HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-04-17 City Council Summary Minutes1
CITY
COUNCIL
MINUTES
Regular Meeting
April 17, 1978
ITEM
Minutes of February 27, 1°78 and March 13, 1978
Oral Communications
Executive Session
Consent Calendar Referral Items
City Flower Beds (Referral to Finance and Public Works)
Consent Calendar - Action Items
2730 Watson Court (formerly 2450 Eest Beyshore Road) --
Planning Commission Recommends Re Dai Associates, Inc.
to Amend P -C Resolution Allowing Sala of Beer
1185 Skyline Boulevard -- Planning Coymission Recommends
re Application of Nathaniel Sherrill for Extension of
Time to File a Parcel Map
Bicycle Ordinance --Municipal Code Amendment -
College Terrace Neighborhood --Yale Street
Adoption of 1976 Plumbing Code
1501 Page Mill Road —Hewlett-Packard Planning Commission
Recommends re Building Height Approval
Adjournment to Executive Session
'ianning Commission Recommends re Regional -Wide Task
Force to Set Goals for Housing as Percentage of Jabs
Acquisition of Utility Distribution System --Barron Park.
Silva Avenue/Silva Court and East kayshore/Laura Lane
Councilmember Henderson re Mr. Frank Manfredi
Mayor Sher re Closure of Termen School
Cancellation of April 24, 1978 Council Meeting
Adjournment to Executive Session in Memory of Serge Morrell
Civic Center Deterioration
Final Adjournment
CITY
OF
PALO
ALTO
PAGE
8 5 7
857
857
858
858
8 5 8
858
858
858
8 58
859
859
8 7 0
876
870,
879
879
8 7 9.
879
&80
880
856
417!7*
Regular Meeting
April 17, 1978
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date at 7:30 p.m.
in a regular meeting with Mayor Sher presiding.
PRESENT: Brenner, Carey (arrived 7:50 p.m.), Clay (arrived 9:50 p.m.)
Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Sher, Witherspoon
MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 271978
•Vice Mayor Brenner asked to have verification from the tape of the
February 27 meeting to hear whether or not she had used the word 'preferred"
as given on line five of paragraph two on page 737.
MOTION: Councilmember Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, that the
minutes of February 27 be approved_as__qual_ifled-and with the Clerk to
respond to Mrs. Brenner's question. The motion passed on a unanimous
voice vote, Councilmembers Carey and Clay absent.
MINUTES OF MARCH 13. 1978
eseeemeameeeeeepamemeeeeea
Councilmember Fazzino referred to page 767, last paragraph, third line,
asking that the last part of the sentence read, "...because of prior
'statements, some might feel uncomfortable doing so, and if other Councilmambers
desire to take an official position on the issue he would be willing to
hear what each individual had to say on the subject."
Councilmember Fazzino asked that on page 7674 last paragraph, the sentence
beginning on the third line read instead "The basic negative point of
the initiative was that it subverted the Council's right to manage, and
the citizen's right to be represented in negotiations."
MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Fletcher, that Council
approve the minutes of March 13, 1978, as corrected. The motion passed
on a unanimous voice vote, Counci lmembers Carey and Clay absent.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. Jere Thompson, Jr., 664 Lomita Court, Stanford, told Counci1me bers
and the assembled audience that an event which would benefit a
drive for funds for Muscular Dystrophy would occur on Stanford
Caroms April 28• -an eight -hour dame -a -thou. The Associated Students
of Stanford University (ASSU), Black Students' Union, StaAfor•d
Chaparral, Council of presidents, Inter -Fraternity Council, Sorority
Council, Radio Station rISU, Senior Class Presidents and the Stanford
Daily ware sponsoring the event. Stanford Students across the
nation would be participating in "this effort to raise $10,000."
The zoney would go toward finding a cure for Muscular Dystrophy.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
1_ J -
f ,yor Sher reminded Count i l that at some time during the meeting it
would be necessary for Coui.:il to meetin an Executive Session on personnel
matters and litigation. He hoped that Council business would be concluded
before it took place.
857
4/17!78
CONSENT CALENDAR
Referral Items
CITY FLOWER BEDS (Referral to
tinanceand v'tbi is works I.ommi ttee) (CMR:239:8)
Staff recommends that its report be referred to the Finance and Public
Works Committee for consideration during the review pf the Parks and
Open Space Budget.
Action Items
2730 WATSON COURT formerly 2450 East
Da snore Itoadj_• P r» � n
?WS It ASSMA uES rr�.'
t) � p -c Rr�SoLr?0N A E
The Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval of the application
of DGW Associates Inc., to amend the P -C resolution applying to 2370
Watson Court, "Supreme Court," to allow sale of beer on premises.
RESOLUTION 5541 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING
RESOLUTION 5346 TO MODIFY THE DEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR THE P -C DISTRICT KNOWN AS 2370 WATSON
COURT (FORMERLY KNOWN AS 2450 EAST BAYSHORE ROAD)
TO ALLOW THE SALE OF BEER."
1185 SKYLINE BOULEVARD --PLANNING
ION
vi ; r iivi j i .30'Gr'iitoL. UVf5 .3Atlia
The Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval of the application
of Nathaniel Sherrill for an extension of tine to file a Parcel Map for
property at 1185 Skyline Boulevard.
BICYCLE ORDINANCE —MUNICIPAL
rs ea ng)
Mayor Sher said that the ordinance, for first reading, related to the
direction of travel on bike paths.
ORDINANCE OF THE COIL OF THE CITY OF
PALO ALTO AIDING SUBSECTION (C) TO SECTION
10.64.130 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL. CODE
PROM I S I T' NS THE OPERAT I ON Of BICYCLES UPON
BICYCLE PATHS IN DIRECTIONS OTHER THAN
POSTED (first reading)
COLLEGE TERRACE NEiGH8ORHOOO--
TALI s MEET 1cAR:2'4d:8J
Staff recommends that Council 1) approve the closure of Yale north of
College Avenue for a trial period of three months; and 2) find that no
environmental impact will result from the recommended trial project; and
3) approve the resolution which will permit the implementation of the
recommended revisions to the stop sign system as illustrated on Alternate
2, (Exhibit E), and adopt the following resolution:
858
4/17/78
• (sue.
RESOLUTION 5542 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING
RESOLUTION 4291 CHANGING THE CITY-WIDE
STOP INTERSECTION SYSTEM AND MAP."
ADOPTION OF 1976 PLUMBING CODE
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALO ALTO AMENDING CHAPTER 16.08 OF THE PALO ALTO
MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT THE 1976 EDITION OF THE
UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, AND TO MAKE CHANGES THERETO
(First reading)
Robert Booth, City Attorney, explained that the 1976 date merely meant
that it had taken the state a year to review the code, and "it takes
about a year for us (Palo --Alta Building Department) to get ourselves
geared up after the state acts. We'll see the 1979 code in abort 1980."
MOTION: Councilmenber Fazzino moved, seconded by Henderson, that Council
approve the ordinances for first reading, and adapt the resolutions.
The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmerrrbers Carey and Clay
ehCent.
1501 PAGE MILL ROAD--HEWLETTi -PACKARD
Mayor Sher said that some Counc i 1:►e hers were not eligible to participate
in the :!otter of the Hewlett-Packard building height approval: himself
because he was an employee of Stanford University, who was landholder of
the parcel in question, Councilmember Witherspoon because she was also
an employee of Stanford, and Covncil er Fazzino because he was are
employee of Hewlett --Packard. He thought that if Counellmem►ber Clay were
present he would likewise disqualify himself. He said that the City
Attorney had said that it would be possible for them to participate on
the third recommendation of the Planning Commission which had to do with
the imbalance between housing and jobs; at that juncture non -participant
Countilhers wood return to their scats on Council.
Ceuncilmember Fazzino expressed hesitance about leaving the chamber, for
it was not ke rn if a quorum would remain.
Mr. Booth said that in his opinion those who were present constituted a
quorum even though they did not participate in the ratter being considered.
It was sufficient for non -participating Councilcembers to remain in the
anteroom, if they preferred.
!Mayor Sher said he thought approval by a full majority of the entire
Council was not required. A majority of those present and participating
would be sufficient. He turned the chair over to Vice Mayor Brenner.
Vice Mayor Brenner presided.
Counc 3lmember Corey arrived at 7:55 p.m.
Vice Mayor Brenner read the Planning Commission recommendations:
The Planning Commission unaniaously recommends that the final EIR
for the Hewlett-Packard Corporate Headquarters, dated January 27,
1978, as supplemented by additional mitigation measures by the
Architectural Review Board (ARB) on February 16, 1978, is a sufficient
informational document.
859
4/17/78
The Planning Commission, by a vote of 6-1, recommends that the
decision of the Zoning Administrator to approve a height of 45 feet
where 35 feet is otherwise required for the proposed project, be
upheld.
1
The Planning Commission, by a vote of 4-3, recommends that the City
pursue a regional wide task force with respect -to setting goals for
housing as a percentage of the jobs projected in a regional -wide
area, and to attempt to identify appropriate sites for housing
within each of the respective communities.
Vice Mayor Brenner observed that the matter had not been advertised as
an official public hearing on the variance, since that legal 'requirement
had been fulfilled by the Planning Commission; however, it was the
policy of the Council to hear from any member of the -public who wished
to speak on the subject, as it was to place a five-minute limit on the
time given each speaker. She said the sufficiency of the Environmental
Impact Report would be considered first by Council; second, it would
consider the variance. Council would hear first from Chairwoman Anne
Steinberg of the Planning Commission, and staff members.
Anne Steinberg, Chairwoman of the Planning Commission, said the subjects
before the Planning Commission were 1) determination of the sufficiency
of the EIR and 2) the Zoning Administrator's decision to issue the
variance for the ten -foot additional height, from thirty-five to forty-
five feet. Under state guidelines for Environmental Impact Reports the
requirement was not that the report be exhaustive, but that it be a
sufficient docent to that the Planning Commission could make an informed
decision on the appeal before it. With regard to the variance, the only
item for review was the appeal against the ten -foot differential in
height. The appeal did not open up questions of the underlying zoning
or general planning which had been previously decided in the adoption of
the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission had found the Eneiror,ental
Impact Report (EIR) to be sufficient and agreed with the decision of the'
Zoning Administrator to grant the variance. With regard to that, the
Planning Commission had not disagreed that there would be major impact;
but such impacts had been discussed during the preparation of the Comprehensive
Plan and the new Zoning Ordinance. The Comprehensive Plan, Land Use .
Section and the new Zoning Ordinance would permit a larger building
coverage than the 171 percent being proposed at this time. The impact
of the variance was visual more than anything else. That was within the
purview of the Architectural Review Board. The Commission has also
endorsed the proposal by Midpeninsula Citizens for rafr Housing (!4CR)
and recommended that a reg iona l task force be formed to set goals for
housing as a percentage of jobs, and identify sites for such housing.
The task force should include Pity officials, representatives from
industry and coerce end those interested in housing in neighboring
cities, as well as Palo Alto. The Planning Commission thought it Was
appropriate for Palo Alto to take the lead in proposing such a mini -
regional approach, since Palo. Alto is a major employee center. Chain
Steinberg concluded by saying she wanted to advise Council that the
Planning Commission, in its review of the Comprehensive Plan, re';omyr nded
the addition of a new program in the Huusing and Employment section, to
read: 'Housing, or payment in lieu of housing, should be provided in
conjunction with new office, retail, and industrial construction,"
Councii r Eyerly asked how the decision to grant a 10 -foot variance
had been made. He knew the ground sloped at that Page Mill site, which
made exterior heights variable.
850
4/17/78
j.ois Atchison, Zoning Administrator, said that both the building and the
site had prominence and so it had been necessary that a sensitively
designed building be constructed on that particular site. The proposed
building was compact and permitted a maximum of open space, those were
the underlying factors which led to the granting of the variance. Mr.
Eorlich, the architect, could answer why the ten feet were needed, as
opposed to perhaps eight or twelve feet, for example. She thought tee
feet had been the needed additional height to permit the use of sky'ights.
Frank Koch, 1065 Greenwood Avenue, a vice president of Syntex, said he
did not want to oppose the granting of the Hewlett-Packard variance; he
did want to say something about the construction tax, which had been
included in the variance as a mitigating measure. That construction tax
had a very significant potential impact on Syntex. Syntex had developed
72 of its 105 acres in the triangle bounded by Hillview, Arastradero,
and Foothill Expressway. In keeping with its master plan which it had
presented to Palo Alto in the early 1960s, Syntex had kept its commitment
to have an attractive, low -density complex of offices, research laboratories,
and production facilities. The construction tax made one major assumption --
those who create people -density had to pay for it. Syntex employed 1100
people on those developed acres, a density of about 15 per acre, and it:
was the lowest density of any major employer in Palo Alto. In Stanford
Industrial Park, Xerox and Lockheed had densities of 25 and 27 persons
per acre; Hewlett --Packard and Watkins -Johnson had densities of 56 and 57
per acre, Varian had people -density of about 68; EPRI had about 80
employees per acre. Most of the foregoing had developed their sites
fully, or had little unused land remaining, and therefore would not be
adversely affected by a construction tax. Syntexa however, was more
vulnerable, for it might take ten or more years for it to complete its
building program, and would be subject to a construction tax for many
years. Further, it had no assurance that the 66t tax in 1978 might not
be moee in subsequent years, for there were indications that some thought
it was not high enough at present. At the 66t rate it could require
Syntex to pay as much as $600,000, perhaps to go over $1 million were
the tax increased, He asked if it were not unfair and discriminatory
when other employers had to pay little or no tax. Syntex had not been a
major contributor to employee -growth in the community. Also, recent
zoning changes had reduce permissibility for building from 20 percent
to 15 percent coverage on the remaining land. Council's confirmation of
housing, employment and transportation and land use goals in the Comprehensive
Plan seemed to give clear direction to the Planning Commission and
staff, Using variance and Eta procedures to reintroduce such policy
measures seemed to him to be an inappropriate way to make alterations to
a sours and imaginative Comprehensive Plan. Syntex had known at the
outset tt its needs for employees would be moderate and highly specialized.
They had "pro'.+iised Palo Alto and Stanford an attractive and low -density
facility, and they had del i vered on that promise. Syntex had been aware
of the jobs/housing imbalance when they moved here, though some had just
recently discovered its existence. Both Syntex and Stanford University
agreed that Stanford Industrial Park was completely inappropriate for
housing, though Stanford was prepared to build up to 1200 musing units
on its Sand Hill Road site; 1200 housing units would be equal to the
total number of housing sites gilt in Palo Alto since 1970. As an
employer Syntex was aware of the impact of the high cost of housing:
its own job offers had ben refused because of the high cost of housing.
Syntex had supported the efforts of the Stanford-Midpeninsula Urban
Coalition (Si C) to construct more residential units in this area and
it had also assisted the Midpeninsule Citizens for Fair Housing to
eliminate discrimination in rental and purchase of housing; it had also
provided financial support to the San Marcus Foundation, which built,
principally with federal funds, two below -market housing complexes in
Santa Clara and Santa Cruz counties. Syntex had encouraged car-pooling
Bbl
4/17/78
and advocated regular and commute bus service, though, unquestionably,
it had also generated some commute traffic, though it was not crosstown
movement on City streets, for it was mostly north -south traffic on
Highway 280. He asked reciprocal consideration from the City Council of
Palo Alto that Syntex had shown to the City by giving careful consideration
to the effect of the construction tax on its future development in Palo
Alto. He asked that the full Council vote on the issue after it had
been studied thoroughly, and that others in retail, commercial and
industrial activities within the City have an opportunity to express
their views.
Janet Owens, 863 Moreno, vice-president of Midpeninsula Citizens for
Fair Housing (MCFH), said she would briefly summarize main points of
MCFH. She said MCFH had no desire to prevent an increase in jobs, and,
specifically, did not want_ to stop construction of the Hewlett-Packard
Headquarters building. She acknowledged that affording more jobs in the
area, however, would further impact the critical housing situation, and
so it was important, she said,.that housing and job needs be addressed
simultaneously. The process _e"..ii'_ewing up an EIR provided one way of
addressing the issues, and must be used, she said, "to the.extent possible."
MCFH thought it essential that Council approve the EIR for the Hewlett-
Packard building with its provision for mitigation of housing impact --
that was a minimum step toward solving the problem. MCFH had said and
continued to say that the proposed 66at construction tax was inadequate
„to fully address the impact described in the report -a flat dollar
amount would be more and more inadequate as inflation continued." She
asked that that concern be addressed in what MCFH considered an essential
ordinance, which would apply to all new construction. The ordinance
should also provide housing or.sites for housing rather than in -lieu
pyment. She thought a rr jor step would be taken toward resolution of
the housing problem by requiring mitigation for the proposed construction;
it added another tool to the growing array that helped maintain a variety
oi races and income levels in Palo Alto. She said the task force,
formation of which had been proposed by Anne Steinberg of the Planning
Commission, could facilitate resolution of the jobs/housing imbalance in
our area. At present only the housing development industry is a participant,
and more sectors need to he represented. MCFH urged approval of the
Hewlett-Pae kard EIR with its mitigation measure; along with that she
expressed the hope that Council would soon pass an ordinance requiring
-housing impact mitigation from all new office, retail and industrial
development in the City.
Councilor Carey pointed out that -further speakers on the matter of
jobs/housing imbalance would be able to speak to all Councilmembers if
they deferred their consents to the second half of consideration of the
proposed Hewlett-Packard building.
Vice Mayor Brenner said that the legal public hearing before the Planning
Commission had been held earlier. She asked if the proposed task force
was considered a mitigation measure.
Ms. Owens said she would like to review that portion of her remarks
again when the full Council sat.
Gretchen Leland, 3700 Laguna Avenue, expressed dismay at "the superficial
treatment given to the study of the impact of the proposed Hewlett-
Packard headquarters.' She thought an added 1500 employees would have
mediate and detrimental effect on Palo Alto. ;io painless solutions
were in store for relief from the stresses on our Bay Area environment,
she said. She questioned whether or not anyone was listening to the
concerns of Mountain View and Palo Alto residents about where 1500
employees mould live. She stressed that community rights, as well as
property rights, be given consideration. She felt conditions for approval
of the EIR were insulting to Palo Alto residents. The mitigation payment
862
4/17/78
was one-time but the project would be existent for years. She thought
on -site housing should be required in future developments, but the end
solution would only come through less intense development. 'Allowing the
height lirtit to be broken, she found, was "intolerable." She thought
the E(R was preoccupied with justifying the project, and did not honestly
assess the impact of the proposed project on Palo Alto.
David Jeong, 4056 Park Boulevard, asked that the minutes of the Planning
Commission of March 29 be corrected so that the next -to -last sentence on
page 117 read instead, "The Comprehensive Plan discourages massive
single uses through limitations on height and density to correct and
protect surrounding uses and community values.'' He continued that
height was the subject of the variance, and that word "height" had been
deleted from the minutes. With that word restored the following sentence
made sense. He noted that the ARB had no jurisdiction in ruling on the
variance, for the ordinance read "All proceedings pertaining to the
variance should be stayed until the appeal is decided." A judge, Mr.
Jeong said, has ruled that the ARB could rule on other thingt but it
could not rule on the height and the visual effects. He said that the
Planning Commission minutes showed he had asked why the Hewlett-Packard
building did not conform to the present building code. Though other
alternatives had been addressed, he said, somehow that particular one
had been overlooked. He said it had cost $90 to ask the question, and so
far the question had not been answered. He asked why, since the variance
would result in the building being only two feet over the limit, could
not the height limit conform?
He asked Council to consider how the project conformed to the three
criteria for granting a variance, of 1) uniqueness, 2) hardship, and 3)
welfare and convenience. fie considered each himself and found no base
for any. He said he would read a letter from the Planning Department of
March 1, 1978 --City of Mountain View, Planning Department.
Dear Friends: As members of the Environmental Planning.Commission
of the neighb ring city of Mountain View, we are very concerned
at et land use decisions which will have a very definite negative
impact on our co unity. It has come to our attention that Hewlett-
Packard Corporation plans to construct a new corporate headquarters
at the corner of Page Mill Road and Hanover Street, in Palo Alto.
According to the certified Environmental Impact Report the project
will bring 1500 new jobs with at least 1100 heads of households
into the Stanford Industrial Park. We are concerned that the
Hewlett-Packard project will have a negative impact on the entire
area. In particular, since it is likely that many of the new
employees will have to find housing in the southern or central
portions of the count,, many of those employees oyees will add congestion
to Mountain View roads and expressways that connect Palo Alto with
other local comities. In addition, since it appears there will
be little new construction in Palo Alto, particularly for moderate -
income workers, the new employees will be thrust into a houaing
market which is already tight, that is, the search for housing will
drive up home prices and rents in the entire area, including Mountain
View. Though we would have liked to have seer land use policies
which would have prevented construction of this project without
adequate mitigation, we understand that there is nothing that the
Palo Alto Planning Commission can do to force reconsideration of
this particular development. We urge, therefore, that yeu will
develop plans which will prevent this from reoccurring without
substantial public review in the future: (signed)
Mr. Jeong asked Council to consider if the variance would be approved if
the coverage were 40 percent. If Council : carts i der*ed height a good
tradeoff vs. coverage, it should so stipulate by designating a maximum
of coverage. He read from the rehens1ve Plan, "Under the urban
design objectives,, changes should be evoliiated that might occur in the
Community through introduction of massive lend use such as large buildings
(b3
863
4/17/78
1
1
or new transportation corridors." He closed by saying there was r)o
reason why scale should always increase.
Robert Moss, 4010 Orme, said he had attended all the Planning Commission
and ARB meetings, and the two major reasons, he thought, for granting
the variance, were the necessity for skylight to provide internal lighting
that could also be retrofitted with solar panels, and the unusual slope
of the site. The internal lighting was to be augmented by reflected
light off the back side of the angled skylights. He said photqvoltaic
or thermal panels should be installed, but since both kinds of panels
had to be coated, the purported reflection would be diminished, and
there would be little energy conservation. He continued to the questio=n
of slope, using a map from the U.S. Geological Survey, which gave the
altitude of and for every twenty feet of gradation,* i by means of which
necessity for additional height could be determined. He favored the
mitigating feature of the construction tax because it helped not only
the community but also business people, who could not obtain the best
qualified employees because of commute distance and time. He thought
Council ?lad to clearly establish the uniqueness of the request for the
variance, and if another applicant could ask for and receive such a
variance it was not truly unique, and therefore this one should be
denied. He added that r ximuna site coverage limits should be imposed.
Councilmerber Carey noted that Mr. Moss had attended many Comprehensive
Plan meetings, and had joined the discussion about holding growth limits
by limiting commercial and industrial growth. Councilr+tuber Carey held
that limits had been set, and Mr. Moss had returned to Council to say
those limitations were not sufficient, by way ofhis questions and
spoken concerns about mitigation measures toward housing. If the variance
request were withdrawn, would Mr. Moss be satisfied with the proje,.t?
Mr. Noss said "...we have no option but to be satisfied, because it's
only their (Hewlett-Packard) request for the height variance, that opens
the door to the other features." He said his answer to a larger, unasked
question, was that he preferred the first Comprehensive Plan, not the
Comprehensive Plan which had ultimately passed.
Counccilmeiber Carey asked if Mr. Moss objected to the variance specifically,
or the development in general.
Mr. Moss said he objected to both the variance and the development —the
application for the variance afforded a legal means to state a specific
objection, for the project itself met the zoning code.
Patricia Cullen, A,09 Melville, was president of the Palo Alto Civic
League. She spoke for that organization's steering committee. She said
the Hewlett-Packard request for variance had been seen differently
.,.through every level of review." She reviewed the findings that had
been made at different levels. She said that another applicant for such
a variance old be afforded basis for suit, if denied. She asked that
Council "...Welke a clear finding of fact as to the exceptional and
extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property that do not
apply generally to proerty in the same district, as required by our
ordinance," and she asked that a reasonable restriction on lot coverage
be imposed if the variance were granted, to protect all the parties
involved:
Councilmember Eyerly referred to the minutes of the Planning Commission
for March 29, page 127, Mr. Ehrlich had said "1 don't think any portion
exceeds the definition of 35 feet if you ensure from the low point of
the building to the I"gh paint; there's no one point higher than 35
feet. However, the position of the building on the side of a hill
results in a proof with the definition of height, and that results in
the request for the variance." Councilee>anber Eyerly asked Mr. Ehrlich.
to elaborate.
864
4/17/78
��y
Gil Ehrlich, representing Ehrlich, Heft & Rominger, Architects, said one
distinct activity related to the Environmental Impact Report, the'other
related to the variance. He would speak on the variance. His firm had
to submit the proposed building plans to Stanford Land Resources Committee,
which group was "...very, very careful about the type of building that
they permit on a site." On the question of uniqueness, he read from a
letter he had sent with the application for variance to the Planning
Department: "The exceptional circumstances involved relate to a unique
building design where the slope of the roof parallels the slope of the
site, rather than having the roof plane parallel to the floor plane."
Mr. Ehrlich said not the site, but the building, was unique; the attempt
had been to develop a building that had significantly less visual impact
than the existing building. The manner in which height was measured, he
said, was fairly complex, and technical --documents which Council had,
showed the differences between ways of determining height with previous
and present zoning. Using the sawtooth uppermost -portion of the building,
rather than the mass itself, of the building, was an extreme way of
measuring height. With the new zoning ordinance, measure to the average
grade of the pitched roof would bring the height three feet above the
grade. If the grade were run up to the windowsill the building would
then comply with the new zoning ordinance, and there would be no change
of visual affect.
Councilmember Eyerly said he gathered thct the architecturel firm had
accepted the ten -foot height variance as a convenient term for purposes
of discussion, and that the actual height variance was about three feet,
as Mr. Ehrlich had said.
Vice Mayor Brenner said that one consideration was that the City was not
actually operating with the new zoning ordinance yet.
Mr. Ehrlich said that at one time it had been thought that they should
get a definition of height relating to the ordinance from the City
Attorney. Finally the Environmental Impact Report had brcught the
height matter to the fore; rather than take a semi -adversary position
the architectural firm had decided to file for the variance, though, in
hindsight, it might better have pressed for a more adequate interpretation.
f.ounc i imember Henderson said that if Council re-established the requirement
for a contribution to housing for any new industrial or commercial
project and that contribution was in conjunction with the granting of a
variance, a rather difficult -to -follow precedent would be set up. He
asked for a caar,ent on that from staff, -
Robert Booth, City Attorney, said each variance application was to b
judged on its own merits; various types of accommodations were as .ed
for. The proposed housing project, which this particular project might
perhaps culminate in, would then becou.: an ordinance of the City, and
that requirement old have to be met, irrespective of any variance, in
order to meet housing needs as trey arise.
Councilmember Henderson said that if coverage were cut, hypothetically
speaking. from 30 percent to a smaller percentage, that might be a
"...direct relationship for allowing greater height. The Housing contribution
did not, and therefore. since we're not giving ... a mitigation directly
involved with the land use ... are we likely to >e in trouble with the
precedent setting?"
Mr. Booth replied that it was up to the Planning Commission, Council,
and Zoning Administrator to make findings in each individual variance.
There was not a likelihood of the same sat of facts occurring twice.
Councfl»er Henderson asked about an assertion that had been made,
that a judge had rued that the Architectural Review Board could not
rule on a height variance.
665
4/17/78
Mr. Booth replied that Mr. Jeong, one of the parties to the suit, had
made that statement and that "...it was totally incorrect. In fact the
Court has, to date, denied all the relief requested by Mr. Jeong and his
co -plaintiffs, althoueh the case is still pending.... The Architectural
Review Board has not been restrained or otherwise prevented by the Court
from doing anything, and, in fact, has acted and completed the action on
this project, subject to the variance before you tonight and that action
has not been appealed, and so it's final."
Councilmember Henderson observed that the restriction of lot coverage to
171 percent had failed in the Planning Commission by one vote. He asked
Hewlett-Packard's reaction to a restriction to something less than 30
percent, which then might be related to the height variance. that were
Hewlett-Packard's plans for the future?
John Young, 526 Center Drive, president of the Hewlett-Packard Company,
said he saw no tradeoff between the height variance and the mitigating
circumstances. Hewlett-Packard was willing to be bound by any subsequent
ordinance the City Council might elect to pass. The -variance Hewlett-
Packard had submitted was, he hoped, being considered 57on strictly its
own merits." City Municipal Code 18.09.090 said -there need only be
"exceptional sr extraordinary circumstances," and Hewlett-Packard had
leased the present Page Mill site.since 1966 with the hope that all its
corporate functions could be collected in one area. It intended to build
a building that "is really outstandingly attractive and that someone
would be proud of. . . ." He thought it had been designed to be in
harmony with -the corporate headquarters building now on the site. He
noted that the variance in height was only three feet on the proposed
zoning ordinance and eight feet on the existing zoning ordinance.
Mitigating circumstances had come into the discussion relevant to the
EIR, and Hewlett-Packard was involved with community concerns and therefore
agreeable to the mitigating circumstances. Mr. Young said that he did
not think Hewlett-Packard should be restricted on the percentage of lot
coverage any more than the zoning called for; Palo Alto employment had
been flat for the past ten years, and Hewlett-Packard had no plan: to
build further than the plan proposed. It would continue "...to move
things out of the area."
POTION: Councilrimer Eyerly moved, seconded by Henderson, that Council
find that the final Environmental Impact Report for Hewlett-Packard
Corporate Headquarters, dated January 27, 1978, as supplemented by
additional mitigation measures by the Architectural Review Board on
February 16, 1978, is a sufficient informational document.
Cosrncil er Carey said that at some
coverage be limited to 21 percent; he
measure to the EIR. He would like to
passed he wanted it incorporated into
before certification.
time he would rove that building
would do that in part, as a mitigation
have that voted on, because if it
the EIR as further mitigation
M . Booth said it would be appropriate to make the motion in relation to
approval of the variance. There would be no guarantee it would apply to
the EIR, for approval of the EIR did not impose such a restriction on
the property. There was no harm in having that mitigation in both the
approval for the variance and the EIR, as Mr. Knox had pointed out.
AMENDMENT: Council ,p Carey moved, seconded by Fletcher, that the
City Council consider, and by this motion, add to the EIR a further
possible mitigation measure that the total site coverage be limited as a
condition of the :ranting of the variance.
Councilor Eyerly ascertained that the proposed zoning ordinance had
lot coverage restriction of 30 percent, and said he would oppose the
amendment because it applied to only one building. He preferred setting
a policy on lot cbvera ,e for a broader area.
S 6 6�
4/17/78
Councilmember Henderson asked Councilmember Carey for some elaboration
on his reasons for making the amendment.
Councilmember Carey explained said that, were it not for the variance
request, the applicant could have built the site out to 30 percent
coverage. Those opposed to the development blamed the variance, whereas,
in his opinion, those opponents were really opposed to the Comprehensive
Plan. The request for the variance was, in itself, a form of a mitigation
measure in that it tended to reduce the mass of the building. Nonetheless,
it was a variance, and a tradeoff was needed. He wanted it related to
the EIR because limitation on site coverage was a mitigation measure.
Councilmember Fletcher said that in some documents it was said site
coverage would be 7.6 percent; ARB minutes of February 16, said, "60
percent of the site is parking and building." She asked, did "site
coverage" refer to the building only, and not parking?
Councilmember Carey clarified that his motion assumed "site coverage" as
relationship of building and improvements to total area.
Councilmember Fletcher said she supported the motion because it would
tend W reduce the amount of the site to be covered by asphalt.
Vice Mayor Brenner said she favored the proposed amendment in principle;
she had some doubt about whether or riot it would be enforceable. Hewlett-
Packard had said it intended to stay well under the permitted site
coverage; a vote of Council would be needed on a request to exceed the
permitted coverage, she assumed. Also, site coverage limitation to 21
percent was not being placed generally on Stanford Industrial Park. She
tended to think that the mitigation measures proposed by the Planning
Commission were more to the point. She thought the real issue was that
Council should see that employment generated a housing need. She would
not support the notion.
Councilmember Carey asked if Vice Mayor Brenner was saying that the
motion (toward mitigation measures) had already been provided for in the
Planning Commission. Without the restriction Hewlett-Packard "could
cone back any time and build up to 30 percent. Are you suggesting that
there's something somewhere else that would provide for this restriction
or are you saying you don't want the restriction and let them build the
30 percent?"
Vice Mayor Brenner said she was questioning the fairness of restricting
one plant only. Were the amendment to result in reducing site coverage
for all in the industrial zone she would favor it. Also, Mr. Young of
the Hewlett -,Packard Company had given his word about the company's
intent, and the City in fact had the site coverage restriction.
Councilor Carey emphasized that he did not want the same restriction
imposed throughout Palo Alts --the Comprehensive Flan had been adopted
and he did not want to change it. His amendment said that if the
building was going to be higher, it should not be as broad.
Councilmember Henderson wondered if, in twenty years, Hewlett-Par.fir-d
would be able to get a variance for the variance, so to speak. Ho would
hope that the limitation to 21 perccilt site coverage would maintain.
Mr. Booth said that Hewlett-Packard, or a successor occupant, could
apply to have the condition removed, or other relief. Every Council had
the right to judge each case that came before it on that case's own
facts.
867
4/17/78
1
Corrected
see page
930
1
Councilmember Eyerly asked what procedure Hewlett-Packard would have to
go through if it wanted to expand later. Would it apply for a permit?
Mr. Booth answered that the City had not had to deal with that; he
thought the procedure would be to file an application in the nature of a
variance. Ar u,..ng the application for a building permit for the proposed
hypathetica, expansion required no variance or zone change, the building
official would refer the matter to the Architectural Review Board; if it
were approved by the ARB, the building permit would be issued.
Councilmember Eyerly asked if Council could place the requirement that
should expansion ever be planned the project would first be reviewed by
it.
Pir. Booth replied that such a condition would be inappropriate; Council
had never had the power to put conditions on building permits. He did
not think Council should assume that power "with this particular application."
Vice Mayor Brenner asked if the amendment now to be voted on by Council
might not have the effect of requiring such a hearing.
h°r. Booth replied in the affirmative.
AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment that the City Council consider, and by
this motion, add to the EIR a further ,possible mitigation measure that
the total site coverage be limited as a condition of the granting
of the variance, passed on the following vote;
AYES: Carey, Fletcher, Henderson
NOES: Brenner, Eyerly
ABSENT: Clay
HOT PARTICIPATING: Sher, Fazzino, Witherspoon
Vice Mayor Brenner said she thought it a good thing for the community to
have the subject of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) come into focus
by way of 7 variance. She took exception to one portion of the EIR:
that said that the particular site under consideration was not an optimum
site for raising residential and industrial, "...because it is separated
from residential areas and residential amenities —schools, park, and
libraries." She said she had spent some time on the site, and found
that a bicycle path connected to roadways leading to grado. acb o1s n
Barron Park and Gunn High School, and also, on the other side of Page
Mill were Lucille Nixon and Escondido grade schools. She cited Bol Park
and the parkway grounds of Funn High School, and the College Terrace
Library. Shopping was available at California Avenue as well as nearer
by. Traffic congestion and the housing problem were the most important
concerns --primarily housing --and the variance procedure had brouent that
prime concern forward. She confirmed with Lois Atchison, Zoning Administrator,
that her comments on some optimal conditions for proposed housing at
that site would become part of the record concerning the EIR.
Councilmember Fletcher said that the mitigating measures had been discussed
in connection with the variance application, yet those measures had'to
do with the environment.. She said that the rather restricting fence now
on the site could be removed. She saidtat though Page hill was unquestionably
a busy expressway, so was the proposed housing locale on Sari Hill Road.
There would be additional concerns of runoff, now at capacity, as well
as utility increase at a time when available power was limited --she was
not "completely happy with interpretations that are argued in the EIR,
but I'm certainly not going to oppose (it). . ."
868
4/17/78
6
Vice Mayor Brenner asked staff if the mitigating measures became part of
the motion.
.Mr. Booth replied that if the ndasures were included as part of the EIR
mitigation measures, it would not be inappropriate to hring them up
again when Council approved the variance. The City's enforcement ability
arose from the granting of the variance, it did not come from:the EIR.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: The main motion, as amended, that Council
•find the final Environmental Impact Report for Hewlett-Packard Corporate
Headquarters, dated January 27, 1978, as supplemented by additional
mitigation measures by the Architectural Review Board on February 15,
1978, is a sufficient informational document, passed on a unanimous
vote.
MOTION: Counci1member Carey moved, seconded by Henderson, that Council
approve the Planning Commission recommendation to uphold the Zoning
Administrator and approve a height of 45 feet where 35 feet is otherwise
required subject to the further condition that the building's total
coverage be limited to 21 percent.
Vice Mayor Brenner noted that the Planning Commission recommendation
included the 66 per square foot that Hewlett-Packard had agreed to,
provided there were a general ordinance that applied equally to all new
construction. She asked the best time for her to make a notion directing
staff to return to Council with wording toward such an ordinance.
Council Aber Carey said he thought such a proposed emotion belonged with
the general housing matter, and that all Councilmembers should have an
opportunity to contribute before she made her motion.
Vice Mayor Brenner explained that her proposes motion only asked staff
to prepare an ordinance. She would bring the matter up later.
Councilmernber Fletcher referred to the staff report of March 17, page 7,
saying she would like to incorporate the five conditions there recommended,
modifying one and adding two more.
Cooncilmber Carey said those Planning Commission recommendations would
automatically become a part of the motion.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Henderson, that
Planning Commission's recommendation 4(b) "Provide as many additional
vans as there are employees who wish to subscribe to vanpoois." be
modified by adding "A vigorous promotional program to be implemented."
Naphtali Knox. Director of Planning and Community Environment, said that
Item (d) on page 7 of the subject report had the same intent as Councilmenber
Fl etcher's proposed amendment, and he read "Make available to each
employee information regarding pedestrian, bicycle, and public transit
routes to work; schedules for public transit and current vanpooling
program." He thought that would constitute a vigorous effort on the
part of the employer and the City, combined.
AMENDMENT WITHDRAW: Councilmember Fletcher with agreement of the second,
withdrew the amendment.
Councilmember Fletcher referred to the ARB minutes of February 1b9 page
12 --Hewlett-Packard is offering to provide bicycle parking with security
and under cover. The percent figure discussed at the ARB meeting; it
was in confonaai a with the 10 percent provision of the new parking
ordinance, along with the provision for 50 percent deferral, so, as a
starting point, 5 percent would be rdequatc
<;;(07
849
4/17/78
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Henderson, that
Hewlett-Packard rrovide secure bicycle storage, in the amount of 5
percent of auto parking, that storage to be under cover.
Mr. Knox confirmed with Mr. Ehrlich of Hewlett-Packard that such a
condition had been agreeable with him when it was proposed by the ARB.
AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment, that Hewlett-Packard provide secure
bicycle storage, in the amount of 5 percent of automobile parking, -that
storage to be under cover, passed on a unanimous vote.
Councilmember Fletcher said the traffic in the Hewlett-Packard area was
very heavy --everything that could be done should be done to minimize the
number of motor vehicles. She read a letter from a firm in Santa Cruz,
"Our bicycle program is very simple: we subsidize purchase of a new 10 -
speed high-performance bicycle...to the sum total of $10.00. We finance
the bicycle purchase by a payroll deduction plan over a period of 90
days. . . ." She was disturbed that bicycles were rarely purveyed with
time -payment plans; paying out the full amount was often a hardship.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved that Hewlett-Packard provide a
bicycle -purchase plan along the lines of that explained in the foregoing
letter.
Councilmember Fletcher stated that the letter had said about 50 percent
of employees had taken advantage of the bicycle purchase plan.
The motion died for lack of a second.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: The rain motion, that Council approve
the Planning Commission recommendation to grant a variance, subject to
the further condition that the building's total coverage be limited to
21 percent, and that Hewlett-Packard provide bicyle storage in the amount
of 5 percent of automobile parking, that storage to be undercover, passed
on the following vote:
AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Carey, Fletcher, Henderson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Clay
NOT PARTICIPATING: Sher, Fazzino, Witherspoon
ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Council or Henderson asked that some limit be placed on the time of
the Executive Session, out of consideration for those n the audience
waiting to hear it discussed.
Vice Mayor Brenner said the Executive Session would be very brief.
Council recessed to Executive Session from 9:35 p.m. to 9:55 p.En.
Councilmember Clay arrived at 9:50 p.m.
Mayor Sher presided: all nine Cciuncil rs were present.
Mayor Sher: Aid one of the matters before Council was discussion of
asking staff to prepare an ordinance on housing or fees in lieu of
housing attendant with new construction; another was a Planning Commission
recommendation for a task force to consider housing matters. Oe asked
Mr, Booth, City Attorney, abut eligibility of Councilnsembers who were
disqualified due to conflict of interest on natters concerning Stanford.
870
4/17/78
Mr. Booth said that as he understood the matters Mayor Sher had outlined
neither had a material effect on any Councilmembers. All were eligible
to vote. However, when some final decision on those proposed matters
was before Council some might not be eligible; he would inquire into it
further.
Councilmember Fazzino posed the hypothetical problem of a motion being
made asking staff to draft an ordinance: was not Council approving a
concept? If, as he thought, Council was approving a concept, he would be
"very concerned about my own potential conflict of interest." Mr. Booth
observed that approving a concept was not implementing a policy nor
requiring anyone to do anything --it was hard to judge without a ration
before Council.
Councilmember Fazzino said he thought that if a motion was made and
voted upon he would abstain.
Councilmember Witherspoon said she shared Councilmember Fazzlno's concerns
because the formation of a task force related to the matter in which she
had not participated up to now. She would be more comfortable if it
were to be a "completely separate item," and did not have to do with the
variance,
Councilmember Clay said he shared the concerns already expressed. He
said an added concern was that comments made on the subject could also
be misconstrued.
Mayor Sher said he thought the course to follow was to have the rotion
before them, then each Councilmember could decide on his or her participation.
Vice Mayor Brenner said she would make her motion as general as possible
for it was important that staff return to Council with some proposal by
May 15.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Brenner moved, seconded by
direct staff to prepare an ordinance that will
housing to offset the fee, for all industrial,
facility construction.
Vice Mayor Brenner said that passage of that motion would clear the way
for an -orderly plan for other projects; others would not have to continue
to guess what action the City would take. She thought it important that
the City should take the lead in recognizing, in a practical way, thle
housing needs generated by construction of industrial, commercial, and
office facilities.
Fletcher, that Council
require a housing fee, or
commercial, and office
Councilmember Henderson commented that the motion: appeared to emphasize
a housing fee; he felt the wording would be better if it emphasized that
the result would be a contributioft to housing.
Vice Mayor Brenner said her wording had been devised to be more general.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO REFER: Councilmember Clay moved that the suggested
policy of a requirement of a housing contribution, whether in -lieu
payment or housing itself, be referred to the Policy and Procedures
Committee.
Councilmember Carey said he would second the motion if clarification
regarding conflict of interest led to the understanding that a vote to
refer to committee did not constitute a conflict of interest, even
though it was known that a conflict of interest would mean non -participation
when the matter returned to Council for action. He did not know if his
871
4/17/78
firm had any interest in undeveloped land in Palo Alto that was not
residential, which could be impacted by the imposition of a required
housing fee; in his opinion that would reduce the value of the+land. He
was troubled with the possibility that he might be acting in a matter on
which there might be a conflict of interest, though he recalled none at
the moment.
Mr. Booth observed that one could not disqualify oneself for what was
not known. If something was learned later, disqualification could:then
take place.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO REFER SECONDED: Councilmember Carey said he would
second the motion.
Councilmember Eyerly said he thought enough €.aerial was contained in
the EIR on the Hewlett-Packard variance for staff to draw up an ordinance.
He favored sending a proposed ordinance to the Policy and Procedures
Committee. He did not support the substitute motion. He asked if the
main motion was meant to say that housing should be provided in the
industrial area or elsewhere. Perhaps that issue about provision of
actual housing could be split off at the time of voting.
Vice Mayor Brenner agreed with Councilmember Eyerly that there was much
information available relevant to drawing up a draft ordinance. Council
would, by using that information, validate the large amount of time that
had already been spent. She did not support the referral to the Policy
and Procedures Committee. She thought an applicant would be coming up,
who would be offer4ng housing --she did not want to nave that possibility,
but also she did not want a requirement for actual housing in the draft
ordinance,
Councilmember Henderson said that the main reason for drawing up the
draft ordinance was to facilitate the surfacing of information on possible
conflicts of interest, yet, until an ordinance was prepared they would
not be known. He saw no gain from sending the matter first to the
Policy and Procedures Committee. He hoped preparation of a draft ordinance
would not be delayed in that manner.
Councilmember Carey said he supported referral of the question of preparing
an ordinance to Committee. If a Councilmember were against the concept
of a housing fee he should also be against the motion to refer, as he
saw it. In spite of all the information now available, he saw the
question of the housing fee as being too narrow to obtain all the needed
information. He thought that the policy decision of requiring housing
or fees should be examined, rather than the specifics of an ordinance.
Except for the impact of the cost, namely X dollars per foot of development,
or X houses per acre, the result of the ordinance was well known. A
policy to work toward righting the jobs/housing imbalance had been made
with the Comprehensive Plan; now the issue was being raised again --that
policy question, he felt, should be dealt with by the Policy and Procedures
Committee. If all were agreed on the policy then the cost of implementing
the policy would be arguable.
Mr. Booth marked that if the outcome of Council's consideration,
whether in Committee or otherwise, • led to action having the result of
Hewlett-Packard having to pay either 664 a foot, or some other price. or
not pay, it was likely that both Councilmembers Clay and Fazzino would
not be able to participate. Councilor Witherspoon and Mayor Sher's
conflict was somewhat different --it arose from connection with Stanford,
not Hewlett-Packard.
872
4/17/78
•c .
Councilmember Clay responded as an elected official he could vote on
matters that were clearly legal; with time he would know if it was a
legal issue. He preferred giving direction before the fact of the
ordinance having been developed. He feared that the City was ';backing
into' policy, or that Hewlett-Packard was establishing policy for the
rest of the community. With referral of the concept to Committee,
others who might be affected would have notice of the issue, and could
respond. He thought the overall policy decision should be separated from
the Hewlett-Packard natter.
Mayor Sher said he would recognize any members of the public who wished
to speak to the matter of housing, or in -lieu fees, in conjunction with
construction.
Janet Owens, Midpeninsula Citizens for Fair Housing, said that her .
organization was convinced that the proposed ordinance was essential.
Susan MacPherson, 376 Diablo Court, spoke as president of the Palo Alto
Housing Corporation (PAHC). At PAHC's April 5 board meeting the Corporation
had discussed the matter before Council and it had passed the following
motion: "To support in principle the concept of industrial/commercial
development providing housing or contributions in lieu of housing which
are to be used for housing purposes." Ms. McPherson said the motion had
passed unanimously. Such a requirement had not been made heretofore
though it was "abundantly clear that industrial/commercial development
does impact the housing market," PAHC praised Hewlett-Packard's accession
to need for housing, and wished to see other similar developers required
to mike such payment in the future, to alleviate the housing strain on
low- and moderate -income persons by industrial and commercial developers
as well as by housing developers. PAHC had not yet developed a position
on a regional task force on the matter, or the specific appropriateness
of the contribution of 55t per square foot. PAHC had set up a subcomittee
to study possible musing sites in commercial/industrial areas beyond
just industrial Park.
Mayor Sher welcomed the next speaker. John Berwald, "...a colleague of
yesteryears."
John Berwald, 261 Creekside Drive, former Councilmember, said he had
modified his planned "strong statement" In favor of something "very
positive" because it was his first time back to visit Council. Mr.
Berwald thanked Council for its prudence and ,judgment in not adding any
new City tares when there was so such concern already about cost of
government. He said he endorsed the thought given to the matter of
required housing before Council asked for an ordinance, which he found
presumptuous. He was not sure that, as had been stated, Hewlett-Packard
",..quite naturally would like to see an ordinance that would require
everyone else to pad this tax." He did net think that was true. He
wondered if Council had given much thought to the proposed housing or
ie-lieu cash requirement --some of the things ghat had been said that
evening aggravated him; land costs would stay the same, he thought, if
two or one thousand employees were added; land banking had removed
" ...thousands of acres out of potential residential for priority purposes";
labor costs added to scarcity of housing --there were more forces impacting
housing than just industrial development. He found irony in the fact
that housing costs had risen when unemployment was at an all-time high.
He favored Council spending time for consideration of the topic prior. to
having an ordinance before it. He did not say there was not a severe
housing shortage, for there was, but there were other ways to address
that shortage. He offered that Stanford Universityhad provided about
9,500 units of housing, along with other cultural enrichment; Syntex
offered its facilities for art shows. My should just companies have to
pay a housing tax, for "...all of us have contributed to the housing
shortage." He likened the housing payment to another property tax,
87
4/17/78
levied without sanction of the franchise tax board or Board of Equalization.
As he spoke with members of the business community, he said, he found
them fearful about speaking out on the issue; pernaos their land might
be downzoned more or Council might find other ways to make them pay.
"What Palo Alto does other cities are going to follow," he said,'s0 it
ought not to load additional taxes on businesses already making "a
tremendous contribution in jobs, and that is probably the biggest need
we have in society today."
Hans Sorenson, 360 Leland Avenue, said he thought the proposed Qrdigance
did relate to the Hewlett-Packard variance, and more study was needed.
He thought Palo Alto had been very successful in attracting industrial
development --perhaps, with study, Palo Alto could make an equally attractive
climate for housing development. He favored a referral of the matter to
the Policy and Procedures Conmi ttee .
Naphtali Knox, Director of Planning and Community Environment, said he
found the matter of referral of the matter to Policy and Procedures
Committee for policy guidance somewhat strange. The Planning Commission
also provided guidance on matters of the kind now before Council. On
April 12 the Planning Commission had approved a new housing policy in
the Comprehensive Plan, which, if adopted by Council, would provide
policy guidance in that area. That proposed housing policy would come
before Council on May 15.
Council►member Henderson observed that it had been said that the matter
before them had no connection with the Hewlett-Packard variance, yet he
had thought the Hewlett-Packard mitigation measure of housing fees was
predicated on a policy like now one before Council. He did not see how
it could be separated from the Hewlett-Packard consideration. Was the
housing fee not a part of the condition of granting the variance?
Mr. Knox replied that it Was; one of the possibilities before Council
way that it need take no action at all at this time because as part of
variance the Zoning Administrztor stated she would request the Council
to consider the meter of contributions for housing from all future
industrial and commercial development within thirty days of the approval
of the variance. In that variance which Council had just approved, was
the condition that staff be obligated to bring that matter to Council's
attention.
Mayor Sher asked if that meant the Zoning Administrator was going to ask
Council to prepare an ordinance, or that she would come forward with
some recommendations and report and perhaps a draft ordinance.
Mr. Knox said staff would come forward with a staff report and some
recommendations; either now, or at that time, Council would have to
direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance, which, in the past, he
had not done without direction from the Council.
Councilor Clay said that he found the assumption on the part of Mr.
Knox that because the Planning Commission had reviewed the housing fee
matter that tne policy had been established, was strange also. The
Planning Commission, he asserted, did not establish policy. He said that
Council established policy, and that stab policy westions were generally
referred to the Policy and Procedures Committee.
Mayor Sher said he thought Council was ready to vote. He felt he understood
the distinction between voting on this rortion of the matter, yet he
felt "a lithe uncomfortable about voting on either of these motions
without knowing whether I'll be free to vote on the ultimate question
that comes back to us." Though he did not question Mr. Booth's advice,
he felt it would be better if he abstained from voting.
4
4117/78
SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO REFER: The substitute motion to refer the matter
of requiring a housing contribution, whether in -lieu payment or housing
itself, to the Policy and Procedures Committee, failed on the following
vote:
Corrected
see page
930
AYES; Brenner, Eyerly, Fletcher, Henderson
NOES: Carey, Clay.
ABSTAIN: Sher, Fazzino
ABSENT: Witherspoon (out of chambers)
Mayor Sher said that the main motion, made by Vice Mayor Brenner, was
before Council.
Counciic.2mber Fletcher said she wanted staff to bear in mind some of the
comments that had been made by the public that evening. She also had
concern about the inequities referred to by Mr. Koch which would arise
if Council approved an ordinance based on square footage. She thought
staff might explore more equitable ways of placing equal responsibility
,among those who created employment.
Counci1member Eyerly said he assumed that the motion asked for staff to
give Council the report of which Mr. Knox had spoken.
Vice Mayor Brenner said that she had asked for an ordinance to reflect
some of the voiced concerns, in anticipation of the report spoken of by
Mr. Knox. She thought triere was realmerit on acting on the impetus of
the tremendous amount of work which had beer; done to date on the subject.
Councilmer+►ber Eyerly asked if the provision about the possibility of
actual construction of housing, mentio;ed in the motion along with
required in -lieu payments, could not be removed from the motion. In that
way a developer could ask for a variance, if he so desired.
Vice Mayor Brenner agreed that there could be other ways for contractors
to fulfill the housing requirement; she wondered if Council should go
intn. the method of stating that in the ordinance before or after the
ordinance returned to Counci l .
Mayor Sher stid he had understood the motion before the: had emphasized
the housing fee --"...or housing to offset the fee" had been added. He
had understood that to mean it would be the contractor's option. That
would mean housing acceptable to the City.
Vice Mayor Brenner said her motion did not wean actual housing; it only
offeredffy that there could be alternate ways of fulfilling the housing
need..
Councilor Carey reminded Counc lmrribers that the emotion had been to
prepare an ordinance to require a housing fee for construction of all
industrial, commercial and office development, or housing to offset the
fee He thought the preceding talk showed that the motion itself had
dropped from sight and Council was talking about policy, which, in his
opinions had been scat on* year ago. If Council wanted to make new
policy it should go to the Policy and Procedures Committee. He thought
the motion before them was the first step in requiring a housing fee
from a special group of people in Palo Alto. He was opposed to it.
875
4/17/78
MOTION PASSED: The motion that Council direct staff to irepare an
ordinance that will require a housing fee, or housing to offset the fee,
for all industrial, commercial, and office facility construction,. passed
on the following vote:
AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fletcher, Henderson
NOES: Carey
ABSTAIN: Clay, Fazzino, Sher
ABSENT: Witherspoon (out of chambers)
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS
MOTION: Vice Mayor Brenner moved, seconded. by Fletcher, that the Council
approve the Planning Commission recommendation that the City pursue:a
regional-wice task force with respect to setting goals for housing at a
percentage of jobs projected in a regional -wide area, and to 4ttempt to
identify apprrpriate sites for housing within each of the respective
communities.
Janet Owens, Midpeninsula Citizens for Fair Housing, said the group she
represented proposed "...an additional method of attack" which the
Planning Commission had forwarded to Council for action during that
meeting. The group proposed a task force to be made up from representatives
of local government, industry, and comrerce, along with local citizens
from Palo Alto and neighboring c mmunities. A goal of setting a percentage
of housing, proportionate to jobs, along with developing specific
methods for achieving the goal, should be drawn up. For efficient and
unwieldy action the task force should not be too large;
Hans Sorenson, 360 Leland, said the motion now before Council was very
similar to the previous :notion --it too set a tax on industry. The 66¢
tax per square foot would come to about $250,000 would build how many
houses, he asked, and he stated the results in actual housing would be a
meaningless drop in the bucket. He repeated that the way to go about
solving the housing shortage was to make it more attractive to develop
housing in Palo Alto; perhaps zoning up instead of down, along with more
allowable uses of land. A task force should first address the matter of
developing "something reasonable" in the forthcoming draft ordinance.
Councilmember Witherspoon asked 'f "regional. -wide" included southern San
Mateo County and East Bay, which, she said, provided "bedrooms for more
and more industry here."
Ann Steinberg, Chairwoman of the Planning Commission, said the Commission
had meant neighboring communities. She cited the letter read by Mr.
Jeong from Mountain View, expressing its concern, The Commission had
asked that she ask Mountain View to take the same kind of action in
asking its City Council to join a "sub -regional task force.''
Councilm er Witherspoon said that in her experience task forces were a
good idea but did not solve problem. It was really asking communities
to downzone commercial and industrial and upzone residential zones.
Most communities had "...said they wouldn't sit still for that." Maybe
talk on the topic would raise people's consciousness, haver. She did
not want "to perpetrate the myth that anything would really be accomplished."
Bib
4/0/78
Ms. Steinberg said the Planning Commission had had no talk about up- or
down -zoning. It had thought only that it would be helpful to discuss
the problem on a community basis. The main thing was to sit down with
industry to see "what kind of solutions we can provide, if any."
Councilmember Witherspoon said unless zoning were changed or a tax were
set requiring housing nothing would get done --the problem was not philosophical
but political.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Henderson, that the
term "regional -wide" be defined so as to include Menlo Park, Atherton,
East Palo Alto, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Stanford University, and
Portola Valley --an area of about six miles' radius from Page Mill and El
Camino Real.
Cuuncilmember Eyerly said that in order to include Mountain View the
radii would have to extend eight miles --a part of Mountain View was part
of Palo Alto's housing and job area.
Mr. Knox said that Palo Alto's Comprehensive Plan, especially in the
traffic model, had included Mountain View as part of the sub -region,
along with the other communities Councilmember Eyerly had mentioned. He
wondered if Palo A1`-) was going to write other cities and ask them to
appoint mercers to the task force --Mountain View should be included.
Councilmember Eyerly agreed to*include Mountain View in his motion.
He added that in his motion should be the provision that the task force
would provide statistics of the number of housing units and job opportunities
within its appointees' communities. He asked that among the task force
members be City staff representatives.
Vice Mayor Brenner asked Ms. Steinberg how the Planning Commission had
envisioned the task force in actual operation. Did the motion before
them fit with what the Planning Commission had in mind'
Ms. Steinberg said the geographical area described, along with the
request for jobs/housing statistics, fit with the Planning Commission's
idea. Among the task force's members should also be people from industry,
for industry's input was needed.
A discussion ensuev on the process to be followed in setting up the task
force. Mayor Sher wondered when and if the task fcrce should report
back to the Palo Alto City Council. Councilmember Eyerly said he thought
the City staff would contact the Council should further information or
direction be needed.
Ms. Steinberg said that the Planning Commission had indicated that the
proposed task force would operate for a few months, maximum.
Mayor Sher said the duration of the task force would be communicated in
the letter written from Palo Alto to various communities; the task force
would report to its respective appointees' communities. The number of
task force members would be left open, at this time.
Couocilmember Carey said he would vote for the amendment: he said it
made "...a bad motion better." He foresaw that Atherton would not share
the goals of the proposed task force; Portola Valley would be the same.
Mountain View would have opposing goals of annexing Stanford Industrial
Park for itself to improve its tax base; other communities would also
make predictable responses. The proposed task force study duplicated
studies. by Associated Say Area Government (ABAG), Santa Clara County,
and others. Ultimately the problem was cne of density, which communities
such as Palo Alto and others were unwilling to increase. Until that
unwillingness was overcome talk on the housing shortage problem was
duplicity.
877
4/17/78
AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment, that the term "regional -wide" be
defined so as to include Menlo Park, Athrrton, East Palo Alto, Los
Altos, Los Altos Hills, Stanford University, Mountain View, and Tortola
Valley --an area of about eight miles' radius from Page Mill and El
Camino Real, with appointees from industry, city'staff; and elected
officials, passed on the following vote:
AYES: Brenner, Carey, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, HendersOn,
Sher
NOES: Clay, Witherspoon
Councilmember Fazzino said he intended to vote for the formation of the
task force; he was concerned about duplicating the county study. Was it
proposed that this task force perhaps build dpon the work already done
in studying the jobs/housing imbalance?
Ms. Steinberg said the task force would build upon the recommendations
of the county study. She felt the main thing was to talk the problem
over with industry to see what their responses would be. She agreed
many negative replies were predictable but some cities would cooperate.
She thought Palo Alto should try to get what cooperation was obtainable.
Councilr ber Fazzino corn:luded that Ms. Steinberg was saying the county
study was rather general; this study would be more specific.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENOEO: The n in .motion, that the Council approve the
Planning Co mission recommendation that the City pursue a regional -wide
task force with respect to setting goals for housing as a percentage of
joos pr=ojected in a regional -wide area, and to attempt to identify
appropriate sites for housing within each of the respective communities,
as per the communities given in the amendment, passed on the following
vote:
AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Sher
NOES: Carey, Clay, Witherspoon
AC + ISITION OF UTILITY DISTRIBUTION
' .YA C ±' a y **~• ! it ��. LANE (+ :244:8)
Mayor Sher said that as he understood the staff report two Council
actions were needed: 1) approval of the purchase of the foregoing
facilities from PG&E; 2) refer to the Finance and Public Works Committee
the question of how the purchases should be financed.
MOTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by:Carey, that the Council authorize
the Mayor to sign the agreements for transfer of electric distribution
facilities ($425,599) and gas distribution facilities ($x,192) and
refer the issue of financing the acquisitions to the Finance and Public
Works Committee for its recommendation, with staff to prepare a proposal
within thirty days for the Finance and Public Works Committee review.
The nation passed on a unanimous vote.
Counci lsaa+aber cif "herspoon offered her congratulations to staff for its
successful negotiations on the utilities acquisition.
Mayor Sher agreed, adding that Council was happy to have the areas
brought into its utility system.
878
4/17/78
COUNCILMEMBER HENDERSON RE
Councilmember Henderson said he had learned recently that Mr. Frank
Manfredi, a frequent observer of Council, as well as commentator on its
actions, had undergone a fall in his home and was convalescing at his
home. He suggested that Council write Mr. Manfredra letter.
Mayor Sher said he would write on behalf of Council wishing him a speedy
recovery and observing his absence at Council meetings recently.
MOTION: Councilmember Henderson moved, seconders by Fazzino, that Council
direct the Mayor to write Mr. Frank Manfredi wishing him a speedy
recovery. The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
Councilmember Henderson said parenthetically that Mayor Sher could tell
Mr. Manfredi that "the moneychangers are still in the temple," in line
with the content of Mr. Manfredi's comments regarding City government.
MAYOR SHER RE CLOSURE OF TEFtAN SCHOOL
Mayor Sher commerted that Terman School would be closed permanently at
the close of the school year. Future use of the property was a matter
of lively public interest: A citizens' committee had been set up by the
school district to consider disposal of surplus property, and the City
had a representative on that committee, Staff was working on a report
on some alternatives and the value of the land involved. Mayor Sher said
he would ask the City representative to ask the Committee to wait on its
recommendations until it could read th? staff report on the muter. He
thought the report would be completed in about a month
CANCELLATION Or' APRIL 24 1978 COUNCIL MEETING
MOTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Eyerly, that Council cancel the
meeting of April 24, 1978, The motion passer! on a unanimous vote.
Mayor Sher explained that the agenda had been quite light, hence the
cancellation.
Councll+ er Fazzino said he w+^uld be unable to attend the May 1, 1978,
meeting.
Mayor Sher said Council could consider having an Executive Session on
April 24.
ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Counci lnember Eyerly said that George Morrell, long-time publisher, and
founder of tne Palo Alto limes, had died during the preceding week. He
had been very civic minded, and he fostered the enlargement of cpen
space. He. had owned the Black Mountain Ranch, now transferred from his
own holdings to Stanford University, and which was perhaps to become
property of the Mid -Peninsula Park District.
Council adjourned to Executive Session at 11:55, April 17, 1978.
8 7 9.
4/17/78
CIVIC CENTER DETERIORATION
Mayor Sher announced that the following ordinance was discussed in Executive
Session.
MOTION: Councilmember Henderson introduced the following ordinance and
moved, seconded by Fletcher, its adoption.
C DINANCE NO. 3053 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL
OF TR CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1977-78 TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR FINANCING A CONTRACT
WITH SELECTED CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS TO REVIEW
AND RECOMMEND A COURSE OF ACTION IN CONNECTION WITH
DETERIORATION OF THE CIVIC CENTER"
MOTION PASSED: The ordinance was adopted on a unanimous vote.
FINAL ADJOURNMENT
The meeting of April 17, 1978 adjourned at 12:30 a.m.
ATTEST:
APPROVE:
--
Mayor
880
4/17/78