Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-09-11 City Council Summary Minutesary COUNCIL MU1UT€t Regular Meeting September 11, 1979 ITEM Minutes of July 16, 1979 and July 23, 1979 Oral Communications Robert Moss, 4010 Orme Roger Schuyler, 239 Kipling Consent Calendar - Action Items Ordinance Adopting New Title 21 of Palo Alto Municipal Code Subdivision Ordinance Ordinance Amending Title 16 of Palo Alto Municipai Code Regarding Flood Hazard Regulations kmendment 03 to Agreement in Connection with Advanced Waste Treatment Facility Resolution Determining Properties Electing to Pay Cost of Underground Utility District No. 21 Finance and Public Works Committee Recommends re Open Space Property Fronting Arastraderu Road Finance and Public Works Committee qv -commends re Lifeline Rates for Master Meter Complexes Proposed Relocation of Two Houses Offered to the City by Northern California Savings Recess Change___ n_ iz_ nrflisr Ordinance re Tree Houses Repairs at University .Av . Parp c_tatinn a_ A.erd :/• %IV•i bi WV Se Report of City Attorney re Willow Road Option Extension Agreement Request of Vice Mayor Sher re Safety of Transit District Bus Drivers and Passengers Request of Mayor Henderson re Property Maintenance Standards Rest of Couril r Fletcher re Energy Conservation Guidelines Mayor Henderson re Tax Legislation Mayor Henderson re ARB Applications Adjou :}'r art' OF MIO ALTO PAGE 121 122 122 12 - 122 122 122 123 123 123 124 125 131 1 3 g 135 1.3 7 138 141 142 1 4 2 143 143 144 1 20. 9/11/79 Regular Meeting September 11, 1979 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Councilchamber, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, Mayor Henderson presiding. PRESENT: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino (arrived 7:50 p.m.), Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher ABSENT: Witherspoon Mayor Henderson announced that an Executive Session would take place at the end of the meeting. He welcomed the City's new City Manager, William Zaner. MINUTESOF JULY 16, 197IMOI NINOMMIIINSIOMMOMMINNYMIMPOINI 9 Councilmember Brenner asked that on page 24, the first sentence of the seventh paragraph read instead: Councilr errber Brenner said that she thought discussion of municipal ownership should not be excluded, Mayor Henderson asked that on page 18, the first sentence in the sixth paragraph read instead: Mayor Henderson referred to the five years' planning and debating leading toward Council approval of widening and improving the existing Sand Hill Road, extending the road from Arboretum to El Camino Real. Mayor Henderson asked that on page 24, the first sentence of the fifth paragraph read instead: Mayor Henderson said he had been on the Council during the cable television task force study and that task force had heard about some cities being 'burned' by private cable TV systems. . . Councilrnember Brenner asked that on page 19, the first sentence of the seventh paragraph read instead: Councilmenber Brenner asked if the agreement was to have been activated on the previous consideration of the subject road. Councilmember Brenner asked that on page 19, t P first sentence of the tenth paragraph read instead: Counc i l member Brenner commented that Palo Alto's share had also included about $400,000 as the value of the roadside land that the City was to have given, in addition to the $600,000$ totalling more than $1 million. Coupullowmhr Levy n tpti that on pane 24__ -third paragraph l'e —es __the - mover of the motion di ting staff to study and report on alternatives for cable television. CQun _ilmember- Fazzino arrived at 7:50 p.m, MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher proved, seconded by Eyerly, that Council approve the minutes of July 162 as corrected. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. T gfLge 199 Councilmember Fletcher asked that on page 48, the second sentence of the fifth paragraph read instead: ICC had prepared an environmental impact report showing that there could not be adequate bus service were SP passengers to switch to buses if the commute service stopped, nor could San Francisco offer parking facilities if private passenger cars were used, 121 9/11/79 Councilmember Fletcher asked that on page 48, the first sentence of the sixth paragraph read instead: Councilmember Fletcher said that negotiations here taking place between CalTrans, who represented the area transit districts, and SP, . . . Councilmember Renzel asked that on page 39, the second sentence of the second paragraph read instead: She had thought that the R-2 would be preferable to division into two lots. She respected the strong reaction of the neighbors to the proposed zone and now feels it would be detrimental to apply the first new R-2 zoning where the neighbors are so strongly opposed, therefore, she will oppose the motion. Mayor Henderson asked that on page 51 the second sentence of the tenth paragraph read instead: The state Regional Water Quality Control Board, however, would have to amend its basin plan, and so, until that was done, the problem still existed. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Eyerly, that Council approve the minutes as corrected. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. DBALSMIALciejigiga 1. Robert Moss, 4010 Orme, commended Vice Mayor Sher for defending North County against some proposals `hinted at regarding regional government, as had been reported in a local newspaper, and he urged that Vice Mayor Sher maintain his stance, and that Council support him. 2. Roger Schuyler, 239 Ki pl i ng, complained that street sweeping in Palo Alto was ineffective because of parked cars; he asked that the City post permitted peeking hours for streets scheduled to be sweep ! . ill SE 1T CALENDA +aif�iY4`�71�0.7aO1.DM.lY` Irk Councilmember Eyerly asked that, the item concerning repairs at the University Avenue Pump Station be removed from the consent calendar. The following items remained on the consent calendar: None Referral Items Action Items ORDINANCE 3157 entitled ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO REPEALING TITLE 21 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (SUBDIVISION OROINANCE) AND.ADOPTINg A NFW TITLE 91.14 (First reading August 13, 1979) j itIviartilig611111.1) v 3 ' ;'.ql T1011t ORD I N'UNCE 3158 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COIL OI Tht CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING TITLE 15 Of THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER 16.52 THERETO, REPEALING SECTION 16.04,185, AND B INS CHAPTER 21.20 OF THE PASO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE BY AWING SECTION 21.20.310 THERETO, REGARDING FLOC HAZARD REGULATIONS." (First reading August 20, 1979) 122 9/11/79 AMENDMENT #3 TO AGREEMENT IN 4 TN EN LITY C R:3881) Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to execute Contract Amendment 3, which will increase the budget amount by $97,000 from $192,700 to $289,700 for Field Engineering Services and Construction contract administration on the Advanced Water Treatment Facility (AWTF). AMENDMENT 3 TO AGREEMENT —CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH ADVANCED WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY. Jenks & Harrison, Inc. RTIES ICT 21 (CMR:375:9) RESOLUTION 5733 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL 6F 'THE CITY OF PALO ALTO DETERMINING PROPERTIES ELECTING TO PAY COST OVER A PERIOD OF YEARS FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT 21." MOTION: Councilnresnber Fazzino moved, seconded by Fletcher, that Council approve the ordinances, adopt the resolution, and amend the contract. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. FL SD PUB :� IKS $PEN SPACE PR'P ARAS MOTION: Vice Mayor Sher, on behalf of the Finance and Public Works Committee, introduced the following recommendations on a proposal to utilize open space property fronting o ► Avastradero Road, Palo Alto, by unanimous vote, one absent: a) that staff be directed to develop a plan for interim equestrian use of the Arastra property by Palo Altans and non -Palo Altans with horses stabled in Palo Alto, including fees to offset any costs involved, with the understanding that this would be an interim plan until a more s.onnxrehensive use plan is developed; b) that staff be directed to monitor the effects of the interim plan for six months to determine the effects on the ecology; and c) that staff be directed to prepare a report on the Harley Bothwell contract for review by the Finance and Public Works Committee. Vice mayor Sher noted that the minutes for the Committee accurately re:fie:etc:4. tevs of its master-, u; thh question.. ne scald _ the proposal that the property have equestrian uses had " been made by people owning stables across from the Arastra property, the 8resslers. Staff had said it was not wise to permit such use at this time; citizens had attended the meeting to object to the us*, though there was limited equestrian use at present. The Committee nosed that some equestrians had keys to the Arastra to , . - e Committee- r --to �L.....ft�i7'ff��-%'vnR3�c�'sin inn' �r t'sa- ar= rruir_c�t� _ �__-� ---_._.. . ..�,.y--�.rv-rv--rrrc- - had _.W--_ acknowledge that the property was used by equestrians who were non -Palo Altans at present. It was not intended that parking or other space be provided for horse trailers. Councilmember Brenner asked if there was a limit or could one be set for the number of horses boarded on the land. She knew that parking (of owner's automobiles) could be very destructive on the land. 123 9/11/79 Vice Mayor Sher said that no limit had been set at present, but use was to be monitored, and would be changed if use was too intensive. Vice Mayor Sher said the Committee had thought it should have an interim proposal to allow Palo Altans access to the property, or else close the property off to use by any one; the Committee had not warted to keep people out. A fee was to be charged to users, and that fee would help pay for themonitoring. Counc i l member Brenner said she thought the Committee had handled a difficult subject well --she feared that the number of horses being boarded might rise a great deal, however. Jean Diaz, City Real Property Administrator, said staff foresaw that it would have to give close attention to the handling of the property during this period of interim use; staff would return to Council with recommendations as to the maximum number of permits to be issued in the interim program. Jay Couperus, 13680 Page Mill, Los Altos Hills, said his family had had a key to the Arastra property for quite some time. He acknowledged the irony of being a non -Palo Altan and having access granted, whereas Palo Altans not owning horses could not get in, but said the reverse was true for some Palo Altans whose horses were boarded elsewhere and who had access to other properties. He said a City -of -Los -Altos -owned barn, Westwood, fostered a plan offering horseback riding to handicapped children many cf whom came from; a school in Palo Alto. He asked that the ecologically valuable Arastra property not be barred to non --Palo Altans. Vice Mayor Sher clarified that fees were now going to be charged, and people were r,ot barred from the land. Larry Faber, 3127 David Avenue, said that the language of the Committee recommendation was ambiguous and did not forestall manipulation of the stipulation by owners of horses being boarded in Palo Alto. Fe said that restricting ridership created an "equestrian fence." Portola Valley, he salt, permitted Palo Alto residents to use its bridle paths, as did Los Altos Hills, at no charge. He said that horses hooves did not cause k of growing p= grass He said the erosion, lack r'c°i+ie ���1�G% and caused erosion. property could stand 2200-300 horses, and he asked that permits for use be summarily revoked at any infraction of the rules. He thought one or two safe corridors for horses from Los Altos Hills to Portola Valley, leading 1.o open space that extended to the coast should be provided. Vice Mayor Sher said that staff had cautioned the camiittee about the hazards of erosion from use of the land by equestrians, and the monitoring would flag that for attention. .wa .-v.. PA(SED: The rz .t= that CS ono t 1 ayf3:Po1P1'' remummendations of the Finance and Public Works Committee regarding an interim plan for use of the Arastra property passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. NOTION: Yke Mayor Sher introduced the recommendation on behalf of the Finance and Public Works Committee that Council approve the Committee's recommendation to deny the lifeline rates to any master ureter customer in the City, and moved its acceptance by Council. 124 9/11/79 V;ce Mayor Sher said that the issue of providing multi -family housing reside>'ts, whose facilities has master meters, with the same benefits of lifelirEt rates that single-family residents could qualify for, posed some difficult problems. The matter had been discussed some time ago, and there was the possibility that it might be discussed again in relation to subsized housing units in the City. The Committee had voted to deny lifeline rates to master meter applicants by a unanimous vote, one absent. Mayor Henderson asked if there was not now a prohibition against installing master meters on new construction. Ed Aghjayan, Director of Utilities, replied that the City was planning to make that prohibition, and also that guideline was stated by the National Energy Act. in a few months Utilities would be making some revisions for review by Council, and the ruling out of master meters would be one such revision. Energy audits for non-profit organizations were planned and ways to conserve energy further would be pointed out; non-profit organizations were urged to apply directly for financial help, not indirectly through savings on utility bills. Mayor Henderson noted that a letter from Channing House had been received, in which testimony on the topic had been given. MOTION PASSED: The ;notion that Council approve the recommendation to deny lifeline rates to any master meter customer in the City, passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. POSED RELOCATION OF TWO H Naphtali Knox, Director for Planning and Community Environment, showed Council some slides of the two houses offered to the City by Northern California Savings, one of which staff had proposed be situated at 2221 Pine Street and the other at 420 Hawthorne. The rouses were in excellent condition, he said; he showed slides of the proposed sites at Pine and Downtown Park North. Mr. Knox continued. He said Northern California was moving its regional home offices from downtown Palo Alto to an 11 -acre site on East Bayshore Frey; though Northern California was moving, additional parking was needed for customer parking downtown, and Northern California wanted to exchange property on Gilman Avenue with the City so that Northern California's parking would be enlarged and the City lot would remain the same size. Mr. Knox shred slides of the subject properties. He explained that NorthernCalifornia wanted to begin building and the process that would have to be followed _t.o bri!TF_ aha land_ u _above. the 7..iml of the fliaod plain, could be set in motion once thaePtwo hoses s ere awed fe om the property. The houses would be a gift to the City, the City to pay for the moving. The questions to the City were: should the City accept the houses? Where, when, and how should the houses be used? Mr. Knox said that substantial 3 -bedroom houses such as these were hard to obtain. The City's low- and berate -housing _ had - 67 wits now --17 were 1-bedronm, 24 are 2 -bedrooms 16 are 3 -bedroom. The house to be located at Coomunity Lane, if the recommendation were approved, would be sold at below -market rate, with the City having first right to re -purchase. Staff recommended the Downtown Park North site for the second house; staff was thinking of recommending that housing on that block be re-habi l i to ted for the rental housing acquisition program --the remainder of the park would be park and community gardens. He showed slides delineating both sites. 4r. Knox said the Downtown Park site would be reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 19, and that would go to the Finance and Public Works 125 9/11/79 Committee on September 25, and the matter would come before Council October 9 or 15. Bids for moving the houses had been opened on September 11 a1id only one bid had been made, and that for moving and placement onto new foundations, not to rehabilitate. The bid for moving to the Pine S'reet location was for $14,875; for moving to Downtown Park North, $15,984. The bid was for moving by October 11, 1979. Staff proposed to., advertise for bids to put foundations under the houses as soon as the houses had been moved. The budget amendment ordinance staff recommended, if passed, would cover costs of moving plus cost of constructing foundations and any rehabilitation work and other contingencies, a total of $100,000. If that was approved staff would return to Council the next week for the matter of awarding the contract for moving both houses. Mr. Knox detailed the following staff recommendations: 1) that Council find that moving the houses to 420 Hawthorne Avenue and Pine Street lots as described in the staff report would have no significant environmental impact; 2) that Council accept the offer of the two houses from Northern California Savings, with the understanding that one house (2221 Past Bayshore Frontage Road) will be raved to Pine Street and Community Lane, and the second house, (2241 East Bayshore Road) will be moved to Downtown Park North at 420 Hawthorne Avenue. 3) That Council adopt the attached budget amendment for the "turn -key' relocation of the two houses; 4) that Council incorporate the Co pity Lane/Pine Street house in the below -market -rate program and initiate the necessary Comprehensive Plan chanu;:i, parcel asap, and rezoning to R-1; 5) that Council refer the decision for the future use of the second house to the Finance and Public Works Committee to be considered at the same time it reviews recommendations for the use of the Downtown Park North block. Mr. Knox sail that staff would put the otter of the Gilman property exchange between the City and Northern California Savings on the agenda in October. Cauncilmeanber Eyerly ascertained with Jean Diaz, City Real Property Administrator, that the acreage of Downtown Park North was 2,07 acres, and that the two 'gift' houses were not now occupied, though one might be temporarily, just to forestall further vandalism. Councilmember Eyerly asked how ouch time the Planning and Community Environment department had spent on the report --perhaps a policy should have been set by Council before much staff time had been spent. Mr. Knox estimated that about one to one -and -one-half months had been epen} . .x e•e4e4 e+f j.k,n..f $2 000 fa._ateff-_J*e.,.___ __..rte." v - r--v vwe �s -�. r:.vv -'y 1.-7.17 - -- •.. -0%S1 F Y..F.�. Councilmember Renzel asked if it was anticipated that the full $104,000 of the proposed budget amendment would be spent. Mr. Knox replied that he had spoken with a City architect who had been active in planning about 150 rehabilitations in Palo Alto within the past few years, who had thought about $31,000 would be needed for rehabilitation and with the $15,000 for moving, a total of $46,000 for each house mould be spent, not including staff costs. Councilmeaaber Renzel asked about how many his were now existing on the proposed Northern California Savings parkin lot. 126 9/11/79 Mr. Knox replied that he had been told there were about seven. The north side of one house had six meters, so there were at least six units. Northern California had requested relocation assistance through the Senior Coordinating Council for one tenant still in the building. Vice Mayor Sher asked why, in view of the shortage of rental housing, the staff had recommended selling at below -market -rate price and only one to be taken over by the Housing Corporation under the rental acquisition program --why not have both under the rental acquisition program? Mr. Knox answered that Vice Mayor Sher's suggestion was one possibility; the proposed house on Pine would be somewhat isolated and for that reason would be a good candidate fur the below -market -rate program. The proposed Hawthorne Street house would fit with the possible program to rehabilitate and rent the block of City -owned houses in that location. Councilmember Fazzino said that August 15 the Palo Alto Housing Corporation had recommended that the park use along Everett be expanded and improved. Was there to be an active park, or was the passive park to remain as such? Mr, Diaz said status to perma Councilmember attached. "expand and improve" meant improvement from the present nent park facility. Levy asked if the houses were a gift with no strings Mr. Knox replied that the only string was that Northern California had asked that the houses be used in the City's housing program and that the City pay the moving costs. Councilmember Levy asked if Northern California would destroy the houses if the City did not accept them. Robert Bulrnore, Northern California Savings, said that his firm would put an ad in the paper to sell the houses if the City did not accept them; the houses had little economic value in his firm's estimation -- "we're not in that type of business." Councilmember Levy asked if Northern California would mace any future requests. Mr, Bulmore replied "I can't think of anything, unless you don't want to trade parking lots." Councilmember Levy said he assume the City had no recreational uses in mind for the Pine Street land, and the City would probably sell the land if the house were not roved onto it. Mr. -Diaz said rtii eSwmpLiun V45 correct. me pianned care to the Council - later with some sites that appeared to be surplus to City needs; he had surveyed all the City departments to see if such sites were needed. There was no contemplated use for the. Pine Street site. A conservative estimated price on the lot might be about $75,000. Mr. Knox added that he had checked to see if there were any plans for that ell -shaped property adjacent to the tennis courts; at the time the tennis courts were bid there had been a plan for an undulating walk and some stands upon which spectators could sit and view the courts. At one time in the 60`s the City had hoped to get the entire block but could not obtain the house at the corner of Pine and Hopkins. There are no current plans for that parcel. 127 9/11/79 Vice Mayor Sher said that he recalled that in the 60`s the house at the corner of Pine and Hopkins was occupied by a widow whom the City did not wish to displace. The City had wanted to have the entire block for park area, at that time, and he expressed surprise that the subject lot was now referred to as surplus property. Councilmember Levy ascertained with Mr. Diaz that should Northern California want to put one of the houses on a lot it would be worth about $200,000, for a 3 -bedroom 2 -bath house, such as this. Mr. Knox said the house totaled 1540 square feet, and pre -owned hones in Palo Alto were selling for about $110.00 per square foot, irrespective of the lot, "...and almost irrespective of location." The location, this instance, was very good. Councilor Levy asked if people who were using the garden space knew that the arrangement for that use was temporary. Larry White, Director of Parks and Open Space, replied that people using the garden space knew that if a different use were found by the City for the land the use as garden space would end. Early in the garden space program users had signed slips to that effect; recently the understanding had been verbal. Mayor Henderson said that Linda and John Parson, 356 Hawthorne, had telephoned him to voice their opposition to having a house moved to Downtown Park; Patricia Riposo had sent a communication to Councilmembers showing the extent of the use of the community garden facilities and suggesting some ways the gardens could be retained as well as the houses, Jane Goldstein, spoke for the League of Women Voters, 415 Cambridge Avenue, who urged the City to accept the two houses for its low- and moderateeincome housing and below -market -rate housing. Counci im er Fletcher said she should have mentioned earlier that there were young people in the audience waiting to hear about permission and guidelines for tree houses; she feared they would be kept up very late. Mayor Henderson said he would have that in mind as they moved through this matter of the two houses. Diarmuid McGuire, 327 %4averley, expressed dismay that Downtown Park North, formerly slated for improvement, was now going to be reduced. He said that there were eleven children in the area now. He thought the need for a park in the area should be determined, and that the neighborhood opinion be sought on reduction of the present park. Mayor Henderson said that one speaker had said the decision to change the Downtown Park to a comhinatinn !onti»cs-and-perk Mack t.ed _been _Hv__... .. _._�._ .._3 �...� rte. .a-r.rv.► e..v-- eYGGY! very sueme' " He asked Mr Knoxfor his Mayor Henderson «t ..�..... ..v oe .�rncv rw� . n;rv� r113 �y+ .ite �`�fuF -- FFCS�uzr� s��=--recalled that Council had directed staff to include housing with the park —had Council not already made a policy decision on that? Mr. Knox said that one of the slides he had shown gave the date as Februry 27 when the Finance and Public Works Cooaittee had moved to recommend that Council direct the Housing Corporation and staff to study alternatives for developing the Downtown Park north site, plus existing housing, with the possibility of acquisition by the Housing Corporation for the rental housing acquisition program. On November 30, 1978, a report entitled "Development of alternatives --Downtown Park North" had been given to Council, and staff had assessed the changes that affected the recreational needs in the area, the status of the remaining houses, and reviewed the background of the acquisition of the site and concluded that if Council desires, staff will study alternatives for developing this site, looking at adequate number of units, density, land available for parks, and so on, and that the Planning Commission and the Public 128 9/11/79 Works Department would be involved in the process. Mr. Knox concluded that the site had been under consideration for about one year. Northern California had purchased its East Bayshore site in January, 1979, and Mr. Bulmore had approached the City verbally in the spring about the two houses, and staff had looked at possible sites for them in the City. Mr. McGuire interjected that "Studying alternatives" and "going out for bid," were two different things --the neighborhood had not been involved in the process at all until five days ago, "We feel we're being railroaded." Walter Sedriks, 325 Waverley Street, said he echoed Mr. McGuire's statements. he felt that though the matter had been discussed for ten years there was not the due process that people were entitled to. Tony Badger, 381 Hawthorne, said that the park with proposed improvements were very important in his decision to purchase his home two years ago. He was surprised that a house was to go where houses had earlier been torn down. He referred to the purchase of 187-189 Bryant by developer, Robert Medearis, in 1978. The two houses on those two lots had been offered the City as a gift also, four -bedroom Victorians that rented for $650.00 monthly, and, on being told by the City there was no place the City could soave then, the developer had bulldozed the houses. He referred to two other downtown houses at Kipling and Lytton that were scheduled, he thought, to be razed. He said "it seems to me that something is going on behind the scenes that we don't see, that's putting a lot of pressure on us right now, ...and i think some consideration should be given to how this thing has developed. . . ." He thought the neighborhood should have a voice in decisions in its area. Mayor Henderson asked Mr. Knox about Mr. Medearis's offer of two houses. Mr. Knox replied that when Mr. Medearis was changing plans from 13 units to 6 units he had informally asked the City if there was a place to locate the houses. No formal offer to the City had been made. Mayor Henderson said he knew of no houses being razed except on Lytton. Ed Firestone, 412 Everett Avenue, said he thought that to place a home on the park l a nd was to make a decision as to how the park was to be users . He asked that placement of the home be delayed until the total plan for the park could be considered. Roger Schuyler, 239 Kipling, said he wished Northern California would charge the City $1 for the homes, so that that amount would be all that could be taken as a tax write-off. He said that ranch style'homes in the Downtown Park North area would be to that area what the Jack Tar Hotel was to San Francisco --'they won't work there." He said that neighbors "...are horrified at the prospect of having a low -rent ghetto Pmt right in the middle of their neighborhood." He outlined an alternate plan for placement of homes in the subject block, that he thought would provide two mini -parks. Jim Paulk, 91 Norton Street, said that he had been notified that his garden plot. which he had attained after a long wait, was to be discontinued. He said he and many others got a lot of pleasure out of gardening, and he wanted more, rather than less, made available. Charlene Davis, 1405 Hopkins, reviewed the history of the house at the corner of Pine and Hopkins, in which she was a resident. During the 1960's the house and lot, she said, had been proposed for possible construction of police headquarters and an addition to the City Hall complex, Neighbors had opposed the purchase and proposed use. Her mother was not a wide but a divorced win with three children. She said that the relocation of the East Bayshore home had "been in the works since last January, and we were only notified ten slays ago.' As a 129 9/11/79 resident in the Pine and Hopkins Streets home she said, she had asked the Planning Commission about plans for the subject lot, and had been told that it was probably going to be surplus property, and that the City was not going to use it for recreational purposes. She objected to "throwing away„ the value of the lot, and said that as a resident in the adjacent house "we wouldn't mind acquiring some of it to bring our property up to standard because it is a very small lot." She thought the house relocation was being pushed through very rapidly, and that people did not want it. Vice Mayor Sher apologized for his mistake in designating the woman a widow. He added that he believed the house and lot were not proposed for an extension of City Hall, that was to have taken place behind the main library. John Fredrich, 421 Everett, agreed with Mr. Firestone's remarks. Mr. Fredrich asked that a decision to place the house on the park land be delayed until after the public hearings were held, so that the park designation would not be prejudiced. Betty Futrelle, 525-B Hamilton, asked that Mr. Fredrich read a letter to Council she had written: the letter emphasized that monetary values should take second place to human values --the interests of twenty-four gardeners, she felt, of which she was one, should take precedence. She objected to the slight amount of time the recent public notice afforded. Bud Buttrill, 1417 Parkinson, said he thought gardening on the Downtown Park North site was an excellent use of the land. He urged that the City develop plans for the park in cooperation with the neighborhood. "They had not been told that the City was going to drop a house in a garden." One gardener had obtained signatures from neighbors and other gardeners opposing such action and he had given it to the City Clerk. He added that Northern California a uld receive free moYement of the houses, and also a tax write-off. He noted that the location of the houses had been under consideration for several months, and a Housing Corporation official had urged that the gift of the houses be accepted even before the City had accepted then. He opposed having the house relocation "railroaded through." Daniel Fred, of the Planning Department, said that the date of the meeting Mr. Buttrill had referred to was August 22, not August 15. Robert Moss, 4010 Orme, asked what add;tional mitigation tht City would require of Northern California Savings --would the kind of fee Hewlett- Packard had paid be hosed on Northern California? He cautioned against the City making a policy decision by placing houses on park land on such short notice, and he feared it would be tantamount to stating that housing was more important than open space. He said the Downto i North Perk issue was more important since there was less open space there. He favored relocating the homes, with the City to recover all costs when the houses were sold. The houses did net increase the amount of housing available --it only reshuffled it. He asked that moving costs come from the unity Development Bloch Grant (C ) funds. He thought the proposed parking space exchange would result in a loss of housing stock. Sarah Johnson, 544 des Drive, spoke for the Citizens for Fair Housing. Her group thought the City should proceed with movement of the houses to the suggested sites; she thought it would serve community needs, albeit at some sacrifice of neighborhood wishes. She thought that adding to available housing at an affordable cost ss toed a basic human need. She ascertained that the cost of the relocation of the houses would be recovered by the City. She hoped that other developers would follow the lead of Northern California in offering the houses to the City. 1 3 0 9/11/79 Carole Leer, 235 Waverley, said she felt fortunate to live in the block where Downtown Park North was located, and she regretted that many families with children could not afford to live in the City --she favored increasing the low-income housing stock. She praised the thought behind Northern California's offer of the houses and hoped the City accepted. Pat Cullen, 409 Melville Avenue, spoke as present of the Palo Alto Civic League, and thanked Northern California for adapting to the City's wishes for low-rise buildings only and also for offering their donation (of the houses) toward low -and moderate -income housing. She hoped other local firms would show the same kind of sensitivity. Jean Glees, 645 Lytton, said she was a low-income mother of seven, and she felt low-income people's needs were not heeded. She feared she would have to move --she objected to the statement of a former speaker who hed expressed "horror" that low-income people would live in a ghetto in the Downtown North Park. Herb Dorock, 3401 Ross, said he had submitted a 3 -page memo to Councilmembers summarizing his recommendations; he faulted Northern California for bringing its proposal in to the City late. He thought Northern California had to build on the 11 --acre site, or not build at all because it could not anticipate approval of its application for a variance for its downtown building. He suggested that Council ask Northern California to pay the cost of moving and relocation to the City, with the proceeds to go toward further landbanking. He suggested delay of placement of a house on the Downtown North Park until due process had been completed through ARB and the like, giving staff and Council more time to plan. He thought that the burden of keeping the housing stock at its present level should be borne by Northern California, and separated from any in -lieu payment that might be levied. He wondered if Northern California was intending to have more intense uze, since its present parking was now under- utilized. He thought the entire matter was very complex, and he favored waiting until October 15, when normal Council action would occur. Wallace Cathcart, 2149 Pine Street, said he did not think the principle of "the greatest good for the greatest number" would be served by re- locating the two houses. He recalled that staff had said that whoever purchased either of the two houses would have to have an annual income of $25,000. "What kind of underprivileged people are we talking about?" He felt Council would be neglecting a long-range view if it accepted and relocated the two houses. digjai Council recessed from 9:58 to 10:12 p.m. Mayor Henderson asked what would happen if a decision was made to move the houses to the sites staff had recommended, and then a decision to make the entire Downtown Park North block into park was reached --"Are we pre -committed there? It's so close that I wonder if there isn't a time device to prevent the actual move." He asked when the actual house moving would be scheduled to take place. Mr. Fred replied the bids were good for 60 days; no commitment had been made by the City to a contractor. Mr. Knox added that in the bid specification the mover of the house(s) were required to do it by October 11. Perhaps the move could be delayed until Council made its decision on Downtown Park North on October 15. Mr. Fred added that there was flexibility in the dates upon which houses could be moved. 131 9/11/79 Councilmember Brenner praised the work of the Housing Corporation yet she wanted to consider further the proposal that the City accept two houses from Northern California to be moved to two yet -to -be -determined sites. Much work over a long period of time, she said, had gone into acquisition of the land for Downtown Park North. The subject of that park was scheduled for September 27 at the Finance and Public Works Committee meeting. She asked if the Council, in deciding to use a parcel at Downtown Park North for one of the homes, would not be pre- empting the Committee's deliberations on policy for the park. The policy would hold for about 30 years, were the house located there. Would such a Council action foreclose action for the future as to other possibilities for uses for the park? She said community gardening had grown in popularity since its inception, affording both recreational and economic benefit. She thought that if the gardens were to be eliminated the former site of the City nursery could be assigned to community garden plots. She spoke of housing policy in the City's Comprehensive Plan: Housing Policy 6 read "Support mixing of residential uses in commercial and industrial areas." Program 10 read: "Provide incentives for all new retail and office construction to provide some proportion of residential space on or near the site." She added that allowance for just such uses had been made in the City's new zoning law. She noted that the two houses were close to the edge of the new 11 -acre Northern California building site, upon which a 70,000 -square foot structure was proposed for the 1i -acre site, somewhat less than two acres, or one - sixth of the property to be covered, if the 70,000 square feet were to be a one -storey building, with the rest of the site probably to go for parking. She did not think the two houses existing on that site would intrude en the parkingt and to move them would be "...neither practical nor is it imaginative." She thought that as very good living units on the site they served as a mitigation measure to help offset the impact of adding still more employees to Palo Alto. Northern California could use the housing as permanent or temporary housing for its own employees -- the houses were there and they were good looking, and with the ,new building the houses would be "reasonably protected." She wanted to leave them there, and have the City move in a new direction toward recognizing a variety of locations for dwelling places. MOTION: Councilmember Brenner moved, seconded by Renzel , that Council direct staff to enter into negotiations with Northern California Savings and Loan to provide the two housing units, in place, as their housing contribution toward mitigation. Councilmember Renzel said she thought the offer of the two houses was good in that it did not waste "...perfectly good structures." She was concerned that City land and money resources should go toward acquiring, at market cost, two housing units, because about $125,000 in resources were needed to establish the housing units. Some 3 -bedroom units were available at market value of about $120,000 in Palo Alto. She thought an approximate one -quarter of a million dollars should net the City more than two housing units. She found Councilmember Brenner's proposal very workable. She said that Mr. Bulrmore had acknowledged that the two houses were surplus for Northern California, and so the City was bearing the cost of acquisition of the houses. She foresaw further exacerbation of the housing problem in Palo Alto resulting from Northern California's expanded facilities. The proposed parking lot exchange would result in the loss of six or seven housing units. The 'gain' of two expensive housing units did not balance out the loss of five less costly units. Leaving the houses in place seemed like a realistic possibility as a possible mitigation measure. Councilmember i:yerly said Councilmember Brenner's motion put a different light on the issue being discussed, "...and it might solve all my problems." Re acknowledged that the Northern California offer was generous; he was distressed that staff had taken the offer as far as it had without some 132 9/11/79 policy having been set in advance by Council. He faulted the naming of particular pieces of property as potential sites; he was distressed at the amount of staff time that had gone into the matter. He thought he would vote for the motion. He cemented on the staff report: he had no minutes of the staff meeting with the neighborhood --he thought the issue was important and required that minutes be kept; the timing was so close there was not sufficient time to obtain input from the neighborhoods involved, and the matter should be referred to both Finance and Public Works Committee and the Planning Commission. He said that the policy on neighborhood recreational facilities was that there should be two acres per one thousand people, to be within a ore -half mile radius. He said that the staff report Council had requested on the existing situation at Downtown Park North might have been misleading --according to the Comprehensive Plan acreage cut off by major barriers could not be considered, and he thought staff must have included Cogswell Plaza and the linear footage along San Francisquito Creek when determining park footage available in the Downtown Park North} area, according to population. He lives in that area, he said, and he also wanted a park there, but priorities within the City had to be considered. Two houses for two low-income families had to he weighed against land to be used by several thousand people. He was distressed that the Pine street lot was to be called "surplus." The Comprehensive Plan had policies for both housing and recreation. He was unwilling to approve the two sites staff had recommended for the houses. He would support Councilmewber Brenner's motion. Councilmember Fletcher favored housing on proposed development sites, though Northern California's 11 -acre site was unhandy to stores and schools, and other City services. She thought more public notice should have been given of the proposed relocation, and she wanted to hear more input from neighbors. Vice Mayor Sher said he also was concerned with the haste with which the relocation of the two houses had appeared before Council when there were so many issues peripheral to the relocation. He clarified that the Finance and Public Works Committee, not Council, had requested a report on the Downtown Park North situation.. as Councilm'ernber Eyerly had said; and the committee meeting scheduled for September 25 was designed to set policy on Downtown Park North, as well as the September 19 Planning Commission meeting consideration. He thought that procedureshould run its course. He would refrain from further comments in view of the lateness of the hour; he thought Councilmember Brenner's motion could be examined after a decision on the Northern California Savings offer had been made, which was on that evening's agenda. He said he had serious reservations about Northern California's offer, and on both sites suggested by staff. If Council r Brenner's motion failed he said he would move to continue the matter of the proposed relocation until after both Planning Commission and Finance and Public Works Committee meetings had been held, and ask staff to look for other possible sites and to explore Councilmember Brenner's idea as well. Counci 1member Levy said he favored the thoughts outlined by Vice Mayor Sher; he said that if Northern Cal i fornl a retained the too hoii es on its new site their value might be about $35,000 in the form of mitigation and also retaining the housing gave Northern California an opportunity to be innovative in integrating housing with industrial and commercial. Though he would not vote in furor of Cot ncilmeober Brenner's motion he did mean to include its intent within the larger purview of housing. He thought the timing on the relocation of the houses had been unfortunate. Time for public input was need, but he appreciated the staff work and he was not critical of it. He thought there was value in having specifics brought to Council in a proposal —it had facilitated Council deliberations. He thought that the Hopkins Street site was a good one, yet the City might, by selling the site, generate more housing el sewhere . 133 9/11/79 Councilmember Fazzino said he thought Councilmerber Levy had stated some of his own concerns. He thought it unfair to Northern California to try to assess the dollar amount that would, accrue to Northern California from its gift to the City. Northern California deserved credit for recognizing the controversy that its variance proposal engendered two years ago, and had found an alternative site, and that had led to the offer to the City of the two houses. He thought Northern California had made the offer to help the housing situation and to recognize the work of the Palo Alto Housing Corporation toward finding more affordable housing for the City without increasing density. He thought the issue before Council was that of parks versus housing, and many gardens would remain if the relocations were approved. He said he was disturbed by the comment of one of the speakers about "low -rent ghetto," with all its implications, here in Palo Alto, in 1979. He thought Council should hold off its final decision until after due process had taken place. He did not want to eliminate consideration of housing for the Downtown Park North site. He would oppose the motion before Council, but he did support the concept, and, also, he wanted to give everyone a chance to be heard. Mayor Henderson said he thought Northern California's offer had been in line with its sensitivity to community feeling. He emphasized that problems of the jobs/housing imbalance had been discussed at great length at an Intergovernaent Council meting he had participated in some days back, during which the need for housing, particularly in Palo Alto, had been emphasized. He objected to the phrase "low -rent ghetto," and praised the work of the Housing Corporation and pointed to the success of the Webster Wood housing development. He said that the present Frontage Road site the houses were on seeped isolated to him --a recent study on housing east of Bayshore had a very negative conclusion. He agreed rnore time was needed before decisions on relocating the two houses were made. He would vote against the motion to keep the houses on their present sites, but he supported a continuance of the process on the question of relocations. Councilc ber Brenner pointed out that families had beon living in the two houses on their present site; though she did not favor building a housing project east of Bayshore, she did favor keeping the present gardening plots and keeping the subject two houses on their present site. Actual distance from schools, marketing and recreation was not far; there might be some advantage to Northern California in having people on the premises. If a Councilor wished to amend her motion and refer the question she would be glad to accept it, or perhaps a substitute motion could be made. She said that there would be savings to the City if the houses stayed in place. Councileier Eyerly said that Northern California could be caught in the division among Councilaembers on the topic --it was not premature to start talking about mitigation measures and Northern California might Biel that it ! t1 ;ale f ;,or reta i ni ne the douses, the way the ordinances were written. Perhaps it would be wise to have tite detailed staff report on its exploration of the available sites. The Planning Commission and Finance Committee could base its consideration on some of the information in the s to ff report also. He would like to see the forego i ng thoughts included in one motion. Vice Mayor Sher read his proposed motion to see if it was inclusive enough: that the matter of proposed relocations of the two houses be continued until the Finance Committee and Planning Commission had recommendations to the Council on Downtown Park North, with staff to explore and report on other possible sites as well as the idea of retaining them on their present site, with staff to take steps to keep alive the offer of the Louses from Northern California. Mayor Henderson said that Vice Mayor Sher's sssotion could be a substitute section. 134 9/11/79 SUBSTITUTE MOTION: .Vice Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Brenner, that Council continue the matter of the proposed relocations of the two houses offered to the City by Northern California Savings and Loan until after the Planning Commission and Finance and Public Works Committee considerations regarding Downtown Park North, and in the interim requests the staff to explore and report on other possible locations for the offered houses, as well as the idea suggested by Councilmember Brenner's motion. The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. ca gy; & r any rain MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council consider the item concerning tree houses before its order en the agenda. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. �lid..wmi Councilmember Fletcher said that because tree houses are structures they are controlled by zoning and building code regulations, and co►isideration of them had been delayed for that reason. An applicant for permission to run a daycare center, that had a treehouse on the premises, had brought the matter to the City's attention, and the applicants were surprised that an order to remove the treehouse had been given them. Council, after consideration, had directed staff to work out some way to make treehouses legal structures. A suggested ordinance had been submitted, regulating and legalizing treehouses. MOTION: Councilor.ember Fletcher moved, seconded by Fazzino, that treehouses be exempted from current regulations. Roy Abrams, City Attorney, observed that, as Councilmember Fletcher had said, treehouses were structures and therefore subject to regulations. The proposed ordinance his office had drawn up liberalized those regulations regarding such structures as treehouses. In the absence of specific treehouse regulations the provisions of the Uniform Building Code applied to them and pretty much prevented their construction. In the proposed ordinance the City tried to draw up some minimum safety requirements. 1f the City inspected the structure and knowingly allowed an unsafe structure it might be liable. Ken Dlnwiddie, 543 Jackson Drive, said he was the householder upon whose land the subject tree and treehouse stood. He said he thought the City had existing mechanisms for dealing with treehouses as nuisances or eyesores, in order to abate those elements. He said the proposed ordinance looked as thought it might be the City's attempt to develop an Office of Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) code for treehouses, and therefore cemeeehet aide -of- ttez i,+ark. He felt that only those_ matters _rte leading +o possible liability on the part of the City should be dealt with in an ordinance. Mr. Abrams asked if Councilmember Fletcher had treehouses of certain dimensions in mind for possible regulation. He conjectured that the larger the size the more the possibility of danger. CounGilme er Fletcher said she could expand her motion to state "treehouses which are intended for play use or curnothological study." The limitation of the ordinance to treehouses which had no electrical connections could also be considered. She did not think size would becope an issue, since treehouses were for non-residential purposes. 135 9/11/79 Corrected Councilmember Fazzino said he did not support any regulation of see page treehouses. Safe construction should be between parent and child, he 227 thought. He thought the regulations proposed in the suggested ordinance 10/22/79 would make the City more, rather than less, liable. Vice Mayor Sher asked if Councilmember Fletcher intended her motion to remove regulation for treehouses. Councilmember Fletcher said that was a question for Mr. Abrams, and there was the question remaining of nuisance and eyesore. Mr. Abrams said the City could not abate that which was exempt from law. "By so exempting we would preclude our ability to abate it." He added that would be true unless they fell into another category, such as fire hazard,, Councilmember Fletcher said that if it was legal she would favor keeping present regulations and enforcing them only on a complaint basis. Mr. Abrams said that the courts, in order to bypass tort immunities applicable to government entities, upheld certain claims relating to private dangerous conditions on the uphold theory that the government has a duty to warn when it knows of a dangerous condition. A discussion ensued between Vice Mayor Sher and City Attorney Abrams, with the conclusion in the absence of some City standard as to what was safe and what was unsafe a plaintiff would not be able to use those standards against the City. Councilmember Fletcher repeated her motion as requested: "The motion is to exempt treehouses intended for play use, or for ornothological study, from municipal code regulations." She added there was no size limit. Councilmember Levy suggested regulation of treehouses insofar as their distance from lot lines was concerned, so as not to infringe on privacy, and also if the treehouse were at a school facility, so that safeness of construction could be assured. He would favor approving the ordinance with elimination of paragraphs c, d, g, h, i, j, k, 1 and m, and inclusion of paragraphs a, b, e, f, and n; he found .040 and 050, with points a and c acceptable. Councilmember Brenner ascertained with Mr. Dinwiddie that the treehouse on his property qualified as safe on all points except 16.05.020 a, d, and e. Councilmember Brenner outlined questions of sunlight and privacy -- she preferred mild prohibitions; 'grandfathering in' existing treehouses might be a good plan. Councilmember Ey r l y natp . thy, .staff roport _: !tan( as i a-ttrr:-.,a °uscs - - "...all 9 ]-' �1 r�.. �A Washington, ja.a. _ i9 h_ k _ � d ta:� 1 �f .! __ _ _.. cities t i iSA 11 the way sacs t : Wa- :'snj;oon, ..a, s �► that other S. r t tes also had problems with treehouses. Council had entered the question on points of privacy and safety, and he thought some kind of ordinance was suitable. Pe favored the 'trimmed' ordinance. Councilmember Renzel agreed a_ skeletal ordinance was needed. Councilmember Fletcher noted that none of the cities had a treehouse ordinance; she feared Palo Alto would "...be the laughingstock of the nation." Councilmember Fazzino agreed: he wanted to keep the present ordinance to be enforced on a complaint basis. 136 9/11/79 MOTION FAILED: The motion to exempt treehouses from regulation failed on the following vcte: AYES: Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Sher NOES: Brenner, Eyerly, Levy, Renzel ABSENT: Witherspoon Naphtali Knox, Director of Planning and Community Environment, said some treehouses were 'residences' with electrical service corning from extension cords. He did not want to eliminate control; the City learned of treehouses only through complaints. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Fazzino, that regulations concerning treehouses be enforced only on a complaint basis from neighbors. Councilmember Brenner asked if staff thought it needed an ordinance. Fred Herman, Building Inspector, said an ordinance of the proposed magnitude was not needed --there were complaints only from the Foothill area, such as on the Eldridge property --a cosine, where there had been 40 treehouses. About ten other complaints had been registered in the last four years. He showed slides of a treehouse on property on Edgewood Drive where three children under 12 had fallen 20 feet onto a concrete patio. MOTION PASSED: The motion that regulations concerning treehouses be enforced on a complaint basis from neighbors only, passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. Councilmatiber Eyerly noted that Engineers Metcalf and Eddy had underestimated the cost by 23 percent, requiring a budget amendment of $20,000. He questioned the need for the amount of $70,000 in the budget. He wondered whit staff did when a company missed a bid by such a large amount. Ed Aghjayan said that in the $20,000 was $6000 for contingencies, $7000 for telemetering equipment, the use of which had been an afterthought on the part of City staff and which had been added to the design of the project, Telex etering would signal back to the Water Quality Control Plant where there was a round-the-clock operator who could dispatch repair service immediately. However, since Council had not yet authorized the contract, that tel tering portion was subject to reconsideration. So far as the contractor missing the bid by so much, staff recognized that tha p'Ject as , di fficuit ___ T. a,,..,p.. ...ate .. as . i � o e.w � b ore-, �3 shown ®� " me ��c� that there _ were x=r-y few bidders. if there's a recession in this country we haven't noticed it in this area when we go out to bid on projects; the contractors are all busy, and in one light -and -power underground project we've had no bidders and had to then rebid it again, and practically beg people to bid o/np�a project. , .a ." The fewerf the bidders, Mr. Aghjayan id, the more the eMen y to h_ f -On .bid - s there �r said, r. __ -- o- �--.w..-w.�sf-v'--�..c�1� x.07 oat much co tition now. Mr. Aghjayan said that the City had expressed its dismay to Metcalf and Eddy firm, and was going to ask for an adjustment of the contract with the firm to reflect that. Metcalf and Eddy had done a fine job on designing the project, Mr. Aghjayan said. Councilor Eyerly reviewed specifics of the cost estimate with Mr. Aghjayan, adding that he did not like the idea of low estimates on the part of contractors. MOTION: Council er Eyerly moved, seconded by Levy, that Council approve the award of the contract and budget amendment ordinance as follows: 137 9/11/19 CONTRACT--Power-Anderson, Incorporated ORDINANCE 3159 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1979-80 TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE UNIVERSITY AVENUE UNDERPASS STORM DRAIN PUMPING STATION." Councilnember Brenner ascertained that the University Avenue Pump station was located near University and Alva Avenues within the Southern Pacific underpass. Vice Mayor Sher ascertained that the amount now being amended was budgeted in storm drain funds for 1979-80. He noted that the amounts listed in the budget and the amount being requested on the amendment "...just didn't hang together." Mr. Aghjayan replied that $7000 had been underestimated, an additional $20,090 for tele.netering not anticipated in the original estimate was added, $3500 of which appeared on the bid and an additional $3500 for force account work to be done by Utilities, which amount would be returned in an interdepartmental transfer of money; $6000 was added for contingencies which amount would probably not be spent. Vice Mayor Sher pointed out that there still remained an unexplained $5800 difference between the estimate and the low bid. MOTION PASSED: The motion that Council approve the award of the contract and the budget amendment ordinance passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmenber Witherspoon absent. ITY ATTORNEY RE IL A Vice Mayor Sher said that since Stanford University was his employer and Willow Road concerned Stanford he would not participate in the discussion. Mayor Henderson said the City Attorney's report reflected 4 desire to include in the study the considerations of a no -build alternative and the two-way, tiro -lane extension —two lanes either way, with the proposed one-way eastbound extension. The matter before Council was whether or not Council wanted to accept that proposal and authorize the City Manager to execute the extension agreement to February 16, 1980, Councilmember Renzel voted that mitigations such as intersection l provenents and bicycle lanes were not mentioned in the City Attorney's report --had they been incorporated in the formal agreements Roy Abrams, City Attorney, replied that those matters were included in a paragraph subsequent to the paragraph Council had previously approved. The only paragraph on which Stanford had requested modification was that set forth in his report. Mr. Abrams added that a citizen asked why an alternative such as exercising the 1969 agreement was not included in his_. report He evpi nod that that alternative - ..: � _ _ .. _ _. F . �, _..�;.� that ass L had fir! i E!C 1 ilded in h'15 original report; he perceived the present report before Council as preliminary to the 1969 agreement. should Council reject Stanford's proposal and should Stanford continue to refuse the final agreement, as approved. Counc i l a+cs ber Fletcher said she had thought Council intended an in-house low-cost study --the staff report referred to a consultant's study. Also, the report said the funds for the study would be provided by Stanford: were those funds to be deducted from the $1.7 million, ion, or be in addition to? 138 9/11/79 Corrected see page 227 10/22/79 Mr. Abrams said he did not recall how the traffic data for the approved extension agreement would be gathered. Mr. Knox had said he had thought a consultant would have to gather it: about $10,000 expense was anticipated. Stanford would have to pay that portion of the updating it was requesting, perhaps about $2000-$4000 of the $10,000. If the proposed study were $10,000 or under the City Manager would choose the consultant. Councilmember Renzel said she wanted the one -lane, right -turn -only at El Camino --was the proposed intersection now before Council to be right - turn -only? Mr. Abrams said Stanford would rather have right- and left -turn lanes. Stanford wanted to look at that and See which was most effective. Councilmember Levy said he had no desire for a two-way road and he would vote against it. He thought others on the Council felt that way also. He asked why Stanford wanted to go through all the studies when that was known Mr. Abrams replied that when Stanford raised its proposal for consideration of a two-lane, both -ways road he checked his notes on the Council discussion of the matter, and a majority of Councilmembers seemed willing to entertain a two-lane, both -ways road. Also, not clear was if Council was authorizing consideration of a one-way road becaus.a that had not yet been considered by the environmental data. Councilmember Levy asked Mr. Abrams if his report indicated that Stanford would only consider two-way. Mr. Abrams replied that he understood that Stanford was unwilling to consider one -lane, one-way, or two-lane, one-way, unless there was a way of comparing that data to one -lane each way. Stanford had not indicated it would be unwilling to consider one -lane, one-way or two-lane one-way road at the ends of the evaluation process. Mayor Henderson said that if Council could not accept Stanford's one - lane -each -way wish Council should face that fact and go back to the first alternative and direct staff to reject Stanford's proposal to compare that. If Stanford then returned to say it would go along with the one -way -one -lane then Stanford could do so. Councilmember Eyerly said he thought Stanford appeared willing to finance the project if Palo Alto would agree to study what Stanford wanted to study, for Stanford seemed to want to have the opportunity to show the different options of one- and two-lane; if Stanford was willing to take Alternate 2 Council could agree to look at whet Stanford had paid for in study data. Mr. braza i aid nd d" Ctiuncilmember Eyerly t ',a t S to nto rd would be i i na nc : a l l y responsible only for that portion of the study dealing with one -lam bot t- ys;the City would pay about $7500. Councilmember Eyerly said that if Council would not consider both -ways extension it was pointless to prolong the st y process. Courtier Renzel said she would be willing to study a_t -lan, both -ways road if it had right -turn -only. Councilmember Brenner said she interpreted the agreement with Stanford to read that Palo Alto could activate the agreement unilaterally. Hr. Abrams agreed that the City Manager could call the option on the 1969 agreement. 139 9/11/79 i Corrected see page 227 10/22/79 Councilmember Brenner asked if, in order to activate the a"--ement unilaterally, Palo Alto had to agree with Stanford about t.. .-< connecting road from El Camino to Junipero Serra (280), or could part of the agreement be called into action? Mr. Abrams said he thought the 'whereases' in the agreement stated facts as they were then thought to have existed. He did not think completion and satisfaction of those whereases would be necessary to exercising that option, though, he thought, Stanford might take the opposition, saying that what had been bargained for in the 1969 agreement no longer could be obtained and therefore the City could not exercise its option. Mr. Abrams said he would return to Council with a rather extensive memorandum and perhaps ask fcr an Executive Session because litigation would be in the forefront, af that point. Councilmember Brenner said that, if she was nut pursuing the matter too far, her concern was mitigation for the subdivision of Oak Creek apartments; she understood that those road improvements were satisfied at that time --'it was presumed there would be a Willow freeway. The original need still existed, she said, for improvements at Oak Creek apartments to smooth the flow of traffic. She wondered if the agreement to complete the section of road should not be activated. She added that the mitigation measure on that portion of road was never performed, and the 90 -foot right-of-way did exist at present. Mr. Abrams said that he had indicated in his memo that it was City staff's position that the three items in the 1969 agreement could be called independent of other portions of the agreement which required some City contribution. Stanford had clearly maintained the opposite position, and Stanford had expressed the wish that the word "project" be defined in any extension of that 1969 agreement. That had not yet been done to Stanford's satisfaction. Councilmember Brenner said that if the initial extension did not pass would it be appropriate for Council to vote to direct the City Manager to activate some portions of the agreement? Mr. Abrams said he would like to discuss the natter further with Council -<-a three-week extension with Stanford was in effect, granted because he had been going on vacation, and so there was time. Councilmember Brenner sa id ' she did not want to discuss another major intersection; tine present -major intersection was- enough. Mayor Henderson asked for a motion around which discussion could take place. Councilmember Fazzino said he did not hear any willingness on the part of other Council rbers to proceed on the basis of what Stanford wanted; he did not_want to:toe d any.a itiaeal piney aro ha ta'ted to ::lwe,4ue that Bier_ s inn 44 + �. nia.. s VI; s'..r di _ us s ion ..�...:.: Y` i a= inn _: - 3t ; i. s;i= 3 - - �+rs a ions reUu i of _ Got go _:.and Eli:. Councilmember Fletcher read a portion of the staff report of October 5, entitled "Sand Hill Road Improvement Project," that gave questions and answers raised at a previous Council meeting: She had asked 'Had a two- lane extension been considered in the EIR?` The response led been '-Yes, The capacity and level of service analysis has been completed using current traffic volume. This analysis simply confirmed what can be observed of actual traffic conditions on sand Hill Road. It is congested at many points at many periods throughout the day. Provision of the linkage to El Camino Real would cause Sand Hill Road to become the preferred route for many drivers de!pite the existing congestion. Congestion anddelay would increase with this additional burden until at some equilibrium po{nt where Sand Pill would no longer provide travel time shorter than those parallel routes during peak traffic periods.' Councilmember Fletcher said that the conclusion was that the two-lane extension, which would have been one lane in each direction, would have compounded the congestion. She saw nojustification, therefore, to spend additional City funds to reaffirm that conclusion, or bo start a new study. 140 9/11/79 Mayor Henderson said Stanford might say that one-way eastbound extension was even worse. He urged one of the Council to make a motion. Corrected see page 227 10/22/79 Councilmember Renzel said that the two-lane extensions all involved full fledged intersections, which meant stop time on El Camino while all the turning movements were made, and so it was possible that a tao-lane extension with only right turns would not result in the kind of congestion a full fledged intersection would give rise to; further, two-lane extensions with all of the mitigations later imposed for the four -lane road had not been considered, including improvements at Oak Creek apartments, bridge improvements, and double left turns at Santa Cruz, and those mitigations might make Willow Road serviceable without the extent of congestion suggested by the EIR. However, it appeared there were not the votes among Counciirnembers to consider the two-lane proposal by Stanford. MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Levy, that Council direct staff to reject the Stanford proposal. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fletcher, Levy, Renzel NOES: Fazzino, Henderson ABSENT: Witherspoon NOT PARTICIPATING: Sher Councilmember Renzel asked if Council should move to request Mr. Abrams to bring information on the possibility of Palo Altc unilaterally exercising its option on some of the improvements. Mr. Abrams said he would bring Council an answer on that. REI.UEST OF VI . E MAYOR SHER RE SAFETY NGERS Vice Mayor Sher said he had placed this matter on the agenda because of a report in newspapers of reports of assaults on bus drivers. MOTION: Vice Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Renzel, that Council authorize the Mayor to write a letter to the Transit District supporting efforts taken so far to protect bus drivers and passengers on Transit District buses, and also stating that Palo Altans are concerned and want other problems addressed and questions answered on how to handle people who cause trouble on buses. Vice Mayor Sher said that some radio reports had been made recently amt how those problems had been responded to, such as installing radios on buses, and transit and law enforcement agencies talking over the rat.t that pollee had not responded to calls_, for he1D. Mayor Henderson said that Supervisor Rod Dirido„ had spoken at the recent Intergoveriental Council meeting about the transit/assault problems, and asked those present to alert their municipalities' police personnel to be alert whenever bus personnel radioed in about trouble, making quick r ecip s to twee. trot:R`em:k+�r. la for r.._._._l . r i ------" _. ..+.. .... -v• v...+.�....if 74S� a la- 4V� ivrma?- AUalEi Fig. ---- Vice Mayor Sher said he wanted th. letter to make clear that Pa10 Alt0 was concerned about the allegation that the transit district might be giving free passes to those who had been abusive. MOTION PASSED: The motion that Council authorize the Mayor to write a letter to the Transit District concerning safety of drivers and passengers from assault passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. 141 9/11/79 Corrected see page 227 10/22/79 HENQERS R PRQP.F�i"Y NTE�i t AD RDS Piayor Henderson said he had been dismayed to see how many properties appeared to be getting no maintenance at all, and upon which were piles of trash and cars parked for many :months. He asked that the laws regarding maintenance of private property be reviewed for adequacy to handle such :matters, perhaps on a continued complaint basis, but also perhaps some permitted action by inspectors who saw such problems, MOTION: Mayor Henderson ::roved, seconded by Fletcher, that Council direct the City Attorney to review the present code for adequacy of property maintenance standards and direct the Chief Building Inspector to report on current enforcement of property maintenance regulations, and direct staff to study and report on the problems of rat control; all reports upon corpletice to be referred to the Pol icy and Procedures Committee. Mayor Henderson noted that the county would act upon report of sewer rats, but not on roof rats unless they were inside the home. Cor;nci1member Eyerly said he thought the City had the ordinances and enforcement was the problem. He thought different l eve"t s of enforcement, related to needed personnel and the like, could be set. Mayor Henderson said his ::notion requested the current level of enforcement with the Committee to determine how much and what kind of enforcement should be rode. Mayor Henderson noted that, in the vain, weeds were rot beautify. MOTION PASSEL: The motion that staff report on degree of maintenance to be enforced for private property, and also a report on problems of rat control, passed on a unanimous vote, Councilr ber Witherspoon absent. EA F! ETCHER RE ENERGY C Councilmember Fletcher said she had learned that only 20 percent of electric power consumed in the City was by residential, and she said she was upset at the energy waste inherent owing to construction design of commercial and industrial buildings, including City Hall. Though the state had new standards they were not very comprehensive. A local developer, Tom Ford; had figures showing that half or three -fourths of energy consumed since 1974 in commercial buildings could have been conserved had certain conservation measures been adopted. She had had trouble finding conservation -oriented guidelines for commercial/industrial construction, and had been advised to apply_ for a grant to get someone _ A . e ! w drew up suGit guidelines. Cuunci I r Fletcher said she would propose that staff explore the possibility of obtaining a grant for a consultant study to develop energy -conservation guidelines for no residential structures. Ed AehJaya r, Director of Utilities, sail that though the effort proposed b: fssios--ilirmw"�.`rer Flat nwrt rpmgt ItnulA if n�waE4�w divert work from tt very comprehensive solar Grogram staff was working n._ - A- staff __report on that solarprogram would rnstA to C`,minri1 in Noveeber, he said. The report would :wake suggestions on conservation measure for commercial/ industrial construction. The report would talk about retrofit for existing buildings. Otherwise, a funding proposal and information to be provided to the consultant would take much staff time. He thought that the staff report to be forthcoming in November Bald give Council a clearer idea of what it wanted from staff: a new code?recommendations? hire a consultant to make a report? At present staff could give Council an interim report on the solar program it was working on for its City consumers. 142 9/11/79 Council to devel grant wo a great Levy sa their Counci she t impl member Levy ascertained that a one -person month would be needed op a funding proposal, and then if funding were obtained the uld have to be administered, and a consultant would then require deal of information from staff to clarify goals. Councilmember id he thought commercial/industrial companies would find it in wn best interests to pursue such questions. Imember Renzel agreed conservation of energy should be encouraged; hought energy department guidelines were now available and being emented through the Building Department. MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Brenner, that Council continue the question of conservation measures for commercial/industrial building to November when the staff report on the solar program would be at hand. Cou gra bec ncilmember Eyerly said he thought Mr. Aghjayan could have used further nt money for his further studies; he would vote against continuance ause he thought the potential grant money mould be useful. Councilmember Fletcher agreed policy could be set after Council had seen the options in the staff report. She thought commercial/industrial would not take initiative because it could write off energy costs on tax to temen is . MOTION PASSED: The motion to continue the inquiry into obtaining a grant for drawing up guidelines for conservation rasures for commercial/ industrial passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher NOES: Fletcher, Eyerly ABSENT: Witherspoon LEGISLATION Meyor Henderson announced that tax legislation regarding the continuance of the telephone number 911 as an emergency number had been extended for three years by the state legislature. APP I CAI I Mayor Henderson asked if Council wanted to set up interviews for applicants to the Architectural Review Board. There were three vacancies; two incumbents had expressed the wish to be re -appointed. There were nine apolicants in all. MOTION: Counc i l m er Brenner moved, seconded by Renzel, that Coun c i l select Architectural Review Board ors () through the interview process. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzin , Levy, Renzel, Sher NOES: Fletcher, Henderson ABSENT: Witherspocn A discussion ensued and Council decided it would not hold that evening's proposed executive session, with interviews for ARB candidates to take place Monday, September 24, 7:30 p.m., and a regular meeting of the Council to commence when the interview were finished. 1 4 3 9/11/78 ADJOURNMENT Mayor Henderson adjourned the Council meeting at 12:40 a.m. APPROVE: