Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-05-02 City Council Summary MinutesRegular -Meeting June 2, 1980 ITEM PAGE Adjourned Meeting of May 19, 1980 6 6]1 Request of Councilrr ber Fletcher re Greyhound Bus Service 6 6 1 Request of Councilmembers Witherspoon, Eyerly and Fazzlno 6 6 1 re ITT Property Excavation Request of Councilmeober Fletcher re Smoking Regulations 6 6 6 Oral Communications 6 6 7 Adjournment 6 6 7 Regular Meeting of June 2, 1980 Minutes of May 5, 1980 6 6 7 Consent Calendar Resolution of (Appreciation - Mervin F. Marty 6 6 8 Ordinance Amending Code Regarding Termination of 6 6 8 Nonconforming Uses Ordinance Amending Zoning Ordinance re Change of 6 6'9 District at 700 Welch Road Ordinance Amending Code re Property Maintenance Standards 6 6 9 Resolution Amending Resolutions re City Conflict of Interest 6 6 9 for Designated Positions to Include Reporting Requirements for Members of the Historic Resources Committee Agreement re Gas Distribution System Study 6 6 9 Resolution Adjusting Gas Rates 6 6 9 Approval of Joint Construction Agreements with Pacific 6 6 9 Telephone Company 2185 Bryant Street - Appeal from Decision of Zoning Administrator 6 7 0 Appointment of Historic Resources Committee 6 7 6 Finance & Public Works Committee Recommends re Electric 6 7 6 Rate Increase Ordinance re Collection offKecyclable Materials 6 7 7 Request of Councilmember Eyerly re Single Family Residential 6 7 8 Mortgage Revenue Bonds Oral Communications 6 7 8 Adjournment 6 7 8 660 6/2/80 Adjourned Meeting of May 19, 1981 held on June 2, 1981? The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Counci lcharrrber at City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:40 p.m., in the adjourned meeting of May 19, Vice Mayor Sher opened the meeting, Mayor Henderson presided thereafter. PRESENT: Brenner, Eyerly, FazzIno, Fletcher, Henderson (arrived 7:42), Levy, Renzel, Sher, Witherspoon ABSENT: None MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Brenner, that Council bring forward the matter concerning the Greyhound Bus service. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. REQUEST OF C0UNCILt P1BER FLETCHCR Councilmember Fletcher said Greyhound was proposing to close the Greyhound Depot in downtown Palo Alto and consolidate its operation with a Mountain View facility at Mayfield Mall. At present it was proposed that the depot be used for a transfer of inter -county buses from San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, to interface with trains. She had hoped that Greyhound would move its operation to the Southern Pacific depot, and also that Greyhound would accept passengers for San Francisco to board at the SP depot. At present Palo Alto passengers were not permitted to ride Greyhound unless they had tickets for points beyond San Francisco. She thought there would be quite a demand for Greyhound service if the City could persuade Greyhound to accept passengers to San Francisco. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher raved, seconded with Eyerly, that the City staff work with Santa Clara county and other agencies and with Greyhound to maintain at least the current level of Greyhound service in Palo Alto and that staff continue efforts to make Greyhound Bus service accessible to Palo Alto passengers. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. t 3EST OF COUNCILMEMBERS WITHERSPOON (Continued ued from S/12/80) Councilmember Witherspoon said the May 29 staff report on the subject of excavation of the ITT property and one more dredging of the yacht harbor was before Council. Dave Adams, Director of Public Works, would report on that, the staff report said, when he reported to the Finance and Public Works Committee in July for the consultant selection process. MOTION: Counc i l tuber Witherspoon moved, seconded by Fa zz i no, that Council adopt the staff recommendations that 1) Council adopt a policy authorizing temporary use of a portion of the ITT property as a spoil deposit area as set forth in Alternative 3; 2) Council direct staff to include design of temporary dewaterir?g ponds as a part of the ITT excavation project; 3) Council direct staff to work with the. County to secure maximum funding for implementation of these policies. Councilmember Witherspoon asked what ttoe $200,000-$400,000 cost for --- dredging would give the City.. 661 6/2/80 Dave Adams, Director of Public Works, said that estimated figure would be for a one-time dredging of about 60,000 yards of spoils from the yacht harbor, using either the hydraulic or clamshell dredging method -- and temporary use of the needed equipment. He said about 15-20 acres of the ITT property would be used for placement of the dewatering ponds, and the use of the ponds would end in time for the 15-20 acresto be used in whatever way needed for the final closure of the dump area. Costs of possible treatment of the spoils in aeration and drying could be negotiated between City and county, Councilmenber Renzel asked what provision had been made for the gates needed to restore the ITT property to marshland. Ken Schreiber, Assistant Director of Planning and Community Environment, said the Baylands Master Plan for the ITT property called for an in -ter and forecast plan element, with in -term being near term, and the forecast Corrected being the ultimate disposition of the property. The forecast plan See Pg. 002 proposes returning all of the area to a marsh environment. The in -term 7/7/80 plan contained the de -watering ponds, with the balance of the property as it was. Councilmember Levy asked about the 'temporary-ness' of the dewatering ponds. Mr. Adams responded that the piping was temporary --main discharging pipes would be put in place just during the dredging operation, The dewatering ponds could be on the dump land, but the ITT property location was proposed. Costs for that were a part of the total dredging costs. Councilmerber Levy asked about the proposed $500,000 needed to convert the ITT property back into marshland and for the tidal gates, was that a cost that had not been included in the original costs of the original plan? Mr. Adams said the cost had been left out --costs fur tidal gates had not been included. The $500,000 was the incremental difference between those gates necessary to convert the 30 -acre dewatering ponds to a marsh area, versus converting about 100 acres of excavated ITT land. Councilmember Eyerly ascertain that the proposed size of the dewatering ponds was to be 15-20 acres; Cooper -Clark had proposed 30 acres. He asked if staff would draw up an environmental impact report (EIR) on the effect of not dredging the yacht harbor, that is, the silting up, how long such silting up would take, resultant appearance, and the like. Mr. Adams said that staff had not included the idea of such an EIR though the eventualities of not dredging had been addressed on the Baylands Master Plan. me. Schreiber said the ultimate plan was to return the yacht harbor area to an undredged condition. The area would be muddy for a considerable length of time unless measures were taken to hasten the silting -up process. Councilmember Eyerly said he thought that would have a major impact on the area. He asked if the pumps now in use for removing excess water were available to remove water from the dewe ter i rig ponds. Mr. Adams said that the consultants would have to look into that -- it was feasible. Counci l rber Eyerly asked if Council had set a policy for use of the ITT property when the City had purchased it. 6 2 6/2/80 Corrected See Pg. 002 7/7/80 Mr. Schreiber said he thought Council had wanted to rnaintair, the radio facility and also the Council had wanted to use the same policy included in the Baylands Master Plan, that is, retention of the property as open space through creation of a marsh envireri!ent. Counc i l merrier Eyerly ascertained that staff would return to Council with costs resulting from negotiations with the county and the like as dredging and dewatering occurred. In that way Council would not be locked into a position. Councilner Brenner noted that staff said the City had the right to purchase the spoils that the county had dredged. Mr. Adams said that staff had thought that if the spoils had been handled in a way that they would be useful to the City, the City would want to be able to purchase them. Couecilmember Brenner said that if the City were to purchase the spoils perhaps it should also pay rent for the land on which the spoils were to be placed. 3r. Adams said that could be considered. Councilrrenber Brenner said she had been surprised to learn that the City mi$3 t purchase the spoils, Councilmertber Renzel confirmed that the ultimate plan for the ITT property was that it was to be wholly restored to marsh regardless of any plan that might be selected to cover the dump. Florence LaRiviere, 453 Tennessee Carne, said she represented the board of directors of the Santa Clara valley Audubon Society. She deplored the return to the dewatering plan, She asked how the Water Quality Control Board entered into the temporary and ultimate plans. She said the Audubon Society questioned spending up to $400,000 for the benefit of a few hundred families. She said more than 30 acres of marshland had been destroyed since 1969 --that had been a total environmental loss. Establishment of trails and so on had cut dote the small mammal population so markedly that raptors, such as hawks, kites and owls had virtually disappeared --they had not even been recorded in the latest bird count census. Studies shams that restoration to marsh was not difficult. She pleaded for wetlands conservation. Walter Str uist, 3418 Thomas Drive, said he would like to present some options not yet adequately reviewed so that costs would be reduced, and environmental impact would be minimized. He outlined a plan concerned with protecting land adjacent to the ITT property. He said cons1&erable savings would result if the ITT property ware left as is and pumping of water from the marsh continued. Dikes would not be needed, for one thing. He cited figures in support of his statements. He thought harbor maintenance would prove to be a cost advantage. A. Daniel Peck, 680 Rhodes Drive, said marine biologists who were his colleagues at San Francisco State University agreed that the more tidal rater was exchanged the mere would marine birds be supported. They said that more birds were sustained by volume of water than by tidal marsh,_ and that hydraulic dredging did little damage, and that damage could be righted within a very short period, Those were arguments for dredging. The ITT preperty would have to be filled to raise its level for it to become a salt marsh. He said results of a questionnaire given to 128 663 6/2/80 1 non -harbor related visitors to the yacht harbor disclosed that 88 percent favored continuance of the harbor and he gave percentages of respondents who favored harbor -related spectating from various points of view. Gail Woolley, 1685 Mariposa, gave the results of responses to a handbill printed giving costs of harbor maintenance and related problems and benefits made by Palo Altans in areas that had shown greatest voter turnout. She said 2,758 residents had signed a statement supporting continued maintenance of the harbor. She handed the petitions to the City Clerk. She said that those using the harbor would accept the idea of having berthing fees doubled. Mayor Henderson ascertained with Ms. Woolley that those who had signed the petition understood that not the entire bayland but just the yacht harbor was in question. John V. Beahrs, 1830 Guinda Street, former Councilmember, said that in his fourteen years on the Council costs had been one of his main concerns. He said that the City got very little return from the 10 percent of the tax dollar that went to state and county for parks and recreation. He said some of the gas tax money went to development of marinas and small boat harbors, and he thought costs related to maintenance of the harbor might be reduced if the City asked for some of those funds. He thought the City should act soon or the county staff would ask that the county be released from its lease obligations, in which case costs would rise even more. He emphasized that, as Mr. Stromquist had cautioned, the land abutting the ITT proberty would halve to be diked for protection. Jane Goldstein, 415 Cambridge Avenue, spoke for the League of Women Voters. She emphasized that the question of dump closure should be separate from the question of dredging the harbor. The League asked when the county's lease obligation to dredge ended and why the City should purchase the spoils --what would the county do with them? Edward Freiberg, 726 Charleston, said that the City Manager's report, (CMR:274:Q)compounded problems related to dredging the yacht harbor and what to do with the spoils. He did not want to jeopardize the City's relationship with the county over the hatter of disposal of spoils. He said he had learned that the harbor had not been dredged for five years. He compared figures of ors of visitors, boaters, and the like in that time. He asked that tax money be spent for activities that benefitted the most people. Philip Ziman, 1444 Pitman Avenue, said he was an eagle scout, and had learned to sail when he was six at the Palo Alto Yacht Harbor. He cited the benefits to both youth and the area itself to be derived from sailing, toward fu1 f i l l i ng "...the American Dream." Bob Moss, 4010 Orme, said the cost of dredging was about $4C,000 per boat --that $400,000 was about 40 percent of the C1P budget. He did not think spoils could be used for covering the dump. He said that impervious plastic film could be used to close off the dump. He preferred using the money for acquisition of land for parks and open space. Robert Horton, 1305 Middlefield Road, said he worked with the Boy Scouts of America in the Stanford area. Lucie Stern had donated the Sea Scout base to the local Sea Scouts in 1941. It had served thousands of young men and woman, and now up to 100 young people would be affected by closure of the harbor. 664 6/2/80 John F. Walker, 19375 Greenwood Circle, Cupertino, observed that users of the harbor paid for the costs of dredging. Berth rent was $1 per foot, and use was restricted to the one hour before and one hour after high tides; if there could be more use space renters would pay up to $2.50 a foot. He said that greenery did grow on spoils --there had been a grass fire at Yacht Harbor point last month. Mayor Henderson said that dredging of the yacht harbor had been before Council more often in the past ten years than any other topic. When the Council had decided against three hydraulic dredgings a year, with disposition to large dewatering ponds, and voted for a proposal to provide landfill cover for the ITT property, it effectively signalled the end of the use of the harbor by larger boats. He had moved some weeks back that staff prepare a report about costs for one more dredging to give an opportunity for owners of larger boats to find a another harbor. Staff had indicated difficulty of obtaining Bay Conservation Development Commission (BCDC) approval of that proposal. He thought that in light of the pressing need for funds elsewhere, and the problems related to the maintenance of the harbor he would prefer having a small boat harbor for use by the general public in a few years, putting the harbor in the same class as the golf course and like City facilities. SUBSTITUTEMOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Levy, that Council direct staff to continue with plans for excavation of the IT! property and grant the county permission to dredge the harbor one final time in 1981, using Yacht Harbor Point as the deposit location for the spoils. Councilmember Cyerly said the motion was unnecessary: Council had already set a policy to proceed in that direction. He said that the assumption made in the notion that the yacht harbor was used exclusively by one group was wrong --other citizens used the yacht harbor too. He said he thought there could be more expanded use of the harbor --it was a valuable recreational resource and he wanted to expand its use. He thought placement of spoils on Yacht Harbor Point would be bad. The debate on points related to harbor, dredging was being repeated. He did want to explore excavating the IlS. property, as well as natters related to dredging the harbor, and he did not want to close off those questions. He would vote against the substitute motion and he favored the ma i n lotion. Councilmember Witherspoon explained the difference between small and large boats: small boats had centerboards, and required some depth to yet in and out of harbor. She thought her notion included the points of the substitute motion -.it proposed using the ITT property rather than Yacht Harbor Point for the spoils. Vice Mayor .Sher ascertained that the substitute motion wade explicit that only one more dredging would mean the boats would have to be moved. He said he did not see much difference, except for area to be used, in the "temporary' dewatering ponds proposed by staff and the Yacht Harbor Point site. He had voted against having large dewatering ponds in the baylands for a length of time. He said he supposed BCDC would approve the one -last -tire dredging, and then, eventually, the lease with the county could be turned back to the City, when the county could no longer charge berthing fees to recover its costs, and so he would support the substitute motion. Councilmember Brenner said that the dewatering pond matter had been deliberated on at great length; she thought it was reasonable to dredge the harbor one more time to provide time for an orderly transition for present users of the berths. Closing of the harbor was inevitable. She favored the substitute motion. 66 6/2/80 8 Councilmember Levy said he would like to keep the yacht harbor open if it could be done without undue cost, and since keeping the harbor open would be so costly, he thought the cost should be borne by its users. finder present circumstances he favored the substitute notion. Councilmember Fletcher wondered if the fill proposed for use for the second runway could be ased for dump cover --would staff check that? Councilmember Fazzino said the Cooper -Clark report pointed to a greater cost for ITT excavation and resulting mitigation for dredging, and there were environmental issues surrounding the ITT property. He emphasized that the consultants who would be hired to do the excavation would also prepare the EIR, and he said he was disturbed by that. He was resigned to the idea that the yacht harbor would be closed within C-10 years. He praised the reasonableness of the staff report, and said he would oppose the substitute motion. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Fazzino, phrase "one more time" be deleted from the substitute motion related to dredging, and keep the yacht harbor open for five The amendment failed on the following vote: AYES: Eyerly, Fazzino, Witherspoon NOES: Brenner, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher that the as it more years. Councilmember Renzel said she thought that by restoring the ITT property to marsh, valuable wildlife habitat would be created, and that could be done only when the excavation of ITT property for impermeable cover had been completed. Completion of the dump would provide valuable upland habitat. She observed that not mud, but tidal action, created marsh. She did not want to further complicate excavation of the ITT property beyond its present elements of recharging wells, the antenna farm and slough remnants. She referred to a map of the southern portion of San Francisco Bay, noting that it was silting up in its entirety, and so harbor wedging would not improve sailing in South Bay. She thought it would be best to begin the transition now. SUBSTITUTE MOTION PASSED: The motion that Council direct staff to continue with plans for excavation of the ITT property ant grant the county permission to dredge the harbor one final time in 1981, using Yacht Harbor Point as the deposit location for the spoils, passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Sher NOES: Eyerly, Fazzino, Renzel, Witherspoon REQUEST OF COUWCILMEMBER FLETCHER Tlarued from M6y 12% 1980) Councilmember Fletc}ersaid the Council had passed regulations on making, the most recent in 1979; remaining elements of the ordinance had yet to be discussed in committee. A bill regarding state regulations on smoking, 582026, a6r n) had been introduced, which would preempt local regulations, a fact that Councilor Fletcher deplored. 665 6/2/80 MOTION: Counciimember Fletcher moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council go on record by writing to the state senate Committee on Industrial Relations, that would hear the bill June 4, as opposing SB.'.026 (Green) because it would invalidate Palo Alto municipal ordinance 3185. Councilmes r Fletcher said one of the regulations in the proposed 582026 was that smoking and non-smoking sections did not have to be separated by barriers, and she said that made the no -smoking areas meaningless. Councilmember Eyerly said he would like more information on SB2026 before he went on record against it. He would abstain. Mayor Henderson said he opposed such "big brother -ism" on the part of the state: he thought laws on that topic were best made in the community. Councilor Fazzino wondered about the intent of SB2026--it seemed an insidious attempt to take away local governance. He urged other Council - members' support of the motif n. Councilrnca!ber Brenner observed that Councilmenber Fletcher had given Councilmembers a copy of the League of California Cities analysis, in which cities were advised to vote against SB2026 and other state regulations that took away local control. MOTION PASSED: The notion passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher NOES: Eyerly, Witherspoon, ORAL COMJNICATIONS Dean Morgan, 4276 Los Palos, said he had written Councilmembers on behalf of the Working Group at Terman. His letter is on file at the City Clerk's office. MOTION: Vice Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that Council adjourn the meeting of may 19, 1980.. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. The greeting was adjourned at 9:24 p.m. Regular meeting June 2, 1980 Mayor Henderson called the regular meeting of the City Council of June 2 to order , at 9:25 p.m. All rakers were present. MINUTES OF MAY 5, 1980 Councilmearber Fazzino asked that on page 615, the first sentence of the eighth paragraph read instead: *Councilmember Fazzino said he thought the project wu. well thaaght out. He feared that legal alternatives to the commercial/ residential before Council might bring about worse traffic problems." 667 6/2/80 Councilmember Fazzino asked that on page 617 the first paragraph read instead: "Councilmember Fazzino said he thought Council should stay with its policy decision statement of two weeks ago. He did, however, think that the anti -drug education in schools was as important as enforcement of laws like the one before Council that evening." MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that Council approve the minutes as corrected. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. ORAL COMl9UN I CAT I OPTS None CONSENT CALENDAR Roy Abrams, City Attorney, asked that Council remove the matter concerning recyclable materials from the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Sher and Councilmember Witherspoon asked that the record show that they were not participating on the matter concerning real property at 700 Welch Road, because Stanford university, owner of the land, was their employer. Councilmember Eyerly asked that his vote be recorded as "no" on the ratter of termination of nonconforming uses. Referral Items None Action items RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TriCarfirrignr- RESOLUTION E797 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO MERYIN F. MARTY UPON HIS RETIREMENT," ORDINANCE SING PANC SECTION 2.04.240 f Y+sv ■ VS.• V • I W . iM/r..O.YR.6..V ,ev. !. f• . . w...V C FS rea s RDINANCE 3203 entitled "ORD/N1ANCE OF THE IfAINCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING PALO ALTO KINICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 2.04.240(a) , 2.04.250 MO 2.04.260 REGARDING THE DUTIES MO MEETING DATES OF THE FINANCE AND PUBLIC hORKS COMMITTEE AND THE POLICY AND P10E ES COMMITTEE." ORDINANCE AMENDING PAMC SECTION 18.94.070(c),(3),(4 (first -reading 1,12y .' ORDINANCE 3204 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE NIKTFOrTFir CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.94.070(c) (3)„ (4) OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING TERMINATION OF NONCONFORMING USES." 668 6/2/80 ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 1992 AMENDING SECTION 3.62 OF ZOM-OhDINANCE rs „ea g y , ORDINANCE 3206 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING ORDINANCE 1992 WHICH AMENDS SECTION 3.02 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE 1324 FOR A CHANGE OF DISTRICT OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY KNOWN AS 700 WELCH ROAD FROM R-4 TO P -C<" ORDINANCE ON PROPERTY 1 MCTEMNCE T tRD ' ORDINANCE entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 9.56.030 (17, (18) OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PROPERTY MAINTENANCE STANDARDS." (1st reading) RESOLUTION AMENDING CONFLICT tirnmormamarrirmaTING RESOLUTION 5798 entitled "RESOLUTION OF #E COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING RESOLUTIONS 5737 AND 5738 REGARDING THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR DESIGNATED POSITIONS TO INCLUDE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR MEMBERS OF THE HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMITTEE." GAS DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM STUDY (CMR:238:0) Staff recommends that Council approve the agreement with R. W.Beck and Associates to perform an engineering study for system improvements and expansion to guide the gas utility. AGREEMENT: R. W. BECK AND ASSOCIATES Engineering Study for System Improve eats and to guide the gas utility GAS RATE INCREASE (CMR:273:0) Staff Ids that Council approve resolution confirming ti,_ .-.s..+, a�..a.. �e�.�rovv.. the C�ii/lii4i�fii Lv7It i[eNi[F4� action taken by the City Manager adjusting gas rates in accordance with Resolution 5775. RESOLUTION MO. 5799 entitled RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SCHEDULE G-1 DUE TO THE EFFECT OF A WHOLESALE GAS PRICE INCREASE UPON PALO ALTO GAS RATES JOINT CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENTS WITH PACIFIC TELEPAGNE UNPANt (CMR :258:0 ) Staff recommends that Council approve the Crescent Park I joint construction agreement and aunt to existing master agreement for joint underground construction, and authorize the Mayor to execute both documents. 669 6/2/80 AGREEMENT FOR JOINT PARTICIPATION IN INSTALLATION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES SYSTEM IN CRESCENT PARK AMENDMENT N0. 1 TO CONTRACT N0. 3622 MASTER AGREEMENT FOR INSTALLATION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES SYSTEM MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Fletcher, that Council approve the consent calendar. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote, Counciim er Eyerly voting "no" on the ordinance concerning termination of nonconforming uses, and Vice Mayor Sher and Ccuncilmember Witherspoon not participating on the matter concerning 700 Welch Road= MOTION: VICE Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council bring the matter of the proposed child care center at 2185 Bryant Street forward for consideration by Council after recess. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. RECESS Council recessed from 9;35 to 9:50 p.m. 2185 BRYANT STREET mumurnrurtm OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ann3ng or�nissron e nration) Mayor Henderson emphasized that he and other Councilmembers had read the Planning Commission material and letters from citizens on this proposed chile; care center, and all of them had also received many personal phone calls and letters on the subject. He appealed for brevity on the part of those wishing to speak or else the meeting would continue to the point where fatigue made it difficult to make any decision. Jim Huntsberger, Boulder Creek, said he had lived near the church for 24 years. He said that Califernia Avenue, before the grade crossing for the Southern Pacific had been eliminated, had been very busy, and parents had worked toward having the grade crossing rived. He asked that the resulting peace and quiet not be intruded on again by the activities connected with a child care center. Glean Story, 363 Shasta Drive, said he was a new father and concerned with the lack of infant care in Palo Alto; he asked that Council support the infant child care center. De. Joan Hor-reil, 2771- Cowper Street, said she hoped Council would be aware of the n r of parents rrho had bee on the waiting list for infant care in Palo Alto. 1 William J. Rosenberg, 820 Bruce Drive, said his house was across from a child care center. serving 24 toddlers, and that had very little *pact on his neighoorhood. He did not think there would be adverse impact at the Bryant Street location either. - Lucille Gold, 377 Creekside Drive, said she was president of the board of the Palo Alto Community Child Care Center (PACCC). She said her group was aware of social channges governments were called upon to accommodate to. PACCC in this Bryant Street location expected to be very good neighbors 670 6/2/80 Tom Cahill, 2701 Waverley Street, said he had been a member of the PACCC board for some tihe. It was responding successfully to community child care needs. He listed other centers in other locations in Palo Alto; there were 130 members on a waiting list, so facilities for child care needs were being sought in other locations as well. Neighbors at the Bryant Street location had not been receptive to establishment of a child care center there. He asked that Council consider the needs of the community and the compromises that PACCC was willing to make in use of the First Baptist Church facility to mitigate any impact on the neighborhood. Joanne LeMaistre, 3264 Ross Road, said she old infant who was cared for at PACCC, and clinical psychologist. She said "There is children who learn early social skills . . benefitted personally from availability of was rnot per of a nine -month Ms. LeMaistre was also a a substantial benefit for . " She told how she had child care. Fred Hillier, said he was moderator from the First Baptist Church at 305 North California. His church supported having the PACCC center located `.here. The house to be given over to the facility had been purchased by the church in 1953, and its intended use had been for community service as well as for its Sunday school. The Community Association for Retarded had started in the building in 1962; in 1967 Palo Alto Unified School District had used the building for a pre-school learning center. No neighbors had complained. The church was glad to participate in ommunity need in this way. He did not know how much neighbors could interfere legally with what the church wished to do with its facilities. He thought human need outweighed the relatively minor inconvenience to the neighbors. Cou tha faci chur ncilmember° Eyerly observed that the Baptist Church had been built at t location before a use permit was required, and did not have parking lities that would have been required at present. He asked about the ch's other piece of property on California -was it for sale? Mr. Hillier replied that it had already been sold a few months back; the new purchaser knew about the church's plan to have child care. Councilor Eyerly said he had hoped the church planned to use the property for parking; he was sorry it had been sold to a private family. Nr. Hill not tear ier answered that the church board had understood that it could down a residence. Jack Oppenheimer. 360 Everett;,said Palo Alto's wise to adjust to the amount of to nt_in the City would--naturaily1 hethought, -lead to efforts to expand affordable infant care in a residential environment. "If I may moralize it sus te4e to be a very civilized sand of behavior." Jared Berns of up to six could take p thought that care would ha Tom Rau 2183 that because of suitable at tha single-family tein. 2450 Agnes may, observed that under City law assemblies people, for trumpet lessons, for example, or infant care, ace in private homes and without need for permit. He relative to that permitted number the provision of infant e little impact on the deighborhood. 671 6/2/80 Bryant, appelant, said that he and his neighbors thought physical limitations of the site infant care was not t location. There was little buffer to surrounding hones with this 'island' location. Infant care, added to other church uses, impacted the area, he said. Though the church itself could accommodate the infant care, the traffic and parking would burden the neighborhood. If the church were built today, it would require 200 parking spaces, not just the six now on the site. Mr. Rau said he and neighbors were concerned about the precedent establishment of an infant care center would set for the City. Councilc ber Brenner noted that access for one lot owned by the church Corrected was across Mr. Rau's driveway. See pg. 002 7/7/80 Mr. Rau said that the easement, if the property were sold for a church, would not be used, but it would be were the property sold to a private family. Robert VanderVeer, 2175 Bryant Street, said his group had invited Councilmibers to visit the site and to hear residents' point of view in opposition to establishment of an infant daycare center. They had signed a petition to that effect. He submitted a map showing location of neighbors near the site. He said most Councilmembers lived in quiet neighborhoods, and he asked how they would feel if they were confronted with the same possibility of daily and Sunday activities in their backyards. That was not consistent with stated goals of the Comprehensive Plan, he said. Frieda Sherman, 100 Waverley Oaks, said that though she was a liberal, she was against the daycare center being in the proposed location. Social needs should be filled within a suitable environment, she said. The site was heavily traversed with bicycle and car traffic. She said the issue WS whether or not this site was appropriate for daycare; she he'd that it was not. Stephen Saul, said he owned 349 North California Avenue, adjacent to the church parking lot. He said he and other residents had been talking to the Planning Commission for four months about traffic problems related to establishment of a daycare center. He reviewed those problems. Cars associated with the proposed daycare center would have to park on the street. Liz Rau, 2183 Bryant Street, said that this was the third attempt by the church to extend its facilities. Two permits, ene for Sunday school activities and one for church facilities at 349 California, had been issued, and neighbors had not been given a hearing on thew. Two hundred some neighbors had signed a petition against the proposed daycare use. Leonard Ely, 2161 Brant, said he would abide by Council's decision to penult the infant daycare center if it approved i t . He said the present driveway of church gr perilous l t - _ the t .�.� the church �'G �i i IVLi� 6,i.:�t';,3� � street. "ir7iVugnt the daycare center-- s avi d go in the church, = not the family residence. Valerie Saul, 349 March California, said safety for bicyclists at that location should be considered. The proposed dropoff for infants would intrude into use of a heavily trafficked bicycle lane. She did not oppose daycare, but she did oppose daycare at that site. Janet VxnderVeer, 2175 Bryant, said neighbors wanted to preserve the area for private homes. She cited Title 18, page 451, of the Palo Alto murr i c i pa1 code. She wow 1 d have preferred that the proposed home had gone for use by a refugee family. She said that 15 people in such a small house led to overcrowding. She thought it would have a significant native impact on the environment. 572 6/2/80 Frank Cristo Jr., 1716 Fulton, said he had been asked by the area residents to speak on the infant daycare issue. He noted that no one in the area had spoken to Council in favor of daycare at the proposed site. He doubted the facility would be permitted in Oreenmeadow or Crescent Park. He thought it was plecemealed spot zoning. He said several thousand children needed daycare, and he thought Council should draw up a plan for that. It was a City, and a school, problem. He asked that Council reaffirm "residential integrity." Corrected See Pg. 002 7/7/80 Alan Sherman, spoke about "lifestyle choices" Council would have to be open-minded about in order to give unprejudicial judgment on the issue. Chanriell Wasson, 423 Chaucer Street, said he had been invited to speak that evening as representative of the University/Crescent Fark Association. The same question might be before that association, he said, and he urged Council to uphold the integrity of the neighborhood through upholding zoning ordinances. John Markoff, 375 N. California Avenue, said he had lived in the church neighborhood for 30 years, and had grown up "...on the lawn of the First Baptist Church." He supported the idea of establishing a daycare center at that site. As a bicyclist, he thought the traffic would pose virtually no problem. He did not experience any inconvenience from the church's Sunday services either. Joe Eller, 365 Parkside, said he had appeared before Council about two years ago in con ection with establishment of a daycare center in Greemeadow for mentally handicapped, in that instance arguments had been much the same as these heard tonight on the daycare issue. Council had granted a one-year use permit, to be reviewed at the end of the year. Since then neighbors had come to him to say they now supported what was being done at that location. He thought it would be good if use permits could be spread throughout town. Mayor Henderson said he had been one of the initiators of the Palo Alto child care program, yet he had also been a Residentialist, and had voted to protect neighborhoods against incursion by non-residential uses. He thought that unless the City was vigilant the City would become habi ted by people who had few children, awing to rising housing costs. The childcare program could keep that from happening. He thought that about 25 car trips a day would not itr ct the neighborhood, and the daycare use was i it i ted to weekdays. On the utter of the threat of further incursions in the future, he outl 1 ned the arguments in favor of th i s location, and said he foresaw no diminution of property values elsewhere if the use were permitted. One of the Planning Commission suggested compromises that had been made MS that the number of Infant= had been reduced o 1? th u,.ht t requirement a t pare_ts _ � from i.i�, he _,.WTYSf"l!!4 �31G __. _._•si.��e-i..'�i���Tl�- rk. in the street to bring infants and pick them up was a poor one and should be reconsidered. He emphasized that there was a one -rear trial period for the daycare center, and it would be closed if the impact was too great. He thought the City had to adapt to changing times. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fletcher, that Council deny the appeal of Tom Rau and uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for approval of the use permit subject to conditions given in the Planning Commission minutes, and find that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment. 673 6/2180 Councilmember Eyerly said that Council support for child care could be seen by the amount of money it had given to its support. He noted that Miramonte had not obtained a use permit in Stonegate about one year age though it had soon thereafter, when opposition had changed to support. He did favor protecting neighborhood environment. He did think that the proposed use permit was a deterioration in part of one R-1 area, he did think a precedent was being established. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Councilmember :yerly moved that Council reverse the decision of the Planning Commission, uphold the appeal of Mr. Rau, and deny the use permit. Mayor Henderson ascertained with Roy Abrams, City Attorney, that the proposed substitute motion was in fact a negative vote and not a proper motion. The substitute motion died. Councilrmegrber Fletcher said that schools were in R-1 zones, and so the proposed infant care center was oat incompatible with the zoning. Schools gave far more impact, yet neighbors deplored their closing. She noted that the minutes of the Planning Commission recorded a 5.2 vote on the motion, with Commissioner Cobb as the maker of the motion --page 13 of the April 30 Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Schreiber pointed out that the minutes had been corrected to show that a motion on page 15 did mention that children were to be dropped off for the center en California Avenue. AMENDMENT: Counci1r ember Fletcher moved, seconded by Fenzel, that the Planning Commission requirement for dropping off children be rescinded and children be dropped off instead in the driveway area, that is, in on California, and ont on Bryant. Councilrr ber Fazzino said that as childcare liaison he had observed PACCC's work and knew that it met comity needs and that there was much emphasis on the need for infant care. Council bee Fazzino acknowledged that the neighbors' objections were not without cause. He had observed firsthand why the Raus would object to the exit proposed by the amendment. He supported the reduction to 12 children, and the traffic restrictions. He would support the Punning Commission recommendation, and not the amendment. Counci lrsember Witherspoon ascertained with Mr. Abrams, City Attorney, that Council would hold to the findings on page 26 of the Planning Commission minutes of March 26; the findings were to find whether or not the proposed center would be detrital to the public safety or convenience and if it WIC in cInformence with the Comprehensive Plan. She said that Council minutes should reflect that Council was speaking to those subjects. She pointed out that Council had had to address those subjects in relation to Miramonte also . She tho ght PACCC' s money would be better spent at another site. She reviewed the proposed amendment, and said she did not think it was a good solution. Council, ber Levy recalled Mr. Schreiber'sstatement that staff would recc end denial of the application if there were to be curbside dropoff on California. He asked which of the alternatives staff preferred. Pir. Schreiber said he had been speaking of a crescent -shaped cut -in for drop-off purposes at the California Avenue site --it was that about which staff would have recommended denial. He said he thought staff would recommend the enter -California -exit -Bryant pattern, and the next choice would be to enter one California, turn around* and exit California* and the next would be the curbside dropoff. The crescent -shaped cutout would be unacceptable. 674 6/2/80 Corrected See Pg. 002 7/7/80 Councilmember Levy said that he would support the amendment, though he was aware that children were dropped -off early in the morning, and the church acted as a noise reflector to the residence that was only seven feet away. Councilmember Renzel said that the property owner at the residence had bought the property with the knowledge that cars connected with church business would be using that driveway, and the recent purchaser on the other side of the church had also known that about the church property next to his lot. She thought the residential neighborhood was appropriate for a daycare center; the City permitted them. She thought perhaps residents' fears were greater than the actual problems. She would support the motion and the amendment. Vice Playor Sher summed up points that had been covered thus far: need for child care, the opposition of neighbors. If the permission of a child care center at the California Avenue site were to be considered spot -zoning then no child care centers would be permitted in any R-1 neighborhood for more than six children, but such permits had already been given in R-1 areas; if it were otherwise then zoning laws would have to be changed. He did not want to do that --there were 130 on the waiting list for infant care. The use permit procedure was on a case - by -case basis, and what Council decided on one case did not necessarily set a precedent for other cases. He found the Planning Commission action persuasive and he thought it appropriate to grant the permit on a trial basis for one year. He would vote for the 'reasonable compromise,' and let the child care center prove that it was a good neighbor. He would support the Planning Commission action. Councilmember Brenner said churches existed in residential areas, and she had always found permits related to churches difficult because there was so much good on both sides of the issue. She said the area had been enhanced since California Avenue had been closed off. She thought that the location of the house proposed for the daycare center was unusually well protected from its neighbors. She thought that if it was not to be used by the church it should be returned to R-1, but she thought that if some teenagers lived in the house their traffic would probably have the impact of the 12 infants being brought to the daycare center. She did not think a church facility should be limited to just a few hours' use on Sunday. She said the effect on the neighborhood would be carefully %etched in that stable and attractive neighborhood. Councilmember Levy ascertained with Lucille Gold that the infants would be from six weeks to somewhat over two years old, whenever a space coul d be found in a f :. i l i ty for children two ;years and over. M r . Sanchez, Zoning Administrator, ;agreed that people might be at the facility from 7 a.m. to 6,p.m.-_-no PACCC activities were permitted on weekends, though the church might have its own activities; there Has a waiting list of 130 children for infant daycare that had been accruing for two years -- expectant parents sometimes got on the waiting list. Palo Alto Unified Schee:el District PAUSD) did _t - c an District FTWJI�I) did ����� infant Care- because so many renovations would have to be made and also for safety reasons for the younger children_ Councilmember Levy ascertained tlh t it would cost about $16,000 not 1 ncl ud i ng equipment; without 20 children however, the $16,000 would Pot beneededsince no addition was needed but required 1andsceping and the like would keep the cost about $16,000. He continued. He said that if public health, safety and general welfare were not threatened the permit 675 6/ 2/80 should be granted, but over 200 people in that neighborhood had•said that their safety and general welfare would be threaterted,,,and so. he would vote to overturn the Planning Commission recommendations. AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment, that the requirement for dropping -off children at the driveway be rescinded, and children be instead dropped off in the driveway area, that is, in on California, and out on Bryant, passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher, Witherspoon NOES: Eyerly, Fazzino AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Henderson, that the condition limiting street parking to 15 minutes be removed. Councilmember Fletcher said she did not think that limitation was necessary; she thought the duties of parents would make their parking time very short, yet she did want to give parents the flexibility to attend an event the center might be having for some children's birthdays, or the like. Councilmember Eyerly ascertained from Ken Schreiber that the street parking could be monitored through establishment of a loading zone. AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment passed on the following vote, AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel, Sher, Witherspoon NOES: Levy MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: The main motion, that Council deny: the_. appeal of Tom Rau and uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for approval of the use permit subject to conditions given in the Planning Comission minutes„ and as amended, and find that y s and the project will not have a significant impact on the environment, passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel, Sher NOES: Eyerly, Levy, Witherspoon APPOINTMENT OF HISTORIC RESOURCES tITIITTEE (Nominations from Council Subcommittee) Mayor Henderson said he had asked Councilmember Witherspoon to chair the c i ttee to choose from candidates- for the Historic Resources Committee, with Councilmembers Fazzino, Brenner and Levy- participating, NOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon ,moved, seconded by Levy, from many very qualified candidates the Council appoint Birge M. Clark, architect, Robert A. Nerrle, architect, Elizabeth Boggs Klttas, architect, James M. Stone, resident of Professorillle, Gail C. $ooley, Palo Alto Historical Association.. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS Vice Mayor Sher said that the proposed rate increase preserved the lifeline principle by retaining the standard charge for so use of a 676 6/2/80 certain number of killowatt hours a month, with differential increases to users of higher amounts. Part of the committee's recommendation was somewhat innovative: a 10 percent increase to be granted those who have a solar facility that provides at least 50 percent of their hotwater and/or space -heating requirement. The Utility Department had suggested that, because it effected savings in natural gas; a proportional amount was to be taken off the electric bill if a pump were needed for cir- culation. MOTION: Vice Mayor Sher, on behalf of the Finance and Public Works Committee, moved the Committee's recommendation re Electric Rate increase, by unanimous vote, that Council adopt the resolution revising Electric Utility rate schedule E-1, E-2 and E-4 effective July 1, 1980, for a 13.7 percent increase in revenues; and further that Council approve a 10 percent solar energy discount for qualifying residents, and that Council approve the following resolution: RESOLUTION 5800 entitled "RESOLUTION OF.THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SCHEDULES E-1, E-2 AND E-4 OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES RATES AND CHARGES PERTAINING TO DOMESTIC, COMMERCIAL, AND STREET AND HIGHWAY LIGHTING RATES." Counci lmember Witherspoon asked that the motion be split, with a separate vote on the rate increase and another on the proposed 10 percent rate reduction for solar energy discount. FIRST PART OF MOTION PASSED: The Council approved the resolution adopting the rate increase on a unanimous vote. SECOND PART OF MOTION PASSED: The proposed 10 percent discount for res dents who had qualified solar heat installations passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher NOES: Witherspoon ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 5.20.260 TO PAP: LE Noy Abrams, City Attorney, said he had received a letter.letter.fromrJames Coke, a resident of Palo Alto, concerning ownership of ebterlalt placed at the curb. Mr. coke pointed out that sometimec nmrers wanted organizations other than the City to collect things placed curbside. Mr. Abrams asked that Council approve the addition of the following language to the ordinance: The City, its duly authorized agent, or a person expressly authorized by owner or occupant of residential property, shall have the exclusive right to collect such recyclable materials. It 0101 be unlawful and an infraction for any person except as provided herein, and in section 5.20.070." MOTION: Councilammber Fletcher introduced the following ordinance, and, seconded by Renzel, moved its adoption by Council: 077 6/2/80 r Anon drz nrrnuV . ORDINANCE 3205 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADDING SECTION 5.20.260 TO THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE COLLECTION OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS IN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO." (First reading 5/19/80) The motion passed on a unanimous vote. RE EST OF COUNCILMEMBER EYERLY TGAGE Councilm+er Eyerly said he had thought for some time that mortgage revenue bonds might provide a viable way to provide housing at a lower price because of the variation in mortgage rates; there was no cost to the City. The bond market seemed to be coming back from a collapsed state, MOTION: Councilor Eyerly shoved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council refer the feasibility of single --family residential mortgage revenue bonds to the Finance and Public Works Committee. Councilm er Levy said that mortgage revenue bonds could also be used for purchase of condominiums. Councilmember Brenner asked staff if the rortgage revenue bond question was very complicated. Ken Schreiber, Assistant Director of Planning and Community Environment, said that staff had been investigating the procedure; the Palo Alto Housing Corporation had endorsed it for inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan, and the Planning Commission, after a brief look, suggested it be in the Comprehensive Plan if public hearings were to be held. The question was not too complicated, and staff would report back to Council. Councilmember Renzel said she favored taking a look at the possibility of the bonds. She did not want the procedure, though, by adding to funds for housing, to result in having prices go up. It might be restricted to below -market -rate housing, however. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on a unanimous vote. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None ADJOURi LENT 40TI01: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Sher, that Council adjourn. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. Council adjourned at 11:50 p.m. AFFI C r