The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1980-09-22 City Council Summary Minutes1 CITY COUNCiL MINUT€s ITEM CITY PALO ALTO Regular Meeting September 22, 1980 Jay W. Mitchell acknowledged by Mayor Henderson Oral Communications 1. Melanie Villafana, 164 Hamilton Avenue, P.A. 2. Al Rooney, 1520 Willow Road, P.A. 3. Peter McSweeney, 1497 Todar, P.A. 4. Oscar Ehrlich, 100 Ferne Avenue, P.A. 5. Millie Scranton, 747 Josina Avenue, P.A. Consent Calendar - Action Items Start-up Training - Advanced v,-..i_ewater Treatment Sale of Surplis property adjacent to 1404 Hopkins 3406 Hillview - Site & Design Review - Xerox 3805 East 5a'/shore - Site and Design Review - Cortana Corporation 4102 El Camino Real - Change of District - RM-3 to P.C. - James C. Sater 3400 Hillview - Site anti Design Review - Clark, Stromguist and Sandstrom 651 - 661 Waverley Final Subdivision Map 400 San Antonio Road - Change of District Resolution Honoring Jay W. Mitchell Resolution Approving Appointment of Assistant City Manager - June Fleming Public Hearing --355 Seale Avenue - Ann Kidney University Avenue S.P. Depot Santa Clara_ County Transit District Welcome to Enschede Alderman Kass Corna'liss 424-432 Webster Street - Subdivision Map - Turner 724/744 Ramona -Tentative Subdivision Map -Harrington 1100 Welch Road - Amendment to Zoning Nap - OR to RN -5 Parks Ordinance - Adding Regulatory Provisions 4047 El "Camino Way .. Exception to Nonconforming Use Termination. Provisions w Masud* Transmission Arastra Property - Planning' for City Owned Property ABAG Plan - Draft Economic Development Objectives Oak Creek Cond osmium Conversion. Parting Near Health Spa at Park Boulevard PAGE 2 0 5 2 0 5 2 5 2 0 5 2 0 6 2 0 6 2 0 6 2 0 7 2 0 7. 2 0 7 2 0 8 2 0 8 2 0 8 2 0 8 2 0 9 2 0 9 2 1 1 2 1 4 2 1 4 2 1 4 2 1 4 2 1,5 2 1 5 2 1 5 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 4 1 204, 0/22/110 Regular Meeting September 22, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto 'net on this date in the Counc i lcharnbers at City Hall, 2.50 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:30 p.m., Mayor Henderson presiding. PRESENT: Brenner, Eyerly, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy (arrived 8:30 p.m.) Renzel, Sher (arrived at 8:45 p.m.) ABSENT: Fazzino, Witherspoon Mayor Henderson stated that he wanted to acknowledge Jay W. Mitchell, who served as a member of the Planning Commission from August 1, 1976 until July 31, 1980. He was the Vice -Chairman of the Commission in 1978 .and served as Chairman in 1980. Mr, Mitchell has given most unselfishly of his time and talents to assist in guiding the growth and development of this city _and was involved in the 20 meetings devoted to the updating of the Comprehensive Plan. The Council regrets that Mrs. Mitchell feels that he cannot continue on this Commission, but the many hours and the "conscientious calm approach that he has given to Planning Commission matters are certainly appreciated. Mayor Henderson then presented Jay Mitchell with a framed Resolution of Appreciation from the city, as well as the flag of the City of Palo Alto. He added that the Resolution of Appreciation would be voted by the full Council later. Mr. Mitchell expressed his thanks fer the opportunity of serving on the Planning Commission. He said that it was a truly gratifying experience for him. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Melanie Villafana, 164 Hamilton Avenue, deputy registrar, wished to notify all those who were perhaps unaware of the fact that the President of the United States would be at the City Hell of San Jose at 9:00 e.m. the next day. She also asked permission to register people in the lobby of the Palo Alto City Hall from September 29 to October 3. Mayor Henderson replied that he would check into the regulation regarding this, and have someone contact her. 2. Al Rooney, 1520 Willow Road, was given permission to speak on the subject of the Oak Creek Condominium conversion, . although this is an agenda item.._ He stated that it appeared to him that the Council may be considering removing the exemption (from the moratorium imposed on condominium conversions) that had been given to Cornish and Carey. He expressed concern about this because of the package that Cornish and Carey has mode available to the tenants tccrt�rr�..ant_ � of Oak Creek -.sin�� -�h$ July nmeeting.. He went on to say that he ' is confused by the statements in the paper attributed to Council members about this issue, but wanted to clarify the issue as it now stood, since Mr. Carey rescinded the provision in.the package formerly offered the 'present tenants: The new material states that anyone not .voting for conversion would not be offered a lifetime lease. He also felt the significant point developed since the July meeting is the guaranteed maximum pricing for their units. 3. Peter McSweeney, 1497 Todar, spoke re Arastradero Road improvements and identified a problem, people from Palo Alto, Manuela, and Old Trace had traditionally taken an off -road path on the shoulder of the road opposite to a bike path on the other side of the road, to travel back to Foothill Expressway from Deer Creek. With the realignment of the road and with the new 2 0 5 9/22/80 curbing, the path on the Los Altos Hills side has virtually been eliminated. Now riders, including children and many Palo Alto residents who board their horses in the area, are forced to ride the pavement or destroy the beautiful landscaping being placed by Palo Alto. 4. Oscar Ehrlich, 100 Ferne Avenue, addressed his remarks to Al Rooney, regarding lifetime leases. Mr. Ehrlich called Mr. Rooney's attention to the fact that 80% of the Cost of Living Index, which, is about;_i8'-20% at the moment, can total up very fast',_ double-, b ,� fiVe yea: s and, very sU.bstaint a ; in 30 years. He- therefore oleagreed' witiOir., Kwon#y's contention that conv�ersibn xo ld offer 'security and guaranteed'liying conditions to the tenant .° S. Millie Scranton, 747 Josina Avenue, Palo Alto, -first thanked the Council for a horse trail put in by the City, to take horse riders off Arastradero Road. She then wanted to augment Mr. McSweeney's complaints about the path from Deer Creek to PurlSsima. She emphasized that a horse trail was badly needed, as it was very dangerous for horses to be ridden on the pavement. She wondered if the Council realized how many Palo Alto residents ride horses. She repeated the horse riders' thanks for the path through the Arastra land, but begged the Council to consider their needs when deliberating on the disposition of the Arastra property. Mayor Henderson remarked that he remembered that there had been a horse trail along Arastradero. RECESS: An early recess was called at 8:00 p.m. to 8:15 p.m. As there was no quorum at the beginning of the meeting, City Clerk Ann Tanner called the roll at this time. Five present, four absent, Councilmembers Levy and Sher expected later, CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor. Hprnderso a asked that the matter concerning they ordinance regarding ciity. p-ar�C"s-: (second read ng): be .re eved..:., Mayor Henderson asked that, at the request' of a meieeer -of-the Public, the matter concerning the •change. of district of property iocated at 400 San , Antonio, Road ebve removed. Counci Ewee+ber Renzel asked that the matter concerting the application of Nasuda Transmission for property' located at 4047. El -.Camino. Way fbr an exception from the nonceeforming. use termination provisions be. removed. :the -following items remained None Referral Items Act -- s o 0! __ i t e* s START OP $1g TRAINI G SE*VICEPOO on the consent calendar: LITIES CT Staff recommonda that the _ City Council Approve the agreement with Janes M. Montgomery, Coh3ult*Ng €egiaaiitera, Inc., and the budget amendment to appropriate S8S,266 to th* Advanced Wastewater Treatment' l.,tirt� budget. frtoie the Sewer! System Ifiprove ent Reserve Fund: t6 f In, .tcg the, protect ' AGREEMENT - James M. Mont'gomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc. ORDINANCE 3232 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF Tiir—UTT—UF—FXL0 ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1980-81 TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 75-77 'REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT ADVANCF WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY' AND TO ?ROVID€ FOR THE RECEIPT OF REVENUE FROM THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD." SALE OF SURPLUS PROPERTY vyntorrirro-Trirryvrin AVENUE ,PlaltrelnIVITSIIIIIMMIMONINIMIMMINVENOUIMOmiLWIVINIV Staff recommends that the Council direct staff to pursue a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Public Park to Single Family Residential and a zone change amendment from PF (Public Facility) to R-1 (Single Family Residential), and authorize the Mayor to execute a Quitclaim Deed transferring the 3,000 square foot unused parcel to Grace O. Davis upon receipt of $3,500 and completion of the Comprehensive Plan and Zone Change to R-1. 3406 HILLYIEW AVENUE rmr—mmil, � a r , EW OF PROPERTY The Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board unanimously recommend approval of the application of Xerox Corporation for Site and Design Review of property located at 3406 HiIlview Avenue, subject to the following conditions: 1. A final landscape plan is to be submitted to the ARB. 2. The panels should be a dark color so that the panels will be less visible (color of the panels to return to the ARB for final approval). 3, The height of'the panels shall be reduced to 10 feet in height. 3805 EAST BAYSIiORE FRONTAGE ROAM. REY1Eb The P:annin; tmd the Architectural - Review "aboard unanimously recommend approval of the application of Cortana Corporat l of for Site and Design Review for property located at 3805 East 8ayshore Frontage Road, subject to conditions es listed in the Planning Commission minutes of August 6, 1980 and the Architectural Review Board minutes of August 7, 1980. 4102 EL CAfiB0 REAL - APPLICATION OP The Planning C;..m.ission unanimously recommends denial of the application of James C. Siter for a change of district €or -property. located at 4102 El Camino Real from *M-3 to P -C, 0 1- ./22/80 1 0 3400 HILLVIEW - APPLICATION emi 301 amp ut,1ar RtYitW STROM The Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board unanimously recommend approval of the application of Clark, Stronquist and Sandstrom, architects for Site and Design Review of property located at 3400 Hillview. 651-661 WAVERLEY r 1nA( SbouLv1'ION MAP Staff recommends that the City Council approve the final map. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Eyerly, approval of the consent calendar, except for the items removed. The motion to approve the consent 'calendar passed on a unanimous vote, Levy, Fazzino, Sher and Witherspoon absent. 400 SAM ANTONIO ROAD tiratrwarTnirarrrROM LM TO RM-3 Councilmember Eyerly stated that it was his understanding that the people involved in this item would like to have it continued for consideratior at a later date, so that they may adequately prepare some of the necessary material. He therefore wished to bring it forward for decision on continuance. MOTION. Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Henderson, that the item regarding change of district of property located at -400 San Antonio Road from IM (Limited Industrial/Research Park) to.RM-3 be brought forward for decision on continuance. Motion passed on a unanimous vote, Fazztno, Levy, Sher and Witherspoon absent, Councilmember Eyerly said that he would move to have the item continued to a later date, without necessarily setting an exact date. Mayor Henderson said he would second ,the motion, remarking that it was an opportunity for the owners to, present some ideas to -.the neighborhood, and discussing change of district to R-3 versus R-4, which is fairly controversial. The staff recommended R-4, and the Planning Commission R-3; he therefore felt it would be worthwhile to let tine neighborhood become _#nvolved, end to present ' the two questions to the Council later. MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved,- seconded by Mayor Henderson, total sib it&A bst continued fo'�' cOtsideraticn later -di -4-e, date <,.. .. v�.s we ova+ at �r ta►.c� va'k�, for discussion to be Worked Ovt with staff. MOTION PASSED: The motion to continue passed on a unanimous vote, €azzino, Levy, Sher and Witherspoon absent. RESOLUTION HONORING JAY W. MITCHELL AKr; U4icd ssruirtir MOT 1O11: , Comm,',member Fletcher, armored, seconded by Eyerly, approval of the Resolution:. RESOLUTION 5637 •nettled *RESOLUTION OF THE Moat .Of ma ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO 4AV W. MITCHELL FOR OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION." • E'OO:. t!2Z/86. The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Fazzino, Levy, Sher and Witherspoon rbsent. RESOLUTION APPROVING APPOINTMENT MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly introduced the following Resolution and moved, seconded by Brenner, its approval: RESOLUTION 5838 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVING THE CITY MANAGER'S APPOINTMENT OF AN ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER." The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Fazzino, Levy, Sher and Witherspoon absent. City Manager Zaner then introduced newly -appointed Assistant City Manager June Fleming to the Council and the public. She was welcomed to the team by Mayor Henderson. PUBLIC HEARING: E AV'L1 'IiUR feet PRELIMINARY The Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval of the application of Ann Kidney for approval of a Preliminary Parcel Map with exceptions for property located at 355 Seale Avenue; plus finding of no significant environmental impact. Mayor Henderson opened the Public Hearing by calling on Mrs.Ann Kidney, who decided to pass if there were no questions or objections. Mayor Henderson replied that the Council had very complete minutes from the Planning Commission and by Mrs. Kidney, and that he was satisfied. He suggested that Mrs. Kidney stand by in case of future questions. ,William A. Ingram, 1975 Bryant Street, gave his support of the application, and passed on speaking. Councileember Fletcher' questioned the notation h the Planning Commission minutes that the driveway doesn't belong to anybody." She wondered if this was accurate. Pr. Schreiber r replied that the comment is in error - the driveway will be part .of the real lot, but it is not counted as part of the let sixes- Counci lr:ember Wenzel had Correction q& a on f1�Rf L_- -His_ _�iwPe .�1"AAi�':-'k1 fC$l: Ae�.-_lest s�i ze - Shsr �2Amrs ..eve - See 1,-1.458 V "-. • A� v -"- .R i l Y Y fif iY10) - �'. �/ ` ? f .l � ". „f f f � \11 0! •i-ri 4 .7 b !.f 643 See that the flag lot was supposed to beve ar minimum of 20% lot area, 11/24/80 and lots were below the minimum of 10;000 square feet. Mr. Schreiber answered that she was correct. Counci lmember Eyerly noted that he understood that the lot is in a district where there are supposed to be 10,000 square foot minimum lots, and asked to have the exact locations pointed out to him on the site location sap. Re was told that the marked o'ff area on the map, crossing We:verley on both sideswas the location. Mr. Eyerly pointed out that all of that area was supposed to be 10,000 minimum square -foot lots, and the request giver it as two 5,000 foot tots. Mr. Schreiber replied that the application will create on lot (the front lot) of 8,360 square feet, where 10,000 square feet is required,:_ and the rear lot will be approximately 9,800 square feet, where 12,000 square feet is required. Councilmember Eyerly commented that the lots are bigger than he had remembered from reading the application last week. He' then asked about the variances' requested. Mr.''Schreiber replied that the bigger exceptions. are for lot sia:ea There were e.so variances on a rear yard,` both for Lot "A", the front' lot, a rear yard of 12 feet where 20 is otherwise required, and a side yard, which the Staff Report indicates as 4 feet where 8 is.. required.' However, modification made by the Planning Commissi;eh would actually make that 7 feet where 8 is otherwise required.; Counciimerber Eyerly replied that, in looking at the area that has boundaries for the 10,000 square -foot lots, it appeared to him that there were many lots in there that were. clot 10,000 square feet, and he supposed that when the zoning map went through, there was no attempt to exclude the smaller properties. He expressed himself as puzzled about why there is this requirement (for 10,000 square -f Sot lots in, the area) when there are so many small lots scattered throughout the area. Mr. Knox replied that the new zoning maps on this area that were drawn in 1978 just copied what was previously on the books, and he has not been around long enough to know how the line was first drawn. However, he suspected that Mr. Eyerly's speculation that the line was drawn in some attempt to accommodate larger lots was probably correct. In looking at the map, one could see that, on the boundaries that cross Bryant, the lots are considerably smaller. this kind of distinction is not as readily evident around Cowper, but, generally speaking, around the boundaries of that area the lots are smaller. Mayor Henderson interjected that he lived in that area for about 25 years, and there are many, many lots there that are even down to 5,000 square feet, (fifty by one hundred) and others that art sixty by a hundred. It is quite standard in that part of town for lots to be well under the 10,000 square foot minimum. Counci lmember Renzel said that it was her understanding that the neighborhood requested the large lot zoning as a result of the many lot splits that were taking place. Mayor Henderson asked if Councilmember Brenner had anything to add, since she had been called upon by Renzel for information regarding these zoning requirements. Mrs. Brenner responded that she agreed with Couunci meaber Renze!'s understanding of the reason for the zoning requirement. She thought it was the same kind of situation with the Crescent P?trk Association, when they came in with large lots. It was prior'tp recognition -of a housing shortage, and at a time when the resides s: wished for large lots like theirs, Also, the ne i hhorhood was _ver _old - this particular c w l ar area had many _,- .n. .. ar�r yr va �..w -•tee• 'nisei � �vw o Rs- maw ��re,y �,..� vea+p t...a irregular lots.: Mrs,"erenner continued by sayi ,g that she felt that it was worth noting, in regard to this particu',_ .,_' request, if the neighborhood is rogarddirf.as one with, say, 7,000 -square foot lots, it more than meets those requirements. She gave her opinion that this particular -let division together wit the restrlctfgns-_.t at_ -the -- = Planning Commission het put on it, does not Violate the neighborhood is aka isey, MOTION; Mayor Henderson ,*o`ved, seconded' by greener' that the Council uphold the planning. commtstion recoateendation, aEndapprove the aipp; citioa• of Ann Kidney for app`r©iai' of a preliminarY_ parcel map at 1,5 Seale Avenue. Councileember Renzel cast a no en this Motion, because she felt that there is a finding that meat be madethat this is a unique property, snd.. the f i d ifg be put 4R tsf re . that lots cannot be divided in any other way. Mayor Henderson urged the Council to approve the situation. He pointed out that there were only 3 properties in the entire square block that are larger than the eventual size of the properties under discussion. He felt that it would be against the owner not to approve this particular division. Councilmember Eyerly stated that, even with the answers to questions he had raised, he still had problems with the division, in view of the policy which the Council has set, of having minimum -size lots in certain areas, and this area under discussion is one of those that have a larger -lot designation. He expressed concern about allowing one lot to be given the right to divide, when they do have the opportunity, as he understands it, to go to the "cottage" type zone, called the R-2. From the minutes, he saw that the owner did not wish to do that, but wanted to sell off part of the property. Mr. Eyerly concluded by saying that he has trouble approving this request in view of the policy set in the past unless a general public hearing is opened up to give the neighborhood a chance' to express their desires for a possible change to past policy. He therefore cast a no vote on this motion. Mr. Schreiber asked if the environmental impact was included in the motion, and Mayor Henderson replied that everything asked for, including the environmental impact, has been included in the notionw He further amplified by stating that when upholding a recommendation of the Planning Commission this includes everything they recommend, with all the conditions. MOTION PASSED on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Henderson NOES: Eyerly, Renzel ABSTAIN: Levy ABSENT: fazz irro, Sher, Witherspoon PLANNING COMMISSION AND ARCHITECTURAL -MTW EMENT LINTY ERSITY AVE., S.P. STATIOPt MOTION: Councilmemer Fletcher moved, seconded by Renzel, to bring forward Item 17. Mayor Henderson ceutieoeyd that he would support this motion only if it were heinit mod e�p - n vote . -_e itr _ It wAsside •brat .$ tsir .ti1..... -_ w - - .. -r - _ o ..- .i.ra ..a-- ..v_f_- L - i it t l -_tit _r.tiusw ___ Wee wouid have to await„ if there were going to be a long discussion He , had received, many calls to move this forward, but wanted to -know if anyone desired to discuss this at some length Councilwaeaaber Renzei, indicated her desire to discuss .this iteiar Counc i lmember Brenner pointed out. that there was a requirement that Item 14 be dealt with at this meeting, and Mayor Henderson Weed that there were eaey other items to be dealt with.. MOTION PASSED: The -motion to bring tie item forward passed en the following vote:. AYES: Eyerly, Fletcher, Levy, Renzel NOES: Brenner, Henderson ABSENT: Witherspoon, Fazzino, Sher Mr. Geor;', Zimmerman said that, before the County made their brief presentation on the facilities, he would like to state that (1) the facility does respond to the overall transit plan for Palo Alto which was approved by Council some time ago (2) the Plan as presently being presented to Council incorporates all the planing Commission recommendations, and (3) Jean Diaz was present to respond to any possible questions from the Council or Public about the Master Agreement. Mayor Henderson apologized, saying he had assumed that there would be no=oresentatioz then called for anyone to make a presentation for the County. Jim Lightbody, Senior Engineer for the Santa Clara County Transit District opened the presentation reminding Council that there has been a great deal of history on this project. The SCC Transit District has been working with the City Staff, Stanford University, the SP for ahont two years, with the Technical Committee which met monthly, and also a Citizens' Committee last year which was chaired by Counci Member Fletcher. He felt that all this work led to a consensus on this project, which is a very complex project, involving many different pieces of land and different issues. It was his opinion that these were all covered as throughly as possible There were just three brief items Mr. Lightbody wished to present, as they would not otherwise be covered; 1. Tunnels underneath the tracks, which is a concern raised in the past. As stzted in the report, SP will no longer have the responsibility for the tunnels under the new contract with them. The County hoped that, in cooperation with CalTrans, they would work to improve the safety of the tunnels, once the project is approved. 2. The second item had just been approved by the Public. Utilities Commission last week, which was the final step in addition to the approval of the Palo Alto City Council. 3. Finally, the. SCC Transit District worked with the developer at the Veterans' building* and it was his opinion that the concerns - there have been resolved. One item that perhaps was tot clearly: •covered .le the report is the matter of thestrip of land udiaeent 0+d- V.farspe+_ Ilii+eere they would provide landscaping to bel4Rte with that on the side of the Depot !Wilding. This is another aftigatioe they proposed to include in the project. Mayor tenderson expressed `the �appreciat.on oftbe;Council for the - _Tr -=efforts of-__the__SCE_ gvis't_ n!zt c*_ __the_pooje._ t9_ congratulated thee on their excellent project;, andontheir- success Se taking are of everyone's special desires and interests and still arriving at a good eonseneus. Counci leeeber itenzel said she realized that the _design preseated to the Coaeecil represented what sbe calls the "westerly" side of the tracks. She woaddared if timproveseets ,were contemplated :for the easterly side . of >thb tracks. . Light$►edy relied that the easterly side of the tracts was in the overall station Brea, and would have to be addressed betiteen the County and CalTrjrs as part of the new SP Agreement. They proposed to deal with that area probably through some kind of maintenance agreement, They had no plans for major improvements there, but he thought there would have to be some improvements made in the parking lot. Councilmember Renzel said that she is a commuter on the SP train to San Francisco, She expressed concern about the shelter on the °easterly" side - it was old, with a leaky roof, and unsightly with graffiti, etc. She felt that it should be replaced with plexiglass type of stcelter, which would provide good shelter, visibility and safety. She felt that this "easterly" side of the station should not be ignored, as it has such heavy use. Mr. Lightbody agreed that this is an important point to consider, and that they would work out an agreement with CalTrans regarding improvements on that side of the tracks, as soon as the project is approved. Something would have to be done in about the next 3 or 4 months. Councilmember Renzel added, in the same veine that there was no telephone on the °easterly" side of the tracks* and asked about a path to the shopping center mentioned in the staff report, as well as a break in the chain -link fence for access. George Zimmerman replied that the path has been paved and in use for about .a 'week and a' half, and that the access through the chain link fence has'been agreed to in discussions between the County and Planning Commission. Councilmember Renzel then quoted from the contract, under the Recitals, "the City desires that the historical significance shall be preservers...,'° and stated that, the interior of the depot being much mere interesting than the exterior, she hoped that it was planned to preserve a goodly portion of the interior. She wondered about the use of the word °desires° as opposed to "requires;" in the language of the contract. Mr. Lightbody said that it was certainly the intention of the County to preserve the interior, and they did not plan any major partitiaining or anything like that inside, but just a minor cleaning of the floor tile, some refinishing of the wood, and some painting. Councilmember Renzel mentioned the oak fixtures, and then asked if the City is protected in the contract by that Recital, ordid there need to be something further in terms of a review of the interior renovation. Mr. Lightbody explained that the recital only sets forth the premiee that preservation of that facility was desired. The later clauses 4ehlinecteith eetUsl_ lere fire Veval'o meal newerli te. v.v. plan as __ preseAiled Transit District and that includes some of thei r specific fntentlbnrs for the fxtOrior and interior. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Levy, that Council adopt a motion approvta t} -e desf n of the Transport Fo011tYi r...., ect to tke zoadh igas specTheo, and that the Council adopt ' a notion authorizing the Neyor to execute the lister Agreement MASTER AGREEMENT - UNICSRSITT AVENUE S.P. DEFOT Santa Clara County Transit District, et al MOTION PASSED: Themotion passed en, a unanimous vote, Fazz•ino and Witherspoon absent. WELCOME TO ENSCHEDE ALDERMAN KASS CORNALIS$ Mayor Henderson then acknowledged the presence of Alderman Kass Cornaliss who is on a private business trio to California, visiting Palo Alto that weekend, and is from Enschede, Palo Alto's Sister City in the Netherlands. The Mayor explained that that community elects 39 Councelpersons, who then select six aldermen of whom Mr. Cornaliss is one. Mayor Henderson then welcomed the Alderman to our city and presented him with a paper weight. PUBLIC HEARING: 424 and 432 WEBSTER STREET Ken Abler, of the Architectural Design Group in Palo Alto, tine architects of the project, introduced himself and the applicant, and stated they were there to answer any questions regarding the map. MOTIONS: Counci imember Eyerly moved, seconded by Fletcher, that Council uphold the Planning Commission's recommendation and approve the application of Barbara Turne►' for approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map for property located at 424 and 432 Webster Street. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Fazzino, Witherspoon absent. PUBLIC HEARING 7T"4 F STREET i t 'afaUllielaiaN MAP F U ANCIAL CORP. MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly, seconded by Brenner, moved that the Council uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the application of Harrington Financial Corporation for a Tentative Subdivision Map, property located at 724/744 Ramona Street, MOTION PASSED: Motion passed unanimously, Fazzino and Witherspoon ab s e n . 1100 WELCH ROAD -AMENDMENT TO ZONING MAP Vice Mayor Sher, disqualified himself because property in question is owned by- his employer, Stanford University, MOTION:.- Council*ember Fletcher moved, seconded by Eyerly. that eeeeeat_ appeoetatesevedinance for first reading and the change of district of property located at 1100 Welch Road from OR (Office Research District) to RM-S. ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY r Of PALO ALTO ARENDINS SECTION 1E0.08.040 DF HE ' PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE ( THE ZONING RAP) TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS .1100. WELCH ROAD FRai, OR TO RS. NOTION PASSED: Notion paused on a unanimous vote,.Shar not participat1aq, :fazzino and Witherspoon absent. Mayor Henderson thin decided to take up some of the items removed from the Consent Calendar. ADDING REGULATORY PROVISIONS Mon ead1ng) Counc i lmember Renzel wanted it noted that she is opposing the ordinance for the same reason she voted "no" at the first reading namely, she feels it should be a broader ban than proposed in this ordinance. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Eyerly that Council approve the ordinance for second reading. R AgE 3 - entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE CITY -OF PALO ALTO ADDING CERTAIN REGULATORY PROVISIONS TO THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE . (1) PROHIBITING, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE POSSESSION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN COGSWELL PLAZA, (2) ESTABLISHING CLOSING HOURS FOR PARKS BETWEEN 10:30 P.M. AND SUNRISE, (3) ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR ADOPTION OF PARK REGULATIONS, AND (4) PROVIDING OTHER REGULATORY PROVISIONS FOR PARKS AND OPEN SPACE LANDS OF THE CITY.* (1st reading, 9-8-80) MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on the following vote; AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Sher NOES: Renzel ABSENT: Witherspoon and Fazzino 4047 EL CAMINO WAY 1111177MTRM N1N-COl FORMINI VS TE a rI ON e.., WOKS Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval of the application of Masada Transmission for property located at 4047 El Camino Way for an exception from the non -conforming use termination provisions. Covnci lsoeaeber Renzel asked if the approval of exception for this automotive use would allow the, current owner to subsequently sell the business end thus allow other types of =automotive uses_ to t+ove in. George Zia�_+er*aerl,_ Principal -Planner, replied #' that i case of sale of --_ t omid have to reati€e a srensiitsion repair • services csr� ss�sc.ats��s - It �.a�itz,t have �.�. Ceunci !member Renzel said that she understood then that this was a very limited exception', in the . respect that it is restricted to the present use. She then asked about the postibilirk+ of other compao uses not _automotive. h t Vin, 4dasegory Mr, Zimmermann, after ascertaining' that Ms. Renzel's concern was with. other Rf.celforming uses, stated that this could only arcmrr through procedures as ovt l i ned in the zoning ordinance for a change from one coon -conforming us* to "another and roust be approved by the building Official according to the WWI., set in the zoning ordinance. If this did occair, the exception would 00 longOr be in effect, and the non -conforming clock would' be set back to dull' 20, 1973. NOTION: Councilmember Fletcher, seconded by Henderson, that Council approve the application of Masuda Transmission for property located at 4037 El Camino Way for an, exception from the non -conforming use termination provisions. MOTION PASSED: Motion passed unanimously, with Fazzino and Witherspoon absent. Recess - 10:35 p.m, to 10:50 p.m. PPQ)LANNING FOR CITY OWNED. NSTRA Mayor Henderson opened the di :cusC ion to the publ is t by first mentioning that various letters were received by the Council an this subject; from the Loma Pr#eta Chapter of th'e Sierra Club, the Palo • Alto Mousing Corporation,. The League of Women Voters of Palo Alto, the Committee for Green Foothills, and the Peninsula Conservation Center. There was also a letter from a Mrs. Frances B. Hogan, of 4198 Oak Hill Avenue, Palo Alto, Larry Faber, 3127 David Avenue, Palo Alto said he realized that many people had a great many interests in this property, but there were many a,aong them, horse -oriented, who have an interest also. He also realized that some of the property will be developed into housing, and had no objection to that, if properly done. He emphasized that the horse people should be included in the decision -making. There is a fine facility already in existence on the property that should be kept, perhaeo even enlarged; there is plenty of space for a park, but horses should be included in that.. Mr. Faber strongly urged that someone from the horse -riding group be included as part of any decision awaking process. He understood that there will be a citizens` committee appointed for purposes of data -gathering and presentation to the Council, and wished to volunteer his services on that committee. Mayor Henderson said that it was not certain that there would be a citixeas'. committee appointed. .his. was just a suggestion that the Council would have to decide on. Mr, Faber strongly suggested that a ci t i.zehs` co*i ttee by foa'saaed, , with representatives from all the: factions involved, and, *gain, that lee. would. like to help with that Committee. - Judith Milgrim, , of Stanford, spoke for, pedestrlans, who can no, hike through Stanford, rough •Arastra, the foothi :is, ,., ` Onto_ :the Santa Cruz mountain trails. She -feared that this_ i_a_ _d �` ham_ tlii .. , Af f_ _ - __-'"�' _.___ --_ -__ter-_: s. - aF4 the present rnedt- tr cf-:-cas =3 ilk, p beyond may ..�� ai ... � ,.wacn� �*F�G�M16 O�k3i. -�-L �r Q�.ii'� ��:..��$ � � � 1�a�rre:. �d he�'oraEai ��y,. be cut off. She felt that pedestrian t al a -round atrastra would not conflict wit% equestrian use. The wsposed trail' around Pam Mill Acted worldbe very unsatisfactory awl dangerous for both 'horses or pedestrians. Joan Nagle, Santa Clara, said he boards a horse very close to the property wader dlscusslo* a*d stated his, interest in seeing the property opened up to horses in sae ffshion, independent of any passible development. Me felt it 12 p,-, oed idea to re-evaluate the. use of publicly -owned lam in the- f *rams : as the Council -is doing, although ugh it was his opinion tket *ft coordination was He poi rrted oat hOt; ,the Armstra prape ty .occw04,: a key locationv with Los Altos Milts si oat side, iertpi a' Vaii tey oe the other, Santa Clara County uoincorporoted land ea :aa rtit r - t ,: . &*d :sr : adjacent Stanford land and Foothill Park. Because of this, the edges of trails should make connections with the adjacent land. In this connection, as Larry Faber pointed out, the recent construction along Arastradero Road has resulted in the perhaps inadvertent destruction of the old horse trail along Aras,tradero Road east of 280. This surprised him, since there was an existing trail proposed in the County Master Plan. He proposed the participation of the hiking, jogging and riding group in the updating of the trails and plan. Tom Jordan, of 474 Churchill Avenue, Palo Alto, representing the Committee for Green Foothills, read the statement dated September 22, 1980, a copy of which is filed in the City Clerk's Office. The Committee for Green Foothills, In existence for 20 years, was originally formed as a result of concern over development of Palo Alto Foothills. The principles of land use which the committee has consistently supported include the statement that urbanization of the foothills is inappropriate. In keeping with these principles, the committee strongly recommends that the entire 515 acres of Arastra property be dedicated as park land. The complete acreage is a logical extension of Foothill Park as a link to the lower foothills and as a part of an original green belt. The 77 acres on the northern side of Arastradero is important beca'rse of its relation to open spaces on adjacent Palo Alto and Stanford land. It is the committee's opinion that housing on this land would be unacceptable for the following reasons: (1) housing in this area is inconsistent with the City's adopted policy of preserving Stanford land with similar terrain and quality as open space (Page 21 of the Open Space Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan); (2) Stanford has made no long-term commitment to open space, so the development on the 77 -acre portion would set a precedent for Foothill's development that extends beyond the Arastra property; (3) Any housing in this area would result in long automobile trips to schools, jobs and services, and (4) the site itself would provide negligible affordable housing. Dedicating the entire 515 acres would leave open some options, for any future'use of Arastra that may be decided upon by other city councils. Mr. Jordan expanded on the first two points by noting that there were not just 77 acres in question, but more like 400 tp 500 acres, because the privately owned property north of Arastradero is the same: kind of property. If the City approves the housing for the 50 units, later private owners,_ like Stanford, can demand the same zoning on their property. Therefore there are not just 50 snits in question, but 400 units. Mr. Jordan reminded the Council -the whole Arastradero question began over the questie of •unreasonable denial of zoning. Secondly, it wait his opinioe that this was bald land planning. It was this I ind of planning Jo the past, that brought us to our present position of urban sprawl, job-hewsi,g imbalance, etc. Thirdly, althoaaah__ h* real1ied__ ra __ imuS4.,i__ie s_ Ver�►_m-eti-.�.�� . .�.... o - - _ _. . - '_"- s.� J--w►hr ♦Met mss. .aam{� .'s4 Y. _--- __- ir4seeo -tine (.ounci l to keep in mind t4at there is no affordable housing coaxing out of this 77 acres proposed for housing - all comparable housing in Los Altos Hills sell fer .aboa0' 1400,000 up. This kind of housing does not help the job-heusing;imbalance. The last point, the proposal to. sell the land and use the money for needed housing elsewhere, is worthy of discussion. However, it was his opinion -that it was not �tcessary to engage in had -land planning to. raise aronoy- for need d l4msisg. r. - Mayor Nsaderton welcomed former lkyor kirke Caaaistoc ,, of - Teaeiysoh _Avenue,' Palo' Alt $-: a as. the net : sp cer . ' Mr a , Comstock reds `a . statement from- the Peit sola►.:.C4tservasien• Ce *er, dated September 22, 1980, ehich esseetlally. sot forth the .recommendation of that orS+aq xati o* that the •Conn 1 l pates s park/open spike, 'dedication ordinance as the entire property." The 'statement gore support to position of the Committee for Green Foothills that the proposed housing on 77 acres not only would not help the housing/job imbalance, but would cause problems because of distance from mass transit, shopping, and community services. A copy of this statement is on file in the Palo Alto City Clerk's office. Louis Goldsmith, of 1462 Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto, stated his agreement with the letter sent to the Council by the Palo Alto Housing Corporation, dated September 18, 1980. He supported the idea of 51 housing units of some kind in the 515 acres. His opinion was that this was a very moderate but important contribution to the hobsing/jpbs,imbalance, and that subdividing the property and selling it would produce needed money for housing, but also $400,000 to $500,000 homes in that area. He then gave two suggestions: f,l) study the possibility of building condominiums rather than single-family hoaxes. A such smaller plot of land would be needed, probably not more than 15-25 acres, probably not necessarily north of Arastradero. He pointed out that previous, garden -type condominiums are almost non-existent in Palo Alto. Condominium development would permit much closer control of the appearance of the housing; there would be less impact on the environment. (2) Mr. Goldsmith's second suggestion was that the City of Palo Alto be .its own developer, or at elst sponsor the development of these condominiums, as these would be fairly simple for the City to develop and at the same time have a beautiful project in one small portion of the property in question. These 51 units of housing could provide to the City a very large belowemz;rket rate contribution, or ion -lieu payment, or a mitigation measure? to help provide affordable housing in the city. Vice -Mayor Sher then asked Mr. Goldsmith to clarify his statement about the condominiums being built on 15.25 acres on the property, but not necessarily north of Arastradero Road.' Mr. Goldsmith explained that he meant that there was.noehine sacred about the 77 acres north of Arastradero for housing, but a •study should be made and the condominiums built on any part of the 515 acres deemed best for housing. Jean Ko 1 enee;, 3541 Louis . Rotel, Palo Alto, stated her agreement with Issues as presented by the Committee for Green Fteethills with regard to our pride in our open space. She`: then went on to support the claims of joggers; hikers and horse riders, that these trails :should be expanded and not cut off by -noosing. Her contentioe ryas :that, considering the -the .amount of money . spent to ei ntein i basebal 1 fields, tennis_ courts, the Yacht Harbor, and other such .lobbies, compered .to the .low maintenance required fer horse/hiking trails, the reeeest made 'by the riding group Is•.quite Dodest and should be recogei Led. _iinhairt_ N'rk' 725 C...,...._r s t:_ _ l ._e_ p .sN yfvilLCl-_'JtiT�P_C� Palo Alto, �.....� the es- _ g, a ..� urged L�� ,a�e,�c a � to ***edit* - the dedication of the Arastra property for - open/park land sod for trails, as this property has been owned by the City of Palo Alto and itwas time to make a decision. ilea►_ Ey1n McCurdy, speaking in behalf of the Loma Prieta Chapter of the Sierra . Club, read a letter dated ` September 18i 1980,..a copy of WOis on file In thee Palo.,41t0 Ci.ty.C1erkis office. : This sbaisarized tke :bositito of titat.oroanizotion,rellarding the Arastra property: the Loma Prieto Chapter of the Sierra Club was advocated for over b decide that the landin Um -lower foothills be left as open space, because: The rerrotOsess of the Arastra: property would revolt in heavy. avtoh*bf le traffic for fretere residents to reach jobs, schools and services; the: $970 L1'iesston b illayney Report recommended that the land be left as open space is a land bank classification,.especialy since the cost of providing services to this area would be more than the tax revenue on property housing; developing housing in the proposed section would invite further urbanization of the foothills and future development or Stanford University land, and the kind of housing that would be built there could not meet the need for moderate and low income housing to alleviate the jobs/housing imbalance. Nanette Hanko, of 3172 Emerson Street, Palo Alto, stated that the Palo Alto City Council now has an opportunity to plan for the preservation rather than the development of a very priceless asset. She reminded them that a comparable issue was decided in the 1960's when the Baylands were dedicated, making Palo Alto the only city adjoining the Bay with the forethought to protect this natural area. She commended the previous Council who negotiated the settlement for the Arastra property the taxpayers should be apprised of the bargain that the City_ received. Ms. Hanko then stated that, since both Foothill Park and land owned by the Mid -Peninsula ' Regional Open Space District are located at distances not easily reached by bicycle, horse or foot, the Arastra lands can provide not only a more local open space preserve, but a safer and far more attractive route for reaching the Park and possibly District land-ss. E;The southwesterly portion of Arastra contains a lake and facil itie.a suitOje for. camping, and many good trails, with the Arastrd!ro Creed' trail connecting with Foothill Park. The 77 acres north of Arastradero could afford, in her opinion, some scenic protection for the rest of the property. Her feelings were that ten years was more than enough time to wit for the preservation of the Arastra land. She urged the Council to dedicate the entire 515 acres as open/park land, and then require any further development to be decided by public vote. Herb Borock, 3401 Ross Road, Palo Alto, stated that he felt that the Arastra property should not be developed until the people of Palo Alto had an opportunity to vote on the issue. As the decision to purchase the property was made behind closed doors by a previous City Council, this would help restore public confidence in the. decision -making process. He supported the arguments . of the Committee for Green Foothills and the Loma Prieta Chapter of the Sierra Club for keeping the entire 515 acres in open space, and suggested that the Council could dedicate the 515 acres as park land, and then require a vote of the people to remove any land for residential development. Me realized that the City Council would not like any probable restrictions in their decision -lurking, and therefore suggested that (1) the City Council should_ tentatively select options for the Arastra property, (2) the City Council should then place an advisory mesaer! .olr .the ballot listing thee options (perhaps on next March's regular State election date) and (3) the City Council . should the n select one of the options, taking into caesideretlen —the: results Katherine McCann, 783 8arlae4 Drive, pa $1'A1tca, 'firit +aade' Clear that she was speaking as ar Audubon Society member, but Pot as an official representative. She then identified herself as having been an Audubon Society Field Trip Chairman for ten years, and organized many field trek .iota. the Arastra property; therefore her interest in this property was more than a casual one. As a consequence, she 'had some suggestions, as,fellows:. (1) -that the horse and p destr la.A trails be kept separate,, as horses* *Wes leave • deep permanent ipdentatipns on the trails when, tee land becomes soft,' Naking it difficult for hiking, (2) the 'peed ;and the *reek are beautiful nature. nears unlike 1 any at Foothill Park and should be left as undisturbed as possible, (3) the Palo Alto City Council appoint a citizens' committee to work with the- staff, to bring out as many different points of view as possible. Vice -Mayor Sher addresed a question to Messrs. Knox and Schreiber regarding M1'. Goldsmith's statement abort keeping options open for 15-25 acres either north or south of Arastradero Road. He wondered if they had a reaction, considering that the staff report clearly states that any housing suggested must be north of Arastradero Road on the 77 acres. Mr. Knox replied that he was present at a Palo Alto Housing Corporation meeting, where this subject was raised, and may have provided same misinformation to Mr. Goldsmith about the prospect of condorainiui development. In speaking about what is allowed in the OS zoning with one unit for 10 acres, they began discussing the details of a condominium proposal made some years ago, for along Page Mill Road. Vice -Mayor Sher then reiterated his question about the north or south of Arastradero Road location for the suggested condominium development. He then stated his surprise that there would be any question about the proposed location, since the focus has been on only the 77 acres north of Arastradero for housing. He asked Mr. Knox'q opinion as to whether there was some parcel on the south of Arastradero that might be suitable for housing. Mr. Knox replied that a considerable portion of the land south of Arastradero shown in the Livingston and Blayney reportsand,the Staff' Report cif September 4, 1980, is considered developable, as well as the 7;% acres north of Arastradero. Vice -Mayor Sher pointed out this aspect had not been mentioned in the Staff Report. Mr. Knox replied, with regard to Item 4b on Page 2 of the Staff Report about retention of openspaces, that possibly all of the residential development could be clustered in the 77 -acre portion. They are now simply responding to Council direction regarding the process where there is a need for citizen involvement and public hearings. This 77 -acre portion is illustrative of the way the process works. The issue would not be argued at this point, but . if Council wished to go ahead with a study, a consultant would need to be appointed to study the suitability of the lands. etc. Specifically in aeswer to She question of where housing should be placed, fres the gross oe1.ye#s that Livingston and 4 laymmepereport, did 10 years ago, it had not been' Met*P.ine'd that there is much . diinference, in the suitability of ,either north or south of Arastradero for deve1op.egt. Vice -Mayor Sher then asked if, there would ha Oe soome disadvantage in develoolog south of Arastradero, as there would be a separation of park lend, some on each side of the road, rather than having the non -park land on one boundary of the property. Mr. Knox replied that there could be some disadvantage, and that would hoveto be evaluated. There has beeh.some public expression of concern that develapieg the 77 acrd could ,provI_de a for of bracket* to traits going through .tbet ore* to some possible future -trail on Stanford land. O.i the other hands smaller developments well placed pie the eeovt suitable antes could be perhaps hidden from view and allow trails end vistas in the open spaces around them. Mr. Knox pointed out then that ell of this must . be carefully analyzed if there is to beam,► development on the property at all,. ;eleeeeeel e,Neee,e. Councilmember 6renner had a question on Item 8 of the Staff Report. where it is suggested that five of the 51 units be BMR units, with the natural conclusion that the approximately half -million dollars would have to be in -lieu money instea.l of units and suggests alternatively that 10 percent of the net intake could be set aside for housing programs. She wondered if the staff had extended that, and how, many affordable units could be built for that 10 percent, Mr. Knox could not say exactly how much profit the City would make, but his rough guess.was-a net gain of about $100,000 pPr,unit'if the city were to develop a subdivision of houses or condominiums, or e total of 5 million dollars. If Mr. Goldsmith's suggestion was taken for the City to become its own developer, then the total net gain might be acaound 12 to 15 million dollars. Speaking of the range between 5 :and 15 million dollars, 10 percent would then work cite t%; between ►00,000 and 'one and a half million dollars. He cautioned, however. that the 10 percent is only a suggestion, because Palo Alto's below market rate program speaks of 10 percent, based pretty much on 10 percent of a developer's profit. Actually, the City could choose to take all the net gain, cep to the figurative 15 million dollars, to perhaps buy parts of Maximart site or whatever school sites might be closed and available for, housing, or any other opportunities, and use the money as a landbank for housing.. Counci lmember Brenner said that she understood that specif iccal ly, using the 5500,000 net gain figure, this would be a case of providing 51 housing units for millionaires, and maybe 10 affordable units. She wanted to make a passing comment that that proportion hardly seemed justifiable to her, and added that she was interested in Mr. Goldsmith's remarks that the City should take a graver view of the situation. Mr. Knox explained that, in speaking ,'f the 5500,000 figure, the City may be able to purchase 2 acres for that account (at the rate of 5250,000 per acre), and building at the density of 20 units per acre, the proportion would be more like 40 affordable units of assisted housing, Counc i lmember Brenner replied that she appreciated these figures, but still felt that the City should do better. in the area of providing affordable housing. Counci lmember Leery asked if anyone could tell him where the Palo Alto Unified School District property was locate. He understood that there was some adjacent to -the property in question. Larry Faber pointed out the PAUSO sites on the map. They are located et the corner of Arastraderd and Page Mill Road, and up Page Mill opposite Alexis Drive, about 50..50, acres... Counci lmesber Levy wanted to establish tse fact that neither:' of the PAUSO parce"1s'pointed out were within the limits of the City of Palo AIto, and the City therefore: had no control -over how they were to be develop«d. `Going back to the Arastra property, he asked -if there was any limitation on the amount of acreage to be used for the prof t',s Si I ousiatg units. Me **adored about the possibility of using a. minimum weber of acres for :Ice 5I units. Mayor Henderson a s+uered in the affirsative, quoting !r. Goldsmith as suggesting 2O-25 acres is beteg satisfactory, W. Knox aide Winged hide. there was we minima stated. The OS zoning lax states that above four; waits would be a cluster, and the City could get that Cluster dawn to the smsl!tst possible area, if desired. 1 Vice Mayor Sher wished to express a few views on the subject. He said there had been several strong statements made about the desirability of dedicating the entire 515 acres of Arastra property to parkland, and keeping it forever as open space. He himself was personally attracted to this idea, and was certain in his mind that the largest part of the property should be treated in this fashion. However, as it was he who had suggested this item be placed on the agenda, in order to begin the cautious, careful process of considering the ultimate use to be wade of this very sensitive, irreplaceable open space, he was not inclined to be precipitous, but wanted a careful analysis of all available -options. He said this process of careful consideration was important to him because of the 7-1/2 million dollars of taxpayers' money spent to settle the lawsuit and acquire the property for the city and its people, and so that the public could be heard aid and the Council hear_ a variety of opinions on this subject. He stated that, of the new ideas put forward; at this meeting, one was the idea of an advisory vote, to be accomplished in two ways: (1) to dedicate the property as parkland, and then to Nindedicate it later if that were the wish of the people.-. However, as Mr. Borock had ported out and the staff had indicated, density,transf :r has become very complicated, if not impossible. Anoeher method, as suggested by Mr. Borock, was for some alternate options to be carefully considered, developed, and put before the people as an advisory vote. Vice -Mayor Sher went on to say that he wished to "float" an idea, not make a notion yet, to see what she reactions would be. First, he suggested that the Counci lmembers then present express their intentions to preserve as open space and eedicate as parkland the 438 acres, as a minimum, of the Arastra property south of the Arstradero Road. The second suggestion was that, without excluding the possibility of dedicating as parklands the remaining 77 acres north of Arastradero Road, staff be directed to develop various options for the use of the 77 acres, consistent with the OS zoning (as would any option), and in accordance with the process outlined in the' staff memorandum of September 4, 1980. The third r'oujd be keeping open the possibility, for later determination, of sending any final proposal to the people of Palo Alto for an advisory vote. He then asked for reactions from the councilarembers. Mayor Henderson answered that he had not anticipated taking any action at the present meeting. However, as the only Counci lmember who had voted on the Ceunc i l - i n 1971 for the open space zoning, he strongly felt that laud -should not be 'given up.' He then gave two possibilities he had in wind: either dedicate all.of the 515racres -to persenent open spoace and parkland, or consider developing all or part' of, the 17 acrs north of_ Arastradero Road. Under no condition would he consider development be=yond thet portion. lie suggested to Vicp-i ayoe _'her that this possibility be kept open for further discussion,- as he felt this react really owed to the community. He .suspected -that his, find vote- would be. for dedicating all 515 acres as parkland/open space, but expressed himself as,willing tp discuss developing the 77 acres. He .reminded the Council thet _a- financial co* itaent had_, been Bade by the City. Through the years a great umber of -people have commeeted-� to him about the 7.5 million dollars sf►eat� for the property, end expressed the hope that some of the money could, within the zoning .ostab l fished, perhaps be returned to the public:. . He felt that .tbeso. PION* Ofd to be considered, , The $ayor , stated however, that alt iegb navae.ally in favor -of citizens' c eittees, .he wished to .avoid;any,00re delays. 4e reiterated that in, tbiS case` he did -have his-•#tRd made up be would not back off Jr0M=the d*vision for: et least 438 'acres of open space/parklapd, He Concluded by sa;ying, .in -;vise: Of `the, fact that there would he ample opportunity fur public inputs at tl!e plenniag Comeission 4hearfngs and the Council meetings, ad: -p1 - ,tronq feelings t+it they Should move 2 .2 .2 .22fee on and perform the dedication for any amount of acreage as soon as possible, h`s reaction was to support Vice -Mayor Sher's suggested motion. Councilmember Brenner said one of her greatest concerns regarding the proposal for developing the 77 acres was that it would seem to set a precedent for surrounding land. She pointed out that, according to the 1976 land use map presently in effect, all of the land from Foothill Expressway or Junipero Serra south is, with a couple of 'spotty exceptions, in open space controlled development. Her worry was that, by approving the development of the 51 housing units on the 77 acres, we might cause an explosion of the same kind of housing,; i.e., one unit per acre, on the other OS zoned lands both in Palo Alto and within our sphere of interest. It was her opinion that the cost of this kind of developments if expanded, would exceed any expected- income. However, she did wish to take some action on this issue, consider the property more specifically, and get the dedication under way. The option which appealed to her was of first dedicating the entire 515 acres to open space/parkland, and then reconsidering other options lei' the'77 acres. Along with other options the staff should be given, she asked them to consider the possibility of land -banking the 77 acres for a future but presently not identified public good, since land can only appreciate in value, and she was not really convinced very much affordable housing would result from selling the 77 acres now. She recalled to them the many disadvantages of developing this property which had been listed earlier by the Committee for Green Foothills. Therefore, if there was a motion to proceed in giving the staff an assignment, Counci *erher Brenner wished to. include those options, and certainly the option of dedicating the entire property. Mayor genderson said it was nut his understanding that any figures were included regarding the ret gain from the sale of the land. The information given so far was an amount of 4-5 million dollars if the city sold the land and did not develpo it, and an amount of approximately 2 million dollars if half were given to housing and half to open space. Counci lmeeber Brenner replied that she did want to know what the amounts were, but she was not very impressed with the figures given earlier. Her opinion was that there would be a satisfactory net gain if a developer developed the land, but there would not be a justifiable profit if the City did. She reminded the Council of the prime reason fora even considering housing on. the Arastra property, which is the ultimate goal of.bui•lding affordable -housing. Considering the selling value of comparative housing in the Los Altos Hill% area tclose to 1/2 million dollarS), _sfe° was not against stcd ►ing this as aei :,Qptien, as this might give us more than 15_ million dollars. Mayor Needersei eepleined that Mfr. Goldsmith's suggestion was for the City itself to develop the.property and then sell it as a whole - there -mould be: nomoderate or low-income housing -there. Counc i lmember' Sreiner reel i ed that .she understood, and appreciated Mr.Goldsmithis suggestion. Coonc l la tuber Levy stated his agreement with l oyor._ Henderson . and Vita-N*yer ~Sher that some action should really be 'taken on this item at the present meeting. It was his understanding everyone was in agreement that , 4 minimum of 437 acres should be set aside for public use, ae the erea .ender discussion was boa much more than that.. His . personal preference wits for a good deal tore than 437 Acres to be dedicated, but her recognized this wee not the eftly land acatvts f tion or land use question : that would be confronting Palo Alto within the next few years. He pointed out that there is a good deal of more centrally located land, now owned by the School Districts but which may become available for acquisition by the City, and for which funds should be set aside. Vice -Mayor Sher then stated he was amenable to considering the monetary value of the 77 acres, or perhaps less, because this was to him a means of acquiring a good deal more land in other parts of the City, which would also be very useful for open space and recreatiar+. He emphasized the importance of beginning the process of taking action on this item, of keeping the process open, and of proceeding with dispatch. Councilmember Rer.zel had a question for the City Attorney with regard to the problems of using the density from .438 acres for purposes of developing on 3 smaller portion, not restricted to 77 or 20, but maybe even 3 acres, She wondered if there was a current mechanise within the City ordinances for subdividing with the 438 acres, plus any other acreage added to the park dedication, acknowledging the transfer of deve1opment rights. City Attorney Abrams answered that there was no formal ordinance addressing this. In discussing he item with the planning staff before the meeting, it was not determined how many parcels are in existence on the Arastra property, or that subdivision would be necessary to dedicate a portion and retain a portion potentially for housing. This aspect should be studied. He pointed out that the City is, as sovereign, Mayor course y entitled to deal with the property as it wishes. Vice Ma.Ior Sher n his proposal and the Council have e expressed clearly that they wish to follow the City's ordinances. The understanding of the staff is that those procedures which would otherwise apply to property development will be followed. If a subdivison process is a part of this procedure, then a transfer of density could result. Counc; iatember Renzel then restated her queston. She wondered if, because of the possibility of housing deveopment on part of the land, it would be necessary to delay dedication in order to set aside portion of the and (with its full density) for housing, or if this could be done as a preliminary process, and the dedication take place on the bulk of the property, City Attorney Abrams replied that, theoretically, staff could bring before Council some ordinance that Would clarify a transfer of density, within a reasonable amount of time and allow a portion of the could alsotbetevaluated�as, a possib means of allowing aspect D 4 quickly. g transfer with$aat the necessity of creating a formal ordinance. He thought that there was concern about the fact that, while the City is the sovereign for :zoning aspects, there is no formalized process, and this may be subject to some dispute. Coupci lruewber genzel then. asked if there was a proi:ess in existence whereby a developer owning, for example, S@0 acres, might wish to dedicate 499 acres for parkland and place all 5d units on one acre She wondered if this would all take` place simultaneously-, where' the 54 units would lave to he s+ab4 r}ded, or if It would' be sufficient to crake a.subdivision indicating, the Weeific ) et1an of. the -5O units, thus resei'v i ng the rest of the land as parkland'. city Attorney Abraes explained that therm 1* a problem in'that area, though, it was his opinion that it icas bet *Moro, end. could be !forked around rather easily. A developer 11th..a largo aro. of .. land moisld, then propose developing : t portion amid idedicaties a pwrt40,, _- TRe- potentiai problem with dedicating a portion ofthe land h w`to parkland is that there is now no, project proposing this, Ind consequently the two actions are separated. Then there immediately arises the concern with whether or not we therafter retain our right to transfer the density. Counciimeraber Renzel said that, in light of Mr. Abrams' answer, she was incllaed to agree with comments made by Mayor Henderson and CouncilMember Brenner and with Vice Mayor Sher's general motion. - She was not averse to considering the possibility of exploring some housing on the site, although her personal preference was for dedicating the entire property to parkland. Her opinion was that any land owned by the city was better than money in the bank; ho rfever, the city hrd the option, by way of the vote required by the park dedication ordinance, of removing land from park dedication if there should arise some compelling city need. She qualified this by recalling Mayor Henderson's statement about the strong expressions of concern by some members of the public' regarding the city investment in this property, and suggesting the explorationof some return. She conluded by saying that she generally concurred with comments made by the rest of Council, especially with Counc i lmember Brenner's condition that the option of dedicating the entire Arastra acreage to open speceiparkland be explored as well. Councllmember Eyerly had a few questions for the staff relating to their September 18th staff report, in which there seemed to be indicated a desire to prepare an update of our open space element, with a stage 1 and stage 2, which, as he understood it, would take about 18 months. He sai,+ he was not qui'e sure a. Brat the amount of area involved; he presumed that to include all the foothills area within the city limits, with perhaps some suggestions regarding the disposition of the. Arastra property_, He wondered if this interpretation was' correct, as there were no ectual recommendations given in the report, but mostly comments, Mr. Knox explained that there were about four different kinds of plans which could be implemented in relationship to the September 8th staff report. The plan at the smallest extreme would take up the question of only the Arastra land; the next step would address the disposition of all cityeowned property within the city limits, including sore comprehensive plans for this property, including the Arastra property among others. The third step up would be to study all publicly -owned land, including that held by the County and the. Nid•Penlnsula .Regional Open Space District. The next step would be revise our open space element entirely and study all public and private properties in the. foothi 11t. He c#a`tieued by saying) that it was the feeling of the staff that,, thomgh there was some redundancy and, overlap, this was an open space element covering the foothills, urban 'flatlands and the baylands. He mentioned in an aside the redundancy and possible conflict in terms of the baylands plan for the open space element, and the opportunity provided now to eliminate that redundancy. He then stated that the report was meant to convey the main point that it was not urgent to proceed with this kind of a plan; the policies are certainly wary,. clear, in the open -space element, in the trails and paths plan* and in Abe Wu/lands master plan. From the staff's point of..view, the planning staff should, in conducting a shady relating to any of the properties in question,, begin with the slnallest, the one kith the best potewtia'l for resolving the hottest issue; that is, thequestion of dedicating allof the Arastra property for open spacefparklend versats taking .the opportunity of recapturing some of the funds invested by the city ,four or five years ago und-using they for the perchese of ether property in the city, whether school sites, or lands for housing. 1 f 1 Councilmember Eyerly said that he was sympathetic to the Council's present overriding interest in settling the question of dedicating all or a portion of the Arastrt property to parkland. His interpretation of the Councilmembers' comments was that they were not interested in any aspect besides the dedication question other than the possibility of recapturing some of the invested money through housing, and the amount of acerage involved. He referred to Vice -Mayor Sher's suggestion regarding en advisory public vote, and stated his presumption that the entire process, a staff study of all the options followed by a presentation to the public for an advisory vote, would take, about 13 months. He was unconvinced that this was necessary. He said that, if the Council were to proceed and give the staff an assignment at the present time, he would like to see that particular suggestion excluded, until the staff returns with some of their study which the Council could then take time to examine, if they so desired. He concluded by stating that he did not think Council should lock themselves in at this time. Counci lmenber Fletcher said that a study of her road map showed some development on the easterly edge of the property under discussion within the city limits of Los Altos Hills. It did not seer very attractive to her to fill in the entire northern side of Arastradero with housing; because of the precedent of adjoining property, it would be more difficult to stop the spread of development tr;ere if the entire site were covered. There was a pocket along the easterly edge that might lend itself to housing and from which some funding might be made available. Her concern regarding raising funds was because of the many comments grade in the community during revenue elections about the limitless amounte of money to be. raised from the sale of city -acquired land, if the city were to acquire some school sites. It was her contention that the City Council must be realistic about the sources of funds for the acquisition of school sites, and about whether they would receive the two-thirds majority vote necessary to purchase school sites, if there were no sale of public property. She concluded by stating that she was notready at this point to make a final decision and would like to see more staff analyses. Vice -Mayor Sher stated that he should probably have made clear when he suggested his motion, that he himself is not enamored ',f develo?pin S1 half -'to -one -million dollar housing units. He wanted to make c l eai 'that he was opposed to anyhousing of that kind ,unless there woulo;;.be substantial benefits. to the city,: enabling it to provide 1g;41fica,nt amounts of affordable housing and possibly open space. Helfelt that Council, as well. as a number of members of the public agreed with him, that Si unitsofvery expensive housing does pot do anything significant for the housing problem. He stressed th,t, when the motion is made,' it should be expressly understood to include, in the"secodd part where options to be given to the staff for edevelopmeet are discussed, some of the suggestions made at the meeting. One would certainly be Counc4imember erenner� s eaestioh, e f to expressed by one member of the ae dieace, aboutthe possibility. of dedicating the. entire 51S acres of the AY astra property at, the outset, and then decide about .housing on a portion, of it later, with en advisory vote. Re believed that sir: Abrams stated the stiff' would study this .possibility. ,',Other que'sttons to take up would deal with the choice of developer (with. Mr. Goldsmith's idea in grind)a d i sp©s i t i a�n of . the proceeds, f the option chosen would really produce substantial benefits for f trdable , housing and possibly open space, the deaper of creatinglittecedence of development on adjecent land, and the -type of ii4del clustering .possible which:: would cause the least damage -to the 1aed9 with no assumption of: using the complete 77 acres now propose* far hsnsi*. Vice -Mayor Sher then said that, with the understanding that these would be included is any options the. staff would study, he would make „the following motion: MOTION: Vice Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Renzel, that the Council express its intent to preserve as open space and to dedicate as parklands, as a minimum, the 438 acres of the Arastra- property south of Arastradero Road (or a comparable 438 acres); and that, without excluding the possibility of dedicating as parklands the remaining 77 acres north of Arastradero Road, staff be directed to develop various options for the use of the 77 acres, consistent with the OS zoning, and in accordance with process outlined in the staff memorandum September 4, 1980 (except that there shall be no citizens committee), and keeping open the possibility of sending the final proposal or alternative proposals to the people for a vote. Counci lmember Renzel said that she felt it was very important for her to slake clear that she was unhappy with the idea of one unit of hosing per acre, thus using up 61 acres for the units of housing. She would much prefer a very tight cluster so that, if the City does pursue housing on this property at all, it could serve, as an example to other developers in the foothills as to the optimum kind of cluster housing. She reminded the Council of the struggle with a recent sub -division that was "clustered' on 6 -acre parcels, which she felt still really has a severe impact on the area. The only other point she wished to make was regarding the necessity of tying together the various public properties by way of a trail plan, for pedestrian and equestrians circulator. She said that, though the Council had been concentrating discussions on the park dedicatirrn and housing aspects, she gave this a very high priority in any planning for the Arastra site; and felt very strongly that this almost had to be taken care of first, in order to determine what land is available for other uses. Mayor Henderson replied that he saw problems with delaying the motion with details which coup be worked out later. Courfci lmember Renzel explained that she was merely speaking of one main through -route through the park, not all the trails. Councilmember Eyerly addressed a question to Vice Mayor Sher. He said it was his understanding that the Vice Meyer, while supporting Mr. Goldsmith's suggeston, also mentioned ih his motion separating the 77 acres north of Arastradero for possible housing. He thought that Mr. Goldsmith had suggested locating the housing possibly on the other side, Counci lasearber Fletcher, had mentioned the desirability of considering both sides of Arasteeadero, and he wts in —agreement,. He expressed uncertainty as to whether this would Wallowed under the present wordinii of the motions. He felt that there were some reasons for considering either side of the road for housing; perhaps tighter ssreia of the grrfAied, puss bly as a buffer against Stanford land, or which, .would ba the best area for housing. Vice Nair Sheri rein iced ,that he thought it important, coeslderi ng commuait r sehtt.ent is -he he° heard it, to take isle f it t step at the hfesedt ae eting of daclarint the intention ofdedicating a substantial. portion of the land to parkland* and that the phrasing of the motion .WAS in his opinion a ;cleaner sad easier meansof taming that first step. He conceded that he does have a problem with the idea of takinga piece of, land in the middle: -of the *rostra property for Consideration for ;housing. Ht could -be chovieced otherwise; if the stoiff ratatr*ed mith a_ plea for locating the, Sl units of housing an en ideal site not on the parcel of land aerth of Arastradero Read, he was certain that the Council will not have irrevocably committed themselves. However, be still thought it necessary for the Council to take this first step of declaring their, intent of dedicitiag the greater " amount -of- this property to p.arklend, ;- ' that his maim was the easiest way of doing this. ; { ' eceocibereee fyerly said that he understood the thrust of the Vice Mayor's motion to be the dedication of a minimum of 430 acres to parkland, and that if the staff were to submit a proposal acceptable to the Council for housing on either side of Arastradero, he would be happy as long as at leas* these minimums acres were reserved as parkland. Councilmember Eyerly professed himself happy with the motion if this interpretation was correct. Vice Mayor Sher replied that his mind was never closed to sensible suggestions. Councilmember Levy had some questions regarding the motion. He suggested that, instead of specifying the property "south of Arastradero," meaning all of the property south of Arastradero, it would be sufficient to state "437 acres, or "it is our desire that a minimum of ..." Msyor Henderson interrupted to correct the figure from 437 to 438 acres. Councilmember Levy replied that.he was merely rounding out the exact figure of 436.834 acres. Vice Mayor Sher then suggested that the motion be amended to read in part" "438 acres of the Arastra property south of Arastradero Road (or a comparable 438 acres)", and then asked if this was satisfactory to all Council members. Mayor Henderson suggested that the motion specify only "438 acres." It was his opinion that otherwise there was the rIsk of losing some of the rest of the property, because he himself would need a great deal ofproofto even consider developing on the other side of Arastradero. Mainly, his point was that Council could always change their minds as a result of convincing ;arga ts-= for another viewpoint. . Councilmember Levy said that he thought Council should start by giving staff somewhat broader leeway and guidelines; and then move detqn to narrower guidelines. Ne himself was willing to consideroat this point areas both north and south of Arastradero. Although he did think it was very likely that the final decision would be for the reservation of the entire . portion , south of Arastradero to open space, he wished at this point to give staff the opportunity to study both sides and give their recommendations. The argte ebbts for or against be had Mard up to that riot' were. not sufficient to close his mind. Re pas, therefore convinced that Council should not stipulate south of Arestraderh aslong as such -a . substanti,a1, mountof acreage was being discussed. Vice Mayor Sher staged that he wished' to leave the, wording of the, motion as, inpart,; 1438 acres of the *rostra property south of Arastradero Road (or comparable 430 acres)..., in order to record the prasumptioa oaf a decision egaiestdevelopment_ south of Arastradero. He'said that as far as, he was concerned, the suggestion for a pos ible development on the other side was mentioned for the first time at Ws mating He was prepared to add the language e(or ,, ;osparable_431 acres" if that would .satisfy.:t objections "raised, butrepeated his iihtention of 1eay1asg..`,th* Wpraing.regarding Property south of *rastradero. Councilmember-Levy said that theadditlan of the 1anVsage et(o►r comparable 438 acres)' sounded cumbersome to him but would be seti•sfactor '. °' - Mayor Henderson interjected that he would consider the language "or comparable 438 acres" added, if the second agreed. Councilmember Levy had some other comments to make. ' His understanding was that land in Los Altos Hills and in other areas around Palo Alto with one -acre per unit zoning was selling in the neighborhood of $400,000 to $500,000 per acre. If this is the case, and the City sold 50 one -acre 'Pots, the total revenue to the public would be around 20 million dollars. He felt that, if his calculations were correct, this was really a good deal of money that would be available for affordable housing and open space acquisition, or .any other uses deemed beneficial to the city. He stressed that the Council should keep this in grind, and that it was not necessary that this specific acreage be dedicated to affordable housing for the City's program of affordable housing to be substantially benefited. Another point he wished to consider was the sUggestion'that the City be the developer or general contractor, etc.e for this property. He himself was very wary of the City getting -F qo the business of being a developer. Mr. Knox wished to clarify the figures used by Cnuncilm ember Levy. He said these were gross figures, whereas those quoted by staff earlier were net intake. It was true that lots were selling for the dollar slues mentioned by Mr. Levy, but on improved land With roadways already put in, etc. There Is only a. road with some utilities presently on the Arast"ra property. A cost development must be considered, as well as the profit. Mr. Schreiber wanted to clarify two points. With regard to staff process, he wished to confirm his understanding that part of that process would be for staff to begin interviewing and selecting consultants. The second part of the process calls for a citizens committee. There had been an objection voiced to this, because of possible duplication of Planning Commission and City Council involvement, however, and he wondered if it was the intent of the City Council to proceed with appointing a citizens committee, as initially indicated in the process. Vice Mayor Sher replied that a consultant would be necessaryp given the constraints placed on staff to develop various options. There would be no built-in bias in this case either. for or against housing development. The options would, all be"kept open, and " this process would be part of the motion. He referred to the Mayor to answer the question about the Citizens co&ittees as having raised the question &beet its desirability. Mayor Henderson said he understood that poi s_ statement wss included in 4r= Sh►er's lotion, which specified no citizens committee.' He ei plaieed that 'his feelio s were that the option* ere. fairly .narrowed dome, bed the citizens will have fell: input at. the Planning Coate i ss i pn end Count i i peer i ngs t Vice Mayor Sher said that the staff had- reeosmended a citizens committee. Mr. Knox said thathe thought Mayor Henderson reel ly discovered that if this were a much broader _ emus ec t, where development of the entire 515 acres were under distussiee, that en advisory committee would be desirable. With the options narrowed dewe es they ere et this stage, this would not ,nerenserY. Vice Mayor . Sher said he would be prepared to delete the requirement for the citizens committee in giving the assignment to -the staff for developing the options, but he thought it should be understood that 22 ,i* 3p there should be citizen input when disposition of the parklands must be decided. Councilmember Fletcher stated her agreement with Mr. Schre;ber that a citizens committe would be very useful for the procese of developing options and when deciding disposition of the dedicated parkland, but she d'd not think it would be necessary at this stage. Councilmember Brenner said it was her opinion that the planning Commission receives good citizens' reactions, and therefore is the Council's official citizens committee for the purposet of this particular study. !MOTION PASSED; The Motion that Council express its intent to preserve as open space and to dedicate as parklands, as a minimums, the 438 acres of the Arastra property south of Arastradero Road (or a comparable 438 acres); and that, without excluding the possibility of dedicating as parklands the remaining 77 acres north'of Arastradero Road, staff be directed to develop various options for the use of 77 acres, consistent, with the OS zoning, and in accccordance with process nut fined in the staff memorandum September 4, 1980 (except that there shall te no citizens committee), and keeping open the possibility of sending the final proposal or alternative proposals to the people for o rote passed on a unanimous vote, Fazzino and Witherspoon absent. A second recess was taken frog-, 10:30 to 10:50 p. Mayor Henderson wanted to correct an omission of one statement from the Arastra item. He had asked for a report from city staff concerning overall planning for the foothills, but thought that should be held in abeyance for now, as staff had a great deal of work to do with regard to the Arastra property alone. DRAFT ECONOMIC J€YELOPMENT OBJECTIVES map VUL IGItS FtJR l RA6rP'L MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Renzel, bring Item 20, regarding drafting of economic development objectives and policies for the ABA6 Plan, forward for consideration. *DIM PASSED unanimously, Faza i no and Witherspoon absent, Councilmember Brenner said that each of the Co rnsi lmeat ers had received a copy of as ABA6 memorandum dated.August 28, 1980, with .an. attached copy of a draft plan for economic development objectives and Policies. This was proposed by a subcommittee of the Regional Planning CoMmittee'of ABAS. This draft was . introduced at the September greeting of ASA6's Regional Planning Committee, by; the chairman of the subcommittees ; b sA *ad,ucaIy dot s t,* ° for economic . develobmebt, and as such was probably in conflict with other policies of the ABA$ plan. The r sw committee itself appereetty agreed with this, but it is the opinion of the' hegional* 'running Cbiomrittee`lhat. all parts of: a plan should be is relationslhp. Consequently the plan was help up, and time subJect committee wad=:• l'atructed by the Regional PIaneing Committee to take time for revision. It was her understanding that many of the revisions have been made, and that the Counc'i l*emb,rt _ reeld ' racei ve them. However, she felt that . there }_ .Wou),4; : fo polet ; in plscisg this ltea on ' the agenda unt i l Coenci lm hers have all the revisions. ' ' She then requested thot the Countilmomber consider t`)a revisions„ when they receive thee, for cent to the ABAS . tai cstive Committee. She said 'tint if any member of': t*e Council wished/AO.•4g this an agenda item, it should , be before early October. She Concluded by stating that she would 2 3 0 9/22/00 appreciate any comments on this subject addressed to her, barring making it an agenda item. OAK CREEK CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION Councilmember Fletcher stated that she had agendizedthis item because the second reading of the ordinance on August 14th included a change from the first reading, involving the consent for to be sent to the tenants. Deleted from that requirement was the statement that it must be stated on the consent form that the conversion may require the tenant to find other housing and to relocate outside the city. This was deleted because the ordinance included a provisio►l y'or protection of the tenants by requiring that they be offered lifetime leases. Subsequent to this action, there was some concern expressed that this change was passed without prior public notice. There have also been rumors, of the proponents of condominium conversions using various devious ways (not only with regard to the Oak Creek conversion) to Circumvent the intent, if not the letter, of the condominium conversion ordinance. She herself has reconsidered the desirability of eliminating this clause because of the real risk of circumventing thelifetime lease arrangement, and jeopardizing the future security of the tenants. One possible method that came to mind was, once the conversion has taken place, the coercion of the tenants still renting to vacate. The parties to this coercion could be the management, or subsequent owners who were not a party to the original arrangement, or possibly the surrounding condominium owners through the Homeowners' Condominium Association. She thought, therefore that the action taken by Council in deleting the protective clause may have been precipitous and that the public had not been giver an opportunity to comment. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Brenner, that the clause be reinstate in the ordinance which suggests that the consent form shall also state the conversion may require a tenant to find other housing and to relocate outside the City. Councilmember Fletcher added that this clause had been included in the original ordinance and in the draft which the Council had passed at the first reading, Vice Mayor Sher disqualified himself from pertcipating in the motion or the discussion, because of a possible conflict of interest since this involved Stanford land. Councilaoeaber. E,yerly saidthat she saw problems with reinstating the clause, as it was already accomplished and there lead been a first and second reading. He questioned whether the motion was in order. City Attorney Abrams anawered that the impact of the motion would be to direct the City Attorney's office to pceparf snetber ordinance amending that section, , and 1s effect oirg beck to the position before the ordinance was ` adopted. This is somewhat different from the Jmit al suggestion., which would, beto reconsider the second reading of the previously adopted ordinance. The motion as made by Councilmember FlettLer would direct preparation of an amending - ordinance to delete the addtional sentence. Councilmember Eyerly asked if , dart would be an amendment that .would require, a first and second readies, and tsar many votes, would be eetessdry to pass it. City- Attorney Abrams replied that 'tfis would be an amendment that, would require a first .and sitcoms reading1 sod that five votes would be necessary to :pass- it. • Councllmember Fletcher asked the Citv Attorney if it would be proper to reconsider the second reading of the ordinance, and substitute this as the second reading, if so ruled and given a majority vote. Mr. Abrams replied that it was his opinion that the ordinance was properly adopted at its second reading on August 4th. He then read to the Council thesectionof the Municipal Code referring to adoption of ordinances: *A proposed ordinance may be amended between the time of its introduction and the time of its final passage, provlding.its general scope and original intention are retained., The correction of typographical or clerical errors shall not constitute an amendment within the meaning of this section." Mr., Abrams then said it was his belief that the words "original intention and "scope" are intended to be rather broad, and that the ordinance as emended, in the sense of Counci lmember fletcher's meaning, did not change either its general scope or the original intention. Therefore, if the Council had no objections to that ruling, then the mechanism now proposed by Councilmember Fletcher would be the only Method available to change the ordinance back to its original fore. Councilmember Fletcher then asked if it would not be possible for the Council to vote to reconsider its action on August 4th. City Attorney Abrams replied that the Council has the inherent authority to determine that it was a change not within the general scope or original intention of the ordinance, and in effect not agree with it. Mayor Henderson then called for reactions from the audience. He reminded them of the 5 -minute limit plated . on each speaker, ard that this was a specific motion to be discussed, relating to this particular clause that had been deleted from the original ordinance. Albert Rooney,l520 Willow Rod 1441, Palo Alto, ,was called cn, but had spoken earlier under Oral Communications. .Sara layer, 105 Ferne Avende, .Palo Alto, expressed her feelings that those in government should have mere concern for the .plight of the middleclass, especially the elderly., Because of 4n,attempt by their apartment management to convert to condominiums, they feared ,for their future; ;They could dotafford to buy a condominium, and they feared large increases in rent with a lifetime imese. They felt that there .should be a.t1 a limit en,_ the conversion process, to avoid herrassment, of the tenants and .that leases would be .arranged so that raises in rent would be no more than 1WO% of the fncreaise.Avis index. It mould be a real hardship for them to relocate, as they de eded on the help of their, nearby children and grandch ldree. She suggested that Conversion should -be prevented unless the rental vacancy •of the area is high `enough to make apartments in town available. After detailing the problems brought upon the elderly by inflation, she begged the Council to "do something' for them. Oscar Ehrlich, 100 Ferns Avenue, Palo Alta, said :that he also lived d in'the some . apartment complex :that was planning comver=ton. He wished to bring to the .ettentio9 of the coil :sone actions taken ,by the apartment _ management before deci.sfoa..te toeVert. About..one.third of the 32-apartuent complex units, __have 'lassie -left vaca , ,ltd:, menegeeiest Personnel resf a .sea of the .other ', Tip#s W411 obviously- to: fact i ifete reC t09 -tom oecgua'y two-thirds, .rote regulr ant; .suggested ' 'ate mots ,to,t * ordinance: (1) that a vacant apart. met would 40- ousted as a "no" vote to converstes9 and (2) that only tenants of _ at least ose.yeer oration be allowed to vote. Mayor. Henderson said that those questions would probably be raised before the meeting adjourned. Clifford McCormick, 1520 i1i11ow Road) P104, Palo Alto, said he was not sure he understood the wording of the change proposed by Counc i lmember Fletcher, where they speak of "you may be forced to move out of town." It seemed to him a very undiplomatic way to handle the citizenry, and asked if he were perhaps misunderstanding the intent of the phres#. Councilmember Fletcher explained that the intent of placing the phrase in the ordinance was to warn the tenant that relocation could conceivably become necessary if conversion were to take place. The wording is that he "! be forced to move or he "may have to move." Mr. McCormick was of the opinion it was not really necessary to include those words in an ord i Manse, as hi fe l t that they expressed the case "quite brutally." Regarding the Oak Creek conversion itself, Mr. McCormick said that he could understand why some tenants were distrubed by the requirement in the lifetime lease that they must agree to the conversion. However, the situatin has now changed and reverted to the original agreement: that an agreement to the conversion was not necessary to receive a lifetime lease. His position was that the status should remain, because for many of the residents at Oak Creek this would be the only possible rental situation for the in this area to remain near their families. He wished to stress this very strongly, and to see the Oak Creek conversion to proceed as it stood two weeks ago. Louis Fein, 1540 Oak Creek Drive, Palo Alto, asked if he could speak to other motions later if he addressed the motion under discussion. The answer was in the affirmative. He said he thought that the clause in the original ordinance which stated, 'people may be required to move out of town in the event a conversion succeeded," was written in when it was intended that tenants other than the two-thirds needed for approval would have to vacate for not purchasing a condominium. as the Council has decided not to correct the "mistake" made in 1974 in not writing into the ordinance that if two-thirds consent, they would be required to buy, then of course the substitution of a lifetime lease for requirement to purchase makes this clause.apparently unnecessary. He agreed with Counc i 1me ber Fl etcher's intent behind the statement "you may be required to 'cove,° because as he saw it, there was the pessibi l ity thet (1) a lifetime lease of the °type under development would not be legally enforceable, aetd (2) even if legally enforceable, there *fight be various seetkods lased to force tenants to vacate; Nis s i t ion tiserefore' es that the phrase was quite valid, clad should be replaced in the consent form. William Keswick, 1618 Willow Road, recalled that some time ago the Council determined that, subject to certain cosditi*as, .the tenants of Oak Creek were to be permitted to vote on the c'eversiore by means of a two-thirds veete. Subsequently a number of tenants sought legal advice Brad spent mosey is en effort to ensurethat the conditions to protect these would be met. It etas his o0lnig0that, based en the packet offered to the tenants* most -of these conditions have boon met, and that nothing lies occurred to rhea a the situation since the tenants had voted for the conVersion No felt the: effect of inserting the phrase in ' theco*sent fore' as . propose by Councillasimber Fletcher world be to cause p*efc omokg tke tenant% who *ad already. wade their de!c1sioe based` on the 1r*foreatieet eta#lass to thaw. Therefore, although he hid originally opposed the conversion, he felt things should be left as ..thus 'were. 2 3 3 9/22/4.. Herb Borock, 3401 Ross Road, Palo Alto, said that he supported the intent of Councilmember Fletcher's motion, but did not think the proposed procedure was correct. He questioned the validity of the second reading of the ordinance on August 4th. He pointed out that Councilmembers Witherspoon and Sher did not participate in the first reading of the ordinance, because of conflict of interest, but were allowed to participate on the substance of the ordinance when the exception was emended to it. At the second reading the ordinance was again approved, without their participation, but the substance was changed without their participation. This referred to the clause under discussion, which was deleted. He stated he had problems with the validity of the second reading, or whether there: really is an ordinance,or whether this meeting could be classified as the true second reading. He wondered if the ordinance could be rescinded if the second meeting were declared invalid. He suggested the Council should focus on clearing up the confusion caused by. the August 4th meeting. Scott Carey, 180 University Avenue, Palo Alto, rave a br,iefi history of the steps leading to the ordinance under discussion, which is based on his proposal to the Oak Creek residents and public promises made to them. Included among these promises was that every tenant would receive a lifetime lease at favorable rent terms, which was then made into law. He wanted to make the point clear that any converter including he himself would not be allowed to convert if the condition of a lifetime lease were not met, because this would be in violation of the ordinance, It was his opinion that the determination as to whether or not this condition had been rnet should be made at the proper time; i.e., when the consents have been turned in to the City. He felt that inserting the clause you may have to mover in order to take care of some remote theoretical possibility would only create unjustifiabe confusion.. Mayor Henderson asLed Mr. Carey about the exact meaning. of the word "tenants," where it states in the ordinance that two-thirds of the tenants crust agree to the conversion. He said he understood that in the cases of sub -leases, those voting would be tenants signed up for the apartments but not actually residing in them. Mr. Carey answered that sub -tenants are not counted in the vote, only the tenants who are primarily responsible for the econooic . payacents T here . i s also a •poo 1 • of about 30 leases oe . scab -1 eases -for tenants who i'!ish to pur{hose, but another unit. When the. switch- is made, the tenant reeaining with the other unit will be the primary tenant and the consenting (or non consenting) tenant.. A ieaseswitk two,or three sigaatdres is counted as one vote only, and. the vato„mast,be unanimous. Also, vacancies are not counted; of the 759 units at Oak Creek. there are. 8 vacancies which are not counted. and -thus amount: to negative votes. HaycrHe ersoo said he understood *r.. Carey's response in re,latt_on to Oak Creek, . but he wondered whether the ordinance as presently worded coeid lead to a situation where another owner could fill apartments as they . are vacated wi tb.. his own,employees, or in sosae way overa period of ,months acquire the ; necessery two .thirds vote for ..corriers ion! He also wondered if these was a leophelC: in the serb4euiaf of Units; he himself defined °`tenaate as so.sone teasing and living in a_ ve11t, Kr. Carey recalled twat be bed .brought up this sue . ie Jul,' where he had. suggested , that the City study the , possibi llty of loopholes in the smaller -unit apartments. = He ezplalaed that it was really not eco ically' feasible for the larger cos¢lexes to tie up the nudber of units that would be necessary,, -just to/force consent fie; conversion. However, it might possibly be easier for a4 owner . of a. v.)e $tu ft complex necessary said that sth Mr. Carey to le ear ere ey wished vacations y �r+ order cases to nits vac �0r fn f©r t s of C)ari 4r to den er f o • -h sakQn y:L 'i0 n �'t' u�+ erset 1o. Herm en t tha nt tv #n t sue r unit Complex am R ion that, me l hn it d that his n a a unfair a t is n �,be apartment coy economically ca to un though fir less Council vote far these f f?:: in,fnf hp sear -unft m 1aye �u g��i �e s ��he f v _ o .i)ga s°n Alt afth �Cpast nts:::: e Council h f decides not the l ego said oft . 4 tth sS�jppQr h ing fumes 11 ty v f e h it u i++s t Ch tv lys e in ncf r fon ih 1d fn t t an sc of 1'° ridhe a,'c mt , rG na++5s e a tend causd ruse f lel:her.s er,s o f are, 'himself frc1 tenants In by Mr the said fled were , Possibilities. as thought >{e circumventing 'eself in ng some j s ab arey,s fon� a'dn erefor: nen , hes e ions Pr e' Mr,ietter�f forme {s s datedd a9an� it it is lifetime wise leases and fe to s' are Surat Bald 1 ' . City ��si dal 13,x$ pad Creek for ten ::: 9 mf +erIn �a . ©e. o e , ti were under lifetime l fletc °Fever ~ °ch member ed e to correct der d f =�{ uo Cher ►s h erbQr is on /etter from cvnf t in stating uid he motion wished 4q of the council, f 1lo r t °'� the uslon wtin9 t vn' but ke'-+e f1t►� It gas address l � a %� converters . � fir ` also 'E'C,j by his 3 himself f amendment s arrest t'ere t en quoted effe th;r# .�lry the re opinion co enl f o n the ted ct Carey s 1ns t,� could be to the protected residents es 3 from a �n Oak Creek and art 1j�n at present applied fe l ease ed hefi. dent, st )ettet. would Resnick of Co(ij leese. t,� already b use+ at fn dated uld Yh. c f meet a' the asP signed. the proposed that d 3u 1 he to ��t cAnver �ers = he said that, �� f na 1 AfC posed 11 the rights ,1 y l�� 1980ad'd le ter had grs' Air consulted before • hotan fatimeo b def ated lean a� :j." ch that $n end Richards e�ly thif s rd his at g;:r #t g ion �- Po he er~ M theaest ,s 8 e;::,::T:,t1 Ct ocu t r ::« elC scane:t e 1i 1 im at r,e e fn b a is ats ant i�Q ' Ono ' h a1 the a lees tenant a r the n© tit they Logan ease ' coo5::,v::?7; . es ax s ! . Rudy, be conversion point asserted tae th .lees 11. n pacr t hE erted art: are f y Cr e9e t was vt t h td oo d Qend , ��de � ''asu 1 �ra�� .� give 1 say concerned ogy s p nL @ ff i to a:o:1e% the� t attorn f hf f 'e�'le a hfr Mas : stet' felt hat ba ottoman, n +'obligat ory- lease ot, becaused dart , that in of fnr ghat +et 1 a I i ere ¢: y. Wh the . tmere #t would an �� i6n o want satrch ' then :,,r #w O tt ng ,b ion nved edmake ere� oLg arad the apt ii.44z!,10:4!_g *:.1 � aeld be nce�Ia� ��,��antes��e, on�� tne��to. �rn icated �o ac1 k Cr M'goer Ors no44 1� �'sat� #hl �ad a a�� #f tk� rs#an�ff�aA flu st present'9. be arely y L; egta h at 1 c l start ✓ 1 dad that -` "00$lir,'. 4 S'.014# '.0 r# �o er f3 f�� °t �� 40 Otitis, �� ;#ate4Vhe;r4.4 � or"r� �� nest a tiee f " "�to gan c®��d Louis Fein again addressed the Council. He remarked that it was his opinion that Mayor Henderson's question to Mr. Carey regarding his cleaning of a two-thirds vote should have been decided by Council. Mayor Henderson explained that he was merely requesting Mr. Carey's own interpretation. 1 1 Mr. Fein replied that he understood, and that he saw this as a sign of the present confusion; that the meaning of such terms as "two-thirds vote" and "irrevocable consent" was unclear. He stated that such terms were clariried in a letter from the City Attorney to Mr. Carey about six months ago, but this inftirpation was not available to others. He strongly felt that this confusion was leading to abuses and violations. Mr. Don Logan wished to clear the record by stating that Mr. Green did tell him that, in his opinion, the lease was assignable only with the consent of the preset,t owners. In a later discussion Mr. Green acknowledged to Mr. Logan -that an assignment could be made, not by regular methods, but by unori+ odox means to a nominee. Councilmeeaber Fletcher asked Mr. Abrams if he had any comments en .Mr. Rorock's remarks regarding the validity of the second reading of the ordinance. City Attorney Abrams commented that there seemed to be a great deal of confusion about what actually transpired at the second reading. He then briefly reviewed his recollections of that meeting. As he remembered, Councilmerxber Levy suggestei- that there was an arperent contradiction between the requirement that assurances be provided tenants that they could either have a lifetime lease or purchase, and a statement contained in the consent form stating that they might have to move. It was therefore decided that removing the requirement for subject clause in the consent form would clarify that portion. Mr. Abrams said it was therefore his position that there had been no change in the ,general scope or intention of the ordinance, and that he frankly could not follow Mr. Iorock's contents. Counci lmember Fletcher restated the intent of her motion, which was to provide added protection to the tenants, which she felt necessary because of the various methods for circumventing the provisions of the ordinance. Counci lmearber Levy stated that he, thought the Council should do everything they : could to reduce .the -great mount of conf us t in surrounding the issue so far. He though_ Qae way would be to remind everyone_ that there is 'Weis an element of uncertainty in a rental situation. One may be forced to vacate in one way or another, such as unusual increases in rent. The intent behind the ordinance is to assure, to the cl greet possible* that peo)le will not be forced out into the street'.,. lit was his op'inino. that inserting the warning clause= -would have the effect of cgntradicting the language of assurapc'ii contained In, the ordinance, and this weuld be doing the tenant a disservice, Me agreed with the actions taken so far, and opposed any change at this point. Counctlae ter Eierly said he agreed wholeheartedly with: Mr. Levy. He addresst a questipa to City Attorney Abreast rF4ardi se eeff*rte the 11 ', motion noaid two,if passed, or, the converter of the Oak Creek Apartments. ,Tilt; wondered if the -converter would be required to send out ;another package, containing the rewording, to replace that already submitted under the ordinance already approved. City AttOras,y said- he--theeght_'thte answer would be "yes.° His only bes i teecy`would be whether or not the converter would file an application for conversion prior to the effective date of the ordinance. He was not certain, if that were to occur, whether the converter would then obtain some vested right under the previous ordinance. He did not believe so, but if the ordinance went into effect, with the change suggested by Councilmember's motion, prior to any filing of an application, then all applications after the effective date must be in conformance. Councilmember Eyerly restated his opinion that, regardless of the final consequences for Oak Creek, the *double" language in the ordinance is ambiguous and leads to more confusion. He felt that the Council should be. getting ready to vote. Counci lraerber Brenner agreed that there was some confusion. She added that she thought that lifetime leases could produce rents high enough to force that 25% of the population on fixed incomes to move nut of town. She wished the vote to be taken then, as she would not have an opportunity to vote later. Mayor Heeder on commented that, after all the effort made to protect the Oak Creed; conversion from a retroactive law application (the reason for eeemptieg Oak Creek from the reconsideration of the condominium conversion,law) he was r eal ly disappointed that any attempt would be made to include a requirement to vote fo'r conversion in order to obtain a lifetime lease. He expressed great displeasure that this shou!et have been attempted or even allowed unchr discussion. He saw in this case, as well as in various other locations, all kinds of means for getting aror:a-l.d the intent of the ordinance. He expressed his total agreement wit;: Mr. Levy, on the otherhand, in emphasizing the requirement for a 1lfeetirne lease. He thought, therefore, that stating that a tenant may be required to move would be in opposition to .this requirement, and wc1 d tend to encourage looking for means of circumventing the lifetime ,lease requirement. He recalled that an attempt to do this had been discovered and blocked, and felt that the ordinance should be left as approved; He therefore would vote against the motion, but thought the Council_ might' have to take some action at this meeting on some of the lassies raised. NOTION F.MILED: The motion failed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Benxel NOES.. Eyerly, Henderson, Levy ABSENT: . Fezt i no, Wi therspopn ABSTAINING: Sher. Caunci lmember Brenner left the meeting at 11.55 p.m. Counci lmember Levy asked if it would be in order to address some questions to the City Attorney regarding the process for the actual approval of the vote taking place Specifically at Oak Creek. He wished to be Clear::. bout whether the Council should take some action to unsure' hat the vote is: IA fact property: taken. Neyor Nendersonreplied that .there :seemed to be a': marlin' of issues on the same order that they *ISM Wish to consider directfnV the staff to investigate and respond to -at the following meeting. lie said he also bad several questions, among the the possibility of amending the ordinance to exclude empty apartments, or req ,ir.ing that only tenaitswith' residency of at lee` t- one year be given ,the right U. vote. There rmre too many possible loopholes and too many canfusln issues, as he saw it, for them to be able to accorrpl psh everything that evening. He then asked for the Councilmembers' reactions. City Attorney Abrams said he would be happy to discus with the Council then or provide them with a memorandum, of his Of=lee's interpretation, which would answer most of the questions raised. Mayor Henderson asked Mr. roeams if there was some possibility of scheduling this kind of discussion in :he near future. City Manager Zaner responded that, as the the agenda for the October 6th meeting was so crowded, the only alternative would be to try to schedule a short amount of time (possibly 45 minutes to one hour) prior to discussion of the Comprehensive Pan the following week .; Mayor Henderson said he was especially interested in Mr. Abram's interpretation of the word "tenant.' Mr_ Abrams said he wanted to address himself to an especially crucial issue as he saw it; whether or not tenants who have just moved in should be given the right to vote. It seemed rather clear to him that, if vacancies were not to be counted, then' -there would be no vacancies in certain projects, inorder to manipulate the vote. He had suggested that vacancies be. counted as one vote, to avoid the potential abuse of "loading up" the vacancies, and that votes be counted unit by unit and not by total number of tenants. He was of the opinion that the only way to avoid the vacancy situation was to specify a minimum period of residency. Counci lmember Levy suggested that a good procedure would be for the Councilmembers to ask their questions first and then direct the City Attorney to prepare a memo dealing with the issues for consideration at the earliest possible meeting. He said he agreed with the concern with the definition of "tenant, how vacancies should be treated, how the vote is to be validated, and how the Councilmembers could assure themselves that fair representations were made to the tenants and that the voting procedure was conducted properly and fairly. Cotanci lmember Rertzel said one of her concerns was that Counci lmember Fletcher's memo that was agendized addressed only the -one issue. It seemed to her that this was too significant an issue for them to be making other major changes at the present meeting. She suggested thatthey consider this matter again in abort two weeks and; then pass it as an emergency ordinance. She wondered if it .would not then go into effect.- as quickly as with the normal . process of two readings. City Attorney, Ahrens replied that there wets such a potential far` -enereeocy passing of ordinances; if f. care were findings such as; the protection of health, safety„ ,or the like. . however, he ' was , "not ` quite sure what he would draft as the erge*l► ordinance. Ie could. include this report in his interpretations in that period of time, but he saw some difficulties with: voting and cosSnsus. Another aspect he wished to point -out was With regard. to Gir.. Fein's concern with the hest* with, which amendments= might be Mode. :t would take 0slt six maths for staff. to respond to the: assignment given at the last meeting. He expressed= concern that they might be veering toward hasty amereahweats. Caenrcilmember !teazel said' that for her part- she $i opposed .to.making exceptions to -their rule deaying conversion approval when the vracsocy rate is less than 3%. She feeds very strongly that there is a severe problem in this cOmmumfty with. rental housing,. and therefore would prefer considering 4w Wore an' ordinance absoiutely, prohibiting cenversien=to cOnde inioaas when the vecscncy rate -is below 11, which in her opinien ceestitotosuc!isis: situation. She added that she 4 agreed with several suggestions contained in Bob Moss= letter, not necessarily to implement them, but to address the problem of vacant units. It was her opinion that a time limit should definitely he established for conversion, of about six or eight months, but should not be left open-ended. Counci 1member Eyerly said it appeared to him that Council was addressing two problems. They had given staff a moratorium on the assignment so that they could submit a report on corrections to 'a conversion ordinance. It seemed that now they were trying to hurry that process and accomplish it in a couple of weeks. He believed this was related to the Oak Creek conversion end the worries of the Coenci l and the rest of the community that it be handled properly. However, there was a vehicle available for :this. The City Attorney has the jurisdiction to rule when a converter submits his approval votes for conversion. The converter must be in communication with the City Attorney in dealing with specific details, such as°.counting units or number of tenants, unto by leasee or sub-leasee, or whether vacancies -should be counted. He did not think a minimum occupation requirement could be read into the ordinance now, but other issues could be ruled on by the City Attorney. 'Therefore, the questions regarding Oak Creek could all be settled and kept in motion, without violating any of the provisions of the ordinance, Mayor Hender;on replied that it would be acceptable to him if Mr. Abrams could ; spond in a week er so, confirming that the issues are defined clearly enough for making definite judgments but as he saw it, this was not so. He wanted to be sure that either there were specific definitions, that Mr. Abrams can make the rulings, or :thether it was up to the Council to do some redefining right away. Mr. Eyerly responded that this was part of what he had in mind; that Mr. Abrams would report to the Council as to whether these issues were within the scope of his jurisdiction on the present conversion. Councilmember Fletcher said that what has presently transpired in the Councilchambers illustrated perfectly the need for a strict percentage vacancy rate ordinance with no possible loopholes. She remark1d that the staff a►ssigneent was growing and felt that a great deal -'af staff time could have been saved both now and in the future, by having passed -a strict 3t, not a l%, vacancy rate requirement. She had recently discovered that Cupertino had passed a S% -vacancy rate ordinance, with no exceptions. She felt that Palo Alto was in a rental housing crisis situation so severe -as to warrant prohibiting apartment conversions, because there 'deemed to be no hope of their being replaced. Site"would therefore try again, At the second sebatiss1on,- to get s % 'scanty rate ;6oewd minium conversion requirement. In the aerant#*e, she wished to: disc= `s some of the 'items in the -staff mom. -Dirt was regarding the illect on a lifetime lease of the transferring 0U -the property, for Instance to t! third er fourth owner. She was concerned about possible loopholes not presently --visible to them. Other matters -were that of setting a. time limit for conversions to be .cool #shed, so that the tenants' unsettled -situation would net be'unduly prolonged; the fact, as brought up by $lr. Low, that the. converter is obligated two offer a !esse, but not to .ectoally give gee. She added that she Would like to tee the correspoedeece which lots already transpired between the. converter and the City Attorney's Office, because apparently ore #nterpret ;ti,,n - had aIreaady been- made asd this imformation ,should be ,isade available to the Cosncil, 44r, Abrams replied that this information had eireaJ,f been made available t* $r. Fele, a d of • coOtse was a matter of public record and avai l a to to anyone interested'. 1 Mayor Henderson said that, since there was nu notion on the table for all this discussion, he would make one. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Renze1, to direct the City Attorney to provide to Council, at the earliest possible date, responses to various questions being given tonight to staff concerning condominium conversion ordinances. Vice Mayor Sher asked Mr. Abrams how this most recent assignment, to be completed, in one or two weekse relates to the assignment already undertaken to study the two-thirds provision in the condominium control ordinance and advise Council of any weaknesses as to tenant protection. The reason for passing the six-month moratorium originally was to give him enough time for this report. He asked if it was to be understood then that that report would be ready in a week or two, City Attorney Abrams said this was not the case; the assignments were not identical as he saw it. He understood this most recent assignment as requesting the city staff's present interpretation of processing condominium conversion applications under the existing ordinance. He acknowledged that there were at present no provisions in the ordinance for dealing with issues such as vacancies or new tenants. He could enumerate such loopholes in his memo, but the suggested closing of these loopholes would be part of the other assignment. Vice Mayor Sher asked Mr -.Abrams about the status of the previous Council ass ihnment . City Attorney Abrams said his staff anticipated returning to Council at the end of the moratorium feeling that the Council was satisfied at the time of adoption of the amendment presently being addressed, and. that the situation would be generally under control. Mice Mayor Sher said that, considering the uncertainties discussed, he was concerned about the possible danger of a number of proposed conversions taking place under the exception, during the s'x-month period before Council had an answer to the tenant protect i ovr question. City Attorney Abrams replied that the staff was aware of several conversion applications . having already been suede, possibly totaling not more than ten or fifteen, with the Oak Creek and Ferne Apar-tm+nts standing out. Vice Mayor Sher affirmed that these were proposals within the exception to 'tne'. moratorium, the ones having a lifetime leese, avid that the report would co°ier w certainties about, how that exception would be applied; Mr. Abrams said tbat:he would not be evaluating what appears to be the central question. which is whether or not an exception should be allowed at all, or such questions as whether to establish a 3% base rental. housing rate. The report would describe the difficulties under the the present ordinaaceand give the staff's present opinion on the, peening of the ordinance. As Mr. Louis Fein wished to speak regarding points raised in his letter, Councilmeemer Renzel suggested perhaps it should be recorded that Nr..Fein has raised some *Nations which are probably typical of many ofthe questfops.in his letter and which would probably be answered in the City Atterneyes report. Mayor Henderson acreed and said a copy of Mr. Fein's letter would be sent to the City Attorney. MOTION PASSED: Motion to direct City Attorney to provide Council responses t:, various questions passed or a unanimous vote, Brenner, Faxzino, Witherspoon absent, Mr. Fein wished to address comments made by Vice Ilaypr Sher. He felt that what they were attempting was to correct present abuses, for instance the pressure being brought on the tenants to sign their consent now, without vital ipformation held only by the converter. He said that some conditions should be set up as a pre -requisite to accepting consent, and that this was needed for the present situation, not. some probable development in six months. He proposed, for instance that the city, not the converter, should deal with sending out the consent forms and accepting them, and that they should become public documents. He added that there was a matter he wished Council to address at the present meeting; namely that some of the consents already received by the converter of Oak Creek were obtained under .the duress of a setter stating "consent or else.j9 He felt that these consents should be revoked, and the or;ly consents accepted should be those meeting:pre.conditions which he hoped Council would be developing in the next week or two. Mayor Henderson said he thought part of Coenc i lmember Levy's motion about the mechanics involved dealt with the validity of matters. PARKING NEAR HEALTH SPA ANDP63421 7.1164, MOTION: Vice Mayor Sher, seconded by Mayor Henderson„ moved that Staff be requested to report whether anything can be done to alleviate the parking and related problems near health spa at Park Boulevard. The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Brenner, Faxsino, Witherspoon absent. AOJOURl i4IIT The Council meeting adjourned at 12:20 a.m. 16fFIRM° APPROVE: