Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-05-05 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL Minutes CITY ICF PALO 4LTO Regular Meeting May 5, 1980 ITEM PAGE Approval of Minutes 6 0 4 Oral Communications Sally Siegel, 4290 Ponce Drive 6 0 5 Consent Calendar Palo Alto Housing Corporation, Regal of Contract 6 0 5 Appointment of R, Richard Roe to Human Relations Commission 6 0 5 Policy & Procedures Committee Recommends Re Selection Procedure for Mayor and Vice Mayor 6 0 6 Policy & Procedures Committee Recommends re Consideration of New Agenda Items after 11:00 P,M. 6 0 6 Policy & Procedures Committee Recommends re Study of Possible Mix of Residential/Industrial Development (Air Rights) 6 0 7 3700 El Camino Real - Appeal from ARB Decision 6 0 9 Ordinance Re Display and Sales to Minors of Drug Pa r^apherna l i a South Bay Dischargers Authority 1980-81 Administrative and Capital Budget Vice Mayor Sher Re "The Mosquito Crisis" Oral Communications jim bregg, Gb1,i Biwa rljneirMAgint 616 617 618 619 6 1 9 5/5/80 603 Regular Meeting May 5, 1980 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council - chamber at 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:39 p.m., Mayor Henderson presiding. PRESENT: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Fenzel, Sher (arrived 7:50 p.m.), Witherspoon ABSENT: Eyerly iP4WE; OF APR:. 7, 198G Councilmember Witherspoon asked that on page 542, fifth paragraph, the second sentence read instead, "All projects could have some costs of the overhead allocated to them." Councilmember Witherspoon asked that on page 552, third paragraph read instead: "Councilmember Witherspoon asked that under "...for recommenda- tions on the historical and/or architectural significance of buildings" be added to Section 16.49.040(1), on page 2 of the ordinance." Ccuncilmember Witherspoon asked that the last paragraph on page 552 read instead: "Councilmember Withersopon asked that research on commercial buildings be mandated, so that they could be added to the inventory of buildings. Councilmember Witherspoon asked that on page 553, the first paragraph read instead: "Councilmember Witherspoon said that ° ers of buildings on the list could get tax breaks if our ordinance qualified by requiring mandatory rather than this voluntary compliance with recommendations of the Historic Resources Committee." Mayor Henderson asked that on page 538, the second sentence in the fourth paragraph read instead: "The total properties being considered for purchase by the City comprise about 7 percent of the land considered..." Councilmember Renzel asked that on page 544, the seventh paragraph read instead: "Councilmember Renzel agreed that the impact of the multi- family units equal to the R-1 density for the site would be less than if the site were entire developed in R-1 but, because there was going to be an additional use of the site for a comity center, that would make the total impact hard to assess, so she old vote against the amendment." Councilor Renzel asked that on page 550, the last sentence in the reoraph l read according i� _ _ ; _ _ - -- p2= instead: "'�'�a8. measure, �e:s,vr v g�:t3 to the 0o'Cit3n, would expire when desired properties had been acquired, but with the wish for services, instead of the tax expiring the proportion of -tax could be reduced to cover only those ser�tices." Councilmember Semler asked that on page 538 the fourth sentence read instead: *She said she also was concerned about a motion that proposed selling Esther Clark Park for private purchase on the open market. MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Fletcher, that Council approve the minutes of April 7 as corrected. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote, Vice Mayor Sher and Councilmember Eyerly absent. 504 5/5/80 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Sally Siegel, 4290 Ponce Drive, said she was Santa Clara County chairman for the "No on 9" Committee. She asked that Council draw up and approve a strong resolution disapproving Proposition 9; in that way Palo Alto would again assert leadership toward maintaining a quality of life that would be threatened should the proposition pass. She asked that Palo Alto share this resolution with neighboring communities. She listed groups of Californians, such as parents of children, workers, and the like, who recognized that threat. She stated that the "No on 9" coalition throughout the state would defeat the initiative June 3. Councilmember Fazzino said that he intended to place an item on next week's agenda to introduce such a resolution. CONSENT CALENDAR Ccuncii r Levy asked that the item concerning display and sale of narcotics paraphernalia to minors be removed from `he consent calendar. Councilmember Witherspoon asked that the mateer concerning the 1980.81 budget for South Bay Dischargers Authority be removed from the consent calendar. The following item re fined: PALO ALTO HOUSING CORPORATION: t. r �. � : 234 0 ) Staff recommends that the draft amendment be approved to renew the Housing Corporation contract for one year at $42,500. AMENDMENT NO, 9 TO CONTRACT NO. 3526 LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING SERVICES Palo Alto Housing Corporation MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Fletcher, that Council approve the consent calendar., The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote, Vice Mayor Sher and Councils ber Eyerly absent. Vice Mayor Sher arrived at 7:50 p.m. APPOINTMENT OF HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSIONER f•. s.a*1G� uesda-1Krt: aeerA -ENDING 12/311 81 Mayor Henderson said all of the applicants were very well qualified, Council had a difficult time making choices of the fift.aen applicants who were on the ballot that evening. The first applicant to receive five votes would be appointed. 1st Ballot Brenner Fazzino Fletcher Henderson Levy Renzel Sher Witherspoon R. Richard Roe Frederick Chancel for R. Richard Roe Michael Kronstadt Frederick Chancellor Donna McGraw Michael Kronstadt Frederick Chancellor 2nd Ballot Brenner Fazzino Fletcher Henderson Levy Renzel Sher Witherspoon R. Richard Roe Frederick Chancellor R. Richard Roe Frederick Chancellor Frederick Chancellor R. Richard Roe R. Richard Roe Frederick Chancellor 5/5/80 605 3rd Ballot Brenner R. Richard Roe Fazzino Frederick Chancellor Fletcher R. Richard Roe Henderson R. Richard Roe Levy Frederick Chancellor Renzel R. Richard Roe Sher R. Richard Roe Witherspoon Frederick Chancellor R. Richard Roe was appointed on the third ballot, Councilrnember Eyerly absent. POLICY AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE RE FOR wrorkwriatrrimr- Councilr ember Fazzino, speaking as chairman of the Policy and Procedures Committee, noted that the City had changed the mayor/vice mayor selection procedure to open balloting. The committee had felt that rotation of the offices was more equitable, but there were too many Councilmembers to make that possible. The present system seems to be working. Most Mayors served two years which gave them opportunity to exert some effect in the office. Direct election of Mayor might have the effect of politicizing the citizens and the issues, and lead to undue emphasis on the individual and his/her views. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino, on behalf of the Policy and Procedures Committee, roved that Council approve the committee recommendation that there be no change in the present system of selection of mayor and vice mayor. Councilrr tuber Brenner said she thought that the present method of selection of mayor and vice .mayor by Councilmembers, who had been elected, gave those officers a bit more authority and perhaps more stature as well. Mayor Henderson said he agreed with Councilmeuter Renzel in observations she had made in committee about the time necessary to learn the requirements of the office. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Council tier Eyerly absent. POLICY AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS Counc later Fazzino said that Councilmembers were all familiar with the wish to co: elude their Council business by -11:00 p.m., because fatigue made clear thinking after that hour very difficult. "In that spirittheCommittee thought that no new item should be started after 11:00 p.m. without two-thirds of the :ouncil approvi;, . He said the Policy and Procedures Committee itself supported the idea of having ongoing short meetings, rather than cancellations and subsequent long stings. MOTION: Councilor Fazzino, on behalf of the Policy and Procedures Committee, roved that Council instigate a policy that would take two- thirds vote of Councilors in favor to begin a new agenda item after 11 p.m. 5/5/80 606 1 i Councilmember Witherspoon clarified that the motion intended the vote of two-thirds of Councilmembers present. She said she thought it might be a good idea for the Mayor or the City Manager to place a star by those items that Council had to act on the evening of the meeting when there were deadlines for contracts, and the like. Councilmember Renzel added that the motion, if passed, would also help the public; citizens who were waiting to speak on an item, uneer the present system, had no idea whether or not the agenda item they were interested in would be discussed or continued, and frequently they had to wait alt evening only to find out that the item would be continued. Vice Mayor Sher asked if it was contemplated that the policy would be written into the municipal code. Councilmember Fazzino said it was thought that the idea would be established as a policy, but there would be flexibility when it was applied; he did not think it would have to go into the code --another Council might want to change it. Vice Mayor Sher said that though he favored early adjournments he did not want to make that a matter requiring a two-thirds vote. At present Council could, at any time, adjourn on a majority vote. He recalled times on previous Councils when one-third of the members might have liked the maneuverability such a policy would have provided to prevent a meeting from continuing. He preferred not to lock such a policy into place; he would vote against it. Mayor Henderson said that though he too wanted meetings to move along and have earlier adjournments he did not favor the rigidity the policy stated in the motion. He also remembered some definite political maneuvering in earlier Councils. He had tried, he said, during his term as Mayor to determine, around 11 o'clock, what items Councilmembers wanted to take up. He preferred leaving the policy less rigid. Councilmember Renzel said she was beginning to be persuaded that the too -thirds vote aspect of the motion could present some difficult problems. She thought the motion should state that as a general policy new items would not be started after 11 p.m. A two-thirds vote was meaningless when a majority could vote through adjournment. Councilmember Brenner agreed it was important to let members of the public know whether or not items would be considered that evening; she preferred agreement among Councilmembers that items not on the floor by 11 o'clock would not be taken up, Councilmember F aiz!,is said -that -in view of the foregoing comments he thought it might be a good idea to include in "Policy Guidelines for Counci l Procedure" written a good number a years agothe general policy statement that Council not begin__ i t after-_ 1 1 p,m. , and eliminate the stipulation about two-thirds cote. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Levy that e Council adoptthegeneral policy statement that Council would rot begin items after 11 p,m. The substitute motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember Eyerly absent. POLICY AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE MIX AIR RIGHT Councilmember Fazzino said the Policy and Procedures Committee met recently with representatives of the Santa Clara County Manufacturing Group to discuss the possibility of a residential/industrial mix, 5/5/80 6O7 particularly with respect to the idea of housing built over parking lots. Some had found the newness of the idea amusing, but a tour of possible sites demonstrated that it was worthwhile to let the Planning Commission determine what problems might underlie such a mix. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino, on behalf of the Policy 'nd Procedures Committee, moved that Council request that the Planning ,'ou nission discuss, during the discussion of the Comprehensive Plan, the problems that might underlie development of residential/industrial mix. Councilor Witherspoon said she thought it likely that residential/ industrial ,nix would cause many problems, and also she did not think at present that she wanted density to be increased to that extent. She . would vote against the motion. Cauncl1member Brenner said it was agreed that every parking lot was not v suitable location for housing, but there were some; about 400 square feet were needed for one parking space, which, if three stories, would provide about 1200 square feet --enough living space for one family. Some of the parking lot sites were beautifully located, and the proposed mix was one way to get affordable housing close to employment. Employment ;as increasing, though she hoped it would slow soon. She did not want to eliminate landscaped areas. Parking spaces could go underground. She asked if it was possible that housing with nigher than R-1 density could be constructed in the industrial zone without any change in the zoning ordinance. Ken Schreiber, Assistant Director of Planning and Community Environn€nt, said that housing could be developed on a vacant site, or on sites not now developed to their capacity, and the zoning ordinance would not have to be craned to do that; the process would include Architectural Review Board (ARB) review of the plans. While Stanford had never said it was against the idea, he thought that Stanford might be more receptive now than it had been several years back. Councilmember Levy said that the motion was a proposal for studying what had to be done in order to accomplish the goat of residential/industrial mix Council was trying to find out what underlay the concept, and would have to assess separately specific locations and projects. Councitss ber Brenner said she thought Council now had such a policy and had found that the policy was not quite as fler.ble as was needed --there was a limitation as to how much floor area ratio could be developed at a given site, and if industry had built up the ratio completely a zone change increasing that ratio would be required. Mt. Schreiber said that Cooncilmember Brenner was correct; a nsde it' was restricted by permissible door area, from 17 to 20 per acre.,.. Councilmember Levy said that the findings of the Planning Commission would help Council to know how much it wanes to encourage residential/industrial mix. MOTION PASSED: The motion that Council request the Planning Commission to discuss, along with its discussions of the Comprehensive Plan, problems that might underlie development of residential/industr;al mix, particularly as they related to parking lots, passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher NOES: Witherspoon ABSENT: Eyerly 5/5/80 6©8 3700 EL CAMINO REAL wrxr-runanismsiON rrrignMOMMTUnTariS 7RIMAKERCIAL AREA -X35:0) Mayor Henderson asked if Council was to speak to the impact of the design of the building itself. Roy Abrams, City Attorney, said that Council would give a design review. Some standards for review might be for Council to consider compatibility of the design with the iraediate environment; appropriateness of the design to the assumptions of the project, whether or not access and circulation to and on the property were safe and convenient for wheel and foot traffic, and so on. Council er Renzel ascertained that the subject property had been rezoned from commercial to neighborhood commercial in 1978. Service commercial had been a more intense use designation, such as automobile repair. Height limit with C-3 had been higher. She asked how much more office space could be built with the neighborhood commercial zoning than would be built with the proposed plan. Ken Schreiber, Director of Planning and Community Environment, said the neighborhood comrercial zone had a floor area ratio of 1.0, so that as much floor area could to built as there was site coverage --up to 15,778 square feet of co rercial or office space. Councilmember Brenner asked haw wide Barron Avenue was, and how close to the lot line the building across the street was, as well as the small building on the corner --she was concerned about parking capabilities of the contiguous streets at that corner. Mr. Schreiber replied that he thought Barron Avenue was narrower than a standard street --maybe about 26 feet wide. He would let the applicant or the applicant's architect say whether or not the proposed sidewalk would be within or without the property line. Mr. Schreiber said the parking spaces for the commercial uses were being completely developed on the site. Councilor Brenner said that it was not desirable for employees to park in the adjacent neighborhoods. Were some of the spaces being put into deferred parking? Mr. Schreiber said that as best as he could recall the five spaces would have been part of the deferred parking. Vice Mayor Sir said he understood thaa : the appeal_ centered around . the scale i the building and the over --utilization of the site. Were those matters within the jurisdiction of the Council? Mr. Abrades replied that they were; scale of the building and col pa t i b i l i ty of the design with the site was another factor to be considered by Council. Council_ could state conditions under which the developer could attain what the City desired, or Council could approve the project as is, or deny the application altogether. Mr. Schreiber said he had re -read the specifications of the proposal: parking under the facility gave 24 parking spaces and the eight residential units required 16 spaces. Office space was to be 3000 square '`Pet and the zoning requirement was for one parking space for each 250 square feet of office space, which require 13 spaces, that is, five in addition to the eight existing --the five in deferred parking totaled 13 spaces. S/5/80 609 Councilmember Levy asked Mr. Schreiber to read uses approved under the commercial neighborhood zone. Mr. Schreiber read: single family, two-family, multiple -family; lodging, daycare centers; medical, professional and general business offices, personal and retail services (except liquor stores), eating and drinking services (except drive-ins and take-out), animal care excluding boarding and kennels. Helen McStravick, 562 Military Way, said she was concerned about the impact of parking on the entire area. El Camino would not accommodate additional parking; she listed the businesses whose customers used all available parking. She said it would be an injustice for space in front of residences to be taken up for parking. She wanted the area to bo kept "...civilized and peaceful." Bob Cool, 520 Barron Avenue, said he opposed the proposed development and had filed the appeal. He objected to the process that determined the use of the site. He said Barron Park residents had made clear that they wanted to be included in the planning process on developments that redefined their neighborhood. Commercial neighborhood zones had been so designated with the intent that they create neighborhood shopping areas of moderate size to serve the immediate neighborhood, and he and his neighbors had expected that kind of development, and so no notice of the proposed development had been given: the developer, Mr. Cool said, ...seized the opportunity and submitted plans for a rather large condominium project with only ARB approval required." Only because ARB had found the plan inappropriate and over -scale had the neighbors had a chance ...to intercede with our feelings as to an extremely impacted project," and the neighbors had been notified, and, at their urging, met with the developer who promised to show them any new plans when they were ready to be submitted to the City. The developer had not honored that commitment. Only changes demanded by the ARB, and not changes discussed by the neighbors, had been made. Neighbors had been notified only six days before the ARB meeting that had been scheduled during the school Easter break, of the meeting. Mr. Cool said he had phoned the developer who had said he would show him his plans, but the developer's associates said that no changes would be made regarding the neighbors' views. Neighbors had favored developing the site, and a proposal by the developer that was sensitive to neighbors' requests would have gotten their approval, Mr. Cool said. The developer had promised to show neighbors the plans, but had failed to do so. Mr. Cool said three storeys in height was over -scale for the neighborhood. Mr. Cool :aid notice for the meeting was so short neighbors had only one working day to prepare for the meeting, but neighbors still sought compromise, and Mr_ Cool said they asked the Council to consider a scaled -down version �� r nr. for similar i�� development o• tie J fL•i a ;� i..•� ..�. dc'�€� on the site. Tom David, 3725 LaSelva, said his house was directly behind the proposed development that he thought would set a precedent for future development along El Camino. He showed slides that he said demonstrated over -use of the site; the height, 35 feet, spas three and one-half storeys, areas existing structures were two storeys. He noted that the height affected privacy of the existing residents .. He said the parking would have a definite adverse effect, where there was already a chronic parking problem. Bob Hershel, 3765 LaSelva, agreed with Mr. David's statements. He praised the design of the proposed development, and said it would be ideal if it were scaled dog --eight units and two commercial units would exacerbate the already present traffic problem. 5/5/80 ILO Patti Hershel, 990 Ticonderoga, Sunnyvale, said she was concerned with the parking and where children would play. She agreed with earlier speakers. Barbara Homsy, 3760 LaSelva, noted that if the plan went through the parking now in front of Berman's auto shop would be landscaped and that parking would not be available; she noted the hazards for school children who crossed El Camino. She did not like three storeys in height. Councilmember Fletcher asked if children crossed E1 Camino with no traffic light. Ms. Homsy said that there was a traffic sign in front of the catering shop, then school children crossed the street to walk along side of LaTerrasse restaurant and the alleyway that would exit behind it, and underground parking would add to the hazard. Gary Cole, 548 Barron Avenue, emphasized that three storeys' height would dominate the present area. George Homsy, 3760 LaSelva, amplified on the nature of the traffic circulation, and also spoke on ARB's findir . of "No negative environmental impact." He said that contrary to the ARB's findings he thought the proposed development would alter the density of the present area. He showed slides to pictorialize that there would be hazards to bicyclists and pedestrians, and that vehicular traffic would be disturbed. He had reflected on the value of the environmental impact report:, he said, and he thought that that value arose because it had become known that the "...environment has limited ability to accommodate and accept the demands we place upon it." He thought the proposed develnpment stretched its environment to its limits. Jeff Wachtel, 3685 Whitsell, said he had lived in the area since 1954. He said growth in that time along El Camino had been rather haphazard. That kind of planning would be repeated with tais over -scale development. He said the corner from Barron to ElCamino was a blind corner and the alleyway used by the proposed development would increase the hazards, and he would quite concerned since his son used that foot route. He had experienced loss of privacy while living at another address on Magnolia Avenue and the county had permitted an apartnent house to be built nearby. He urged caution when working within the conditions permitted by the commercial neighborhood zone. Anne Seeley, 516 Barron Avenue, said she agreed with what her neighbors said, and emphasized that the parking and traffic problem would be worsened. ���� Devid 3725 LaSeiv-, noted loss of privacy, parking problems and -- -.- grew M _ TWl T.f.Q " noise during evening business hours that impinged on neighbors' lives. She thought the ARB should ensure that new development be sensitive to the e i s ti ng surrounding neighborhood, as it had been enjoined to be in section 16.48 of the Palo Alto Building Code. She said that .the separation of only 30 feet froA single-family residential was not "...a harmonious transition" as rewired by the code. Neighbors would seek compromises that were acceptable, and the ARB should keep in mind :*ten problems. Judith K. Larsen, 3790 LaSelva, agreed with earlier speakers. She was concerned about the scale of the building and additional traffic jeopar- dizing the safety of school children. Also, there was no playground left in the area and that would force children to play in the street. 5/5/80 611 Wendy Earl, 3745 LaSelva Drive, agreed with what her neighbors had said. She said her house was on the property line between her and the applicant's property. The alley was heavily used. She and others had asked that alley parking be deleted, She asked that the dumpster be moved to the southwest corner of the lot, away from her house. She objected to the proposed three stories, and loss of privacy. John Miller, 3735 Cass Way, agreed ;wholeheartedly with the foregoing speakers. He said Barron Avenue was heavily used by school children. He thought access to the proposed project should be from El Camino Avenue, even though it required scaling down of the proposed project or redesign of El Camino itself. Joyce Anderson, 3881 Magnolia Drive, said that on page 98 of the zoning ordinance the maximum floor area permitted in commercial neighborhood would be 2500 square feet, if more than one entrance, and 5000 square feet if there were one entrance only. She said she thought the AR8 was unwilling to postpone in order to hear neighbors' input. She cited bonsistency and compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan, and access to the property and circulation of cycle and vehicular traffic, and pedestrians. She thought the project violated the Comprehensive Plan regarding reduction of traffic. She said that meeting zoning requirements did not ensure good planning, as shown by the Glass Slipper and other 'monstrosities.' She said the curb cut for the project would bring the total in that block to five. She did not want to apply bandaids after the project was built. Gretchen Leland, 3700 Laguna, said that though the landscape and design were good she still thought the project was too massive for the neighbor- hood. She thought Barron Avenue and El Camino was a dangerous intersec- tion and she tried not to use it. She said she did not know how density of 22 per acre was being permitted. She read a letter from Mrs. Thomas Hamilton of 819 LaJennifer Drive, objecting to increased traffic; a letter from Mrs. Emil Wachtel, 3862 Magnolia, noted the increased traffic and disturbed traffic problems; a letter from Clara Shapless was given to the City Clerk for later perusal by Councilmembers. Sam Sparck, 4099 Laguna, said he was chairman of the Barron Park Associa- tion, 13 of whose meters had approved his statement: supporting residents' appeal to reduce the scale of the proposed development, and its potential impingement on the neighborhood. He cited passages from the Comprehensive Plan validating those requests by neighbors, regarding height and parking. Mary Henshel, 3775 LaSelva Drive, said she had lived in Barron Park since 1925. She thought the proposed project would, if permitted, violate Palo Alto's promise that it would help Barron Park retain its iulet and rural atmosphere. Morgan Seeley, 516 Barron Avenue, said those who appeared to speak that evening represented both themselves and also the future residents of the development. He praised the design of the project but said it was out of scale with the area. He emphasized that more was at stake than just meting the minim requirements of the zoning ordinance. He asked that at least one story be removed from the proposed building, City try to help the area with its existing that the traffic problems. Jane Grubgeld, 3746 LaCaile, said no one had mentioned the utility prole that posed a hazard to motorists. She said that the German body shop extended five feet farther into the street than it should, and the utility pole was five feet further. She would like the City Engineer to look at the area and see if the utility pole could not be moved. 5/5/80 612 John Northway, said he was architect and representative for the applicant. He said the project had come before the Architectural Review Board in November% Neighbors and the ARB had had concerns about traffic and lack of on -site parking. The ARB had continued the matter and shortly thereafter Mr. Northway said his had been one of three firms interviewed by the applicant and his firm had been selected to do the project. He said the site was not being developed to its capacity; he thought the project aright have the disadvantage of being the first combination of office and residential to be built in the commercial neighborhood (CN) zone, a circumstance that Ied to its being closely scrutinized. He detailed the various combinations of use of space the lot dimensions and zoning permitted, and said that eleven residential units could be built, but only eight were being proposed. He explained the rationale that led to decisions regarding setbacks, height, and site coverage. He emphasized that the underground garage drive was planned exactly to code. In response to a question from Councilmember Fletcher, Mr. Northway said that people residing in the proposed development could view the nearby residences if threy walked to the edge of the balconies. The units in the project did not open on El Camino, and closets built on the interior had been insulated and designed to soften the noise impact of the traffic; occupants would instead view the foothills because railings and the like were designed to screen out nearby R-1. Vice Mayor= Sher asked if studio units could be planned. Mr. Northway replied that the developer wanted to have at least two - bedroom two -bath units. He gave difficulties that would be encountered if the nunber and size of units were reduced. Ken Arutunian, landscape architect, gave details of area coverage and placement of plantings. In response to a question by Councilmember Witherspoon, about screening between the development and the R-1, Mr. Arutunian said Canary Island pines were planned because they grew quit tall. Five or six were planned. He pointed out that there would be about 50 feet from the second storey units to the R-1 property. Mr. 1' orthway said he had not agreed with ARB's requirement that five parking spaces be placed in planted reserve; he had wanted to provide them for overflow parking should one of the occupants need theta for parking a social gathering. He did not think it would be possible to keep the in reserve very long, but they could be put back in reserve at any time. Philip Vogt, Chairman of. the Architectural Review Board, said the ARB thought the developer had done a cod lob in wor�kina nsjt transition tw o ` R-1 at the rear of the property-�-he t tight. it web executed project for a mix of residential and commercial; he added that traffic was a concern, but traffic was a fact of life. Councilmember evy ascertained with W. Northway that though the 35 -foot high roof could be loaned to about 31 .feet by constructing a -fiat rather than peaked roof, the befits of a clerestory for the unit would be lost and the visual effect would not be much improved. Councilmember Levy I: cer a i n that two parking spaces per unit were required by the zoning ordinance. The office space would probably be rented to engineers and the like. Me. Northway said that he wanted to clarify that only one meeting on March 29 had been held* a sine went meeting that had been scheduled had been changed sine the City staff had reviewed all the plans. 5/5/80 613 Councilmember Levy ascertained that there would be the full number of thirteen parking spaces for commercial as required by the zoning ordinance, though Mr. Schreiber preferred keeping five of the thirteen spaces in landscaped reserve. The commercial parking spaces would not be available to residential tenants, since it was planned to have a security gate for the commercial; during the day, since most residents would be gone, most of the parking would be available to commercial. The facility did not provide guest parking. Councilmernber Brenner ascertained with Ken Schreiber that it was not known who owned the alleyway —research showed that in the early 1.900s the alleyway had been offered to the county, but there is no record of the county having accepted. To do the legal research would be a lengthy and expensive process. If the county had in fact not accepted the alleyway the title still rested with the heirs of whomever offered it to the county. Councilor Brenner said she had walked on the property, and she thought there should be some way of improving the alleyway. IIow could the dusters be removed from the alleyway? Roy Abrams, City Attorney, said that regardless of whether the property was public or private the City was entitled to control uses. Councslr tuber Brenner asked if the City could assess adjoining properties for improvements to the alley? It was too narrow and needed some resurfacing. Mr. Abrams said a title search would have to be made to levy assessments. If it was public property assessments could be ;made for its maintenance or City general funds would pay. If the property were private the City could not create an assessment district. Counci l rsenber Brenner asked if the City would not do the work if a title search were to be as expensive as the improvements; perhaps the developer could be assessed for the improvements. Mr. Abrams said a title search was fairly inexpensive. Councilor Brenner said she thought that shortage of parking seemed to be the symptom of overuse of property. She thought it was unfair to expect neighbors to have to provide street parking; she pointed out that if visitors were entering an unimproved alley they might be confused, since they were going to a new building. Mow should steps toward improving that alley be taken? Mayor Henderson noted that problems concerning the turnaround, Barron Avenue and the access were points that had to be address- Council r Brenner said that the alley affected neighbors' access; the five reserve parking spaces could get in the way of that access. She said she thought th 1 n. of t nr�o ect was attr tivA and ingenious; r -.-/'• ,P'• ry�.a ti was Gi 46/ Oi{r /'�'�L' 11i�}�ii ill .�.�! j lowering the roof might create a visual #lluslon of awkward bulk. She liked the idea of the combination o€ commercial and housing that was suited for the CM zoning, though housing was needed more. The street system in that area was not designed for dense vehicular useandthat placed x burden th w.e$rslr b rl.•,.od t f - mca l ury mere placed before r...��s � rte. u�r on w..:s. fro/y/wav/ 7/W6Ao 111 tT Y theta that could be amended she would consider goingalong with the project. 5/5/80 614 MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Fletcher, that Council find that the project will not have a significant environmental effect and that the decision of the ARB to approve the project be upheld, with four conditions (as listed in CMR:235:0), with the first condition to read instead: 1) a revised landscap'► plan be submitted with the five reserve parking spaces constructed and the alleyway improved, as described by Mr. Northway; 2) a relocated trash container, if PASCO accepts another location; 3) the driveway along El Camino should be to the satisfaction of CaiTrans; 4) the sidewalk along Barron Avenue should be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Vice Mayor Sher said he thought the combination of commercial and resi- dential would be commonplace in the future; he praised the design of the project for what the lot size accommodated, but he tended to agree with the neighbors that it resulted in over -utilization. He thought that eliminating the third floor would ameliorate bulkiness, threats to privacy, and also less traffic would be generated. AME i 'IENT: Vice Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Brenner, that, for a fifth condition, the project should be redesigned without the third storey and returned to ARB for review and approval. Councilmember Witherspoon said she thought the design of the building was good; many large trees in the area made the height less dominating, Councilmember ember Renzel said she was sympathetic with many of the concerns that had been expressed about the denseness of the project, yet, in view of the amount of commercial the developer was permitted under the CN zoning she did not want to diminish any of the housing the developer had included. She said she thought the height, since the topmost portion of the project was so far from the neighbors, was less objectionable than the same height now permitted in R-1, which was much closer to neighbors. She thought it would be best to put the five reserve parking spaces into active use to keep visitor parking off adjacent streets. She did not favor the amendment because she feared that the residential use might be driven out altogether: Councilmember Fletcher said she did not think privacy would be threatened because the angle of the view from the third storey made it difficult to see into the neighbors` yards --there was a 50 -foot setback at that level. Councilmember Levy agreed that the distance from neighbors' yards would keep them private. He thought the landscaping and design of the project would enhance that block on El Camino. He would vote against the amendment to eliminate the third storey. COtit s meMb=1 F64444! "-Aid he thought the project was well thought out. He feared that legal alternatives to the commercial/residential use might bring about worse traffic proHems. The general traffic in that area Was bads and it might be wise to have the Director of Traffic report on that general problem. Mayor Henderson recalled that in the past Council had rejected a project, then something worse had developed later. Annther use such as a restaurant or high use commercial could aggravate the traffic conditions more. He thought the project was quite innovative for the zoning. AMENDMENT FAILED: The amendment that the project be redesigned without the third storey failed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Sher NOES: Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Witherspoon ABSENT: Eyerly Corrected See P4. 66 6/2/80 '5/5/80 615 Councilmember Brenner said she was concerned about the alleyway; she did not want its unimproved condition to confuse visitors to the residential or cornercial in the project. Mr. Northway said that costs of improving the alleyway had been figured into costs of the project. Mayor Henderson said that in the main motion would be included the recommendation that the five reserved parking spaces be made active parking spaces, and the statement about the alleyway being unproved by either the City or the developer, as indicated from ownership title to be disclosed through title search. Councilmember Renzel said she thought neighbors had brought in a number of problems about traffic circulation in the neighborhood and the City should be looking at them. She added that the zoning ordinance and the CN zone itself might need some revision to relate to the scale of the project relative to the systems. She thought the project offered much to the City; its design would screen some of the noise from El Camino for the neighbors --a straight commercial project would be likely to impact the neighborhood more. She said that the landscaping at the corner would give a green effect to El Camino and create an attractive entryway to Barron Park. She would support the vain motion. MAIN MOTION PASSED: The main motion, that Council find that the project will not have a significant environmental effect and that the decision of the ARB to approve the project be upheld, with four conditions (as listed in CMR:235:O), and that the five reserve parking spaces be mede active parking spaces, and the alleyway to be improved by either the City or developer, according to findings of a title search, passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember Eyerly absent. City Manager Zaner noted that it was now 11 p.m., and Council had said it would have to agree whether or not to introduce any further items after that hour. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Brenner, that Council continue with the agenda and complete the three items remaining. The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember Eyerly absent. ORDINANCE RE DISPLAY AND SALES iirtrmitr-anmormom—�---- .F. iii 0R:213:0) pouncilmember Levy asked if the state had any legislation on this matter. _William 7ae ner .. [i t.. ms=....r, tT�ei ris �..- M-rJ .aK 3 V L.. rr� J2 J J 5U iii,e, kipu end he did not know i e Council s Levy said that though Council had wanted to make a statement about the matter he thought it would be wise to wait until adjournment of the current state session on June 30 to see whether or not the state mould_ act. _He thought that if the City's ordinance were to be superseded by a state law there would be extra costs: MOTION 10 TABLE: Cou ci i r Levy moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that Cuuncil table the second reading of the ordinance forbidding display and sale of drug paraphernalia to minors until Council's first meeting In July. The motion to table failed on the following vote: i i 1 AYES: Fletcher, Levy, Fenzel, Witherspoon NOES: Brenner, Fazzino, Henderson, Sher ABSENT: Eyerly Councilmember Fazzino said he thought Council should stay with its Corrected policy statement of two weeks ago. He thought it more important to work See Pp. 668 on education about drugs, particularly in schools, rather than on 6/2/80 enforcement. MOTION: Mayor Henderson introduced the following ordinance for second reading and, seconded by Fazzino, moved its adoption by Council: ORDINANCE 3199 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COMM OF Tr. CITY OF PALO ALTO ADDING CHAPTER 9.57 TO THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE DISPLAY AND SALES OF NARCOTICS PARAPHERNALIA TO MINORS.' (First reading 4/21/80) Councilmember Fletcher said Council had agreed in an earlier discussion that there was no problem at the present. She preferred that the second reading be put off, until a problem aro$e or until similar ordinances in other communities were held to be valid. She would not favor the ,notion. Alan Adler, 752 LaPara, said he spoke as chairman of the community action subcommittee for Parents Who Care, made up of about 500 Palo Alto parents. He said he did not think the group had any objection to tabling the ordinance to see if the state passed an ordinance; if that did not take place he thought it would be good for the City to enact an ordinance: paraphernalia tended to glamorize the use of narcotics. Mayor Henderson said that he thought the ordinance *could cause little or no trouble even if the state did pass an ordinance. He favored passing the ordinance. MOTION PASSED: The motion approving the second reading and adopting the drug paraphernalia ordinance passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher NOES: Fletcher ABSTAIN: Witherspoon ABSENT: Eyeriy- SOUTH BAY DISCHAREERS AUTHORITY AL BURET (CMR : 237:0) MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Henderson, that it _ to adopted by Council: RESOLUTION 5791 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE t `G:,, ,`a 07 'e`` yz Ci:TV OF PALO ALTO AiPKOV It46 THE 1980-81 ADMINISTRATIVE AND CAPITAL BUDGETS FOR THE SOUTH BAY DISCHARGERS AUTHORITY." Councilmember Witherspoon said she had removed this matter from the consent calendar because she wanted to know if, as she had heard, the South Bay Dischargers Authority was going out of business, and also to find out how much of the proposed amount Palo Alto would have to pay. 6/S/80 6 I 7 Mayor Henderson replied that the Authority was planning to become inactive and was working toward that until the San Jose sewage spill of a few months ago. The Regional Water Quality Control Board was not in a position to say that the pipeline would never be needed. South Bay Dischargers had recommended against the pipeline, as had the Environmental Protection Agency and some other state agencies. Some monitoring of the bay would be required for about five years to ascertain that conditions stayed favorable and that the proposed pipeline would not be needed. That decision had not yet been made. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilrnember Eyerly absent. VICE MAYOR SHER RE "'trS S °' Vice Mayor Sher said he had asked the City Manager for more information about the mosquito control problem, and also, he had learned that the head of the Mosquito Abatement District in Alameda County had said he had received 400 complaints in the first 24 days of April. Mosquitos had caused some serious problems in the Central Valley as well, and the state legislature was looking into ways to provide funds for mosquito abatement; the state required that users of chemicals for mosquito abatement had to be licensed by the state. The County of Santa Clara would like help from cities in spraying catch basins and also for some more information to be made available on ways citizens can cut down on mosquito breeding on their own properties. Vice Mayor Sher said he hoped one Public Works staff person could participate in the training offered by the county on the spraying of catch basins, MOTION: Vice Mayor Sher roved, seconded by Fletcher, that the City Council 1) request the City Manager to make a staff person available to assist the county in its catch basin spraying program in Palo Alto and 2) regi:est the City Manager to communicate with Mountain View, Los Altos, Sunnyvale, and perhaps other neighboring communities, to see if they would also be able to participate in the program and in the training session that the county has said it can provide; 3) request the City Manager to institute an educational program, by means of the utility wailer or otherwise, to inform Palo Alto residents about preventive steps they can take to eliminate mosquito breeding planes; 4) also educate the public about how it can eliminate mosquito larvae, for example, by the use of mosquito fish in fish ponds, and 5) go on record as supporting 58382 and authorize the Mayor to send a letter to our legislators advising them of our support. Councilr ber Witherspoon said that information in the utility mailer 4Ni/� 1. be AA�.,y.,.$.y �. late, i w but w 1 � - _ ,.�...id .. a ���ti oate, but it was a good idea for next year at this time. Count,l r Rend said that mosquito sprays killed mosquitos, but also killed predators of mosquitos, such as dragonflies; she hoped the spray selected for the purpose would make those distinctions. Sprays on the `approved" list, she thought, meant only that they did not contain DOT. She favored a fro drops of oil on puddles of still water --thy oil prevented oxygen from reaching the larvae. Couhcilmember Brenner said she found it ironic that the efficient Mosquito Abatement District had been discontinued some years back, and the City had to go through this complicated reactivating process. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember Eyerly absent. 5/5/80 618 1 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Jim Gregg, 2513 Alma, spoke of his attendannce at Cour?ci1 meetings, ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned at 11:30 p.m. APPROVE: Mayor 5/5/80 619