The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1980-02-12 City Council Summary Minutes1 City Council Special Meeting February 12, 1980 ITEM Oral Communications Report of Santa Clara County Re Industry & Housing Management Task Force "Living Within Our Limits" Recess Public Hearing; Proposed Moratorium On Industrial, Commercial and Office Building Oral Communications 1. Curtis Van Vliet, 455 Forest Avenue Adjournment PAGE 436 436 442 444 450 4 5 1 Special Meeting February 12, 1980 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in a special meeting in the Council chamber at 250 Hamilton Aven..e, et 7:45 p.m., Mayor Henderson presiding. PRESENT: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher, Witherspoon ABSENT: None Councilmember Witherspoon asked that Council send a Get Well card to former Councilmember Bill Clarke who had undergone open heart surgery recently. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Jack Otto, 3157 Louis, expressed dismay that the Ecology Control Center at 2235 El Camino Real might have to close because of lack of funds; Mr. Jim Jevans with the Center had emphasized using depth rather than breadth of soil to increase crop yield. Mr. Otto felt the City would do well to fund the experimental agricultural project. Mr. Otto said he did not think the improvements at the Palo Alto golf course warranted their expense. REPORT OF SANTA C!ARA COUNTY_ --NAGEMENT TASK FORCE Mayor Henderson announced that the usual Council meeting trne had been changed to the present time so that a presentation of "Living Within Our Limits" could be made. Also to be considered was the proposed moratorium on further building in the City, Trixie Johnson said she chaired the Industry and Housing Management Task Force. Ms. Johnson said she worked with the League of Worsen Voters, and she introduced Janet Owens who served with Midpeninsula Citizens for Fair Housing (P9CFH), and Terence Ainscow who served as a representative of one of the industries in the Santa Clara Manufacturing Group, She said a former task force had identified the problem related to housing, that is: growing need for affordable housing that could rot be filled because of the growing number of industries locating here in Santa Clara County. The present task force had been asked by Santa Clara County to look at the location of housing and the rate of growth and amount of industry, keeping in mind the enaironment-and capacity of the county along with the needs of unemployed and underemployed residents. "Living Within Our Limits" had been produced by the present task force in about fifteen months. and embodied the problems and solutions in organized detail. Official bodies within the county, and citizen groups had been asked to discuss i.ue publication's findings. On March 1 the Intergovernmental Council (IGC) will sponsor an all -day forum on the "Living Within Our Limits" report, at San Jose Community College, at 9 a.m. Ms. Johnson continued. She said there was much backup material for those statements in the pamphlet. She said the description was "ultra- conservative.° It now appeared that the estimated figure of 725,E people to be employed by 1990 was already close to realization. Steve McKinney, Member County Planning staff. commented on how few people had attended a similar meting in Gilroy last week, and he said Palo Alto "...has been the heartland of creative and progressive responses 436 2/12/80 to problems that have been identified in the community," as he observed the large audience present. He said Palo Alto's Comprehensive Plan had acknowledged the disparity between Jobs and housing early on; the county had now engaged itself with the problem because the entire county: a large geographic area, was now feeling that disparity. There were 27,000 housing units in Palo Alto, and 78,000 jobs; the county had about 460,000 housing units, 700,000 jobs. In 1975 San Jose had had more housing units than jobs, but that had changed dramatically, particularly in Mountain View, Santa Clara, Palo Alto, Sunnyvale and San Jose. About 200,000 jobs had been added since 1975, but only 50,000 housing units in the county as a whole. He noted that many households now had second. wage earners --leading to one housing unit for every four jobs. The severity of the problem led to the county's involvement. He noted that three -fourths of the housing built was single-family. Prices for housing had tripled in Sari Jose, and "...vacancy rates have plummeted," to under one percent in some cases, and there was migration out of the county by families with children within the last three years. Mr. McKinney spoke of transportation: fuel costs made movement close to jobs more desirable; people would have to shift their ideas about acceptable Fork -to -home configurations. Sixty percent of the housing had occurred in San Jose, and San Jose was being unduly burdened with the increase, and was considering ways to forestall such increases in building. The communities of Evergreen and Edenvale were bearing most of the brunt of increased home building, and those places were great distances from the rapidly expanding jab markets in Santa Clara and Sunnyvale, and, to some extent, Cupertino. He said that number of jobs per acre had intensified, and was, at present, about 40-60 jobs per acre. Mr. McKinney noted that traffic had increased throughout cities, and did not restrict itself to arterials, as motorists sought less congested routes. Costs of providing public services had increased, Mr. McKinney said: Morgan Hill, Gilroy, Milpitas, and San Jose, though they had had the vacant land available on which to build, have the lowest tax bases and infrastructures such as water, sewage and roads had to be installed at increasing costs. Costs for the proposed San Felipe canal to bring water for the Santa Clara County Water District had increased a great dear l . Mr, McKinney said air and water quality control costs had not been addressed, nor had the potential of the energy shortage. Councilmember Levy ascertained through Pr. McKinney that about 15,000 new jobs had been added in Palo Alto; figures on the loss of school -age population and its relationship to costs of housing were not known. Santa Clara County was approaching the point ;grin County had reached so far as optimum ase et of building, though de ii raphic;;srojections were not always wholly verifiable. s. Johnson added that school -age population was increasing in Gilroy where affordablehousingstill existed. Solutions lay in 1) managiree growth; 2) governmental and fiscal reform issues; 3) reducing un- and underemployment in the rounty. Growth would be limited by accommodations in transportation, housing, and water supply. _ The county could choose the degree to which growth would be limited. In hunting for a balance point her committee aught new jobs should be created proportionate to housing that could be built; growth old be per fitted insofar as cities could provide sewage, water, and other services; growth would be permitted insofar as a livable environmental system could be maintained. Conies should limit their own rate of growth in the future; cities should take action on permissible industrial growth within their entities, each city assessing its parking facilities, for example, and cities could also do 437 2!12/80 some rezoning to control growth --mixing both residential and commercial, perhaps. Cities could employ the growth -limiting mechanism of setting limits to employment densities, as was the case with the airport land use plan, where density was regulated to limit exposure of population to aircraft -crash dangers. Ms. Johnson said that data was needed to plan sensibly, and she asked that groups producing data such as the Santa Clara County Manufacturing Group, share such data with the county's planning department and with Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCO). Under ordinary circumstances, she said, such data collectec would be confidential, but now such information should be factored into the general public picture. Ms. Johnson said it was important to match unemployment areas with the setting up of new jobs. Where housing had increased, in Evergreen and Edenvale, there was no provision for creating jobs. Jobs should be tied to housing with transportation connecting them. She said her Industry and Housing Management Task Force had set apart the area south of Coyote Narrows as a separate consideration because it could not provide a housing solution to the North County problem since it was so far away; Gilroy, however, had en appreciable unemployment problem, and needed job growth. She said it was important for cities now considered "havens for the rich" to provide housing for low- and moderate income groups. Ms: Johnson said that portion of the report, "Living Within Our limits" had been pulled from an earlier report on housing, and repeated for emphasis. Pans submitt?d for housing developments should be 'streamlined' through the planning process; HUD was coning up with new financing techniques, one way by looking at cooperatives as another way to buy affordable housing. Condominium conrev1on was discouraged, landbanking was encouraged, as was building at much higher densities, because even 20 housing units to the acre still would not take care of housing needs - sometimes higher densities would be workable. Ms. Johnson said the committee realized it could not finance major achievements in transportation capacities by the 1983 date when a great deal of industrial expansion would be in place; therefore the committee emphasized carpooling, by means of which traffic patterns could hold somewhat at today's point. The "What if..." position, Ms. Johnson said, were steps, which, if not taken now to prevent undue growth, would lead to moratoriums. Such a fallback position would go to referendum. Fragmentation of the problems did not suffice, and large land use decisions had to be undertaken by larger jurisdictions; Palo Alto's looking to the north did not help the situation in the south (in Santa Clara County). Also, some mechanism for those who were 'disenfranchised' was needed, job- and housi --rich communities did not understand those problems. The Committee mcommended that the county make large land use decisions, and it also recd ways the county should structure such a group, with fiscal inequalities among cities to be worked out; the process, in the light of Proposition e, would be difficult. But cities like San Jose and Milpitas would continue rajor industrial expansion and fall behind on planned housing. Training for under- and unemployed could be tied in with community college system and local industries, aloe with possible job location d sisio se To facilitate those decisions daycare for children and other problems eras keeping single parents from enters ng the workforce would have to be dealt with. Councilmember Eberly said he thought Ms. Johnson's committee had surveyed the various comprehensive plans of the cities; haw did Palo Alto's plan 438 2/12/80 compare with other cities, insofar as its method of facing the problems she had outlined? ►1s. Johnson replied that Palo Alto not only had its Comprehensive Plan but had also built upon it --that left fewer alternatives for future action relating to the problems of other cities; such 'hindsight' was not productive, and future intensification of housing did not seem as feasible. Mr. McKinney replied that the county planning staff admired Palo Alto's planning. It would be useful if such planning were used for the county as a whole. But it was difficult to get other cities to see the usefulness of such planning or to see that they should emulate Palo Alto's planning."San Jose has made it very clear that there are some 'industrial villains' to the northwest of them" and it did not want to work to help Palo Alto solve resultant problems. Jane Goldstein, representing the League of tin Voters at 415 Cambridge, said the League supported Palo Alto's airy toward supplying more housing; she listed ways that could be done through rezoning, and providing alternatives to one-person/one-car mode of transportation. She said the League supported cooperation with other cities on solid waste management, growth, and transportation. The League had not studied countywide government, but supported agencies formed to seek countywide solutions. The League also supported tax -sharing. Joyce Leonard, 4107 Briarwood Way, spoke for Palo Alto branch of Arerican Association of University Women. Her statement i , on file at the City Clerk's office, and the paper contained specific emendations and suggestions for "Living Within Our Limits," She said that AAUW had supported moratoria in the past in this area. She commended the efforts of the Task Force. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council express its appreciation to the task force for its production of 'Living Within Our Limits' and that Council express its support, and that Council submit staff's comments on the report as its response. Mayor Henderson said he thought perhaps Councilmembers might wish to cent on specific matters of the report. Vice Mayor Sher said he knew others wished to discuss the proposed moratorium, but he did want to State he had served on the task force, attending its meetings every Wednesday night for one year. He was convinced that the job/housing imbalance was very serious. He emphasized recognition that the limits of man-made environments, that i s , solid waste, transportation, and the l i ke y had been reached, or the area would lose much of what made it attractive. V i ce Mayor Sher spoke of the recommendation of the task force for a metropolitan =versmrent--he said he felt skeptical about that being feared as another tier of government. He {-:e';.". hf that th r4campentiztlon evoked J_.__-_"'____ He . that ....� . �.rvtirw� r ttirO i i bf t i%O!-:i�i (}�/j associations-. i 7ti himself thought local area government was best. He thought it questionable to have one locality decide on +tat was best for /mother; the proposed recoarmaeedation, however, did not suggest that, but there haenot been time "..,to draft that kind of a detailed proposal of what the jurisdictions would be. . . ." A charter development committee, and then a vote of the people would be required' -and _Emit had oc icer" ed him because San . _. �.. � r. ....v •. ..�• because Seen JOse had usually asked for 50 percent of the representation P-ecause of its population. Vice Mayor Sher said he favored a proposal for something like the structure of the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) that stated that any project to be developed on the bay had first to be approved by the local Jurisdiction. Vice Beyer Sher continued. He said it was important for job -rich cities to maintain their tax bases so that services could be provided. Those tax bases should be protected from inflation and there had been a 439 2/12/80 recommendation that revenues perhaps be increased; in any event, less revenues should be avoided. He thought there was a legal question as to whether or not revenues could be shifted from one community to another because excess revenues should be given back to the people who paid them --they could not be given to another unit of goverment. Such information indicated that revenues'should be shifted only if all of the cities join on the problem, and not compete with one another for revenues. Vice Mayor Sher thanked Trixie Johnson for her presentation that evening -- he said she would be welcome in the future also. Jack Beckett, 260 Coleridge Avenue, said he had seen changes in Palo Alto throughout his education 'sere from kindergarten through to graduation from Stanford and to the present --some sixty dears. He supported the first four reco ndatior,s on page 35 of the 'Living Within Our Means" report and objected to the fifth recommendation that i easures be adapted to curtail job growth. He thought that the first four objectives would be reached, maki rg the fifth unnecessary; his experience with the Metropolitan Transit Commission OMTC) had shown hire that if the first four could not be attained the people who were to achieve the objectives could not do their jobs. Also, he thought there would be voluntary compliance with the guidelines, thinking otherwise was negative, he said. He thought the MTC was a part of the solution for 411 the cities in the county. Palo Alto had itself been a commuter town, with people commuting to San Francisco. He held that having the Board of Supervisors act as the Transit Board was in error; that situation had to be corrected. He said San Mateo used its transit board more efficiently, and he added that the tax set aside for transportation was not being used properly. He appealed for some solution to the county's transportation problems. Robert J. Debs, 3145 Flowers Lane, asked that Council bear in mind the priority of keeping Palo Alto a fine place to live. Councilr ber Witherspoon noted that "Living Within Our Means" did not cross county lines --she stressed that Menlo Park and tither cities in San Mateo County were also to be considered. She said she did not want to jeopardize Palo Alto's tax base. Council ber Renzel praised the report but added that a no r of the rat reiesndations sewed quite negative and Palo Alto had perhaps the furthest to go in correcting the jobs/housing disparity. She thought Palo Alto wes doing its best to correct that disparity¢ but it was clear that it would not be _enough, SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Levy, the Planning Commission four-part recommendation: 1) Planning Commission unanimously agrees that the document "Living Within Our Limits'" has correctly assessed the severity of the jobs/hoysinq/gam problem that exists in this area and the Commission generally agrees with the report's ey 1 ut ti ce and d ecei . x1 on of these problems and . with the need - expressed therein for conscious action to deal constructively with these issues. The Commission specifically supports the essential nature of the objectives end recommendations of the sections "Managing Crunch" and "Reducing Underemployment and Unemployment"; 2) The Planning Commission unanimously agrees with the tccm 1t of regional and area approach to the search for -solutions. heir ing tJ'e - np c is � 31 it i a i of _ __ .. . � µms:: jai �� L��S regional forums joint !ter agreements; and 3) Planning Commission, by a vote of 5- 2 (Commissioners Gordon and McCown -Ma ces opposed) recommends against the formation of a metropolitan goveent; 4) The Planning Commission unani ly agues that the report points up the need for Council consideration of wilt art the desirable limits to growth in this area, and to what extent form=al action is required new by the City of Palo Alto --Council to cooperate in seeking constructive solutions; further, with regard to recomaeeda't1 on #4a that the City Council agrees with the report pointing 440 2/12180 up need for consideration of desirable limitation of growth in the area and to what extent formal action is required, the Council will cooperate in seeking constructive solutions, and that the County be advised of this position. The Council further recommends that the staff comments be referred to the Policy and Procedures Committee to refine and comment back to Council. Councilmember Brenner seid she approved the substitute motion's sense of approval; she felt that each of the staff recommendations in the original motion should be discussed individually and she did not think Council wanted to do that. AMENDMENT: Council ber Brenner moved, duly seconded, that in the third paragraph the word "county" be added so that the third paragraph read "lbe Planning Commission opposes and recommends against formation of a "county" metropolitan government:" Councilmeatber Brenner explained that being United to the county_made the particular proposal less desirable, because county boundaries were not "natural" boundaries on which to base an overall approach. Councilmember Renzel said she would, with Counci lmember° Levy+'s concurrence, accept the addition of "county" but she was not persuaded that land use planning at a larger level would be more effective than it was locally because of the distance of representation. Councilmer Levy said he did not favor "county" because he did not want language endorsing any kind of metropolitan government right now. Naphtali Knox, Director of Planning and Community Environment, said that tiie Board of Supervisors was to hold public hearings in March and April; the Intergovernmental Council (IGC) would discuss the matter March 6. Councilmember Levy ascertained that Planning Commissioners Gordon and McCown-Hawkes voted against recommendation of formation of a retroplitan government. Co micilmember Eyerly ascertained that the word "generally" in the Planning Cowrission atd —ni tion that had: bye moved in the substitute motion meant that some of the recommendations did not apply to Palo Alto; he said the ideas of moratorium and rezoning would have to be debated at. Council level. He would infer, he said, that *generally" meant "some" rec ►ti ons . Vice mayor Sher repeated that he had reservations about being able to define the kind of metropolitan goverment that Palo Alto could support; He age that the word 'county' should be added, because Palo Alto should not close off the possibility of area goverment, but he preferred that Council a�i�is that It 1..d #Or!...o.r.. .....��,....�aa...__,7 _��_--� - h.`-- - - e .. - thao C.run os-: a o-tsa�.--ae.-h d grave„ ,ese+rvaF{E about metrupoiitf[n Councilmember Renzi! noted that fiscal controls would affect any kind of regional planning. She would age to including "grave reservations" in her motions Pursuant to a cent from Mayor Henderson she said she would ask :that the stiff recommendations be sent to the Policy and Procedures Committee for modification, then to return to Council. AMENDMENT: The t, t%t the word *qty" precede "metropol i tan govt" in the third part of the Planning Commission reoommeo4ation, passed on the fol l irq vote; AYES: Bar, Eyerly, Fazz ne Fletcher Henderson,. Renzel, Sher NOES: Levy, Witherspoon IN !Writ AS AMENDEDPASSED: = 3 lea Motion, that Council eve the Planning Commission recommendations, as amended (that the City Council has grave consideration about formation of a county metropolitan government,) and referral of the staff comments to the Policy and Procedures Committee, passed on a unanimous vote. RECESS Council recessed from 9:20 to 9:40 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: PiraSrvirrtMUM 0� Mayor Henderson asked for brevity on the part of speakers so that Council could reach a decision that evening. Roy Abrams, City Attorney, introduced Anita Ruud from his staff, who was the attorney working with the Planning Commission. Mr. Abrams continued. He said he would speak about the proposed moratorium, and how it might relate to potential conflicts of interest. He said his office had contacted the Fair Political Practices Commission office for guidance. He had given the occupations and businesses of the individual Counciin mbers, and asked for an analysis of the political Reform Act of 1974. The conflict -of -interest rules were fluid, he said, and so he would monitor discussions throughout the evening to ascertain if there were potential conflicts in specific contexts. Frederic Nichols, Planning Commissioner, said that though the Commission had had unanimity there was difficulty in arriving at their 5-0 recommendation. George Zimmerman, Principal Planner, said the February 4, 1980 report (C R:l41:O) gave the Planning information relevant to the proposed moratorium: legal status, list of projects submitted to the City for review, and a table showing commercial and iedustrial vacant land up to 1980 along with projects approved since 1976 showing gross floor area. There was a list of projects submitted since January 16. Beckman Instruments had submitted its application prior to that _date.. Warren meter, 3227 Verdun Avenue, San Mateo, snake about the Varian credit union, building space for which the membership had applied. He hoped Council would make it possible for that building to be completed. Bill Byxbee, 101 Lytton, said he thought the proposed moratorium might do more harm than good. He said housing was needed, and he said it could be developed in the Foothills and Baylands, as well as air rights over parking lots. Josirph Ehrlich, 2470 El Cfaino :Rext _ said more affable us _r. } affordable housing chc,4al>�! be the goal, rather than a moratorium on i nd stri a l bui 1 di ng . He cited figures reiatiig to rental charges at current building costs. He suggested a consortium made up of business leaders, bonding consultants and the City`s finance personnel to determine ways to get loin interest rates. A moratorium would affect the revenue base adversely. Terence Ainsm , 3401 Nillview, said he was a member of the county Industry and Housing Task Force, and he ems an architect working for Syntex. His task force met twice monthly while producing "Living Within Our Limits.* He space of the progress of those meetings and outlined the points of view of various memberi. His statement is on file at the City Cleric`s office. He spoke of the contrast between nerds End goals and he listed Syntex*s efforts and deeds in cooperation .with the City toward enlightened industrial development. Jim Kemp, 300 Hamilton Avenue, said he thought his employer, Northern California Savings, had cooperated very generously with the City. He listed specific ways, and he added that though it might be a matter of indifference to other Palo Altans about Northern California's plans to headquarter in Palo Alto he did think the City should be aware of some other reasons for not impas i ng a moratorium. fie noted that the area Northern California planned to build was land that was particularly vulnerable to earthquake doge and flooding, and land subsidence, raking that land a very poor site for housing, along with its isolation from City amenities. He said HUD had stated the area was not financeable for housing. He said adjustments for those hazards would be made for Northern California's proposed commercial building. He said his firm asked that the site be excluded in a survey of potential housing sites, and said his firm would work with the City toward a solution of filling hous i ng needs. Richard Watson, 233 Sansome Street, said he was an architect for a building improvement plan at Hyatt Hotel, at 4291 El Camino Real. He introduced Bob Williamson. and also thanked Council for the smoking ordinance. Bob Williamson, general manager of Rickey's Hyatt House, said several buildings had been started at the location on El Camino. A moratorium would be very disruptive while construction was underway. Richard Watson acknowledged the pmbiem of jobs/housing imbalance. Cross -boundary political planning was needed, he said. He urged that Rizkcy's Hyatt be permitted to continue its it ro nt pry rain Robert Braud, Leeb and Braud Real Estate Developers, 1900 Ctarcadero, said the firm owned no land that would be affected by the proposed moratorium and he was there as vice president of government affairs of the Palo Alto Chaffer of Coerce. That organization opposed the proposed moratorium. Amoeg his reasons was the fact that the City's industrial development had provided a nationwide sal. Orderly planning had produced this fine community. and a moratorium was not an orderly tactic, he said, and he feared "panic results" from such a move. Ha proposed a business/industry task force to hunt for an action plan to increase hous i ng and rental housi deg • Frank haze, 1117 California, said he was vice president of Spiro Division of Beckman Instruments. Beckman, he said, had d€clded'to complete its master plan this year so that operations could be consolidated. Such consolidations would reduce traffic congestion: he said, but not add to the present number of 620 employees. His letter is on file at the City Clerk's office. He said Beckman would support the formation of an industry/business task force toward finding another solution to the Nosing Problem. Ed Glnzton, Varian Associates, said he was chairman of the board of that firm. He said he opposed the proposed moratorium and he did not think it would be a help with the City's housing problem. He gave the history of Varian's help i t trying to solve the housing problem for l owe and sowu.r. rs 1 ns oreserc • 4.NlloY feWillieU $ Maur Jiou vice 41 . nesaki _ Varian had no more room for expansion on its present site, and had branched out else -Varian had plan in 1969 to have an adsainistrative center on Page iii i 1 Road, fiver, and the moratorium would ha7t those loog.t re plans. He would like to stop plans for a moratorium, and instead help form a task fore for finding more low-income housing. .ion Young, 526 Center Drive, said he was chief executive officer of the # slett-Packard Cons, and that his company had empty demonstrated its 443 Illxl8O 1 i concern about the housing situation. He gave figures about number of employees and company efforts to cut down on employees' car traffic. He thought that a moratorium was not needed and individual housing was needed. He did r.ot think the number of jobs would increase much to the future in this area because land was not available. He did not think industry should have to bear the brunt of the housing shortage by undergoing a moratorium on its building. "...The club of the moratorium..." was not needed, he said, to bring about cooperation. Ned Gallagher, 440 Melville Avenue, said he was executive director of Downtown, Incorporated. He referred to the possible exclusion of the area bounded by Alma, Hamilton, Cowper and Lytton from the proposed moratorium, and he said he supported that exclusion, and he asked that the westerly bound be extended to Webster. He did not think the downtown area had contributed significantly to the jobs/housing imbalance, and instead had improved it by making capital available to private enterprise to solee the problem. He said a moratorium had a psychological disadvantage that lasted long after it had been lifted. Jo Ann Chase, 1325 Cowper, said she was secretary to the Palo Alto Civic League; she spoke for the steering committee of that group, That group had long wanted some industrial land rezoned for residential use. She preferred that the moratorium proposal be accompanied by formation of a civic group to hunt solutions to the housing imbalance. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme, said he too was a -ember of the steering committee of the Civic League, and he supported Miss Chase's co rrents. He aelad that in the recent past Santa Clara Count} had provided about as ,zany jobs as nine northeastern states combined. Palo Alto was riot solely responsible, He said Portola Valley, Woodside, and Atherton, along with Los Altos Hills, should also be involved in filling the housing need. He questioned the building of an Industrial Park in East Palo Alto. A moratorium should be undertaken if its intent was to locate housing sites then rezoning them. He thought in -lieu payments should be increased; buses, should be bought and donated by developers; employees' bus fares should be paid for; credits should be issued to c anies for public participation and cooperation; subsidies on mortgage costs should be paid. Peter B. Giles, 786 E. Meadow Drive, said he was president and chief executive officer of the Santa Clara County Manufacturing Group. The group was made up of about 60 coaapanie., that employed about 145,000 people. His letter, on file at the City Clerk's office, gave Ways in which the group had helped with problems related to increased population; one small matter had been the instigation of the shuttle bus, he said. He favored more involvement ent by industry in the housing problem. He favored more such voluntary cooperation, rather than *position of the proposed moratoriums. Suzanne MacPherson* president oft 'PaloAlto Housing Corpo ation, said her group thought the proposed moratoriue was appropriate. She thouoht certain parcels of industrial land should have a di nt for housing, as a developmental cent. She thought land in the Oaylands sI ouid be included in the land to be emoted from the moratorium. She thought it good thatVhe__ ProPosed moratorium had received wide community pmcs coverage. The Pouting Corporation had pie the idea of a moratorium, she said, and she did not think, as was charged, that it was "too little too late. ° She noted that there were 65 acres zoned for residential not yet put to .than purse, but much eater acreage was suitable for wing but not so zoned; she listed the forcer Maximart site, the California train station area, aid the El Camino strip, generally. She thought a limited moratorium, ' as proceed, old give an opportun i ty' to look at all hard suitable for housing not now zoned rues i denti al . One less job and one more housing unit, she said, was the kind of equation 444 2/12/00 the Housing Corporation had in mind. The moratorium would make possible a continued offering of a range of housing for a proportion of those who worked here, and to attempt to moderate both housing and jobs to the advantage of both present residents and businesses. A moratorium was not a solution to problems, but it was a pause permitting reflection toward solutions. Tod Sanchez, 25 Via Del Pinar, Monterey, California, said he was vice president of Monterey Savings. He said his company owned the property at the corner of Bryant and University, not yet developed. He thought the moratorium would "...kill the goose that laid the golden egg." Ellen Christensen, 4217 Los Palos, represented the Loan Prieta chapter of the Sierra Club. She said the City had approved projects within the last year adding about 37,000 new jobs to Palo Alto, but only 300 housing units had been added in that time. She favored adoption of the moratorium to show that the City, along with Sunnyvale, would take the lead toward a better quality of life for the county in general. She noted that her neighborhood, and others, were being impacted by *unrelenting additional traffic." Peter Lindes, 363 Ely Place, said he was a project manager at Hewlett- Packard. He favored the moratorium. He said 60,000 people commuted into Palo Alto daily to jobs. That had a negative effect on industry too, he said --high cost housing made it difficult to recruit qualified personnel from other places, and that cut off vitality to industry. Use of energy in the form of gasoline by commuters nullified the effect of savings of energy elsewhere. He approved the idea of proposed rezoning. Bill Massy, vice president for Business and Finance at Stanford University, said Stanford supported strong action to remedy the jobs/housing imbalance. He said Stanford wanted to build an 800 -bed student housing near Lake Legunito; the project hard been approved and awaited notice on financing through California Educational Facilities Authority 5. The University was going to build 140 units of cluster housing on Peter Coutts Hill, the zoning change having been approved February 11 by the county. Stanfordwas going to implement an experimental co -invest ent program for faculty, designed to permit moderate -income -f i 1 i e to perch se reasonable -housing an end off campus. Trustees had approved the program that day, February 12 The University was going ahead with the idea of housing on small infill sites within actin campus and residential areas. Talks were underway t lead to an annouceeaent of -a serious proposal to develop about 1600 units of housing on the 46 acres along Sand Hill Road, with a wide range of costs, oriented hard those employed on Stanford land. That would be an open planning process. Stanford University would research the possibility of housing to be built of lands now leased long term by the university. Stanford University would also be thinking about building one or more significant taroiects with housing asthe i ti(nt nt, and the unieersity's land use planwould disclose that. The touting project? had taken form before talk of a building moratorium. The uni vii ty would prod with them whether or not there was a moratorium. Stanford had major concerns about its lessees in its industrial part so far as the moratorium was concerned, however. He spoke of the contrtbutions to the community those lessees had made, . -and the difficulties a moratorium w(04/4 brie. a. - f rt - y-+.wsw-.,��F �i� pT �ei�a � said a L ereti� approach to righting �j /housing imbalances was preferred to a aaaorator'lum. Mayor Heederson thanked speakers for appearing before Council. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, . seconded by Fauzlno, 1) that Council refer to the Planning CommissiOn for pose of determining possible suitability for rezoning to residential all ant industrial land Parcels (parcels 4-4), excepting such land located east of Bayshore Freeway; 2) that Counct1 rrefer to the Planning Commission, for the purpose of determining possible suitability for rezoning for residential all vacant industrial and office land, (parcels 10.13); 3) refer to the Planning Commission for purpose of determining possible suitability for rezoning for residential all developed and partially developed office and commercial lands except those in the downtown commercial core area bounded by Alma, Hamilton, Webster and Lytton. Mayor Henderson said that he would support a moratorium when significant legislation could result from one and could not otherwise be realized. He listed differences between the proposed moratorium for Sunnyvale and Sunnyvale's housing programs compared to the proposed moratorium for Palo Alto and Palo Alto's housing efforts. He said that Palo Alto did not have to impose a moratorium to show that it meant business. Palo Alto could avoid a rush of applications; by making a determination on suitability of unused land in a short tine and Council action could take place within 1-2 months. Property east of Bayshore would be exempted --a letter from HUD had stated the area was not suitable for housing funds. The notions set no impediment to commercial expansion such as Rickey's• Hyatt House, for example. He noted specific areas on a transparency projected on the Councilchamber wall. Roy Abrams, City Attorney, asked that the motion be split for voting purposee---four of the parcels mentioned were owned by Stanford University end Council=ors Sher and Witherspoon were employed by the university, and the rezonir:g the motion proposed would directly affect Stanford. Councilmeeber Faezino said the proposed moratorium would not be welcome to him; he thought both the Housing Corporation and the Planning Commission had done excelle=nt jobs beet he thought that the moratorium as proposed was "...short on substance and long on symbolism and simplicity." He thought it surprising that Palo Alto sheuld follow Sunnyvale's lead; because Sunnyvale was a latecomer to the idea of urban planning, whereas Palo Alto's recognition of the need for open space and requirement for in -lieu mitigation funds had begun as early as 1970. He said there were in Palo Alto 38.8 vacant acres of industrial lend and 24.7 acres of office/commercial, with 60 acres not yet specified. He thought a moratorium would set the stage for poorly conceived projects so that companies could commence before s moratnritim might, .rte set. He thoe-lit- that to impose e moratorium now might betray a trust on the part of land owners when the Comprehensive Plan had been adopted in 1976 that uses for land would be set for at least a decade. He said jobs in industry were diminishing in PaloAlto; he thought additional=housing could come from school sites, increased densities, along with looking at industrial Park, otherwise he would prefer that Palo Alto live with its jobs/housing imbalance. He did not think the "last resort" of a moratoriums was yet needed. He thought housing/industrial mix was one approach to a solution, and he preferred, looking at specific sites rather than asking for an amorphous look et the entire industrial communiti, Nolt wanted presently planned bui l ding t6. be seireereeti freer-_ mnrete rl im ea - He _,i .8 9 L think the present large proposed for the moratorium was acceptable. A discussion ensued, from which it was concluded that the motion was divided into three parts for purses of distinguihing.possible conflicts of interest. The first portion was now beihg discussed. Councilmember Cyerly said he had the some view as Councileember Fazzlno on the moratorium; he skid he had been glad to hear Stanford's housing plans* and also industry's tone of gyration that evening. He thought that for Council to favor either rezoning or a moratorium would be to change the intent of the Comprehemsive Plan. He thought higher in -lieu mitigation payments could be asked. He that there could be higher amities on sites that lay alongside transportation corridors. Councilmember Brenner said she would prefer to address the Planning Commission recommendation on the moratorium first, then spend time discussing specifics in Mayor Henderson's motion. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Councilmember Brenner introduced the following ordinance for first reading and, seconded by Renzel, that Council support the Planning Commission recommendation: that the Planning Commission unanimously recommends to the City Council that it enact a moratorium on further industrial, commercial and office development exempting projects in the three categories identified in the January 15 staff report (Category 1, approved projects which have not applied for a building permit; Category 2, approved projects which have applied for a building permit; and Category 3, approved projects which have received one or more building permits) . The moratorium to apply to industrial development of 25,000 square feet or more, and commercial and office development of 5000 square feet or more, with mixed -uses of housing and either industrial, commercial, or office that have 60 percent or more of the gross floor -- area in hosing exempted. We further request that staff immediately prepare an inventory of properties to which the moratorium should not apply and which may be exempted. Also, that Council immediately institute through whatever form it deems appropriate a public discussion directed toward expeditiously defining the limits of industrial and residential growth in Palo Alto: ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON ALL NEW BUILDING PROJECTS AND BUILDING EXPANSIONS FOR ALL INDUSTRIAL, COMMERCIAL AND GENERAL OFFICE USES Mr. Abrams said that he thought the subject of Councilmember Brenner's motion would perhaps better be discussed concurrem; with the motion on the floor. He thought the moratorium could exist along with consideration of rezoning. Her motion could be made after action was taken on the motion now before Council. Councilmember Renzel said she thought the Planning Commission recommendation for a moratorium would permit discussion of rezoning as well as other matters, whereas the motion before them addressed only rPzc r i ng, -The motion and the substitute motion were quite different matters, she tit: Mr. Abrams aareeds adding that for just that reason the substitute motion was not suitable for it addressed a different tatter. Mayor Henderson said he accepted the ruling of the City Attorney and the substitute motion would be withdrawn. Cour,isi1 er Brenner said she would then talk about moratoria in_ general . enabling _ v ins She thought a �raug�-ium �i a legitimate tool� i � r� �t 'yt# _fit- - to occuie without spurring a race to develop before reasonable planning could testae place. She said housing and iNdustry were interdependent; the 60e acres could bring either 2000 more jobs, or about 1000 more housing uni is . Cowcilmember Ren7P1 said the moratorium m would . said � •.w. �s v►re t list 9Fi8i1 i V Ri' E YiC i S. l UV A - D t some - housing -related matters; current information showed that alternative sites for housing in a lair area in edjacent communities were now not so available. She noted that the acreage covered by the original motion leas half of that covered by the Planning Commission recommendation, and she did not think such a moratorium would interrupt the smooth flow of planned pro jests . Couocilmmmber Renzel ascertained with City Attorney Abrams that Co!anc i 1 by enacting a moratorium could not strip any project of vested rights as sized by the low and projects that had required approvals and had 1 engaged in substantial construction would meet that exemption requirement. Any project that obtained vested rights within the 45 -day period prior to retroactive enactment of a moratorium would be protected. Mr. Arms added that in subsection 2(b) of the proposed moratorium the language would require additional approval for projects not in existence at the present time, but if there were only a partial approval for a project that project would not be exempt from the moratorium. Councilor Renzel said she thought, in favoring the moratorium, that it was important for the Planning Commission not to have to plan in a "pressure cooker." Vice Mayor Sher said he thought a moratorium had been aimed at giving staff a brief pause while it put together an inventory of properties that might be considered for rezoning; the motion on the floor was to take certain already -identified properties and send there to the Planning Commission to see if those properties were suitable for rezoning to residential. He had been prepared to consider a moratorium for a shorter period than six months. He also thought the exceptions to the moratorium in the Planning Commission recommendation were too narrow. He did favor helping companies that were already established in town to preserve their vitality and perhaps take a tougher line on new developments that wanted to come into the community. He would support the motion on the floor and he thought it best to adopt a position that represented the broadest Council support. The motion took action immediately, without the emergency aspects of a moratorium. The ration recognized that industry had said it would cooperate and asked that its help be enlisted short of a moratorium; also, it acknowledged to other communities that Palo Alto knew it was a part of the problem, and was taking stepa to ameliorate the imbalance. Councilm ber Levy said he supported the (*motion as a rive to increase housing and limit expansion of jobs. He thought the motion was "reasonably fair" in the projects which it exempted; the nature of growth was change, and therefore he thought that flexibility was important in the mechanism used in making a change. Decisions made in the past should not be permitted to impede adjustment to changed circumstances. Counci lme aber Witherspoon agreed with many of the arguments made and for those same reasons already given she favored the motion. She feared there would not be many sites suitable for housing, in view of the standards Palo Alto had set for itself. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Renzela that staff report to Council on increased mitigation measures relating to on -site housing and in -lieu pants for construction and expansion. He said he thought such wording -should be_a part of the motion and it should be in a rrinellitive for; that r of permit equal i tr..as....nt when � ,�� F: iFtd i•l ,I f:st� �s��i �,iC :ii the subject returned to Counci l . �� Mayor Henderson ascertained with Mr. Abrams that such an amendment would be appropriate since the motion mentioned specific parcels. ---------- --- - Tice Mayor Shee said he supported the amendment; he wondered why Counci bomber Eyerly wanted to 1 imi t it to particular parcels —perhaps it should be a serrate motion askir the Planning Commission to reconsider the eerie matter. Councilmember Eyerly said he thought the parcels that were subject in the motion were about the only ones big enough to sustain larger in -lieu payments. He thought the word "expansion" in his amendment wou l d speak to parcels of which development had already taken place and on which more construction might be undertaken. He wanted to add it to this 448 2/12/80 es _ motion so that it would return from the Planning Commission at the same time as the report requested by the motion. Councilmember Brenner said she supported the amendr.:nt but she would prefer to vote on it separate from the motion. Councilmember Eyerly agreed to make it a separate motion. FIRST PART OF MOTION PASSED: The first part of the motion, that Council refer to the Planning Commission the question of determining possible suitability for rezoning for residential all vacant industrial land (parcels 4-8) except those east of the Bayshore Freeway, passed on a unanimous vote. SECOND PART OF MOTION PASSED: The second part of the motion, that Council refer to the Planning Commission the question of determining possible suitability for rezoning for residential all vacant industrial and office land (parcels 10-13), passed on a unanimous vote, Vice Mayor Sher and Councilmember Witherspoon not participating. Mayor Henderson emphasized that only comercial and office property was meant by the third part of the motion;. Councilmember Eyerly confirmed that the properties near the Southern Pacific at California Avenue, along with Maximart, and also around Urban Lane were included. THIRD PART OF MOTION PASSED: The third part of the ration that Council refer to the Planning Commission the question of determining possible suitability for rezoning for residential all developed and partially developed office and commercial lands except those in the downtown commercial core area bounded by Aire, Hamilton, Webster and Lytton Avenues, passed on a unanimous vote. A discussion ensued and it was agreed that Council would like to have the subject ratter of the first part of the motion returned as quickly as possible. MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Renzel, that staff report to Council on increased mitigation measures relating to on -site housing construction and in -lieu payments for construction and expansion_ Councilmember Eyerly emphasized that it would be good to have that report return to Council as soon as possible. Councilmember Renzel noted that mitigation payment wa much less for industrial building than for residential, a paradox, since residential solved the problem industrial _develeprent ?tee: exacerbated. Councilmember Levy suggested adding some language aboutincentive,. Councilmember Eyerly said staff could add information on that. He would add the word, however, and he obtained the consent of his second, Councilmember Renzel. MOTION PASSED: The motion, with the word, "incentives" add q passed on a unanimous vote. MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Brenner, that Council approve the Planning Commission recommendation with the modification that it be for a three month time period, and property east of Bayshore Freeway be exempted. Councilor Renzel said she thought a number of questions, such as whether or not housing should be required in conjunction with industrial, 4-4 9 2/12/80 and the like, could be explored with a moratorium in effect. Statements made that evening about increasing densities would, she thought, compound mistakes that may have been made in the past. Councilrnernber Fletcher asked if it would be possible to also exempt from the proposed moratorium those projects that had applied to the Architectural Review Board (ARB). Ken Schreiber, Assistant Director of Planning said that would involve projects in Category 4. The first three categories were projects that already had approval. Councilmember Renzel said she did not know what value the proposed moratoriums might have if everything pending were exempted. Quite a few protections for projects in process had been taken. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved, that all projects for which application had been made be exempted from a moratorium. The amendment died for lack of a second. MOTION FAILED: The motion failed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Renzel NOES: Eyerly, Fazzino, Henderson, Levy, Sher, Witherspoon Vice Mayor Sher observed that many industries had expressed willingness to join in a search for housing solutions in Palo Alto, and the Planning Commission had also recommended that there be held a public discussion defining the limits to industrial and residential growth in the City. MOTION: Vice Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council request the Planning Commission, by formation of a task force or otherwise, to facilitate a study leading to recommendations concerning methods by which industry might further the production of affordable housing in Palo Alto, and also request the Planning Commission tot facilitatey public discussion involving representatives try, housing groups, and discussion .. involving rtC rc?��r,�tivzs of industry, the public generally, leading to a definition of the limits of the limits of industrial and residential growth in Palo Alto. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Curtis Van diet, 455 Forest Avenue, said he wanted to discuss FSP; he said he had a direct telephone line to the future and the past and he caked most` l r r help in —dating K sore financial L.anier.w....ord :: .. - i s- .- -_ :".-sL!'.�.`.e..-:'.•a �. document ..- ..:z he asked for signatures attesting to the validity of the claims the document made. He asked for help. Mayor Henderson said that Council did not respond directly to Oral Communicants, . it was the: usual Practise for staff to look into the matter and make reco ndati ens , sir. Van Vi let asked Mayor Henderson if he had experienced psychic Phenomena. Mayor Henderson replied that staff would respond to Mr. Van Vlietrs request; Mr. Van V let's request would berecorded in the minutes as well. 450 2/12/80 ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Vice Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Fletcher, that Council adjourn. The ration passed on a unanimous voice vote. Council adjourned at 12:30 a.m. ATTESC: APPROVE: ,� -�� %- - .. 47 '-rte Ci gr / Mayor° S1 2/12/80