Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-08-18 City Council Summary MinutesRegular Meeting September 18, 1978 ITEM .. PAGE Minutes of August 28, 1978 1 7 7 Oral Communications 1 7 8 Rose Goetz, 575 Tyndall Street, Los Altos Joseph Hirsch, 4149 Georgia Consent Calendar - Action Item 670 San Antonio Road --Application for Final Condominium Subdivision 1 7 8 Map --Grant and Bridges 550--564 Forest Avenue --Application for Final Condominium Subdivision 1 7 8 l p---Harri ngtor►/Kul akoff 810430 Los Trancos Road —Application for Preliminary Parcel Map-- 1 7 9 Tymes & Associates 570 Kingsley --Appeal of Harry E. Karrer From Decision of Acting 1 7 9 Zoning Administrator Denying a Variance for Building Addition Palo Alto Community Players --Award of Contract --19A-79 Season 1 7 9 Annual Street Resurfacing Contract —Rejection of all Proposals 1 7 9 Vehicle Mai ntenance--Amen nt to Agreement 1 7 9 Appointment of Two Architectural -Review Board *ors to Fill E rir*d 1 8 0 Terms of CoMmissioners Vogt and Vyn 1131 San Antonio Road --Application of John Law for Prezoning and Site 1 8 0 and Design Review Upper Page. M i 1 l Road --Application of Harry € . Ai sae for Prel is i nary 1 8 1 Parcel Map Recess 7 8 4 UPPOr 7490 Mill Road --Application (continued) DiscussiOn of_ Continuance of 8aylands Master Plan. Public Hearing T 8 4 Upper Page Mii I l Rod —Application (continued) 1 8 7 Recess to Executive Sess i on 1 9 1 Upper Page Mill Road --Application (continued) 1 9 1 365 Parkside--Operation of Residential Camilla*: t ision to Uphold 1 9 2 cision to Allow Residential Care MONO Cancellation of Meeting of Septeedl ' it, 1978 -1.11 7 Adjournment 7 ti 176 9/18/78 Regular Meeting September 18, 1978 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date at 7:30 p.m., with Mayor Carey presiding. PRESENT: Brenner, Carey, Clay (arrived 7:55 p.m.), Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Sher, Witherspoon ABSENT: None MINUTES OF_AVOKLiaLUEVi Councilmember Witherspoon asked that on page 121, the first sentence of the second paragraph read, "Councilmenber Witherspoon stressed the difficulty of having to make such a decision, yet'neighbors already had many conditional Uses in their area, some of -which stretched the law somewhat, . . ." - Councilmember Brenner referred to page 106, and asked that the first four sentences in the first paragraph read, "Phosphates caused some portion of heavy metals to become water soluble, thus creating environ- mental problems. The phosphates were being leached at tae present time, into the water of the bay. The presence of'the precious metals gave the City leverage to make sure that environmental hazard was confronted and solved. That was actually a more serious matter than counting quick dollars." Ccuncilmember Brenner referred to page 110, and asked that the first sentence read, "Councilmember Brenner spoke to the matter of the 90 -foot easement along San Francisquito Creek during discussions on the 45 -acre parcels that distance had . been set aside owing to the drip line of the trees on the site." Councilmember Brenner referred to page 119, and asked that the first sentence read, "Councilmember Brenner hypothesized that if the Center returned to its quedrupl ear use, the rear. parking space, shared its driveway for an easement for the nextdoor nei ghbor t . . .'R Councilmember Fazzino referred to page 120, and asked that the first three sentences of the last paragraph read, "Councilmember Fazzino said that the testimony in support of Mirsmonte heard tonight'made it difficult for him to focus on issues of parking and zoning, however the neighbors were entitled to be protected by those laws* just as M'i rem orate looked for legal protection in other areas. He agreed -that mental hea s th facilities belonged within the mainstream of society. He saw no threat to neighbors from Mir onte's :Alerts or activities- but' felt that the site simply was not right for the pied use... Above all the parking was not adequate. He might have been more receptive to the possibility of Mirmonte using the site as a residential' home . . He thought arequest for permission for increased usage by Mirmmonte was likely and it would be hard to turn down later." Mayor Carey referred to page 109, and asked that the second sentence of paragraph three read, `"The parcel w E to -be an' integral part of Sind Hill Road improvements and was to have' become somewhat of a public park facility." He asked that the sentence' following that be deleted. Mayor Carey referred to page 116 end asked that -the first sentence in the last paragraph read, "Mayor Carer - pointed out that it was not appropriate for Councilmaabers to ask the public-to'interpret the City's position on use permits." Mayor Carey referred to page 121 and' asked that, the' sixth _sentence.r Teal, . "He had been persuaded that'because" of off -site -parking which required a split P -C, and because of the stability of the previous user, balanced_ against the possibility of' growth' of the potential user, . ." MOTION: Councilmember Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council approve the minutes as correcte.. The motion -passed on a unanimous voice vote. ORAL CO ICN I CAT IONS 1 a Rose Goetz, 575 Tyndall Street1Los Altos, said she'was treasurer of the South Peninsula- 3ewi sh" Community' Center; and- she said she was a regular user of- bus' route #23. She -asked -that the service be maintained• and' improved, and' she 'listed- reasons. The County Transit Authority had told her thatimprovement depended upon action by the Palo -Alto City Council, 2. Joseph Hirsch, 4149 Georgia, expresses conceeps a out proposed cutbacks in recreational' activities in -Palo -Alto. He' said the College Terrace facility was the -only Palo Alto service obtainable west of El Camino of that type. He -thought the proposed closure of Terman, Wilbur and Jordan swinrning pools was unwarranted in view of the small savings, and would be missed very much by children in those areas, as would the' proposed personnel to be cut back, in after -school activities. He thought such cutbacks would spoil the fine reputation Palo Alto had acquired for i s, srvvi :es to residents., MayerCarey and Councflmember Witherspoon' announced that stings were taking place regarding libraries that evening' and a- Finance and Public Works Committee -meeting was to -he held on the' matter- of ' cutbacks on the following' evening. The public was invited to speak at' both meetings. CONSENT CALENDAR Action Items 670 SAM ANTONIO ROAD —APPLICATION The Planning Commission, by a vote of -4-0, 2 abstentions, recommends approval of the -application of Grantand Bridges -for a' final Condominium Subdivision' ls' (40 units) for property known_as' 670 San Antonio Road, Zone District P -C. ORDINANCE OF THE COMM OF. THE CITY OF PALO ALTO smormAG SECTION- i#t.04:180 (OFFICIAL FIRE ZONE HAP) OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH FIRE ZONE N0: 3 FOR THE PROPERTY AT 670 SAN ANTONIO ROAD (1st Reading) 550-564 FOREST AVENUE AP I 'TION The Planning' Commission unsn1mousty vnds' approval' of the application of Harrington/final ff for a final conda1nitaa-subdivisionreap (8 units) for property located at 550-564 Forest Avenue, Zone District RN -3. 178 9/18/78 810-830 LOS TRANCOS ROAD --APPLICATION (YMES & ASSDCIh'TE5 The Planning Commission unanimously recomrendsapproval,.ni the application of T, es & Associates for a preiiminaryparcel map with exceptions (3 lots) located at 810-830 Los Trancos Road; Zone District 0-S. RESOLUTION 5594 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COACIL O THt CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVING A MISCELLANEOUS DIVISION OF LAND FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 810-830 LOS TRANCOS ROAD NEAR ALPINE ROAD AND GRANTING EXCEPTIONS, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS:" 570 KIHGSLEY--APPEAL. OF HARRY E. KARRER %* CriltIMMITRITMATOR Or The Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval . of- the appeal of Harry E. Karrer from the decision of the- Acting Zoning` Administrator to deny a variance to permit the construction of a -building addition at 570 Kingsley, Zone District R -l. PALO ALTO CQMMON?Tr PLATERS A :A<SON (CMR:402=8) The Community Players Board of Directors. authorized their representative to sign the agreement with the. City. Therefore the staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to execute 'th+e . ayre. ent. AGREEMENT —COMMUNITY PLAYERS THEATER SEASON 1978-79 Pa i Alto Community Players, Inc. ANNUAL STREET RESURFACING CONTRACT 0:8) Staff recnm'nends that sn view of financial cutbacks owing to passage -Of Proposition 13 that Councsl'reject all proposals for 77-52, 1977-78 street resur°facIng VEHICLE MAINTENANCE --AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT (CPm:3688:8) The contract provides for a maximum expenditure of $9,300 during 1978- 79. —funds for the program are i nncl uded in -the -1978-79 budget. The total amount of the service ;s less thane1;2'peerceit of the City's investment in motorized equipment and vehicles. Staff.recommends that rouncll approve the amendment t and authorize the -Mayor -to execute the Contract. AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO AGREEMENT NO. 3687 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE INFORMATION AND REPORTING SERVICES Mainst , Inc. Councilmember Brenner = asked that her -vote be recorded as, "no" on the matter -relating to vehicle maintenance. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, mended by Fletcher-, that Council approve the consent calendar: The motion- passed on -a unanimous voice vote, Councilmember Brenfter voting "no" on the final item. 179 9/18/78 Corrected see page 270. 1 1 APPOINTMENT OF TWO ARCHITECTURAL rxrarTror S VOLT AND VYN, MOTION: Counci lmember Sher moved, seconded by -Henderson,- that. Commissioners Vogt and Vyn be reappointed for another term. 'The' motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. 1131 SAN ANTONIO ROAD --APPLICATION OF SIGN The Planning Commission, by. a vote of- 4 ire' favor;..l' opposed, recommends approval, and the Architectural Review Board, by a' unanimous vote, recom nds. approval' with conditiOns., of the application' of John Law for prezoning and -Site' and Design Review -of property' located at 1131 san Antonio Road to L -M -1-D. Councilmenber Fletcher said she was somewhat confused by -the statement in the letter attached to the report that stated -that -it was planned to sell the four proposed buildings as' condominiums. Lou Green, Assistant City Attorney, said thatthe- applicant would have to come to the City for a subdivision map once' the' parcel was included, as the owners requested -within the City bounds . At present the property was it the unincorporated area of Santa Clara County. MOTION: Coancflme Der Eyerly moved, seconded' by -Clay, that Council find that the project will not have- a significantimpact on the environment; 2) accept the offer of one' percent of the construction' cost (minimum $18,000) for housing -related purposes- arid' direct' the' City Attorney's office to prepare an agreement -with the' developer; 3) adopt -the ordinance for first reading, pre -zoning the site to LM -1 -D; and -4) approve the Site and Design application as -recommended by the -Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board. ORDINANCE- OF THE COUNCIL OF -THE CITY OF PALO ALTO SING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO #SIC I PAL CODE TO PREZONE PROPERTY KNOWN AS 1131 SAN ANTONIO ROAD -TO L4-1-0 (1st Reading) CounciImember Fazzino asked what would have happened -if -Mr. Law had not volunteered the $18000 far housing -related purposes. Ken Schreiber, Assistant Director of ' Pl anni n - aRnd- ni ty Env i ro non t , said staff had recommended a negative declaratioi -and that' recomend a- tion-was supported -by the Planning Cca m1sslonl• ifi*r. Lam- had not offered the $18,000 -the matter would still be before- cil , without that item included. Staff would not have brought it uo. The negative declaration was recommended on the basis of the location of -the -site. 'Larger projects have been asked to provide mitigation in ts* way - of funds for in -lieu housing. The site was sandwiched in between' the Los Altos se ge Out and the back of the industrial aff1e aorea,' with` the' El Capri no Mnnel s at the other end. The Ba shore Freeway was nearby. The land was not considered a part of official housing land. Councilmember Fazzino said that' the- Policy and• Procedures - C i ttee had not yet approved mitigation -measures, and"t ey' would' eventually be signed off by Co►ncil, a 01 asked how that related -to -the mitigation . measure now before them? 180 9/18/78 Mr. Schreiber said that staff was aware that' the Committee had asked that mitigation guidelines be developed. In the meantime the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) continued to act' as' the -guidelines for Palo Alto's local environmental quality act. According to findings made in other locales it was necessary to identify potential negative impact, then propose mitigation under the state law as well as local ordinances. Until Council took action on' gui delines- staff' would -continue to work within the framework of the state law as well as previous -actions of the Council and other applications, plus findings from reviews of negative impact with other developers. The process, while not clear and simple, was distinctive as far as the developer was concerned. Counci lnie ber Brenner commented "...that it seems very .easy for us to add a little bit of LM here and a little'b1t of LN. there° and the accumu- lation affected the increase of employees; °':..it'seers so much easier than adding housing. I'm voting no on this item." MOTION PASSED: The motion that Council adopt the staff recommendation to find the project will have no significant impact, and accept the offer of one percent of the construction cost, for'housing-related purposes, and direct the City Attorney's office to prepare an agreement with the developer; and adopt the ordinance for first reading, that pre - zoned the site to LM -1-D; and approve the Site -and Design application as recommended by tee Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board, passed on the following vote: AYES: Carey, Clay, Eyerly, Fazzino;'Fletcher, Henderson, Sher NOES: Brenner ABSTAIN: Witherspoon 'PPER PAGE MILL ROAD --APPLICATION The Planning Commission forwards without recommendation -(by a 3-3 vote) the application of Harry -Acne for a preliminary -parcel -map with exceptions (3 lots) off Upper Page' Mill Road, Zone District 0-S. Emily Renzel,- Chairman of the Planning Commission, said that three of the Commissioners had felt there• was' some' env1ro ntal' Impact from the proposed subdivision and so the'Commission was unable to come to a • recommendati on . Barbara Geiger, 3981 Page' Mil l Road, presented a' petition from teenty four neighbors, who were "extremely opposed to -the- proposed development of -this area" because the environmental teract was- "irreversible," neither pubs t;; 'nor private road should run through -90 acres of Open Space: there was increased fire hazard. Winter Sojourner, 31570 Page Mill Road* listed reasons for her request that Council deny approval of the pre'1i inary -subdivision' zep: a twenty - foot road should not run back into an isolated area --some parts of the road had more than a fifteen degree grade, with- its attendant engineering problems; overhead poorer tines would' be unsightly, wells, fill, and fire hydrantswouldalso be unsightly. The City's "foothills Fire Study" said that of 121 districts the 'Foothills ranked -18th in the state as a potential fire hazard. She said that'she had calculated that it would take thirty or forty minutes fora fire department to. arrive at the 181 9/18/78 scene In response to a call, and al;oe.thet'tt-wauld be difficult to get fire equipment -into the area: She -objected -'to' the' fact. that the land had not been dedicated "long ago," for that had - been the reason the land had been given to the City. She thought the matter of granting an easement -for the road should be considered before -the approval of a preliminary subdivision map was' taken up, and -'that -the process for dedicating the land be set in motion- that evening. Leland 0: Levy, 1564 Walnut Drive-, spoke on -behalf -of the Palo Alto Civic League -steering conmlttee;. which was concerned -about the impact of the road and:the fire danger. The road -was to-be'over a. mile long. He quoted from -the -1971 Foothills study undertaken -by the City, which said that the north and northeast -slopes of Montebello Ridge were a very visible skyline for Palo-Altans, and predicting -that -the cutting of a road would "...create a scar that=could'never'be erased." -He-emphasized the -high -fire -danger of -the -areas -with the danger -to be' increased the use of gasoline -powered generators. He quoted fro+ the 1971 Foothills study s done forthe- City by Livingston surd- 81 :. - "Above Foothill Park fire hazard is high in all developable areas. . .';The wisdom of permitting development is highly questionable." He said -his -groups the Civic League, -thought it was wrong that no environmental tract report was required of the subdivision -and the proposed access'road. Development -would cost the City money, he said. John OSrnsted, 31574 Page Mill -Road; said' he. had fought- several grass fires in -his seven years as a resident at- that addres', -and he knew it took quite a bit of time for engines to get into the area. He stressed the unlikelihood of the proposed road, and deplored the amount of wooded area that would -have -to be cleared for such a road. i Jean McCown-Haw-kes, 656 Greer Road, represented -the board of directors of the Committee . for Green Foothills. She repeated' poi rats. the group had made in a letter to Council on August' 29, 1978. She covered points made by previous speakers regarding the need for dedication of the land "according to Article 8' of- the' City Charter;" for -that -dedication would mean that any subsequent action taken -on -the' !and would be subject to public referendum. She -thought it "dangerous" -for -the City Council to make ad hoc decisions on -individual applications, -for -lack of a policy regarding City -owned lands. She- urged that' an f tl be- mede as early as -possible, for her -group thought there -would be. a- definite- impact. She asked that the proposal not be -approved, and she stressed the need for protectfon'of wildlife in the area. .Tom Harrington, 1250 Montebello Road; - said . he. was- on are unaccustomed side of'the-issue for he was in realestate-bosiness himself. He 'asked that the application not be' approved, ' tie -thought the property was "undevelopable"- for there were -ferry-five' degree -slopes- in many areas, and spanned "a - o oupi e- of creeks," and -he -objected -to -more overhead .wiring; -which -would-be called "temporary," even -though there was an underground wiring -ordinance.- He asked that all wiring- goi ng to park land -be instal led underground. Max Kramer, 4175 Page Mill Road, concurred -with -statements made so far. He objected -to additional traffic because -there -had -been -an increase in trespass - and 'motorcycles, which -Increased -dater;' fro a fire, and to life. He asked that- the City Council maintain- Its -pesh'teward retaining and creating open -space, and not scar- the land -with this project. He wanted the wildlife to remote- undisturbed. He -objected- to- the amount of litter, along with abandoned junk oars,- tlratewas-ruining the present road. Housing stood -out -like 'sore thumbs" in'a-primitive area. 182 9/18/78 Alan Ligda, Box.397, Los Aitos:'sai hi= faintly had sold much of its property in the subject area. He wanted' permission'to'build a house on the remaining. ten acres; he did not-want'utilities or a public road. He gave some history of his -land. "We want -to -build three houses on thirty acres," he said, and he did not-want:to se11'his property for $1000 for open space. "All I - want to-do is to live on -my own -property," he said. Trout Black, 4443 Virginia, Oakland; said he -had -lived on the Hidden Villa property for -the past'six-years. He aligned himself'wlth "caretakers for the future;" who, -along -with Josephine Duveneck, .did not want to develops but instead,- wanted to take -care of the land: He described some of the -terrain, and he thought that- for -roadbui ldi ng it was "totally inappropriate." Harry A9ne, 30600- Page Mili- Road, said- tha the staff -report contained items about environmental-ispect, condtttc l' acceptance,' corrections of the submitted map, and the- appropriateness' of"the- private' road. He and two -other speakers -would take up those -matters, after which, Mr. Aine said, he would propose an amendment to the condition. Barry Block, 30610 Page Mill -Road, sal d- he- was - a facul ty member at the Institute -for Geophysics at UniverSlty-of California; for eight years, along with being a staff -member -for for Scripps -Institute -of Oceanography. His basic concern at both institutes had been with seismic and techtonic movement of the earth's crust; He had -found -that the "basic Franciscan" material of the proposed area would make agood roadbed. Bedrock in the area was close to the surface --buildings on bedrock -were -"worth one full magnitude in an earthquake" anywhere in the Bay Area. -He -referred to a scale model of the proposed project showing' that- the houses were to be on the flat -portions of the land. ;cone of -the property gave a view of Page Mill Road. The old PG&E road had had no -damage from erosion or structural fault. That PG&E road would' constitute -one-half of the proposed road. No electricity, -and' only water; would -go into the site. He thought the proposed road would facilitate -fire protection. He agreed with the staff -report, which said that a negative declaration would be suitable. Mr. Aine said that the terrain made it'unsuitable for• each lot to have frontage on a public road. He deferred-, for that"point, to exhibits attached to the staff report, and to the petition of August 4, 1978 staff report, Exhibit C: Stuart Auchincloss, 220 Greer Road, .said' thatas' a -civil engineer he had been involved with the property working with Mrs . L igda -and now for Mr. Aine, since 1969. He had several maps in his possession upon which he bas ed - the location -of the -section ' l 1 nee ° of thw property : He fend tht geological survey -map was- in error -en' thestaff report,' far section line and City boundary were "some ,600 feet furthereast- than shown on the application, He gave some history of the prope ' , and' of annexation and levying of assessments. He cited some alleged -misrepresentations by the City regarding possible develop ent of the property, which, Mr. Auchincloss said, had been considered residential for a long time. Mr. Aine referred to a map of the area and outlined the• course of the proposed road, saying he had documentation -from -a- geologist and civil engineer shoeing the proposed.road was feasible. -He' referred to Exhibit 3, outlintng"how,tne proposed -road would-facftttatel#refighting possibi- lities, He p +ed ' an amenatnent . to Coot ti on 4 given in the staff report making se language less specific -em the width -of the proposed road, asking instead that "...an adequate -road should -be put in, subject to Site and Design approval and Ci ty- Counci 1-, approval : without making the actual requirement for the 20 -foot width-, at -this. time," be the wording used. 183 9/18/78 Councilmember-Sher asked about the'pov ibility of anaccess road to the property to come fr other' direction;:as-mentioned' in the Planning Commission m1nutes; was the Ouveneck property -road no longer under consideration? e Mr. Rine said that the road proposed - by their -application was the least complicated so far as obtaining -approval'. The'Duveneck property road was still an alternative. RECESS Mayor Carey said that Councilmembers' would-examfne the exhibits Mr. Aine had -submitted -during recess*. The- 8ay'tends-Master' Plan could- be considered after -'the'; per Page Mill Roed ' and the Parkside'Drive matters. Councllmember Sher said he thought amplo-ttme should be assigned to the Baylands Master Plan discussion. Council. recessed from 9:05 to 9:20 p.m. UPPER PAGE MILL.ROAD--APPLICATION (continued) Craig Britton, Midpeninsule Regional -Open Space District (MROSD) said he had writtee the -Planning- Co itssion August' 30, 't978= to' discuss problems regarding access to the District -property. He -corrected the parcel number to' 551-0422. He said "The road as' originally conceived was shown on this map before the Planning' Commission- ard' the• one on the exhibit over here as shown• tonight-sho s that- alithree-parcels are served with a road that would go across the westerly' 4 feet -of ?POSD's property. supported this letter of doctamentation' that- shows' that- only one of those parcels would have any rights over the' District property, - and so only a parcel fronting those parcels could be'served•wtth'a'road of that type. Some other means would have to be found, and' it 'did -co a up that this was going to affect the City of Palo , lto`s-property'as far as easements were concerned, and -it would -also- affect'the-District-land, so 1 just wanted -to -make that-cicar." The City had been -more -than -satisfied with the District's'provisions for fire protection, he said. Counci lmember Sher asked if- the applicant- now •had-clatrn to an easement across that parcel' of land. Is there some question -about= this?" Was it the stand of NNWthat there was tee such easement? Mr.- Britton replied that t -ease t:existed-over the westerly and easterly forty feet of the property;' and ...as -far• as-+ ' ne concerned there's only one parcel that have rights to -that -easement. The two most northerly -parcels did not'have any rights: the'most southerly parcel may have rights, and -the applicant;- not' MROSD, -had- to prove that to the City's satisfaction. Coon$ lreearber Sher asked if MROSB ' had some -position on the matter of the easement. Mr; 8rtttol replied that 1f•any of the parcels -find -a -right to cross MOW ' property it was only thei'a t� southerly _one: , f8 3.. had' not addressed the question � as to whether or , not it world- grent- an -ease+ ent to the three parcels, Couocilmember Cley asked -if consideration"of-the 8Wands Master Plan could not be ' moved -to another evening. 184 9/18/78 i Mayor Carey outlined some of the difficulties about. time needed to consider some other items'. 8e suggested that perhaps the next meeting which Council -had considered cancelling' because' of the League of California Cities (LCC) meeting in Los'Angeles might be the answer. Vice Mayor Henderson suggested -that Council continue working on that evening's matters. MOTION: Councilmember Clay moved, ` seceded:by Witherspoon; that Council continue the matter of the= B$ylands ' Master` Pian' until September 25, 1978. Vice Mayor'Henderson said the matter:was.too'important to act on without the full Council. The Regional* Water"Quai'ity- Control• Board had put on pressure about the need to cover the' closed dump after 1t had been closed --he was -a member of`the Regional Water Quality Control Board: A state law established a period for closing because some ' ccsnmuni ti es had closed drams without covering them. The Regional Water Qual i ty Board did not want to favor a plan that made it advantageous to keep dumps open for longer periods of time. The portions -of the -Palo Alto dump where there was incineration would not have the same closing requi re nerits as other areas had. The Regional Water Quality Board wanted to get together with the City staff to discuss' those different problems, and ...no doubt the Board itself would probebly come up with some other answer for closing." Vice Mayor Henderson said he thought it was impera- tive to do that. He thought it: would be-possible'to close the d p in eight or tee years and continue to cover itwithdredgings from Palo Alto's yac.it harbor and not have -tremendous -extra -expense. The Army Corps of Engineers dredged the bay and -those -spoils were available and Council could see if those could be used. The possibilities of de - watering ponds had not been talked about. He thought that the Joint Powers Authority ;JPA) study now going on -with other cities might give ':hoices for landfill operations. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Vice Mayor Henderson moved that there be continuation of the Baylands Master Plan until completion of'JPA's'study about Phase 2, during which time staff was to pursue the' following: 1) meet with the staff of the Hater Quality Control Board -to discuss -possible -alternatives to time requirements to complete cover- operatior1s'after dump closing; 2) meet with representatives of the Ate. Corps of Engineers to discuss availability of dredgings for -use by Palo Alto; 3�'meet`wtth Leslie Salt Corrected Company representatives to discuss possibilities' of`converting evapora- see page 270. tinting ponds to de -watering ponds. Councilmember Witherspoon said she-thought'the motion -dealt with only one aspect of the kyle/Ids Master- Plan. r She- thought'the Baylands Master Plan could be coesidered, and the final decision on -the dui could be postponed Vice Mater Henderson said the City : mod' to' knomr puss% bl a uses for dredgings from the yacht harbor--the'd&mp'ciostng and the Baylands Master Plan and consideration of the closing •of• the ,yacht harbor were all tied together. Cevocilmember Witherspoon said she referred ' decl di ng onr as much of the Baylands setter as possible, with the a pect-oi'-the'dump to be left undecided. Stanford University had just i ded' note to proceed with its incineration plant, and that was a disappointoent'to those who had thought it might provide a solution. Ben Pawl oski , Director of Public -Works, sal d -the .implications of Vice Mayor Henderson's plans were very -strong. The Ctty had -been trying for two or three years to make a decision on the gredtng`pian'for the refuse 185 9/18/78 disposal area and unless a' decision -were made- further operati' ns would have >.o -be discontinued, - because* theepresen —method- was` common to all three of the -proposed grading'plans,'hut by the'ftrstof- the year there would be no more space, because it ti ;d'not be -known what grading plan to use. If the dump were to continuej'without"a• plan' tt-would have some irreversible effects so far as grading was concerned: If there were further -delay the City would either do:somethingtrreverstble or it would have to -have some° other plan'for w at'to do with the rubbish. In October the City will complete the first phase-of'the' resource recovery plan, which meant that markets and -technology -would be -looked at; the second phase -would be to have a closer tookeemany solution is years down the -road:" The -Stanford -Solid Waste' tiergy'Plan'had-as-its objective to put a plan in operation eey-19B3, and' Stanford'had to realize that that was much too ambitious . • i n view of- i ts' ntar+erous other` probl eme. Mr. Pawloski thought Palo Alto was ten or fit n years away from any solution for taking care of solid wastethat coa7ld point to r°esouree ' recovery= -that is, a total solution. Council ber Clay said -he would -vote against the -substitute motion. If that motion failed ' he would amend' hi s mots on• to propose the Bayl ands Mster Plan discussion for October 11. The- second to his motioe, Counctlmember Witherspoon, agreed. Councilor Sher said he ttooght- Coon imemberhenderson's motion said -that the -Regional later- Qual i ty Control Board had not respdnded to Palo Alto's clearly implied indication that it -would like to close the dump as soon as possible in line with the policies of the Regional Board, showing how its paper requirements might -be adapted to fit the City's wish to protect its environment tens of the- imported fill and the other factors that are involved." He thought the problem of the grading of the dump had to be worked out so -that the dump did not have to be closed in Januarry. Councilor l:azzino asked if staff -had attempted to pursue questions raised -that evening with -the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Mr. Pawloski said staff had rec ntly had several meetings with them. Dr.. Kroll, a RWQCB staff pperber, had` coo to 'speak. before the Planning Commission -on some of the issues. Mr. Pawloski-said that he, himself, had never represented that the Regional Water. Quality Control Board would require Palo -Alto to -finish off the dump: in eny- specified period of time. All - thet the -Board would require, -with- hard- tocover material, was theta minimum of one foot -meet certain- specific- : i rements , and that there be a total of three feet of fill atistni .--The City's plan had been to cover each year the acreage of r isk' that -had been placed the prior -year. With that plan todo' so annually -the cash expended would be spread out, and the -City r l d- not - h►ave' to fill a - hundred acres at one time. That would make possible'a'better-balance-of revenue and expenditure. Vice Mayor Henderson said he did r +t' understand why the ten-year period of time had been stated. Mr. Pawloski explained that the eight-to-ten`year'plan.was the shortest possible time. that 'the' fi l - cool dt be'. com3tetad: -That-represented the shortest -length of -time. The other extrl ' t e - testy to twenty- five year lan. What might be misleading in"the- coact `estimate was that in the eight to -tam year plan was included -the -cost up to twenty-five years ' to take care'of the disposal of refuse. Vice Mayor Henderson said- huthoughttbfercestucited were for closing the -dump acrd then co eri ng it. - He tit, t e -matter- too deep to be deci d d ` that evening or in any ' short period of'on` or two weeks. 186 9/18/78 Mayor Carey said he ;would vete egaiait the moton; tie thought Council had enough'inforin t°;on- on! idre;ch'to'base-decis:ons;-the master plan could be modified later There' ;sere ' too many demands on -staff for more ano more information. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED! The substitete:mot'icn that discussion on the Baylands Master Plan, with more •;nformatien'to'be'reported by staff on sources of-'spoils.and location of de-PraterIng ponds and alternative dump closing times, failed on the following vote: AYES: Bremner, Fletcher, -Henderson, Sher NOES: Carey', Clay, Eyerly,•Fazz;no, Witnerspoon MAIN MOTION PASSED: Tne main mvton, that- Counci i continue the discussion on the Saylands Master Plarr- ente the-Spec iai Counci f meeting of October 11, passed on a unan im ee vote -UPPER PAGE MILL ROAD--APPi iCAT;Of (coat; rued) Ken Schreiber said the eppi cation gave'the appearance of being very complex; he would like to separate -the different issues: -The application was for the die son of a 30-ac,e payee; `:ntc trree l0 -acre lots. He said that the transparency on the scTeer was a copy° of +ire map submitted by Mr. Aine; the area to be dry ded ea cut►ireo in red. Preliminary maps such as tnfs ee re rot based V, oeta-i'!e` =l, Vie_' recerd3 and details of engineerng, acrd that frt 0 07 t,r,c. tee.teg' ea_' r,cmal iy left for delineation on tee fa : mep Staff tneught the p; ::pert.y to question was about 1500 more feet to tee r lend.-h3i:d a tde of the- beurde gut.! i' ad on the map : neon on the c�eee, That eeeld-e t be knoen-for sure until the propert, w -oureeged and ma key's aeee•p.;::.ed :re the venous corners of the property • Tne !amid wee, , at- resent; eoeed 0-S(open+ space, 10 - acre mthimwn parces) and tint eu'd net -be -charged. The only exception from zoning or siebtovisien iegj.Y nti-tt',',ie ed frontage on a pL ,lic road, and the e=cept' on W3s to. p'e'„ C ; te' rL id rather than a Rally- dedicated stanaaun puoiioteadeee, to se e the properties. The question of the read as the most ditr u =t. Staff -is acutely aware of the potential enei roe nta ; ;mpa,t of the read The proor was that it was not known where the read ;gar goieg to go, The ,hap on the transparency showed the goad out? irs.ed- Mfr beek, Mr. Schsebet- .erbafly outlined the course of the road, snoning- tt croseed: pTopevtee- owned -by Mr.�, MccColley, which was n 4n escrow, City of Pale Alts,;- • pust-Adobev.+rfreek then the road crossed land owned by Hr. Du'>tene k, returrltng' to land owned by MROS©. and fi ra i ly to trr'e and Wined by these who had made -the application. The road outlined -in Exhibit 2, 'she d a different•a'tigrment, and did not crams the- 0 zveneck property. for an -environmental review to be done, a project was needed, and in this -case -the -project mas to subdivide the )and. Discussion.of the road`was not the project. Normally,• after a subdivider received approval of a ten" t ve°snap'he-then-hired technicians as heeded and laid out a specific road alignment: -That -specific road alignment would then return to the City fot-rev-4w, and'that was one of the conditions for -approval; - That t proposed r pad'ra€i over a number of different properties coe+pounded the- problem before Council. In the initial staff report sent to the Planning Comeission-iand-also included in the City Council rs` packets) staff bad proposed eleven conditions fur approval of the tentative ap, .ore . of whi cr,' was to`obtai n. an easement from the• City of Palo Alto tor -access for reunite linens across the property; another was to Ootain an aa.sement for' pertinent Ingresslegr s for any utility lines from each -property -owner: owner. Mr. Schreiber said that -legal -questions had been ra►sedby-rvptesentatives'of the properties; Mr. Aine and Mr. Block had offered tneirewn-ieterpretations of the law and of title --staff thought that was' a matter between t e subdivider and the' corers• of tine -other properties. . Anothercond; tion was that the I 8 7 9/18/78 subdivider was to construct the -road -to -meet requirements for width; accessibtlity to -emergency vehicles-foroatside tarn radius, and the like. The September 14 staff reportproposedan eleventh condition: "That the subdivider shall submit:a satisfactory -and' -complete application for site and design approval for -the -proposed -access -road. Approval of the site and design application shall be obtained prior -to approval of the final map." .That condition -came -to grips with -the road issue, and the City and Planning Commssion and'A1t8-could-deal with the problem, for the terrain and numerous -possible -road -alignments ware very tricky. The direct issue before Council was subdivision of the' land, and the offshoot issue was access to the -property. The'accessematter was very complex. Site and design approval was needed, then Mr. Aine could attempt to obtain the easements from property owners; including the City, with the matter -to return to': tte- City -for-final-approval . If, in that site and des i gn.- process , the- need' for' an -CiR became apparent, it would then be appropriate to request one, for -then -there would be a project on which an EIR could be made. Counci lmerber Witherspoon asked if: tree. chronological -order was not different from the customary order of -requirements -for a subdivision map. Mr. Schreiberreplied that the chronological :order was different from the customary; the conditions were interrolated.` le thought that the step of obtaining an easement from the City might. be' tied- into the site and design process. Condition number 4'was. the last step-in the process, relative to this particular application. Councilmember Witherspoon said it was difficult for her to understand Corrected how staff had said that the project would not have,a. signicant environ- see page 270. rrental- Ir ,act, until the eleven conditions had been met. Mr. Schreiber said the. staff statemert: related. to the subdivision of the land, not the road; That finding by staff'did.not'foreclose any judgment on the road itself. Lou Green, Assistant City Attorney; said that -under the Open Space zoning site and design approval was-necestary..on-development of arty road or driveway in remote -areas. The roadway portion- of -this application was not yet defined sufficiently to judge- environmental impact. Counc1lmmiember Sher asked if the easement -question -should -be taken up at the same -time -as the site and -design review -if -the applicant went ahead with the course of the road he had shown. Mr. Schreiber said staff -was rec ndtng: that -Council- au rize (point G on page 6 of the staff report) staff to negotiate -a proposed easement subject to review Le -Council. One of the' conditions `in approving en easement required that - then' be an initial ' s i to - and- design approval. Councilor Sher said that if -Council approved- of- staff -negotiating an easement'it implied that "...it's a -good thing to do." Mr. Schreiber said he thought that negotiation tl.:.a refinement of this proposed subdivision...dtd not forecrose any- options -on the part of Council." Councilmember Sher observed - that' he : thought-i t- awkward for staff to recommend theft -Council negofiate yen-e.semmmenteew thst t e- City could look at the -entire project without consi deri ng' whetherr or not -the City wanted to grunt the easement. . 188 9/18/78 Mr. Green replied thet staff recommended that, but nothing precluded Council from deciding it did not-want'to-grant an easement. Councilmember Sher asked if itewere- possible; relative -to the recommen- dation, for the applicant to return with a site and design application for a road which he did not have permission to build. Mr. Schreiber said that would be an incomplete. application. The applica- tion would have to have permission froe'propertyowner(s) and in this particular hypothetical case there would be no•per tssion'from the City. Councilor nber concluded that then -Councils -in order for the owner to go forward, would -have to direct the staff, at least tentatively; to negotiate an easement. He referred to' page 2 of -the . staff report of September 14, which said Council needed to consider four major items with regard to the application, with the first -being -the adverse: environmental impact, and so on, with the fourth consideration -being "Is the proposed private road, an easement across City property, an appropriate -design for the subdivision?" If Council's answer were "no" would the Council deny the application? Mr. Schreiber said the intent of the fourth -consideration -was -to ascertain if the general concept of -the -road running across City property was acceptable. MOTION: Councilmember Shermovedeseconded by Henderson, that Council denythe app! i cation -for a preliminary parcel -map for -three lots off Upper Page Mill Road. Counci 1,remer Sher said- he did not want to _grent -an- easement for a road across -land -that should have'been dedicated for park purposes long ago. Councilmember Cyerly suggested that- perhaps .there was . another way to achieve access without going across -City land. He -thought the preliminary parcel -application had to be separated'frtn the question of the road. He did think the owner had a right to build but he -did not like the approach of the road. He did not know if those two had to be related. Mr. Schreiber said it would be appropriate for -Council to add that on as a part -of condition ll. Counctlmember Eyerly asked- if- the condition -4 -had -to -be considered, about -the proposed road across private property. Mr. Schreiber said Council had befcre:them.en exception, which needed to be -given -0 and that was -lack of access - t.o' a' pub li c street : In granting that exception sorsthi ng 'had to be done to 'showhose the intent of that regvi rest was to be met. Ptr: Green referred to page 2 of. the staff report saying -the four condi- tions set forth therm were not - neces sari 1 y the conditions - reccrrended by staff; they were basically four considerations -the -Council was now .considering-.- If Council did not want to grant an'easement it was aopropri ate - to indicate that at this time. Page' 5 of the staff report requ1 recd -various ' eas nts, and' it demonstrated' that- the City was not requiring the -developer to'obtain i ngr ss/egress"thrx r- Ci ty property. The developer could come to Council with another i ngtess/egress plan. Councitmember Fazzi sro said he - thought ttwavf'ol ly to separate the issue of the- road -:from the other'parti of the° prvposa i; -He-asked. Mr. Sipel if be - knw why - the land ho d - by the City had not -been dedicated back in 1972 when i t had - been given to the City. 189 9/18/78 Corrected see page 270. Mr. Sipel replied that he wanted totalk about the:matter in executive session because it-invnlved pending litigation. Councilmember Fazzino asked how he could initiate`dedication proceedings on the City -owned piece of bind. Mr. Green repliedthat' Councilmember Fazzino could`put it on the agenda. It could be talked -about in executive session. Councilmember Fazzino said -he thought-Mr.-Aine had• a legal right to build on -the -land, but he was very concerned about -:the- road -building proposal. He. asked if only -the Ouveneck-property approach was open to - Mr. Aine. Mr. Schreiber said that was the only alternative -he could think of. - Staff had not considered the question in much detail. Councilmember Fazzino said he would like' to proceed- as:soon as possible to dedicate the land- and foreclose- the chance. of -putting a road across the land. He wanted to do so before he voted on the Aine proposal. Mayor Carey said that Councilmember Fazzino could- make - the- mot: an at the present time, and Council would -adjourn to executive session before it would be voted upon. The motion would cause Council -to adjourn. Mayor Carey said he was going to ask staff -if a) Mr. Aine-had-an easement on the City property at present; b) if he did and -it was not a viable access route, did the City have an obligation to provide an access route? or cr if Mr. Sine did not have are access easement -over City land, did the City have an obligation to provide him with an easement on the theory that he was entitled to s e -access 'from- somebody? If the City perhaps had the obligation to make available a less onerous access than other aiternatives, he would like to discuss: that as -well. Mr. Aine probably had the right to a subdivision map if exception about fronting on public streets ' were granted. It had already= been decided that houses on 10 -acre lots could be built` in the Foothills then "the property had been zoned for residential use. The question -now -was -should the City give away public land for the benefit of a private developer. He would not vote for that. He would vote against` the' motion before them. The developer had to return with better answers than those at present. Councilmember Fazzino said he would like.to proceed -with -dedication of the land soon. He disagreed with staff's' recommendation; and he thought that once Counci l - agreed to the proposal -some momenta had -been established, and see moNy would be spent, making it more difficult• to -oppose putting an easement . -on the property. Mayor Carey asked if the application -were -denied -the -applicant would be pr vented for one year from re -filing. Mr. Green replied that he did not think so,:especially under the circum- stance. The applicant wool d be cowing 'back- with -a nor proposed access which would give a different set of circumstances. Coimci lmaera Brenner said that -the Planning -Commission -seemed to have been precluded from- a' free- discussion' of access -to -the subdivision. She had never -been -confronted with the -sittktion-wtere`'there-was no access to a subdivision and there was no discussion -.of: t -fact. She thought the principle of granting an ease t- on public- land -h d -been lost; the subject of access had-been-amphaslzed'instead. One relearegarding subdivi- sions was that they be' not less than ten acres. Ordinarily, when there was a -flag lot, the road that reached.ttw flag tot had -to be owned by the property, and not just be an' easement. proposed -road length was too. long . to` tae considered a' cul-de-sac; there-wrere; ' tn- effect, three 190 9/18/78 flag lots. She agreed that it was completely unacceptable to allow such a road over public land. The easement -had to -be maintained up to a standard that could protect any property -that uses the -road. Was the Corrected road for the exclusive use of the three properties, or did it serve the see page 270. area it went to? Was the design of the road -compatible -to public land, or, for that matter, any of the land? A cardinal -rule of subdivisions was that they - not have access 'Friuli d r' jut tsdicttons .. For example, access to.Palo Alto land through Los Altos roads sts unacceptable. She was sorry the Planning Commission was not allowed to consider what that road did to the area. If the area could support -a road she thought it should be designed -from a- standpoint- of- hoW-. it -served the whole area, and not be a network of private easements "running 'around through the hills." She supported the motion. Vice -Mayor Henderson- said he- supported' Councilmember Brenner's direction not to approve the road easement across City -property, and also he supported the motion to deny the' application. The -applicant could apply again with a proposed road that did not, cross-City'property. He did not agree that Council should approve any subdivision without having a clear idea of where access was to be. Councilmember Clay said he would vote:against-the motion; he thought the road question should be examined, but without'precluding-the possibility that an easement -could be across City property. If there were no other alternatives, or'other alternatives were worse than one across City property it might be better to -go across City property. He wanted to question the necessity that the road be twenty feet wide. At present, there was an easerrnt across the Arastra-property to private property. Mr: Green said he thought that was correct. Councilmember'Eyeriy said'he thought Council had "certain'legal exposure that hasn`t-been-fully explained by the staff -yet." -He thought an executive session was needed•but'he was not sore -they -should take the tiii.e that evening. RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Carey said Council mould meet in executive session for about five minutes. Council recessed toexecutive session -from -1O:30 to 10:40 p.m. UPPER PAGE M1i..WAD—APPLY Tim (conting ) Mayor Carey asked CouncIl r'Sher to recapitulate his -motion which was now before Counci l . Counci lmember Sher said his Motf on -related to item 4 on' page 2 of the staff recommendations, and moved that Counctt'deny-the application for the preliminary Parcel Map -off -Upper Page Mill Road. MOTION PASSED: The motion that Council deny the application passed on the fol l owi ng vote: AYES: Brenner y Eyerl ye Faxxi no , - Ft etcher; Henderson, Sher, ` therspoon NOES: Carey, Clay 1 91 9/18/78 36F PARUDE--OPERATION OF RESIDENTIAL iv A1LUNr V 1 PtN1 f k uA Emily Renzel, Chairwoman of the- P1anning-Co mission; -said that the Planning Commission, by a 5=1 vote, recoemended that'the decision of the Acting Zoning Administrator be upheld, to allow operation -of a residential care home at 365 Parkside, Zone District R-1. .Alice Crenshaw, 385 Parkside, -opposed: the use 'permit, -for- she minded the area she lived-in being used' for' coarnerclal purposes. Fred Crenshaw, 385 Parkside, opposed: the : use permit, saying Greenmeadow had a covenant among its. homeowners that'residential 'zones should be restricted -to residential use, and that did not include commercial use. .Joe Mann-, 3946 Nelson Drive,- supported"Joe and Abby Eller for their reeuest for a use permit to'.operate. a hem for:the developmentally disabled, at 365 Parkside. His letter -.is on file -at the City Clerk's office. He said he and -his -wife Margaretwei d- the -Ellers to their Greenmeadow neighborhood, for he -felt the ki nri - of home 'the Ellers were providing was needed in all cities. Pauline Mills, 671 Seale Avenue, praised -the Fliers for their method of Instilling a sense of responsibility i n --the -young -people who made the i r home with them. .She gave one specific.example of -one resident who, were it not -for the -availability of the Eller's home, would have to be institu- tionalized: She said the youngsters were well groomed and cheerful owing to their constructive home environment. William Logan, 158 Ferne Court, said he and his family welcomed the Ellers. George A. Thompson-, 421 Adobe -Place, supported the Filer's application for a use permit: -The-household operated like -a- family, he said. Lucille Gold, 377.Creekside, said-.sbe.tbought:that-sepporting the granting of theeuse- permit would "-...be both 1aagal:anddhu nely'valid." She felt that those -who -opposed having the use permit granted -would grow through experience with the developmentally disabled. Jim Mathiott, 3t65 Ramona Street, spoke: lot support of 7 the application for the use. permit.: The. resident hocae;:called-'Watership;" had received nothing but co aiendatl oat from their neighbors in -their -former area on Walter Hays. Drive.- He thought the items of possible increase in traffic or noise had -been satisfactorily it't ih. He allude to the covenant among Greenmreadow' residents,' saying be thought -ft could`be interpreted to include this home as well. Elizabeth Mallory, 391 CreekstJe. spoke-fe support -of- filee application. She said she had' been - uhaaove: of the covenant among.Orienmeadow residents; many residents .did - operata busi nesses:A n the# n:homes - there , such as bicycle: and auto repair, arIist� ; and -the like. She- did- not think the Ellers' residential care home would change the character -of Greenmeadow. Jack Hamilton , 4014 Ben Lend Drive,,, sald--he• to #'fir- president of the Breenmoadow Association: ' . said he'welcomed the fact that his own grade and high school children would have an opportunity to interact with -the youngsters at the Eller -home, because he'thought'he and others tended toward ster ping- of those less fortunate than he. Waiter Nays, 335 Parkside . Drive, lured- rat door -to the subject proper t . He said he had keown fi rsthand 'the feelingswanrneighbors had when 192 9/18/78 Agnew Hospital had been closedhand-former patients had been housed within -the comrnuritty. 'He. had' inquired- about: the- Ellers and had good reports from all who had had contact wtth'the residents; at this time his own experience had removed all his reservations, and he approved the granting of the use permit. State law had deemed the residential care home as a residential use, and so -he did not think the zoning could be legally challenged. He predicted that after -the year's trial time, allowed by the Planning Commission,:atmost.ail'the-people in -the neighbor- hood would support -the use -permit; The—Ellers—had—reduced-the number of residents from six -to five voluntarily,. and with"the hope -of eliminating opposition; perhaps -they could re -apply after'the"year so that they could have a more comfortable' financial - marginwith six residents, Carroll S. Rankin, 372 Parkside: Drive,' had lived' at' his- address since 1964. He thought -too much had been said: on the -:emotional -aspect of the Filers' work; -Ha asked Council if "...our' deed'restriction. can be invalidated by the 'good intentions' -of the Ellers?" -He'thought residents were entitled to have Council take- a:second look at'the' single-family residential zone before asking that: neighbors -support the Ellers' work with -developmentally disabled youngsters-. Permitting -the Ellers to continue their work might -lead to allowing two -storey additions as well. Ben Wright, 382 Parkside, had lived at_his,address for about 20 years. He questioned the wisdom of having. so -many people -live-in a "moderate - sized home." He said that white he:supported the Ellers' works he did not favor having it take place in its present setting. Ralph M. Scherer, 3864 Middlefield Road,,said he was Executive Director for the Comunity Workers for the Retarded. He -said -that he had been associated with the state in establishing such -homes as that afforded by the Ellers; and he had always -been gratified -by -the -support offered by Palo Alto to homes such as the Ellers provided; He -thought the Ellers provided a model to the community of the kind -of caring home provided for developmentally disabled. Roger Crawley, 4100 Mackay Drive, said he, and :his' family had liked the neighborhood to which they -had moved two'. years ago, and they feared that the Ellers'-business would change the' character -of the- neighborhood. He thought that permitting the Ehlers might lead'to"further stmilar permissions. Joe Eller, 365 Parkside,' reviewed the fire precautions, - lack of family - generated traffic, adequacy of accorodations, ' so far -as -size of home, the Income from their caretaking work; and —their —outgo, the nature of their work toward fostering the abilities-bf'.thernildly retarded to attain Ind dent'living status, along with figures on'the degree of support' by the neighbors - of their work. Councilmember Eyerly ascertained..that:the:filers:presently had a use permit for -their Work. He found that-. there -were" four-booys' and a girl in their care:- One of -the five bedrooms -was for the Ethers' use, one bedroom for —the -girl, and - t'he two boys .each 'occupied the' rema►i ni ng two bedrooms; They'were not goi -to-iteerestdential use of the garage. The Ellers had - formerly rented a- ham- on Walter -Hays -Drive, two bedrooms of which the building inspector had detered ned could not be used. Councilmember Clay reviewed the El l ere' fi. nano : -there was expense of $2200, seed-II/come of $2400 per month; a'breakeven with five, ple. Council yr^ Henderson ascertained that` the -mildly retarded residents Corrected did not own or drive cars. see page 270. Alan i a rson, ` 376 Diablo : Court, favored the: granting' of a use permit. He NO'S -that "...us#ng cOemonts'as'a shleid'to`denying'a family -like 193 9/18/78 environment to retarded people' becomes:a' sterile community, indeed." He felt the fliers' work was -beneficial to'the youngsters and -to -the community. Sue Sucher, 4094 Ben Lomond,• favored'granting'the' use- permit to the Ellers. Marti Campbell, 330 Parkside Drive,' sait.she was a- Licensed Clinical Social -Worker; She was -aware, because of hetework; that there was a shortage of homes for -the developmental ly dtsabl ed: - Pier-. mei n . concern about the Ellers' heme'was'the fire.hazard,.and she said'":..the Eichler homes are'very expensive firetraps." Her agency had -suggested that the Ellers install sliding glass doors:where- windows ware: now Installed in two. of the bedrooms of the' clients: Shea, said only one of the develop- mentally disabled -residents at.the Eliers:had'a-soctalworker, whereas .state law required that each resident.:have' oneeassigned. Developmentally disabled were "...not like. children." She said -she -had -chosen to raise her children in Oreerreadow - because :she felt 7 the area would not be .subject to change, and there would- be' no commercial development. She had signed an agreement saying she. uld.not- use- her home for business. She held that boarding care homes were.presently receiving about $900 per noon per-cliente-changes for such services' were not regulated. Lucy Young, 318 Parkside, opposed issuance of the' use'- permit to the Ellers. She said that -when -thee Ellers livedon:WeTteriHays Drive they had only three clients, for which a' use' permit:was' not -required. Mr. Eller -Pad given a different set of figures on his finances in another circ:Tstance; she said. She held: that financial -need was -no reason for granting a use permit; the main concern'. as_supposed"to be the health and welfare of the clients. She thought the:applicant, Mr. Eller, should find a home he could afford. She said it -was dangerous to erode, the zoning law. Horn Williams, 144 Walter Hays Orive,-reaffirmed-that-the Ellers had been fine neighbors. Karl Iintch, 1354 4ontciaire Way, Los Altos, :said he was- on- a supervisory board for care of developmentally -disabled: - 'He said -a -care home was, by state law; to be considered a family unit, with six -or -fewer client - residents. He said.he assumed that.thcE1lers` clients -had been placed with him through regional centers, and that such' vendors'- rotes were set by the state. Martin Berndt, 207 Ferne, asked. that' Cotmcil-grant' the use permit. He thought that his own child might sum`- day need -suchrcare. He thought the emphasis placed on the covenant among 5reena madow' residents was misguided. Counci m mberr Fletcher said:she -had'. received a: very favorable impression of neatness and di l i gene' from .her 8:15 a.m.-visit-to-the Ellers' home. She. had observed two broom and one front room doors: She had felt. Corrected that the home could well l be ap -roved` for care for six people. see page 270. MOTION: Councilommber Fletcher moved9:seconded by Henderson, that Council uphold the Planning Commission recomindation that the application for a use permit by the Ellers be approved* and that the figure of five young adults be changed to six to be cared for in a'residential care how. Vice Mayor Henderson said -he bad :felt'• rte d to' mar Palo Al tans speak in support of having the -developmentally disabled -cared for in a residential setting. He would support the motion. 194 9/18178 Council3 = eer Eyerly said he thought it - would be. wet l . to investigate the fire hazards presented -by Eichler homes: ' He: sand• he would like to know about fire exits -in relation to issuance-of"use permits; he asked about the - use permit' issued on Walter -Hays Drive to the Eller, and how many young people were included on that application. Ken Schreiber, Assistant Director of Planning and' Communi ty Environment, said that one of the provisions of'the:use-pevm t was -that -the appropriate state license had to be obtained; Licensi ng'meant-that 'there would be a full' fire. inspection. He recalled thata use permit' to' care. for four individuals had been applied -for -on -Walter Hays Drive. They had withdrawn the application and bought the house oar Parts i de , and applied then for a permit to care for six. The zoning admieistretoraindieated an intention to grant a use ' pe! mi t for five, and tom' Ei l ers . had -appealed that; techni- cally there was not a use permit for the five individuals at the home, though the Filers had been given indications that'the'zoning'ac tnistrator intended to grant one. Mr. Schreiber added that -his wife -was a licensed clinical social worker, and through talk with her -he -understood that tiring, especially involve ent with city process, was -lengthy and had madeit difficult to comply at' present,. ' He thought the' Filers intended to comply with all the regulations; if the use permit were not granted the Ellers would abide by the City's judgment. Councilor Eyerly observed that he thought all'Councilmembers would like to support the obligation from amoral point of view, yet realism demanded that it be acknowledged that there was impact on a neighborhood from an undertaking like the Ellers. He thought opinion in the community was split as to whether= or not the Ellers' work was' acceptable to them. He did not think the neighborhood was ready to accept it and so he would vote against the motion. Counciimember Brenner asked if there had been -any logic behind reducing the number applied for from six to five. Mr. Schreiber said he had talked'about that with Acting Zoning Administrator Glanville, and that he had intended:to speak to the 'significant neighbor- hood opposition" during the public hearing on the zoning -administrator's issuance of a permit. The number applied for had been reduced in an effort to compromise. Councilmember Brenner asked -if, in -Mr. Schreibees' opinion, six was an overload of people. Mr. Schreiber that he did not think so personally;'he-did•not think Mr. Glanville thooght it was either. Councilmember Fazzi no said . that for a ;couple . of months he had thought state law precluded cities from taking steps 'to"restrictuse of a hone for Mr. Eller and others who did that work. Mr. Green said -two sections were - involved:-. 5ectioes : 51-15, end 51-16 of the Welfare and Institutions -code. Thoscsections-restricted cities in certain -respects, saying that resident#al'care' suctt as the Ellers' cou 1 d be -allowed in certain residential zones. ' He .did not know if that law applied to a charter city such as. Palo Alto;'but Los Angeles,' another charter -city, had litigated in tire- matter' and lost; .The -code section di d. el to w the city to require"' use permit, .sad' stated -rather ambiguously that no condi ti on shoul d be imposed on su : ho ees which ' are more restrictive than those- is rased 'on other, similar. wellings, in -the area, unless they rove. necessary to protect. the health and safety -of -the residents. Pale Alto has not' totally precluded from regulating' for it could require a use weft. .Specific aspects . of tip. bo%ise : had ' to - be viewed in terms of - safety and impact, and cities could not rely. simply'on the' fact that the use was "inappropriate," for the state had said he use was appropriate. 195 9/18/78 r 1 Councilmember Fazzino said he thought -the Planning C +isslon's approach Corrected had been sensitive: The Ellers:had:oae-year-to-conv1nce the neighbors see page 270. that the-Ellers'-use of -their home was appropriate -in their residential area. Councilmember-Fazzino said he was .impressed- by -the support the Ellers had received. He felt that the use'was'.appeopriate, for he also feared, as one of the speakers had said, that Palo Alto might become a sterile community. He thought neither the fire hazard nor the financial matters were -relevant. -He-said-he knew the- Fliers and -he had "...absolute and total faith 1n the-Ellers and their integrity." Councilmember Sher sa1d- he- thought. Council had always . thought -the situation regarding acceptance or denial of a'. situeti on' -to a neighborhood was the most difficult to -resolve. Care -had tc: be-.taten-in' the granting of use permits to see that no one- neighborhood:was overloaded:wtth too many, as had happened to San -Jose: The state lawrequired that -developmentally disabled be placed within -the co ani ty - rather than kept in institutions. He supported that law and the policy behind i t that said it was more beneficial for such people to be -within a-retettee'hood. He felt the case before them for granting the application -approached being almost the perfect case for noquestion' had: been. raised- about the- characters of the apolicants, or their dedication totheir-calling, and also they had proven their abilities already here in Palo Alto. The Planning Commission recommendation called for a review of- the use permit in -twelve months, at which time concerns could be made known. Hehoped neighbors who had concerns would accept the spirit of the Ellers' words and try to work out with the Ellers whatever problems they might have with them as those problems arose. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Sher moved,: seconded -by Fazzino, that Council approve the Planning CommissionTrecommendationeand approval of the number of five residents as recommended by the. Acts ng Zoni ng' Admi ni s trator . Councilmember Sher said he woul d _like . to° have the - matter- of the nu r of residents -subject to=review at the end of .the year along with the general review of the Ellers' undertaking. Councilmember Fletcher said that:reviewal,of-number,of residents could eiso be' a . cons tdera ti on of` reducing .tae aber eof'. residents from six to Corrected five. She emphasized -that the residents did - not and wrou l d not drive. see page 270. Counci tame ber Sher said he . proposed . app ~v f ng :tire . number . recomended by the zoning administrator in' the interests oi~ccaap omise' with the neighbors. AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment passedeon the -following vote: AYES: 8ren er, Carey, Clay, Eyerly, Fazxiem, Sher, Witherspoon NOES: arson, Fletcher Councilor Cl ay 1tkenet. the .applicattowfor a:use- permit at 365 Parksi die to that for a use permit at -948 Cowper; i n• both• cases Council ' s .concern had been with how well the apps 1 cants' ' uses fitted in the ne i ehbore hoods. in the 365 Par kst tie matter the' acc eptabtl t ty-af members focussed more on the business aspects, rather than peraefitted- uses. He would oppose the main motion as amended. 196 9/18/78 r MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: The%mein motion; that Council approve the application for a use permit -as recommen ect by the -Planning Commission, and for five residents, passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Carey, Fazzino, Fletcher, -Henderson, Sher, Witherspoon NOES: Eyerly, Clay CANCELLATION OF MEETING 0F_ SEPTEMBER 25� ] 978 MOTION: Councilmesnber Fletcher moved, seconded -by Witherspoon, that Council cancel the regular meeting 'of- Septe berg 2B, 1978. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. #R� MOTION: - Counci ln r F azzi no-- moved', - seconded- by Eyerly, that Council adjourn. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. Council adjourned at 12:15 a.m. ATTEST z� zt. , City Cerk 197 9/18/78 11'