because the PC had to go head and glove with an under- lying land use designation of neighborhood commercial. The Council appeared ready to justify the rezoning by saying that the neighborhood wanted these uses, and would be very specific about what types of uses the ewner,could have on the property in order for it to be rezoned to PC. She was concerned whether the pro- posal would be economically viable for the owner, and, if for some reason it was not, the Propertywould revert to neighborhood com- mercial. She found the entire process to be backwards and could not support it. Counci lmen:ber Klein said he was pleased to support the main motion. He believed there were a variety of reasons why the change in the land use designation and zoning ordinance was appro- priate at this time. As pointed . out by 6unci lmember Eazzi no, the decision: to amortize the property 15 or 20 years ago was in all likelihood correct; however, .no decision should .remain locked .in concrete because it was made 15 or 20 years ago. Times and condi- tions had changed in the community, and it was appropriate to reconsider the issue. The outpouring of support for the change was unequalled during his two years as a Councilnrember, and it was interesting that almost all of the support had been for those named stores --not _ to rezone the property to have some other type of vague use. The citizens had been advised that the property could not be rezoned to protect AV Cleaners and Century Stores by name, but Councilmember :°Renze1 `s amendment ;carne_ 'eery close to ,doing - that , and he was tempted_ to support i t . , He ° believed : that Mr. Cavaliero was a min, of his word, and that the leases discussed .would be entered into. He was concerned about placing the owner in an absolute straight jacket and believed he . should have some discretion, He did not believe the Council should . become some type of super landlord trying to designate which uses should be 1 allowed. The neighborhood must accept the fact that changes, including ownership, would take place over time, and that some business might have to discontinue operations --that was the economy. Council could not control the economy, and landlords should have some discretion and not have to return to the Council every time a tenant went out of business. Further, he did not believe the Council , should consider a PC zone change to determine whether the tenant should be a shoe repair shoo or a candy store. He would not support the amendment, but wouA support the main motion. 1 Mayor Eyerly asked what body would address any changes in a PC zone. Zoning Administrator Bob Brown said that Condition No. 8 provided that a change in use to the PC zone would require only Planning Commission and City Council approval and would bypass the ARB review unless a physical modification was also sought. Vice Mayor Bechtel said that the staff, Planning Commission and City Council had limited the hours of operation for the uses and expansion of the liquor sales area while the owners and operators of Century Stores had been responsive to the needs of the area by the shielding of lighting, substantially improved landscaping, and by safer ingress and egress. The amendment before the Council eliminated six uses --hardware store, bakery, bicycle sales and/or repair shop, shoe repair shop, candy or ice cream store, and flower shop. She said that A.J.'s Quick Clean had tremendous sup- port, and who was to say what other uses might not be just as acceptable to the neighborhood at some future date. It was diffi- cult to support the amendment to limit the list contained in the main motion any further because by limiting the liquor sales retail square footage, the City insured continued general business uses, which was the City's goal. Councilmember Renzel clarified that a lapsed PC zone reverted to its previous zone until further action was taken by the Council. There were a number of additional uses and operations that could take place. The Council had images of the little neighborhood stores, but in fact, Orchard Supply was not the same thing as Eyerly's Hardware when one was talking about hardware stores because there were different atmospheres in some of the stores which fell under the lists. She believed that the neigh'6 orhood support was built around the present usages,,and it was clear that the current uses were successful and wished to continue in -opera- tion, and that the owners were willing to lease to those present tenants. By adding other uses, the Council changed the rental structure and the potential sale for the building. If Council was going to deal with the wishes of the neighborhood, they should address the current uses and let any other uses . corne in by gray of. the hearing process where the neighbors had an opportunity to be heard, Mr. Brown said the only case in which` a PC lapsed was when the applicant failed to meet the development schedule. In this case, the development schedule stated that construction must begin by May 1, 1983, andebe completed within six months. If the develop- ment schedule was not met, the City Council made a change last year in Section 18.68.146 wherein the. Zoning Adminstrator was= required to initiate a zone change for the propel=ty. There was no requirement that the PC revert to the prior zoning. Mayor Eyerly said. he.continued ,to` support . the amendment because by not doing that, the landlord would be allowed to .move into a posi- tion of escalating rents by moving basic and farth the allowed uses. There appeared to be a minimum Of effort " on behalf of the Planning Commission and City Council to address a new use; if the landlord came in and requested a change on the PC. 2 8 0 Z 12/20/82 Councilmember Klein said that the protections to which the neigh- borhood was entitled were contained in the square footage. A Farrell's Ice Cream store could not be placed in the area with the amount of square footage remaining after including the, require- ments for the liquor store and food operation. Requiring that - the applicant go .through_ a zone change in order to change any type of store in the development was unparalleled anywhere else in the City. The City had other commercial PC's in town without any con- trol, and the landlords were not required to come in every time the uses changed, and he did not understand why the Council should go to that extreme now. Councilmember Fazzino echoed Councilmember Klein's cotements, and strongly encouraged his colleagues to vote against the amendment. The Council was unduly limiting the owner of the property in his opinion because the Planning Commission had already discussed in detail the proposed neighborhood uses which were included as part ofthe list. The Commission had done its job, and he believed the Council should go along with it. He encouraged nonsupport of the amendment, and instead to approve a limitation of the total maxi- mum space that the liquor store could occupy as part of the site. He believed that was a far better way to go. AMENDMENT FAILED BY A VOTE OF 3-6, Eyerly, Renzel, Witherspoon voting "aye." AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Cobb, that the maximum space to be occupied by the liquor and grocery store component of the development be limited to 60 percent of the total developed part of the site with the balance of the site being devoted to multiple (more thanone) uses. Councilmember Cobb pointed out that the purpose of the amendment was to ensure that one large operation did not take over the entire site, which was in direct response to the kinds of interest expressed by the people of the community, and to at least have something resembling a multiple use for the balance of the site. Mayor Eyerly said that 60 percent of the maximum developable space was mentioned as being fo-r liquor or groceries. He asked whether that still contained Councilmember Levy's motion to limit the actual liquor store --not the combination --to the current square footage devoted to retail liquor sales. He clarified that Councilmember Fazzino's amendment stated that 60 percent of the developable site would he for liquor/grocery combined. Councilmember Fazzino said that was correct. Mr. Freeland said that as an additional clarification, the 60 per- cent included the liquor, grocery sales and storage. It was not intended that liquor could expand to 60 percent at the expense of the storage space. Vice Mayor , Bechtel said _ she had trouble picking out magic numbers --such as 60 percent. Who was to say that 60 percent was better than 65 percent or 70 percent. Councilmember Levy said he was almost convinced. Sixty, percent of the site was a total of 7,500 square feet, and liquor sales had already been limited to 4,600 square feet; therefore, the amount of .a =combined liquor and grocery sales could go up by another - 2,900 square feet unless some limit was ;set on the storage space. Mr. Freeland said the beginning and end amounts of square footage were not the same. He did not believe Councilmember Levy's deduc- tion was correct and said that 60 percent of_. the final -site would be something less than 7,500 square feet, but ,he did not have the exact numbers. 1 Councilmember Levy said that the objectives of Counci lmembers Fazzino and Cobb --to keep the site a neighborhood shopping one and not suddenly the location of one large store --were admirable. If passed, the motion would limit the size of liquor sales, and Councilmembers Cobb and Fazzino wanted to limit the size of any given store whether it be liquor or other. The Council wanted to limit any one store from being too large a percentage of the site, and the amendment intended that a combined liquor and grocery store could not be more than 60 percent of the site. He respected the objective, but was not sure it was the correct way to go. City Attorney Diane Lee believed that Councilmember Levy's approach was to get a variety of uses on the site, which was part of the motion. She suggested that it be achieved by requiring a minimum number of uses on the site without specifying them. Councilmember Fletcher asked if the interior plans would go through the PC process or design review when completed. Mr. Brown said there was no City review other than the building permit. Mr. Freeland said that if the PC district specified .particular square footages for different uses, the use and occupancy permit process would check them. _Other than that, no special permit existed. Councilmember Fletcher believed that Ms. Lee's suggestion was good one. Councilmember Witherspoon said that the liquor sales square foot area wa'e currently 23 percent of the total sales area. She sug- gested that liquor sales and display be limited to 23 percent of the total sales space. Councilmember Klein said he believed Ms. Lee's approach was best. He did not like the percentage of square footage idea because it provided too tight a pair of handcuffs on the landlord, and made the Council too involved in things they should not be involved in. He would not support the amendment, but was prepared to support a motion along the lines that there shall be at least three dif- ferent businesses at the location with specific minimum numbers of square footage. Councilmember Renzel associated with the greater part, it was said that regardless, if the groceries were liquor store and the liquor store was the all classified as a liquor store by use. Mr. Freeland responded that if that use were typified by a single word in the zoning ordinance, it would be a liquor store. How- ever, that did not preclude ;the Council from specifying that within that operation, an area of 750 square feet be devoted to groceries. Counc i lmemb er - Rees ze1. cl arifi ed that the 60 .percent would not -:pre - elude the 750 square feet from getting large*, but would still be classified -.,as a liquor store ,kith ,retail grocery .sales.- Mr3 Freel-and said, he believed that was theintent of the motion... Councilmember- Renzel -said that if the owner wanted to reduce storage, significantly .or' use --it differently, there was ;a potential of; up to .2.200 square feet of additional grocery, space =that -could 00 in under _ the 60 percent. Mr. Freeland said that'. was correct. Councilmember Renzel said the amendment was confusing to her, and with the variety of uses as Yet -unknown to the neighborhood. She could not support the main motion or- amendment. 2 8 0 9 12/20/82 AMENDMENT FAILED BY A VOTE OF 3-6, Fazzino, Cobb, Witherspoon voting 'aye." AMENDMENT: CoUncilmeaiber Klein moved, seconded by Cobb, that there be at least two additional uses On the site in addition to the ones labeled "a, 1, m and n" and that those two other uses. each have a minimum square footage of 750 square feet.. Two addi- tional uses are intended -to mean two additional stores. Councilmember Klein clarified that some of the earlier numbered paragraphs already required a minimum of 750 square feet of retail grocery ,sales, which took care of that use. That assumed every incentive, on behalf of the landlord, to retain the liquor store in any event. Administrative and storage space did not count as uses to be promoted even though they were necessary to the site, which was why those two paragraphs were excluded from the motion. That left the other listed uses as the Ones from which the appli- cant shall choose at least two, and the square footage figures had not been given a lot of thought. Counci lmember Levy wanted to be sure that the motion did not allow for one large store with a multitude of uses. • He asked if the motion required that those extra uses be extra stores in order to maintain the neighborhood scale. Councilmernber Klein responded that the motion did not include that, but believed it was a good point. He suggested that language be added that the two separate uses be separate stores. PROVISIONS OF THE AMENDMENT INCORPORATED INTO THE MAIN MOTION BY MAKER AND SECOND Councilmernber Renzel clarified that one little shop of 750 square feet, and something else as big as the liquor store, would be acceptable as a neighborhood use comparable to the kinds of uses. which currently exist. She believed there. was an unusual circum- stance in the center in that the liquor store and grocery sales were operated by relatives of the landlord. That was a little different relationship, and as much good faith as there currently was, she did not believe it was appropriate to say that all tenants would be held in exactly the same position with respect to the landlord. She was concerned that the end result woi 1d not be what the Council bargained for, and that the motion did little to ensure that there would be small neighborhood uses. She would not support the main motion by incorporating the amendment. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 7-2, Refuel, Witherspoon mating "no." ITEM 09 PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RE `Y • Planning Commissioner Ellen Christiansen said the Planning Commission believed there should be an amendment process for con- dominium tentative maps because tenants' understandings, were involved, and that the process was properly more strict than the process for regular tentative maps. Likewise, it was appropriate for all changes to go to the Council and Commission because the sites would involve" current , tenants, and it was difficult to determine what was important, what was not important what was minor, and what was not minor to the people luring there. Fur- ther, the Commission' believed it <, was appropriate for tenants originally.. a party to the process, to know about the amendment and consent to any amendment offered. Those tenants should be involved because they were the only ones eligible for any package of commitments for sale --special financing etc., that might have been offered as part ;of the original condominium map. The Commission believed that. getting the consents was not the same as getting the approval from the City, and was a necessary require- ment to get the process. going. The Planning Commission and City. Council would have full review power over any amendment offered. Mayor Eyerly declared the public hearing open. Louis Fein, 1540 Oak Creek Drive, said that any ordinance should be adopted or rejected on at least two criteria --the merits of the issue, and how and why the issuq came to the Council in the first place. He hoped to persuade tI a Council that no generic amending ordinance for condominium conversion tentative maps was necessary or' desirable, and certainly not one designed specifically to facilitate amending the Oak Creek condominium conversion tentative map. When in 1974, the Council passed the condominium conversion ordinance requiring two-thirds of the units to consent, it was the demonstrated intent of the Council, as shown in the minutes of that meeting, that those who consented were expected to buy if the conversion was completed. The then City Attorney in writing the text of that ordinance, omitted the Council requirement to buy. With the knowledge of that loophole, the Oak Creek converter met with Oak Creek tenants over several months attempti;:g to ascertain the conditions under which two-thirds of the tenants would consent. Four hundred tenants signed petitions riot to buy, and the converter was induced to offer a lifetime lease with specific terms, which were indicated to the City Council as bribes to those who would not buy. Prices and mortgage terms were offered for each unit, terms and conditions of the Stanford participation were offered, and certain improvements to the buildings at Oak Creek were promised. The converter also made clear that if he could not meet those terms by about July, 1982, he would walk away from the conversion. Two-thirds of the units consented irrevocably to the conversions and none of the _,above -mentioned conditions for the consent were written in the consent form. .The converter applied for a map and was granted one on June 8, 1981 under essentially three major conditions --1) the specific terms of the 1i etime lease; 2) the price; and 3) the mortgage terms of 11.75 percent, 30 -year fixed rate. All of that was done under the 1974 ordinance, which did not requite a lifetime lease -not. under;the existing 1981 ordinance which did require lifetime leases. The conditions of the Oak Creek map approval were in writing, but the conditions under which people consented were not. When Mr. Carey found that he could not -meet the 11.75 percent mortage condition, he conducted a postcard survey of Oak Creek tenants to ascertain whether they would approve seeking other financial terms. The results of the postcard survey were brought to, the City Attorney who advised that those "consents" could not be used to modify the conditions of the map approval because there was no amendment pro- cess. Soon thereafter, the staff and Punning Commission pre- sented the Council a single amendment procedure to apply to both condominium conversions and - other preliminary and tentative sub- division maps. He objectedbecause the proposal was not suitable: to amend condominium conversion maps especially since the proposed procedure- would permit the undoing of promises Oak Creek tenants relied upon when signing consents: The Council apparentlyagreed and referred the entire package back to the Planning Commission` requesting that they consider' the questions raised with respect to condominium conversion map amendments with the admonition that a condominium conversion map amendment procedure was to be generic and not written for Oak Creek. After several meetings, the Planning -Commission decided it could not formulate an acceptable condominium conversions map_ amendment procedure and returned ` to the Council a .procedure to amend tentative and preliminary subdi- vision maps, together with a recommendation that the condominium ,conversion maps not be amended ', at all. 'The Council adopted the. first recommendation, but during that August 18,. 1982, Council meeting, __,Mr. Carey warned the Coutrci 1 about two things .relative to tonight`s discussion --1) that if the Council did not provide for an amendment procedure by_ which the Oak Creek conversion 'could be consummated, it . would sacrifice 55 ' BMR Units or the cash equivalent, and 2) that he was renegotiating his deal with Stanford and would know in 30 days whether things would go, by which time the Council might not care whether it had an amendment procedure. Oak Creek started as a result of the exploitation of a loophole in the 1974 ordinance. If the Council passed the pro- posed ordinance to amend condominium conversions tentative map approvals, it would provide another loophole, to be exploited by the converter in order to consummate the conversion. He did not believe that should be allowed. . Scott Carey, 180 University . Avenue, said he was unsure whether to be angry or sad. He had heard Mr. Fein for three years, and noted there were over 1,000 residents at Oak Creek and Mr. Fein was the only one at the Council meeting. He wondered why no other resi- dents .attended the Council meeting if, in fact, exploitation, bribery and coercion were involved. The issue before the Council was 'not Oak Creek, but whether the City should give parity and equal opportunity to those applicants for a final subdivision map --which map happened to deal with conversions --that parity to be equal with those similar applicants for a subdivision map which did not involve conversions. The Council had given the right to those who filed for a final or tentative map to amend it, but had not yet decided whether a similar applicant with respect to a con- version should be given an equal opportunity to amend. The Planning Commission Minutes reflected his statement, and he could only say that after a ;number of hearings over the last several months before the Planning Commission and City Council, the Co4ission had provided a unanimous recommendation to grant parity to those subdividers who happened to deal with a conversion. He asked that the Council approve the Planning Commission recommenda- tion. Herb 8orock, 3401 Ross Road, said he did not have an interest in the Oak Creek conversion, but was concerned about the effect of the recommended ordinance on the 1981 conversion ordinance. He opposed the recommended ordinance because it was similar to the application procedure for new maps with one exception --the number of consents required for an amendment was less than the number required for a new application. That would permit an applicant to promise anything to obtain the tenant consent required for an original application, wait until a number of tenants left, and then obtain consents to an amendment for less favorable conditions when a'smaller number of consents would be required. That could happen_; because there was no protection against displacement for tenants during the time an application for amendment could be filed --there was no tenant protection between the time of tentative map approval and the time of a final map approval. The lifetime lease protection took effect only after the approval of the final reap. If the Council decided that an amendment procedure was needed, he suggested that the consent - formula should be the same as the consent formula in the 1981 ordinance, and that the recommended ordinance should be amended as 'indicated in the letter from he. and. Mr. Fein, dated December 15, 1982, which was on file in the City Clerk's office. He did not believe that the map amendment process should be retroactive because Oak Creek was the only pending application, and its lifetime lease expired six months ago. Additional language was provided in the typewritten document entitled "Remarks of Herb Borock, City Council Meeting, December 20, 19132, Agenda Item #9," which is on file in the City Clerk's office. Councilmend er Witherspoon said she 'did not understand why the Council was going through the clumsy.. ,,procedure of determining who was eligible the second time around in order to vote on an ..amend- amend- ment. She did not necessarily agree that z the; landlord was going to get rid of tenants ofe ivay or the other .in order to obtain loaded dice in terms of the consent process. She could not under- stand why it was not just the person who was in the unit at the time theamendment was proposed because they ; were the ones 'pre- sumably who ,were eligible to buy the units, and trey- should be' the ones to look at the total package as now proposed and see whether it should apply. 2 -8 1 2 12/20/82 1 1 Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber did not think the, issue was who could participate in the vote, but rather the base number that two-thirds was measured against. The Planning Commission recommendation and staff recommendation was that the consent process for amendments be such that it would be two-thirds of those units that would be eligible to vote. In other words, at the time of the amendment process those vacant units and those occupied by new tenants would not be eligible to vote. If the amendment process were two-thirds of the total number of .units, all vacant units and ail units with new occupants would be `automatic "r/o" votes, and would count towards the one- third plus "no segment, which would be sufficient to stop pro- cessing of the amendment. Councilmember Witherspoon said in her opinion that was not logical because the vacancy rate was down to .05 percent, and obviously there were not many vacant units. Mr. Schreiber said that Mr. Borock was indicating a fear that if vacant units did not count as part of the percentage there was a built in bias toward trying to obtain vacant units and clear people out. The Planning Commission and staff basically concluded that the risk was not substantial in that regard given all of the other protections that were available plus the willingness of people to participate in the process and bring their objections to the City. MOTION: Councilmetber Witherspoon moved, seconded by Eyerly, to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation to approve the pro- posed ordinance amending the Subdivision Ordinance to provide a process for amending tentative subdivision map approvals for con- dominium conversions. ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF L0 ALTO AMENDING CHAPTER 21,40 (CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS) AND CHAPTER 21..12 (TENTATIVE MAPS. AND PRELIMINARY PARCEL MAPS) OF THE PALO ALTO Mi4INI :IPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A PROCEDURE FOR AMENDING TENTATIVE AND PRELILMINART PARCEL MAPS FOR CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS" AMENDMENT: Counciiwemb er Witherspoon moved, seconded by Renzel, to amend Section 21.40.085(1)(c) to remove "...eligible to consent' from (c) and to remote (i) and insert language on , page 730-16(8). Mr. Schreiber said. the Commission recommendation referred to the original tenants, and the aalendrent would open the "consent process to all tenants with the exception of those people related to the developer, converter, etc. Councilmember Renzel said that in the 1981 ordinance, the number of units was specified as the base, and there iere certain excep- tions as to who could vote. For Instance, if someone had been in the unit less than one year, that person could not vote and counted as a "no" vote. An employee also counted as a "no" vote. i She asked f the intent of the amendment was ..to parallel . the 1981 consent process. Councilme ber Witherspoon said it was her intention to, parallel the '1981 of dinance. She intended to retain the current condocondo- minium conversion ordinance, but, felt it was appropriate to make adjustments wherever. Possible. In this case, she believed there should be an amendment . process. ,She preferred to fol lc w the lines and _, intent of the 19815ord i nance City ,Attorney :01ane- Lee requested that changes should refer to ordinance itself rather than to the ,staff report. l: 1 1 Mr, Schreiber said the Planning Commission had a discussion regarding the population of tenants that would have a logical interest in the conversion. Within any complex applying for an amendment, there were tenants with a clear interest --they were there at the time the conversion occurred, and had a real interest in the activity because there were certain conditions that bene- fited them. Through the normal vacancy process, there were also new tenants, and the process was now set up that, other ethan the lease benefits, those new tenants did not necessarily ber`'efit from the conversion. They did not have an inherent right to the price established through the conversion, interest rates, etc. The staff and Planning Commission recommended that the voting on any amendment be restricted to those with a direct interest in the conversion process. The feeling was that to include those without an interest --tin newcomers --would either create a situation where people would not have any interest in voting anyway, or where people could come in to a complex after the initial conversion and try to obtain a lower cost unit with certain price advantages, and attempt to work the process to their advantage. A basic question was whether to open the tenant voting on the amendment process only to those people with a direct stake in the process, or whether to open it to those people plus all the newcomers. The Commission and staff recommended that the voting be limited to those with a direct stake in the conversion. Councilmember Witherspoon believed that assumed that the people moving in might not want to buy a unit, which was not necessarily true. Ms. Christiansen clarified that the Planning Commission understood that the people moving in after the conversion and tentative map had gone through were rot eligible for the terms of that condo- minium conversion map. In other words, if the developer offered 11,75 percent as was done in Oak Creek, the people who were living there at the time that the Oak Creek tentative map was approved were those people eligible for the 11.75 percent, The new people moving in would not be offered those terms. They would be given the right to buy, but not the right to the ether terms. Whatever the terms and whatever the conversion, the new people moving in would not have the same right to the terms as those living there at the time the conversion went through. Mr. Schreiber said that was the basic difference between those who were residents at the time of the conversion and those that occupied the site afterwards. The ones coming in afterwards did not have an inherent right to buy a unit at a certain `price; and certain interest rate, etc. He said concern was expressed that newcomers would either not be interested, or 'could be manipu- 1 ated. Councilmemb er Witherspoon said thatt was ridiculous. She preferred to have an amendment process, -'but did not particularly want to make it as complicated as it jappeared to be getting -. Her inten- tiop in the amendment was that those who came in and were eligible under 1981 rules, would have a chance to vote yes or tilot on -:the conversion process. She, found. it hard t to believe thatt someone would be aib-liet to maripulat,e all of .those :units in the -Ailiountt of time specified for the condominium conversion to go- forward se Mayor Eyerly said the Planning Commissionrecommended a mi niMum of changes to the current ordinance, and spelled out those eligible to consent - to be the voters. The _ other -change ` spoke to who the eligible tenants were. The process was., pretty' simple,- in terms of the ;,change, and -he believed the Council ►;is complicating their reo meodatfon`:. ,. 2 8 1 4 12/20/82 Councilmember Renzel asked City Attorney Diane Lee what language would be required to make it clear that the rental units were related back to the consent process for the main tentative map. Ms. Lee said she assumed the same -consent process as existed in the original ordinance was Section 21.40.050(8). Councilmember Witherspoon clarified that she intended that Section 21.40.050(8) would apply. Ms. Lee suggested that she have an opportunity to put something together before Council voted on the motion, to make 'sure it all fit together. Councilmember Cobb said that Council did not want to have to go through the process again for a simple subdivision where a drive- way was moved, and there was a process for staff to make changes. The same thing should apply in a condominium conversion where a driveway was to be moved. The matter of consents started to get complicated very fast. He asked how long the consents were valid, and at what point the conversion was changed so substantively that the process should be started again. He asked if the amendment dealt with those kinds of substantive questions. Ms: Lee said she believed there was no limitation on how long the consents were valid except the limitation on the life of the map. Obviously, once the map was expired, any application process would not be available. Mr. Schreiber said the total process was limited to two years from initial approval of the tentative map. Ms. Lee suggested that if an applicant for amendment procured tenant consents pursuant to the foregoing provisions, the amend- ment application must be received within 50 days after those con- sents were procured. She suggested that would achieve timely con- sents. Mr. Schreiber said the whole purpose of the consent process was not to approve anything, .it was \ only to allow an expression of interest before the City process began. The City Council could not give away its power to modify a proposed amendment or deny a proposed amendment. Ms. Christiansen said that the Planning Commission felt that the consents triggered the process. With the consents, the amendment would go before the Planning Commission and go to the City Council, The Planning Commission would decide whether the amend- ment was so minor that it could go forward on its own, or whether it was so major as to require a :whole new tentative map. Without the consents, the amendment would not be considered. Councilmember Klein said that one desirable component of any law was that it be understandable. The proposed ordinance was clearly not understandable. For the Council to Put its imprimatur on, the ordinance was an abuse of its time and of the process. The prop lem was inherent in " the procedure chosen --once consents were used, all the technical questions came into. play. He would vote no on. the whole motion because he did not, believe the City should endorse the process in any way. Cooncilmember.. RenZel said she concurred with Councilmember Klein. It was typical of the problem run up against when the City tried to .design an, ordinancefor a specific case, -rather than for''; gen eral cases. One reason there was an attempt to design an ordi- nance for a specific case was because another ord nance.;was designed for another, specific case which' made reapplying for a tentative map somewhat untenable in this spec;iffc case. Council member Klein was correct that the Council had a mess before it. 1 MOTION TO TABLE: Counci ]member Renzel moved, seconded by Bechtel, that the subdivision ordinance to provide a process for amending tentative subdivision map approvals for condominium con- versions be tabled. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 8-1, Fazzino voting "no." Vice Mayor Bechtel clarified that the passage of the notion to table meant that the City had no amendment process for tentative map approvals for condominium conversions. Mayor Eyerly said that if any Counci lmember wished to take the matter from the table, it must be done before the end of the next City Council meeting on January 10 1983. ITEM #14 APPEAL OF THE COWPER HAMILTON BUILDING INC. FROM THE F 5 WLuslL.K (LMR:b18:Z) Chief Planning Official Bruce Freeland said that many of the issues raised by the ARB had to do with the context of the building in terms of its effect on the overall street and how well it would blend in with the neighborhood. If the appeal was upheld, the applicant would have approval of the design, but the particular project could not be built without first securing a subdivision map. Councilmember Renzel clarified that if the ARB decision was up- held, the matter would have to be redesigned and go back before the ARB. Mr. Freeland said that was correct. Architectural Review Board member Linda Ludden said that the ARB specifically asked the applicant whether it wanted to redesign or have the ARB deny the application. The applicant stated that they did not want to redesign, and thus the .ARB denied the applica- tion. Bill Taylor, applicant, 929 Lundy Lane, Los Altos, understood it was very unusual to appeal an ARB decision. Their reasons for the. appeal included the fact that they had made a mistake of not prop- erly passing along .information to the ARB that would enable them to grasp the scope and nature of the project andsome of the con- struction details. Jon Schink, the ARB Chairman's letter of December 16, 1982 mentioned six specific items: 1. Failure of the project to respect neighborhood character. The present character of the neighborhood was not integrated, and there were many different architectural styles. The buildings were different sizes with many different types of construc- tion. His firm was concerned about what architectural style or character should be adhered to, and he referred to the second and third paragraphs of the December 16 letter which `stated: "The objections of the ARB were based on the design of, the project with particular reference to the failure of the project to respect the : neighborhood character,-...." arid, "The existing neighborhood contains a great variety of architec- tural styles and sizes." and, reiteratedwhat character of the neighborhood were they suppose to adhere to. 2. The massive treatment of the building was objectionable to the ARS.- The building was no bigger or massive architecturally than any other 32,©80 to 33,000 square foot condominium. 3. Inadequate quality of detail. They were not ab l a to determine their shortcomings in that .area and were open to suggestions. 4. The project would .--have only minor variations in street set- backs and the overall effect would be a very large, monolithic mass with walls rising a ful.L three _floors all =along the street front. He submitted statistics and slides that showed the side and front setbacks of the development which indicated that they had :not violated any City -ordinance . or law and were' justified by City law to have the entire front setback at 20 feet from the street. 5.. The problem with the project. was not its .density, but rather its approach. While the :buildings 'conformed to thee zoning standards of the City, the'bui lding forms created a project that was far more massive than necessary. It was difficult- to design the building, which was 33,000 square feet and 17 • units, less. Massive without lowering the ceilings. 6. A secondary concern of the ARB was the quality of the ornamen- tation. The complex was large ond block -like. He- referred the. Council- to the design and asked if it appeared any more or less block -like in relation to many other developments of a similar nature in downtown Palo Alto. They prepared a model which was not faithful to scale but showed the proposed development in relation' to height. He referred to the state- ments in the December 16 letter: "The Board had no objection to the use of historical styles, but was concerned that such buildings be executed with forms, materials, and details appropriate to the style selected. Poor detailing in this type of project produce works of vulgarity. This concern was raised at the first review of the project, and nothing pre- sented at the second hearing served to change our feeling that the the project would be acceptably detailed." That was interesting since the applicant had made significant architec- tural changes i.e. redesign of the windows, removal of entire window bays, and the remaining window bays were moved to the ground at the request of the ARB. "...In summary, the ARB found the buildings to be highly unattractive, out of scale, and unacceptable for a Palo Alto neighborhood. He pointed out a possible contradiction . on the part of the ARB because the letter stated that, "Although . the applicant made some minor revisions to the plan in response to the initial ARB review, the project was not improved sufficiently to warrant approval. In reaching the 3 to 1 vote for denial, there was no lack 'of agreement that the plans as submitted were inadequate. The one dissenting vote by Tony Carrasco was .based on Tony's desire to continue the project for additional modifications, while the majority felt that additional modifications of the same basic design could not prove satisfactory." If that was the case, Mr. Taylor asked, why, was the basic design not proven unsatisfactory at the first ARB meeting. The final paragraph of the letter said, "As -a final comment, the November 17, 1982 letter from. Robe •t Taylor to the City Council gives the impression that models of the project and the surrounding uses were presented to the Board.. The ARB saw no such model." Mr. Taylor said he did not intend to infer that any such model was presented. to the ARB, but that it had been made available to City Officials —though not in a public meeting. • Mayor, Cyerly asked if any staff mercer had seen the model. 1 Mr. Freeland said that he saw the model: which showed height. Mr. Taylor continued to showed slides of the neighborhood in the Webster/Forest area. He requested that the Council approve the design of the development, or provide the opportunity to return to the AR6. He . asked for the Council's approval of the 'design tonight. 2 8 -1 .7 12/20/82 1 Mr. Freeland said that although the model had much the same flavor as the drawings, it was not the same as the drawings presented to the ARB. He noted a number of detail discrepancies, and commented that if the Council was interested in approving the project, they would need to have the corresponding drawings. MOTION: Counci 1 memb er Witherspoon moved, seconded by Faeel no, to uphold the Architectural Review Board decision and deny the project finding: 1. The proposed project is incompatible with the goals and pur- poses of the architectural review process (Chapter 16.48 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code) which include the promotion of harmonious development of the City and the promotion of 'vi;ual environments which are of high aesthetic quality and variety and which, at the same time, are considerate of each other" in that the proposed project by its mass bulk, and general appearance would be inharmonious with its neighboring structures, and would not create an aesthica1ly pleasing quality; 2. The proposed project is inconsistent with the standards for review established in Section 16.48.090 of the ordinance, including: (a) The design is not conceptually compatible with the immedi- ate environment of the site, in that the for of the building is inappropriate for the neighborhood, the bui 1 d rig does not relate well to the adjacent structures, and the bulk and character of the project will create a canyon -like effect along the street which will fundamentally alter and detract from the established character of the street; and (b) The amount and arrangement of open spaces are not appro- priate to the design and function of the structures in that . the arrangement of the open spaces of the project in relationship to its building, masses and flush side ,yard walls are not compatible with adjacent properties. Councilmereber Witherspoon said that although the area was subjec- tive and she could sense the frustration of Mr. Taylor and his colleagues at wanting some design review, she agreed with.: the ARB 100 percent. The proposed project was a poor use of what little open space there was on the site, and actually the corner of Webster and Forest had her vote for the ugliest corner in town and the building would compound it by being enormous and right next to the existing ugliest building in town. The proposal had no sensi- ,t.i vi ty whatsoever to the scale of the neighborhood. She did not feel that the density was excessive, and she believed it could be handled with a great deal more sensitivity in terms of more light, and open space. Councilmember -Faxzino believed it was a crime to lose the current structures which more properly represented the kinds of desig-ns welcomed in Palo Alto. He agreed with the comments of the ARB that the building was ,massive and bulky and not very sensitive to the site, despite the fact that it conformed to the law. He could accept it if they were looking at a site on El Camino Real with acres of parking lot behind it. Further, the physical operations in :the area were those structures that the proponent_ had pointed to as examples of design--Channing House, : Forest Towers, and the other monstrosities which were built in the 1960`s and had little to do with the Comprehensive Plan developed by the City : it the. 1970's or the zoning .decisions made since that tthe, Because. there. was = no 'violation of th'e last in and of itself did` not mean that the design was sensitive to the area. He encouraged the proponents to walk : around downtown „ Palo Alto ,:.and : adjacent neighborhoods, sit' down and read through the Comprehensive Plan and the Minutes of the City Counc l i°" over the past ten - years 2 1 8 12/20/82 when discussing that area and seriously think their design pro- posal through. He was disturbed about the displacement of tenants from the site, and given that loss and the loss of homes which much better represented the design quality preferred in the down- town area, he wanted to be doubly sure that an attractive and worthy structure replaced them. The model he saw tonight made him more convinced to uphold the ARB decision because he believed it represented a massive kind of design without much innovation or creativity. He encouraged the proponent to goback to the drawing board and start again with the ARB. 1 1 Councilmember Levy said he was unprepared to make these kinds of decisions based on a model. He liked the work of. the ARB and believed they had been conscientious and thoughtful and could see no reason not to support their work. He believed this was the ARB appeal to the Council_ based on design grounds, and that normally. the ARB was able to work with an applicant and resolve the prob- lems. He asked why the problems of this proposal could not be resolved. Ms. Ludden said that when the project was first before the ARB, the ARB made much the same comments as were heard tonight. The project went back for redesign and reworking and nothing more was heard for at least six months. Some of the ARB members were approached individually and asked ,to look at revised plans of the project. Again, the applicants were advised, on an individual basis, that the design was still not appropriate in massing and scale for the site. The matter was officially before the ARB the second time with very few modifications as to the actual root problems of the bulkiness and facade presented to the neighborhood and the textural problems in terms of trying to relate to the forms in the existing smaller single family structures in the neighborhood. At that time, the ARE specifically asked the appli- cant whether they wanted to continue with the ARB process and try to work together in terms of redesigning the building. The archi- tect did not feel his client was prepared to do substantial redesign on the project, and for that reason preferred that it be denied. Councilme er.Levy asked if a 33,000 square foot project on the site could be built in an acceptable way. Ms. Ludden responded that the ARB was not supposed to be involved in issues of combining lots to allow the increased density as part of the subdivision process. She believed that the increased den- sity was part of the problem, but the ARB was not supposed to deal with that issue. A good design was possible with that density, but would take careful thought and innovative approaches to the plan. The ARB did not believe that the present design or modifi- cations thereto would handle it. Counci lmember Levy said he would vote to deny the appeal. He corea mented that the Council had to be more sensitive than `t was to the current zoning of the areas around downtown.:, The Council might be allowing the zoning far too much _density. Councilr ember -Renzel said she supported Counci lmenber Witherspooh's;,comments about the open space, turning out, to be. nothing greater than a light well, , and that a horrendous example of that _already existed on waverl ey and Forest ,where a tunnel < was being counted : as open space. When the zoning'` ordinance was done, the Council set parameters that were the maximum building envelopes within. any given zone. It'was, the architects on the. Planning Commission who were said . to 'set the parameters and let the architects \'have the flexibility_ to: do something with .them. When the complete parameters _were used, -massive, uninteresting buildings werethe result, which was not the intent of the zoning ordinance. =he;.believed..: the ARB was proper in denying the bnildings on the basis of design even -though the applicants met the letter of._the zoning envelope. 2 8 1__9 12/20/82 MOTION PASSED unanimously. ITEM 011, REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBER FAllINO RE GYPSY MOTH SPRAYING City Manager to provide information in packet. ITEM 012, REQUEST_ OF COUNCILMEMBER FAllINO RE DOWNTOWN PARKING City Attorney to provide information in packet. ITEM 013, REQUEST OF COUNCkLMEMBER LEVY FOR STAFF REPORTS RE OPEN SI3ACE/RECREATIOMl -DSFS'"Er "T SOUL -SIT Councilmember Levy said that earlier in the evening the Council voted down the concept of a study regarding open space and recreational uses of surplus school sites because those studies have already been made. He requested that a summary of the recent studies of usage be provided of the three schools --Wilbur, Cubberley and Jordan. City Manager to provide information in packet. ITEM 014 - CANCELLATION OF -DECEMBER 27, 1982 AND JANUARY 3 1983 MOTION: CouncilaeMber Cobb moved, seconded by Bechtel, to cancel the Council meetings of DeceMber 27, 1982 and January 3, 1983. MOTION PASSED unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned at 12:30 a.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: