Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-09-16 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MINUT€s CITY of PALO ALTO SPECIAL MEETING Tuesday, September 16, 1980 - 7:30 p. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date at 7:40 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Mayor Henderson presiding, in a Special Meeting to consider revisions to the Comprehensive Plan, PRESENT: Brenner (arrived 8:10 p.m.), Eyerly, Fletche►~, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher (arrived 7:45 p.m.), Witherspoon ABSENT: Fazzino PI 'LNG COMMISSION RECOMMENDS RE COMPR!kEES I'Vt PLAN Mayor Henderson said that the Planning Commission held twenty meetings prior to making its recommendations regardin=g revisions to the Comprehensive Plan. He commended the Planning commission and staff members for their efforts. He requested that both the Council and the public move rapidly and confine their comments to specific programs and policies. He said he would ask for public input first on all parts of the Plan, including the sections regarding the Land Use Plan Map. After the public input, Council will go through the Plan, using as a guide for discussion the list of items Councilra bers have submitted for discussion. He recognized the members of the Planning Commission who were present --Mr. Nichols, Ms. Ci 1len, Ms, McCown-Hawkes and Mr. Cobb -- and said he welcomed their comments at any time. Fred Nichols, Planning Commission Chairman, said a major portion of the work involved updating statistics, clarifying and updating existing policies and programs. They made no changes in the structure from the 1976 document. The five major proposa l s have not changed. The bu l k of the changes ref l ec t two basic issues --the problems relating to the jobs/housing imbalance and the problems relating to preserving the quality of life in Palo Alto; whit are the limits of growth beyond which the quality mains to diminish. The problems relating to the jobs/housing imbalance are more tangible and there were numerous meetings on that subject. There was emphasis on industrial land as sites for horsing, suggestions for requires transportation plans for new/expanded developments, suggested changes for land use to provide multiple family housing oar vacant industrial/c ercial land, and psis on reduced dependeney on the alto.. Manly ohms reflect that Palo Alto is nearing its limit for growth. Projections do not differ significantly from those in 1976. Another item of co mcern was the issue of closure of schools. Changes re flect the Commission's feeling that school sites represent very important park and recreational facilities for neighborhoods, as well as potential sites for housing and other uses. He commended the staff for their help and hard work. Ken Schreiber, Assistant Planning Director, noted that copies of the Draft Updated Comerehsnsive Plan were avariable that evening for ors of the public, along with staff reports relating to land use changes and the ovirommeetet assessmee He exptalroed the format used in presenting the recommeaded chance. of the text of the Plan has been retyped, and that material is incl in the document as well as the marked -Op copy of the Plan. For example, pages 3A through 3J, the Housing Section, have the same text as found on pages 4 through 13A. The same approach has been used for other sections. Environmental Resources has not been retyped as additions and revisions are not extensive; the marked -up text is easier to follow. Staff has suggested that Council work with the retyped pages rather than the marked -up pages. Mr. Schreiber reviewed the information that has been distributed to Council --a September 2 letter from Stanford University regarding the recomnende Plan change on Welch Road, a September 9 letter from June Schiller regarding the recommended change on Alma, a September 8 letter from Rose Bernett also regarding the change on Alma, a petition from individuals living in the area along Alma opposing the recommended change, a letter dated September 16 from Mike Golick regarding a recommended change in the California Avenue Area, and a September 16 letter from Mrs. Marcus Stedman. In the packet of last week, Council received a report from Planning Commission Chairman Nichols relating to trees. Mr, Schreiber noted that under the Municipal Code, changes to Planning Commission recommendations made by Council must be referred back to the Planning Commission for review and comment. The Code provides that there be a forty day period after the initial Council review when all changes go back to the Commission. After Council review, changes will go back to the Commission and comments on those changes will cote back to Council, probably in late October, early November. Mayor Henderson asked what would happen if the Plan cores buck to Council from the Commission and Council makes more charges. Mr. Schreiber replied that if new items are raised, those items would have to go back to the Planning Commission. Mayor Henderson welcomed Planning Commissioner Wheeler to the meeting. Vice Mayor Sher said he assumed that if the Council decided not to follow a recommendation of the Commission for a charge in the Plan, that would not have to be reviewed again; it would only be necessary if the Council proposed additional recommendations. Don Maynor, Senior Assistant City Attorney, said that if Council doesn't accept a recommendation, that is a change and it would have to go back to the Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission came back with the same recommendation and Council again chose not to adopt it, it wouldn't have to go back to the Commission again. Mayor Henderson said he would now call on rimers of the public and reminded them that counts should be limited to five minutes per person. Mrs. Marcus Stedman, 2280 Byron Street, said she had two requests concerning the proposed new land use designations for the property bed Park Blvd. and the SP right-of-way. She did not feel the entire area was appropriate for multiple family residential use. She felt it was particularly in- appropriate for the small lot at the corner of Sherman Avenue and Park Blvd. That land was bought by her late husband nearly 30 years ago. He passed away a few months ago and the property will have to be sold to pay the death taxes. She said she was concerned as to who would buy it. She sub- mitted a letter dated September 16 to the Council for the record. David Midlo, 420 .des Road, said he was a retail merchant at 320 University Avenue. Regarding Urban Design, he said he felt the wording regarding retail vitality should be strengthened as far as the conversion of retail storefronts to office space. Expansion is not up, but laterally. On page 35A; the last paragraph, he expressed concern about the statement "Parking garages mist be sacrificed." Mike Golick, 366 California Avenue, said that as ae ownerof an office building at 2555 Park Boulevards he would like to file a protest to the recommendations dations of the Planning Commission regarding the proposed land use cap changes of the California Avenue/Park boulevard aroma from Casty 190 9I16/1O Commercial to Multiple Family Residential. If the property were downzoned to residential, it would lose its highest and best use. He read his letter to the Council, dated September 16, 1980, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerk's office. Sally Supplee, 291 Leland Avenue, said she wanted to address the proposed change number 1 for the Comprehensive Plan Lard Use Map, specifically Exhibit 1, and the recommended rezoning of the area bounded by California Avenue and Park Boulevard to multiple family residential. She said she lives in an area called Evergreen Park and she was very concerned that the rezoning would result in increased traffic and parking problems in her neighborhood. She urged Council to retain the current zoning. Corinne Powell, 302 College Avenue, said she wanted to comment on traffic in general in Palo ,alto. She felt that the Plan did not speak strongly enough to eliminating through traffic in Palo Alto. She also opposed the rezoning in the Cvergreee Park area. She supported any recommendations to require employee transportation in any new development or expansion. June Schiller, 863 Garland Drive, spoke to the proposed change on Alma Street between Kingsley and Coleridge. Because of the intense need to provide rental housing in Palo Alto, she urged the Council to support the proposed multifamily land use and RM2 zoning. Bill Blake, 316 Oxford Avenue, opposed the recommended change to multi- family in the Evergreen Park area, and urged Council to retain the current residential/commercial zoning. He felt that 80 units/acre was too dense. Mayor Henderson said he would like to clarify that he knew of no zoning in Palo Alto that allowed 80 units per acre; he felt the maximum was 45. He felt that the present zoning would allow 50 foot high office building structures. Ken Schreiber said that the community/commercial district allows a housing density of 45 units per acre. It has the highest allowed housing density in the City. Vice Mayor Sher said he felt there was some confusion about what the effect of the zone change would be. Under the commercial zone, the option is with the property owner. If the zoning change is made to residential, then only housing would be allowed. If the property owner chooses, under the present zoning, to put up all housing, there will be exactly the same effect as if the zoning only allowed housing. He said there wouldn't be any increase in density if the zone were changed. The only change is that the property owner would not have an option to do all commercial or a mix of commercial. Councilor Fletcher asked that if Council approves the recommendation to rezooe the eras to multiple famaily, would the Planning omission then make recommendations regarding density in that rezoned area? Mr. Schreiber. said that was correct. Miphtali Knox, Director of Plewningt said that the present land use designation in the Flom albs: both comeercial and multi -family. It does not set the densities for multi -family. The zoning, which is based ore the land use designation, does set the density. If the champ which 1s sty in Exhibit l is carried out, the opportunity for building any ,commercial office or ratai1 is:rid and the apportunity is added for mittsignation of the i M#pl a falsity housing into one of the five zones -- RW1 to MReS. Those zones have a density range of 10-45 units per acre. Mayor Henderson said he felt that point was important. lledesignatlofl as sultiple falsity dees met set what the actual zoning and density would be. The maximum would be 45,:but it might be less depending on the zoning. Mr. Knox said that the RM-4 and RM-5 zones have a height limit _of_50 feet. RM-1, 2 and 3 have a height limit of 35 feet. So there is also an opportunity, by adopting the Planning Commission recommendation, to lower what is now the allowable height limit. David Schrom, 302 College Avenue, said he wanted to address the issue of Transportation. He felt the Plan was ambiguous with regard to eliminating commuter and through traffic in residential neighborhoods. The "rights to travel" are in conflict with the "rights of neighborhoods." He urged Council to take action to keep commuter traffic out of residential neighborhoods in order to preserve the quality of life in neighborhoods. Joseph Carleton, 2350 Ross Road, said he was speaking on behalf of the Loma Prieta Chapter of the Sierra Club. He proposed wording for Program 18: "The Willow Road widening and extension project between El Camino Real in Palo Alto and Santa Cruz Avenue in Menlo Park was rejected by the Council in 1979, and the option with Stanford University was cancelled. Traffic flow on the corridor should improve with Menlo Park's planned double left turn lanes at the Santa Cruz intersection, improved signal tieing and other improvements of a relatively minor nature. These improve- ments would not have the effect of inducing new traffic growth which would be self-defeating, and which could well be the case with a widened road extended to El Camino Real. The construction of multiple -family residential housing on the 46 acres should not present a severe problem for the following reasons; (1) Since Stanford University owns the land, preference could be given to occupants who work at ttie University, the Medical Center, or the Shopping Center, (2) Ccmeting for the above residents would easily be accomplished by walking, bicycling, or shuttle bus. The possibility of computing without an automobile means that many households could get by loeth one automobile rather than two, at considerable financial savings, (3) The above mould be it consonance with the City's expressed goal of reducing de- pendence on the automcbi1e." Mr. Carleton also proposed wording for Program 15 regarding Dumbarton Bridge: "Concerns about the detrimental effect of traffic from a new Dumbarton Bridge upon University Avenue in East Palo Alto were expressed by the Loma Prieta Chapter of the Sierra Club as early as 1973. The bridge was approved largely as the result of efforts by East Palo A110 officials, and thus Palo Alto should not be expected to bear the detrimental effects of the increased traffic. We maintain a policy of opposition to any Southerly approach to the Dumbarton Bridge, as this would ultimately result in more traffic in- truding into South Palo Alto neighborhoods. It is not too late to consider the addition of rail rapid transit facilities to the bridge structure, and %mediate actions should be taken to investigate this possibility." Phil Williams, Stanford University Planning Director, commended the Planning Commission and stafffor a thorouoh piece of were in updating the Plan. With regard to housing* he said Stanford felt the Plan was not quite perfect, aod h* referred to the recommendations to redesignate the hospital heliport site to multiple family housing. He summarized his letter, which is on file in the City Clerk's Office. He referred to page 59f and the text relating to Stanford Land Ilse planning. He said it accurately reports Stanford's curr e t planning evente. He said they had mode a progress report to Council on Jun 16 and they would be in a position to do that again soon. It is hoped the final report will be completed in December. Sastia 8oisseeai,n, 410 Cat idge /, said she was representing the California Avenue .Development Association (CADA). Regarding the California Avenue/Part Boulevard recommendetion, CADA is opposed to the proposed change in teeing. The present CC wing already allows for both residential and vial use, and CADA does not believe that commercial_ a: 1d be eliminated in order to substitute it with high density housing. The SP land is the future key CCUMerd41 anchor for the 01atrictp'and it has been figured into all the wing and development of the Iistr<fct. Ted Thompson, 410 Cambridge Avenue, said he has been active in the California Avenue Cevelopment Association for the past 20 years. He opposed the rezoning of the area. Bonds are based upon 10, 20, 30 years; plans are longterm. Now the City is proposing to change the plans, and he felt the City had a moral responsibility to honor those plans. Lucy Tyler, Midpeninsula Citizens for Fair Housing, 457 Kingsley Avenue, commended the Planning Commission, on behalf of MCFH, for their work, She said $CFH had a few comments on changes in the Housing Element. She read the suggestions from MCFH and submitted the statement to the City Clerk for distribution to Council. Jill Young Coelho, 1824 Park Boulevard, spoke to Exhibit 1. She said she would like to set her neighborhood remain a varied one. She supported Mr. Golick's statements. She said she would like to see traffic barriers be- tween the residential and commercial areas. Bob Mess, 4010 Ors, referred to page 3J, second paragraph, under Program 18, and asked that it be modified to say "Developers of market rate housing to provide more than the minimum 10 percent," to make it clear that they were talking about profit -making developers, and not such organizations as the Housing Corporation. At the eottorr of the paragraph, he requested that the following phrase be added: "which does not adversely impact adjacent residential neighborhoods." On page 19E, he said he agreed with the comments made earlier by Mr. Carleton about both Dumbarton Bridge and Willow Road. He suggested additional wording in the text to say, ''Connection of the Dumbarton Bridge to Palo Alto streets or across the baylands would be detrital to Palo Alto and should be prevented (or resisted)." On the same page after the reference to Arboretum Road and the Stanford Shopping Center Parking Lot, he e yid like to add the sentence, "Any such extension of Willow Road should be designed to pre- vent crossing at El Camino Real or connection to Alma." On page 19G, Program 29, toward the end of the left column, where it reads, "discourage through traffic from filtering through residential neighborhoods..." he suggested adding the phrase, "by use of appropriate street modifications, traffic rerouting, d eiders and encouragement of public transit." On Correction page 31L, Program 10, he asked for an explanation of "encourage privately See Pg398 sponsored community activities." He felt there were already too many 11/3/80 organized activities in places such as Rinconada Park on weekends,. With regard to the Land Use Map, he supported Exhibit 2, the change from regional unity commercial and research office park to multi -family housing cwt San Antonio, the extension of Cis Drive, Exhibit 5, and the deletion of the interchan l: at Page Mill and El Camino. Dick 5chupi cks 270 Stanford Avenue, spoke to Exhibit 1 and the proposed rezoning. Given the mixture of commercial and residential zoning, he said the fragmentation of zoning tends to slow down development. Ever- green Par$ is having a lot of trouble with parking and traffic. The rezoning of this to multiple family will visit enormous hardship on the neighborhood. The rezoning is not in the interest of the people who live in the area. Elizabeth Beckeet, 1883 Park Boulevard$ she had been actively involved in urging the resin in Evergreen Park to make their concerns about mooing g known to the Council. She has been aeke4 by several : residents toinform the Council that they are in strokrepp nslt#on to the multiple family zoning. She said she would submit the letters to the City Clerk, t then ulth a petition against the rezoning, Nero Wrack, 3401 Ross abbdo.sugg*Sted several changes to the Plan. The first related. to his coecern about no mention of 1iaiteed equity cooperatives in the Housing section. The Planning CommUsion ett mpteed to address that concern by wing the Ptah, but the part that was amended deals with T ita 1 housing and he didn't feel it eddreesed his coc . He suggested 1 9 3 9/14180, changes on page 3G, right-hand column, first paragraph, and adding the following wording at the end of the paragraph: RA third example is non- profit or limited equity cooperative ownership, in which the buyer gain the tax advantage of homeownership, including homeowners' property tax exemptions and the deduction of property taxes and interest on income taxes, but where the purchase price is less than comparably sized fee - simple or condominium ownership, because resale value is based on a formula that limits the increase in home value due to market -place appreciation." The second change is on page 3J, left-hand column, the paragraph following Program 19. He suggested changing the period to a comma, and adding the following: "including buying or building non-profit or limited equity cooperatives." Mr. Borock said his third suggested change relates to Willow Road. He said he supported Mr. Carleton's comments and he recommended a further change on page 19E, left-hand column, paragraph following Program 18, to change the first sentence to read: "The Willow Road widening and road extension improvement project between El Camino Real in Palo Alto and Santa Cruz Avenue in Menlo Part tees rejected in 1979 as inappropriate." He referred to the Council minutes of October 1, 1979, as support for that statement. He said his last change related to the mention of Shopping Center Theaters, and he said he understood from Mr. Schreiber all the required approval has already happened, but if that is not the case, he urged deletion of the sentence referring to the theaters. Mr. Borock said he would like to speak briefly to the concerns raised by the residents of Evergreen Park regarding traffic. As he recalled in an earlier report from Transportation, priorities were set and the second highest priority set on traffic was Southgate all the way to California Avenue, which he believed includes Evergreen Park. He encouraged residents in that area to organize and come to Council meetings to ensure that their needs get met and that that set traffic priority does include Evergreen Park. Charles Holly 152 Melville, spoke to the rezoning issue on Alma from Kingsley to Coleridge and said he opposed it. On Melville, all of the R-1 zoned lots are owner occupied and they'd like to keep it that w•y, He did not want to see condominiums built in the neighborhood. He was concerned about parking problems and noise. Mayor Henderson noted that there are parking regulations for each of the zones. Mr. Boll continued by saying he felt there were other weys to provide housing and one was to develop the school sites and have a lottery for Palo Alto employees, depending on their income bracket, etc. Eugene McKinney, 304 Oxford, spoke to Exhibit 1 and felt the property involved was expensive real estate. He wo. could afford to rent units on that land. Me fired if the City couldn't consult with Stanford University and get a few thousand acres on a 99 -year lease He was concerned about the noise from the trains, because with current transportation problem, he felt the trains would be used more and more, thus creating more noise. People in his neighborhood are opposed to any multiple family unit. Boyd Smith, 301 Coleridge, spoke to the proposed change on Alma from Kingsley to Coleridge to multiple family rRsideetial. As a resident of that neighborhood, he doesn't wind multiple family housing provided there are height restrictions and the density, is kept in balance. To heavily increase the density in that area would be a big mistake. rill Carillon, x053 Part Boulevards said he felt that the use of the California/Park plots for small business, smell office structures is viable. To build five storey combination condo and office structures, would double pepulatlons at a efp�a, in that immediate aces., It would more than double the traffic flow in the area. The only person profiting from such a project is the develcper. It would cost Palo Alto more in taxes because they have already gone beyond the most efficient level for providing City services to'the people in Palo Alto now --Palo Alto is over- populated. He felt the City should take over the land for public service use. Robert Debs, 3145 Flowers Lane, said he wanted to be sure that drafts of Stanford University's plans are sent to the Council before they are sent to the Trustees. Mayor Henderson said he felt the Council was being kept well i nfor d . RECESS The Council recessed from 9:20 to 9:35 p.m. Page 2 - Introduction Mayor Henderson said he hoped Council . wou 1 d keep in mind the comments made by the public that evening as they go through the Draft Plan. He said they would go through the Plan starting with the first page. He said he has a list of the pages in the Plan which Councilmembers indicated they world like to speak to. Mayor Henderson said he would like to inquire about some housing unit data figures on page 2. On page 2 it says, "Housing units will increase to 26,100," and he wondered about the date for reaching that figure. He assumed it was 1990. The next sentence shows 15,200 and 11?300 units for a total of 26,500. On page 3A there is reference to 1990 estimates of 27,000 to 28,000 uuits. On page 3C there is a comment regarding 25,750 units on developed land in 1990. That would leave less than a 1,000 units possible on undeveloped fend. He asked that staff bring the figures together and settle on a consistent figure. +Councilmembe' Levy said he felt that the Plan could be clearer if at the beginning, on page 2, the objectives were clearly stated for residential and employment population. MOTIO1: Councilmomber Levy moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that the Major Proposals be as follows: 1. Maintain the residential population below 60,000. 2. Limit employment to a maximum of 80000. 3. Maintain the general low density character of existing single family areas. 4. Maintain -existing homing and provide some new housing for low, mete and middle income households. 5. Reduce the growth of auto traffic. 6. Change the appearance and function of El -Camino Real. Courwci it Lety sa id he felt the .60,E and 80,E figures were con- sistent with other data in the Plan. The Plan calls for employment of 77,100 in 1990, and he would be willing to modify his numbers to whatever Council feels is appropriate. Counc i lber: ' Re nzel said she was supportive of setting a limit for employment, but she'questioned whether they could..really put a handle on controlling population.. They might have -trouble saying how maw People could live in a house. tomrcould titer regulate that. Mr. Miaynor send there tes e recent case wee ruling takes away the abi i i ty to define what constitutes a family. The Attorney's office has discouraged the notice of settia " a micel limit; ittends to be arbitrary in nature and theyr preferred the Chervil rely upon traditional planning standards and techniques of limiting growth. 1 95 9/16110 Councilmember Levy responded that he didn't have any specific programs in mind at this time to implement these two guidelines. Fach specific program designed to limit those elements would have to be carefully discussed. But he said it was his overall goal.for Palo Alto that population and employment do not exceed these levels. He would like to be on record as having those limits as overall goals. He felt the figures were implied as a goal. He didn't think the figures were any more arbitrary than setting 26,000 residences as a goal. He agreed that the goals might not be easy to implement, but ha would like to see them stated in the Introduction to set an overall framework. Councilmember Witherspoon said she felt they had a dichotomy in their goals to respond to the pressures for more and more housing and more and more demand for employment. She felt the motion spoke to an overall goal. They talk at great length about donsity and no where in the Plan does it state what they City would look like in 1590. Correction See Pg , 398 8i11 Zaner, City Manager, said the subject is one which has been discussed 11/3/80 by a number of cities in California; it is not a new concept. One of the principles behind that concept, insisted upon especially by the courts, is that when a Council establishes growth limits, it have some rationale behind the numbers that are set, such as sewer capacity, parking capacity, etc. Council might wish to have staff provide that kind of data.- Councilmember Eyerly said he recalled that four years ago when they discussed the Plan, they had figures as to build -out. With zoning now, does the Planning Department have any figures on the build -out for the residential areas and a forecast for commercial/industrial. He agreed with Mr. ?:aner's cents about gathering data for such things as sewer capacity. There may be some major limitations. Mr. Schreiber reviewed the process that the Planning Commission and staff went through. Last February t e•City Council in referring a number of issues to the Commission included the question regarding the limits of growth in Palo Alto. In an effort to identify how much additional develop- ment would be possible, staff had to review the differences between now and 1974 when the earlier work was done. There is considerably more flexibility in the current zoning ordinance in terms of mixed uses; the developer has more options. Several conclusions did come out of that review, On page 3A of the Plan, in the right head column, there is a paragraph rich states, RA realistic 1990s estimate of full development in Palo Alto is around 27,000 to 28,000 units which is 11) to 15 percent above the number of units in 1980." They esti ted in the Plan that the January 19S0 residential units totaled 24,100. They estimated a growth during the year 1980 to about 26,100. These numbers were reviewed with representatives of the btil#ties and other City departments. From a residential standpoint, the growth is small. Utilities felt there would be no problem with the proj td growth. In looking attraffic, they found that given the information they have now regarding numbers of trips ps o percentage increased " caused by `, n i is .s very ` i Y . In 1980 they are looking at totalvehicletrips in Palo Alto, including the Stanford area, of approximately ?9000 trips per day. Adding a 1,000 dwelling units aright add 10,000 more trips. That is a pretty small percentage increase. That led staff to conch that there was not a threshold as far as residential develo nt, given the current City policies. Councilmember Orly said he wasn't against looking at limits and trying to arrive at a figure such as Councilmember levy was: suggesting, but he felt he needed more staff input before he could support the motion. Mayor Meederson said that if they started to talk amt specific numbers, they would have to go into a very detailed study of all the factors mentioned 1y staff to come up wlth justifiable ors. He knew MO. Maynor was correct that they would have to have data - to support any figures. He asked that Council speak to the s ect as to whether or not they want to include in 19-6 9/16/80 the Introduction to the Plan specific numbers at all. He personally felt that would be a mistake. There are too many changing conditions. He would like to encourage more families living in Palo Alto. Councilmember Renzel agreed that specific numbers should not be put in the Introduction, although she was in sympathy with setting some reason- able limits and she felt that the Programs throughout the Plan spoke to those limits. She said she would at a later date support referring to staff a request for estimated capacities. Councilor Brenner said she felt that the suggested numbers weren't too far off. In 1976 the Planning CoMnission tried to introduce programs that would take a firm stand against allowing employment growth to keep on moving. One of the dangers she saw with equating any employment growth with equivalent housing, is that can be open ended. She saw the natural limits to growth being set by the threat, for example, of losing their very favorable electric rates, by outgrowing the supply. The sewage treatment capacity might be used as a teal limit. She favored a staff report discussing capacities and limits. She said she would be very circumspect about putting limits on residential growth given the current jobs/housing imbalance. Mayor Henderson noted they would not reach the Land Use Map section tonight and hoped the discussion on that would occur on September 29. Vice Mayor Sher said he questioned the desirability of putting specific figures in the Introduction. He felt the staff's comments show the danger of doing that. He said he didn't disagree with the objective of slowing down the employment growth. but if a specific figure is set, there must be programs in the Plan which justifiy that figure. If there is an absolute limit set for housing, there must be programs which decide where those houses are going to be. He felt it was better to leave the Major Proposals general. Councilmember Levy said he appreciated staff's comments and he would make a substitute motion. SUBSTITUTE NOTION: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Witherspoon, to refer his suggestions to staff and that staff be directed to develop rationale for setting limits of population and employment for 1990. Pat Cullen, Planning 1oemissionery said the Planning Commission considered this same question for a long time. They arrived at the idea that 15% was a maximum limit on both employment and units over the present l eves 3 i vets current r'e'in ati ons . Councitmember Eyerly said he thought it was premature to give staff an assist. Pa didn't feel they cold provide data before the Council completes aiskjsion or the Plan. Cm d1 bet Renzei said as she understood the motion it is a general direction to staff and not related to this specific revision of the Plan. Mayor Sanderson said that if that were case, he didn't think it was pertinent to tonight's discussion. It should be an agenda it in the future. Coencilmember Levy agreed that realistically staff couldn't provide data prior to completion of discussion of the Plan, Mayor Henderson said he would rule that the motion was not applicable to the discussion and that it be brought up an a later agenda as an item of new inoss: Councilmen ber Levy said he would chellenge that ruling. RULING UPHELD: The ruling of the Chair was upheld on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fletcher, Henderson, NOES: Levy, Witherspoon ABSENT: Fazzino Renzel, Sher MOTION FAILS: The motion to set employent limit at 80,000 and population limit at 60,000 failed on the following vote: AYES: Levy, Witherspoon NOES: Brenner Eyerly, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel, Sher ABSENT: Fazzino Page 3A Housing Mayor Henderson said he wanted to rive a word from the text, left hand column, last paragraph. He would like to remove the word "however" its the third sentence from the bottom of the page. Councilmember Levy said he would like to change the wording at the beginning of the last paragraph in the left hand ccl u n. MOTION: Council ber Levy Moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that the paragraph read: "third, Palo Alto should modestly increase its housing supply, especially to provide affordable housing for additional families employed in the community at low and moderate income. This will meet some of the housing demand caused by the jobs -housing imbalance." The remainder of the paragraph would remain the same. Vice Mayor Sher said he liked the, addition of the 'ward "affordable" housing. He wondered why the word "individuals" was dropped. Councilmember Levy said he would like to focus on people with children, and it doesn't rule out individuals. Vice Mayor Sher said the word which troubled him most was "modestly." He wasn't sure what that means. It looks like an unwillingness to deal with this serious problem its implications are unclear. Council* l_itherspooi said she was glad the last sentence of the paragraph was part of the motion. She felt it was very important. She had no trouble with the word "modestly." She felt Paso Alto has done more than any other community to address housing needs. Counc i lr Fletcher said her concern was if the motion passes they will be on record a.s supporting something very worthy,, but not very realistic. With the pmt property values end housing costs and the dpi for smaller units, she didn't think they had sufficient control over the market place to implement such a pot icy,. Councilmmmber Levy said the reason he would like to modify the lord "increase,* is because he is coecemod about having in Palo Alto a policy of majorg h, Mbdifiatrs are used elsewhere in the Plan. He wanted same kind of modifier so it does not appear that their housing objective is to simply increase without 1l,it. He would be willing to change the wording to say "Palo Alto should increase to some extent..." Again, this, is an objective and r±ot a pal i cy or program. Councilmember. Eyerly said he supported the thrust of the motion. He fe1 t there were two issues in the Plebe which were motconsistently, compatible. One is the quality of life in Palo Alto and the other is the jobs/housing imbalance. He suggested t modifier "sensibly." 1 g8 9/16,89 Vice Mayor Sher said he felt the language being proposed dilutes the statement. It is a statement of objective to provide more and affordable housing to certain groups. The last sentence of the paragraph was put in as a recognition that they couldn't do it all without destroying the quality of living in Palo Alto. Councilmember Brenner left the meeting at 10:30 p.m. Councilmember Levy said he would substitute the following wording in his motion: "Third, there should be some increase in housing supply, especially to provide affordable housing..." That would mirror the wording on page 2 which says under Major Proposals, "Maintain existing housing and provide some new housing for low, moderate, and middle in- come households." Councilmember Renzel felt the current wording of the paragraph states the objective and speaks to the need to do something and the need for more housing. She preferred not to change it. MOTION FAILS: The motion to change the wording of the paragraph failed on the following vote: AYES: Eyerly, Levy, Witherspoon NOES: Fletcher, Sher, Henderson, Renzel ABSENT: Fazzino, Brenner Councilmember Eyerly noted that Councilmember Brenner had left the meeting, and although she had registered her vote before leaving, he suggested that she be recorded as absent since she left prior to completion of the discussion. Mayor Henderson agreed with the suggestion. Councilmember Renzel referred to the bottom of page 3A and the top of 3B and the statement "...both ownership and rental housing have been stable at below three percent in recent years..." and asked if that figure was, in fact, one percent. Mr. Schreiber replied that the vacancy rate has been below one percent. Councilmember Renzel said she would like to have it so worded because that would help illustrate the severity of the problems. Councilmember Levy said he recalled the 1980 census indicated a vacancy rite of little over one percent. He asked if that was correct. Mr. Xnox replied that the census counts vacancies a little differently that the City does. The census courts units which are under construction as vacant and the -City does not. Councitmember Eyerly asked what prat" ins. NO. Schreiber replied that.within the last five years it has been below two percent, He suggests the wordiog nod *below two percent in r ent ors:" Counc i lmember° R zei wondered hot makryears they have ben below pne percent. She felt it had been quite los for sow time. Mr. Schreiber said he'didn't have an 'exact number, but it's been,for the last year and a half or --twee„ r Councilmen/bier Renzel suggested that staff insert the proper figure tie before the next disc ssion of the Plan. mar Henderson wondered if it were possible to use 1900 census figures through ut the docueent when they are available, Mr. Schreiber said the only 1980 mars they have are still preliminary figures. It will be at least another m eth before they even got a revised growth total. The detail is stillmother Year away. MOTION: Meyer terser novelo seconded by Reuel, that any 1900 figures available at the final printing ,of the sire Plan be included. _11 9 /16/80 MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmanbers Brenner and Fazzino absent, Councilmember Renzel referred to the right hand column, page 3B, in the middle of the paragraph called "The People" and said there were two "is's" and they may wish to remove one of them. Mr. Schreiber said there was a missing "and" and the sentence should read, "The highest concentration of seniors in Santa Clara County is found in the Downtwon area of Palo Alto and is increasing." Councilmember Levy referred to the right hand columnand the paragraph at the top. He wondered if the statement "Absentee owners often are not wi l l i og to invest in expensive repairs and improvements..." was a documented statement. That is not the case with Oak Creek, for example. Mayor Henderson said he could document it through his observations around town. Mr. Schreiber said it was staff's observation as well. Page 3C Mayor Henderson referred to the bottom of the page, right hand column, and the sentence, "Both old end new units should be retained under one ownership to provide much -needed rental housing." He said his goal has been to retain all the rental housing possible, but he also wanted to see oeportunities for people to buy a home and become permanent in the City. He would like that statement deleted. Mr, Schreiber said it was in the Zoning Ordinance and couldn't be deleted at this point. Councilmember Fletcher said she would like to add a policy, which would fit either on ;gage 3C or 3D. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Henderson that densities of clustered housing shall be based on the environmental impact such housing will have relative to the impact of R-1 develop- ment of the entire site in R-1 neighborhoods. Mayor Henderson said he felt an example might be the Terman Site where they discussed the density of possible multiple housing that would equal what the R-1 impact would have been on the entire site. Councilor Fletcher said that when one has multiple family housing the impact of traffic, for example, is less per unit than in single family zoning. The less dense the housing, the more automobile trips per unit. Councilmember Renzei said she supported the concept and suggested that staff con hack with soma warding to clarify, the intent. Mr, Zane* said theycould pass the concept, and staff could reword it. It will have to ge beck'to the planning .Commissionand then Council can review it before final adoption of the Plan. Councilneiber Eyerly asked if the intent was to look at the environmental 'impact and e+rerything'ehse that might go on the property as a whole package. Cotincilmember Fletcher said that was correct, she meld exert everything to be taker into account Vice Mayor She said he felt the motion was a little narrow in its application, mouse they are tailkttg about P -C zones in R.1 neighbor- hoods. There isn't any clustered housing in R-1 zones, only to,P-C MOS. Councilmember Fletcher skid her goal wm.s a concept of the fact that clustered housiinetaly hove. less *pea per unit Von if there mere single family scattered throughout the entire site. vice Mayor Sher said he s pposed one could find space in a R-1 zone that would accommodate acre than one unit...he hoped staff could draft clearer wording. Councilmember Witherspoon said she agreed with what Councilmember Fletcher was saying. but how could it be structured for non -City developers? What if the school sites are sold for private development? Mr. Knox said he felt they were trying to generalize a concept that may only apply to one site. If this concept were applied to the Terman Site, there would be an environmental impact analysis on all the functions and it would be compared with the impact if the site were developed R-1. Another Bite which might apply would be the Maximart site, but he couldn't think of any other examples. He wondered if there was arty value in such a generalized concept. Courcilmember Fletcher said shewouldwithdraw her motion. MOTION WITHDRAWN: Councilmember Fletcher withdrew her motion, with approval of the ;ecor > Page 3E Mayor Henderson referred to the left hand column and the paragraph under "The Cost of Housing." In the last sentence, he requested that "1979 Condominium Conversion Ordinance," be changed to 9197+ Condominium Con- version Ordinance." In the right hand column, second paragraph, he expressed concern about the statement, "Occupying housing more than 30 years old and valued at less than $10,060.9 Did such ho„sing exist? Mr. Schreiber said those four points were 1970 Federal standards. Mayor Henderson said he would like to delete that standard. Councilmember Levy said he had a question about the same paragraph. Apparently, if any one of the four items apply, then it is considered inadequate housing, correct? Mr. Schreiber replied that was true. Ccuncilmember Levy said his impression is that today anyone buying a house, almost invariably is paying more than 25% of their income for either rent or mortgage payments. Is the 25% still a valid factor? Mr. Knox replied he thought the Federal standard was nos one-third of income, but they are trying to make a statement of conditions in 1970 because theydon't ,have new census data. He suggested making the statement that there were 3600 households in 1970 welch did not meet federal standards and not list the standards. Councilaember Renzel asked if it were possible to get unpubl i shed census data from the Census Bureau. He. numeraae replied that the preliminary counts sent to Congress will be available shortly after January. 1, 1981 Housing and income data will be available around the ,middle of 1981. Page 3F Councilmeaber Eyerly said he felt the nee for another policy, which might be termed Policy 5A. He said there are a lot of long time residents in Palo Alto who are leaving the comity they sell their large homes. Most don't wart to let Palo Alto, but they can't find multiple family housing to suit the, probably because of minimum sizes. . So many of the people move to Sharon Heights, for ep 1 e . He, wou l d like to encourage developers to consider Oil type of housing. Anther ref i t - of this policy would be to free up larger homes welch would provide housing for families. 201. "9116180 MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Witherspoon, to add a new Policy 5A on page 3F to read: Consideration should be given to the housing problem facing older residents in selling large family homes in their desire for more space than most Palo Alto multiple housing offers. Lack of this type of housing finds these residents leaving Pelo Alto for desired housing in their later years or indefinite delay in selling of their homes. The sale of larger, older homes would provide needed housing for younger families. Councilmember Fletcher asked for clarification on the type of housing Councilmember Eyerly was proposing. Councilor Eyerly replied he was proposing housing such as that provided in Sharon Heights --higher priced multiple family housing. Mr. Knox said the Palo Alto Housing Corporation has pursued a similar proposal. They find that the high cost of land leads to more, smaller units. Councilmember Renzel wondered why a developer couldn't build fewer, larger units. She was concerned, however, with building expensive housing be- cause they have no guarantee who would live in such units. Mr. Schreiber said they were unable to influence developers on the size of units. Councilmember Eyerly referred to page 3A and the objective to provide a variety of housing types and sizes, a mixture of ownership and rental housing, and a full range of housing costs. He said they could let the builder test the market. Mayor Henderson asked if he were eliminating the requirement for low - moderate housing? Councilmember Eyerly said he was not. Vice Mayor Sher said that with ,he exception of BMR provisions, builders are free to service the market demand. He wondered what impact Cad'nci l - ber Eyerly's proposed policy wo lid have. Councilmember Eyerly said he felt the builder could get the price down. More units are not necessarily better. Planning Commissioner Cullen spoke in support of Councilmember Eyerly's motion to assist upper income people in selling their homes and finding other suitable housing within Palo Alto. Moiler Nenderson said he felt there would have to be specific programs stag to support the policy. Ns. Cullen replied that there were no programs for Policy -5 and some other policies in the Plan. Mr. Knox said the currant policy adopted by Council is a provision of 10% below market rate units. He noted that on Bryant Street, the developer built six execut1vl condominiums. MOTION FAILED: The motion to add a new Policy 5A as proposed by Counci l - member Eyerly, failed an the following vote: AYES: Eyerly, Witherspoon NOES: Fletcher, Irinnderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher ABSENT: Fa&aino, Brenner - 2 0 2 9/16/80 Councilmember Fletcher said she would like to insert a new policy on page 3F regarding reversion of residential units currently in office use back to residential use with appropriate amortization period. She noted that the Employment Program #4 on page 13E related to this subject. MOTION: Ccuncilmember Fletcher moved that a new policy be added to provide for reversion of residential units currently in office or commercial use back to residential use with appropriate amortization period. Councilm ber Renzel said she felt they had such a policy now. Mr. Knox replied they have a policy relating to nonconforming uses. Councilmember Fletcher said her emphasis was on office or comercial uses in residential areas. MOTION DIED: The motion to add a new policy on page 3F died for lack of a second. Councilmember Eyerly referred to Policy 6 on page 3F and asked if it was intended as a general statement of support? Mr. Schreiber replied that it was a part of the 1976 Plan. Councilmembeer Eyerly said that the Policy and Procedures Committee ambers had toured the Industrial Park seeking housing sites, which was more than jest supporting the mixing of residential uses in commercial and industrial areas. MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved that the wording of Policy 6 be changed to read, "Support the mixing of residential uses in commercial and industrial areas where feasible." MOTION DIED: The motion to add the words, "where feasible" to Policy 6 died for lack of a second. Counoilmember Eyerly referred to the right hand column on page 3F, Program 8 and suggested adding the words "when corpatitle" after "...to provide some residential on the same site..." Planning Commissioner Cobb said he felt those words were implicit throughout the document. Councilmember Levy referred to the left hard cold, last paragraph, page 3F, and requested that the word '"provided* be changed to "located" so that the sentence reads, °New housing should be located near transit centers.:." Mayor Henderson suggests they conclude tonight's meeting. He announced that the next Special !Ming to discuss the evis1ons to the Comprehensive Plan will take place on may, Septa- 29. AOJCURNMENT 11111101411011 NOTION: Councl1 r Levy mvved, seconded by Sher, to adjourn the meeting at 11:40 p.m. The motion passed unanimously, Council ers Brenner and Fazzino absent. ATTEST: EVE: