HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-01-29 City Council Summary MinutesJanuary 29, 1979
Special Meeting (5th Monday)
ITEM PAGE
Minutes of December 18, 1978 4 5 7
Minutes of January 8, 1979 4 5 8
Oral Communications.- None 4 5 8
Consent Calendar -- Action Items
Finance and Public Works Committee ttee Recommends Change in Service 4 5 8
by Revising Schedule W-5, G-5, and S-5 to Reflect Current Costs
Incurred by the City
3370 West Bayshore F.oad--Change of Classification of Property From 4 5 9
LM to PC --Amendment of Section 18.08.040 of Palo Alto Municipal
Code (The Zoning Map)
California State Litter Control, Recycling and Resource Recovery 4 5 9
Grant Program
Project Mobi 1 i ty--Award of Contracts 4 5 9
Quitclaim Deed (Old Miranda Road): Vacation of Easements 4 5 9
(Electric Overhead) --Alta Mesa Improvement Company
Issuance of Utility Revenue Bonds 4 6 0
Home Weatherization Program:• Contract Amendment 4 6 0
Findings re Taxicab Hearings 4 6 1
Senior Assistant City Attorneys: Promotions 4 6 1
Appointment of Two Visual Arts Jury Members 4 6 1
Planning Commission Recommendations re Amendments to Various Sections 4 6 1
of PAMC, Title 18 (The Zoning Ordinance)
Reconsideration of Consent Calendar Matter: Findings_re Certificate 4 6 5
of Public Convenience and feces s i ty
Finance and Publ l c Works Committee RecOmmends re5,11rror Park Noise 4 6 5
Study - Award of Contract to Earth Metrics
Index Page Continued .
ITEM
California Avenue Offstreet Parking District --Amendment to
Resolution 5372
PAGE
466
Proposal Package --Sale of Veteran's Building 4 6 7
Findings re Taxicab Hearings 4 6
Reconsideration: Findings re Denial of Application for Certificate 4 6 8
of Public Convenience and Necessity
Recess
469
Public Hearing --University Avenue Assessment District --Change and 4 6 9
Modification Proceedings --Project #75.63
Request of Councilmeut ers Brenner and Fazzino re Administrative 4 7 5
Approval for Minor Changes in Projects --Palo Alto Municipal Code.
Title 18 (Zoning Ordinance) Section 18.99
Public Heaping --University Avenue Assessment District --Change and 4 7 7
Modification Proceedings --Project #75-63
(Continued from Page 475)
Mayor Carey re School Board Committee to Discuss Surplus Land 4 7 8
Recognition of Ben Pawloski, Director of Public Works, on the 4 7 8
Occasion o,; His Leaving City Employment
Oral Communications
Jim Dechtold, 4181 Verdosa
Recess to Executive Session
Adjournment
479
479
479
4 5 6
1/29/79
January 29, 1979
Special Meeting (5th Monday)
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in a Special
meeting at 7:30 p.m., Mayor Carey presiding.
PRESENT: Brenner, Carey, Clay, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher,
Henderson, Sher, Witherspoon
ABSENT: None
MINUTES OF DECEMBER to 1978
Councilmember Fletcher noted that a memo from the City Clerk's office
at Councilmembers' places observed that the following item had been
inadvertently omitted from the Consent Calendar in minutes of December
18. She asked that it be included:
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS RE LI
OR STORES
ZONES
Planning Commission, by a vote of 4-0 finds that allowing liquor stores
as a conditional use in CN zones will not have a significant environmental
impact and further recommends includin{ the definition of liquor stores
and the modifications of Section 18.41.040,
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO Ai1ENfING
SECTIONS 18.04.030 AND 18.41.030 AND 18.41.040 OF THE PALO ALTO
MUNICIPAL CODE TO REQUIRE USE PERMITS FOR LIQUOR STORES IN Ch
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL OISTRICT REGULATIONS (1st reading)
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO REPEALING ORDINANCE
3097 ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS FOR THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF USES REQUIRING AN OFF -SALE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
LICENSES IN CN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONES (1st reading)
Councilmember Fazzino asked that on page 388, the loth paragraph, the
second ;entente read instead: "He thought ABAG was important to Bay Area
cities, and also a clearinghouse for federal money."
Councilmember Brenner asked that on page 388, 8th paragraph, the next -
to -last sentence read instead: "At 70 percent reduction in dues AUG
would receive $187,Q0O."
Councilmember Witherspoon asked that on page 390, the minutes note that
she did not participate in the Planning Commission matter on Road Safety
Improvements for Arastradero Road.
Councilmember Witnerspoon asked that on page 404, on the matter of a
motion on repairs to the Reiner-Arastra property, her stipulation that
the repairs be made within 6 months, be included.
Councilmember Witherspoon asked that on page 406, third paragraph,
A stipulation that the repairs be made within 6. months be included.
Councilmember Witherspoon asked that on page 406, the third paragraph
read instead: "Councilmember Witherspoon said she would oppose the
motion; she did not want to enter into an action that could be construed
as harassing an individual applicant."
457
1/29/79
MOTION: Councilnember Fazzino moved, seconded by Eyerly, that Council
approve the minutes of December 18 as corrected. The motion passed on a
unanimous voice vote.
1
MINUTES OF JANUARY 8_, 1973
Councilmember Witherspoon asked that on page 424,6th paragraph, the last
sentence read instead: "She thought it would more likely refer to
adding a bedroom."
MOTION: Councllmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Carey, that Council
approve the minutes as corrected. The motion passed on a unanimous
voice vote.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Carey asked that an amendment be appended to the item concerning
Project Mobility, prepared by Assistant City Attorney Don Maynor, with
the first sentence of Section 4 of the agreement to have added "..,to
provide collision and comprehensive insurance for the City's van. The
Senior Coordinating Council shall provide comprehensive automobile
liability, collision and comprehensive insurance coverage for said van,
in the amount to be determined adequate by the City risk manager, in
accordance with provisions of Section 15 of the agreement."
Mayor Carey noted that, since he had been absent from the taxicab hearings
his vote should be recorded as an abstention on Section B).
Courrcilnen,ber Brenner said she wished to vote "no" on arty part; w'iich would
allow an exclusive contract, which she opposed.
Councilrrrnber Clay asked that the matter concerning the
Barron Park noise study contract award, be removed from the Consent Calendar.
Councilrr ber Clay asked that his vote concerning denial of certificate
of convenience and public necessity for a taxicab service be recorded as "no.
Councilmrenber Sher asked that his vote on the matter concerning denial
of a certificate of convenience and public necessity for a taxicab.service (B)
be recorded as "no", and said he would abstain on Sections A) and C).
Councllm+eeaiber Fazzino asked that hil' vote on the matter concerning
denial of the certificate of convenience and public necessity (8) • be .record
as "no" and said he would abstain on Sections A) and C).
The following items remained on the Consent Calendar:
FINANCE PU IC WORKS O 1TT RE .f; NOS
IMP
D BY TNE CITY(CMR:107:9)
The Finance and Public Works Corte i ttee recommends to Council, by unanimous
vote, 1 absent, that Council approve staff's recommendations for a
458
1/29/79
change in service connections by revising Schedule W-5, Schedule G-5 and
Schedule S-5 to reflect current costs incurred by the City.
RESOLUTION 5638 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL
OF la CITY TPALO ALTO AMENDING SCHEDULES W-5, G-5, AND S-5
OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PERTAINING
TO WATER, GAS, AND SEWER RATES."
3370 WEST BAYSHORE ROAD
OF PROPERTY
ORDINANCE 3107 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY brITETILTo ,MENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE
PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (THE ZONING MAP) TO CHANGE
THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS 3370 WEST
BAYSHORE ROAD FROM LM TO PC."
(First reading 1/15/79)
CALIFORNIA STATE LITTER CO R01..4._RECYC TNG
'I fit ` v ,r �:1°. , R MR:126:9)
Staff recommends that Council pass the resolution authorizing the City
Manager to make application and to sign all related documents for grant
funs under the State Litter Control, Recycling and Resource Recovery
Program. Grant funds are derived from assessments on retailers, wholesalers,
and manufacturers, and from a landfill surcharge.
RESOLUTION 5639 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE C0 r IL OF THE
Y Oi 'A.O ALSO APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT
FUNDS UNDER THE STATE LITTER CONTROL, RECYCLING AND
RESOURCE RECOVERY FUNDS, AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
THE APPLICATION AND RELATED PAPERS BY THE CITY MANAGER."
PROJECT MOBILITY
Ig S (CMR:134:9)
Staff recommends -chat Coun;il authorize the Mayor to execute the contract
with InterTrans Corporation for Project Mobility taxi services effective
February 7, 1979, for the remainder of fiscal year 1978-79; and execute
the amendment to the Senior Coordinating Council with Palo Alto (Contract
3931) to provide for Project Mobility handicapped van services as noted
in the qualifications preceding this Consent Calendar itemization,
effective February 7, 1979, for the remainder of fiscal year 1978-79.
AGREEMENT - PROJECT MOBILITY
InterTrans Corporations
NENDMENT NO. 1 TO SENIOR ADULT SERVICES
AGREEMENT NO: 3931
Senior Coordinating Council of the Palo Alto Area, Inc.
ITCLAIM OE MI
Staff rends that Council authorize the Mayor to execute the quitclaim
deed covering Old Mi ; anda Road; adopt the resolution of the Council of
459
1/29/79
the city of Palo Alto declaring its intention to order the vacation of
an overhead electric easement and setting of a public hearing therefor
(Alta Mesa Cemetery); Direct the City Clerk to schedule the public
hearing for February 26, 1979, and publish a notice of public hearing
for at least two consecutive weeks prior to the public hearing in accordance
with government code section 50440. If, after the public hearing, the
Council desires to proceed, staff recommends Council adopt a resolution
of the Council of the City of Palo Alto ordering the vacation of a
public utility easement (Alta Mesa Cemetery).
QUIT CLAIM DEED
Alta Mesa Improvement Company
RESOLUTION 5640 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
trfrorowroo DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE
VACATION! OF Ali OVERHEAD ELECTRIC EASEMENT AND SETTING OF A
PUBLIC HEARING THEREFOR (ALTA MESA CEMETERY) .
ISSUANCE OF UTILITY REVENUE DS (CMk:120:9)
Staff recommends that Council adopt resolutions pertaining to issuance
of $1,150,000 in utility revenue bonds. These resolutions have been
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney's office. 1) A resolution
authorizing issuance of City of Palo Alto electric and gas revenue
bonds; 2) a Series resolution authorizing the issuance of a principal
amount of $1,150,000 City of Palo Alto electric and gas revenue bonds,
1979 Series A; 3) a resolution calling for bids for bonds, approving
Notice of Sale and Official Statement, and authorizing and directing
certain actions with respect thereto; 4) a resolution appointing Paying
Agent and Registrar, City of Palo Alto electric and gas revenue bonds,
1979 Series A. On February 12, 1979, bond bids will be received by the
City Treasurer and a recommendation of award of bid will be made to the
City Council; the City will receive proceeds from the bond sale approximately
two to three weeks after the award of bid.
RESOLUTION 5634 entitled "A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
IVITARMITUTV OF PALO ALTO ELECTRIC AND GAS
REVENUE BONDS."
RESOLUTION 5635 entitled "A SERIES RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
irtUART-OrrINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $1,150,000 CITY OF PALO ALTO
ELECTRIC AND GAS REVENUE BONDS --1979 SERIES A."
UTI 6 entitled "A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR BIOS FOR
iTING NOTICE OF SALE AND OFFICIAL STATEMENT,
AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CERTAIN ACTIONS WITH RESPECT
THERETO."
RE 1 Ui'ION 5637 entitled 'A RESOLUTION APPOINTING PAYING AGENT
f SY O(, CITY OF PALO ALTO ELECTRIC AND GAS REVENUE
BONDS, 1979 SERIES A"
HOME WEATHER 1 ZAT 1 ON
=Mr samititotafl t ` :9)
Staff recommends that Council approve the amendment substituting Western
Weathercheck brand loose -fill cellulose for Fibercell brand loose -fill
cellulose:
AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 TO CONTRACT NUMBER 3911
Hose Weatherization Program
460
1/29/79
FINDINGS RE TAXICAB HEARINGS
A) FINDINGS RE REVOCATION OF PENINSULA
CAB LEASING, INCORPORATED'S CERTIFICATE
OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
B) FINDINGS RE DENIAL OF APPLICATION FOR
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
C) FINDINGS RE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF
PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY TO INTERTRANS
CORPORATION
Becht on B g as r+consldered lour 1n meeiln�)
SENIOR ASSISTMT CITY } ifl R EiS:
ns
The City Attorney requests Council approval for appointment of Louis B.
Green and Donald H. Maynor to the position of Senior Assistant City
Attorney, in accordance with reguireee ►t of Section 2.08.120(4) of the
Palo Alto Municipal Code. The City Manager had concurred.
MOTION: Councllm er Clay moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council
adopt the resolutions, approve the ordinance, authorize the agreements
and amendment included in the Consent Calendar, The notion sassed on a
unanimous voice vote, Councilmembers Brenner, Clay, Sher and Fazzino
voting "no" on findings re denial of the application for certificate (B)
of public convenience and necessity.
A) PASSED 7.0, Fazzino,
Sher abstaining
B) FAILED 4.4, Sher,
Brenner, Fazzino, Clay
voting "no", Carey
abstaining
PASSED 7-0, Fazzino,
Sher abstaining
C)
APPOINTMENT OF TWO VISUAL ARTS
Mayor Carey noted that one of the candidates, Vivienne Andres, had
withdrawn her name from the list of candidates.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council
reappoint two incumbents, Ms. Kathleen Cohen and Mr. Orlando T. Malone,
moose terms expire January 31. The motion passed on a unanimous vote,
Eyerly absent.
PLANNING t 1 f. * i . ► TI'' S R
pIMANCi)
Mayor Carey said he thought changes would best be dealt with by exception,
rather than by piecemealing the Planning Commission's recommendations.
Mayor Carey' asked that a motion to approve the Planning Omission
recormendations be made so that changes could then occur in order.
MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Brenner, that
Council approve the ordinance subsumed in the Planning Commission recomrendations.
ORDINANCE OF THE CECIL OF THE CITY
OF PALO ALTO AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS
OF TITLE 18 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL
COOE
461
1/29/79
6/
Councilmember Witherspoon asked for the formula staff used to determine
the daylight plane.
Mayor Carey said that in that connection he had received a letter from
Albert Hoover, architect, regarding the daylight plane formula, and also
a letter from George Cody raising the question of benefits to be derived
from the daylight plane; Mr. Cody had suggested that the matter of
daylight plane be stricken from the ordinance, explaining that the
daylight plane did not have "...suppportine graphics to clarify its
relationship...to make the benefits apparent to property holders and
users." Mr. Cody had said he was aware of the daylight plane restrictions
in the P -C zone, and he had thought the intent of the P -C zone was to
give the property owner a chance to design property not contemplated in
"regular" zones, making the daylight plane, therefore, contrary to the
intent of the P -C zone. Mr. Hoover had asked if the daylight plane, in
the case of property adjacent to subject property, were to be used as
its restrictions applied to the subject property or the property adjacent
to the subject property. And did the daylight plane begin across the
street, the middle of the street, or at the property line? If a commercial
lot adjoined a residential lot on one side only, or within 150 feet of a
residence, did the daylight plane apply to all four sides?
Naphtali Knox, Director of Planning and Community Environment, explained
that in some cases the daylight plane began at the property line at the
site at which a building was contemplated, and in some cases it began at
the property line across the street. Each zone in the zoning ordinance
had its daylight plane: in a commercial zone which had a daylight plane
applied to its site, the daylight plane began at the adjacent property,
or the property across the street. Therefore, in the case of a commercial
zone which has a daylight plane applied to its site, it began at the
property line of the adjacent property, or the property across the
street --if a commercial property were across the street from a residential
property which was to be protected by use of the daylight plane, the
daylight plane arose by a specified number of feet (in the air) from the
property line of the residential property, at a 45 -degree angle *cross
the street and over the commercial property. In P -C zones the daylight
plane was determined by restrictions arising from properties surrounding
the P -C. Mr. Knox explained that in determining daylight plane, one had
to visualize a 10 -foot platform surmounted by a pyramid with its four
sides having 45 -degree angles. Daylight planes were determined by
adjacent abutting zones. For that reason there was no single diagram
which could plctoriallze daylight planes --the daylight planes varied
according to zoning. The building inspector drew the planes as they
applled'to properties for given sites.
Mr. Knox continued, saying the new zoning ordinance "...does considerably
tighten restrictions on the Planned Community zone all the wady down the
line It adds a height limit, it adds a sideyard setback with minim
to set the daylight plane. . . .with substantial public benefits that
were not required under the previous ordinance. So this is in line with
all of those things.'°
Counci 1 +ber Witherspoon questioned th phrase on page 15 of the * P1 anni ng
Commission minutes of January 10, 1979: "that moans all PC's are limited
to a one-story height limit for 150 feet around' heir perimeters."
Mr. Knox said that the. ordinance was now before Council with the intent
to correct that language.
462
1/29/79
Councilmember Witherspoon noted that Ms. Renzel, chairwoman of the
Planning Commission, had pointed out a more simple formula a 45 -degree
angle for the first 25 feet that satisfied more requirements. Had that
just been an observation she had made, or had that formula been incorporated
into the ordinance?
Emily Renzel, chairwoman of the Planning Commission, said she had merely
raised the possibility; she thought that the other alternative had been
more flexible, in that some zones had a more liberal daylight plane.
Councilmember Witherspoon referred to page 3 of the staff report, 13(b)
that read "If the Planning Commission -recommends denial the application
and preliminary plans ehall be forwarded directly to the City Council."
She asked the purpose --of tnat stipulation.
Ms. Renzel replied that_13(b) was standard procedure at present; that
procedure had simply not been expressly stated before.
Mr. Knox amplified that the statement in 13(b) forestalled having the
denied project go to the Architectural Review Board, because it had
already been denied by the Planning Commission, and so to send it to the
ARB would be wasted motion.
Mayor Carey said that the zoning ordinance might require another look,
since two architects had said they had difficulty understanding it.
Mr. Knox replied that a reading of the ordinance made the daylight plane
quite clear.
Mayor Carey said that Mr. Cody had questioned the cross aisles required
for parking lots, and that he thought cross aisles took needed parking space.
Would staff give its reasoning for requiring crops aisles?
Ms. Renzel explained that the provision had been modified so that it
read "...may be required" instead of "...shall be required.'' The Transportation
Authority required cross aisles where they were necessary.
Councilmember Fazzino said that repeated readings of the daylight plane
requirement had not yet made it ;leer to him. He thought staff and the
Planning Commission could cleai some of the misunderstandings.
A DMENT: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that
the daylight plane concept be held in abeyance until a committee to be
composed of members of the Planning staff and Planning Commission and
selected architects and other members of the business community study
the concept and report to Council within two months.
Councilmember Fazzino proposed the committee be appointed by the Planning
Director, with the approval of the Mayor.
Councilmember Brenner said she opposed the motion, though she woulu
favor have the question of clarifying the daylight plane returned to the
Planning Commission. She did not approve of having a citizen's committee
that bypassed the Planning Commission. She recalled having spent some
time on the concept several years ago and she was a little surprised
that some found the concept of the daylight plane to be new.
Councilmember Sher notes that clarificaticn seed needed to establish
the smatter of daylight plane in several zones. He said he assumed
Council was not going to .hange.the zoning ordinance, which established
463
1/29/79
1
the varying daylight planes; therefore the existing ordinance would have
to be amended if the matter of the daylight plane were to be put in
abeyance. The corrections in the Planning Commission recommendations
dealt with daylight plane in the P -C zone only. Was only the P -C zone,
or were all zones to be considered in the motion now before Council?
When he knew the answer to that he would know if he wished to support
the motion.
Ms. Renzel said that Council had referred to the Planning Commission
another zoning ordinance matter on non -conforming uses. Also the Planning
Commission had a referral on the daylight plane regarding second stories
in residential zones. The Planning Commission would be clearing up some
zoning ordinance matters within the coming two months, and it might be
appropriate to combine those matters and the present question. The
Commission had established height limits within every zone, and that
question had not been re -reviewed though staff had been questioned about
possibilities for limited exceptions in the residential zone.
Counci lm r Sher observed that the P 1 ann rg Commission had reviewed
only that specific question of daylight plane in P -r; zones --it had not
reviewed the whole matter of daylight plane, in general. Perhaps it
would be best to ask the Planning Commission to study the concept of the
daylight plane in general, then make a recommendation to Council.
SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT (REFERRAL): Councilrnember Sher moved, seconded by
Henderson, that Council refer the entire issue of daylight plane require-
ments back to the Planning Commission so that the Planning Commission
can hear cc ; nts and make a recommendation to Council.
Councilmember Witherspoon suggested dropping provisions 8 a, b,c, and d
from the Planning Commission recommendation now before Council.
Mr. Knox said that he and his staff had thought they were bringing
before the Planning Commission a modifications to facilitate use of the
daylight plane, making its application possible in areas where it did
not apply at present. The Planning Department had given the Planning
CommissionA table shswing existing daylight plane requirements in
various zones along with recommended changes. The P -C zone had a one -
for -two slope, which was very shallow, he said, and the Planning Department
suggested to the •Planning Commission that the requirement instead be
identical to whatever was the most restrictive abutting zone. Mr. Knox
said he feared that if the daylight plane matter were referred back to
the Planning Commission there would be 4-6 months delay; he thought the
recommendation before Council ought to -be adopted as an interim measure,
perhaps, because daylight plane coesideration was a restrictive matter
in P -C and CP zones,And and forced requests for variances under the present
rules.
Councilmae ber Sher said he now understood that the staff recommendation
was intended to liberalizer the application of the daylight plane requirement.
He wanted the effect of his motion to be to send the whole daylight
plane question back to the Planning Commission for review, but not
delete star recommendation 8 a,b,c and d.
A discussion ensued, followed by a decision to temporarily withdrew all
substitute motions and to vote on the main motion, that Council approve
the ordinance for first reading, as subsumed in the Planning Comri s s l on
recommendations.
The main motion approving the ordinance for first reading passed on a
unanimous vote, Councf lmember Eyerly absent.
464
l/29/79
Corrected
see page 534,
Councilmember Sher restated his substitute motion.
MOTION: Councilmember Sher moved, seconded by Henderson, that Council
refer the entire issue of daylight plane requirements back to the Planning
Commission so that the Planning Commission can hear comments and make a
recommendation to Council. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote,
Councilmember Eyerly absent.
RECONSIDERATION OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilm aer Sher asked that the votes on the taxicab findings as
they had appeared on the Consent Calendar be reconsidered.
City Attorney Abrams said that pursuant to the municipal code a tie vote
may be reconsidered. He said he had some compromise language to add to
B), the finding re denial of application for certificate of public
convenience and necessity: 'These findings do not preclude consideration
of the issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to
Mid -Peninsula Cab Company or any other cab company at any time. These
findings do not create an exclusive right to a public convenience and
necessity certificate in any taxicab company."
Councilmember Fazzino said he had voted against the item January 15; since
he had not been at the meeting of January 8 he did not think it would be
fair to hold up Council approval of InterTrans Corporation. He would
therefore change his vote to ''abstain" on B) of that 3 -part motion.
Mayer Carey suggested that the review of that consent calendar item be
brought up again after Councilmember Eyerly returned to the Councilchamber
sometime after 9:30 p.m. that evening,
FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
+ ` ,•'' . ` t 4. -R .' ; -� � _ ; y - : . a U D !
rrected
e page
34.
Councilmember Clay said he was opposed to spending $4800 on this study;
He wondered if an ordinance adopted in a special circumstance, such as
the objections of residents to commercial noise at Varian, could apply
to the rest of the City. He thought staff could gather needed information
and recommend what modifications to the ordinance could be made. He
would oppose the motion to grant money for the proposed study.
Vice Mayor Henderson, Chairman of the Finance and Public Works Committee,
said Council had recognized that there was a definite noise problem in
that area, and it had referred the matter to the Finance and Public
Worts Committee. He did not know if Council or Committee had decided to
hire a consultant. The ambient level of sound in that area was higher
than that of other parts of town and that ambient level had to be measured
and compared with other ambience levels. The Committee's vote to do
so had been unanimous.
Councilmember Fazzino said the consultant, Earth Metrics, could provide
recommendations on how t� ,irovide a buffer zone and perhaps to improve
on the noise level. The area was unique in that industry was right in
the back yard of the residents.
Councilmember Fletcher pointed out that the tens of the contract provided
not only for readings on noise levels but also for specifying possible
solutions.
465
1/29/79
1
Councilmember Clay said he did not want to spend that money; he thought
that the location inevitably gave rise to a higher ambient noise level.
Buffers could be established without paying for the services of a consultant.
Mayor Carey foresaw that Council would have to decide what to do after a
consultant submitted readings on noise levels. He said that as in the
case of Edgewood Road residents who complained of the noise of the
Bayshore freeway, the residents near Varian had known it was noisy when
they purchased the property.
Vice Mayor Henderson said that noisy activities had probably been added
throughout the years. He thought the noise could be controlled by
taking steps. Correct readings of ambient noise levels were needed. An
ordinance could state levels beyond which noise would not be tolerable.
He read from Earth Metric's proposal: field measurements; data reduction
and analysis; land use planning analysis; ordinance analysis.
Mayor Carey said that land planning would be useless with existing
industry; what could Council do to reduce the present noise level,
irrespective of consultant's findings?
Vice Mayor Henderson said that the consultant was going to make specific
recommendations to modify the noise, and the ordinance, along with some
suggestions toward long_ and short-range planning and some ways to
mitigate noise.
Councilmember Fazzino pointed out that not the companies but some specific
activities of the companies caused the problem of noise. He thought
companies would cooperate with the City, and wanted the City to develop
a noise ordinance which applied fairly to all industries. Therefore,
specific noise -generating problems had to be identified,
Councilmember Brenner said she had attended a neighborhood meting in
that area on the noise problem, and she had learned that noise, as such,
was a technical problem:. She thought the recommendation from the Committee
for the study was very good, and she would support it.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Henderson, chairman of the Finance and Public Works
Committee* introduced the recommendation that Council award a contract
to Earth Metrics, Incorporated, for the study of the Barron Park noise
problem. The motion passed on the following vote:
AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Sher, Witherspoon
NOES: Carey, Clay
ABSENT: Eyerly
CALIFORNIA AV FES '. P KI
372 (CMR:121:9)
Mayor Carey said he understood that the California Avenue Association
was in agreement with the recommendation that Council approve the amendment
to clarify use of money in the California Avenue Area offstreet parking
district capital outlay fund.
466
1/29/79
MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino introduced the following resolution, and
seconded by Fletcher, moved its adoption by Council:
Corrected
;see page
534.
RESOLUTION 5641 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE
COUWClL i CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING RESOLUTION
5372 TO CLARIFY THE USE OF MONIES IN THE CALIFORNIA
AVENUE DISTRICT CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND."
The motion passed on a unani ;ous voice vote, Councilmember Eyerly absent.
PROPOSAL PACKAGE --SALE OF
R itJItbIltit. (CMR:f31:9)
Mayor Carey said that the general make-up of the proposal to solicit
bids from the public was before Council. That was the only issue
Councilmember Witherspoon praised the format of the proposal; she thought
that returns to the City should be as large as possible, therefore she
did not think bidders should bid on the option agreement. She understood
that all the plans and proposals now in the hands of the City for renovating
and repairing the Veteran's building were to be turned over to the
successful bidder. Depending on the kind of organization that became
the successful bidder, the City could or could not have it pay for the
cost of a special election to qualify the building into park ordinance.
Also, the successful bidder might have to pay part of the cost of the
Stanford lease on the property. She understood that the Red Cross did
pay part of the cost of its lease. She thought the City was responsible
for the building for the duration of the present 24 -month leases and so,
during next winter's rains, it would be the City's responsibility to try
to keep the water out.
Councilmember Eyerly returned to the Councilchar:ber at 9:28 p.m.
MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Fazzino, that
Council accept the staff proposal for putting the Veteran's Building on
the market.
AMENDMENT: Counci?member Witherspoon moved, seconded by Fazzino, that
the option agreement be obtainable for $100. The amendment passed unanimously.
Councilmember Fazzino referred to a stipulation on page 2 of the staff
report, that read: "The proposal package indicates that the City will
assign the $50,000 State Historic Preservation Grant to the successful
proposer. The grant is transferable so long as assignee agrees to all
of the terms of the grant." He wondered if that requirement might
affect the balance of the proposal.
Jean Diaz, Real Estate Department, said that the successful applicant
was not obligated to accept the grant money; if the assignee did want to
accept the money the State would give it only if the assignee were
eligible and accepted all of the tens of the existing grant. Mr. Diaz
said that relative to what was needed for the building, the $50,000 was
only a small gaunt of money.
Councilmember Fazzino praised the clarity Mr. Diaz had achieved in
writing the proposal; he noted that approval of Stanford University
would be required to move the construction from the site. Councilmember
Fazzino wondered if tentative approval on the part of Stanford could not
be ascertained before the bids came in.
467
1/29/79
1
Mr. Diaz said he had met with Stanford, and asked about that, but he had
gotten no specific answer.
Councilmember Sher asked if it would be possible to move the building
out of Palo Alto; were it to remain in Palo Alto it would have to conform
to the building code.
Mr. Diaz replied that all proposals, regardless of whether or not it was
to be moved or left in place, were to be considered; Council had so
directed. If the building were to be !roved out of Palo Alto, restrictions
on the building regarding rehabilitation and other conditions could be
imposed.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Sher moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that the
words "...to a new location, within or without Palo Alto, or leaving the
building in place," be added. The amendment passed on a unanimous voice
vote.
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: The motion, that Council accept the staff
proposal for putting the Veteran's Building on the market, as amended f
passed on a unanimous vote.
FINDINGS RE TAXICAB HEARINGS
Mayor Carey said that the vote on part 8) of the findings re taxicab
hearings had been 4-4; City Attorney Roy Abrams had said that Council
could reconsider matters on which there had been a tie vote, and Council -
member Fazzino indicated he had intended to change his vote, thus breaking
the tie.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council
reconsider part 80, the findings re denial of the application for certificate
of public convenience and necessity. The motion passed on a unanimous
voice vote.
RECONSIDERATION: FIN +I S RE DE I OF
4Y
Mayor Carey said Item 9, Part 8) was before Council for reconsideration.
Councilmember Brenner said she had been concerned that Council might have
given the impression that it would restrict issuance of a certificate to
only one company..
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Brenner moved. seconded by Clay, that wording
be added to finding 8) to say, "3. These findings do not preclude
consideration of the issuance of a certificate of pu;ilic convenience and
necessity to Mid -Peninsula Cab Company or any other cab company at any
time. These findings do not create an exclusive right to a public
convenience and necessity certificate in eny taxicab company."
AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment passed on the following vote:
AYES: Brenner, Clay, Fletcher, Henderson, Sher, Witherspoon
NOES: Eyerly
ABSTAIN: Carey, Fazzino
468
1/29/79
Councilnember Sher said he wanted to explain his forthcoming vote on the
main motion as amended: Council had not considered whether or not there
was sufficient demand for more than one taxicab company in Palo Alto; he
opposed the issuance of only one certificate for he felt it created a
monopoly situation --he preferred to have the understanding that those companies
that met the criteria of financial responsibility, andthe like, could
also be considered.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: The main motion, adopting the findings
re the denial of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to
InterTrans Corporation, amended with the addition of "These findings do
not preclude consideration of issuance of a certificate of public convenience
and necessity to Mid -Peninsula Cab Company or any other cab company at
any time. These findings do not create an exclusive right to a public
convenience and necessity certificate in any taxicab company," passed on
the folloaing vote:
AYES: Brenner, Eyeriy, Fletcher Henderson, Witherspoon
NOES: Sher, Clay
ABSTAIN: Carey, Fazzino
RECESS
Council recessed from 9:07 to 9:20 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING --UNIVERSITY AVENUE
all• OP
_-; ro-ct #75-63 (CMR:132:9)
con nue
Mayor Carey and Counci 1merker Eyerly did not participate Vice Mayor
Henderson presided.
Vice Mayor Henderson said that it was the time and place set for two
continued public hearings on the matter of raking certain changes and
modifications in the University Avenue area off-street parking assessment
district 075-63. He said the Council could consider the ordering of one
of three alternate possibilities: 1) completion of the off-street
parting improvements as generally described in the original resolution
of intention including Iandscap.ig of the properties at 424 and 440
Lytton Avenue, but increase the total engineer's estimate of cost of -the
total principal amount of bonds proposed to be issued to finance the
project from $791.000 to $966,000; 2) completion of a smaller parking
lot on properVes known as 412 and 420 Ki pl i ng, and abandon the acquisition
and'ikrovement of properties known as 424 and 440 Lytton Avenue, at the
southwesterly corner of Kipl ing and Lytton; 3) same as alternate 1)
except to provide for parking spaces on the properties at 424 and 440
Lytton Avenue instead of landscaping. The first hearing, Vice Mayor
Henderson said, was scheduled to be held under Division 4 of the Streets
and Highways code, and is made necessary because of the possibility of
alternate 1) or alternate 3) involving a substantial increase in the
estimate of cost and in the amount of bonds proposed to be issued. The
purpose of the hearing is to hear written and oral protests against the
ordering of the proposed changes and modifications which involve ordering
said increases in cost. The second hearing was scheduled under the Palo
Alto Municipal Code for the same purpose, namely, to hear and consider
469
1/29/79
written protests against the proposed changes and modifications described
for alternate 1), alternate 2) or alternate 3). Since the hearings deal
with basically the same subject matter, they would be held concurrently.
Any person interested, Vice Mayor Henderson said, may address the Council
on whether the estimate of cost and amount of bonds proposed, to be
increased from $791,000 to $966,000, be issued, or whether the project
should be reduced by abandoning the acquisition and improvement of the
properties known as 424 and 440 Lytton Avenue. The Council would also
welcome comment on the question of whether, on considering Alternate 1,
the Council should approve either the original plan which provided for
parking spaces on said properties at 424 and 440 Lytton, or the plan
which provided for landscaping at those propertiee. The law requires,
Vice Mayor Henderson said, that, at that hearing under the report of
Division 4 of Streets and Highways Code, said report, except as to the
map and individual evaluations and true valuations and assessments, and
estimated assessments, must be read or summarized before protests are
considered. Vice Mayor Henderson said that fnr that reason he would ask
Ben Pawloski, Director of Public Works, to summarize the Division 4
report and to present his staff report prior to the opening of the
hearing to the public.
Ben Pawloski, Director of Public Works, said the general nature and
extent of the proposed improvements and acquisitions were described in
Resolution 5242, adopted August 9, 1976. He said that as he discussed
those improvements and acquisitions he would also discuss the changes
and modifications that were the subject of the public hearing that
evening. Properties acquired had been the Old Safeway lot between
Florence and Bryant on Lytton, and 412 and 420 Kipiing,and 420 and 440
Lytton. That project involved relocation of persons and businesses
located on the properties, demolition of the existing structures, and
the approval, as public off-street parking facilities, by grading and
construction of base pavement, curbs gutters, drainage facilities,
lighting, striping, landscaping, and all the work necessary to complete
the facilities for oft -street automobile parking. Yet remaining to be
done on 424 and 440 Lytton was relocation of existing businesses, demolition
of the existing structures on the Lytton and Kipling site, and completion
of improvements at those sites. A third element had been the financing
of a feasibility study for and on behalf of the assessment district;
that had been colleted, and action by the City Council had been taken.
Three alternate projects were under consideration at that public hearing
that evening, as outlined by Vice Mayor Henderson, for alternative 1,
that involved an increase in the amount of bonds to be issued, from
$791,003 to $9660000, an increase of $175,000. Alternate 2 did not
involve an increase in cost, and consisted of a smaller parking lot on
properties at 412 and 420 Kipling and abandonment of properties at 424
and 440 Lytton. Mr. Pawloski said that Alternate 3 was the save as
Alternate 1, except that it provided for parking spaces at 424 and 440
Lytton instead of landscaping. He said the assessment district boundaries
were posted on the wall of the Council chaffer, and were also on file at
the City Clerk's office. A table showed the assessment value and amount
for each parcel in the district. A limitation prevented the assessment
from exceeding the valuation of the land owned, and that limitation had
not been exceeded for any parcel in the district.
Vice Mayor Henderson confirmed that Alternate 1 would involve 44 parking
spaces and an additional cost of $175,000; Alternate 2 would be 39
spaces with no additional cost; Alternate 3 would be 55 spaces and
additional cost of $155,000, or $20,000 less than Alternate 1. He
further confirmed that letters Councilmembers had received which urged
approval of one or another of the alternates would not be thought to be
470
1/29/79
letters of protest, though they should be included in the minutes of the
public hearing.
Mr. Pawloski said 8 written letters had been received; two protested
construction of any improvements, one from Ruth Frapwell, one from
A.L.Holland; five letters favored choice of Alternate 3: Downtown Palo
Alto Inc., Earl M. 8erendsen, Pacific Holding, Kenneth McDougall, Frank
Lee Crist, and Congdon and Crone.
Councilmember Fletcher asked about a letter of protest received from a
resident in the district.
Mr. Pawloski said that residences in the assessment district were not
assessed.
Bill Byxbee, chain of the traffic and parking committee for Downtown
Palo Alto, inc., formed to enhance and expedite transportation within
the district, said their. suggestions.. :weer 4.eirig incorporated into a manage-
ment program for downtown.. The program had the approval of the Council
and the work was done under the auspices of the City's Transportation
Department. He reviewed the background on the growth of traffic that
led to need for public parking it the northwest quadrant of downtown',
and he said his group favored Alternate 3, that offered the most parking
at not much more cost. He listed reasons why alternates 1 and 2 were
not as desirable to his group.
Ed Dobbs, representing Greyhound Lines, 934 Brewster, Redwood City,
noted the high cost of each added parking space, and he said his company
favored Alternate 2, which cost the least.
Helen Smith, 1863 Hamilton Avenue, represented the Palo Alto Art Club, a
non-profit organization; she feared that the Club's ar3essment would be
raised. She submitted a petition protesting the raise in the amount of
the assessment, and requesting an easier parking arrangement for the Art
Club in the City Hall parking area.
Med Gallagher, 440 Melville, spoke for Downtown Palo Alto, Inc., and he
enumerated the various points of the 3 alternatives before Council. His
group, he said, favored Alternate 3 for it cost less per parking space
and gave the most spaces. He pointed out that though the text said
alternate 3 would provide parking instead of landscaping, there would in
fact, be landscaping, as shown by the City's Exhibit E. He asked that
the 424 and 440 Lytton spaces be retained.
Herb Borock, 424 Lytton Avenue, covered points he had made in his
letter to Council protesting demolition of the Peace Center at 424
Lytton Avenue. He said that the greatest public good required that 4`:4
Lytton be retained in its present form. He noted some disparities
between the City's statements in 1977 and the present. He observed that
only 1 of the Coun_ilmembers who had voted for the project was now on
Council and able to participate, Councilor tuber Clay. Mr. Borock noted
that the City's bond counsel had negotiated the price of $120,000 for
the properties, between then and now the sale had occurred, Mr. Borock
noted, though the contracting parties and the price were nct given. He
said that the money that had been in an account and could have been used
to build Al ternati ve 2 without having to levy additional taxes had now
been spent, meaning that Alternatives 1 and 3 were left. He said that
with Proposition 13 a too -thirds vote was needed to levy additional
taxes. He said he still favored Alternative 2. He said that at noon
that day the present parking lot at Lytton was not filled.
471
1/29/79
Counci member Sher noted that the Palo Alto Art Club petition requested
that as a non-profit corporation it be excluded fron the assessment. He
asked if such exclusion were possible.
1
1
Roy Abrams, City Attorney, replied that only public property could be
excluded from the assessment.
Councilmenber Sher ascertained that the City owned the 424 and 440
properties and that therefore they could no longer be abandoned, so that
if Alternate 2 were aba^cloned the parcels would be sold by the City, and
the zoning changed from Public Facility (PF) to another zone. Was
Alternative 2 not based on the assumption that the property would be
sold, the proceeds of which would go toward completing the parking
project?
Mr. Pawloski said the acquisition of the property was made with assessment
district funds. If Alternative 2 were chosen the project could be
completed by selling off those properties,
CouncilmeMber Sher calculated that if the City were ti hod the two
parcels there would not be sufficient funds to complete the work called
for with Alternative 2.
Mr. Pawloski agreed, saying the balance of funds were insufficient to
complete Alternate 2.
Councilm tuber Sher then concluded that if the a.sumed value of the
properties stayed the same the project could be completed with proceeds
from sale of those parcels.
Mr. Pawloski disagreed, saying there was a wide margin between the value
of the parcels and the amount of money needed for the project.
Councilmeriber Sher said that both resolutions for Alternates 1 and 3
called for court action, called the In Rem validating proceedings, which
he understood to be a court action in whichthe court is asked to decide
if the proceedings are legal so that the revenue bonds would be marketable,
One of the questions upon which legality would be decided would be
whether or not an assessment district levy was a property tax, which,
under Proposition 13, would be illegal, or what procedures had to be
followed for implementation. Did Mr. Abrams know of any cases in which
assessment districts had fallen within restrictions made by Proposition 13?
Mr. Abrams replied that there was a move to bring before the California
Supreme Court such a matter, to find out if it was within the restrictions
of Proposition 13; if such taxes were special taxes they were not restricted
by Proposition 13. Bond counsels throughout the state, Mr. Abrams said,
held that assessment districts were other than taxes, and they cited
cases in point. It was notknown if the In Rem proceedings would in
fact answer that question. Notice was given; should anyone wish to
challenge the proceedings; If there were no challenge the court might
raise the question on its own motion, or it might ask bond counsels for
points of authority.
Councilmember Sher said that as a member of the City Council he wanted
to stay within the bounds of Proposition 13. Could the City Council
direct that the court give answer to those legal questions?
Mr. Abrams said he did not know; if the court by final judgment concluded
that these proceedings were valid that would implicitly answer all the
472
1/29/79
questions. He did not know if the court would answer those questions
without an adversary challenge.
Councilmember Sher said that Proposition 13 made further axing of
property unlawful; if the assessment were a special tax the question was
what kind of election had to be held to validate the assessment. If it
was appropriate, Councilmember Sher said, he thought the In Rem proceedings
should put the question to the court. Councilmember Shersaid`that the
question of the Eminent Domain proceedings to acquire the two Lytton
properties had given him trouble; he had voted against the Eminent
Domain proceedings because the property owner did not want to have his
property taken by the public, body and could not agree on the price that
was offered him. Also, the property owner's tenants, a number of community
organizations, strongly -opposed the Eminent Domain proceedings. The
fact that the properties were being taken for more parking spaces had
also generated controversy. He himself had thought it a misuse of the
Eminent Domain proceedings. Now the situation had changed in that there
no longer were Eminent Domain proceedings. Those had been recently
settled, and the City now owned those parcels, If Alternate 2 were
selected the City would be faced with selling off those properties, and
what use they would be put to or what the zoning would be was not clear.
Councilmember Sher recalled that Counci members who had voted for the
Eminent Domain proceedings had done so in the context ofcompromise,
with the aim of making the properties into a visual asset --perhaps a
small park, as a tradeoff for all the paved parking space. That had been
Mr. Berwald's proposal. Councilmember Sher observed that Alternative 3
would eliminate that compromise nature that had made the instigation of
Eminent Domain proceedings acceptable to enough Councilmembers to vote
it through. He could not disagree with those who favored Alternate 3 in
view of the money involved, though he was not "...wholly happy eith
Alternate 3. . Councilmember Sher calculated the number of spaces
and costs per space according to the three alternatives. Those figures
shored that the cost of each space was quite high. Councilmember Fletcher
said that if the assessment district levy were not legal and the City
had gone ahead with it she supposed the money would have to be returned,
and the City would have to pay.
Mr. Pewloski said that if Alternates 1 or 3 were chosen the City would
have to award a contract for constructions and bond bids. That would
occur sometime in June probably, and so the information on the validation
proceedings would be on hand before Council awarded a contract for
construction, or a bond bid. That would forestal; the City having to
PAY
Councilo r Fletcher asked if the Senior Center was included in the
assessment district.
Albs. Pawloski said he thought the City had entered into some agreement
with the Senior Center, but if it were not adjudged a public facility it
would be assessed.
Counciime er Fletcher wondered if the Palo Alto Art Club, which called
itself a nun -profit educational institution, might not also be exempt
from the assessment district.
Mr. Pawloski said he had just been informed that the Senior Center was a
public facility, and so it would be exampts the Palo Alto Art Club was
not so classified. Assessments were based on the amount of parking
required and the amount provided; records showed 33 spaces were required
by the art club, with one provided on site.
473
1/29/79
Mr. Abrams said that there were three classifications of property, so
far as taxability for the assessment district was concerned: public,
residential, both of which were exempt, and non-residential, under which
classification the Palo Alto Art Club fitted,
corrected
see page
534.
Corrected
See page
534.
Councilmember Fletcher commented that sometimes a motorcycle took an
entire automobile parking space; she said that in San Francisco it was
now customary in some cases to fit as many as eight motorcycles into one
automobile parking space --a useful modification when parking was scarce.
Councilmember Brenner recalled that the Palo Alto Art Club's assessment,
one of the speakers from the public had said, had gone from $41 to $633.
Councilmember Brenner asked what method of assessment had been used, and
over what period of time the assessment had risen to the $633 figure.
Mr. Pawloski said that the figures Councilmember Brenner had, had been
calculated in accordance with the Majority Protest Limitation Act, which
said that all of the proposed and existing assessments against the
property could not exceed the land value. Those figures complied with
the law, Mit they did not reflect the Actual arsee.smants made reach year,
which were based on the amount of bonds that had to be retired each year
and the net square footage of the entire building being assessed. The
assessment for the proposed project had been assessed a couple of years
ago, and the formula for assessing had not changed. He said that the
assessment for the Palo Alto Art Club, totaled about $636 for its parcel.
He did not know about the original $41 assessment.
Councilmember Brenner asked, in relation to the Palo Alto Art Club
petition 2, how it happened that the number of spaces allocated to the
club, in City Nail, had dropped, whereas the assessment had risen.
Mr. Pawloski said he did not know those circumstances.
Council,fnber Brenner said she recalled she had voted against acquiring
the two houses at 424 and 440 Lytton when she wes on the Planning Commission;
she had thought that having the parking in the center of the block had
seemed less objectionable. Parkin lots on important corners tended to
deteriorate property aesthetically. That the houses had been paid for
was a dubious advantage, for the purchase used up all the money reserved
for the parking improvements. The park -like plan had offered some idea
of giving the downtown area a better feeling; the larger area took the
total corner, of which she did not approve, she said, and the amenity of
a small open space would be lost.
MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Fazzino, that
Council approve Alternate 1, for completion of the offstreet parking -
improvements as generally described in the original Resolution of Intention,
including provision of parking spaces on the properties at 424 and 440
Lytton Avenue, and she introduced the fol i owi ng resolutions:
RESOLUTION 5642 entitled "A RESOLUTION APPROVING
DIRECTING FILING OF NOTICE OF
DETERMINATION (ALTERNATE III)."
RE 3 .lil10115643 entitled 'A RESOLUTION DETERMINING
EEDINGS (ALTERNATE III)."
RESOLUTION 5644 entitled "A RESOLUTION ORDERING
CHANGES AND FI+CATIONS (ALTERNATE III) ."
4 7 4
1/29/79
RESOLUTION 5645 entitled "A RESOLUTION
AUTRUMTATTRIEm VALIDATION PROCEEDINGS
(ALTERNATE III 7—
Councilmember Witherspoon said she thought the additional 16 parking
spaces more than justified the additional cost. She thought that Alternate 3
was as good a compromise as could be expected; it appeared that the City
could no longer afford the formerly proposed mini -park.
Councilmember Sher asked City Attorney Abrams whether or not he and
Councilmember Witherspoon. both employed by Stanford University, should
participate in the ensuing vote, since Stanford owned land in the assessment district.
Mr. Abrams replied that Mr. Pawloski's records did not indicate any
property owned by Stanford.
Mr. Pawioski said his list was made up of names to whom notices about
the forthcoming assessment ent ere to be sent; Stanford University
not
�iilsCf � 1 L�/ was not
listed among those names.
Mr. Abrams said he thought there would be no material relationship
between Stanford's ownership of a piece of property and the subject
assessment district. Since it was not known whether or not Stanford
owned any of the properties to come under the assessment district, Mr.
Abrams suggested that Council perhaps continue the matter so that possible
ownership could be ascertained.
Vice Mayor Henderson ascertained with Mr. Abrams that 5 votes were
needed to approve the assessment district.
Councilmember Sher said that he would not participate in the vote to
approve: if Council did not get the five votes he perhaps would rove to
continue the matter.
A discussion ensued, with the conclusion that since any purported ownership
by Stanford of property in the assessment district could not be ascertained
the matter be continued.
MOTION TO CONTINUE: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Brenner,
that consideration of the assessment district be continued. The motion
to continue, passed on a unanimous vote, Mayor Carey and Councilmember Eyerly
not participating,
Mayor Carey and Councilmember Eyerly returned to the Council.
Mayor Carey presided.
RE EST
151ECTIORTLITT
Councilmember Brenner recalled that S.ct$on 18.99 had been adopted in
1976 and amended in 1977; since then an appeal procedure had been added.
She thought that perhaps enough time had passed so that the experience
of requiring administrative approval of minor changes could now be
evaluated. Was that requirement giving results intended by passage of
the ordinance? Toward ascertaining that, she and Councilmember Fezzino
INANCE )
475
1/29/79
1
I
had proposed that staff prepare a list of decisions regarding that
ordinance, since January 1978, to the present, with attention to details
such as what matters were approved, dimensions of resulting change, and
whether or not formal or informal public notice had been given--i.e.,
had neighbors had any beforehand information about projects before
building start-up.
MOTION: Councilmember Brenner moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council
direct staff to prepare a list of decisions made since January 1, 1978 --
to present, under the authority of Chapter 18.99, giving physical descriptions
of changes in somewhat greater detail than had been furnished in the
formal report form periodically sent to Council. The list would include
a sugary of such specifics A f : 1) exactly what was granted; 2) dimension
of change; 3) whether or not public notice, formal or informal, had been
given; 4) whether or not neighbors had any reasonable way of knowing
about changes before building start-up.
Councilmember Fazzino said that his and Councilmember Brenner's proposal
had been given impetus by Mr. Bechtold's comments of last week regarding
Barron Square. Also, Councilmember Fazzino said he wanted to insure
that there was a maximum level of public participation, and some clear
definition of what was meant by the use of the ter "minor."
Councilmember Witherspoon said she was not willing to ask for a staff
report unless there were some major concerns.
Councilmember Fazzino said he wanted to be able to review such concerns
as daylight plane, and the like.
Councilmember Eyerly said that in view of present-day financial constraints
he would prefer to ask Naphtali Knox, 8'rector of planning and Community
Environment, to give a brief overview that evening, rather than have
Council ask for a detailed report.
Mr. Knox reported that there had been 37 zone change requests during the
period of time referred to. Nineteen of those requests had been diverted
under Chapter 18.99. from Council consideration. There had been four
changes in Barron Square, one adding 2 uncovered parking spaces, 1
relocating a play area, l rearranged some floor plans and location of
garages, 1 modified some elevations. In the process of one developer
selling Barrar Square to another, the purchasing developer had wanted
some changes in the interior plan. Three changes had been made at
Toyota of Palo Alto, vial. a requested 100 -square foot building addition
bong permitted and erection of a security fence to protect cars. Hyatt
House had requested , nlign changes.
Mayor Carey asked if the matters Mr. Knox spoke of would, prior to the
adoption of Section 18.99, have had to have come before Council.
Mr. Knox said that was correct; the changes had been on P -C developments
which formerly would have required Council approval. He added that the
carport at 101 Alma had been found to be 8 feet too long and had been
shortened; an emergency access at the Holiday Inn situation had also
been righted.
Mayor Carey said he had initiated the subject ordinance after he had
learned about the delays that had to be suffered through to make only
minor changes in structures. He felt that staff was entirely competent
to deal with such applications, without the intervention of Council.
476
1/29/79
60
Mr. Knox noted the Chapter 18.93 requirements for publicizing public
notice for minor changes, the same as with major changes. Notices were
placed in the newspaper and after a 10 -day waiting period the hearing
was held.
Councilmember Brenner said that her motion asked only for a list of
matters that staff had handled so that there would be more detail available;
was a ''minor intrusion" for example, four feet or forty feet? She had
not meant that an extensive report be submitted, or that the present
administrative process be changed.
Councilmember Clay said he would be satisifed with the report that Mr.
Knox had just made orally.
Mayor Carey said he saw no need for a staff report.
MOTION TO TABLE: Mayor Carey moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that
Council table the motion to direct staff to submit a report on decisions
made from January 1, 1978, to the present, under Chapter 18.99.
MOTION FAILED: The motion to table failed on the following vote:
AYES: Carey, Clay, Eyerly, Witherspoon
NOES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher Henderson, Sher
Vice Mayor Henderson suggested that Council approve the main motion and
have Mr. Knox distribute the list from which he had read some examples
of the way staff had applied Chapter 18.99 thus far. He emphasized that
he did not want his vote to be understood as a criticism of staff's
judgment.
MAIN'MOTlON PASSED: The main motion, that staff prepare a list of
decisions it had made under the authority of the process given in Chapter 18.99
and answering specific questions passed on the following vote:
AYES: Brenner, Clay, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson)Sher, Witherspoon
NOES: Carey
PUBLIC HEARING —UNIVERSITY V UE
7563
on n rom age
Mayor Carey turned the chair over to Vice Mayor Henderson.
Vice Mayor Henderson presided.
Roy Abrams„ City Attorney, said that Stanford had one parcel in the
assessment district. The assessment was approximately $60, which* in
his opinion, did not have material affect on either Councilmembers Sher
or Witherspoon and therefore it would be all right if both participated.
Vice Mayer Henderson said that the motion made by Councilmember Witherspoon
when Council considered the item earlier in the meeting was again before
Council That motion had moved Council approval of Alternate 3 and the
four resolutions.
477
1/29/79
;4
1
1
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Sher moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that to
Resolution 5645, concerning in rem validation proceedings, language to
the "Now, Therefore,...confirm assessment," be added saying "including
the determination of whether the confirmed assessment is valid under
Proposition 13,".
Councilmember Sher said he wanted to make explicit whether or not the
assessment district levy was legal under the strictures of Proposition
13.. His motion was, in effect, asking the court to determine the validity
of the assessment. If the court did not give validation Council would
have to decide how else to move on the question.
AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment passed on a unanimous vote, Mayor Carey
and Councilmember Eyerly not participating.
Councilmember Sher said that in voting on the main motion before Council
he would have to dismiss the past history'of the parcels at 424 and 440
Lytton; the City now owned those parcels, and, were alternative 2
adopted, the City would have to sell the parcels, and the prospective
purchaser and purpose could not be known. Many in the assessment district
favored alternative 3 over alternative 1, in view of the additional
number of parking spaces and proportional reduced cost: he would vote
for alternative 3.
Vice Mayor Henderson commented that he too had voted against the eminent
d in proceedings, and logic favored his voting for alternate 3.
MAIN MOTION PASSED: The main motion, that Council adopt alternate 3 and
the four related resolutions, passed on a unanimous vote, Mayor Carey
and Councilmember Eyerly not participating.
Mayor Carey resumed the chair. Councilmember Eyerly also returned to
the Council.
MAYOR CAREY RE SCNOOL B0 RD
S LAN
Mayor Carey raised for discussion the appointment of a con itte by the
Palo Alto School Board, to which members of City staff had been appointed
without the knowledge of he City Council. It had been called the Site
Disposit on Committee.
Mr. Knox explained the make-up of the committee and his participation in
it.
Council took no action on this i tefl .
RECOGNITION F B: P SKI
r. �. r� ti„ E '.�► lt` VING
Mayor Carey took advantage of the opportunity to praise the cooperation
and creditable work Ben Fawloski had rendered the City during his sixteen
years of employment. On behalf of the Council, he conveyed thanks and
best wishes to Ben.
4 1.8
1/29139
ORAL COIVIUNICATIONS
1. Jim Bechtold, 4181 Verdosa, spoke of the Barron Square garage site
that was being installed contrary to plans that had formerly been
agreed upon. He spoke of his contacts with Ken Schreiber and Stan
Nowicki of Building Inspection on the matter.
Mr. Schreiber said Mr. Nowicki would go to the site promptly at the
beginning of work the following day to check the matter out personally.
RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Council recessed to Executive Session re personnel matters at 11:10 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
Council adjourned at 12 Midnight.
APPROVE: