Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-09-29 City Council Summary MinutesCITY CQUNCL MINUTES CITY PALO ALTO Special Meeting Monday, September 291, 1980 7:30 p.m. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date at '1:45 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Mayor Henderson presiding, fn a Special Meeting to consider revisions to the Comprehensive Plan. PRESENT: Brenner, tyer'-y ; fay';; ,. f l etei er, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher (arrived 8:00 p.m.) ABSENT: Witherspoon PLANX I NG COMMISSION RECOMMENDS RE Mayor Henderson said one of the first issuesthey should deal with tonight was on page 3G and the statement "The former Maximart site and adjacent nonresidential areas, and the area between Holiday Inn and Town and Country Village were retained in the Service Commercial land use category." He said the Council could not discuss this without setting a specific public hearing. Since this was not a recommendation of the Planning Commission and people would not necessarily know the Council might discuss it, it would have to be announced ahead of time. He wondered why the subject of possible rezoning of certain properties to residential hasn't come back to Council as a Commission recommendation, rather than have it presented as part of the Comprehensive Plan. Ken Schreiber, Assistant Planning Director, responded that the Council re- ferred a number of specific sites to the Planning Commission. Council also referred a more open-end assignment to look at cca rcial/industrial areas. In that assignment, the Commission looked at a variety of sites and made tame recaemeedations for changes and those items have been scheduled in the public hearing process as part of the Comerehensive Plan update. However, the attons that the Commission acted upon in.:reviearitgetle_ Plan which do not lead to changes in time plen, wither in the text or map, were not advertised as such for plan change. The Maximart and Urban Lane arms, therefore, were not advertised fora public heaariny. if the. Council wishes to discuss the land use designation of either of those sites, the aperopriate procure old be to set a public hearing date. Thy do not doled a formal Comeission action at this tame because the Commission has taken an action to not recommend a change in the land use snap. Mr. Boyd Smith, 301 Coleridge, spoke and asked members in the audience who were opposed to eny changes in _ .zoning of these sites to stand. About two- thirds of the audience stewed. He requested that the C.ounci l uphold the Planning Ce emission decision and lame the zoning alone. He thought the issue had been settled, but since then he has Mord mars that several Councitmembers wonted to. discuss the m etter. if Council accepts the Planning omission's decision, the other speakers will leave without speaking. If the Counil wishes to set a publichearing at a later date, they wish to be heart tonight. Mayor Henderson said he would persoeally like to leave those sites as they *rev , end mot bring op the subject under the Comprehensive flan. He reminded W. . Smith that any member of the Council . can _ agendize the matter at a - time end be coulftest gemetest that thet-wouldest.happen. But at :this points parsaieny ts unites the eission's dads#on. Counci lrnenber Renzel said there are many..actioot .which the Commission , doesn't take and she saw no reason to incorporate those in the Plan for 1990. MOTION: Councilmem!ber Renzel moved, seconded by Brenner, to delete the sentence referring to the Planning Commission non -action on page 3G beginning with "The former Maximart site and adjacent nonresidential areas...'.' Councilmenber Renzel said that the matter concerning this rezoning should have come to Council in a separate report and dealt with separately. MOTION PASSED: The motion to delete the sentence passed on o unanimous vote, Co nc lmmembers Sher and Witherspoon absent. Mayor Henderson clarified that the removal of the sentence feonm;:the'PMan does not change the action to keep the sites Service Commercial. R. J. Debs, 3145 Flowers Lane, said Palo Altans live in this City because it is a good City, and neighborhoods needed to be protected from commuter and through traffic. One of the first objectives stated in the plan is to meet the demand of traffic and he disagreed with that. His concerns about inclusion of Dumbarton Bridge in the Plan related to this. The Plan talks about the history of the Bridge and he didn't think that history belonged in the Plan. The Plan is a policy for the future. The City Council can made a clear statement that they do not want the southerly approach, biut. the Council has to accept what is so and try to deal with it. David Schram, 302 College, said he and other residents of the Evergreen Park area have two specific concerns about rezoning the area: the development of the parcel at the foot of California Avenue, and thvt demands of transportation needs outside the neighborhood will take prece- dence over maintaining the quality of life in the neighborhood. They were not convinced that the land use changes won't adversely affect the neighborhood. Any development of the parcel, will raise the volume of traffic in the neighborhood which is already over 2,000 vehicles per day. Under the current zoning, no developer has been able to present a plan to develop that parcel, and the residents feel somewhat protected by that. Paul Gillette, 1765 Park Boulevard, said he was concerned about any increase in traffic in Palo Alto. As a bicyclist he expressed concern about safety and breathing exhaust fumes. He urged Council to do what- everthey could to keep more traffic out of Palo Alto. Erica Prince, 302 College, submitted a letter from the tree committee . of Palo Alto, which recommended some amendments to the Urban Design section of the Plan: Page 35A under 'objectives" acid, "Utilize tree planting on public and private property to enhance the quality 'ef the urban environment;" Page 35C under "Trafficweys" add Program 12(a) "Development a comprehensive urban forest resource management plan for the City of Palo Alto.. ; ; Page 35C under "Traffi ►s" reinsert Program 13, "Supply the planting along Alma to screen the railroad right-of-way;" Same page re-insert former Program 12 "Extend and renew street tree planting Citywide, including median strip trees wherever possible, with specific schedules for completing individual streets;" and Page 3SD under "Business Districts" revise .Program 19 to read, 'Trdividual property owners, and the City,should provide temaporary landscaping of vacant lots in business districts and plant more street trees 'ear California and University Avenues . " She submitted the Metter- meted September 29, 1900, for the record and for distribution to Council. David Midio, 420 James Road, said he felt titre were'many contradictions under Parking and Housing in the Dowetown area. 0n page 3D the Plan .talks about air rights and sus parking lots skald be converted to air rights w th housing above them and the City will determine 'which site aret appro- priate r ring. C Page l it s will l l- be asubstantial ortage: of _'sort and long term parking. On Page 19F it says that new parking facilities should be avoided. Retail and housing should not be torn down for new parking spaces. He felt these were examples of contradictions in the Plan and he wasn't clear about what will happen in the next 15 years. He said he would also like a definition of low -moderate income housing. Mayor Henderson said many of the people at the first hearing. He realized that as a public hearing, and he asked if at public hearing portion closed. wishing to speak tonight spoke this meeting had been advertised some point they could eeclare the toy Abrams, City Attorney rep;ied the Council can set a public hearing time as it wishes. Tonlgnt's meeting °gas advertised as a public hearing, but Council can close it for the future. Corinne Powell, 302 College, said she felt they were so insistent in coming to the meetings because they were having difficulty understanding the Flan and have gotten different interpretations frog! both Councilmembers and staff. She was specifically worried about the wording in Program 19 which reads "Discourage through traffic in residential neighborhoods." She would like the word "discourage" changed to "prevents" and that that program be given first priority. The: optimal solution is redesigning of neighbor- hood streets by the residents, she said. Rica Pering, 243 Rinconada Avenue, said he would like to encourage the bike boulevard idea and proposed that Bryant and Emerson near Alma be considered as a boulevard. Mike Gil`ix, 333 Leland Avenue, said his major concern had to do with quality of life, the density question and traffic. The residents of Evergreen Park feel they are already bearing a significant amount of commute traffic. The City is currently conducting a traffic study in the area, and it seemed to him that while this is being done, the Council should not adopt changes that might be useless as a result of that traffic study. He agreed with the need for housing in Palo Alto, but felt that no one neighborhood should bear the burden. Darien Dawson, 631 Colorado, referred to page 19A and the transportation objectives. He suggested that the first objective be stricken and that the first priority be serving the residents of the neighborhoods, which is currently objective weber seven. Mayor Henderson said he k Aew that several Counc f 1 ambers wanted to make some shifting of t`ose priorities and they old be speaking to his suggestion. Herb Sorock, 3401 Ross, called attention to his 9/29/80 memo in the Council packet in which he urged them to define middle income households in the Housing Section of the Plan. He said staff had susilested a definition of affordable housing to include 30X of gross income for housing as the cut- off point for determining affordable housing. Historically the figure has been 25% and Council amended the Plan st the Nast greeting to take out that historic information; he encouraged Council to use the 25% figure if they intended to include a figure in the Plan, and not the 30% as recommended by staff. Sag Sporck, 4099 Laguna, said he would also like to speak to the issue of through traffic in residential neighborhoods. A figure mentioned earlier rtes 3,000 cars a day and if that were broken down, thcre wou l d be about two a minute, and during the daylight hours, it is higher than that. Ho wanted to see some guidelines as to what will be done Alencapacity limits on certain streets are reached. Who: a limit is reached, he would like to see some sort of barrier erected on certain streets to lower the traffic density. 244 9/29%$0 Jennifer Reid, BCD Miranda Green, said she was a member of the palo alto tree committee and supported the comments made ec!rlier by Erica Prince, She asked that the Urban Design section address the area on Arastradero Road going down to El Camino, which has not been designated as a Scenic Highway, She asked that they review it in terms of needed shrubbery and bicycle paths. She requested that they include throughout the Plan that high density buildings not be put too close to the road. Jim Culpepper, 2121 Amherst, referred to Program 18 on page 19E regarding transportation and the statement, "An extension cf a two-lane Willow Road from Arboretum to El Camino Real would help relieve the aggravated traffic conditions on Arboretum Road and in the Stanford Shopping Center parking lots;..." He requested that staff provide more data to support that statement. He felt the likely result of a two-lane extension would be two lanes of bumper to bumper traffic extending from Arboretum to El Camino. Given this, he felt that further expenditure of public funds for this project cannot be justified. Program 18 further states, "Willow Road serves an undeveloped 46 -acre site zoned for multiple -family resi- dential. Development of hous.ino_on_t_his _ 1te may mike improved access necessary." He suggested adding the following sentence, "One r .ans of providing improved access would be to connect the development directly to Pasteur drive by weans of an underpass ender Willow Road." Mr. Knox had suggested that idea at one of the forum sessions. Gill Carillon, 2053 Park dlvd., said he would like to suggest a possible alternative to the zone change in the Park Blvd./California Avenue area -- a neighborhood/commercial zone, which would limit the ground coverage and height. Elizabeth Pynchon, 1883 Park Boulevard, reiterated the comments she made at the September 1( meeting and her opposition to any land use change in Cie California Avenue/Para Blvd. area. She submitted letters and peeitions from residents in the neighborhood for the record and distribution to Ccunc i l . MOTION: Counciln nber Fazzino moved, seconded by Sher, to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Mayor Henderson said that closing the public hearing did not mean citizens_ could not submit letters on the subject. Counci lamer Eyerly referred to the same paragraph on Pane 3G where they roved the wording referring to the *xlmart site and sentence, "Sites along San Antonio Road, Arastradero Road, and Welch Road, and near the California Avenue Southern Pacific station have been redesignated for housing." He said the only one he recalled redesignating was the site on Welch Road. Mayor Henderson sb i d a1 l sites had been r^edes i gnated except the one on California Avenue, and suggested they flag it for later discussion, Councilmerrber Eyerly said on the same page, second to last paragraph, left column, he would like to remove the word *more" in the first sentence, because the project has not yet been put together. MOTiCA: Councilmember Eyerly moved that the word "more* in that paragraph be removed. Themotiondied for lack of a second. Councilmember Eyerly said onlhe same page under Program l l , he objected to the word "Primary*. He felt that art objective for new housing that is for low, moder&tev and griddle income households is one objective but not the prl.ery one• MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved to change the wording under Program 11 to "One objective for housing is construction for..." The motion died for lack of a second. Mayor Henderson said he felt they needed to make one more change to the paragraph on 3G where they deleted the wording regarding Maximart. In the second to the last sentence, he felt the word "these" should be re- placed with "commercial and industrial ," MOT/ON: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Renzel, "these" with "commercial and industrial." The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember to replace the word Witherspoon absent. Councilmember Renzel referred to page 3G, left column, second to the last. paragraph, and said she felt the sentence in the middle of the paragraph which begins "In 198©, a proposal for a housing project..." is an example of extraneous language and not appropriate for a long tern plan. MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Fletcher, that the present language be changed to say, 'The City is working on developing procedures for considering air rights projects for assessment district lots. The City will determine which public parking sites are suitable for housing." Planning Commissioner Cullen said this was a sentence on which the Planning Commission was divided. The minority felt that the language should be left open. The motion passed on a unanimous votes Councilmember Witherspoon absent. Councilmember Renzel said she had a comment under Program 10 and the specific reference to Stanford University's Coinvest lent Program. She said she didn q object to innovative financial techniques, but felt it }ives some people a. competitive edge in the market place. She suggested they simply be aware of that. lice Mayor Sher said he had a question about the procedure they would follow regarding suggestion they heard in the public hearing. For example, Mr. 8oro k had pressed the addition of a third example: of innovative housing, specifically co-op whip. He suggested that staff present Council with. a list of the suggestioes by,categeries. Otherwise, he was afraid they might lose sight of thee. The other question he had on page 3G was what were they going to do about the reference to California Aver and the Southern Pacific Station. Qo they met to deal with that question at this point or when they get to the Land Use section? Mayor, Henderson said he felt they intended to discuss it under Land Use. Counci ter Wenner void as lane es :may were "listing ways of f ii hart i ng housing, she couldwent to include the suggestion about co-op ownership. They should either do that, or shorten the list of exa l es . Herr Henderson said they old let staff look at Mr. Borock ° s idea and omen to them at a later date. 4w.1.11 Mayor Henderson referred to the left -heed column, paragraph 4, where it sta►tee0 'This contributions which was 45 cents per sere foot in 1979..." and slid he preferred not to have specifics in the Plan such as "45 cents." NOTION: r Henderson awed std by Bra,.. to delete the refererce to "45 cents.' Counci lmember Levy said he felt the reason that reference to the 45 cents was included was to make the point that follows, "Even so, this money could produce only a small fraction of the additional assisting housing Palo Alto needs..." MOTION RESTATED: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Brenner, to delete the reference to 45 cents, and substitute the following wording at the beginning of the last sentence, "Money produced from the housing mitigation measures cair produce only a swell fraction..." Councilmenter Fazzino said he was concerned about the nitpicking at the text. He asked if they were adopting the text with the same emphasis as the actual programs? He felt they hadn't really dealt with a substantive program; they are dealing with five or six words in the text. Mr. Abrams replied that the text will clarify the program. Councilor Faezino said he wished everyone had looked at the plan ahead of time and made specific recommendations in writing to the staff, which could have been incorporated in the text before it was sent to Council. Councilm.ember Orly referred to Policy 8 which speaks to the percentage of multiple -family rental units in the unity. He felt that the present level of rental was almost 50% and that it was an adequate level. MOTION: Councilmearber Fyerly moved, seconded by Levy, that the words "at least" be removed from Policy 8. Mayor Henderson noted that 47% refers to all rentals, and that this policy refers gust to multiple -family units. MOTION FAILED: The motion failed on the following vote: AYES: Eyerly, Brenner, Levy NOES: Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel, Sher ABSENT: Wi thers000n Mayor Henderson said he would like to reserve the right to come back and look at Program 13. He was getting some new thoughts abut condominium conversions from their recent experience. Mr. Abrams suggested a change or: page 3H, righthand cold, in the paragraph starting, "This ordinance prohibits the ;conversion..." and Mayor Henderson said he would make a motion to make that change. MOTION: Mayor arson moved, weeded by Menzel that the paragraph read, "This ordinance prohibits the conversion of rental units to coddostiniu s anti 1 the city -pride rental: vacancy rate exceeds three percent. The ordinance allows filing of a condominium conversion application where the tenants indicate weir consent to conversion and where displacement of tenants is miniwiz d.* Mr. Abrams said this wording properly reflects what is currently in the proposed ord i Trance. The entice passed unantwously, Councilmeaber Witherspoon absent. PI. 41 Councilmember Fletcher said they presently had a regulation that in resi- dential developments of ten or more units below market rate housing be provided. That has resulted in a lot of nip unit condominium develop- ments. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Renzel, that developers of five to nine residential units should contribute in liens funds towards the below market rate housing program. Councilmember Levy said he felt they were talking about a major new ordinance and he was uncomfortable about that. Maybe they should say that 10% of each unit, no matter how many, should be set aside, that is, some kind of in -lieu payment. He said he would prefer not to discuss the possibility of a new ordinance while they are in the process of reviewing the Plan. He would be willing to discuss it at a later date in another context. Councilmember Brenner said that since to return to the Planning Commission, of the Commission's discussion before any change they make in the Plan has that Council would have the advantage they took any final action. Mr. Knox said he would like to clarify there is no ordinance, the entire below market rate program comes from the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Fletcher said that the process which was used when the initial Plan was adopted was that the policies then led to the ordinances. Councilmember Fazzino said he would like for staff to discuss the item with the Planning Commission before the Council considers it. He said he was interested in some type of contribution on the part of developers. The emphasis of the entire program, of course, is to provide actual units. He would prefer to strengthen the ten or more, rather than looking at developments with :underten, however he was very wit tine to have the Planning Commission review the item and discuss the rate of return issue, Planning Commission Chairmen Nichols said the Housing Corporation had expressed some concern to the Planning Co isslon that there might be a detrimental effect by putting extra berden on the smaller develooments, Vice Mayor Sher said he was enconfortable about making such an amendment now and felt a more appropriate wAy to handle it was to refer it directly to the Planning C+c ission for review as a separate item; Planning Commissioner Cullen said the Commission spent a lot of time on this subject and received a lot of ireput from goobers of the Housing Corporation and the public. As she recalled, the Housing Corporation was ccmfortabie with a 1O% figure and with the negotiating process in operation; and were they to either increase the percentage or reduce the level of the amberof units, they old have a difficult time ding with the pro- gram as currently structured. She said she would not like to see any changes made at this point, without the input of the Housing Corporation. Mayor Henderson said he Agri with Vice for Sher's point. If Council felt they wanted ted to review this entire subjects then perhaps it should be on the agendd as a separate item, with a referral to the Housing Corporation and the Planning Commission. Council .. Fletcher said she understood the process to be that this was the time to review the policies and programs of the Plan, and if they wanted to'eke a atiou, it would go beck to the Meanies omission for review. At Wit, with the proliferetion of eine unit condominiums, they are losing housiag. So with adoption of this policyo,even if they don't let more. houstegoeat hat there will be , see coetribution to the pregrem.' Mr. Wm said thet with respect to this specific languages the Council should be afire, this is the Daily place ire the OMR progre r is mentioned end applies t ciy 4090 A subdivision comes before Council. He felt it was advisable to establish sone standards. Me suggested wording for the third pa ph, loft isand column. on leg : 60evelopers of five to nine units should provide atbelow market rates to low and berate income families, onion` 10% of its molts of 1 whiff is mor4P(thet old be at Council's d ). Councilmember Fletcher said she would incorporate that wording in her motion, with agreement of the second to the motion. Counci1member Brenner said it did give them a basis to deciJe whether it was within the context of the Plan. Vice Mayor Sher said the language which Mr. Abrams suggested and which has been incorporated in the motion was an attempt to have an objective standard in the Plan against which to measure the subdivision application. What he was really saying was that there would be one unit. Mr in- . Abrams said what he was trying to avoid was a direct reference to an lieu contribution. Vice Mayor Sher said that an in -lieu payment should be equivalent to the thing it is in lieu of. That should be true for over ten units and under. If there is to he at least one unit in the five to nine, then there should be an in -lieu payment equivalent to the one unit. He still felt this item should be sent directly to the Planning Commission for review if Council wants to make any changes . to the current standards. Mayor Mende figure ten to rson suggested thatone solution wuuid be to just change the five. Councilor L Vice rruyui Sher he wondered why t they were doing n of public input. want to lower the f structured way. evy said he would be more comfortable if they followed s recommendation. Although five is an adequate number, hat number couldn!t be four, or even one? He felt what ow was quite arbitrary; they have not had the benefit gain, they are setting a specific level. If they iqure from ten, he felt they should do it in a more Cauncilmember Eyerly said he recalled in reading the Planning Commission minutes that there was lot of discussion about this subject. He questioned whether everyone had read those minutes. He would be more comfortable talking about this at another time. Mayor Henderson clarified t to "five" in Progrom 17. hat the motion was to change the word "ten* NOTION FAILED: The motion fai ed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel NOES: Eyerly, Fezztno, Levy, Sher ABSENT: Witherspoon Councilmember Renzel referred to the text on page 31 in the middle of the right hand column, and the peragrapA winning, *elopers who are Wilding..." She said she gaged this nes si-policy--are they expecting a new change :in policy thtt puts the sentence in the future tense? She suggested the sentence reed, 'Developers who are building on sites larger than five acres are expected...* instead of mwii1 be expected,' . . Mr. Schr'eiber respond the negotiation process is framed around what is now tous1nei program 17. COUnci limber Axel said then she #e1 t the r4 should be *ere because it reflects currant policy. The next two sentences in the same paragraph refer to Nax#eeart and Park Boulevard sites, end she suggested that the reference be deleted, Mayor Henderson said he didn't thinthat uss a problem because under the curt zoning, ImoPie could put housing on the sites if they wanted; the was no harm in leaving it in, 0 e Planning Commissioner Nichols said that Mr, Jacobson appeared before the Commission when they discussed the Maxlmart site and in his long term plan for the site, he will look at housing. Mr. Nichols said he thought it was appropriate to leave the reference in. Mr. Abrams said with regard to Program 17 that it was staff's intention that the program relate to both existing and new construction. The language could be modified to ensure that it applies to both new and existing. Councilmember Renzel confirmed that the Council accepted her suggested change of the words "will be" to "are." Pa 3J Councilor Eyerly refuted to Program 18, lefthand column, third paragraph, which mentions the 1979 state law and development percentages. The paragraph above that indicates that they should be paying attention to density bonus concept and that details will be developed through Zoning Ordinance amendments. He had trouble with the way it was worded. Input from the community is fear of any increased densityinhousing areas. MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Brenner, that the second paragraph on Page 3J, lefthand column, be deleted. Councilmember Renzel said she would like to see only the last part of the paragraph deleted, beginning with, "Particular attention should be pain...." The other wording was okay except that it could be modified to say that "Developers of low rate housing who provide..." Councilmember Brenner said she seconded the motion because she thought the paragraph was vague, it provides a vague kind of incentive. Mayor Henderson nor:ed that Bob Mss had presented some language for the last two sentences in the paragraph. Vice Mayor Sher said he thought the first paragraph seed to be City policy about density bonuses and the next paragraph speaks to state law and it appears the City doesn't have any control over it. He wondered how those two paragraphs related to each other. Planning Comissionet_Culleittaid: while .the Cessission was discussing the density bonus concept this stage 1a ,rotes passed.: They thought it pre, eluded the usual review process and therefore should be flagged in the Plan. Vice Mayor Sher asked if they had to.include the state law language. Mr. Abrams said ht4elt the paragreph wes sl p1y intended to be a narrative setting the perameters .of . the OMR prograe which includes the mandates of state law. Vice Mayor Sher said that Mr. Moss had suggested wor d l ng for the second to last sentence in the second paregrephf, to say "Particular attention should be paid to a density was concept which does not adeersely affect adjoining neighborhoods.* _. MISTIME LION: Vice'iiayor Sher moved, second by' Levy, to idf' the language.. *which does. not adversely affect adjoining neighborhoods,* to the end of the senesce, and that the first sentence of the paragraph ra>$d, "Developers of market rate housing uho provide..." puncilmembar Orenmers said that the is a oaf the state law puts ►sure on everyone not to .use the -highest density housing zone. l r to . lee t the wards-, tt t of the tea Vice,' Ster41101 hisalb t tt notas Utawiett to :the. motion and with approval of his second, deleted that reference from his motion. MOTION PASSED: The motion to add the words "which does not adversely affect adjoining neighborhoods," passed unanimously, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. Councilmember Levy said he spoke with staff today about the definition of middle income housing. He felt staff had a concept for defining it, and he wondered if that definition should be included ire Program 20. MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Renzel, that somewhere in the Plan there be a definition for middle income housing. Mr. Schreiber noted that the definition of middle income housing is one which has been proposed but not yet adopted by the Federal govern- ment: Middle income is 120-150% of County median. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. Councilmember Levy said that Midpeninsula Citizens for Fir Housing made some suggestions regarding Policy lls Program 26. MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Renzel, that under Policy 11, the wording should define all the types of discrimination which are presently illegal: race, religion, national origin, sex, marital status and physical handicap. Counciiimember Levy said MPCFH commented that many people are not aware that. all of these types of discrimination are illegal and he felt it was important to define them in the Plan. MUM PASSED: The motion passed unanimously, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. Councilmember Levy said that Program 26 talks about age discrimination. MPCFH suggests that they make it clear that age discrimination in rental housing includes not only families with children but single parents with children, students, the elderly, and not just families with children. He said he would agree with all of that except the word °students." Students don't necessarily fall within a certain age group. He felt that if they talk about age, they have to include all ages. MOTION: Councilor Levy wed that Progrsy. 26 incline language to make it clear that age discr ination in rental housing includes families with children, single parents with children and the elderly. MOTION DIED: Motion died for lack of a second. MOTION: Mayor Henderson wed, wed by Renzel, to change the word *families° to °house * 1ds° in dam 26. Councilaember Eyeriy said he had a problem with tha whole program. The. issue of age discrimination in housing hasn't been discussed at the Council level, and if they adopt the program, they are setting a policy without a hearing. Councilmember Levy said he felt NO. Eyerly hed a good point. Under Policy 11 it states, *Work towards the elimination of rectal discriminatioe, ego discrimination..." and that dictates a direction. When they have implemented that direction with a specific ordinance, then the program can be put in *Pilch reflects the ordinance. MOTION PASS: The motion passed on a 7-0 vote, Councilmember Fazzino abstaining and Councilmember Witherspoon absent. 251 0129010 MOTION: Councilmmaber Eyerly moved, seconded by Leary, that Program 26 be removed from the Plan. Mayor Henderson said he felt people would realize that Council was not making a statement t et they wanted to continue discrimination; it was a staterent that Council hasn't yet considered an ordinance. When it does, the ordnance can be reflected in the Plan. Planning Commissioner -Cullen said the CoMmissloh felt "age discrimination" did not convey the ids of discrimination against children. The Council may wish to add more specific wording. Mr. Knox said that if Council wanted to adopt an ordinance, sometime it would be helpful to have such a program in the Plan. This really is a policy document for programs which Council wants to carry out or ordinances which they may want to adopt later. One suggestion was to. change the cord "adopt" to "consider." Councilmember Eyerly said he amid be willing to emend his motion; rather than eliminating the program, he would accept Mr. Knox's recommendation to change the word "Adopt" to "Consider,'' MOTION RESTATED: Courcll r Eyerly moved, seconded by Levy, that the word "Adopt" be changed to "Consider," in Program 26. Councilor #.retire:° said the issue has been discussed for years. Adopt an ordin nce means that Council will consider an ordinance, If Council votes it down, at that point they will consider dropping the program. She would prefer to leave the wordin alone; it is a predicted action. Louncilmember Renzel said the programs of the Plan are action plans and guidelines for implementing policies. MOTION FAILED: The motion to change the word "Adopt" to "Consider" failed on the following vote: AXES: Eyerly, Fletcher, Henderson. Levy NOES: Brenner, Fazzino, Sher, Renzel ARSE '': Witherspoon Mayor Henderson said if there was going to be a specific ordinance he wanted to make a motion. i TIti : Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Eyerly, to addthe words, *such ordinance to exert adult housing limited to persons fifty-five year;! of age and older." Councilmember Fletcher said she felt they were getting into s ific numbers *gain. Sys prsf'� ceding such as "housing specifically set aside for the elderly." Vice Mayor Sher said he didn't see the need for that kind of specific qualifications. This is a prop= to adopt the ordinance, without the particulars of the ardi defined which will be defi d later when they discuss it. MOTION FAILED: The motioe failed on the following vote: AYES: f rl,y, l wok , NOES: Brenner, Fezzino, Fletcher, Levy, Reuel, Sher__ ASSENT: Witherspoon Mayor Henderson announced that the next Special Meeting to discuss the Comprehensive Plan amendments will be held on Monday, October 13, 1980 at 7:30 p.m. Pale, 9A (Page 3D) Counci1ienber Renzel referred to the section on Housing Quality, top of the page, and expressed concern about the sentence, "Standards which define desired results rather than specifying the means for achieving them are most useful." She wondered how they expected to set standards for objectives to achieve without getting into means of achieving them. MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Brenner, to delete that sentence beginning with, "Standards which define desired results..." Mr. Schreiber clarified that the paragraph identified o/s page RA also appears on page 3D. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, %ltccher, Henderson, Renzel, Sher 4OES: Levy ABSENT: Witherspoon :. Page 3F Councilmember Renzel said that the text on this page under Policy 6 only spews to residential and commercial and that ray also be true in the earlier part of the Plan. MOTION: Councilmem.ber Renzel moved, seconded by Fletcher, that the text be changed to refer to commercial and industrial areas. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Hendersea, Levy, Renzel, Sher NOES: Eyerly ABSENT: Witherspoon Councllme ber Renzel said she had concerns about what she considered to be the reverse of the incentive to get residential in nonresidential zones. She thought incentives should be provided for straight residential develop- ment rather than the mixed development. She said this item was discusses! under Prover 8. The program allows for what she is suggesting, but she said she would like to see an emphasis on straight residential development. MOTION: Councils Renzel wed, seconded by B ter, that the Council instruct the Planning Commission to consider the appropriateness of providing incentives for straight residential in nonresidential zones, rather than for mixed develepment. Planning Commissioner Celled said the Commissioe spent at least two meetings on this suet and wort finally w inced by the testimonies that if they go for ' straight residential in some of the zones, the cost of the resi- dential would be so greet that affordable housing would be lost. The mix topeo.d suppose affordable housing., Councilmember Reuel said she thought they t current/y providing bonuses to a deftlefeer who providesa little commercial mixed in with the residential. That developer gets benefits such as elimination of open space requirements, parking, etc. Affordable housing may not be provided in any case. N Henderson said he thought the icy of the program was to get some mix of citmaarcf*l and hang such es coemercial on the groom floor and housing over it. If they were talking about straight wing, they were beck to taltime abut mewling to redgeotiel. Councilmember Btenner referred to the Southern Pacific site in the Ever. green area, and said right now that area is allowed the highest housing density, however if they put even a bit of commercial in part of it, they could increase the maximum density for residential uses, eliminate useable open space requirements, and allow up to 20% reduction of offstreet parking. That is one of the reasons that a CC zone in that neighborhood would be a disaster. If they opted not to put any commercial, then they would have to abide by the regulations of a housing zone. She could see where a developer would want to put in a little commercial. She felt they made a big mistake when they allowed some of the housing incentives, that is they allowed some commercial and provided the developer with tremendous bonuses. She said she supported the motion on the floor. Councilmember Eyeriy said he had some problems errs with the motion. The Council has recently been concerned about grocery stores in the downtown area. They weren't ging to have any downtown grocery stores unless somehow they can protect the zoning. The land value is such where developments for residential will push out other uees. He felt that once they completed review of the Plan they needed to give some assignments to staff and possibly the Planning Commission to analyze build -out and the overall needs in the City. For the area Councilma er Brenner referred to, he had already heard about proposals which contemplated straight housing. That may be okay for that particular area, but was concerned about emphasis on that city-wide. Vice Mayor Sher asked if the motion was a direction to the Planning Commission. Counci 1r+aember Renze1 replied that it was. The policy was implemented by way of the Zoning Ordinance. Vice Mayor Sher said he felt they were limited as to what they could do. Councilmember, Renzel said there was no problem with the policy, it was the text which needed changing. Tice Mayor Sher said he understood that all they could do tonight was move amendments to the Plan. He suggested that they could reword Program d to "Provide incentives....to provide all or some residential..." Councilmember Reuel said she could amend to say eliminating usable open space requirements for °straight" residential, etc. , instead of "mixed." The Commission can report back to Council and if they suggest that Council not do that, it can be discussed at that time. She thought that was the psis they intended five years ago. Vice Mayor Sher said *felt t she ought to do it in the alternative, because there may be s situ cos where the developer under no circumstances would be willing to *lop all residential. The incentives were aimed at getting developers ,to put in some residential. Councilmember Reel said she was mainly concerned that they were penalizing Correction 0414 hundred pent residential add nonresidential zones. See Pg.08 11/24/80 MOTION RESTATED: - Counci lmember Ranee moved, seconded by Brenner that the sentence under Program 8 read *Providelmcentfves for industrial, retai l , and Office. developments to amide all or sone res rdehtial on the some site or on another nen-residentially zoned site." WNW PA ED: The *timn to add the words "a11' or" to Program 8 passed oh the following votes AYES: Brenner, Fletcher Levy, taarderson, Renzel, Sher NOES: Eyerly, Fainno Witherspoon Page 128, Councilmamber Levy referred oo Table 2 and said he would like to sugoast that the wording be improved. Under Median Santa Clara County Income it indicates that the more people there are in the household the higher the income; he didn't think that was the intent of the heading. He would like to see the old heading for that Table be retained and that the column heading be Median Santa Clara County Income for Purposes of Housing Assistance. MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Renzel, to retain the previous heading for Table 2 and change the column heading to "Median Santa Clara County Income for Purposes of Housing Assistance." MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. Council r Brenner referred to the first paragraph, lefthand column, and said that one of the most important reasons on which the Industrial Park ways based was low cost utilities, and she would like to the text to reflect that. 1OTION: Councilor Brenner moved, seconded by Renze'; to reword the second to last sentence in the paragraph to read: "Other industries chose to locate here,..,.as well as the fine residential areas, the outstanding municipal services, and the inexpensive utilities." MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel, Sher NOES: Hone ABSTAIN: Fazzino, Levy ABSENT: Witherspoon Counc i 1nvber Levy referred to a letter the Council received from the Civic League, He read an item from the letter regarding Employment: "The effect of Proposition 13 Sri 1 s be to gradually reduce the share of property tax income provided by the business community. Additional taxes, such as a business license tax, should be considered to restore and maintain the historical balance of tax inch between the business and residential unities." He said he thought the point was valid. He suggested that at the end of col un one, third paragraph, the language -contained in his emotion be added. POTION: Caw ci lmsmber Levy Moved, seconded by Ronne, to add the language: "An effect of Proposition I3, Wirer, will b . to gradually reduce the share of property tax ire provided by the business community. Additional taxes, such es a Business license tax, should be considered to restore and maintain the historical balance of tax income between the business and residential communities." Councilmembee Rszziie said he felt it was too highly speculative for an action document. There are some good arguments for a business license tax and he suggested that Councllriu ber Levy send it to the Commission for discussion. Before that discussion occurs and they have the benefit of testimony from the public, he felt it should notbe included in this document. for meson said he didn't have any problem with the moth n' mouse i t. says _ u such as a business license tax. Vice r Sher said *se didn't have any probles with the general statement' but it felt it could be phrased in such a :ways to eke -it clear that it old require a two-thirds vote of tha People to enact an such. tax. Council ber Levy said he would change the wording because the business license tax is not the critical element; the balance is more critical. The second sentence could state: "Additional taxes, requiring a two- thirds vote of the citizens, should be considered to restore...:' MOTION PASSED: The motion, as reworded to include "requiring a two- thirds vote of the citizens," passed unanimously, Cauncilmember Witherspoon absent. 12.4.91-12E Councilaw ber Eyerly referred to the column under "Objectives" and said that one of the major objectives in his mind was encouraging Stanford University tc move along on their housing goals. He would like to add a reference to that under the objectives. He acknowledged that Stanford had done quite well in meeting their goals duringthe last two to three ,ors. MOTION: Councilor Eyerly moved, seconded by Levy, that an additional objective be added to encourage Stanford University to obtain a higher percentage of housing units versus student enrollment and staff and faculty population. Vice Mayor Sher said he would not participate in any discussion or the vote, as Stanford University is his aeployer: MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously, Counci lmember Witherspoon absent and Vice Mayor Sher not participating. Councilmember Levy said that under "Existing Conditions and Trends" he would like to see some stronger language about the negative impact from an increase in € pioWent. MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Renzel, that the last sentence on page 13B read: "The increase employment from intensification, rile very hard to forecast, could have substantial negative impact on traffic, noise, and delivery of city services." MOTION PASSED: The notion passed unanimously, Councilmenber Witherspoon absent. Councilmember Eyerly asked for clarification in the righthand column, - the sentence stating: "The appearance and function along El Camino Laic especially from Matadors, Chic to the southern City limits, is of special co:ream among Palo Altos commercial areas." The next sentence then says, "Shift the balance of land use aloes El Camino Real from automobile and service vial toward neighborhood commercial and residential." He said he understood that to eeae the entire strip frca I tadero to the sout h City l lei ts.: Mayor beers said he felt that was in line with what isr already policy. rN Counci lmeeber E ly said this indicates Was :die that the regional - commercial which includes the motels should be phased out, according to thi e statement. He said it should go to neighborhood/commercial, _which he felt was an un- tested zone • ; -F Mr. Schreiber said ,this objective is a slightly modified version from that in 11176. The intent is not to fug c gee the land use but to retain the mix of neighborhood/commercial king. He thought there was a program later on which spot* to this intent. Councilmember Eyerly, said be jest felt the sentence was misleading. MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved oral of the sentence commenc with "Shift the islammef land use alb El Cmaim ' l . . a n9 Councilmember Renzel said she thought the problem was with the word "balance," in terms of the ratio of those kinds of uses. She agreed it was misleading and suggested it be reworded to speak to that ratio. MOTION DIED: The motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember Renzel said they have accomplished the rezoning that is shifting the balance from automobile and service commercial toward neighborhood residential. She suggested that staff could add "in line with current zoning" to the end of the sentence to clarify the wording and intent. Councilmember Levy suggested the following wording: °Recent changes in zones have encouraged a shift in the balance of land use along El Camino..." Mr. Knox suggested wording to the effect, "Land use changes made in the 1976 Plan and zoning changes made thereafter have achieved the objective of shifting the balance...' The stat ent recognizes that the objective was in the previous plan and doesn't call for a continuation of the objective. Planning Commissioner Cullen said there was a motion at the Omission meeting to delete :his paragraph, but it was retained. There was a minority which felt it wasn't necessary, that it was descriptive of fomething which already happened. Councilmember Fletcher said her concern in indicating they are happy with the status quo is all the exception applications. Mr. Knox said this was a sentence which appeared as a major objective on page 2 of the Plan; if they make a change here, they will want to pick that up later in the front. Councilmember Brenner said the fact that the zoning and intent have changed, doesn't really say that the land use has changed. She felt they needed to cuntinue to work to maintain the shift in ratio of land use along El Gino. MOTION: Counc+leeeber Brenner mewed, :seconded by Renzel, that the wording be changed to read: Work to maintain the shift in ratio of land use along El Camino Real...* and add at the end of the sentence ", lire with current zoning." Councilmenber Eyeriy said he felt better adding the reference to current zoning bemuse it takes away the confusion. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unaniweusly, Councilmember Withers p absent. Councilmember Renzel noted that the discussion of the need for capital expenditures related to eaaplovent areas was deleted from the 1975 Plan med she felt that a very significant part of the City's function is to provide capital services to all residences and businesses. They know for example: that only 10 users urn 50% of the electricity NOTION: Councilmember Fenzel moved, seconded by Brenner, that at the eras of °Employ ant Related Prot !e ,* the wording on Page 17 of the 19/5 P1en be reinstated., Councilmember Eyerly asked why staff had taken the wing out of the proposed Plan. , . Mr. Schreiber replied that he recalled it was taken out at the advice of the utility staff because the paragraph was inaccurate, that the expanded capital facilities were by and large not needed. Councilmember Renzel said the paragraph may need to be factually updated but from what she could tell from the last capital improvements project there ware still many utility projects there specifically related to the Industrial Park. They know there is limited space left in the dump, that 70 percent of the garbage comes from commercial and ioduetrial users, that 50 percent of the electricity is used only by ten users. She felt it wasn't inaccurate to say that those things may reflect on the capacity of the City's facilities. She said she supposed it may depend on how one defines capital facilities and she thought the multi thousands of dollars that come in under the CIP every year reflect those capital facilities. Mayor Henderson suggested the wording: "Expansion of commercial and industrial facilities and resulting employment increases may generate. the need`for expenditures..." The word "may" would substitute for "will also." The same would be true for the last sentence: "Additional capital facilities sty. have to be constructed..," Councilmember Renzel, with the approval of her second, agreed to incorporate Mayor Henderson's suggestion in her motion. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyeriy, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher NOES: Fazzino ABSENT: Witherspoon Page_ 13D Councilmeatber• Levy said he would like to address a concern expressed by members of the public, the concern that Council is not strong enough in their discouraging of through traffic in neighborhoods. In the second paragraph on page 13D, : regarding the sentences stating: Establ ished- neighborhoods will have more co muter parking on their streets. Other neighborhoods + i11 experience more traffic as commuters seek less con- gested routes," Councilmember levy said he would like to replace those sentences with the following, g, "Steps must be taken to ensure that established neighborhoods will not have more commuters parked on their streets and that residential street traffic not increase due to commutersseekingless congested routes." MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved, sect by Fletcher, that the wing ba changed to reed: "Steps gest be taken to ensure that established neighborooOs Lei 1 l not have mere commuters parked on their streets and that r i tial . street traffic not increase due to commuters seeking less congested utes.° for Henderson said this, was a statement of concern and it wasn't uorded well. Perhaps it shoed have been prefaced with 'Among the cis are.. Then it goes on stating the policies ` to address the concerns. The present ceding could be stated more positively. Vico Mayor Sher said:be felt the changes Mr. Levy wants to make belong more appropriatelyy in tko transportation section. This is describing a prob/em which will new from increased employment. He agreed with the hr's suggestion to identify the statements as concerns. MOTION FAILED: The motion failed on the following vote: AYES: , ASSENT: "Ffetther Primer, Eyerly, Fa iron„ arson, Levy, Recital, Sher Witherspoon MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Renzel, to add the words "Among the negative impacts," with the sentence to read: "Among the negative impacts, established neighborhoods...." `OTION PASSED: The Notion passed unanimously, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. Counci1a inber Levy referred to Policy 2 and suggested a word change to make sure that they were talking about construction of housing in non- resident1?'l areas, rather than construction in one part of town because of a non-residential development in a different part of town. He suggested the wording be: "Encourage the construction of housing in areas occupied by non-residential development." MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved to change the wording in Policy 2 as suggested. MOTION DIED: The motion died for lack of a second. MOTION: Councilor Fletcher moved, seconded by Renzel, to change the word "affects" to "exacerbates" in the fourth paragraph, lefthand column. MOTION PASSED: Themotionpassed unanimously, Councilmember Witherspoon absent. Councilmember Fazzino said he understood the point Councilmember Levy was trying to make with his motion and he .supported him. However, at the same time he didn't want to exclude the possibility of housing in residential areas. They don't want the burden to fall exclusively upon residential areas. MOT/ON: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Levy, to change the wording of Policy 2 to read; "Encourage construction of additional housing, primarily on or nearindestrial/commercial sites so that more people who work in Palo Alto can live here..." Planning Commissioner Cullen said the Commission phrased that policy ties way because they were trying to encouragethe construction of housing in nonresidential areas. Councilmember Eyerly said he would vote for the motion, but he felt it sags the same thing .as the policy statement. MOTION PASSED The motion passed unanimously, Councilmem4er- Witherspoon absent. Couhcil r Eyerly. said he had concerns about Program 2. The native effects firms inte sificstlon of the use of industrial/commercial sites are lousing and traffic. If they try to resolve that by ltmiting what an employer can do, ;he felt thy amre taking the wrong approach. The policy was in a way unfair. NOTION: Councilember Eyerly moved, sect by fazztnc the wording: °Develop methods warlch will keep intensificationof nonresidential uses from compounding 'traffic a d .pellutioe problems," end deletion ofthe last two sentences beginning with, *Program 2 is intended to set... 6 Councilmember Fletcher said she was opposed to the motion because she didn't see how they cold control -traffic if they keep intensifying sites. The program won't become a reality in Palo Alto until they met an ordinance: She felt could work ot, limits and how to o it at that time. 2 6.9 91 MN Councilmember Renzel said she felt the motion leads then' back to all the other policies and programs they have been implementing for five years. She felt it was worthwhile to see if they can develop the methods and programs. When they establis= limits by type of use, she felt they might be encouraging higher density uses. She felt they shoeld establish the limit by the zo02. Councilor Fazzino said he felt this would be an extremely difficult standard to develop. He felt the primary concerns were environmental issues and the policy should relate to those problems. It would be very difficult „to regulate Theaters of employees. The City should use its police power of zoning to accomplish the same goal. Mayor Henderson said he thought the Plan was talking about some limits of different types of employment and trying to avoid the shifting of, say, office from certain intensity use to something else of much higher irtens i ty. Vice Mayor Sher said this question of intensification of use was one discussed at great lerth by the County Housing Management Task Force. It was recognized by the Task Force that no matter what kind of measures were taken in rezoning, a tremendous impact of increased employment came from the ability to put more employees in existing buildings. Sunnyvale has adopted by ordinance a classification of industrial uses and he thought it applied in their case to new properties and in terms of how many e ployees per square foot. They don't actually say how they are going to police that. He wondered if Councilmember Eyerly really wanted to leave in the word "intensification." That takes on a creme of reference which means putting more employees in existing buildings. He felt the emphasis was on pollution and traffic and that relates more to getting people to car pool, etc., and that's all addressed in another part of the Plan. He said he was gong to vote against the motion. He would prefer to see two words added at the beginning of the program, "Attempt to." He didn't think the answer was zoning, unless they were prepared to rezone this land to a no industrial use. Cour.cilmeaber Brenner left the hating at 11:00 p.m. MOTION FAILS: The motion to change the wording in Program 2 failed on the fo llowing vote: AYES: Eyerly, Fazxina NOES: Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher Ate: Bre!er, Witherspoon NOTION: ViceMeyor Sher moved, seconded by. Fletcher, to addthe words "Attempt to* at the beginning of Program 2. Councilnember Levy said he preferred the wording as it exists and didn't went to water it down, MOTION PASSED The motion paw .on the following vote. AYES: Eyerly, Fletcher, Sher, Henderson NOES: Fezzina.Aenzel, Levy ABSENT: Brenner, . Witherspoon Pa. . MOTION: Councils Reseal moved, seconded by Fletcher, to chaff the phrase *Provide incentives ' and encouragement to to ' "Require' . in Program 7. tic i lr i ,y asked staff if that.* vats any problem with the word "require.* Mr. Abrams said with the absence of an ordinance, he didn't see how it could be required. It would only apply directly where they get a commercial subdivision plan. Mr. Knox said one alternative eould be to add language such as 'Develop an ordinance to require," or something like that, recognizing that if an ordinance is needed to require something, it has to he done. Councilor Renael said she would be willinj to use that wording, "Develop an ordinance which would require industrial..." Mayor Henderson asked how this differed from Policy 3 which says, "Require planned transportation programs..."? Councilmember Renzel said another alternative is just to delete Program 7, and let Program 6 make the statement. Planning Commissioner Cullen said she had proposed this section. The thinking behind Program 7 was first under the policy that there be .a program and secondly, that the program be reviewed by the City in the regular review process. It was deliberately left vague because there were so many ways In etich transportation programs could be implemented. They felt that if they added "provide incentives" they would be more apt to get the cooperation of industry. Councilor Renzel said sho felt if they were requiring it, industry would cooperate. Ms. Cullen said they are requiring a program. The incentives would to encourage industry to cooperate in implementing the program. The incentives weren't spelled out at this time, and she thought they would evolve in the process. Counci imember Renzel si id she was concerned about "givena-way's" and that might occur. MOTION FAILED: The motion to delete Program 7 failed on the following vote: AYES: Renzel NOES: Fee zipo, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher ABSENT: Brenner, Witherspoon Councitmember del said she would like to be sure that current census data is included under Employekent when it is available, particularly- in the text on page 13F. Couacilmember lei referred to page 14C and asked about the additional SOO employees.2000. Mr, employment forecast from 1990 to 1i is`a change from MOO o 2000. Mr, Schreiber replied that Phase III of the Shopping Center is still..going on. `D EN • Counci hombar Fazziao weaved, std by Sher, that the Meettng be adjourned at 11:30 p.m. The. motion passed unanimously. ATTEST: .APB: 8 0 CITY COUNCIL M INUT€s ITEM Corrections to Minutes Oral Communications: Jim Culpepper, 2121 Amherst Ronald F. Bennett, 524 Middlefield Joan Pizzo, 631 Channing Street CITV OF NALCO Alto Regular Meeting Monday, October 6, 1980 CONSENT CALENDAR: Firefighter Physical Examinations (CMR:421:0) Miranda Avenue Traffic Signals (CMR:442:0) 841 Newell Road --Intent to Vacate Public Easement and Setting Public Hearing (CRM:414:O) Ordinance re 1980 Speed Laws (CMR:437;O) Ordinance re. Lytton Gardens 1100 Welch Road - Ordinance re Zone Change Condominium Conversion Ordinance PAGE 2 6 3 2 6 4 2 6 4 2 6 5 2 6 2 6 5 2 6 5 2 6 6 Public Nearing: 227 High Street - Application for Tentative Map High Street Solar 1evestors 2 6 5 Finance & Public Works Coammi,ttee re Downtown Parking Management P l en 2 6 6 Finance 6Public Works Committee re Feather Project and Calaverras Hydroelectric Project 2 6 7 Condominium Conversion Ordinance (Continued on Page 285) 2 6 9 Human Relations Omission Recommendations re Anti - Discrimination Ordinance re Sexual Orientation(CMR:444;O) 2 7 4 CoeO minium conversion Ordinance (Continued from Page 269) 2 8 5 8aylands Bicycle Path (CMR.441:O) 2 8 8 Coui ci laiee►ber 1'azzino re Peter Coutts Hill 2 9 0 Castel 1ation f October 14 Council Meeting 2 9 2 2 6 2 10/6/84 Regular Meeting October 6, 1980 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Councilchambers at City Hall, 250 Hamilton, at 7:45 p.m., Mayor Henderson presiding. PRESENT: Brenner (left at 11:30 p.m.), Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher (left at 12:10 a.m.), Witherspoon (left at 12:10 a.m.) ABSENT: None Mayor Henderson made an announcement regarding the item dealing with the Hunan Relations Commission recommendation on anti -discrimination re sexual orientation. He said he had informed a number of people that this items would be set for a definite time, namely 9:00 p.m. This had been overlooked in printing the agenda. He felt that, in fairness to those so informed, this time should be adhered to; therefore at 9:00 p.m. all other business would be dropped for a while its order to take up this. subject. Councilmember Fazzino said he, had no objections to this, but wanted to mention that he did intend to raise the Peter Coutts Hill issue as a ,matter of new business. MINUTES Of AUGUST 11, 1980 .roaaNi10 iaaarru� Ciuncllmerber Fazzino asked that on page 119, middle of the first paragraph, it read "he would not support expansion," instead of "he would support expansion." MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Fazzino, that approval of the minutes of August 11, 1980, be continued to October 20, 1980. The motion to continue passed on a unanimous voice vote. ORAL CAN I CAT I ONS 1. Jim Culpepper, 2121 Amherst, Palo Alto, representing the College Terrace Residents Association, read his letter, dated October 6, 190, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerk's Office, regarding the proposed Peter Coutts Hill Housing,Development. His main concern was with Stanford's last minute objections to too conditions which Palo Alto had attached to its approval of the plans for the development. These relate to the public dedication of Peter Coutts Road and the guarantee of public access to the open space a aea. Since Councilmember Fazzino had said he would introduce the matter der Neo Business at this meet i ng, there were three motions Mr. Culpepper wished the Council to discuss (copies . of which lead been given to each Comnci l r) . 2. Mr. Ronald F. Bennett, 524 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, spoke regarding the new location for Chinning Market. He sited consideration of Scott Street Park. He asked what the procedure would be for acct plfishing this move. Mayor Henderson said that the City ; Oanacger would contact hi . 3. Joan Pizzo, 631 Chinning Street, Palo Alto, also spoke regarding the moving of Chinning Market. She agreed that it .ahOuld be relocated to Scott Street:. Park, the plans for which were in ,her possession. She praised the $#j h family (the owners of the store) and suggested that they 26.3 1W6/80 continue to run it as a grocery, for the convenience of especially thr elderly, as in the past. She also suggested that this buil-.ing might be considered for classification as an historical monument, should it cease to function as a grocery. She concluded_by stating that the Palo Alto Clinic and other locations involved had been contacted and voiced no objections. She had a petition containing 1500 signatures which she turned over to the Council, Mayor Henderson stated that an Oral Communications card had been handed in from someone who wished to address the Peter Coutts Hill project, but as this item was on the agenda, discussion would be deferred until then. CONSENT CALENDAR Counci Iarember Witherspoon asked that the record show her as abstaining on the item concerningtheordinance to change zoning classification of 1100 Welch Road, as this involved Stanford Property. Counci lmember Sher asked that the record show hire also as abstaining from the same item for the same reason as Counci imeraber Witherspoon. The following item remained on the Consent Calendar: Referral Items None. Action Items FIREFIGHTER PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS • 4'1: Staff recommends approval . of the . contract with tine Palo Alto area YMCA for. fiscal 'Tear 1980-81. AGREEMENT - FIREFIAMTERS PHYSICAL FITNESS YMCA EERAIIO.L. AVENUE TRAFFIC SIGNALS.. Staff recommends that (i) Council- apPruve the agreement between " City and Santa Clara County, tad ;authorize the Mayor to execute the agreelInt i aad (2) that = -Connell authorize: the I4iyor to execute a cpnst ^uctioi contract with Steiny.. and ComPanit 'sc. AGREEMENT ;: INSTALLING AND MODIFYING' TRAFFIC SIGNALS Seamy and :C omm, Inc, ANREMNgr ` ARPF'E140T: _$ETWEEN Tie -COUNTY OF SANTA' CL411& A.14D Into t. OF PALO .ALTO #ELAT1I T$%' TI E 1RTTAM LMTION AND OIFIcItiON_OF:SIONALS. At MAMMA MOA AVENUE AID NIL .VIEV cVEi E i s FOOTHILL EXPRESSWAY A 111041R4 A E1 . ARD::ARASTRADERQ ROAD AT. FOOTHILL EXPRESSWAY. 841 NEWELL ROAD INTENT TO VAcgrt A PUBLIC EASEMENT & Staff recommends that the Council (1) adopt the Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto declaring its intention to order the vacation of public utility easement and setting of a public hearing therefor (2) direct the City Clerk to schedule the public hearing for November 3, 1980, and publish a Notice of Public Hearing for at least two consecutive weeks prior to the public hearing in accordance with Government Code Section 50440, and (3) if after the. public hearing, the Council desires to proceed, adopt the Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto ordering the vacation of a public utility easement. RESOLUTION 5839 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF" PALI'CTO DECLARING ITS INTENT TO VACATE A SURPLUS PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT AT 841 NEWELL ROAD, PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA.* ORDINANCE RE 1980 SPEED LAWS CMR: 437:0 rs ea• n4, w a uns o ec on 1 by City Attorney) Staff recommends that Council adopt the following ordinance revising Chapter 10.56 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to include the five new engineering and traffic surveys as discussed in CMR 437;0: R OR D L NANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 10.56.010 AND ADDING SECTION 10,56.015 TO THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING SPEED ZONES.'' ORDINANCE REGARDING LYTTON GARDENS ORDINANCE 3234 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE nUATT€; ' Tit CITY OF PALO ALTO PROVIDING FOR THE CITY OF PALO ALTO "HEALTH FACILITY FINANCING LAW INCLUDING GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS, POWERS AND PROCEDURES TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PRQVXDINC tiNAMCIN'a TO PARTICIPATINV; HEALTH INSTITUTIONS FOR SPECIFIED PURPOSES, AND. CERTAIN. OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS.° (First reading 9/1S/80) 1100 WELCH ROAD IPS TONE CHANGE !35 entitled •ORDINANCE Of THE CITY OF PALO AUTO AMENDING SECTION. 18.08.04►0 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL ' COOE`'(THE ZONING tSAP) TO CHHANGE. THE ZLASS i F I CATION OF PROPERTY . KNOWN AS " 1100 WELCH ROAD FROM ,0* TO MP (First. reading 9/2240) MOTION oeeci la a ber Faztioo Mevad, secondei by Pletcher, approval of . tke cansr;:nt calendar. The motion passed on a Unanimaoes sate, with Cooec i I s bers- Sher ,- and Witherspoon abstaining on the item -concerning zone itansefor -'1100 Welch Rood. 1 1 CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Renzei, that this item be brought forward. Councilmemher° Eyerly questioned the advisability of moving this item forward, as many of those who wished to speak might arrive later, in accordance with its order on the agenda. MOTION FAILED: AYES: Henderson, Renzel NOES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Sher, Witherspoon ABSTAINING: Eyerly, Levy PUBLIC HEARINB: AFFLIIITTWITUR TENTATIVE NAP Mayor Henderson opened the Public Hearing on the matter of the Planning Commission recommendation on the approval of the High Street Solar Investors for a Tentative Map for p, operty located at 227 Hish Street. MOTION: Councilmerber Fazzino moved, seconded by Fletcher, that the Public Hearing be closed. Motion passed on a unanimous vote. Councilmember Eyerly had a question for staff. He wondered if, by adding an extra unit which would lower the total square footage of the common area, a problem would arise regarding the amount of common area expected, or if any of the property had been pre -sold. Mr. Knox answered that to his knowledge none of the units had been pre -sold. There are 12 partners involved, and it was their request that the thirteenth unit be provided as a below -market -rate unit. MOTION: Counci lmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Levy, that the application by the High Street Solar Investors for a Tentative Map for property located at 227 High Street be approved. Motion passed on a unanimous vote. F IHANCc ARO PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE !!»ruc k rknxxis6 *nerve 'REn; POW The Finance and Public Works Commit:ee,transaitted the stiff report, on the,Downtown Parting Maeagewent Plan to Council without. recommendation, on a unanimous vote, Councilrmember Brenner absent. Vice -Mayor Sher, Chairman of the Finance and Public Works Committee, explained that the Downtown Parking Management Plan is a detailed, complicated plan prepared by staff to deal with the problem of shortage of.. parking in thedowntown area, and the impact this has bad .on the residmatiei streets. ' The finance end Works Committee considered i nmeher of staff proposals in preparing this Plan, which wet= with a great deal of opposition from the public. The Committee thereforedecided to return the Plait to the Council without recoaseendation. Counci liv ers bad well received a staff report dated ,Qctber 2, 1S8O, rick snouts ti t it might be best to. postpone consideration of this item _ in view of the fact that the Comprehensive fen new coder review by the Council deals with sone larger policy questions relatiiy to puling and traffic not only in 2,66 the downtown area but in the city generally, and that this specific proposal for downtown perhaps- should be addressed after those general policy questions are reviewed by the Council in the context of the Comprehensive Plan, Staff suggested two ways this might be done: (1) to postpone discussion of the Downtown Plan until October 13th, when it can be dealt with together with the Comprehensive Plan provisions for this matter, or (2) postpone the discussion of the., general policies to a special date later than the next session on the Comprehensive Plan, to give it more attention and perhaps study the Downtown Parking Management Plan at the same time. Vice -Mayer Sher said that, consequently, he would not go into more detail about the Committee's deliberations at this time, and would make the following motion: MOTION: Vice -Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Levy, to defer the discussion of tne Downtown Parking Management Plan and of the Comprehensive Plan , Transportation Program 23, until the Council Meeting of October 20, 1980. Councilmember Fletcher asked what the agenda looked like forthe meetings of October 20 and October 27, 1980. City Manager Zaner replied that, although the agenda for October 20th included a substantial number of Planning Commission items, these would mostly be on the Consent Calendar, and he would therefore recommend this date. MOTION PASSEO: The motion to continue discussion of this item to October 20th passed on a unanimous vote. FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE rxrurrn—ffrurummic PROJECT Vice -Mayor Sher, Chairman of the Finance and Public Works Committee, explained that this item was in two separate parts. One proposal relates to the Feather River Project and a staff recommendation that the city join with other members of the Norti-ern California Power Agency attempting to recapture the license for that project now owned by Pacific Gas and Electric, and which is due to terminate. - The cost to the city would be $120,400, to be taken from the Electric Utility Reserve Fund. The Committee was told that this is an expensive process, as it involves an application to .the appropriate federal agencies, with the attendant lawyer and brief .fees. The second proposal relates to the Calaveras Hydroelectric Prejectv in which the Northern Callfornta Power Agency is interested. It is the retomaendation of the finance and Public Itorks-tommittee that the Council authorize expenditure of 5114,600 from the Electric Utility .Reserve Fund for the the financing of an increased financial commitment for this project. Vice -Mayor Sher stated that the Finance Committee unanimously recoomoods both projects for approval . He himself hes some reservations about the Feather River license recapture, but would move for approval of :both of those recomeendetions on behalf of the Committee. Mayor Henderson satd•that each_projoct would be handled separately for purposes of voting. They would therefore discuss the Feather River Project first. _2 i 7 10/6..00 1 Director of Utilities Ed Aghjayan said that his office had a last minute problem with the language in both agreements, on which they have received some last-minute legal opinion. They therefore wished to suggest two minor changes. Three staff reports are involved; two transmitted on July 31, 1980, which include a contract or agreement, and one transmitted in August summarizing action taken. Roth the Feather River and the Calaveras Agreements mention (on page ) of Section 5) a "term'° of agreement, with language appearing to indicate that the agreement would be invalidated if not passed by October 1, 1980, by 85% of the participating cities. Discussion with Senior Assistant City Attorney Don Maynor just prior to the meeting disclosed that the suggested changes would not be substantive, nor would they invalidate the agreements or reflect on the participating cities. The first change would be to strike the word "initial" before "percentage participation," on the third line, and the second to change the date 'October 10 to "October 10' on line 5 of Section 5 of both agreements. Vice -Mayor Sher wished to share his reservations about the Feather River Project, of which one related to the poor odds (estimated by the -Staff as et best 50-50) of winning away the license from the Pacific Gas & Electric Company. One argument against a municipal utility like Palo Alto, as well as the other cities in the iorthern California Power Agercy, attempting to obtain this hydro project is the obviously fewer persons served as against those served by the Pacific Gas and Electric. Staff toad explained to the Finance Committee that this was an issue to be debated and argued in the proceedings. Mr. Aghjayan had also explained that they must aggressively pursue any possible source of power, as the city's supply under the contract with the federal government will soon reach its allocation limits. Counciimember Eyerly'urged the Council to vote for the member agreements So that Palo Alto could proceed with HHCPA. He pointed out that Palo Alto, with the MCPA, has the first filing for the license, Also, it was his opinion that the staff was being quite conservative when placing our chance of recapturing the license at "50-50," in view of the fact that there has been a court ruling that municipalities now be given preference on such licensing. He felt that this . would be a low investment, t, mostly covering legal fees,- about $121„000 for Palo Alto, ' a total of perhaps $550,000 for the entire NCPA. He was confident that' all were aware that the need for, low -Vest power for Palo Alto is becoming more carcinomata and tbat the CPY Power being studied for marketing on a new cost basis wi .l 'hit us rather hard' by the grid: 1980's. He therefore believed that Palo Alto should pursue and projects such as recapturing liceases or, joining action groups like the PICPA. MOTION: Vice-Nayer Sher, .on behalf of the "Finance and Public: Works Committee, mowed that Connell act'favorabl,y. on, the agreement for financing and p'iaioeiag the development of the activities to recapture the Feather River Project with a contingency to increase Palo *lto's share to 301 if Santa Clare -doesn't participate, rather than 201 _ as shown: _e+n. page 2 of agreement: AGREEMENT F$ t FINANCING OF P A IIi 'i AS -DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES FOR R► CAPT4J*C OF THE FEATHER.=NITER PR�CT NCPA and City. of Palo Alto The motion passed on a esafi*ous vote, with changes as indicated ` by the ''City- Atte-nee,. MOTION: Vice -Mayor Sher, on behalf of the Finance and Public Works Committee, moved that Council approve the members agreement regarding the Calaveras Hydroelectric. Project, and that Council authorize Si14,b00 frnm the Electric Utility Reserve Fund for financing or the increased financial commitment (plus $12O,4CO for the Feather River Project): AGREEMENT - MEMBERS AGREEMENT FOR FINANCING OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPRENT ACTIVITIES OF THE CALAVERAS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT NCPA and City of Palo Alto 0RO I CE 3236 entitled kORDINANCE OF THE COONCirei r CITY OF PALO ALTO- AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1x-81 TO, PROVIDE ADDITIOI td. APPROPRIATIONS FOR, PALO ALTO'S PARTICIPATION iA THE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY LONG-TEK1 POWER SUPPLY ACTS. The motion} passed on a unanimous vote, with changes as indicated by the City Attorney. MOTION: Councilimenber Fletcher moved, seconded by Henderson, that the item regarding the Condominium Conversion Ordinance be brought forward. Motion pnsed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Menzel, Sher :'1 S : Eyer l y, Wi t herspoon CONDOMINILti CONVERSION ORDINANCE Council Witherspoon asked the City Attorney if she would be allowed to participate, or if there tld be a °cenf l ict of interest because of the pie Oak Creek Candadaises lion on Stanford land, Tbe answer . was that both she and ViceAtper Sir bald participate it the general ddistmssiosvregardiag the ordinance, but must abstain when Ook Creek is specifically involved, Mayor Henderson then ptie tl a bOckgreentiMer placing this It on the tea, remarked that his fwd bean the fife . and deciding vote for- i ing the provision, in the arig4nal ordinance in 1974 that allowed two-thirds mmhe 4, the mss of a proposed conversion' to e'er stlPolation. It had Wen their`waderstandieg t t wee useets *ice fa the t thirds votiog for conversienvissid add be awing the property, but it nom appeared t the imai mat hew stated clearly and applicants lead is ahle to cf s Tenditflo. ;: 0* that, or lj1 nee4 1 discovered in this ordiesece„ and Vivera "iees uhtt-he few;. a - Y' This Not the Went of the orieleel ordinance, and he himself felt disturbed point mbar* he mos convinceduse octisaimmet be S flow; he believed, ` 'therefore, that the onI, eff use moos he *OM this would to te direr o aNtisOce with: the 311. wow/ rote Itsletresent WY. itt4for lieenharSon ileam `ittetast, thtt 1 1 e the rest of the discussion, so that all members of the Council would be able to participate in this basic issue. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Renzel, to exempt from any proposed new ordinance any prospective conversion applicants who had mailed or otherwise delivered to tenants, prior to October 2, 1980, consent documents as defined under the current Palo Alto condominium conversion ordinance, such applicants to be governed by the then existing moratorium legislation. Councilmea!ber Renzel wished the record to clearly show that she did not favor the Oak Creek condominium conversion, but would support the motion because that process is substantially under way. Mayor Henderson agreed, and added that his making the motion also is not an indication of any position on Oak Creek. His policy was to state that what has already been done there is within the existing law, and he was not willing to make any retroactive laws. MOTION PASSED on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, Henderson, Levy, Renzel NOES: Fletcher ABSTAINING: Sher, Witherspoon Mayor Henderson said he assured that all members of the Council would be free to participate as they move on to a general discussion of condominium conversion. He would make the following motion, as he was convinced that action rust be taken now to stop some of the attempts at conversion that would not provide homes for two-thirds of the tenants and would not be following the original intent of the original ordinance: MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fletcher, that the Council direct staff to prepare a new condominium conversion ordinance that establishes as the only condition to apply for conversion a city-wide rental vacancy rate of 3% or more. Mayor Henderson added here that it was understood that the action taken earlier has exempted any applicant under the October 2, 1980 date. Counciloe+aber Renzel said that there were other conditions for subdivisions, and was concerned about making -the 3% rental vacancy rate the only condition for conversions. Mayor Henderson explai*red that thewordingspecified to apply' for conversion; that no applications for conversion would be accepted unless this pre -condition were satisfied, and then thenormal process for approval would be followed. Herb Borock, 3401 Ross Road, Palo Alto, wished. to commenton the motion already passed:. to exempt from any proposed new ordinance any prospective conversion applicants who had .delivered.consent documents to their tenants before October 2, 1980. He hoped the Council would agree to adding a time limit to the exemption, as the applicants under this exemption could be exempted. indefinitely. He felt that a reasonable tine limit could be duly, 1, 1982, which he believed to be the cicaing option date for the Oak Creek.convers.ion. This would preclude the continued -exemption of prospective converters not having an application in by that date. Mr. 8o ock expressed his support for the motion before the Council, except for this one change. 270 10/6/80 Mayor Henderson replied that, since action had already been taken, perhaps some Counc lmember may wish to place Mr. Borock's suggestion on the agenda for a future date. Councilmember Renzel asked the City Attorney if Mr. Borock's suggested change were placed on the agenda for a subsequent date, whether it would still apply to anything exempted by action taken at the present meeting. City Attorney Abrams answered that there was no prohibition against simply adding it to the agenda, but he would really encourage doing this at the present meeting. Oscar N. Ehrlich, 100 Ferne Avenue, Palo Alto, suggested that the City Attorney include a provision that the moratorium apply to buildings not over six apartment units (or whatever figure decided upon). He suggested this because of a new "gimmick'° discovered where in San Francisco 17 people purchased an 18 -unit apartment building on a partnership basis; as owners they could therefore, ask tenants to vacate. David Blumenthal, 1766 Willow Road-. 1,210, Palo Alto, read a letter, dated October 6, 1980, addressed to the Council, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerk's Office. The letter, with attached San Francisco Examiner article, dated April 17, 1980, disclosed a recently discovered loophole in San Francisco's condominium conversion ordinance. This is the same "gimmick" pointed out by Mr. Ehrlich, where "'the new owners became partners in the total building rather than purchasing individual apartments, and the transaction does not fall under the condominium conversion laws.' The fear was expressed that there was nothing to prevent even larger apartment buildings being sold under the same concept. Mr. Blumenthal, representing some of the Oak Creek tenants, suggested that the City Council set up the specifications of a 'Lifetime Lease' so that there would be no loopholes, and that each owner irrevocably guarantee that the lifetime lease be binding on all future owners. Louis Fein, 1540 Oak Creek Drive, Palo Alto, addressed the first motion passed, which clearly continues to exempt the Oak Creek conversion from the moratorium. He wished to reiterate his often repeated suggestion that all condominium conversions be banned, including Oak Creek, until an acceptable conversion ordinance is put into effect. With regard to the motion: under discussion, he supported the 31 rental housing vacancy rate limit, but believed some tenant protection measures should be added. Specifically, he suggested that the Mayor take over from the converter all the functions relating to the consent form: the mayor should send out the -forms to the tenants, with clear explanations of all ..conditions and tens, the forms should be notarized with statements by the tenants of a full understanding of what is involved and that the consent fora was not signed under duress, and then the forms should be returned to the Mayor and retained as public. record. Also, the converter should be required to,pay for this service. This procedure would have the advantage of closing off potential abuses, and protect tenants from various kinds of pressure to consent. He understood that the staff was reluctant to accept this responsibility, but urged then to give it serious consideration, as he was convinced that the potential for problem and abuses would be much less than if left to the converter. lie therefore: suggested that the Council make a motion to instruct the City Attorney to. write the text of an ordinance that would mandate .this procedure. Mr. Fein offered his services as a consultant. He concluded by describing tFe attitudes of a large number of Oak Creek tenants, briefly that they !reel that the -City Coumc i l will not protect them, that they are helpless, and therefore intimidated and afraid of 2 7 1 10/0/80 "speakinv out." He felt that implementation of his suggestion may help change their attitudes toward city government. Don Surath, 1930 Ivy Lane, Palo Alto, pointed o'.t that Oak Creek contains 7% of all rental housing in Palo Alto; the city cannot absorb such a loss in rental units. He recalled the City Attorney's ruling that such a conversion could be counter to the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. In his opinion, the Council has a duty to the people of Palo Alto to prevent Oak Creek's conversion. He stated 1 that the tenants at Oak Creek had the same right to protection as other residents of Palo Alto, and strongly supported Mr. Feints description of the situation at Oak Creek and his recommendations. Bob Moss, 4010 0rme, Palo Alto, asked the Council to take three actions at that meeting: (1) prohibit all condominium conversions, including Oak Creek, unless there is a 3% rental vacancy rate, because of the constant risk of loopholes in the ordinances due to the hugely lucrative profits involved, (2) provide adequate tenant pi [`O tot run, such as d oowIng only just -cause evictions, tenure before voting requirements, and many of the recommendations already made, and (3) make this applicable to Oak Creek also. He enumerated the special needs of Palo Alto for rental units - the large number of short term renters and transients because of Stanford University, and of our high technology industry. He reinforced Mr. Surath's contention that the city cannot support the loss of Oak Creek, with its large number of rental units. David M. Logan, 1380 Oak Creek Drive, Palo Alto, expressed distress that Oak Creek should fall under the exemption to the moratorium. Mayor Henderson explained that the Council has taken no position except to state that the existing law is to apply, and did not feel that they could retroatively change the law under which the Oak Creek conversion process began. Mr. Logan said it was his understanding that there had been a special exemption given to the Oak Creek conversion based upon the promise of a lifetime lease. He was addressing this problem again, because of the great deal of confusion surrounding this matter. He implored the Council to consider the status of that confusion in terms of the tenants at Oak Creek. He stated that, being an attorney, he felt qualified to judge the clarity of the issue, and he had to admit that the situation was not at all clear to him. Aside from the central question of whether Oak Creek should be allowed to convert, it seemed. to him_ that there was certainly a public duty upon the Council to require that the converters state the conditions under which the consents are given. As a result of legal analysis, and research, he has discovered that the lifetime leases are not really binding: Mr. Logan's suggestion was that the public be given access to all the data provided to the city on this issue. 1 Joe Lewis, Palo Alto, said that almost every attorney who has studied the lifetime lease, including those for the converters, the tenants, and 'a number of independent lawyers have all reacted generally the same conclusion: that the lease affords protection to the tenants. Therefore, he felt, the terse °not binding"', was misleading, because the lease clearly states that it is binding when certain conditions are met. He identified himself as the Chairman of the OCTfC, a tenants' group, which was not advocating any particular position, except that the considerable confusion, in fairness to the developer, results from a badly drafted conversion ordinance. He asserted that tom. Abrams' Metter was anattempt to rewrite a badly drafted ordinance, and he strongly urged that it be completely overhauled. He disagreed that most of the tenants were 272 IoI'I6o ill-informed. He concluded by stating that there were two separate issues to be addressed. (1) whether it is in the public interest and consistent with Council's polio; as declared in the Comprehensive General Plan to take 10% of the housing stock off the market, ani' (2) to provide protection to the tenants no matter what the conversion law is. Norma Oevidson, 1300,00 Creek, Palo Alto, stated that all attorneys would not necessarily agree with Mr, Lewis, particulaly those practicing in Palo Alto. CouncilMember Witherspoon said that it appeared to her that there were two main issues to be addressed: (1) the number of loopholes in the condominium conversion process,_-- The staff had been given an assignment to examine, these loopholes and return in six; months with recommendations, and there have been some recommenatlons that have been suggested by the public or,that have occurred to members of Co.unc_i1...._She_fe?t--that'-Cotarcil--theeld proceed with examining the recoa endations, but also wait for --the staff -input. (2) Regarding Mayor Henderson'S motion before the Council, it seemed to her that in effect -this would place a permanent moratorium on condominium conversions, because there was no way she could realistically forsee Pale Alto's rental vacancy rate going below the 3% limit, unless they agressively begin pursuing ways of building rental housing. This was an entirely different subject which she intended to address at the next meeting on the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Witherspoon then declared that she was very much in sympathy with closing all the loopholes possible, but was not in favor at this point of placing a ban on all condominium conversions in this city. Coruncilmember Fletcher wished to briefly repeat her former statements; that is, there are no market rate multi -family rental housing units being built in Palo Alto, but there are continual demands for new condominiums. There is no shortage of condominiums compared to rental housing, therefore those desiring to buy into condominiums have the advantage. She did not believe that there really existed an ordinance that could close all loopholes, and cited as an example of circumvention the San -Francisco Examiner article mentioned earlier. ilecapse of this, and the existing serious rental shortage, she saw no excuse for permitting any condominium conversions until there was at least a 3% rental vacancy rate. Councilmember_ Faxxino asked the City Attorney far.clarification as to the eaact tensnt.protection to be expected from the proposed moratorium. City Attorney Abrams explained that.the present ordinance allowed for a.six-month period, until March 3, 1981, when applications for condominium conversions a are accepted, if the vacancy rate is below 3%, and if meeting two conditions: (1) the two-thirds consent of all the adult tenants, and (2) the provision of a so-called lifetime lease . If the rental vacancy rate is above 3%, then there would be in effect no moratorium or pr•e-ccndltions for filing. Counci lmeiber Fezzino declared that he was opposed to the total prohibition of condominium conversions; he still thought that this was a "meet•ax° approach, and expressed himself surprised at hearing members of the Council suddenly supporting this approech as the major pro -housing effort," after the rejection of so many other reasonable housing approaches. He hopedthat the discussions on the. Comprehensive Plan to begin the following Monday would remedy some of this. Ne'woeid propose some alternatives, and asked to make a substitute motion at that point. 2 7 3 10/6/80 Mayor Henderson wished to take a vote on the motion then and take up the discussion later, when he would call epon Councilmember Fazzino first, because it was past the time promised for the discussion on another item. i Councilmember Fazzino made the following motion, as he thought the item could be dispensed with fairly quickly: CHAIR CHALLENGED: MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Witherspoon, to overrule the Chair and to complete discussion on subject item. MOTION FAILED and Chair upheld on the following vote: AYES: Fazzino, Renzel. Witherspoon NOES: Brenner, Eyerly, Henderson, Levy, Sher ABSTAINING: Fletcher HUMAN RELATIONS. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS t R I UL ;AK R MR: 444:0 The Human Relations Commission recommended to the City Council adoption of a City ordinance making it illegal to discriminate against Homosexuals in the area of housing and employment. Mayor Henderson welcomed the Chairman of the Human Relations Commission, Ray Wilbur. After ascertaining that Mr. Wibur did not wish to make any comments at that point, Mayor Henderson said that copies of the H.R.C. report of September 5, 1980, as well as related information including the complete minutes of the H.R.C. meetings, were on file in the City Clerk's Office. He then opened the meeting to public discussion on this item. Kenneth R. Allen, 3784 Grove Avenue, Palo Alto, identified himself as married, with two children, a landlord and a homeowner of five years' standing, and an attorney in private practice in Palo Alto. He saw two sections involved in this issue: (1) the best_ arena for addressing the recom endetion of the Human Relations Commission regarding a gay rights ordinance, and (2) the best method for examining and presenting this issue for consideration. Some options he suggested .for . dealing with the first issue were to present an advisory referendum to the voters, and a more critical analysis of the issues, with possible recommendations other than an ordinance. In speaking for those he represents, he felt compelled to sugest to the Council that it is inappropriate for that body tc consider or =adopt °special protection' legislation. Mayor Henderson commented that copies of Mr. Alien's letters dated July 3, 1980 and October 2, 1980, areonfile in the City Clerk's Office Todd Victor Legate, 1045 McGregor Way, Barron Park, was nervous at *putting his identity on the.1ine° as a gay person. He expressed his anger and weariness at the -penalt;es.for admitting to one's "gayness*; -denial of: a weans of earning a living and being turned away from housing. He then read a poem written by ;°a lesbian minister of the Gospel. He commended ell . gaj Persons attending the meeting and declared he firmly believed they were ail God's children and rightful citizens of this country. He c'ncluded by expressing nis hopes that the Council would °hive: the courage* te, vete for the ordinance, in preference to presenting it as a. referendum. 2 7 4 10/6/80 Diana Egly, 2698 Cowper Street, Palo Alto, said she was speaking for the Palo Altans for Human Rights. She felt one of the fears brought out by the proposed ordinance ryas that Palo Alto would become like San Francisco. She did not believe this could happen because Palo Alto's extremely low rental vacancy rate would prevent a large influx of people, and because the atmosphere here is very different from that of San Francisco, not attracting the same types of people. She gave examples of two cities which had successfully passed a sexual orientation ordinance, and stated such an ordinance would, in her opinion, do much toward relieving fears of discrimination, as well as being a means for using education, mediation and legislation for that purpose. She therefore urged the City Council to follow the Human Relations Commission's recommendations and pass the sexual orientation ordinance. Or. Herbert Zeman, 464 West Charleston Road, Palo Alto, a resident since 1964, and a homeowner since 1974, said he has been living with his lover for a year. As spokesperson, with Diana Egly, for the Palo Alto Human Rights Organization, he read a petition, containing 236 signatures of Palo Alto residents, which in effect requested the Council to enact the ordinance recommended by the H.R.C. A copy of this petition was given to each Councilmember and is on file in the City Clerk's Office. He continued by stating that, in his opinion, discrimination against the gay community was on the basis of the orientation, the gay person's desires and feelings, and not on the basis of particular sexual practices. It was important to him, therefore, that it be understood that the ordinance should deal with the orientation and not actions, which are a matter of choice, whereas feelings and desires are not. Eric Jackson, 2420 El Camino, Menlo Park, but working in Palo Alto, said he had gone through this same experience before, when Ann Arbor, Michigan, passed a similar ordinance in 1972. They had added the words "sexual preference." He wished to rake the Council aware of the Dr. Kinsey studies, which disclosed that 10 percent of the population is gay, including many doctors and scientists. He remarked on the tragedy of such human resources being wasted by discrimination, and urged the Council to adopt the ordinance that evening. Doug IcGaughy, 464 W. Charleston Roadt Palo Alto, asked the Council to adopt the sexual orientation ordinance._ He was there to publicly identify himself as a homosexual, despite fears of even personal injury, in an attempt to educate those wishing to suppress homosexuals simply through lack of- understanding. He- took issue with a statement made by Counc i lmember Witherspoon, quoted in en October 4, 1980, issue of the Peninsula Times Tribune, that; she, "did not consider a person a minority when thereis a matter of choice." He explained that the idea .that gay people choose to be different is a common misconception of many heterosexuals. :Ne then gave some details of his own lifelong struggle with this problem, as an example of the experience of most homosexuals. He therefore urged the Council to endorse the ordinance, as he felt anything short of endorsement was against human rights. David Shallenberger, 327 Oakwood Place, Menlo Park, was_ born and raised in Palo Alto, and is in business here. He described how he felt about being a gay person having to ask for normal rights, and the fact that the hateful opinions of one group should have the power to deny hits opportunities doe to everyone. Jim la?rie, 2386 Santa Catalina, Palo Alto, a 1Z -year resident and a landlord, said bigotry in any form is an ugly manifestation of emotional insecurity, in his opinion, and as the application of pressure and punishment against any minority group is hateful to the 2 7 10/6/80 1 1 1 ideals of our entire society. He felt that a society aware of this in its midst is obligated to take any means of remedy at hand. He felt the Council is obviously being made aware that discrimination is substantial in Palo Alto, and urged them to pass the ordinance. Michael Kronstadt, 470 El Dorado, Palo Alto, a renter and a 12 -year resident of Palo Alto, and a member of the Task Force which led to the recommendations made by the H.R.C., wished to point out that the Human Rights Commission made a number of specific findings and recommended a number of specific proposals, including the non-discrimination ordinance. While dealing with the ordinance, he urged Council not to ignore these other findings, but to begin their deliberations by endorsing those before moving on to the question of the ordinance. He had been reauested by Ceuncilmembers and others to supply specific numbers and data which went into the survey which began this study, but had not the means of producing as comprehen- sive a report as, for instance, the State of Oregon. He then answered the criticism he had heard that all the homosexuals giving testimony are male, white, middle-class, and therefore dearly not in need of protection, by explaining that homosexuality, is repre- sented in all walks of life, but only those economically secure enough can bear the threat of testifying publicly. He tried to describe the fears under which gay people constantly live, and stated that discrimination hurts everyone, scarring those discrimi- nating as well as the victims. This injustice can only be elim- inated by education, and education can only come ti th openness. RECESS: A brief recess was called from 9:45 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. Ed Cristiani, 837 Marshall Drive, Palo Alto, a homeowner for four years, said the real estate agent who sold him his house felt it necessary to tell the neighbors that he was a heterosexual and engaged to be married. He told the Council the ordinance under consideration would protect not only homosexuals but also single men who have the stigma of being gay imposed on them. He reminded them of the phrase miiberty and justice for all,* in our Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, and asked in this spirit for them to €od overt discrimination toward gay men and women. Scott Weikart, 3328 St. Michael, Palo Alto, commended the Human Relations Commission on the excellence of their proposal, and concurred with their recommendations. He told of his experiences as a bisexual renting an apartment. -.when a man visited or stayed with him his landlord would receive variousunfounded and unrelated complaints, but this never happened when the friend happened to be a woman. The worry and insecurity this. caused him could have been prevented by the existence of a human rights ordinance. Therefore, he urged the Council to draft and pass such an ordinance, as it would make such a big difference in the lives of some many residents of Palo Alto. Dr.. Manfred 6ahmann, 522 Georgia Avenue, Palo. Alto, Pastor of the University Lutheran Church in Palo Alto, wished to draw the Council's attention to the request signed by 22 members of the clergy in Palo Alto, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerk's Office. He wished to make clear that the signatures represent a large portion of the mainline religious community in Pala Alto; they are not *vociferous voices on the religious fringes." He urged the Council to exercisethe authority they have to.adopt‘the ordinance. He and his colleagues realize this implies some liability in their political future, but he and his fellow clergy willingly face liability in their own professional futures (some havelost members and revenue), because they feel they must do what is right. He said he saw some striking'parellels with what happened in his native Germany to people's reactions here; there was an element of 2 7 6 1016/80 P the same fear of speaking out surrounding controversial issues. Dr. Bahmann then quoted a German Lutheran Minister. Martin Mueller, who acknowledged guilt for not protesting Nazi persecution of others, and then "there was no one left to speak out when it was his turn." Jim Burklo, 534-B Pope Street, Menlo Park, Associate Pastor of the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto, was representing members of his Churc`' who are deeply concerned about this issue, and wished to make c !ear that they stand for the human rights of all persons regardless of sexual orientation. He urged the Council to take the courageous step of passing the ordinance. A copy of a petition, datedOctober3, 1980, signed by members of the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto, is on file in the City Clerk's Office. Joseph R. Vallee, 327 Oakwood Place, Menlo Park, had lived in Palo Alto for many years. He told about his experiences with employment at a hospital, where he at first hid his homosexuality but eventually had to reveal it. He encountered a great deal of confusion, some fear, and hostility for having kept his sexuality unknown. Fortunately, the problems have been resolved and relationships there are functioning well. He urged passing of the ordinance. Ira Helf, 340 Ventura Avenue, Palo Alto, wished to point out the nature and type of people testifying there, homeowners, business and the peofessions being widely represented. He thought this demonstrated that gay people are interested in being contributing members of this society. He was glad to count himself among them, and asked the Council to vote for the ordinance. Lee Galbraith, 107x; Space Park Way, #23, Mountain View, though n -+t a Palo Alto resident, wished to consider Mountain View •pith Palo Alto as part of the general intellectual and business community which rakes up Silicon Valley. He himself possesses a Ph.0, in Solid State Physics from Vase, and works with similar scientists in the semicond cter industry. As a gay person, however, he lives under a cloud. He compared the plight of the gay community with that of the blacks and other minorities, who had :;e siitutlonai protection for 200 years, but this did not mean very much until positive legislative was enacted. He urged pe sage of the ordinance, as Palo Alto's positive contribution to humor 1ghts. Clayton Lane, 665 hale, Palo Alto, a resident of Palo Alto since 1951, a homeowner since 1959, and a Professor of Sociology at San Jose State University, wished to address a few issues seen in the press regarding the ordinance, one being the idea that passing such an ordir+ance.gives gay people a °sanction to teach homosexuality.° Sociologists teach life styles of all kinds, both the conforming and the deviant,_,,:rte himself has been teaching a course, since 1975, on the sole i of ogy °of homosexuality. Those taking the course learn to lose their fears and to appreciate a different viewpoint; for instance, relationships based on equality rather then htirarchy. He would be happy to see the course taught at the secondary' level as well. Regarding the legitimacy of the homosexual lifestyle, he pointed out that California is one of 24 states where sex among consenting adults, of whatever kind._ has been de -criminalized. Also, 30 cities, including Washington, D.C.' and Minneapolis, have banned discrimination due to sexual preference, since 1973-74, in areas suck as credit, union practices, as well as housing and employment. @y comparison, Palo Alto's proposed ordinance is rather modest in scope. Me then told about an employment discrimination case. in which a. professor at Santa Cruz University was denied tenure solely -because of his admitted homosexuality. He urged. the Council to pas; the ordinance, Ronald D. Packard, 115 Waverly Place, Mountain View, grew up in Palo Alto, a resident until two years ago, practices law and is a lsndlord in Palo Alto, and is a member of the City Council of Mountain View. Although generally opposed to any form of discrimination, he recommended caution before creating a special protected class. He feared the protection may be used less as a shield and more as a sword, and this would be a case of the solution being worse than the problem He s td most Councils, when presented with a "hot potato," wishing to avoid having to take any position, present the issue to the voters. He asked them to study the issues and make the difficult decision, whatever it may be. Boyd Smith, 301 College Avenue, Palo Alto, asked the Council to let the matter of discrimination because of sexual orientation drop. Dwight Monson, 1536 Emerson Street, Palo Alto, said he was touched by the testimth y of those choosing to live a life of homosexuality, but at the same time was very conscious of the personal nature of the issue and the impact it has on the rest of the community. He criticized the Human Relations Commission for not researching the possible impact on the straight community also. As an individual, he was willing to allow the existecece of the homosexual l if ?style, but could not condone or encourage its acceptance in society. He quoted Lincoln as stating, in summary, that we cannot yield to what we believe is wt tlg, and then encouraged the Council to turn down the ordinance. Doug Winslow, 630 Los Trances Road, Palo Alto, commended the Human Relations Commission for their excellent work in assessing sexual discrimination ir Palo Alto. He descrited some of the conditions of prejudice under which homosexuals must live, with no legal recourse, because the absence of protective legislation allows the courts to rule in favor of discrimatory practices. He asked the Council not to place this issue before the voters, because of experiences elsewhere, and because he was convinced that a majority would not vote in favor of a minority. He therefore urged the Council to support the ordinance, in fulfillment oftheir duty to protect the rights of all Palo Alto citizens. Greg Osborn, 1450 Greenwood, Palo Alto, reminded the Council that the County of Santo.Ciara defeated this ordinance, as did the City of Palo Alto; if the =Council passed it, theyawould effectively be overruling the voters of Palo Alto. He firmly believed Palo Alto would then be singled out as the city -in Santa Clara County ripe for "colonization.` and that every landowner, maeager and employer's freedom to act would be restricted by having to justify their decisions because of the issue of , dtscriainatior conVtantly . being raised. The current law protects everyone; _ therefore he felt it would be ag mistake to single out one group such =as . this The conventional family relationship ; is not now enshrined by any specific. law, and therefore no other relationship should be ,so esnshr i and. H2 urged rejection of the proposed gay rights ordinance. Reverend Joan Abrams, 2698 Cowper Ste at, Palo Alto; a resident since 1965, is a _ ?,oaaeomner, a lesbians, 'and a single mother who had raised three sons. She quoted -from a statement --regarding .justification for action$, siring in :unwary that just actions .need no . justif4catioea. She urged the Cavdct 1 to decide on the issue: themselves, not leave it to the voters. Stephanie 'Toothater, 2 S ForestAvene e*: Palo Alto, ' is d co4,parent with tbretet chf l:dreen, , Sbe.' re?+shred to an artic)e in Newsxeelc _. $agaa$a.,, oakessisalal 1ty� $1*c e_ Rome," arrd: aerged ell to' read_'it, Shee felt strongly teat* in:vieti of the' r1siog. pars.cutions of ao1oorities world-wide, it is important for communities like Pilo Alto to speak 1 out and make a powerful statement in support of human rights. Referring to the statement that homosexuality is a question of "choice," she asked if the right to choose is no longer protected as a value in this country. Olivia Mendez, 360 Sheridan, No. 101, Palo Alto, . a journalist and a professional woman* was representing the Women's Collective of the Stanford Review. She wanted people to know she was gay and was proud of it, and stressed the fact that .homosexuality is represented by all classes and professions- She was a co -parent and had raised a child to love all people equally She urged passing of the ordinance. Jennifer Gates, 980 Waverly Street, Palo Alto, grew up in Palo Alto, is a chemist at Stanford Research Institute. She in ormed Council that SOR.1. enacted a policy of non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation two years ago, and pointed out that it has not sustained any damage thereby. She supported the ordinance. Dave McFadden, 921 M4addux Drive, Palo Alto, wished to emphasize the importance of the Council taking action on the issue and not giving it to the voters to decide. He believed matters relating to human rights are questions for legislation and policy, not of advice and consent from the public. He assured them of the support of a large number in the community, and stressed the point that the whole question of lifestyle should not obscure the basic nature of this issue as one of human rights. Henry Taylor, 745 Christine Drive, Palo Alto, said security (from oppression, for instance) is a fundamental result of competence and the willingness to accept responsibility. He could see nothing in the nature of sexual orientation to limit these qualities. He did not believe the enactment of an ordinance was the best approach tow..=.rds the issue of civil rights; it appeared to him that it might give license for advocacy. This seemed a problem to him, especially in the case of young children, who might . not be as mature anS able to cope as college students. He asked that the ordinance be either rejected, or if the Council wished, submitted to the voters. Mr. Taylor then yielded the balance of his time to Kenneth Allen. Kenneth Allen had spoken earlier, and wished to add to his statement. He did not see any need for an ordinance in Palo Alto; the people seemed to be well situated and appealing largely to emotions. He suggested, therefore* that the survey be returned to the H.R.C, for documentation of actual cases of discrimination in detail, and the staff be directed to analyze the cause, specific remedies, and possible consequences of such remedies, in each instance. He felt individual cases could possibly he resolved :by voluntary efforts. An unresolved issuefor the Policy and Procedures Committee would be concerning .*ediation, sower under the threat of civil or criminel sanctions. He concluded by asking the Council to consider other values. Donald J. Bahl, Treasurer of the'Pro-Femily Political Action Commitee, offices at 4020 Fabian Way, Palo Alto, said he sat in on meetings on this issue in San Jose and Santa Aare County. He informed Council that the candidates from San Jose and Santa Clara County on the November ballot were guestioeed te this issue, and, regardless of their perse*al fee fines; all ._agr d this was a dead issue, because it had coma to a voter He remieded them that a sexual preference ordinance was voted upon already in Palo Alto, and he could not see the need for eeetirg after meeting. He suggested that the ho osexuel community be asked to draft their own ordinance to be put so the ballot, rather thaw putting the burden on the Council. 1 1 i Susan Allen, 3784 Grove Avenue, Palo Alto, recounted her experience as a landlord renting a small cottage to a couple with children, who became very undesirable t;:narts, rowdy and violent, frequently necessitating police yelp. Thy could not be evicted, because of sanctions against discrimination toward unmarried couples. It was only when the tenants were married that they could be evicted. She also, cited an example of how difficult is to fire an obviously incompetent minority employee - all instances of incompetence involving minorities must be minutely documented. The strong impression she received from listening to.the homosexual witnesses was that Palo Alto is net in' need of an such an ordinance .. they all seem to be well established members of the community. She herself has had good relationships at work with admittedhomosexuals, but felt that an ordinance would get into the problem of overregulation. It was her strong opinion that these matters shou?d be left to the individual conscience, and she urged the Council to oppose the ordinance. Lee Schmitt, 848 Seale Avenue, Palo Alto, mother of 7 children, Chairperson of the Outreach Ministry of the First Congregational Church of Palo Alto, said she is not gay. She is employed as a research nurse in a local pharmaceutical company, where many gay people are also employed. However, they dare not admit it for fear of losing their jobs. She herself and the organization she represents strongly support the ordinance, because it is an issue of basic human rights, which arc continually being violated. She felt that putting the issue to the voters is as unnecessary as if the dill of Rights had been put to a vote, and urged the Council to make a strong statement for human rights by passing the ordinance. Arnold Norden, 10159 South Foothill Boulevard, Cupertino, said he was astonished by the number of comments about the witnessing homosexuals all being well established. He explained that those seeking Jobs are probably afraid to speak out; being a homosexual and acknowledging it are two different things. Councilaember Levy asked for 'n€ormation related to the Task Force Report. Hewonderedif there was some data available tasulating specific incidents of housing or employment being denied because of sexual orleetation. Ray Wilbur, of the Howe Relations Commission, said the Task Force may . havereviewed it; if so, the data was never turned over to the Commissions perhaps because of the confidentiality assured to the respondents. lie thought someone from the Task Force was better qualified to answer -the question. MarI1ym Williams* of the Rupee. Relations Commission, explained that members of the Task Force had decided. not to disseminate the data, because -of; their guarantee of confidentiality. Counci teember Levy asked if the Task Force could make_ the broad data public„ for example: of the total number of respondents, how many had been 's:eoi� d employment totally, how many hats been denied enp10 isent•_within loalo;Alto,.stc. Ks. Wi li lass aaasvrered that the data was sti l i intact; .they could_ -go back and retabulatee it.-- She reminded that Council, however, that this was a voluetery assigement, on which eaey Mufti bad ,beers spent, with no money assigned. Speaking for herself„_ stye WAS strongly conscious of their euaraetee of coaf ideseti ei i ty. Cou*cilame tuber Levy then listed ahootthe police -situation. Wepition had been made is ,tint report of adverse situations with the police in other commyeities, sea he wondered if tberq had beams ca s .Prebies is Pale Alto, No Ms. Williams said Michael Kronstadt, who had prepared that section of the report, had received no specific complaints regarding the Palo Alto Police Department. Courtci lmember Levy asked if any employers had been interviewed regarding discrimination. Ms; Williams answered no, this was not a part of the interviewing schedule. Councilmember Levy asked for a description, for the record, of the distribution of the questionnaire. His understanding was that they were distributed by committee members, were left in the libraries, City Hall, bookstores, gay establishments which were all outside of Palo Alto, etc. Ms. Williams replied this was essentially correct. She mentioned that Michael Kronstradt and Virginia Lee, other members of the Task Force, were also present to answer any questions from the Council. Councilmember Levy first wished to make clear that he agreed to the objective of no discrimination based on sexual preference in Palo Alta. The question was how specifically to address the problem. He was not convinced at that point of the nature of the problem in Palo Alto. As far as he could determine, the number of mediations due to discrimination because of sexual preference, which have come to the attention of the H.R.C., has been very low. Apparently, there have not been problems with the police. Therefore, he was not sure that an ordinance was the proper method for dealing with this issue, or whether a resolution on the part, of the Council affirming the objective that there be no discrimination might not be a better answer. If the decision is for an ordinance, he thought there should be a good deal of discussion first dealing with the type of ordinance preferred. In researching the ordinances in their packet from San Francisco, Berkeley and Los Angeles, he was informed that there had been no actions, complaints or mediations brought under those ordinances in any of the three communities. He could not but question whether their ordinances have had any impact at a11, He expressed himself as frankly not comfortable with the work done so far in terms of the Task Force Report. First, he wished to see the data on employment, housing and othee kinds of discrimination, particularly as it applies to Palo Alto. So far, the report could be described as a series of "vignettes,'" not giving the kind of data upon which action could be taken. There was one item in the report he found disconcerting, raising many questions. The introduction to the report, on Page 1, referred to. a largo minority, 10% of our population, being homosexual, the sorce`-of `this information being noted as a b'®k by Norton Hunt. Councf laember Levy said he had checked theAource referred to in the footnote and found that, though, quoting Or. Kinsey's finding of 1€% h000`sexuals emonq American males, Hunt labeled K i nsey's survey method as having "grave methodological flares producing serious exaggeration:of incidents data.° (Bunt's conclusions were that there were only'2% of American males and 1% of American females in the category of basicel ly homosexual, ilecause of his reluctance with taking action that evening, based on the Task Force Report sod Itiat iih had discovered about the ordinances enacted so far, Councflmember Levy made the following-motiom; NOTION Council*saber Levy moved that Council refer the question of discriminatloe based on sexual "preference to the Policy and Procedures Committee, with the request that they consider an., ordinnsce, a resolution. or other appropriate action in the area of dis+tri*Tset1o.' hesed on se+aoel preference, NOTION FA1.Ut dee to lack of a second. S 1 Councilnember Fazzino.tegan his statement by expressing his appreciation for the members of the audience who had testified, particularly those who had the courage to be honest about their own homosexuality. -He wished to make clear first, though, that he did not intend to support an ordinance at the present time, although he frankly -had little use for discrimination against anyone because of their personal lifestyle. However, the California law with respect to -protection of Consenting Adults' Rights had always seemed to him' to. be a reasonable start on protection of peoples' rights, without the establishment of a special class in the sexual arena. He would support ;additional strengthening of that law at a state-wide level in the -areas of both employment and housing. As a Rosman Catholic, he supported his Church's strong valises with respect to heterosexuaility, family and procreation, although feeling that at times it hasdeferred too heavily to Acquinas and Augustine in establishing a philosophy -on these issues. - He firmly believed in the general societal rights of the individual to engage in whatever nonviolent, non -publicly offensive acts they so desire, without fearing retribution in employment or housing. He could accept and apprreciata the gay lifestyle, but he frankly could not place it at this time in the same category as discrimination against one of the minorities in this society. This is why he believes the Consenting Adults' Act is a far more responsible approach at this time to the protection of sexual rights. He also head concerns about the Council considering the adoption of an ordinance which was defeated by the voters so recently. Despite the closeness of the vote, he felt the Council hds a mandate of trust to the voters to at least for some time not approve what was defeated on the ballot so recently. Taking up the subject of the H.R.C. report, Councilman Fazzino expressed his appreciation for their work, recognizing that their concern is mainly with human rights. Because discrimination does exist, the inadequacy of the H.R.C. study may not be a major issue; yet in terms of an objective study, its data collection was woefully inadequate for proving such a great incidence of discrimination as to warrant a separate ordinance, beyond the protection provided at state 'level, He would encourage'increased police training programs, educational outreach with local firms, and other voluntary_ approaches on- the ,part of the H R.C, as swell as better research on the -incidence of discrimination, before approval of a separate " ordinance. He was convinced that not to do so would certainly result ia' 4'referendue which could 'bitterly polarize this Comm -nit, . lie had wanted to support ;Coupci!*ember Levy's motion to pass the issue t0 the .Pal icy and .Procedares, Committee, but the Council had seessed clearly against. -it. #e was not opposed .to. a simple advisory vote by thd=.:voters of Palo Alto Jo March 198.1, if.: it could be coasol idated with any Santa Clara Measures _ to be considered , it tht time, and with the Understanding -that the H.R.C.,' would co tinue to explore other approaches including the areas already raised: WON: Caunci leaember fazzino moved, seconded by Sher, that there be -an .. advisory vote in lllarch 1961-i. where the Palo Alto voters Would vote on the issue::- 'Shall tba Pala Alto= -City Councilapprove an ordinance prohibiting housing. a»d 6001oryOent discfiMinati4o on the basis of sexual prefer ode Caanc i lmember 8r egin.r #, eld she felt the Council was in an extremely difficult position of being asked to pass as ordinance' after it had bee .turtned-.dp+wa by :tb . voters, . LT/0 authority, even if by a shell me4eritY. She bard a peand'tbe referendum of the County ordinance, and accepts the Milian Relations %eamsissioe conclusion that there is discrimination against this + ie.erity. Sine did het seed mort-statistics, nor did she ask that every gay person stand up and be counted. On the other hand, she was very concerned that any question that has to do with minority protection should ever be decided by a popularity vote. It was her belief that if the Council voted for an ordinance that evening, it would be referendEd. She felt that a certain amount of hate could be dispelled by returning the subject directly to a vnte by the people of Palo Alto. She wo+Jld be inclined to support either an advisory vote or a vote on a proposed ordinance. Counci lmember Brenner then said she had to leiive the meeting, but wished to declare first her desire to move forward in whatever direction taken by the majority of the Council. Cauncilmember Brenner left the meeting at 11:30 p.m. Mayor Henderson said he would support the motion to put the subject on the ballot, as it seemed the most sensible and supportable, mainly because if the Council did -adopt an ordinance, it would be. referended, causing resentment and bitterness. Another advantage for the supporters would-be an opportunity to participate in forums, etc., to further educate the public. He did rot think any consideration should be given to the goal of *protecting their political lives" -they were there to serve the public and must do what they felt was right. He did, however, wish to make a brief position statement: 1f -it had been left to the Council to approve or disapprove an ordinance, he would have supported approval. He confessed that he did not happen to understand homosexuality personally; that is, he could not personally identify with it. He was convinced, however, that it was not a matter of preference, but of natural orientation. The question is how this could harm anyone - it does not if it involves private behavior. There are laws against public sexual practices that apply to everyone and to every practice. Public displays of sexual activity in any form are not acceptable in our society. There is definitely and obviously prejudice against homosexuals, without even getting into the subjects of equal housing and employment opportunity. In the past few years, gays have begun speaking out publicly, much to the benefit of open and accepting people. We have become educated to the fact that these people are intelligent, industrious, loving, interesting people. They are just as capable as anyone of being highly productive members of the work force and professions. No one should be deprived of his or her rights because of color, sex, religion or sexual orientation. We should not ever have to consider special laws to protect rights based on those considerations, but prejudice requires such laws. There was no question is his mind that a rather large segment of our society is discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. Mayor Henderson did wish to add a caution to his statement, .however: people .do fear what they observe in Saan°..Francisco.:. ;He-,hieself would continue to . support laws relating to publ a -di_splay of sexual_ activity. What happens in private is none of his business what happens in public that -is offensive to others is. `of Concern to him.: In summary, there is discrimination - the exact numbers are not important. Even though the Constitution does protect the rights of minorities in reality such rights have not always, been protected; therefore wehave to 'spel l out such rights exclusively and, back they up' by special laws and eaactions. Councilmember Eyerlydeclared his intention. of opposing the motion for an advisory vote to : be put to the People, because he felt that this would really be a 0cop-out.* It was his suggestion that, if the Couocli did not fee? the need for a city ordinance at this times the subject should be taken up at a later time, after some. P.R. work. He was coevinced giving this issue to the community for decision would cause nothing but divisiveness and bitterness It was the duty of the Council to decide whether there is a need, andto so vote. 2 8:3 10/ 4/80 1 C'ouncilmember Fletcher said some of her sentiments had already been expressed by Mayor Henderson. Regarding the documentation that has been requested, she recalled the process taken with the smoking ordinance, which was enacted in 1974 without task forces or figures giving lung cancer victims, etc. Discrimination is very evident; she was sure it took courage for those of the gay community who had testified to speak out pe,blicly about their personal lifestyle Regarding the doubt cast on the effectiveness of sexual orientation ordinances enacted by other cities, she drew a comparison again with the smoking ordinance here. Although there have been _no prosecutions or complaints, she felt that non-smokers" rights are being considered because of the existence of the ordinance. The fears being expressed by the opponents to the ordinance are very similar to the fears expressed about fifteen years ago, when laws were passed eliminating inating discrimination on the basis of race. A proposition legalizing discrimination in housing was placed on the ballot in 1964, and was passed by the voters; it was later declared illegal and unconstitutional. She thought it would be safe to say. that, since the enactment of the anti -racial discrimination laws, many of the fears have been dissipated. She hoped that with a little more. education and time, eventually that same situation will pertain to discrimination against the gay community, For the present, however, she would support the notion, as the only practical course to follow; are ordinance passed by the Council would almost certainly be referended. Counci lmember Witherspoon began her statement by observing that she did not believe Palo Alto need apologize to anyone for good intentions in the civil rignts areas, though admittedly our record is far from perfect, which is the reason for the existence of the Human Relations Commission. She expressed herself as very leery of ordinances which are difficult to enforce, and which would cause divisiveness in the community. Therefore, she would like to propose more direct action, in case the notion is defeated. In the conclusions of the H.R.C. Report, she noted their encouraging the use of the Human Relations Commission as a mediating force. Her suggestion would be to ask the N.R.C. to submit a concrete proposal on how this function could be expanded, and how an outreach educational program could be developed in the community, as effective as that. now in existence in the landlord -tenant area. Vice -Mayor- Sher agreed with much of Councilme.ber fazzino's opening statement, though not with the suggestion of sending the issue to the Policy and Procedures Committee. He alto agreed with such of Mayor .Menderson's and Cuuncilmember fletcher's-statements. His own views on discrimination in housing and employment based on sexual preference, or on any other unsupportable bases, parallel those of other members of the Council. He recalled the existence in Palo Alto of a non-discrimination palit, in employment by the -city. This inc1udee, among other eacceptabla bases, sexual preference, added in 1974, when he himself was o* ,the Council, and restated as the policy of the city as late as October Test year.- After --hearing the public statements, it seemed to him there were several options; 1) Adopt the ordinaece as proposed by the H.K.C. 2) Put the issue to the vote of the people„ .the motion on the floor. 3) Return the •ttter`. to the Human Rl ght s - Cs m iss ion for further study and some suggested documentation. 4) Send the matter to our own Policy and Procedures - Committee, for which there seemed little enthusiasm on time part: of the Council. Sj Oe eothiog. His own views were: Discard any consideration of the last item; they could not in conscience do nothing. It would serve no useful purpose to return the matter to the Human Relations Commission; the response would differ very little from the present report. It appeared to him the only two realistic options were to put tie matter to an advisory vote of the people or to adopt the proposed ordinance. He agreed with those who felt the adoption of the ordinance at that time would be unwise, considering the recent defeat of similar legislation by the people of Palo Alto and of the County, and the inevitable referendum and devisiveness generated by the referendum process. it was therefore his conclusion that the best option would be to pass the motion for an advisory vote. Councilmember Renzei said most of her views had been expressed by other members of the Council, especially by Mayor Henderson and Councilmember Brenner. It was clear to her that fear and prejudice, as expressed during the hearing, do exist in the community, 'and can best be dispelled by education. She felt strongly, however, that the legislative process was not the most effective mans for bringing about that kind of education in a positive way. Councilmember Levy had no objection to bringing this matter before their constituents for an advisory vote. He felt this was peefectiy appropriate - they are no less in a position to make this kind of fundamental choice than is the Council, .who could theli take on the responsibility of drafting and passing the proper legislation based on the message received from the public. He would therefore support the motion. MOTION PASSED on the following vote: AYES: Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher NOES: Eyerly, Witherspoon ABSENT: Brenner CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE: (continued) This item was continued at 9:00 p.m. in order to take up the item on the sexual orientation ordinance. Councilmesber Fazzino wished to make the following substitute motion: SURSTITJTE NOTION: Councfleember Fazzino .vied;: seconded by Renzel, that a eoraator$ us : be enacted until the City Attorney Roy Abrams' report comes back to the City Council on the Codoe i ni um Conv er s i o n Project (Oak Creek already exempted under previous sption). Councilmember Fazzino wished to comment od his motion. He was very. concerned that Mayor Nenderson's approach, which , he views as an outright prohibitioe of condominium conversion, not be adopted. Ne. believed the City Attorney's report should focus on the tenant protection area including: adequate tenure in its structure, possibly three to six months, for a tenant to be alegittmate voting member; a conflict -of -interest provision to preclude voting b► relatives of dev:iopers; sub-leasees and vacant units not to be coec dared part of the . total voting block-, and eispf.ration of the { if time least -prevision. Finally, he would like Nr. Abrams and his f to study the possibility of giving the Humes Relations ission authority over the condosisium conversion elzctions, to ensure fair .and equitable treatment for tenants". Vice Mayor Sher wished to verify with the City Mtoriiey that he was'_. free tc participate because, although the motioe,addresses exception to the moratorium based on the October 2, MO, date for sending out consent forms, and the Oak Creek project will be exempt under this motion, it is already exempt under the existing moratorium with this exception. City Attorney replied in the affirmative. Vice -Mayor Sher said the moratorium as suggested in the motion seemed to him a good solution. It was his view that, after the City Attorney files his report, the Council may decide to delete the two-thirds provision of the condominium conversion ordinance, if it turns out to be impossible to devise an ordinance with adequate tenant protection. He was of the opinion, on the other hand, the reasons for that provision were still valid; for instance, where there is no abuse of the process and most of the tenants do desire condominium conversion, and provision is made for protection against some of the loopholes disc,iussed recently. He thought Counc i lmember Fa zz i no' s motion does keep this option open and at the same time closes the possibility of any more conversions during the period of the moratorium, because it limits exceptions to those projects (as he understood it, only two) where the consent forms were sent out before October 2, 1980. He was especially interested in seeing if the City At!lorney's report will include the possibility of a change in the condominium conversion ordinance to provide tenant protection under the two-thirds provision. Co=uncilmember Levy said he would support the motion for the same reasons given by Vice -Mayor Sher. Councilmember Renzel also supported the motion, because it at least gave the Council time to deliberate further. She strongly supported Mayor Henderson's original motion, expressing her concern about the serious consequences to the City particularly of the Oak Creek conversion, with the loss of not only 10 percent of its Housing rental units, but also a substantial portion of its vacancy rate. She suspected that, after receiving Mr. Abr-a+m's report, she .could still be supporting an absolute ban on condominium conversions when the vacancy rate falls below 3 percent, because the the impact of the Oak Creek conversion will be clearer. Councilme;aber Witherspoon asked the City Attorney if more findings were necessary before the moratorium could be imposed. city Attorney Abrams responded that, as he understood the motion, it really directed him to return to Council with an ordinance implementing the -provisions discussed. He hoped to return on October 20. 1980. iayor Henderson injected the comment that the City Attorney would be returning with the moratorium ordinance, not the answers to all the questions. City Attorney Abrams agreed, and said the date might be the 27th instead of the 20th of October. They would not care to delay the report any further, because the moratorium would be applying to a date of October 2, )980.. Couoci.lmeeber Fletcher opposed the motion, because she felt the staff was being given a great deal of work to do on the impossible task of finding a method of avoiding, loopholes and for protecting tenants frog all kinds of.. abuses. This task will involve a considerableportion of the -Planning Department staffs, as: well as the City Attorney staff. She also felt that the motion evades the whole concept of maintaining the City's stock of multiple family rentals, Mayor Henderson agreed with Councilmember Fletcher's statement and said he would have preferred the other motion, but felt he had to be practical, as it had received only four votes. He did not wish to appear to be voting against the moratorium, which would at least stop further conversion activity for the next few months. He would therefore support Countilmember Fuzzino's motion, though h2 regretted the tremendous workload being placed on the City Attorney and other staff d he had hoped to avoid that by the motion imposing the 3% vacancy rate requirement. Councilmember Renzel wished to ask a procedural question, regarding the exemption voted on earlier in the evening. One recommendation made by the public was that the time limit of that exemption be extended to July 1, 1982. She wondered if, since that was a preliminary to the present motion, it would be necessary to include the suggested termination date as an amendment before voting on the lotion, or if it should be treated seperately. City Attorney Abrams answered that either method was acceptable. SUBSTITUTE MOTION passed on the following vote: AYES: Eyerly, Fazzino, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher, Witherspoon NOES: Fletcher ABSENT: Brenner MOTION TO RECONSIDER: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Fletcher, to reconsider previous motion regarding exemptions for the purpose of amending the time limit. MOTION TO RECO dSIDER PASSED unanimously, Brenner absent, Sher and Witherspoon not participating. Councilmember Renzel then wished to grove that, regardless of any actions taken after the end of the moratorium and Council ecceives the City Attorney's report, a termination date of July 1,. 1982, be imposed on -the exemption, in order to prevent its being left open-ended forever. Councilmember Fletcher stated she was in favor of a termination date for the exemption, but wondered if it need be so far into the future. Counc i lmeeber Renzel answered that this seemed to be a date not subject to controversy at the present time, but which does set a term i rrat i on , date . City Attorney Abrams reminded Council of their conclusion, after some research, that six months was . a reasontie time frame for a conversion process.. He cautioned that one of the dangers of **tending the limit until July 1982 was that the Oak Creek controversy would probably be extended for that length of tine/. because the finalizing of the conversion application could only take place at that time. He si:ggosted a six mouths' time period from the effective date of the ordinances. Councf Memee'r Renzel had no objection . to shorteniag``the time to six months, if agreeable to other members -of the Council. was a*eneble to 'a date of July 1981. Mr. Scott Careywished to affirm his understanding that July 1981 was the date for filing. He was toldthis was correct. limit She Counciimember Eyerly asked Mr. Carey if the suggested time frame would be enough for completion of the conversion process. Mr. Carey replied there would be no problem. MOTiIOP.: Counciimenber Renzel moved, seconded by Henderson, that the exemption terminate as of July 1, 1981. MOTION PASSED on a unanimous vote, Brenner absent, Sher and Witherspoon not participating. - BAYLANDS BICYCLE PATH {Ct4R: 441.0) Staff recommends that Council pass a resolution reaffirming City support for a multiuse facility along the frontage route location MOTION: Counci lmember Renzel moved, seconded by Fazz ino, that Council adopt • the following resolut on` RESOLUTION 5840 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO REAFFIRMING ITS SUPPORT FOR A MULTI -USE FACILITY FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESCERIAff USE ALONG THE FRONTAGE ROAD ROUTE LOCATION.' Councilmember Fletcher opposed the motion, because it would be a very expensive facility which she would wholeheartedly support if there were no other access in that area. There is a parallel facility on the road and a very nice path off the road. Considering the strong opposition because of the cost, she could see no reason for continuing to fight for it. She suggested the money could be better spent on other projects, for instance extending the Arastradero Road trail to Page Mill Road. Counci 1r ember Eyerly recalled the approval of the location of the trail, when there were two routes proposed: one on the levees, and the other along the edge of the frontage road. The existence of a parallel route was not then included in the staff report and he was a little surprised to see it there now. It seemeo. the evidence was not complete when he voted for the trail before. His interpretation now was that the City was in a veryweak position for receiving, the grant.- ihis it supported by the stetereent of the Department of Parks and Recreations, dated September 11, 1980, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerk's Office. He suggested .consideration of the route originally proposed or, if thegrant is available, some other section of the trail route as suggested by Counc i tmember Fletcher. Without snort at state level, he could not support the staff recommendation, Mayor Henderson asked if. the money was interchangeable, and City Manager laser replied that the grant is not transferable; if .the project dees not receive State approval, the funds would .probably be reallocated to other projects in the County. Counci lmember Eyerly asked If the alternate route, the levee path, net with State approval; also, what the total cost would be iu coapar ison to the other oro ject . City Manager Ianer 'did not recallthe total cost of the project. His recollection was that the levee route would have been acceptab/e to the State; they would have approved either route end were depending on the Council to select one of the alternates. Councilmumber Witherspoon stated she had been very opposed at the bare to placing a $400,600 Like trail , along Highway "101{ and 'could not understand the oppIfition by'the Trails Committee to .a bicycle path in the bay;asads. As tiler, of Woo 4o0tpoit at State looel for this PrOic16` old "$* the res*I loo., ;felt It s tins to i* t after Ores yows of Ming for _ t She 'mild coed*der 00 .$I*wets roots.: Councilmember Renzel addressed Councilmember Eyerly's question about the parallel route, stating this is actually the Frontage Road, not a separate bicycle trail by any means. It is very heavily used by fast traffic, particularly during the commute hours. It seemed to her if people are to be encouraged to bicycle to work, direct routes connecting with other trail systems must be available to them. The Trails Committee recommended a trail along the Frontage Road, separate because of the traffic danger, to provide a direct line for commuters between Mountain View and Palo Alto. The levee route is rideable during dry weather, particularly by commuters, She believed that by presenting a sound position to the State we may continue receiving the funds. Councilmember Fletcher did not believe the Traits Committee was in favor of paving the levees; she felt the levees were rideable. Regarding the matter of the transferability of the funds, she, remembered the last staff report as offering three options from the State, in the case of rejection of a proposed project: 1) modify the project, 2) suggest an alternate project, or (3) release the funds to another jurisdication. MOTION FAILS on the following vote: AYES: Fazzino, Renzel, Sher NOES: Eyerly, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Witherspoon ABSENT: Brenner Councilmember Eyeriy wished to move that the stafz submit a proposal to the State for an alternate bicycle route along the levees, as proposed in the original staff report. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Vice -Mayor Sher, that the Council seek a new recommendation from the Trails Committee. Mayor" _Henderson said he felt much more comfortable _with this approach. Counci lme tber Witherspoon wished .to know how ; long this would take, because she understood time was- of the ' essence in this matter: City_Manager Zaner replied they were re4uired'to return to the State Public Works Board to withdraw the ome project and substitute, another based- on consultation with the Trails Committee. CoMncilmerber Witherspoon confirmed that the new recommendation by the Trails Committee would require council approval before submission to the State Public Works Board. Counci lme*ter Renzel informed Council that Mary Gordon was st rong iy supportive of passing the motion at that times SUBSTITUTE NOTION PASSED on the following vote: AYES: fazziao4 Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, l enzel, Sher, leitherapoan NOES: E,9erly ABSENT: Brenner 2 .0 9 COUNCILMEMBER FAllINO RE PETER COUTTS HILL Vice -Mayor Sher and Councilmerber Witherspoon would not participate in this issue due to conflict -of -interest, aid left the meeting at 12:10 a.m. 1 1 e Councilmember Fazzino referred to staff report and two letters from Jim Culpepper (dated October 2 and 6, 1980, copies of which are on file in the City Clerk's Office). He reviewed the problem: the last-minute objections by Stanford to two provisions in the proposal, "15. Development rights to the opens space be dedicated to the County prior to tentative map approval," and "16. Access to the general public be guaranteed to the 4.3 acres of open space." He hoped this problem could be resolved quickly, as he understood Stanford was under pressure to proceed with County approval in order to avoid added costs, but Council could not approve the project without the condition of guaranteed access to thepublicbeing met. City Attorney Abrams said he did not believe, after discussions with Stanford attorneys, 'that their intent was malicious in any sense. They were concerned that, if the conditions of required pudic access were imposed on the application and became in effect a consideration for approval, Stanford might Lose the property "in Beige" to the public. After exploring some provisions In the civil code, they were going to investigate mechanisms by which Stanford could both protect their title and provide the public access. Mr. Abrams' conclusions were that Stanford did rot wish to back away from public access and was only concerned with protecting their title. Assistant Director of Planning and Community Environment, Kenneth Schreiber, informed Council that the staff would be meeting with the Stanford staff the following Wednesday. He agreed with Mr. Abrams' assessment of Stanford's intentions; their concerns were more in the realm of tehnical problems or wording. They were reasneably hopeful of being able to work out some solution at the forthcoming meeting on Wednesday. Counci ]member fazzino wished to correct any impression that he was accusing Stanford of malicious intent; it was just aggravating that the objectionsshould he brought up so late in the process. He did have a question about the procedure to be taken if the problems are not resolved,. Mr. Schreiber responded that presently the Planning Commission has approved the`. zone change and the use permit, The subdivision is the last part of the process. The zone change wi 1 l have to go -to the Board of Supervisors; the use permit only if appealed, and probably not before early November. The staff is trying to keep ,a number of optioo5 open. The conditions are attached to the tentative subdivision, and the case could go before the County Planning Comwission; ,1f .unsuccessful there, then to the County Board. They could also appeal the use permit, Neal Davidson, Stanford University, Project Manager of Peter Coutts ' Mill, said Stanford's position was that the motions now being presented are premature, and if moved on, would cause an unnecessary delay in the project, resulting in increased costs and time. Stanford ,is .In quite a time bine; :they would like to get'•the project underway in ;the Spring, He did not .believe Stanford has any intention of reneging on 'any conditions or agreement; in their np,inion the 'problem is very definitely a mater of terminology specifically the words "absolute guarantee .° They realized the difficulty causedbyraiing'these objections at this late date, but were quite certain that some wording or method could be developed to provide public access to the property. Even if en agreement is not 2 1 0 10/61*0 dedication as well as of the guaranteed access - could be resolved with some terminology acceptable to all parties. Councilmember Renzel expressed her disappointment et these last-minute objections, especially considering that Stanford received such a bargain - 140 units to the City's 4 of 6 requested acres of open space, to which public access now seemed in jeopardy. She strongly supported Councilmember fazzino's motion: (1) respectfully request Stanford to agree to a continuance, (2), reaffirm the conditions already established, and (3), a procedure for avoiding this kind of last minute conflict, particularly after the decision -making process has left their jurisdication,. Referring to City Attorney Abrams' summary of Stanford's concerns, it was her understanding it was patently illegal to consider the conditions set on zoning or subdivisoons as considerations for zonii g. In her opinion, this was a *red herring," end Council should pass the motion. Councilmember Fazzino explained his motions, mainly reaffirming the commitment of a year ago to the issue of public access and encouraging the Staff and Stanford in their efforts toward resolving the difficulties. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino made the following motions, duly seconded, quoted from letter-, dated October 6, 1980, by Jim Culpepper: 1. "The Palo Alto City Council respectfully requests Stanford University to agree to a continuance at the County level of the Peter Coutts Hill deliberations until the Palo Alto Planning Commission and the City Council can consider and respond to Stanford's objections to the conditions Palo Alto attached to its approval of the final development puns on June 16, 1980.* 2. min the event Stanford declines to agree to the Council's request for a continuance, the Council reaffirms its support for the conditions which it attached to its approval of the development on June 16, 1980." 3. "The Council refers to the Policy and Procedures Committee for discussion the subject of developing a procedure for last minute conflicts at the County level between Palo Alto and Stanford land use pol icies.° Mayor Henderson had one question referring to the alleged threat by Stanford to remove public access. He himself had heard nothing to give such an impression. His understanding from Mr. Abrams' statement was that ..:t is was just a technical matter of wording. Mr. Schreiber explained that, at the Planning Commission meeting, Stanford attorneys voiced some concerns over the word 'guarantee," along the lines described by Mr. Abrams, regarding the possible I:;is to the* of the property. According to Mr. Abrams, there is apparently a way under state law where the campus can provide the guaranteed access without risk of losing title. There is no loss of access at this time. The concern was -two -fold: (1) the prospect of giving away Stanford land= in. the process of dedication, and (2) costs attached to the project because -.of the need of bringing the road; up to County standards. As he had ;iadfceted to bis_ comments to the Planning Countyy.-Commissien, the specific objective Was to ensure the use of Peter Coutts goad es a public rigbt of way. Dedication is only one way of accospl:ishiagthis; ,_there are other alternatives, such as easements, which .mold free Stanford frost the repairing costsS,-and also resolve -some -of the wording problems. 1 Mayor Henderson said he thought the Council had rejected the annexing of the Peter Coutts Road to the County. Mr. Schreiber replied that the letter sent to the County stated the Council recommended approval of the plans on June 16, 1980, on six conditions, of which No. 2 stated: "Peter Coutts Road And that portion of Stanford Avenue outside the City limits be dedicated ti County,' and No. 6: *Public access to the open space area be guaranteed.' Mr. Knox commented that he believed it was important to keep objectives separated from the mechanisms used for achieving them. It is the focusing on mechanisms that is responsible for so many roadblocks. It may be possible to achieve the objective of public access on Peter Coutts Road without dedication. The forthcoming meeting on Wednesday would address alternate mechanisms. Councilmembee Renzel commented that Palo Alto has an escape provision regarding improvement of roads, stating "...subject' to the approval of the City Engineer." She assumed the County had a similar provision. If not, she wondered if it would be necessary, because of Part 2 of the motion, to modify the wording "a dedicated road,* to 4a guaranteed right of way." Mr, Schreiber replied that, at the County Planning Commission Meeting, a representative of the Transportation Agency informed him the road would have to be brought up to County standards if dedicated, which would involve some recoestruction. Regarding the change in wording, he did not believe it necessary to modify the word "dedication." The main objective was quite clear: to maintain ongoing public use of the road - whether by dedication, easement, or another mechanism. Mayor Henderson said he would oppose the motion. It seemed to him this was a case of a bit of overreaction on a technical problem which he hoped could be resolved at the forthcoming meeting by staff on Wednesday. If not, it could become an item on another agenda. He did not think it necessary to make negative statements at this time. MOTION PASSE° on the following vote: AYES: Eyerly, Fazrtho, Fletcher, Levy, Renzel NOES: Henderson ABSENT: Brenner, Sher, Witherspoon CANCELLATION OF OCTOBER 14 COUNCIL MEETING MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, to cancel Regular Council Meeting of Tuesday, October 34 red set Special Meeting on October 13. MOTION PASSED unanimously,: Brenner, Sher and Witherspoon absent. ADJOURNMENT: Council meeting adjourned at 12:35 p.m. ATTEST: APPgC A 1 1 CITY COUNCIL MIfiUTEt SPECIAL MEETtHs. Monday, October 13, 1930 - 7 30 P.m, CITY PM!,O ALTO The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Mayor Henderson presiding, in a Special Meeting to consider revisions to the Comprehensive Plan. PRESENT: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher (arrived 8:5O p.m.), Witherspoon ABSENT: Hone Mayor Henderson announced that at some point during the netting there would be an Executive Session re Personnel. STANFORD UNIVERSITY'S PETER CO+JTTS Mayor Henderson suggested that Council discuss the Pete' Coutts project before proceeding with review of the Plan as Council's position should be known prior to October 16. Councilmember Brenner said her first reaction was to proceed with the review of the Plan because that has been announced as the agenda item for this resting. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, that the Peter Coutts Hill item be considered first on the agenda. The mption passed on the following vote: AYES: E, r3y, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy NOES: Brenner, Renzel ABSENT: Sher NOT PARTICIPATING: Witherspoon Ken Schreiber, Assistant Planning Director, said that he and Ctty Attorney Abrams met with Stanford `staff 'fast week and the staff report dates October 9, 1900, contains the wording which resulted from that meeting, The word ng is intended to protect the City and to rem to Councilts position an the r+ tter. He noted the languege in th "staff report re- garding Peter Coutts Road: °Dedicate Peter Coutts Road through the - granting of an oa t, subject to Stanford University Board of Trustees` approval, to Saante Clare County in an as 1s condition. Failing acceptance by the County. and sect to Stanford University Board of Trustees' aporoval, Stanford University to enter into an egreement with Santa Clara Comity for thelife of the project to keep the tad open. Any modification of the agreement will require Sent& Clare County Ord of . Super�vi sors dal a shall 'not fir• yeti! . after 3 netike tot tip °Cl ty. ° # . reviewedl the provisions for protection of and accessibility to the Open Space Area as set :forte in the staff report. He said staff is comfortable, with the language covering the road aces end the open space issuC Councilmember Renzel asked what changes are coetatplated ifremOvel of public amass is not one of the,changes that combs dime. We solid she_ wen referring tO Oa sorting taprevision_ 1,5tot 00 staff - t. Mr. Schreiber said one of the items which came up in their discussion was limitations on the public access. One example would be time limitations and the question of reasonable curtailment. Councilmember Renzel said it might be clearer to state time limits for use in the language. Roy Abrams, City Attorney, said he thought it was impossible to foresee all the different kinds of difficulties which might arise. They tried to look at the issue from the neighborhood's perspective. The neighbor- hood would have the opportunity to adopt rules in order to regulate activities. He said an important point to remember was that if there are violations by Stanford on any of the reasonable access provisions, the citizens have a right to go to the County and request enforcement of the provisions. The matter is not simply in the hands of Stanford or any one citizen, but in the hands of government entities. Councilor Renzel asked if it was normally up to the homeowners to modify CCUR's as long as they all agree? Mr. Abrams responded that generally speaking, within the CC&R's there is a, provision regarding changing the by-laws. He said they :ould not ramify these provisions without the Board of Supervisors' concurrence. Councilmember Renzel said she understood the Board of Trustees met today and she asked if they concurred :with the easement dedication. Mr. Phil Williams, Director of Planning at Stanford, replied that the item was not on the agenda today. Councilmember Renzel asked who would define `'reasonable," under the open space issue. Mr, Abrams said initially the cooperation would occur between the citizens and Stanford; ultimately, if there is dis- agreement, the County of Santa Clara would make the determination. Councilmember.Fletcher said she would like to in:ert the word "concurrence" in prov!sion z.6 to say "Any modification of provisions 2, 3. 4, and 5 shall not occur without a 30 -day notice to and concurrence of the City of Palo Alto," Mr. Abrams said there was a lot of discussion about that during the meeting with Stanford and they tried to resolve it by compromising the City's right to veto. Stanford's position was that the land was not within the City's limits and it should deal with the govormeental entity ultimately responsible for .control of the land --the County. They compro- mised it in two mays: one, requiring the 30 days notice; and two, if for some reason the City does become a successor jurisdiction, the City would then have the right to pursue any modifications it felt best. Councilmember Brenner said she was also concerned that there is no mention of concurrence. The fact that the area is unincorporated ist. perhaps, part of the problem; and the fact that it is intricately re. lated to College Terrace is a reason to be particularly concerned about the conditions. She "referred to the second paragraph on page 2 of the staff report and the sentence "Therefore, the fallback position is a University/County agreement which would not allow a road closure to occur without County Board approval after review by the City. ° She said in her experience the County Board usually does approve Stanford requests without a great deal of discussion. She questioned what looked like a large loophole. She felt the process being described ignored neighbor- hood involvement which ressalted in the approval in the first place. She said she wanted a guarantee on keeping the road open. Mr. Schreiber said the arse is unincorporated and therefore the County does retain jurisdiction. Short of dedication, he wasn't sure how they could guarantee it. The first objective is to try to get the road dedicated. 294 10/131 Councilrnember Brenner said the -e were things short of closure such as slowing down the traffic at Stanford to make it inconvenient. She felt that perhaps the hatter should go back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Schreiber said that one of the factors from the staff's perspective is the cost factor. The County is holding to a policy position that they want the road brought up to all current standards. That is an ex- pensive process. Councilmerber Eyerly said he felt the wording had been !parked out with ample protection. He was concerned, however. with the word "e11ow" in Provision 1.3, which says, "Allow public access..." They had originally asked for a guarantee of public access. MOTION: Councilmenrber Eyerly :moved, seconded by Fletcher. approval of the wording and provisions re Peter Coutts Hill as contained in the staff report (CMR:462:O) with the word "Allow" in 1.3 changed to "Provide." Mayor Henderson asked if the wording in the staff report was the same as that contained in the letter from Bill Massy. Mr. Schreiber said he found only one change that eras significant. In 1.6 in the staff report (1.f in Mr. Massy's letter) the word 'prior" should be inserted. That is clearly the intention. Councilmemrber Fazzino said he would like to see a change in 1.6 that the 30 -day notice be to the City Council of Palo Alto. That change should also be made in the text. Mayor Henderson asked whether the motion spoke to only the road access and open space provisions or the entire staff report. Mr. Schreiber the staff's intent was that Council approve the indented wording under the two subjects and not the entire staff report. Councilor Eyerly said he would incorporate Councilmomber Fazz?no`s request and add that notice be given to the City Council and the City of Palo Alto. If notice didn't get to the City Manager directly, it might slog the process down. Cauncil ber Fazzino said that was fine with hire; his only concern was. that Council have a chance to review the process if there is an abridgement. Councilmember Renzel asked for clarification. If Stanford dedicates Peter Coutt Road they uld have to bring it up to Cede. If they dedicate an easement, they won't? or is that still not clear? Mr. Schreiber replied that if they dedicate the road and the County is to maintain it, the County's position is that they want it brought up to 01 current standards. Councilmember Renzel asked if there was any way it could be dedicated and a maintenance agreement be taken on by Stanford, since Stanford is going to have to aIntain: it if it isn't dedicated anyway. Mr. Schreiber said that was discussed and .they came back to two alternatives either having the,CountY here the responsibility and maintain it, or have the road min as it is. Councilmember Renzel said tom, basically. dedicationis really out because the County will rot accept dedication and responsibility for maintaining a substandard mod. Under tkisagreement. sheunderstood that the alternatives were subject to the il yd of Trustees approval. If. the lord refuses to approve it, does that then delete this whole of scussi on of the rid Mr. Schreiber,replied the subdivision conditions would be that the road either be dedicated or an agreement be reached between the County and the University to keep the road open. If that cannot be satisfied for some reason, then Stanford is in a position of having a condition attached to the tentative map which they cannot satisfy. Then they w111 have to go back to the County and get that tentative map cond.tion changed. There would have to be another review process. Councilmember RRenzel said that if that is the case, they can simply delete the language "subject to the Board of Trustees approval." If Stanford wants Peter Coutts Hill, they'll meet the conditions of the subdivision. Mayor Henderson asked if there was any legal problem in reioving those words. Coune#lmember Fazzino said they were dealing with semantics. Stanford University is the Stanford Board of Trustees. Councilmember Eyerly said he would incorporate the deletion of the language in his motion. Councilmember Renzel questioned whether provision I.6 was necessary. Does that have to be added to clarify that provision 1.5 cannot be modified? Mr. Abrams said provision I.6 sirsply adds the 30 -day notice; it does not sreak to modification. He suggested that the 30 -day provision be put in 1.5. Councilmember Renzel suggested that they delete I.6. There is ne reason to speak to modification of 1.5. Hr. Abrams suggested the following wording for 1.5: "Provisions 2, 3, and 4 cannot be changed 1! without the approval of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisof or a successor jurisdiction, 2) without a 30 -day prior written notice to the City and City Council of ?alo Alto, but in no event shall modification..." and suggested deletion of 1.6. Councilmember Renzel said she felt the wording was probably the best they could do, but she was concerned. She preferred that they not incorporate the interpretations in the text of the staff report. They are not part of the notion, but they wi. s l be made to interpret es who the motion ins and she didn't entirely agree with everyth:fng in the text. For ale, there Is no reason for the text to include the sentence, *That .is why both the first end second sentences are qualified to reflect the role of . the Board of Trustees." Councilmember Eyerly said he would incorporate the clams suggested by m'. Abrams ie his. motion. MOTION PASSED: The motion to adopt the provisions re Peter Coutts Hill with the following changes: change "allow"' in 1.3 to "provide," add that the 30-dey notice will be to tire City and the City council, delete language "suet tt- Board of Trustees approval " ' and delete .1.6 and *Klee notice ceding in I:5, passed on the following vote: AYES: Bremer, Eyerly, Fletcher, Eazzino, Henderson, Levy NOES: MOAB ABSTAIN: Viral ABSENT: NOT PARTICIPATING: Withers. Mayor Henderson said since the last action that the Council took was a motion last week to request that Stanford agree to a continuance, was there any need to make a motion to undue that. Mr. Schreiber replied that pending any other action, his intrepretation would be that the first part of last week's notion is moot. Councileember Brenner said that they have by motion deleted the reference to University Board of Trustee's approval and she would like to make a motion deleting reference in the text. MOTION: Councilmember Brenner moved, seconded by Renzel, to delete the following sentence from the text of the staff report, page 2, 3rd paragraph, that reads, "That is why both the first and second sentences are qualified to reflect the role of the Board of Trustees." MOTION PASSED: The motion to delete the sentence passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fletcher, Levy, Renzel NOES: Henderson ABSENT: Sher ABSTAIN: Fazzino NOT PARTICIPATING: Witherspoon PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS RE AP , `!!I?>VAN Page 19A - Transeortation Mayor Henderson said he had talked to other Councilrnembers and felt there was a general concensus about the sequence of the objectives at the bottom of the page. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, that the objectives be shifted as follows, plus word changes as underlined; 1. Protect residential neighborhoods from through traffic and especially meter traffic. 2. Reduce growth of overall traffic. 3. Reduce peak -hour traffic congestion. 4. Serve the transit -dependent population, 5. Reduce public dependence on private cars. 5. Provide alternatives attractive enough to reduce the number of single - occupant automobi 1 es. 7. courage the use of bicycles for non recreational as well as recreational. B. Serve present and future transportation needs safely, efficientTy, , and reliably. Councilree er Fletcher said she would like to delete the objective, "Serve present and future tr~ansporation demands..." There is always going to be an increase in demands. Mayor Herrdersoe noted that he had changed the word "demands" to "needs." AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Brenner; ` to delete that objective .on page 19k, Mayor.ftedimr-soi said he would like to speak against the motion. One.. example of the objective is the' imp►rov .rt of Aline -Street to more efficiently handle the traffic flow and keep it out of neighborhoods. As needs like that arise, the City has to meet them. He agreed that they couldn't rim to every.d nd. AMENDMENT FAILED: notion to delete the objective failed on the followinn vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Levy, Renzel NOES: Eyerly, Henderson, Fazzino, Witherspoon ABSENT: Sher Councilmember Fletcher said she would like to :.ee the wording changed which states: "Encourage the use of bicycles for all activities." Mayor Henderson suggested the words, "for non -recreational as well as recreational," and agreed to incorporate it in his nation. Councilmember Levy said he would like to delete the word "efficiently" in the eighth objective. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Brenner, to delete the word "efficiently" from the last objective stafemertt. Councilmember Fazzino said ha evuld be concerned if the word "efficiently" were used in an exclusive manner, but in this case he thrught it was practical to include the word; he will oppose the motion. Covncilmemiler Brenner suggested that the proposed word "needs" in the same objective, be "requirements." CouncilmembPr Levy said he would incorporate that word change in his amendment. Councilmciber Brenner said that this particular group of aspirations has been the subject of several neighborhood concerns, and felt the Council needed to spend time discussing these objectives. Cor nci, nem%er Fletcher said if they were talking abo i efficiency in moving tr ffic, they'd probably suggest that there be grade ecpaeations all along Page Mill, Oregon, Middlefield and other places. That would rave traffic quite efficiently. Mayor Henderson said he would like to separate the amendment and vote on it in two parts: FIRST PART OF AMENDMENT FAILS; The amendment to eliminate the word "efficiently" failed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Levy NOES: Fazzino, Eyerly, Henderson, Renzel, Witherspoon. ABSENT: Sher SECOND PART OF AMENDMENT FAILS: The amendment to change "needs° to °require rts* in the la.t objective failed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Renzel NOES: E ,erly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Witherspoon ABSENT: Sher Mr. Noguchi said he had a problem with the term "transportation~ as has been construed by Council. Transportation, as used here, includes all fors;: of transportation. If Council wishes to talk about "traffic" they should make a distinction between that and transportation. MOTION PASSED: The motion to shift the order of the objectives passed unanimously, Vice Bar Sher absent. Mayor Henderson referred to the basic fares, "The basic fare at He said he would like to delete that could change. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Levy, to eliminate the reference to specific fares. righthand column and the wording re the beginning of 1980 was 25 cents..." reference to specific fares because Councilmember Fazzino said it was a statement of fact and he didn't think changing it would have any negative impact on the Plan. It merely makes reference to the fact of what the rate structure was in 1980. Mayor Henderson said the motion was consistent with Courxil's position not to put specific figures in the Plan. MOTION PASSED: The motion to eliminate reference to specific fares passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel NOES: Eyerly, Fazzino, Witherspoon ABSENT: Sher Councilmember Fletcher referred to the last paragraph in the lefthand column and said they had a suggestion from Mr. Schram to substitute a sentence which she liked. The suggested language is: "The Plan supports public transit, ride sharing, car and van pooling, bicycling and walking as alternatives to single occupant aut biles„." LOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Renzel, to change the sentence commencing, "The Plan seeks to encourage alternatives..." to, "The Plan supports public transit, ride sharing, car and van pooling; bicycling and walking as alternatives to single occupant autombiles." MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel NOES: Eyeriy, Witherspoon ABSENT: Sher Councilmember Fletcher referred to the last paragraph in the righthand column which describes the various transit services and she thought it would be appropriate to include SaiTrans which does service Palo Alto, Suggested wording would be: "SamTrans provides service to Downtown Palo Alto from East Palo Alto and along El Camino Real from Page Mill Road , north to San Francisco." WAIN: Councilor Fletcher moved, seconded by Henderson, that the last paragraph in the righthen3 column include reference to the SbmTrans service, POTION PASSED: The motion passed on the following vote: ,YES: Br r9 Eyerly, Fletcher, Henderson, Witherspoon ROES: Fazzino, Renzel, Levy ABSENT: Sher Cooncilmembor Levy said that In the first paragraph under Transportation be would like to add words to focus in on the desire to keep through traffic out of neighborhoods. - i9DTIO1: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Fazzino to add warding at the end of the first sentence under Objectives, with the sentence to read; "Palo Alto recognizes the individual`s right to travel in an efficient, safe, and reliable manner, but not so as to encourage the flow oit traffic in. residential neighbo ods.° 299 10/13/80 POTION PASSED: The motion to add wording to the end of the first sentence under Objectives passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel NOES: Witherspoon ABSENT: Sher Councilmember Levy said there are two words in the Plan which are almost used interchangeably --"through traffic" and "commuter traffic." He thought the phrase "through traffic" is a more descriptive one. MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Brenner, to change the words "commuter traffic" in the first paragraph under Transportation, to "through traffic." lir. Noguchi said that again he had a little trouble with the change to the extent that commuter in this case pertains to an employee coming into Palo Alto. "Through" relates to both employees coming in and traffic created by residents in the community. This could be a problem for Council later on in defining "commuter" and "through" traffic. Councilmember Levy said he recognized that difference but when a car passes by your home, it doesn't make much difference whether it's a commuter or a Palo Alto resident. MOTION FAILS: The motion to change the word "commuter" to "through" failed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Levy, Renzel, Witherspoon NOES: Fazzino, Fletcher, Eyerly, Henderson ABSENT: Sher Councilmember Eyerly referred to reference of the Downtown Parking Manag nt Plan and asked if they would be discussing it at this time. Mayor Henderson said the Downtown Parking Management Plan has been agendized for the October 20 Council meeting. They will come back to this section after that date. Councilmember Fletcher referred back to the first paragraph under Objectives and suggested that reference to parking shortages be in- cluded in the fourth sentence. The touncil_agr ed to include the word "parking" in that sentence. Page 198 Councilmrmber Renzel referred to the third paragraph in the righthand column commencing °An innovative approach to the parking problem.. e' and said in reading the Cates Report she fob that Stanford is having nothing but problems with the parking system. She wondered if they should point out that there are problems. Mayor Henderson said there were things throughout the Plan going on which have problems. The system is operating and it is innovative. Councilmember Fletcher referred to the 'last paragraph, lefthand column, w..••s . and said -that the Downtown Parking. Manage e, t Plan showed that 1.3 percent of the employee road the bus, 1.7 percent road Southern Pacific, for a total of 3 percent. Those who walked and bicycled totalled 7.4 percent. Those figures effect the amount of panting that is needed and she old like to see same reoado ng to address that. Mayor He rson said that as he understood the sentence, even if 15 percent of the trips are diverted to transit or other forms of transportation, there will be. a :substantial shortage of ,par king spas. Mr. Schreiber said the statement was really a problem statement rather than a goal or objective statement. He wasn't sure this was the correct place to add in an objective or a goal. Councilmember Brenner said she found the statistic astonishing and gratifying and it's at least as worthwhile mentioning that statistic as it is mentioning Stanford's success in diverting automobile rides. She said she would like to see the statistic included as a matter of information. She said she was referring to the figures Councilmember Fletcher just gave from the Downtown Parking Management Plan. Mayor Henderson said he would like to delete the reference in the top paragraph, lefthand column, which refers to Hewlett-Packard's 45 van pools. They don't know how many they will have later and maybe other companies have van pools. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Brenner, to delete the reference to the 45 van pools. Councilmember Fletcher said she felt it was a significant number and deserved mentioning. MOTION FAILED: The ration to delete reference to the 45 van pools failed on the following vote:: AYES: Brenner, Renzel, Henderson NOES: Eyer'ly, Fletcher, Levy, Witherspoon ABSTAIN: Fazzino ABSENT: Sher (Vice Mayor Sher arrived at 8:50 p.m.) Councilmember Levy referred to the paragraph at the top of the righthand column, last sentence, and said he would like to delete the words "on mass transit" and add the phrase, "by other than automobile." MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Fletcher, to delete 'or mass transit': and add ''by other than automobile" so that the sentence reads: "However, 30 percent of all trips by other than automobile would make the current spaces adequate..." NOTION PASSED: The motion passed on unanimous voice vote. Councilmember Levy referred to the paragraph regarding the Delabarton Bridge in the lefthand column and said he felt it was predictive of a little too much door. He said he would like to add a statement to that paragraph. MOTION: Councilmember Levy saved, seconded by Renzel , to add the statement: "unless ameliorating program such as express transit lanes and car and van pooling can be implemented." Councilmember Brenner said she thought that was a vain hope. Mayor Henderson said even though he wanted to do those things, he didc't think that would end the traffic problem. Vice P4y0r Sher suggested wording which said some little relief • might be provided by these measures to indicate a goal rather than a suggestion to solving the problem. Mayor Henderson - noted that, again, this is a prob/em statement and the intent is not to propose solutions or goals. Mr. Knox said that perhaps "problem statements" was too yarrow a phrase to use. The section is headed "Existing Conditions and Trends," He said that staff would have to note that it has done a poor job in in- dicating in the retyped version the outline format of these various sections. Policies are commitments to do something, whereas the pro- grams specifically describe how to achieve those commitments. If the Council can keep that in mind, it may be helpful. He agreed there was some confusion by trying to put goals into problem statements. Councilmember Levy said he felt it was important to forecast what might happen if Palo Alto is able to implement programs it would like to. He said he liked Vice Mayor Sher's suggested wording. MOTION RESTATED: Councilor Levy moved, seconded by Renzel, to add the following wording to the fifth paragraph, lefthand column: "Some relief, however, may come from programs such as express transit lanes and car and van pooling." MOTION PASSED: The motion to add the sentence to the paragraph passed on the following vote: AYES: Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Reraei, Sher NOES: Eyerly, Brenner, Witherspoon Pam Councilmember Fletcher referred to Program 1 at the bottom of the left- hand column and said she woneered how much more reliably buses could run. She had checked with the Transit Agency and reliability is now at 99.1 percent, among the highestin the nation. MOTION: Couelcilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Levy, to change the wording to read: "Encourage transit use by having buses run reliably and more frequently." MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher, Wi thers poon NOES: Fazzino Councilmember Fletcherreferred to Program 2 and the list of public transit systems and said she would like to add Southern Pacific to the list. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher removed, seconded by Renzel, to add Southern Pacific to the list of public transit systems. MOTION PASSED: The Motion passed unanimously. Counci Ime ber Fletcher referred to the paragraph under Program 4 and noted that the first -stage construction work on the University Avenue center is scheduled for completion by raid -1980. She felt that warding needed to be updated to say "in early 1981." The next sentence says that construction of the California Avenue center will not occur until 1981 or 1982, and she felt 1981 should be deleted. In the third paragraphs under Program 5, she suggested that the wards be changed to indicate that the Transit District "is explorinu" the possibility of reserving one or more exclusive bus lanes on some roadways. Under Program 7, she said she had problems with the reference to "freeways and expressways," and she would like to change the wording to support high -occupancy vehicles lanes on only Dumbarton Bridge. Mayor Henderson said an alternative would be to support the use of exclusive bus lames and hiloh-eccupanoy vehicle lanes on existing freeways and expressways* without expansion. 302 10113/& Councilmember Fletcher agreed although she said the happening. Mr. Knox suggested that they look at that in tandem on page 19E. There may also be other places in the to high -occupancy vehicles. couldn't see that with Program 19 text which speak Councilmember Levy asked if what Mayor Henderson was saying was he would support exclusive bus lanes, high -occupancy vehicle lanes, if it meant not increasing the total number of lanes on the freeway. He would prefer to use specific language which addresses that. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Brenner, the minor word changes under Program 4 and Program 5, and that wording under Program 7 be added after "Dumbarton Bridge" to say "where this can be done without adding to the total number of lanes available for traffic or presently in use." Councilmember Eyerly asked if the thrust of the motion meant that Councilmember Fletcher wasn't supporting Program 19. He said he supported Program 19 and therefore couldn't support the thrust of the notion. Councilmember Levy said Program 19 does have to be spelled out because that's an exception to the rule. TIOH PASSED: The nation passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner-, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher, Witherspoon NOES: Eyerly, Fazzino Page 190 Mayor Henderson referred to the statement preceding Programs 8 and 9 which stated there were three programs. He assumed that should say two programs. Councilor Fletcher referred to Program 9 and said she would like to delete the word "needy." The statement does not say that it has to be subsidized special transportation. There are handicapped people who can afford to pay the full cost, but they have no lift -operated van or other type of service available. They should be providedthe special transportation service at cost if they can afford it. In essence they have already said that on page 19A where it talks about Project Mobility. Mr. Noguchi said the word "needy" in reference to Program 9 refers basically to the guidelines established for Project Mobility and the to income requirements. !Mayor. Henderson asked if they could say "provide subsidized special transportation." Councileember Fletcher said the thrust of her proposal is to make that service available also to those who have the means of paying for it. Mayor Henderson said he felt they were talking about tee different things and maybe they needed another program. He asked if she meant the City was to provide the transportation services for seniors and the handicap. Councilmember Fletcher replied thah t at this poiet t the City is the one which owns a van with a lift, but she wouldn't ,sake it a condition that it has to be the City. At present, there is no other service for a handicapper person. 303 10/13/80 Mr. Knox said he felt they needed to read Program 9 keeping in mind the paragraph before and after it. In the preceding paragraph it talks about the existing County transit service not being sufficient to meet all transportation needs, which leads to this program. The paragraph that follows Program 9 talks about supplemental transportation services for needy senior citizens and handicapped persons who are not able to use the existing bus system. The whole thrust is to talk about a level of transportation service beyond what the County provides. So far the Plan has stated and the programs have pursued City subsidy only for the needy seniors and for the needy handicapped. If they want to go beyond that in the programs that is okay but then they will he facing up to some other means of carrying out that program than Project Mobility. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Levy, to add the following wording to Program 9: "and at market rate for those senior citizens and handicapped persons able to pay." MOTION FAILED: The motion failed on the following vote: AYES: Fletcher, Levy, Witherspoon NOES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, Henderson, Renzel, Sher MOTION: Councilmember- Fletcher moved, seconded by Brenner, to add a new Program 9A to read: "To encourage the County Transit District and private transportation coa:~panies to provide special transportation services to seniors and the handicapped not eligible for Project Mobility." Councilmetmber Levy asked if this implied that this wood have to be done through a City -run project or that it could be done by a private company which complied with the concept Councilrember Fletcher had in mind. Counciimerber Fletcher replied that at present the City is the only one that has the equipment, but she didn't want to licit it to the City. MOTION PASSED: The motion to add Program 9A passed unanimously. Councilmeaber Fletcher said she would like to add a program for the City to explore the feasibility of instituting a jitney service in Palo Alto to improve non -private automobile transportation. A jitney service can be a sort of cross between a taxi and a bus or about anything you want to set it up to be, Mayor Henderson noted that they now had three programs under the first paragraph in the iefthand column, so the 'three" in the text is now correct. MOTION: Counci lmember Fletcher Loved to add a new Program 11A to explore the feasibility of. a jitney service. • The.motion died for lack of a second. Cosancil r Fletcher referred to the righthand colas under "Trafficways," second paragrap, .and said she would like to ,talc out the word ppreferably, MOTION: -Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Menzel, to remove the word "preferably. °- Mayor Henderson said he had a•profiler with that because he preferred the widening -of Alma to increase safety and providing left turn -lanes. He wouldn't want to totally elietinat+e:.ery widening such as the one on Alma. MOTION FAILED: The motion to remove the word the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Sher, Renzel NOES: E,verly, Henderson: Fazzino, Levy, "preferably" failed on Witherspoon Councilmember Fletcher referred to the last paragraph in the righthand column and asked that the sentence read that the Dumbarton Bridge is scheduled to be completed in 1985. Actually the bridge will be completed before the approach road is done. Councilmembers agreed to incorporate that change. Councilmeaaber Renzel referred to the last sentence in the righthand column on Page 190 and the top of Page 19E. She felt some of the text was extraneous. MOTION: Councilmenber Renzel moved, seconded by Fletcher, to delete the text starting with: "East Palo Alto officials....." through the sentence "However, no agreement was reached en modifying the approach road," on page ISE. MOTION PASSED: The motion to delete the wording passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel, Sher, Witherspoon NOES: Eyerly MOTION: Councilrnember Fazzino moved, seconded by Renzel, to add the wording: "Palo Alto continues to oppose a southern approach. The City will work to enact any and all plans to eliminate any intrusion of Dumbarton Bridge traffic onto Palo Alto streets," which replaces the text just deleted, Vice Mayor Sher clarified that "by southern approach" meant one that ties into Palo Alto streets. He felt that should be made clear. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously. Cotncilme ber Pinner said her comments related to a concern about a program on 19Gz Program 29, which she felt more appropriately belonged on Page 1Q under Traffic. She would like Program 29 to read: "Reduce through -traffic from traversing residential streets," and put it on Page 190 as a new Policy 3A. In place of Program 29 have a new program which reads: "Reduce employee or commute related parking in residential neighborhoods." Mayor Henderson wondered if the proposed Policy 3A shouldn't be a program. If it's a pr~' icy, there will have to be programs under it. Mr. Knox clarified that a policy is a commitment to do something. There is sore confusion because goals and objectives tend to be used inter- changeably with the word "policies." A programs describes how to achieve that policy. Thee is often more than one program to implement a policy. Same programs will - implement more than one policy. The programs need not be greatly detailed in the Plan; for example, the details of operating the OMR program are 95% elsewhere. M yor Henderson said that, the're:6ore, Program 29 is really a policy. MOTION: Councilmember Brenner moved, seconded by Renzel, that Program 29 on page 19& be put on page 190 as a new Policy 3A to read: "Reduce through -traffic fro traversing residential neighborhoods." Councilmember Levy confirmed that the motion changed the word "discourage" to "reduce." He said he felt "reduce" implied a comparison with what is now and he suggested the wording be "strongly discourage." Councilmember Brenner said that wording was acceptable. Mayor Henderson felt those words weakened the motion. Councilmember Brenner said she agrees and would keep the word "reduce." Councilrrher Eyerly said he presumed that "through -traffic" is commuter through -traffic. Councilmember Brenner replied not necessarily. The College Terrace area is a good example. The traffic from which they were suffering was not necessarily all commute traffic. A great deal of it was simply traffic getting from the Campus to the industrial Park. Councilmember Eyerly said that may be true but there are neighborhoods not like College Terrace where people have to get out of their neighborhoods and that traffic can't be reduced. Councilmember Brenner said she felt it was understood that it's not an easy thing to do. Councilmember Eyerly asked if staff interpreted the word "through" the saute as Councilmember Brenner is interpreting it? Air. Knox replied that he understood the interpretation of the word to discourage unnecessary traffic in residential neighborhoods. Councilmember Eyerly asked about Hamilton Avenue and the through traffic of the people who live there; they had no way to get out of the neighbor- hoods except on Hamilton. He considered that through traffic. Mr. Knox said he recalled there was a mixture; they had 40 percent commuter traffic on Hamilton and the other percentage was neighborhood --generated It was coming from within Crescent Park. That is through traffic. Councilmember Eyerly said he didn't think they could support the policy unless they planned to isolate some of these people in the neighborhoods. Councilmember Brenner said her concept of through traffic on Hamilton Avenue is the traffic which comes from University Avenue (the apartment group on bell Road in East Palo Alto) which instead of going around on Frontage Road to get, for example, to Stanford go through Hamilton Avenue. They take a shortcut through a residential neighborhood when a peripheral route is available. The Policy doesn't say prohibit through traffic., it just says to reduce it. MDT1O$ PASSED: The motion to add Policy 3A passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Levy, Reenze ; Witherspoon NOES: Eyerly, Fazzina, Henderson, Sher Vice Mayor Sher- said in the letter from David Schram there was a suggested change relating to the signing of ' neighborhood streets to eliminate traffic. He ' said be would like staff to Est. They have tried to do that underthe grid system with stop signs and street closures. Mr. Knox said staff felt it was a good policy statement and he felt that the new Policy 3A says basically the same thing. If the statement is put in, it would be a Policy and they would have to come up with programs. Some of tie programs are th the Urban Design section. The Council recessed from 9:35 to 9:50 p.m. 306 10/13/80 Page 19E Mayor Henderson said that in all his service on the Council the issue of Willow Road has bothered his the most in terms of a need which seems obvious and something that is not being responded to. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, to delete the sentence on the bottom of the iefthand column commencing "An extension of a two-lane Willow Road..." and insert the wording: "A widened Willow Road and an extension from Arboretum Road to El Camino Real will help relieve the aggrivated traffic conditions on Willow Road, Aeborettm and in the Stanford Shopping Center parking lot. Any connection of Willow Road to El Casino Real will not include a connection to Alga Street." Councilmember Witherspoon ascertained that they were talking about is the policy of widening the road and which does not necessarily involve Stanford's paying for it. Mr. Abrams said he felt it was really a question of what the road serves. At the time the matter was placed before the Superior Court Judge, the records reflect the concern about at least the potential impact upon the Shopping Center, in particular, and the ability of the road to serve the Center by being widened. At this point, he said he mould have `o continue to advise Councilmembers Witherspoon and Sher not to participate. Councilrerber Fletcher quoted from a staff report on the two-lane extension, dated October 5, 1978: "Provision of linkage to El Camino Real will cause Sand Hill Road to become the preferred route for many drivers despite the existing congestion. Congestion and delays would increase with this additional burden until some equalibriurrn point with Sand Hill Road would no longer provide travel time short of ot'.ter parallel routes." In other words, it isn't going to help. Mayor Henderson noted that he moved the reference to two lanes; staff very much supported the original widening and extension and in fact the Council approved that. This is a widened Willow Toad; he did not say two lanes. Councilmember Renzel said that all the discussion regarding widening mild extension is irrelevant to the policy as it now stands that they are willing to consider reduction of traffic congestion by way of intersection improvements, etc. It seemed to her that all th s language and text about what might help is in fact discussing a policy that was rejected by the Council. She felt it was inappropriate for inclusion in the Plan at this time. She would oppose the motion and make a subsequent motion to delete all the reference to widening and extension and to simply; deal with intersections improvements and what Willow Road serves. MOTION FAILED: The motion to insert the new wording failed on the following vote: AYES: Fazzino, Henderson Eyerly NOES: Brenner, Fletcher, Renzel, Levy NOT PARTICIPATING: Sher, Witherspoon MOTION: Council member Reezel moved, seconded by Brenner, to delete the language at the bottom of the lefthand column coming with, "An extension of a too -lane Willow Road.." and ending with °...a double left turn lane at Santa Cruz/Said Hill/Willow intersection should also be considered," at the top of the righthand column. Counc1lmesseber Brenner said if they get into listing, they could go on and on listing other specific suggestions; deleting is a way, to clean up the text. Mayor Henderson said he would vote against the motion. He might consider eliminating the entire statement and just have a program to relieve traffic congestion on Willow Road. MOTION PASSED: The motion to delete the statement passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Levy, Renzel NOES: Eyerly, Henderson, Fazzino HOT PARTICIPATING: Sher, Witherspoon Councilrnember Levy referred to Program 18 and said he would like to change the word "relieve" to "reduce" traffic congestion on Willow Road. To truly relieve congestion will take some kind of massive change. MOTION: Ccuncilmember Levy moved, seconded by Renzel, to change the word "relieve" to "reduce" in Program 18. MOTION PASSED:: The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel ?4CES: Eyerly NOT PARTICIPATING: Sher, Witherspoon Councilmenber Levy said he had another proposed change for Program 18. Rather than saying that the Willow Road project was inactive in 1980, which implies that it is going to get active again he would like to change to wording so that the statement is more factual. MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Brenner, that she first sentence in the paragraph under Program 18 read: ''The Willow Road widening and road extension improvement project between El Camino Real in Palo Alto and Santa Cruz Avenue in Menlo Park was rejected by the Council in 1979." Mayor Henderson said as long as they are giving facts, he would prefer that it also say that Willow Road was approved by a Counc i l in whatever year it was; it was reaffirmed by the Council in 1978 on a 4-2 votes and as far as an official vote on the original Willow Road approval, it passed and that: sas the last action ever taken on the four -lane road. It did pass by a 2-1 margin. It is not a total picture to just say that it was rejected. MOTION PASSED: The motion to change the wording in the first sentence passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Br n r, Fletcher, Levy, Renzel NOES: 7y, Fazzino„ Henderson NOT PARTICIPATING: Sher, Witherspoon Councilmember Renzel suggested that the next sentence in the paragraph read: "Willow Road still has severe intersection congestion problems 2 MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, sect Brenner, to substitute the word "traffic" with "intersection." NOTION FAILED: The motion to substitute the word "traffic" with "intersection" fair on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Levy, Refuel NOES: Eyerly, Henderson Fazzine, Fletcher NOT PARTICIPATING: Sher, Witherspoon 308 Councilmember Eyerly said he thought all they had been talking about was property titled "Sand Hill Road." Mayor Henderson said he thought that went down in defeat with the road the last time they discussed the issue. Counci]member Eyerly referred to the second paragraph in the righthand column and said that the congestion at Page Mill is a poor condition. MOTION: Councilm+ ber Eyerly moved, seconded by Witherspoon, to delete in the last sentence of the paragraph the words "in the 1976 Plan but has been deleted because of lack of funding," and replace it with the words, "is a long range goal." Mayor Henderson noted that Councilmembers Sher and Witherspoon were now participating. MOTION FAILED: The motion to replace the wording failed on the following vote: . AYES: Eyerly, Fazzino, Witherspoon NOES:. Brenner, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Renzel , Sher Mayor Henderson said they should change, however, the wording to say that the intersection was improved in 1980 rather then to be improved in 1980. Councilr ber Fletcher referred to Program 19 and said she had trouble with the whole paragraph commenting with "Widening of Bayshore Freeway..." She felt the whole tone is that the Council would really like to see eight lanes on U.S. 101 and 280. She didn't think that was Council's intent. She said she would like to make it clear that Council is in opposition and suggested adding to the end of the paragraph that the Council is opposed to additional lanes on 101 and 280. Councilmember Reuel said she had marked that page too since it did sound like a support statement for widening 101. Since the program that is being addressed is only if it's widened, there should be reservation of two lanes for high -occupancy vehicles. She suggested the paragraph read simply that because the State announced that it has abandoned widening the freeways from Redwood City to San Jose, it appears that it is unlikely; but if it occurs, the Council supports that those expansions be used for high -occupancy vehicles. It should simply be an explanatory statement for Program 19. MOTION: Mayor Henderson movedt seconded by Witherspoon, to eliminate the first paragraph under Program 19. Cduncilmemter Witherspoon questioned aaether Program 19 even needed to be included. Mayor Henderson replied it still is a speci fc situation and one being talked about: Councils Fletcher a !eed that the issue lz in the Corridor Evaluation. WIN PASSED. The anion to delete the paragraph passed unanimously. Council or Fletcher referred to the last paragraph in the righthand column and asked whatever happened to the bike program? She was Particularly troubled with the words, "-Perhaps the best payoff" when bicycles weren't included in the list. Mr. Knox said that bicycles were covered under Policy 10 on Page 196. This language is specifically relating to pra ting car, van and bus pals in Pragrwas21 and 22. Councilmembers agreed to delete the words "Perhaps the best nayoff in" with the paragraph to begin, "Congestion relief could be obtained by..." Pate 199FF (Page 19E) Councilmember Renzel referred to the paragraph at the top of the left hand column which states: "By mid -1980, more than 10 Palo Alto employees had established a Transportation Coordinator position to help reduce the use of one -occupant vehicles for commute traffic." She felt that was a rather limp statement and maybe ought to be Program 22A or something which says, "Encourage employers to establish transportation coordinator positions," to be part of the whole promotion of van pools and car pools. MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Brenner, to add a new Program 22A (or Program 23) to state: "Encourage employers to establish transportation coordinator positions to help reduce the use of one - occupant vehicles for commute trips," and eliminate the wording starting with "Sy mid -1930,..." Councilmember Fletcher felt there should be some recognition that it is already being done by some employers. ?ir, Knox suggested that the paragraph be left in as an explanatory statement and put in the program that was moved. Councilmember Renzel said there is a lot of language in the Plan that is descriptive of the current state of affairs without, really supporting the programs in a more direct way, and that language competes with the really important language in the Plan. She said she was willing to separate her motion into two parts for voting purposes. FIRST PART OF THE MOTION FAILED: The part of the motion to delete the paragraph failed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Renzel, Witherspoon NOES: Eyerly, Fazzino, Henderson, Levy, Sher, Fletcher SECOND PART OF THE MOTION PASSED: The part of the motion to add a new Program passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel, Sher, Witherspoon NOES: Levy Councilmember Witherspoon said her cent may not relate directly this specific page, but throughout the discussion they have been talking about traffic and no where are they addressing the energy crisis. She said she didn't have any specific language to, propose but she could work on i t . MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Henderson, to direct staff to draft language for the Plan which addresses the energy crisis. Counc t 1 e ber Witherspoon noted that she felt the language should be included at the beginning of the section under objectives. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Fazzino referred to the first paragraph under Policy 8 and said he would like to add a statement, "That the City of Palo Alto supports adoption of a state-wide auto inspection maintenance program to reduce motor vehicle emission." 3 1 G 10/13/80 MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Renzel, to add under Policy 8: "The City of Palo Alto supports adoption of a statewide auto inspection maintenance program to reduce motor vehicle emission." Vice Mayor Sher said given the controversy which was generated in the last several weeks in the Legislature which really relates to the kind of inspection maintenance program to be adopted, whether it would be privately operated through service stations or publicly operated through State systems, gust to put the statement in doesn't really tall the whole story, His position was that if they are going to have one, it ought to be effectively managed and it ought to produce better air quality. Councilmember Fazzino said he believed that an effective inspection maintenance program can do the job and he wanted to state that the City's policy is to support such a program, and he would l'nclude. the words "properly managed and effective." He said he would also like to make the statement a program under Policy 8. MO rite RESTA ED: Ccunci lmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Renzel, to add a new frogram under Policy 8 which states: "The City of Palo Alto supports adoption of a properly managed and effective statewide automobile inspection maintenance program to reduce motor vehicle emission." Councilmember Levy said he assumed thatone of their objectives was to eliminate inate repetition in the Plan. He felt they didn't gain any impact by repeating the Policy 3 statement in the following paragraph. In fact, they night lose impact by doing that because some people start to question what the Council is trying to get at. He felt the Policy statement itself was strong enough. Councilmember Brenner said that inasmuch as the State has been heavily criticized for not having passed a vehicle inspection law, she felt it was appropriate that the Council pinpoint it as a specific recommendation that the Legislature do something about it. Councilmember Renzel said she felt the proposed action was quite appropriate and it is something for major consideration by the State both in temps of air quality and in terms of funding. MOTION PASSED: The motion to add the new program under Policy 8 passed on the following vote: ,YES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel, Sher NOES: Levy, Witherspoon Councilmember Fazzino referred to the third paragraph, lefthand column, and the sentence commencing, "When new or expanded developments..." and suggested inserting the word "required* in the last l e ne to say that planned transportation, programs should be a required part of the review process. Counci lme hers agreed to accept the propoeed word insertion. Councilmember Fletcher referred to the second paragraph, lefthand column, beginning "'Both the City and the employers..." and said she would like to add the words "or leased from the State RIDES program," to the end of the fourth sentence in the paragraph. Councilors agreed to accept the additional wording. 3 1;1 10/13/80 Councilmember Fletcher referred to Policy 9 and said she would like to add a new program. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Witherspoon, to add a new program to Policy 9 which states: "Encourage employers to provide a transportation allowance in lieu of free parking." Councilmember Fletcher said she had put in the packet recently articles from the San Jose Mercury which go into detail about this subject. She quoted from an editorial in the Mercury: "Instead of rewarding workers for driving to the job, why not pay theft an extra $10-$15 a week to use alternate transportation." She quoted from a report by a professor at UCLA: "For example in 1975 the Canadian government began charging employees for parking and within a month, one out of five federal employees quit driving to work alone." She felt this was a very worth- while concept. Employers are incurring costs in providing the parking and they could turn those costs into an allowance for employees, Councilmember Eyerly said he didn't think the matter was clear, He didn't know that employers were all providing free parking now. He felt the discussion of that policy might wait until they talk about the Downtown Parking Management Plan. Councilmember Fletcher said she wouldn't want to leave out the industrial areas and she really wasn't thinking of Downtown specifically. She said she also had the City as an employer in wind. Mayor Hsinderson suggested that they say "in lieu of free or low cost parking (or inexpensive parking).,' Councilmember Fletcher said she would change her motion to include ''or inexpensive" parking, Councilmember Renzel said she felt they needed to understand all the implications of such a program before they agree to any kind of program. She generally agreed with the concept, but said she would vote against the motion at this time. MOTION PASSED: The motion to add a new program to Policy 9 which states: "Encourage employers to provide a transportation allowance in lieu of free or inexpensive parking" passed on the following vote: AYES: Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Sher, Witherspoon NOES: Eyerly, Brenner, Renzel Councilmember Renzel re€eerr;e 1 to the fourth paragraph, lefthand column, and suggested that the last sentence in the paragraph read: "These include substitution of landscaped reserves for required parking." Councilmembers agreed to incorporate the suggested change. Councilmember Renzel said she had a question under "Mid -Range Actions" in the righthand column. Mayor Henderson reminded her they were not going to discuss that section of the Plan tonight which relates to the Downtown Parking Management Plan. Mrs Knox said he felt it wes important to point out that the Council did adopt a Downtown Parking Management Plan in 1978 and what the Council will be dealing with on October 20 is the implementation of some of those policies. Page 19G Mayor Henderson said this is where they should put in Councilor Brenner's suggestion re Program 29 to reduce employee or commute related parking in residential neighborhoods. 312 10/13/80 1 MOTION: Councilmember Brenner moved, seconded by Levy, that Program 29 read: "Reduce employee or commute related parking tin residential neighborhoods." MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Fletcher referred to Program 25 and suggested the word "encourage" be changed to "require." MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Henderson, to change the word "encourage" to "require." Vice Mayer Sher asked if that meant on every project. Mayor Henderson said it meant any time it appears that not all the required parking will be needed, it will be required to be held in landscape reserve, Mr. Schreiber said staff had concerns that the requirement would lead to modification of the zoning ordinance. Staff's experience is that most developers often don't feel the need for the parking, they are willing and eager to put it into reserve because it is a lot cheaper. MOTION WITHDRAWN: Councilmember Fletcher, with the approval of the second, withdrew her motion. Councilmember Fletcher referred to Policy iO_and said she liked the suggestion in Mr. Schrom's letter which said, "The use of bicycles will be increased by providing secure bike parking, shower facilities at work places and employer paid travel time, educating the motorists to the rights of cyclists and to the legal and leelluio responsibility to protect cyclists by providing protection in the foam of bicycle boulevards..." She said that actually this paragraph was a little involved and some of the things are already covered so she wouldn't pursue it. Councilmember Fletcher referred to Policy 10 and the items listed under "Further incentives include,"; and said she would like to make a minor word change to clarify the statement under the second incentive. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by .Renzel, that the second sentence under the second incentive read: "For example, a bike carry -on policy for buses and trains, bike lockers at SCCTD park -and - ride lots and at SP stations so that commuters ..." POTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously. Councilwember Renzel asked about credit for bicycle parking; she thought they already had some sort of provision for that zoning ordinance. She thought the Plan indicates that they ought to do it and haven't yet done it. She thought it should be made clear that it was current policy. Councilmember Renzel said she didn't quite understand what Program 26 means in tens of minimizing the amount of paving of lots. Mr. Knox replied that staff thinks that Program 26 is a leftover of the former plan and if the Downtown Parkin Mangement program is left in the Plan, then this statement is redundant. Councilmember Renzel said then short-term parking is the public parking that is turned over heavily as opposed to employee parking where people stay all day. 313 10/13/80 Councilmember Witherspoon said there was really no logical connection between Program 25 and Program 26. She suggested that the wording for Program 26 be moved to below the explanatory paragraph, or Program 26 could be put in after the first sentence in the paragraph. Mr. Knox said maybe it could be solved by putting in another heading such as "Assessment District" to separate the programs from those regarding Downtown Parking. He would suggest the breakpoint be at Program 26. Councilmembers agreed to insert the new heading between, Programs 25 and 26 and leave the explanatory paragraph as is. Pam, Councilmember Fazzino referred to the first paragraph under Program 35 and said he would like to add a sentence to the end of that paragraph. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Renzel, to add the following sentence to the paragraph under Program 35: "The City will work closely with the PTA and School District traffic councils to determine appropriate traffic alternatives when closure occurs.'' MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commissioner Cullen noted that reference to working with the PTA and the School District was contained elsewhere in the Plan. She said she was appalled with the way Council was going through the Plan paragraph by paragraph as if the Planning Commission didn't exist. Perhaps they should have have a joint Planning Commission/Council meeting to update the Plan. She felt discouraged. Mayor Henderson said he could appreciate her concern. Councilmember Renzel confirmed that the Palo Alto Bikeways neap mentioned on this page was covered in another section of the Plan and has been incorporated Councilmember Levy said he would like to add another program, which might be Program 34A and which responds to concerns from those living north of Embarcadero and the problems they have had in bicycling to Palo Alto High School and the fact that there aren't any safe ways of getting across Embarcadero close to Palo Alto High School. MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved to add a new Program 34A: "Safety of the bicycle access to Palo Alto High School be students living north of Embarcadero should be addressed." Mr. Noguchi replied that staff is already dealing with that particular problem and they are on their way to resolving it. Mayor Henderson said he felt Program 34 already addressed the problem, and the motion just pinpoints one of the problem areas. MOTION WITHDRAWN: Councilmemder Levy withdrew his motion. Councilmember Fletcher said she would like to add to the paragraph in the lefthand column which begins with 'Park Boulevard now...° the words, ''and it should be extended to link up with the El Camino Park bicycle path." Mayor Henderson said he felt that was a very strong statement. C.ouncil er Eyerly asked if it was in the Bicycle Master Plan. Mr. Noguchi said it was included in the Bicycle Master Plan. Councilmember Fletcher referred to the sentence, "Cowper would be a logical alternative to Middlefield and said she would like to add "or Bryant" to the sentence. Councilmembers agreed to incorporate the change. Councilmember Fletcher noted the next sentence commencing, "Waverley has been proposed as a bike boulevard..." and proposed that the sentence be deleted as the statement serves no purpose. Councilmembers agreed to delete the sentence. Councilmember Fletcher referred to the Paragraph beginning with "Other potential bike boulevard routes are along California Avenue except through the business district," and proposed that everything in the paragraph after that sentence be deleted. She said it wasn't a very practical bicycle boulevard route. Councilmember agreed to delete the language,.. Councilmember Fletcher requested that "and multi -family developments" be added to the end of the statement under Program 33. Councilmembers agreed to add the words to the end of the Program 33 statement. Councilmember Fletcher referred to Program 36 in the righthand column and said there is an increasing amount of employment development on East Bayshore and access to it other than by car is very dangerous on the south end. She would like to see th€ wording in Program 36 say, "Develop walkways and improved bicycle routes in industrial areas through an Assessment District." That changes the word "Stanford" to ::industrial." Councilmembers agreed to change the word "Stanford to "industrial" in Program 36. In the paragraph under Program 36, Councilmember Fletcher said she would like to include reference to bus bays and indentation in the curbing for bus stops. Mr. Knox asked for clarification. He understood that in the paragraph minder Program 36 they were to change the text to refer to the industrial areas and also add something in that paragraph about bus bays. Councilmember Levy said this section deals with bicycles and wondered if if would be confu s i ng to put bus bays in. Counc i t mee ber Witherspoon asked who would pay for the bus bays; who is going to require them. Mr. Noguchi said when you deal with pathways along the Stanford Industrial Park in particular, you'll be dealing with the bus bay anyway. The proposed wording can be added, but he felt it more appropriately belonged back in the traffic section. Councilmember Fletcher said she o ld like to add a program, perhaps Program 33A, to require shovers in new developments/employment centers. Planning Commissioner Cullen said that for most of the developments that have come before the Commission staff has negotiated for showers. She felt the discussion was getting off the point. Councilis supposedly reviewing the Planning Commission's recommendations and not rewriting the Plan. Councilmember Fletcher said she did forward her recommendations to the Planning Commission at the time they met to discuss the Plan and this was one of the recommendations stye, made. Councilmember Witherspoon said she had a comment she would like to make under the Employment element since she had been unable to attend the earlier Council meeting when it was discussed. A lot of thought has been given to the jobs/housing ratio and in several places the Plan states the number of jobs estimated and the number of households, but Correction nowhere is there a statement en the number of jobs per household. She See Pg488 suspected that the census is going to show that they have probably 1.5 12/15/80 or 1.6 employed people per household in Palo Alto and that significantly changes the conclusions drawn from the jobs/housing imbalance. She would like to see a statement of that ratio in the Employment element of the Plan. MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Levy, that the Employment element of the Plan include wording about the ratio of jobs per household. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Fazzino said he would urge Cot_•ncilmembers to put any comments they have regarding proposed changes to the Plan in writing and Council can then act upon the written proposals. Councilmember Reuel said she worked hardpreparing a list for the Mayor of the items she wanted to speak to and she has tried to stick to that list and she said she felt it was asking a lot to ask everyone to re - prepare another list at this late date. NEXT MEETING RE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMEHOMENTS The next special meet to discuss Comprehensive Plan Amendments was scheduled for Thursday, October 30, 1980, at 7:30 p.m. ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION The Council adjourned to Executive Session re personnel at 11:00 p.m. F I NAL ADJOURNMENT The Counciladjourned at 11:30 p.m. ATTEST, 3 1 b 10/13/80 APPROVED: