Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-03-23 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL Minutes Regular Meeting Monday, Marc?,; 23, 1981 ITEM Oral Communications Minutes of January 12, 1981 Special Orders of the Day 7 4 4 CITY MLJ ALTO PAGE 7 4 3 7 A4 3 Resolution of Appreciation - Palo Alto Profes- 7 4 4 sional Parents for Art (PAPPA1 Consent Calendar - Action Items Final Map - 320 Curtner 7 4 4 Revised 1981-82 Community Development. Block 7 4 4 Grant Application Resolution Authorizing Destruction of Records 7 4 5 in Accordance with G.C. Sectic.a 34090 Material Recovery Program 7 4 5 Curbside Recycling Program 7 4 5 Combined Arts Agencies of Santa Clara 7 4 5 County State/Local Partnership Program Increase in Contingency Irrigation System Automation -'Project 79-37, 80-37 7 4 5 Ordinance re Giving of Notice for Planning .- 7 4 5 Department Applications (2nd reading) Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions 7 4 6 Public Hearing re Tentative Subdivision Map for 7 4 6 property located at 334 Cowper Street Public Hearing re Tentative Subdivision Map for property located at 3700 El Camino Real 7 4 8 Recommendations of Finance and Public Works : 4 9 Committee of Approval of the Arastra Property Consultant Planning Commission Recommendations re denial of appeal of CIC Construction for a Use Pelrmit: and Variance for property located at 2799 Middlefield Road Resolutions- re Appropriations Limitations for Fiscal Year 1980-81 7 5 5 7 4 1 V23/81 ITEM PAGE Resolution re Application for State Coastal Conservancy for Grant Funds.€or Bike Path in Baylands 7 5 6 Air Rights over Parking Lot Q to A.K, Pro- 7 5 7 perUes - Award of Option Agreement - Report on Palo Alto Fruit Removal Program 7 6 0 Integrated Urban Insect Control Research Program 7 6 1 Letter of Agreement -• Spencer Associates, Archi- 7 6 2 tects and Planners for Additional Structural Design Services for Phase I Improvements to the City of Palo Alto Library MayorHenderson re Vigil on April 5 Regarding Atlanta Crisis Adjournment 7 6 3 7 b' 3 J': Regular Meeting Monday, March 23, 1981 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in a Regular Meeting at 7:35 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Mayor Henderson presiding. Present: Bechtel, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, `-'itherspoon (arrived 7.37 p.m.) Absent: Eyeriy ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -1. Charles 0. Bernstein, 444 Oak Court, Menlo Park, owns and operates —a business in Palo Alto, is therefore a taxpayer and is concerned about.the budget department in Palo Alto. He listed an extensive budget background. He recalled the Arts Department budget debate over the recommendation that several positions be deleted, but after restoration of the positions, a feeling developed that vindictiveness would haunt the program. That happened when the sole source "independent study" of the Arts Department staf- fing, done by a former City employee with no background in the arts, and the same City budget department analyst who last year recommended the positions cut., recommended cut- ting those same positions now, He considers the study unprofessional, citing the study's conclusion that the reception desk should be staffed nine hours a day, followed by the recommendation that the position be only a 3/4 time position. He said this reflected badly on the City and -hurts all programs involved, and that stringent controls over consultant studies should be instituted. He felt the whole budget department process should be looked at and offered his services free of charge. Correction See Pg864 6/8/81 Mayor Henderson recommended he pursue this with the budget hearings beginning in late April. 2. Berkley Driessal, 259 O'Conner Steet, extended an invita- tion to the Council, as a neighbor Council, to a meeting on Friday, March 27, of Mayors of San Mateo County hosted :East Palo Alto to discuss often overlooked problems. 3. David Schrom, 302 College Avenue, addressed the Council on the issue of removing trees in Palo Alto, which he said happens all over .Palo Alto without proper replacement policies. He also said that to maintain a stable forest of trees, 1,000 trees should be planted each year, and the staff .persons responsible for maintaining our trees estimate that 'only about 2,000 trees have been planted over 'the last decade. He wanted to see a_different policy introduced by Council with a clear priority to plant trees in Palo Alto at the minimum replacement rate, to guide the staff when they prepare their budget for 1981-82. Councilmember Fazzino said the Finance and. Public Works Committee looked at a proposal prepared by staff rer4rding contracting `for tree management, but made no foetal deci -: sion on it, and it will appear at :the budget hearings in late April. He also mentioned -there is support for the: concept of a tree committee and discussions on that con- cept, will occur at the budget hearings. MINUTES OF JANUARY 12. 1981 Mayor Henderson made a correction to page 559, last paragraph 7 4 3 3/23/81 5th line: "West County JPA shoTld be "North County JPA." Councilmember Witherspoon said on page 556, 3rd paragraph from the bottom: "abstaining" should be "abstaining." MOTION: Vice -Mayor Fletcher moved, seconded by Fazzino that. the minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of January 12, 1981 be approved as corrected. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION - Palo Alto Professional PaSents for Mayor Henderson read the resolution of appreciation to Palo Alto Professional Parents for Art (PAPPA),. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino introduced the following resolu- tion and, seconded by Councilmember Levy, moved its approval by Council: RESOLUTION. NO. 5889 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIA- TION TO PALO ALTO PROFESSIONAL PARENTS FOR ART (PAPPA) FOR THEIR OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTION TO STUDENT ART WORK TO THE CIVIC CENTER LOBBY EXHIBIT PROGRAM." MOTION PASSED: The motion passed 8-0, Eyerly absent. Mayor Henderson presented the plaque to Nancy Sharp, PAPPA, and expressed Council's appreciation. Ms. Sharp introduced Mary Stewart, one of PAFPA's teachers Norma Hesterman who organized the exhibit, and thanked in absentia their office manager Marilyn Smithson. CONSENT CALENDAR Referral Items None Action Items Mayor Henderson removed Item 4, Planning Commission's _.recommen- dation of a denial of the appeal of CIC Construction from the decision of the Zoning Administrator for a variance at 2799 Middlefield Road. Councilmember Witherspoon removed Itelie (2) Integrated Urban Insect Con Research Program; (3) Additional Structural Design Services for Main Library; and, (7) Resolution re:' Application for Grant Funds for Baylands Bike Path. Councilmember Levy said he would abstain on Item 11, Combined Arts Agencies of Santa Clara County State/Local Partnership Program, because he did not understand the, specifics of `the.. master plan that has yet to be written. Final Map - 320 Curtner Staff recommends that the City Council approve the final map. Revised 19.81-82 Community.Develooment Block Grant Application . _ nrrw -i.�.wr�...�r.wwr. mw�w�Fdw �w 1 St&Ff recommends that the:.. City Council authorize staff to include the identified charges in the 1981-81 CDBG Program to be submitted to HUD. 4; 4 3/23/81 Resolution Authorizing Destruction of Records in Accordance Staff recommends that Council approve the Resolution authorizing the destruction of miscellaneous files as identified. RESOLUTION 5890 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVING THE DESTRUCTION OF CITY RECORDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 34090" Material Recovery Program Staff recommends that Council approve the budget amendment which increases estimated revenues in the Refuse Budget by $6,206 to reflect receipt of grant funds. ORDINANCE 3271 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1980-81 TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR THE MATERIAL RECOVERY PROGRAM ANO TO PROVIDE FOR THE RECEIPT OF GRANT FUNDS FROM THE STATE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM" Curbside Recycling Program Staff recommends that Council approve the budget amendment transferring $32,100 from the Refuse Reserve Fund for Systems Improvements to the Refuse Budget. ORDINANCE 32 2 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1980-81 TO PROVIDE FUNDS IN THE REFUSE UTILITY OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE CURBSIDE RECYCLING PROGRAM" Combined Arts A encies of Santa Clara County State/Local ar° Hers p rogram Staff recommends that Council enact the following resolution. RESOLUTION 5891 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL CF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE STATE/LOCAL PARTNERSHIP FOR THE ARTS" Increase in Contingency Irrigation System Automation - Pro.iect Staff recommends that Council approve an additional contingency of $8,250 to the contract..with Munkdale Brothers, Inc. for pipe -installation. Sufficient funds remain in the project to perform this work. Ordinance re Givin• of Notice for Planning Ile artment �i ca ns n• rea' in Staff -recommends that the Council adopt the recommendations _of --the November 26, 1980 staff report plus thn Planning Commission modifications aind additions outlined. To implement that recom- mendation the following specific actions --are necessary: 1) Approve the attached Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance Amendments, 2) Approve a budget amendment. tq .prov'ide funds for contracted clerical services estimated at 117 hours. for the remainder of 1980-81, and 7 4 5 3/23/83. 3) Approve fee increases of $55.00 for all Planning Division applications effective March 1, 1981. ORDINANCE 3273 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF - TIT- CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE ZONING CODE (TITLE 18) AND THE SUBDIVISION CODE (TITLE 21) OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE GIVING OF NOTICE FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPLICATIONS" (1st reading 3/9/81), passed 8-0, Henderson ° absent) MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino, seconded by Klein, moved approve the consent calendar items, MOTION PASSED: The motion passed 8-;', Mr. Levy abstaining #11, Combined Arts Agencies of Santa Clara County State/Local Partnership Program. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS Mr. Zaner said that item 2,. Integrated Urban Insect Control Research Program, would become 19a; item 3, Additional Structural Design Services for Prase 1 Improvements to the City of Palo Alto Main Library, will become 19b;- item 4, Planning Commission's recommendation of a denial of the appeal of CIC Construction from the decision of the Zoning Administrator for a variance at 2799 Middlefield Road, will become 16a; and item 7, Resolution re Application for Grant Funds for Baylands Bike Path, will become 17'. Mayor Henderson said Ke would hold a new business item regarding the situation in Atlanta until the end of the meting. PUBLIC HEARING lEN1ATIVL SiJBfIVISION MAP FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 334 COWPER , STRICT R1T- Jeari McCowneHawkes representing the Planning Commission said there wa% an additional- condition added to Commissioner Cullen's motion that landscaping to be provided in the form of trees along the setback on the property line between this pro- ject and 330 Cowper Street. She added that the project gave the Commission concern on the issue of the adequacy of guest: - parking, as well as the effect on the preservation of the single farni ly character of- the neighborhood. She said other than general concerns about the landscaping and ability to have this -project integrated into the neighborhood, tke 5-2 vote speaks for the positi'ore of the Commission. Mayor Henderson declared the public hearing open. Katherine McCleary, 610 California Avenue, expressed concern over the demolition and proposed demolition of many of the older home s in Palo Alto, saying she was appalled at the number of ugly structures being built in place of such irreplaceable buildings. She asked what was keeping the Council from pre, tecting the beauty and architectural _. heritage of the ,City as well as the 1ow_-_ income units many ,of the older homes pro- vide. Ken Schreiber added that to, his knowledge none of those homes are on the hi stori c `preservati ors list. Don Avila, 4020 Fabian Way, one of the developers, said the house -in question has "a crumbling brick foundation and bad plumbing. He said the new development would be the same type of architecture as the house to be taken down and would have 7 4 6 3/23/81' less impact on t;,e street than the existing dwelling. Milly Davis read a letter from the Palo Alto Neighborhood Coalition into the record, which is on file in the Palo Alto City Clerk's Office. Cauncilmemoer Klein asked Jean McCown-Hawkes if perhaps the Planning Commission should review the issue of demolition of housing and whether the zoning ordinance takes care of parking problems. Ms. McCown-Hawkes said that parking problems were the same. as those associated with the crowded 9ature of the down;;own area and new developments had _the ability to serve their guests in the even;ngs. Regarding the demolition issue, new condominiums that are going in comply- with the current zoning regulations and in fact multi -family developments could be built on these sites without the Commission ever seeing them, and for that reason could not say whether further policy review should take place. She reminded everyone that the upcoming report on the condominium conversion ordinance addressed many of those issues. Kenneth Schreiber, Director of Planning, reiterated that the daytime parking problems are employee -related, and the evening on -street parking problems are around the older apartment units which do not provide the level of parking required of newer developments. The number of cars generated by the newer devel- opments are fewer than the spaces provided and the amount of on -street parking around those developments tends to be consid- erably less than around the apartment areas. Staff has thus suggested, and the Commission has concurred, that additional guest parking regulations for residential development would not seem to be appropriate. He added that an effort was made to preserve as much single-family housing as possible, but the properties in the multi -family zoned areas are by and large already developed multiple -family at a reasonably high den- sity. MO -ION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Henderson, approval of the Commission's recommendation as amendcd, to find the project, including the design and improve- ment (e.g., the street alignments, drainage and sanitary facilities, utilities, locations and size of all required rights -of -way, lot size and configuration, grading, and traffic access) rs consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and complies with the' Subdivision Map Act and Title 21 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code; that the project will not be likely to result in serious public health problems; that the site is physir l_v suitable for the type and density of the proposed development; :.nd tl.at there are no conflicts with public ease- ments, and recommends approval of the tentative subdivision map with the following condition: An internal drainage plan and a landscape plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Counci lmember Witherspoon said that like old trees, old -houses must,,be replaced,- a-lthough it is deplorable- that they are- allowed,to get to the point where they cannot be preserved and, the project is as_ a good a. project as could be had on the_ site. Counci lmeir_ber Bechtel agreed there was no choice even though it was sad to see such a house go,,, but the plan meets all the zoning requirements. She felt the only choice might be to fur- ther evaluate whether that area should. be down -zoned. 7 4 7 3/23/81 Councilmember Fazzino concurred, adding that the Council's hands were tied with respect to Zoning Ordinance and procedures the Council must follow, but hopes the Historic Resources Board could bring something back to the Council with respect to demo - prohibitions shortly. Councilmember Renzel said a major portion of the downtown area was rezoned in about 1973 from commercial to multi -family resi- dential, which was a far-sighted move or the part of the Council then, and had a short term effect of preserving a lot of the existing older homes. She added that the Commission and Council paid great attention to preserving the existing housing in the downtown during the rezoning, partly to preserve the character of the neighborhood and partly because the heavily developed downtown core depends so extensively on the adjacent neighborhood streets for parking, and they couldn't -have sus- tained the parking resulting from _development to the past zoning. However, they recognized that certain properties would be •vulnerahle and supported the proposal, but expressed sym- pathy with those who find it hard to see out- older homes demo- lished Councilmember Klein reiterated what the other members had said, saying the development was to be commended under the circum- stances and there was no choice but to go forward with the pro- ject. Mayor Henderson agreed with all the previous comments, adding that the Council, needs to encourage retention and rehabilita- tion of older homes wherever oossible, but that it does not add to the City to retain deteriorating property and favors further study on the rehabilitation program. MOTION PASSED:- The motion to approve the staff recommendation was approved 8-0, Eyerly absent. PUBLIC HEARING 77117711117-777blvisioN MAP FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3700 EL Mayor Henderson declared the public hearing open. Barbara Homsy, 3760 La Selva Dr., said she does not accept the project, and probably never will because of the density, the future parking problem, and the height. She agreed Palo Alto needed housing, but_ felt it should be lower density to keep down the hei gl:t for the sake of the privacy of the immediate neighbors. George Parry, 510 Barron Avenue, reminded those at the meeting that the project was .thrown out when first presented and finally was accepted after the developers got John Northway, a member of the Architectural Review Board, to do the --archi- tectural design. He said he arid his neighbors couldn'.t under stand why this size project on such a tiny lot was been allowed to slide through. He considers it an abomination with the same parking and other problems menti Wined for the earlier develop- ment. He asked the: Council not to say their hands were.tied, but -to do something based on 4. legal stance that it is not consistent with` the neighborhood, based on size and density Stella Chiffonato, 469 Grant, said there are some families who cannot afford to buy single family house , but can only go the way the Europeans have, that is the condominium concept. She said save the -very best of the old houses, but provide for young families',- She said she wants to see her -city grow and he vital and requested the Council make their decisions. not on the basis of density or height -but rather whether the project adds to the neighborhood from the standpoint of beauty. 7 4 8 3/23/81 Vice -Mayor Fletcher wondered if Palo Alto can't build fairly dense housing on El C minu Real, where it could. be built. She said the development has sight line such that it will not unusually intrude into the neighborhood, and it also has 40 ft. setbacks. She added that increasing the parking any more would increase the cost, per unit substantially, as would requiring :"ewer units, and -'the Planning Cemmission had stated that if this were developed completely R-1 rather than as a mixed use the density would be even higher. She hoped that being on El Camino with such good bus service, that car trips would be substantially reduced. MOTION: Vice -Mayor Fletcher moved, seconded by Witherspoon; approval of the Planning Commission recommendation. Councilmember Witherspoon wanted to know who owned the adjacent alley. Mr. Schreiber said that was still being researched but it would be resolved before the project is granted a building permit. Councilmember Fazzino said a major concern. raised at last year's Council meeting. had to. do with traHic and parking in that area. Some neighbors felt inadequate progress had been made with respect to Council request to look at the situation. Mr. Schreiber said the Transportation Die lion had come before the Council with a list of neighborhood traffic studies to be done, priorities were estabiished,,and Barron Park was #4 on that list. Evergreen Park and Southgate came before and once that and the European Health spa study are completed:, Barron Park will be next. Councilmember Renzel said she supported the motion for all the reasons previously stated. MOTION PASSED: The motion ... passed 8-0, Eyerly absent. RECOMMENDATION OF 77770=7 — FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE OF MOTION: Committee Chairman Fazzino, f.:r the Finance and Public Works Committee, moved 1) to negotiate a contract with the joint venture team of Sedway/Cooke and R. W. Smith & Associates for the "Arastra" Property Study; and 2) to negotiate with the firm of William Spangle and Associates provided they are willing upon request to submit a revised list of subconsultants if staff fails to reach an agreement with Sedway/Cooke and. R. W. Smith and Associates. Mr. Fazzino reminded the Council that it decided in October, 1980, to explore the possibility of lox -density housing in the _lower poee i on of the Ar'astra property for the possibility of economic gain without a major negative visual impact and for more housing opportunities because of the City's job/housing imbalance. The consultants job will be to prepare alternative land use options for this. Property including residential deve1- opment and open space concepts and development venture options within the context of a -6-month program. -Concurrently, they 'are to prepare environmental, economic and physical analyses of the land use, adventure options, implementation strategies and td pr- pare -a final report on both of these items, and the con=e duct of :a community participation study, and assistance to the City in the Planning Commission and City Council hearings. Mr. Fazzi.no-advised.that he Was concerned about and presently opposed to the concept of housing on the Arastra site. He did not .'think it was an apropriate site to use to help correct the job,'housing imbalance, and felt that this kind of housing 7 4 9 3/23/81 approach was better done in the flat -land area of town. He also felt that the size of the contract might be excessive. Further he advised that the Committee made it very clear that they were not approving the concept of housing, but were deter- mining that a study should be done of all housing options, and, that they should be looking at environmental and economic con- siderations and have those issues brought to the Counci . Mr. Zimmerman advised that the total amount of the contract was for $107,180, $10,000 of which was for contingency. Councilmember Witherspoon also expressed concern over the amount of the contract and wondered if p'rhaps some of the tasks might not have been done during son' of the studies at the time of the lawsuit. She was particularly concerned that tasks 2 and 3 of the consultant report which were dei`initior, of the total site and definition of the 77 -acre site, might be the same. 1r. Zimmerman responded by defining task 3 as the first analy- sis and evaluation. The first two tasks were really setting out to define.. the scope of the overall site, task 1 from a large overview and task 2, looking at the specific site itself. Mr. ,Zimmerman assured Mrs. Witherspoon that they were using as much of the material, including the topel s from the original Arastra suit, but when it came to looking at the site and suit- ability for any housing at all, the proposed study was essen- tially to determine the feasibility of whether any type of housing development would be suitable for up to 77 acres. Mr. Schreiber added that the dollar amounts listed by task does not necessarily represent the exact dollar amount that it will take for the various tasks. When the consultant starts, they will start on a numbca of tasks so they ask that it be recog- nized that when they ere done, with the first task, they will be well into the other tasks, so that task actually receives more money as a factor to recognize, their start-up costs. Another faa'ai , the last tasks will not cost as much as listed. Mr. Schreiber further advised that generally, when negotiating a contract, he wanted to make sure there was enough of a payment near the end of the contract so, if there was a problem some where along the way, at least there is a negotiating point. Councilmember Witherspoon asked they were paying a premium for the time insisting that it be completed within three months. Mr. Zimmerman advised that there was no problem with the three month time limit and that he was confident that it hado-been negotiated as tightly as possible. Council ember Bechtel stated that her preference was to keep the entire property in open space, and that when the matter was discussed in September, many of the councilmembers said to study it, but the preference was to -keep -it in open space.. She questioned why they were doing a $100,000 study, and the study did not contain are- open space option. She suggested that either it not be studied and it be kept in open space and dedi'- cated as parkland. aShe felt that the type of housing that would be built, would nut help the current housing needs, i.e. low and moderate Income housing, and that it was not consistent with what they were telling other agencies in -the surrounding areas that they do not want to see their land developed, She said if the motion is passed, she wants -to ensure that the tract contained the open space option. Mr. Schreiber stated that the purpose of the consultant was to look at the alternatives to the Open space a ption. _The no development option does ilot have any consultant involvement at this stage because they are looking at possible development schemes and financing mechanisms. 7 5 0 -- 3/23/81 Councilmember Renzel said she had similar concerns to those of Councilmember Bechtel's. She said that her understanding at the time the Council authorized going forward with a study, that there was a clear instruction that one of the options to be studied was to be preservation of the entire site in open space and felt that ought to be very clear.. Unless open space is set as a criteria, it would not be considered in this type of an option study and the recommendation would come for devel- opment. Since the contract was so expensive, and since her preference was open space, she was concerned about the contract as structured. Maybe there were too many options to be pur- sued. Councilmember Fletcher said at the time direction was given to staff, it was in response to a staff report, and -they did have some information on the site and, the fact that there was a 77 -acre parcel separated from the main part of the Arastra property, separated by Arastradero Road, and that there was some development already contiguous to that particular parcel. It did look quite feasible and met with Council's outside pro- jections _ that world pcssibly be a, desirable site for some ho -u=sing. Previously, the Council was discussing how they could raise funds to buy some school sites specifically Terman and Ventura. She reminded the Council that more school sites were going to be available as time goes on and substantial funding would be needed to buy any of them, and if there is a site that was not going to be detrimental to the Foothills area itself that could. be developed and• bring the city enough return to buy some open space school sites. It was looked at at the time as a possible trade off. She did not feel that the Council was predominantly intent on keeping the whole 515 acres in open space at that time. She wanted to keep the options open to developing some of the land if the study showed that it was not going to be detrimental overall. Councilmember Witherspoon said it was her impression from reading the minutes that the consensus at the time was that the Council was not considering the development of the 500 acres across the road, but, if anything, they might possibly after seeing a study consider the developing the 77 acres. She asked about deleting some of the options involving the entire 500 acres. Mayor Henderson advised that if the Council were interested in a one in ten development up to 51 units, that there might be locatIons on the other --side of Arastradero more suitable or less detrimental than this particular 77 acres. The Council did end up approving the general look at the property so that that could be included. AMENT?MENT TO MAIN MOTION: Witherspoon moved an amendment, seconded by Klein,. to limit the study to 77 acres, including option of "no. development." Councilmember Renzel said her recollection was to _determine how to go about using the Arastra land, how it would be used if the City retained it as recreational open space, and whether housing would be appropriate on the 77 acres that was divided off by a road, and not anything on the main piece of land. She did not recall discussions.of moving housing across the road to the main piece of land and requested clarification from staff 'on the scope that was discussed. Mr. Schreiber advised that the Council adopted a policy that at least 438 of the 515 acres should be in, open space, and -that consideration should be given to the use'of up to 77 acres, it could' be less, for a residential development. References were made to the 77 -acre parcel that was split off from the main property by a Arastradero Road, but the record clearly states that the Council wanted the consultants to look at possible 3/23/81 residential options on the main part of the property. The operating assumption that staff and the consultants have is that in all likelihood the effort will focus on the 77 acres that were split off from the main part of the property. Councilmember Renzel asked if the Council had a motion on the 77 acres, that it also be considered for open space. Mr. Schreiber replied that it would be some combination of residential or open space it could be all residential, or all open space or somewhere in between. Councilmember Renzel asked staff if addressing just the 77 acres, would significantly cut the cost of the study. t'r. Schreiber said no. He felt it would be a relatively minor cut. Mr. Schreiber clarified that this study did not include future open space area. uses. After tcie Council had identified areas for future open space use, then efforts would be made as to the types of open space uses, trails, etc., but that was not a part of this study. Councilmember Klein pointed out that it was the-. Council's desire to retain as much of the land .as open space as possible, but that the City faced serious fiscal alternatives. He felt the consultant fee was high, but the dollars they were talking about in terms 'If housing en that side if that should ever be the case, acquisition of school sites was far larger. He said they were talking about numbers that could run into millions of dollars and the citizenry of Palo Alto and the City Council deserved to know all that. Thus, he felt they should go for- ward with the study. Councilmember Levy said there were two issues: 1) The question of whether or not to develop the 77 acre site or some portion of it -or ;Here than that. He agreed with comments by Mayor Henderson and Councilmember Klein that it was important to move ahead with the investigation of development of that site because it was being talked about in a much larger context, particularly of the school sites that may become available; 2) What -the scope of the study should be. He said he was uncom- fortable with a study of $100,000 unless it was necessary that it be done. He did not know how to evaluate the study because there was no alternative presented. He felt reassured by the care with which the subcommittee --'looked into the selection of the consultant and in the absence of any other alternative, he was prepared to approve the consultant although he -agreed with Councilmember Witherspoon's amendment that the scope of the study be limited. He felt perhaps he would feel more com- fortable if they were riot simply presented with one scope, one recommendation to approve r 'not to approve, but if there were alternatives given so that they could approve a study that was larger in scope or smaller in scope to fit the objecti Ves ' of 'the Council. Mayor Henderson commented that he was troubled with speaking about 77 acres as though the entire 77 acres had to be devel- oped if development occurred. He felt the key point was that they would never exceed 51 units and hopefully they would be clustered and that would be far from taking the entire 77 acres. Further, it was owed to'the citizens of Palo Alto to do this study. There had been controversy in ..the community about the Arastra property from the beginning and now, the added points presented by the Councilmembers regarding school site funding and, he felt it would take a very positive report for there to be any chance of development i, that area. He felt the alternatives must be looked at within the zoning created for the Foothills, one unit per ten acres, and it must be looked at on that property, and Council should make a judgment based on the consultant's findings.. 7 5 2 3/23/81 Councilmember'Fletcher asked what changes would occur regarding the scope of the study itself and the estimate in the reduction of the cost if the amendments passed. Mr. Zimmerman answered that it would eliminate the detailed anal vsi s of alternative sites to the 77 acre site for hous ng, The consultant would concentrate on the 77 acres and do the thorough analysis of whether 'various types of housing would be suitable including all the environmental and geological, eco- nomic and fiscal type analysis that was outlined in the scope of work, but would concentrate on the '17 acres rather than a preliminary analysis of all the area to see what would be environmentally suitable for housing. Councilmember Fazzino asked what could be done for $20,000 or $30,000 in terms of a study. Mr. Schreiber said that $20,000 or $30,000 for a study of this nature -would give the City a very superficial analysis and would not obtain any valuable economic data. Councilmember Fazzino felt the information to be de:-'ved frorn the study was very important, but was very uncomfortable about the $100,000 figure. Since he wanted to retain the acres in. open space, he could not justify spending $100,000 to have someone try to change his mind. He felt that the Council should not look upon this area as being the pot of gold to pay for the school sites. If the total cost were reduced, he felt Correctio comfortable that the information presented to the Council could See Pq864 likely change their minds and allow them to proceed with 6/8/81 housing. at least in the 77 -acre part of the property, he would go along with the proposal:. He did not feel compelled to sup- port the motion for a $100,000 study. Mr. Zaner said if the Council was concerned with getting the baseline data in the report, that was already included, but it should be clear to the Council that this would not constitute a plan for a use of the open space territory. Mayor Henderson stated that he still felt strongly that the Council should go ahead with this study. He also expressed concern over the $100,000, and said he was counting on staff to have a few thousand dollars knocked off if they were going to reduce the scope of the study. He then confirmed with Council - member Witherspoon that the amendment would limit the study to the 17 acres, which she AMENDM NT TO MAIN MOTION PASSED: The amendment to limit the scope to 77 acres passed unanimously, Eyerly absent. Mrs. Renzel stated that she was still uncomfortable with the scope listed on page 12 ' -of of the report that talked about ' large 'rat, single family and so,forth. She agreed with the Mayor's earlier comments and that her concept of looking at development at all in this area was for possibility that the city might actually do some innovative design that used. very little of the land and that provided marketable -housing .and at good return to the city at the same time. She did 'not see the clustered single family, ten acre type lots, or six acre lots as her idea of whatr she wanted to see up there even if "they would make money off the land. AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Witherspoon, to eliminate 6.4 option on page 12, "large lot, single family" and to insert "shall" instead of "may" and, to include the other four options. Mrs. Renzel indicated her concern that the larger the space that each house occupied, the larger the space that roads, access, and telephone poles, etc. would occupy. She was not willing to make money on that land in that way. It was not 7 5 3 3/23/81 appropriate for the City to be pursue. that particular kind of development even if they talked about 51 one -acre lots, plus an additional 20 percent for roads, because the entire 77 acres would be covered over ;with tennis courts, swimming pools and roofs. She could not visualize any circumstance under which she would supeort that kind of development on city land and saw no point in studying. it. If the city looked to other rne,;Ens of financing school site acquisitions they would need the economic data about this property for comparative purposes but she preferred to see the Council limit the option area. Councilmember Fletcher said she was not sure that eliminating 6.4 was going to reduce the thrust of the study more than a few dollars, since they were looking at.the site in total and felt it would be worthwhile to see it in black and white in order to justify the chosen venture or development.• MOTION PASSED: The amendment to the agreement passed on the following vote: A(ES: Bechtel, Fazzino, Levy, Renzei, Witherspoon, Klein NOES: Fletcher, Henderson ABSENT: Eyerly Mr. Levy wondered if the budget amendment would come out of the contingency fund because there was money left in the general operating contingency, He asked if five votes were required. Attorney Abrams answered that it was the general operating con- tingency. The five votes were needed because the money was appropriated at the time of the adoption of the original bud- get. Me. Zaner concurred that it would require a majority of the Council to confirm a transfer of funds. Mr. Levy wondered if there was any reason it could not be delayed so that it went through the formal budget process. Mr. Zimmerman responded that it would mean delaying the study and the intent was to have the study move as rapidly as pos- sible. Mr. Klein asked what the procedure would be if the motion was passed with regard to the changes that have been made in the work program. Mr. Abrams interpreted Council as saying they were directing staff .to return to the consultant and ask for a decrease in accordance with the modifications, and if that decrease was unsatisfactory, to.then inform: the Council, but technically;: COunci l was approving the amount , set forth. Mr. Abrams felt `it was important. that staff could return to the consultant ,and discuss the decrease,' whatever it might be, staff would be eblig3,ted to return to Council without-- the doc+.aments being executed. MAIN MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Frenzel, Klein, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Witherspoon e NOES: Fazzi!ci, Bechtel ABSENT: Eyerly 7 5,4 3/23/81 ORDINANCE N0. 3274 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1980-81 TO PROVIDE FOR FUNDING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION FOR THE ARASTRA PROPERTY STUDY CONSULTANT SERVICES RECESS: Recess was called from 9:35 p.m. to 9:50 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ON A UNANIMOUS VOTE 7-0 C Mayor Henderson felt that it was important to remove the item from the consent calendar because he did not want anyone to . think -that the Council did not consider appeals individually. The Zoning Administrator denied the use perit and variance ar,d the Planning Commission supported the Zoning Administrator by also denying the appeal. Marty Wilson, 2264 Bush, San Francisco, Agent for Home Federal Savings, and the author of a letter that was included in the packet regarding this project, asked if the Council had any questions. Mayor Henderson said he felt Mr. Wilson's letter responded very well to the Planning Commission's comments and acknowledged that the Counci lmemhers had the letter of March 19. Counci lrember Witherspoon asked Mr. Wilson if it was his under -- standing that if the Council went along with the Planning Commission's recommendation$.the savings and loan would stay in its presert location. Mr. Wilson advised that it was conditioned upon the lease they currently have. They have a lease that runs through the end of the year and it is the savings and loan's desire to stay -in that area, quite an investment was made moving in. They would exert.all effort to stay in that area, but one can never say. JoAnne Russel), 605 Colorado Avenue, Palo Alto, circulated a petition. She felt the variance and _use permit would add sig- nificantly to the congestion of that particular corner. It would feed traffic into the savings and loan as the Safeway traffic was coming out right next to it. There was a traffic tight backup that everyone would have to wait to go through. The people that signed the petition were not in favor of a bank being built at -that paeticular corner. Herb Borock, 3401 Ross Road, Palo Alto, responded to Mr. Wilson's letter which he understood was,a response to concerns raised at the Planning Commission meetings. He had not seen a copy ar'd did not know what Mr: Wilson had said. He was given a,copy of the letter to read. Mr. R. J. Debs, 3145 Flowers Lane, Palo Alto, indurated that there was no March 19 letter in -the packet and no one from,the public had seen it. He felt the Council was being given a sales job whereas the members of- the public had no idea what was going on. He ,felt that the Council should accept the vote of the Planning Commission.` The smatter went through the Zoning Administrator, it went to the Planning Commission with a very full discussion and was turned down unanimously. If Mr. Wilson wanted to change his mind, he should reapply. He did not feel it was being handled fairly by the Council. The fact that the 7 5 5 3/2381 letter was not on the wall was setting a bad precedent. He advised that there was now three financial institutions in that intersection and this was a neighborhood commercial zone. 'The area is _a citizens' neig''borhood, a very nice one, and waF not supposed to be a major financial -center. He hat' lived in that area for 24 or 25 years, and did not want to ;see it become the financial corner of South Palo Alto. -Besides his own prej.-!- dice, he felt the procedure was irregular. He was not quar- reling with Mr, Wilson's right to come in with a letter, but he was quarreling with the fact that the public did not see that letter and that as much as the public trusts the Council, he_ felt they should turn the appeal down, let them come in with another application and go through the procedure again. Mayor Henderson said he saw nothing wrong with the procedure. Many times the Counci i has letters given to them the night of the meeting, and would not want to think that Mr. Wilson could not submit his letter. Mr. Debs said there was nothing wrong with submitting the let- ter, the problem was that the public had not seen the letter and he could not find it on the back wall. Ms. McCown-}lawkes said that the Planning Commission Chairman's packet did have the let-cer in it, She reviewed the letter and said that the comments Mr. Wilson made at the Commission meeting were simply reiterated in the letter. MOTION: Councilmember Bechtel moved, seconded by Fazzino, that the Council uphold the Planning Commission recommendation to deny the appeal. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed by a vote of 7-1, Witherspoon voting "no," Eyerly absent. RESOLUTION RE APPROPRIATIONS LIMITATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Bechtel, to apprcve the resolution to establish appropriations limita- tions for Fiscal Year 1980-81. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed by a vote of 8-0, Eyerly absent. RESOLUTION 5893 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ESTABLISHING ITS APPROPRIA- TIONS LIMITATIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE XIII OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION FOR FISCAL YEAR 1980- 81." RESOLUTION RE APPLICATION TO STATE COASTAL CONSERVANCY FOR Staff recommends that Counci approve the Resolution autho- rizing application submittal for bike path construction in accordance with the requirements of the State Coastal Conservancy. Councilmember Witherspoon removed this item from the consent calendar because she had a questNion of staff vis-a-vis the pre- YiouS application which was"made for grant funds for the bike path along the frontage road. She asked whether they were going to get the first grant to connect the new bike path around the base of the frontage road, with the two ends as pointed out in this grant. Mr. Adams advised that the first grant application was cur- rently being reviewed by the State. There have been a number of technical questions like legal.,description of the land that the City owned, and he felt, the answer .should come soon. Mr.. 7 5 6 3/23/81 Adams stated that the City must put through its appliction for this grant before they hear about the previous application or the City would miss out on the opportunity for ',4sese funds. It was be a separate project, but it would be coordinated with the other. Councilmember Witherspoon asked what would happen if the City loses the funding for the first application. Me. Adams said that if they lose the money for the first grant, they could st'.11 construct the proposed bike bath in part they were independent of the one that parallels the frontage road. MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Levy, that the resolution regarding the application for grant funds for a bike path in the baylands-be_approved. Councilmember Fletcher preferred to see Cooley Landing stretched and felt that it was a much more crucial link around the bay trail system than either the frce;itage road link or the to the interpretive center because _there was access in both those areas already. If the stretch to Cooley Landing were built that would be a completely new route which was very much needed. Mr. Adams responded that they would keep those comments in mind, although they may not have a choice. MOTION PASSED: The section passed by a vote of 8-0, Eyerly absent.,. RESOLUTION 5892 entitled 'RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM THE STATE COASTAL CONSERVANCY FOR PURPOSES OF BIKE PATHS IN BAYLANDS AREA." AIR RIGHTS OVER PARKING LOT TO A. K. PROPERTIES - AWARD OF Mayor Henderson advised that the Counc0 met in a study session last week. Jean Diaz touched upon Councilmember Eyerly's March 18 memoran- dum urging Council support in awarding the option agreement, and expressed a concern that the Council not get too far along in air ri hts projects -without looking at all - of the assessment district lots and their potential for parking structure con- struction. He informed the Council that in response to past Council action, staff would come back to the Council in one or two weeks, with a scope.. Of services on a study that would examine a couple of lots in particular for parking structure feasibility. ..Staff envisioned that kind of an assessment as generating which lets should be considered for parking struc- ture without going through any -air rights development. Ann Werry, 4169 Willmar Drive, Palo Alto, spoke on behalf of Downtown Palo Alto, Inc. Since the beginning of the considera- tion of Air Rights, Downtown Palo Alto, Inc. has been .uppor- tive of the possibilities for improving parking and housing shortages. in Downtown_ Palo Alto. Two letters which were ' pre viously sent,to the Council oy Downtown Palo Alto, Inc. on the subject of air rights over parking lots in the liniVersity Avenue Parking Assessment District were contained_in the staff report which the Council had before them. Their views were essentially unchanged from those expressed in the letter. . (A) that as a matter ,,of equity and considerable- investment=, down- town �roperty owners and business people have a. high degree of concern and interest in the proper recognition of parking needs and the establ i shment : of a Palo _A1 to policy on air rights over assessment district parking lots;' and (B) that a minimum of 51 additional parking spaces over and above the existing 71 be 7 5 7 3/23/81 provided at, no expense to the District. The concept of using air rights over parking lots as a means of improving parking and housing shortages in downtown Palo Alto was a course of action for which Artunian and Kinney should be commended for an imaginative and practical solution to an extremely difficult problem. Given the shortage of land for building in downtown Palo Alto, Downtown Palo Alto, Inc. has supported this concept since its inception and recommended that the Council continue to move forward toward satisfactory and equitable option con- veyance agreement.: Jean Diaz reminded the Council that the initial concept that was proposed called for the 74 spaces that presently exist plus an additional 51 plus 65 for the private parking. Councilmember Bechtel said that the Council received a letter in their packet from a group of downtown property owners asking that revenue from the sale or lease of air rights should be returned to the assessment, district to provide additional parking. She wondered what the legality of that might be, or if it was possible. Mr. Abrams answered that it was 'possible and that the attorney's review does not reveal that it is required for two primary reasons. (1) It has to be understood that the District is a financing mechanism of the City of Palo Alto, a way to achieve a certain goal, it this case parking through assess- ments of properties which are deemed to be benefited. The District does not have a separate status in and of itself, it has no governing body so it does not stand alone. (2) The law requires that the properties which are being assessed receive the benefit for which they are being assessed, in this case parking. This project, eas staff understood it, provided not only the parking which is there now, but additional parking so that the purpose for the assessments were still met. When one reviewed the facts, it wa more clearly understood that the purpose for which the district was formed was being met and it had been for a number of years ' and that the project was not defeatinu it, hence, it legally did not need to go the District, although the Council could establish any policy it wished. Councilmember Bechtel stated that she was torn because this was a way to get a pot of money started to build a much needed parking structure, but because this required more staff time, probably.considerably more than the fees charged to do the work, she felt that the 'money should go back to the general fund, but in. the future, she would be open to explore having the money go to the district. Mayor Henderson said that this type of thing comes up periodi- cally not just parking and felt thati the Council and -the Finance Committee must be continually prepared to discuss the whole subject cf designating specific revenues to other than the general operating fund.- The Mayor suggested that this be looked at during -the budget hearings this year. Councilmember Klein said he recalled the subject of air rights first tieing brought up more than ten years ago, and being dis- cussed in the early 1970's when he was, on the Planning Commission, but not getting anywhere. He thought it was very excitiog to see it coming closer to. fruition now in 1981. e He felt the staff and Artunian and Kinney-shQ,uld be commended for all the work that had gone into the project. He felt that the air rights idea offered at least one partial solution to :some of the problems facing Palo Alto in regard to parking and housing, and hoped that the 'Council moved the project - forward as swiftly as possible. At the, study session last week, he raised several concerns, the main concern was: -the formula and he felt that all of them had- been addressed„ by the staff in their report and was satisfied with the answers given. He referred to how the City would determine by appraisal the value of the units that were going to be sold. The staff's proposed amendment was satisfactory to him. MOTION: Councilmember Klein moved, seconded by Fletcher, to authorize the Mayor to execute, the Option Agreement as pre- sented in March 12, 1981 CMR (CMR:,184:1) with, clarification on page one of the Conveyance Agreement, Exhibit 11, that the estimates of the project income shall be as of January 1984 (as opposed to construction estimates of January 1981); and autho- rize the Mayor to execute the Conveyance Agreement upon notice from the Real Property Administrator that all option conditions have been satisfied by A. K. Properties. Councilmember Witherspoon had the same concerns as Council - member Bechtel, and felt they were pretty well covered. If the City needs to recoup some money up front and there was ongoing income from this project, she hoped that the money would eventually go to the Assessment District to defer the costs of maintaining the parking structure in a neat fashion as•the other lots downtown. Councilmember Levy was pleased at moving ahead but he had some reservation about the concept of negotiating the use of the air rights rather than having a competitive bidding situation. However, after perusing what staff had done in terms of this negotiation, the City was getting a fair value for the air rights so he was amenable to moving ahead. The concept of sup- plying a substantial amount of extra parking was a proper con- cept. He questioned whether the City was in any way locking itself in by approving the option agreement. An element of the proposal was the number of parking places per unit as spelled out in the tentative proposal from the developers and he won- dered if the City was committed to those numbers. Mr. Diaz answered no. The A. K. Properties proposal was a conceptual one. The option agreement process will go through the Planning Commission, the Architectural Review Board and the City Council as any regular project in terms of looking at the zone change, comprehensive plan change and the specific devel- opment plans that are proposed. The City was not locked into the :specific plan that was proposed and, it was subject to revision and modification. The first step in the process was that the developer provide four different schemes. Mr. _Levy stated that the density was 44 units which was sub- stantially in excess of that allowed in RM-5 zoni,ig. He a�zked for clarification on that. Mr. Dial said there is no guarantee for the developer of the project. Councilmember Levy indicated he was amenable to endorsing the concept that funds from the sale of air rights be kept within the assessment district budget. Councilmember Renzel felt they were fortunate that Mr. Artunian and Mr. Kinney had come forward with a proposal , for that par- ticular lot and she th,nked staff, particularly Mr. Diaz, fur an excellent job in working out the details and giving Council such a thorough -report. She, toot'; was pleased that they were going forward. AMENDMENT TO MAIN MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Levy, that the four options be referred to the. -Planning Commission for review. 7 5 9 3/23/81 Mrs. Fletcher raised the objection to the assumption that there revenue had to go into parking without looking at the broader picture of transportation. In other cities, including Los Angeles, in the downtown areas, developers were encouraged to provide alternate transit or some kind of funding to go into transit, i.e. vans for the employees, etc., instead of building parking to. the benefit of the entire area which would also be applicable in downtown Palo Alto, because that is where the congestion is. The people that live in the University Avenue corridor complain that there is too much traffic coming into downtown and she hoped that instead of always concentrating on providing additional parking they look at other alternatives. She asked why the prices were so low when. the other condo- miniums developments going in downtown were in the $200,000 and up bracket. Mr. Diaz directed Council to attachment "F" in the staff report here the average. figure was about $205,000 per unit which was more in line with today's economics. • Mr. Zaner remarked that a number of the Councilmembers had com- mented about the transfer of revenues from the project either into the assessment district or back into the general fund. He stated that there were pros and cons to that argument and did not want to yet into them at this point, but hoped none of the Councilmembers would become irrevocably committed to one posi- tion or another until staff got the information to them which would be appropriately at the Finance and Public Works Committee budget hearings. Councilmember Fazzino stated that without being totally com- mitted, he supported the concept of transfering revenues from the project either into the assessment district or back into the general fund. He felt that Mr. Diaz as well as Messrs. Artunian and Kinney had done an outstanding job of insuring that there is an adequate level of profit in what is a very difficult and complex project, at the same time allowing the City to recoup what resources it placed into the project. He was also glad to see that the proposal met almost all the goals and resolved some of the very legitimate concerns which were raised in the Policy and Procedures Committee almost a year and a half ago. With respect to the downtown parking issue, he felt that downtown parking continues to be a problem, and it was absolutely essential that the parking be replenished when projects like this come before the Council. He hoped that the Council would look seriously at the proposal brought before them by members of Downtown Palo Alto, Inc. He felt it was important to look beyond the issues of fair price and parking and Planning Commission that -the Council was looking at a very important housing concept and he was pleased that the developers had been successful to this point. He felt this project Was an exciting o,ie for the downtown area which does provide housing opportunities for people and he'supported the proposal. • Mayor Henderson added his personal commendation to the staff and especially to Mr. Diaz for his excellent work on this sub- ject:. He also commended Mr. Artunian and Mr. Kinney for staying with the project through very shakey times and working out the option which he supported. MOTION PASSED:. The motion passed, including that four options coo to the Planning Commission, unanimously 8-0, Eyerly absent. REPORT ON PALO ALTO FRUIT REMOVAL PROGRAM ' Mr. Zaner addressed the Council regarding the lengthy and com- prehensive program which was headed by Geoff Paulson. He advised that Mr. Paulson was at the meeting and had a slide presentation for the Council. 7 6 0 3/23/81 Mr. Paulson gave the Council a brief look at what happened in Palo Alto during the fruit removal program. To combat the the threat to fruits and vegetables, State and Federal offi- cials proposed to aerial spray with Malathion over Palo Alto and areas of San Jose, but there was concern on the part of the Council and they rejected the aerial spraying due largely to health concerns. Therefore, Council directed staff to come up with a program to remove fruit, which denied the Medfly a place to lay the eggs and denies the larvae a place to live, and was a method of controlling the Medfly which would be harmless to humans. On December 9, an outline was developed, which included purchasing of supplies and recruiting and organizing of several hundred volunteers. The State then announced plans to remove fruit in basically the southern half of Palo Alto. This reduced the City's program to basically the northern half of Palo Alto and a couple of outlying areas such as College Terrace and the area around Esther Clark Park. On January 10, over 500 volunteers distributed over 14,000 flyers, return postcards and bags for fruit disposal in a matter of about three hours. The volunteers helped the elderly and hanaicapped by removing their fruit. The response to the fruit removal program was tremendous. The fruit removal effort which was the biggest volunteer effort in the City's history, has reaffirmed the people of Palo Alto's place as leaders in environmental concern and community involvement. Mayor Henderson thanked Mr. Paulson and expressed his apprecia- tion to he and his volunteers on behalf of the City for his efforts on the fight against the Medfly. Councilmember Renzel commended Mr. Paulson and reminded the Council that when they first took action to oppose the aerial spraying and the County Board .of,. Supervisors Has meeting jointly with members of the Stace Agricultural Committee, she was at the Board of Supervisors_ Chambers and the commendations. were coming in then that Palo Alto was very well organized and Correction so in to their campaign and felt staff really deserved a tre- See Pg864 mendous thanks for the hard work. 6/8/61 Councilmember Fletcher said it was incredible to be. able to mobilize 700 volunteers who -put a lot of effort into this prob- lem. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Renzel, that staff prepare a resolution of appreciation for the volunteers who served the City so will. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously with Mr. E,yerly absent. iNTE-GRATED URBAN INFECT CONTROL RESEARCH PROGRAM Staff recommends that 'Council approve an agreement with the John Muir Institute of Napa, California in the amount of $15,006. ( CMR :171: 1 Councilmember Witherspoon - removed - the item frcm the consent calendar because she .felt that budget items should not be on the, consent calendar. As she nnderstood the contract it was basically for insect control search program and she noted in Correction. the staff report that each year there had been an increase in See Pg864 the number of cultivated diseased trees rather thin pest 6/8/81 related problems.- She asked what covered the diseased trees because it was not covered in the contract, and was there an increase over the cost of the contract last year. - 7 6 .1 3/23/81 .J Mayor Henderson advised Councilmember Witherspoon that this was not a budget amendment, and was on the consent calendar because the Council had to approve the contract each year. Mr. Adams responded to Councilmember Witherspoon that it was a continuation of a program that was started several years ago. He advised that last year's contract was also $15,000, and that this one wi l l be a phase out of the program for training staff. He anticipated that in the future they would only need the consultants for particularly difficult situations sa that the primary purpose is to train the City staff to carry on with the program. As to the diseased trees and other vegetation, he though it was the intent to refer to those that are infested with critters that can be taken care of by other critters, which was what the pest control system was. Councilmember Witherspoon was concerned that trees are a very fashionable topic of conversation and obviously diseased trees. needed to be responded to either by being cut down or treated. She asked that at some point staff advise what was being done about diseased trees. Mr. Adams reflected that the City did have a program for treating with chemicals, but it was not necessarily taken care of through this contract. MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Renzel, that the Council approve the contract with the John Muir Institute in the amount of $155006. Mrs. Bechtel referred the Council to page 2 of the agreement, the top of the page, under (b) which described the scope of the work, which included a raster tree plan and species selection work with the Palo Alto Tree "ommittee to develop a master tree planning list for the City, and wondered what Tree Committee it referred to. Mr. Adams said that the existiny Ad Hoc Tree Committee had been working with staff to develop an accepted species list and that the consultant was also working with the staff and the tree committee. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed 8-0 with Mr. Eyerly absent. CONTRACT - INTEGRATED URBAN INSECT CONTROL RESEARCH PROGRAM - John Muir Institute LETTER OF AGREEMENT - SPENCER ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS AND MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, . seconded by Fazzino, that Council approve the staff recommendation to authorize the Mayor to execute the letter of agreement for $19,100 which adds structural design services to the original contract with pencer- Associates, Architects and Planners;. Councilmember Klein advised ' that mils law firm represents Spencer Associates, and that he would ..not be participating this matter. Mr. Levy sad that the city had, identified structural deficien- cies in the column bracing and wondered if that was one of things to be remedied. Mr. Adams stated that there hadbeen changes in the earthquake safety code since the - Library was built. he reminded them that in the Finance and Public Works Committee meetings, staff informed members of ,that committee that there were .necessary items to be designed concurrently with the other design of the 4.vd'rticati'uns of that buliding.'" 7 6 2 3/23/81 MOTION PASSED: The motion passed 7-0, Mr. Eyerly absent and Mr. Klein not participating. LETTER OF AGREEMENT - Spencer Associates, Architects, & Planners MAYOR HENDERSON RE VIGIL ON APRIL 5 REGARDING THE ATLANTA Mayor Henderson advised that he was informed the previous week of a vigil to be held on April 5 between 5:00 and 7:00 p.m. at the Y.W.C.A. on Alma Street related to the Atlanta situation. He advised that it would be Palo Alto's moment to express its concern and support of its citizens. He agreed to participate that evening .and hoped everyone else would. As part of the program, he read a resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto. He asked the Council to approve the resolution as an emergency item and authorize the staff and mayor to prepare the resolution the following week. MOTION: Mayor Henderson, seconded by Fazzino, that Council voice its support of the April 5 Atlanta Vigil program in Palo Alto and direct staff to prepare a resolution to be read by the Mayor at the event. 1 MOTION PASSED: The motion passed 8-0, with Eyerly absent. RESOLUTION NO. 5894. Mayor Henderson announced that the next meeting would be April 6, 1981. ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned at 10:50 ATTEST: �7 it y Cle l p.ni0 APPROVED _arZcinedhieiree.41.40=022...- Mayor 7 6"3 3/23/81