Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-11-07 City Council Summary MinutesRegular Meeting November 7, 1977 ITEM PAGE Minutes of October 17, 1977 3 0 4 Oral Communications 3 0 4 ''.onsent Caledar - Referral Items 1978-79 Community Development Block Grant Funds Consent Calendar - Action Items Analysis of Costs and Benefits to Cc--Op/California Avenue Parking Assessment District NCPA/CALAVERAS Hydroelectric Project Extension of Existing Partial Residential Moratorium Until Completion/Adoption of Zoning Ordinance Award of Contract: Elevator Maintenance and Repairs Award of Contract: Replacement of Wood Flooring at Lucie Stern Community Center Retirement of Peter S. Azcueta Request of Couucilmember Fletcher re Tree Douses 305 305 305 3 0 5 305 3 0 6 306 3 0 6 307 3 0 7 4130, 4146 El Casino Real - Change in Zoning Classification From R-1 and C -3-S to P -C (Barron Square) 3 0 8 Public Hearing: Noratorlum on Portion of Tbain Property 4146 El Casino Real and 520, 524, and 526 Maybell Avenue 3 1 2 Approval of Minutes of October 17, 1977, 3 1 4 Recess to Executive Session re Personnel 3 1 4 Public Hearing: Sand Hill Road Improvement Project Assessment District Proceedings Finance sad Public Works Committee Recommends re . Californie Avenue Parking Garage Feasibility Study 315 327 Rumen Relations Commission **commode to Council re Affirmative Action/Equal Opportuait*,, Contract Compliance 3 2 8 Request of Councileem4ers Eyerly and Air re Planned Community Zoning 2 9 Oral Commm mnications 3 2 9 Adjournment to Executive Session Re Personnel 3 3 0 Final Adjourmment 3 3 0 303 11/7177 Regular Meeting November 7, 1977 The City Council of tho City of Palo Alto met on this date at 7:30 p.m. in a regular meeting with Mayor Sher presiding. PRESENT: Brenner, Carey, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Sher, Witherspoon ABSENT: Clay MINUTES OF OCTOBE I7, 1977 (Also acs page 314) Mayor Sher directed that if there were no objections, the following corrections as submitted by Naphta�:' Knox should be made: 1) On Page 243, second line from the bottom, "would be different" should be "would not be different"; 2) On Pegs 244, sixth full paragraph, second line, the word "commercial" should be added after the word "thoroughfare"; 3) On Page 245, first line of the eleventh paragraph, the reference should be to "paragraph". B (8)"; 4) On Page 246, sixth line from the top, the sentence should read "at the southern side" rather than "end"; 5) On Page 247, third paragraph, fifth lira, the words "anything other than" should be deleted; 6) On Page 248, second paragraph, first 1_'ne, '„roadwap"." should be substituted for "right-of-way"; 7) On Page 249, sixth line from the bottom, the referenced zone should be 11-V and not 'C -R-1". 8) On Page 252, in the eleventh line, "Silia" should be "Silvey", and the same change should be made in the second line on Page 253 and the sixth line from the bottom on Page 258; 9) On Page 262, in the third paragraph from the both, third line, the word "density" should be deleted once; and 10) On Page 263, ninth paragraph, sixth line, the sentence should read: "The KM -1 zone will allow four units per lot, maximum". Councilmember Henderson as ed that on Page 266, first paragraph, second line from the end, the words which had not been included be added: "...he thought the remaining wood fence around 'the full area vas hazardous and should be replaced.'" Councilasber Brenner asked that on Page 261, about eight lines from the bottom of the page, the passage read, "...and so the project, essentially, 'asked for' the best of both worlds." Councilmsmber Carey asked that on Page 253, fourth paragraph, third line,. that the passage read, "...vas one of the seven requests 'Mr. Koss' had mmade . „ Counci1member Carey said he would have another correction later in the meeting if corrections on the minutes could be continued, and Mayor Sher agreed. i4OTIO3: C uncilmember Henderson coved, seconded by Carey, that approval of the minutes be coatinue3 until later in the meeting. The notion palmed on a umuai ous vote. 1. Joe Begley, 201 Cowper Street, said he had taken EST (Wrbard Seainer Training) a couple of years ago and he received the EST Graduate -Journal. What he had to soy was taken from that journal. He left it with the City Clerk for distribution, 3 0,4 11/7/77 because EST scholarships ware avetileble for umbers of city councils. He continued, saying that the journal had said that stPrvation.was the prase catyan of most deaths, and they thare was to be a general fast cn November 14 to heighten people's awareness of that fact. He offered that the City Council might want to make the public aware of that. He concluded, 'saying that his experience during hie one-year residence in Palo alto had been very good no far as accsUibilit7 to aC.ity personnel was concerned, and he voiced his apprectation. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmesber Fazeino asked if he could remove an item from the Action Items and place it with Referral Items. Councilmembe.r Sher replied that the item had to be removed first for the purpose of tre ferring,it,., Councilmesber Faszino asked that Item 4, c.ncarning Human Relations Comeaiseion support for staff report, and recommendations to Council regarding Affirmative Action/Equal Opportun.2.ty Contract Compliance, be removed. CouncilmeMber Eyerly asked that Item 2, concerning Finance and Public Werke Committee recommendations to Council regarding the California Avenue Paring Garage Feasibility Study be removed. Mayor Sher said the two foregoing items would appear then under Reports of Committees and. Commissions. Counci1ne ber Brenner asked that Item 9, concerning the ordinance changing the zoning classification of the Barron Square property be removed. The following items remained on the Consent Calendar: Referral Items 1978-79 COMMUNITY DEWLOPMENT BLOCK GAANT FUNDS (CMR:469:7, CMR:5O7:7) Staff recommends that Council refer the programs of 1978-79 Comity Development Block Grrnt Pup t'+ the Finance and Public Works Committee. Action Items (ti .:470:6; MR: 472 7) Finance and Public Works Coap4.ttee, b• s rte of three is favor, one absent, records to Council that no action be taken on this item. MCPA/Gt'4VIRAS HY►DROM.F.CTRIC PROJECT (Q :497:7) Staff recommends that !"imcil approve the attached ordinance emending the PT 1977-78 Elects...::tility budget by appropriating $31,858 from the Electric Utility R serva Fond. The status of this appropriation vill be reported to Council when staff seeks additional foods to finance its proportionate developeeet costs for the Caiaveras County Water District O• 305 11/7/77 EXTENSION OF EXISTING PARTIAL RESIDENTT AL ' SIORA'''ORIO triffiL etitdirs• ASP a ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXIENDING THE TERM or ORDINANCE 2958 IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON NEW BUILDING PROJECTS, ZONE CHANGES, AND CHANGES OF USE IN CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO Mayor Sher said that in the ardinanca itself, the second "Where" should read: "WHEREAS, said 0rdinano* 2958 ways amended on January 17, 1977, 1977, May 15, 1977, and Juna 6, 1977, by Ordinance 2964, Ordinance 2987, and Ordinance 2992, raspectivaly; and. . ". The City Attorney will incorporate this in the final document. AWARD OF CCR:TL CT : ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE • AUNT ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SERVICE -Otis Elevator Company Staff recommends that the Mayor ba authorized to execute a contract with Otis Elevator Company on b-$t1f of the City. Otis Elevator Company meets the City's minority employment program standards. AWARD OF CONTRACT: REPLACEMENT ITIMITIUMITIrMTTITRIT 'COMMUNITY CEM'a'ER ( :)i95:7) AGREEMENT --Stuart Floor Company Staff recommends that he Mayor ba authorized to saecute a contract with Stuart Floor Company on behalf of the City. Stuart Floor Company meets the City's mia,rity employment program standards. UNDERGROUND CONVERSION - 66b Block of Rasoas (Q :515:7) Staff recommends that Council continua v:ha conversion project procedure by ^rising throe resolution as follows: RESOLUTION,5476 entitled nk RESOLUTION OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF ENG ' S SORT" RESOLUTION 5477 entitled "A RISOLUTION DESCRIBING PROPOSED BOUNDARIES or ASSRSS L AT DISSTRICT, DIRECTING FILING OF BOUNDARY Milo AND ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM 'AND TES RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT." RESOLUTION 5475 entitled "_A RBSOLUTI_OK APPOINTING TIME AND PLACE OF CURING PROTESTS IN RELATION TO PROPOSED , AND DIRECTING NOTICE." NOTION: Councilsenber Fass ao moved, seceedad by Saodarson, that Council' authorise the Mayor to sign tbs *greenest', a+sd that Council adopt the resolutions add approve the ordinasas fee first" reading. The motion passTad on a unanimous vote. 306 11/7/77 RETI NT OF PETER S. AZCUETn (CMR: 502: 7) CFarles E. Walker, Asaistant City Eger, said that Pete Azcueta had worked with the City for twenty-two years, first as a casual, then with Pul c Works Department, in the Park Section, nine years of which he had spent at the Golf Course. He planned to travel, perhaps visiting hie native home in the Philippines, in his retirement. MOTION: Counciimember Henderson moved, seconded by Pletcher, that Council adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION 5479 entitled "R.SOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF TEE CIT. OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO PETER S. AZCUETA UPON HIS RETIREMENT." MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on a unanimous vote. &dOULST OF COUNCL FLT RE TREE HOUSES MOTION: Councilaaaember Fletcher moved, secimded by Henderson, that Item 14 on the agenda be brought forward for the purpose of sending it to comet-Ittee. Councilmember Fletcher explained that she was asking that the matter be brought forward because the citizen who was concerned was quite young, and would find it diffir:u1t to stay until this item came up in its numerical place in the meeting. Couucilmember Eyerly thought that there should be some priority for moving items forward on the agenda. One reason fox moving an item forward might" be because Council might not otherwise get to the matter, and also the number of people waiting for items to come up ou the agenda had to be considered. Many other people were waiting for their items as well. He would oppose the motion. Counci)member Carey agreed with Councilmembsr Eyerly. While it was the concerned citizens '.sere very young, Council had also to consider the tines seniors been called upon to wait also. He would like a more substantial reason than age given as a reason for brining an item forward. Councilmamber Fletcher explained that she had told the fa!lily concerned that she would move to refer this subieet tn c^ilmg" ttet _-_— ire - t - �+. �.aorT.Y i i C L7JL - - matter, and then discussion would take place at the committee level. The family was not going to make a presentation tonight. Mayor Sher pointed out that the family concerned, the Dinviddieas, had indicated they would speak on tba item only if it were not referred to committee. f ouncilm tuber Brenner said that if no discs ssisn was involved she favored moving it to committee so that it would be moved off of this particular agenda. NOTION PASSED: The motion to agave the item forward for referral passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Clay, Fangio), Fletcher, Henderson, Sher NOES: Carey, Eyerly, Witherspoon Countila sober Fletche.::said that she had bean eoatactid by the Diuviddies because they had bean told that their tree house, mbicb ram in violation of the setback c'de, had to be dismantled. She said sbe mould like to see tree house permitted in Palo Alto. 307 11/7/77 t -. MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, ascended by Henderson, that the matter of the feasibility of an ordinance permitting tree houses be referred to the Policy and Proceduzes Committee. Councilmemher Fazzino asked if a temporary restraining order was required, permitting the subject tree house to remain in existence until the diecusefiarn occurred. Cotuciimembes Fletcher said tflair it the referral motion passed she was sling to bring that up. Charles Walker, Assistant City Hasag r, Said that if the item was referred to committee staff would assume that the matter was tamer active study, and sow would mot cause the tree bausa to be torn down unless it was a clear danger to public safety. Coumc lme ber Eyerly observed that tree houses were considered structures; he ermined there was nothing in the City -erdinancee that spoke to the matter; he aakad staff if tree houses. veers not allowed. Marilyn Norsk Takata, Stonier Assistant City Attorney, said that she thought the problem► was that tree houses were prohibited they had to meet regulations that were not geared toward tree houses. She assumed the import of the assignment would be to find what regulations could e instituted specifically for tree houses, so that they would not have to be deemed regular structures. MOTION PASSED: The motion to refer the matter of the feasibility of an ordinance permitting tree houses to the Policy and Proead'zres Committee passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Clay, Eyerly, Pazzino, Pletcher, Henderson, Sher NOES: Carey, Witherspoon MOTION: Mayor Sher coved, seconded by Carey, that -Item 9, concerning a change in zoning classification at 4130, 4146 El Camino Real, be brought forward oa the agenda. 'ilea motion passed on a unanimous wrote, Council - member Clay out of the room. 4130,_4146 EL CAMINO REAL _ IN , CXTIO IHEINii- i C -3-S TO P -t 7111121711Enallrlrin Mayor Sher noted that several seaibss of the audience had said they would dike to speak on this setter. Stow Ceuncilmeiber Brenner had asked to have the natter removed shi would speak first. Mayor Sher said that this was the second reading on theardinenes changing the zone. Couacilmember Brenner said she bad removed tb• shatter in response to several miletCicaa requests fresco the public. Mayor Sher. pointed out that Council bad received several cas®micationi on the subject from the public, and also -from the Barren Park Associa- tion. • Zennoth Arutnnisn, 922 Hatadece Awe, reed the following letter into the notes which band been benA-delivered to Councilnenbsrs over the weekend 308 1117177 Dear Counciimembers: The Board of Dirsctoxe of the Barron Park Homeowners' Association feels it needs to restate its position with regard to.(Bareon Square) . We oppose the revised Barron Square prrojectbecause it threatens to worsen an already serious series of problems facing Barron Park and its residents. Specifically, we are concerned with the following: 1) Denary--theoriginal Thain property is now divided into too percale Barron Square parcel and the parcel still held by the same family. is adc ition, the Perkins -McDonald parcel, of about one acre, he4 been sold by the developer resulting in throe 'separate potential devalopeents. This poses a threat of piecemeal and inconsistent development, in particular a layer attempt to place higher density development an the new, undeveloped parcel. We ask the Council to define now, and with specificity, the future use and density which it will allow, both in the zoning ordinance and land use map for the remaining portions of the Thain and Perkins properties. Specifically, we ask the Cmcil toa) set as a maximum for these properties'a density of tan units per acre; b) consider a transition tam that would have the higheat _density of the project farthest from existing R-1, and a density more in line with R-1 adjoining existing single-family development. 2) Multi- family housing. Barron Park is already saturated with multi -family housing and more is proposed. This is the result of many apartment complexes in the immediate area, plus recent d imelopment of two high -density projects similar to Barron Square. At the same time, the southwest quaedrant, south of Page Hill and west of Alma, has virtually no community services or facilities such as a library, community center, and so forth. The proposed Barron Square project will only worsen the situation which is already bad and which the City has not yet addressed. (Mr. Arut inian submitted a map which showed 'fairly clearly' the amount of -high -density and tiu1ti-family in the area.) 3) Traffic. The Barroa Square project will markedly worsen the traffic situation which is already a major problem for Barron Park. As presently approved, the project will apparently channel all of its traffic on to local Barron Park streets, increessing the traffic flow which is already the subject of compleinte, Barrou Square should have ingress and egress via El Camino in order to lessen its impact on the surrounding neighborhood< The proposed traffic light is a whole debate in itself. The pros and cars _of the impact of the fight, to our knowledge, have not beee thoroughly ,studied.... _ .. The City must deal coherently with both alIPIKts, . of. Ba ron Park _ traffic problems --access, via El Casino and the general high level of traffic on internal ;streets --before it allows additional develroment within Barron Park. 4) Below -market housing. The low- cost element of Barron Square could be substantially improved with re -designing. Such units would 'matter serve the people if they were a) spread out among different buildings and not concentrated in one location; b) sized to accommodate familial. We applaud the Council's attention and wlllingmmaa to listen to the concerns of the neighborhood and its residents. The moratorium and density limits placed on the parcels of lead adjoining Barron Square vas a positive stop forward. We hope that with this project, as well as any future development which is propose for Baron Park, solutions for the problems outlined above will occur. (signed) Signatories of the Barron Park Homeowners' Association Samuel aster, 3744 Laguna Oaks wee also a member and a director of the Barron Park LNocfaUon, said tee had pss'tialpated in the Association almost from its inception. Se felt they had pert-icipateed in -the General 309 1117/77 Plan, which had resulted in the up -zoning of some r-1 properties from 5000 and 6000 square toot lots --one of the major goads had been to maintain the nature of their community. Another accommplishaent had been Bol Park and the acquisition of the railroad right-of-way. The Association was now engaged in a second -phase of further development of the Park. During recent months the Association bed taken a low-key arppaoaeh toward per- mitting neighborhood residents to.expresa their desires. The Association maintained an ongoing interest iiaminimum density and concern for the impact of developments on the community, rind those wishes seemed to be cocpletely rejected by the developer. The referendum had bean disregarded. Me thought there was a need for unified planning for the whole area. Though he wee not opposed to le .:oat housing he did not waderctand how one -bedroom units would serve the co —city --boat was owerrhip going to be administered? Ue asked staff sad Council 'mustwould happen if the economic situation changed for particular ivi.r.iduals. Be held that rental units would serve a greater need. He said he would like to see data on other low-cost housing in Palo Alto. He asked that the proposal. be denied until stated objectives were resoled. Bill Thornahlen, 957 Yes Robles, said be felt fortunate to be a resident of Barron Park along with his faeLly. 1!a felt others, also Barron Square :utura residents, should also be able to enjoy the area. Be thought that the yell -designed project eight be spoiled if too many changes were made, and he compared . it advantageously to sub -stands: (1 projects in the sears area. Bill Brastow, 551 Maybell Avenue, said ha taught transportation planning at Stanford University in the spring. He said he had seen the traffic impact report and the environmental impart report, and he would grade them 'minus.' He projected a slide on the councilchamber wall showing the traffic impact report. Ha analyzed some of the fiadicos, based on data from a CalTrans study, and ha also held that an illegitimate statistical procedure had bean used to calculate traffic conclusions, and be gave aloes figures be arrived at using his own method: He said the traffic study had been udei al, ha thought the City staff had not had tine to do a thorough study. -B4 asked that the City perform s more serious study before approving Barron Square. Leo D l y , 813 La. i ea�relf e r ►, rc.irk d that mother meeting Was taking place that evening regarding_tits peseibility of closing Ternan Middle School, and that one of the primary considerations between 'this' school end 'that' one was the amount of trait/et a natter that recurred over and over in the Barron Park community. 01- tbs 3.etters seat to ' c'jncil, only 22 had bean frat'people who lured.sentb sY Lea Tobias avenue, end 165 lived north of Los Robles, as area that would net be impacted by the project, for they did not exit on Matadoro or Barron Avenue*, but exited with the traffic light at Los Robles. She urged Council to approve the present project unanimously, for she and stbera •thought the project met the commitments mode to Barron Park. Urea Millar, 540 Maybell, said that eh* spoke to try to determine the course her neighborhood would take, and stmt our teat vas of a few dis- senters 'playing at being irritated.' the referendum had - resulted in the ordinance being rescinded, no acceptable plan had yet resulted. She continued in detail, concluding that she Would "notbe so trusting when she nett went to the polls." Mayor Sher commented that it would be well for Counci],msubers to discuss- only rani insights and observations since mach of . the matter had been thoroughly discuss.:. MOTION: Councilmembsr Witberspsoa introduced tbs following ordinance, and moved, seconded by Carey, that it be; pprdvsd for second reading: t 310 111.7/77 ORDINANCE 3024 entitled "BIDINAUCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNILIPAL CODE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN P.OPZPTY KNOWN AS BARRON SQUARE LOCATED AT 4130 AND 4146 LL CAMINO REAL FROM R.1 AND C-3-5 TO P -C, SUBJECT TO CCL DITI0NS." (First reading 10/17/77) Couneilmemmber Fuxin asked for clatifiaation of Counc lm ber Cerey'o mention of the peevioua meeting that any application coming to the City ender the P -C zoning not exceed 9.8 units per gross acre. Was it correct that there was no zoning at present that dealt with approxi- mately 9.8 units per gross acre? Mayor Sher said the question watt with the erdiaance proposed for the Thain property; • it had beam adopted et the sac time. Councilaeember Fazziao's statement was correct. Councilsember Fs zino asked if thst.partieular aspect of the moratoriva lost its force as law once the moratorium was over. Naphtali Knox, Director of Planning eed Community Environment: said that the question was relevant to Item 12 regarding the properties at 520-526 Maybeli and a portion of 4146 El Camino Real. Mayor Sher said he thought it wee appropriate to coneider the Barron' Square ordinance and Item 12 together. That had been why Item 9, the item they were discussing, had been moved up. Mr. Ynox answered that Item 12, if passed, would enact a moratorium on sur3ro4:,.ding properties on two sides of the Barron Square project, leaving out the properties on the corner of El Camino and Maybell, some of which were already in the El Camino moratorium. "This 'otdinance, which would enact that special moratorium, would expire on July 1, 197E. It's our assumption that the new zoning ordinance will be adopted by that time. Item 6 oe thetoed*, which was adopted earlier tonight, was an extension of tba moratorium and had slightly different language and stated that ti;i extension of the particular mretorium that was in question there, which was on residential properties, basically, would remain in effect up to and including July 1, 1976, or the effective date of the neew - zoning ordinance currently under study, whichever occurs earlier. I just point out the difference* in thee* too ordinances.,' Couaci2member Fessino caked -if that* wee any direction from Council to the Planning Commission re6asdias establishment of a type of zone that would essentially keep tha 9.6 density, which was on the parcels at the present tins. Ms. Kwon said there was us specific dire tios, but that, in discussing it with the Plammring Camisoles ammd.inc paassatimg a amp to the Planning Commission be would bans to roc send thatthmt the awes that would be applied to the properties is q sstias round . be the closest they could get to the 9.6 figure. The maw maims ordinates, at present, bard two somas which had a Ismer density of 10 resits per acre --ems with a potential UMJiMUM of 13, aswthe r with s pstamtial sexism of 20 units per acre. If the soloing ordimoca ice alerted prier to the ermpixeU of the natatorium and if so P -C came is at 94 aaxeos, them epee of those two sow mould be relied to the properties. Se said that on the assumption that he ewld make a recsesmssdatiuoa as nasals; Streeter to the Come- slasiora, and be thought the Cammaissies would also sees that it ears direction from the Conseil; out of =,.;a process amd ',bile hearings would come the conclusion that the lower daoaity somas ors to be applied. 311 11/7/77 Council -member Fazzino summedup that Mr. Knox would need no further direction fee= the Couecil about applying the lower density approach to those particular parcels. Mr. Knox said that was correct. Councilmember Fazzino contineed that he had supported the project beca'ise he thought the moratorium had to be applied to the other pa,..cels, and that the Barron Park project should not be looked at in isolation without con- sideration of the other parcel. He said he felt comfortable with. Councilmember Carey's motion of two weeks ago regarding the 9.8 units per acre. He said that he would like to see a zone adapted for that area that would not go beyovad the 9,8 units per gross acre on that parcel. Councilmember Hendarscn said ha had sped over one reason during the last meeting which he would raise at the pI went: be felt the project plan was not a sufficient change from the plan that was to be referended by petition and Olich had then been rescinded by Council. If Council approved the project he felt it would be subverting the referendum action "...taken by well aver 3J00 Palo Alto residents." Councilmember Carey said he thought items clear that there was a difference (bet= sen the projects). Passage of his motion limiting der.rity for other areas was one such difference. He thought the cor- respondence and large number of supporters for the present proposed project also indicated that. Regarding the moratorium and whether or not the Planning Co®micsion had been given direction, the fact was that the Henning Commission recommended to CoutLcil and so Council could change recommendations if it so desired. There were two reasons to place a moratorium on property, it was tot 'mown what to do regarding developments, or 2) it was knowu what to do but the existing zoning did not permit Beat WAS wished, or it gave too much latitude fot choices. His motion had been based on not knowing what to do with that property, so 'sy voting for a specific, the unknown had been eliminated. He thought that was a substantial change, when it vas coupled with the new and revised plan. MOTION PASSED: The motion, changing the zoning on the property at 413- and 4146 El Camino Rea]. from R-1 and C -3-S to P -C subject to conditions, by approving the ordinance for second reading, passed on the following vote: AYES: Carey, Clay, Eyarly, Fazzino, Witherspoon NOES: Brenner, Fletcher, Henderson, Sher PUBLIC Ham: MORATORITM ON Penes es OF TRAIN PROPERTY Mayor. Sher declared the public hearing open, saying that Councilaembers had received a draft of lama proposed ordin one which would impose the prIposed norstorium. Also included vas a coprof a letter from Golden State Title Company relating to the properties on Naybe11 Avenue. Eephtali anon, Director of Planning and Community Environment, said he bad.projscted a slide on the councilchamber well of the project which had been approved by **cord reading of an ordinance im the foregoing Council action. Also outlined wars the anbject propertiea which were being considered for moratorium. The sense st tbs motion mode at the previous Council mietiz►g vas to have the moratorium be in effect until the adoption of a now zoning ordinance. Direction bad been given to the City Attorney to work out as ordinance and bring it back to the Council for passage. Ths City Attorney bade brought to his attention that it would be desirable to have calendar dates for moratoria. '.therefore, in Section I of the ordinance►, the date of July 1, 1978, had 312 11/7/77 Corrected see` pace 432 been proposed, rather than tying it in with the contusion of the zoning ordinance. If the Council wished to have alternative wording, it could be similar to that wording which had been pawed in Section I of the ordinance relating to agenda 'tee 6, which had to do with having the moratorium remain in full force and effect up to and including July 1, 1978, or the effective date of the new zoning ordinance currently under study, including the zoning regulations and zoning map, wtltthever occurs earlier. In that way, if the ordinance were adopted on an earlier dae, the new zoning could be put in effect, for the norazoriu* would be bff. Gretchen Leland, 3700 Laguna, said the ordinance regarding Barron Square had been passed over the objection of 3000 "of your constituents." She faulted the City'., record for keeping caamitmsnte, and said she meted a more binding comeitmant concerning the use of the land, yet a mora- torium vas better then nothing, though the use of the parcels was not yet decided. She expressed fear that the density might end with 14 to 26 units, for the intent had already been changed from 9.8 to "approxi- mately 10." She preferred Mr. Pazzino's statemo'jt of 9.8 units maximum. Mayor Sher, finding there were no further aptskere, declared the public hearing cloned. Councilaember Cley said he had reeexretions abomomoratoria in general; specifically he objected to Ibis moratorium because passages from the Comprehensive Plan could be used to argue any program, pro or con. One objective of the Comprehensive Plan was to improve the ratio of housing to jobs; another was to facilitate development of low- and moderate - income housing. The moratorium, at the same time, limited the member of units on a piece of property --he thought Council should take a firm stand on one or another of the objectives. He bad heard Barron Perk residents say they wanted 1o4+: -income housing, but not iu their area. He said he would not support a moratorium that set a limit of 9.8 units per acre. He wanted to see all application. that cams in. He did tot object to having a P -C an a proposal. He would not support a moratorium that set a limit to number of units per acre. Counciimember Brenner reminded Z ouncilmembers that Barron Park had already supplied its fair .bare of low and moderate -income housing on )IaybeLl. Though she favored finding houeirg land wherever possible she did not think Barron Park shoulr3 be asked to shoulder more multiple - housing than some of the other neighborhoods had accepted. Zoning on that particular piece of property bad been arrived at by averaging allowable density and the frontaga.vith the *-a, which she felt vae the only possible jusit:ification for fining that 1-1 land within the multiple zone. In adapting the soning- ordinatnce she thought one category saying specificzt.ly, "10 unite per gross acre" should he included, possibly tc be described as having the objective of a.inteining_the Lae density area and help psopia,in that noiShbolthood accept, willingly or not, that particular development. She thought Council hems committed itself to aainteinSng density on that pastieulat project. On that basis he had supported the motion. --cammtilmember Sanderson said ha thought Mrs. Lel and's arguments quite valid, for it was not known what w ss going to happen to the parcel of land when the Moratorium expired. "Of coura'' we wet to improve the ratio of housing to Jobe, however, you do mot put' alt new housing in one area." Except for 8 !spits, the nits . appr wed that evening were to be priced from $90,000 to $120,©00, hardly aodsr'ate-incaw housing. NOTION: Cos ci1assiber retsina introduced the following ordinance, and, seconded by Fletcher, moved its approval by Council for first reading: 313 L1/7/77 51 ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CM OF PALO ALTO LIMITING NEW DEVELOPM:T . 0T CERTAIN PROPERTIES -- "' _ THE CTTY OF PALO ALTO COMMONLY KNOWN AS 520, 524 AND 526 MULL AVENUE, AND A PORTION OF 4146 EL CAMIN0 REAL Councilmember Witherspoon said ohs preferred Mr. Knox's wording for the moratorium, which gave the ending data, or the effective date of adoption of the new zoning ordinance, whichever was earlier. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Eyerly, that the ordivan A include the alternative expiration date of adoption of the zoning ordinance, if it were sooner than July 1, 1978. AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment, that the ordinance include an alternative expiration date of adoption of a zoning ordinance, if it were to code sooner than July 1, 1978, passed on the following vote: AYES: Carey, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Witherspoon NOES: Brenner, Clay, Sher MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED: The main motion, placing a moratorium on properties at 520, 524, and 526 Maybell, and a portion of 4146 El C,-1no Real, passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Carey, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Sher, Witherspoon NOES: Clay APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 171977 (Continued from Page 303) Councilmember Carey asked that the second paragraph on page 2.61 read as hollows: Councilmember Carey said that the land use map had been adopted. That land use map and the text of the Comprehensive Plan, were, to hip mind, consistent. He otated "We all ca., make asrgumeui.s by pulling specific sentences out of the text to support a desired conclusion, and he selected several statements in the text to illustrate his point. He then stated that the density of the proposed project was no greater than many parts of Barron Park today, and in some cases, less than some of _ale At-...OttAtm....Ott= cf Barron Park. He pointed out, as an example, that not far from the proposed site, lots as small as 1600 square feet existed. The density of Eadron Park would be preserved by the passage of the proposed development, as well as the teat of the Comprehensive Plan. "Those from the public," he stated, "that compared the project with Lytton Gardena or Webster Wood, were comparing projects ten tines the density that vas being proposed tonight." The arguments in opposition were essentially 1) to benefit the adjacent neighbors, and 2) to reduce traffic on Maybell. Be stated be would rely on the traffic engineers of the City with resp,ct to the traffic questions, and therefore the question before the Council vas 1) does the proposal conform to the new CosprebenaiQe Plan and the land use rap, and 2) is `it beneficial to the City in general? MOTION: Coanelinamber Witherspoon moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council approve the leiautes of octeber 17 as "corrected. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. RECESS TO EMOTIVE SESSION RE PERSONNEL Council recessed from 9:00 to 9:50.0.a., to discuss personnel matters. 3 -4 11/7/77 PUBLIC HEARING: SAND HILL ROAD rTSTRICT ' DZ , ( :517:7) Mayor Sher said he would not participate in the ensuing discussions since the project involved his employer, Stanford University. Councilsember Witherspoon asked permission to read a statement prepared for that evening concerning her non -participation: Based upon advice received from the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) staff, it is possible that some of the actions regarding the Sand Hill Road Project scheduled for this evening may have a material financial effect upon my employer, and therefore I will not participate in the deliberations or decisions to be made on this matter. Muny of the decisions and actions to be taken, both tonight and on previous occasions when the general subject matter has been before the Council, are viewed by the Comuission staff as being merely implementation of policy decisions previously made, or as not having aarerial fina.acial effect upon Stanford University. But because some of tonight's items may have such an effect, I will not participate in any of the matters pertaining to the Sand Hill Road Project before the City Council tonight. (Signed) Anne Witherspoon Councilnuniber Henderson said he had been questioned several times during the past few weeks about whether or not he might have a conflict of interest in participating in the Sand Hill Project. He made a statement for the record: Corrected see page 432 The Center for Advanced Study of Behavioral Sciences, of which I am the business manager, is an independent research and education facility that 1ias-been located on the Stanford -campus for 24 years. It is a leaaebolder of Stanford similar to Hewlett-Packard, Varian, and others, and the land it occupies is not within the proposed assessment district. The Center receives no finding from Stanford, it operates with a Board of Trustees that has no connection with the Stanford Board of Trustees, and no members of the Winter's Board of Trustees are members of Stanford's Board of Trustees. Vice Mayor Bremner assumed the chair. Vice Mayor Dreamer said that before the Public Hearing was opened Council would take care of some ndscelleaeous items that had teen the subject of motions at the previous meeting. She suggested taking osie item at a time and, if possible, voting on it. She had a list of speakers, who, she would assume, wanted to speak for the public hesring, rather than on the eight niscellaneo•is items. The miscellaneous items were conditions which the City Council hod asked bc. ,:Iiecuss+,ad with Stanford. They concerned 1) Campus Drive Extension, closure of e y portion of Azboretam Drive within the juriedic lion of Stanford University; 2) state- mentof intent from the Stanford Board of Trustees regarding development of the 43 -acre parcel, (adjacent to toe Oak Creek Ap&rtments, prsseetly zoned for housing); 3) agreement with Stanford University regarding the 90 -foot setback on the 45 -acre parcel, (the 90 -foot setback to San Prancisquito Creek); 4) Preparation of a general landscaping plan for the 3.5 acre "open space" parcel, (the parcel that abutted San hraacisquito Creek 315 L1/7/77 from Children's Hospital toward El Camino); 5) etaff to explore the traffic gate alternative concept for the Willow Road/ El Camino intersection; 6) cooperative agreement with the California Department of Transportation for improvements at the El Camino Real intersection; 7) Council statement of intent regarding approval of possible future changes to the Oak/Vine intersection requested by the City of Menlo Park; 8) cost participation agreement with the City of Menlo Park. Councilmembex Eyerly said he thought the public should be permitted to speak on any of the eight items before Council took action that evening. Vice Mayor Brenner agreed: anyone wishing to speak on a matter could approach the microphone and speak an it sometime beft"e the vern on the motion had been taken. Item No. 1 Couacila+eaber Henderson asked, regarding Item 1, if there was a relation- ship between starting Campus Drive and the progress on Willow Road; he wondered if it would be necessary to have some statement that Campus Drive would go onto completion; Sand Hill Road had been covered in that manner. Council*ember Carey pointed out that an added phrase read "and shall ,zooplete construction within 18 months," and so the matter had been covered. Cuuncilme»mber Henderson ascertained that also added was Galvez Street, as the termination for Arboretum Drive, in Item 20, page 5, of the agreement concerning Campus Drive Extension and Arboretum Road. Vice Mayor Brenner observed that: the paper about which Councilmember Henderson's comments had been directed had only been received by Cotlncil,- membera that evening. MOTION: Councilsember Henderson moved, seconded by Eyerly, that Council approve the proposed agreement between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees of Stanford University concerning Campus Drive extension and Arboretum Road. DT. Nancy Jewell Cross, represented twenty-four residents of Palo Alto and also the Committee for a Safe and Sensible San grancisquito Creek Routing, as well as the University Park Association. She submitted a list of the Palo Alto residents to City Clerk Ann Tanner. She said the Committee for Safe and Santee San Prancisquito Creek pouting asked that Corrected the project be completed "very fast if it goes at all." She read the see page first paragraph on page 3 of the agreement that was before Council: 432 "Stanford shall commence construction of the Campus Drive extension no later than two years after the commencement of construction of the Project provided that the Project is substantially completed." She asked if the phrase about being completed in 18 months was to be added, or wens a substitution. Vice Mayor Brenner replied that the added language had been taken from the first paragraph and put in tha necond paragraph. She read from the November 7 report from the City Attorney, giving some changes in wordings "Stanford's obligation to commence coastrnction of the Campus Drive eaten pion within two (2) years of the commencement of construction of the Project is conditioned upon substantial completion of the Project within said two years." Marilyn $orek Takata pointed out that the additional language about what happened if the project wrss not substantially completed within the two years bad been inserted, vbich cleared up the vagueness of the original language, 316 11/7/77 Vice Mayor Brenner read the eiditional language: "In the event the Project is not substantially completed so as to be available for vehicular use within two (2) years of the commencement of its construction, then Stanford shall be obligated to commence and complete construction of the Campus Drive extension within eighteen (18) months. . . ." Dr. Cross observed a contradiction between the two years and the 18 months. She said her group would like to have Campus Drive constructed first, otherwise it was possible that the time projection might extend to the five-year time that Menlo Park had rejected earlier: She did not want to see completion of Campus Drive contingent upon whether or not the project as a whole was completed. She said she would also like to speak further on ele Oak/Vine intersection. Ban Pawloski, Director of Public Works, said there were two conditions covered in the agreement; one stated that Campus Drive extension was to begin within two years after the commencement of the Sand Hill/Willow Road project, and be completed within eighteen (18) months after that; another condition said that if for any reason the Sand Hill Road project would not be substantially completed within a two year period, after it begins, then Stanford would be obligated to complete construction of the Campus Drive extension, eighteen (18) months after substantial completion of the Sand Hill project. One condition pertained if all things went normally, the other pertained in the event there was an interruption in construction activities of the Sand Hill Road project. Joe Carleton, 2350 Ross Road, referred to a newspaper article about possible continuance of the Sand Hill matter to the Council meeting of November 21. He asked if the public could speak at other meetings if they were unable to speak that evening. Councilmember Brenner said that wag possible --Council pass at the present disposing of the eight items which had resulted from an earlier Council meeting. Any of them could also be continued if the discussion seemed inconclusive that evening. Al{ce Smith, 4284 Los Palos Circle, asked if there was a liquidated damages clause in the contract so that the effect of the conditions just added could be known: Ms. Norek Taketa said a provision for liquidated damages was not a normal provision of contracts; she did not believe there was such a clause. The City relied on other remedies provided by law. Jerry Rallise said be represented the owners of the Oak Creek Apartments. There had not been an opportunity to review any of the documents until that, evening. He asked that voting on the items, and on the entire project, be deferred until all had been considered. Mr. Pawloski clarified that tha motion also included the changes submitted that day to the agreement. Coeancilmember Henderson agreed on that point. Councilse!*ber Carey said he agreed with Mr. Hallise--Council was taking items piecemeal and all the pieces had to fit together. He wee reluctant to take final action on items until he bad sewn the matter . in its entirety. He thought action should be deferred to the next meeting„ and all debate and discussion and public input had taken piece. One of the additions to the agreement appeared to his to give Stanford permission to delay construction on Campus-! ive if construction on Willow wan delayed. 3 1 7 11/7/77 0 1 1 Such delay would have little to do with the increase in traffic that was projected over the next few years. He thought the terms of commencement on Campus Drive extension shcsld be modified, and that once construction was begun on Wi11c:i Road Stanford should be obligated to commence their own construction. Delay on one would probably affect the other. He preferred sending the question back to be worked out between staff and Stanford University. With respect to modification on Arboretum, the use of Arboretum had been agreed to by Stanford essentially in perpetuity, but the provision th..t use of the road was limited to people traveling to Stanford or to places on Stanford might affect traffid from Palo Alto to Woodside or the like, and that posed potential problems. MOTION TO CONTINUE: Councilmember Carey moved, seconded by Clay, that final action on all miscellaneous items be continued to November 21. Councilmember Carey said he preferred that only discussion on items, to be taken one at a time, take place. Any modifications; to which Councilae berm were agreeable could be made by the time of the next meeting. Vice Mayor Brenner concurred. MOTION TO CONTINUE PASSED: The motion continuing action on, but not iiscussion of, the agreement and all miscellaneous items to November 21, passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember Witherspoon and Mayor Sher not participating. Vice Mayor Brenner said she had had the same concern about Arboretum Drive. Item 24o. 2, statement of intent from Stanford Board of Trustees regarding development of the 45 -acre parcel, for discussion. Councilmember Henderson said he had been seeking from Stanford a statement of intent to use the parcel for average income persons, such as staff employees, for he had wanted to avoid another Oak Creek development. His motion had added "as far as economically feasible." under the zoning that was on the property. The present statement of intent has so many qu.i1ifications it gave no sense of that direction, in line with the City's statement in their Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Clay said that since no motions were to be wade tonight, he wondered if specific items, such as average -income housing, should or should not be considered by Council as a whole. He felt such matters should be resolved by Council. Vice Mayor Brenner recalled that the natter of average -income housing had already been voted on at an earlier meeting, and Couocilmeaber Henderson was saying that matter had not been addressed satisfactorily. Councilmember Fazzino agreed that the letter from Stanford met Council's concern expressed on September 6. Reading from the second line of the second paragraph, he noted that Stanford intended to develop the land "principally" for housing, and he wanted the word "principally" clarified before the meeting of November 21. Vice Mayor Brenner said that as the natter stood at the present the letter not only did not offer anything, it modified the City's present legal position, which was that the parcel was zoned residential. Unless the statement was Bede much more clear she felt it would be redundant to include it 318 11/7/77 Item No. 3 Agreement with Stanford University regarding the 90 -foot setback on the 45 -acre parcel. Mary Ann Mark, 735 Cowper, said that the 90 -foot setback from San Francisga'ito Creek was a sound idea, eliminating potential flood and erosion hazards. She was concerned about the provision in the agreement excluding the public from the setback, because streams were rare, and also precious resources. Public easements end rights, she asked Council - members to bear in mind, were attached to the crream eorridor in the following ways: 1) the California Water Code, at Section 100, stated that stream waters belonged to the people of the state; passive use of the waters, such as walking and birdwatchircg, was specifically recognized and protected. She suggested the staff consult the Basin Plan of the San Francisco Regional Water Boards about existing beneficial uses of San Francisquito Creek. 2) Section 1600, 1800, and various other sections of the California Fish and Game Code declare that wildlife belongs to the people of the state. Riparian habitats are particularly valuable to wildlife, which was further recognized by Section 1601 and 1603 of the Fish and Game Code. 3) The California Public Resources Code acknowledges the existence of a public easement. If there has been public use for ten years prior to 1972. She and her husband had walked that section of the creek for nine years, from 1964 to 1972. During that time she had seen many others also enjoying the area. She asked Council to take notice of the state-wide policies regarding public easement along stream corridors. She also reque ted that Council consider the City policies encouraging use of open space corridors along streams. If public use has been attaches to land, she said, the right to exclude is modified. Public exclusion in this case would be an unfortunate precedent. She did not know if Palo Alto had adopted its version of the Quimby Act, permitting it to require dedication of land for Open Space use in the public interest, upon approval of any development project. If the City had adopted a mini --Quimby Act, it could be used in maintaining public access along the Creek. If Palo Alto has not adopted it, she hoped it would soon. She asked that Council consider City policies on streams, and state policies on easements along stream corridors, which would be acting in the interest of Palo Alto residents. Counciimember Fletcher asked about the phrase in the first paragraph of tie agreement regarding the completion of the project --did that pertain to the road construction or the housing? Was the agreement null and void upon completion of the project? or was it only effective during the construction of the project? Marilyn Norek Taketa, Senior Assistant Attorney, said the agreement did not become null and void upon completion of the project. Counciletber Carey said they agree to maintain a 90 -foot setback, providing the project goes forward; in addition they are saying 'until the formation of the assessment district and until completion of the project we'll still maintain a 90 -foot setback and we won't build anything on it:. Council mber Fletcher referred to page 2 of the same section regarding limitations, saying she would like the following words.deleted: "This agreement does not authorize and shall not be construed as authorizing the public or any member thereof to trespass upon or use all or any portion of the parcel, or as granting to the public or any member thereof any right in or to the parcel, or whatever right, to go ucon or use the parcel in any manner whatsoever, it being understood that the sole purpose of this agreement is to restrict certain uses of the portion of the parcel lying within the setback." That section, she said, effectively 3 ;i 9 11/7/77 prohibited access to the creek bank. She wanted Stanford authorities and City staff to try to arrange for limited access to the creek bank. She did not think the full 90 -foot setback need be provided. She thought such a precious resource as the creek bank should not be hidden from the public. On page 4 of the eg:eemeut, in te first paragraph, tenth line, "Stanford shall be entitled to such compensation for the taking as it would have been if the parcel had not been burdened by this agreement." She asked that the foregoing passage be re -thought for she did not think pedestrian access to the creek was the same 38 taking a parcel of land and buying it. She thought it would be reasonable for the City to e::pect to have public access without haying to.pay for the right. Councilmember Carey said he thought both issues should be voted on otherwise it might not be considered as a direction given. He thought Council had discussed public access to the creek and Ise of .the creek and had voted it down in a previous meeting. Re had argued against it because, in the r.ourse of discussing the matter with the three jurisdictions of Menlo Park, Stanford, and Palo Alto, Menlo Park had asked, and Stanford had agreed, that there be setback only. If the additional provision vere imposed that the wetback become available to the public it then became more than just a setback, and the basis upon which Stanford had agreed was no longer valid, which weakened the whole agreement. He, himself, saw some very valid reasons for not having public access to the creek and the setback. It would not, for one thing, give the public access to the entire creek, for it would be unobtainable behind the Oak Creek Apartments or behind the Stanford Convalescent Hospital or the Convalescent Home. In the case of Oak Creek Apartments, they were publicly owned on leased land, and Stanford could not "agree" to let the public use it, for the land would not belong to them again for another 50 or 60 years. If it were permitted it would provide a substantial detriment to development because people would not want to look at the land from the standpoint of private use if their backyards were open to the public. He would therefore oppose public access; be would not oppose the elimination of the passage on page 4 regarding condemnation, that in such event, the condemnation award can take into consideration the 90 -foot setback as though it didn't exist --he agreed with Councilmember Fletcher that it was inconsistent with the agreement. If Stanford agrees to a 90 -foot setback in perpetuity, then in the event of condemnation it ought to be based on that agreement. In one case the City was asking Stanford to modify what they had given, which changes their reasons for giving ft; in the ether case Stanford is apparently asking to take back what they had given. He said he would like some consensus as to whether or not the Council felt that way. Vice Mayor Brenner said she thought she would stay with the ruling made earlier not to vote, but she thought some discussion could give Stanford some insight as to shat could make the project appealing. Her thought, she said, about public access, was not to sake the full 90 -feet available, but, simply, to wake known: that the entire Cotmcil policy bad been to work toward baring past easements wherever the City could get them. A flat statement that there would be no easement gave her doubt. A word on page 2 in b) flamed certain things that could be included in the setback; "structures shall not include (structures, she explained, were not to be allowed on that area) pathways and facilities which are compatible with streaamide open space, such as ti.cnic tables, barbecue pits, and volleyball courts, and so on." She said she would without doubt omit volleyball courts because it would require impervious surface, such as concrete. She suggested it be side certain,thst 'pathways' were to be c mistakable foot pathways, not in excess of eight feet wide, and that pathway et the edge of Oak Croak Apartments was not the kind of thing that was wanted on the parcel under discussion. 320 11/7/77 Councilmember Fletcher responded to Councilmember Carey, saying that when Council had discussed the project before she had moved to permit pedestrian access along the creek from El Camino to Sand Hill intersection. At that-. time a Stanford representative had spoken against her motion, which she then withdrew, in recognition of the fact that a setback could cot now be requested at Children's Hospital and Oak Creek Apartments. Yet this rather large parcel would provide considerable access to the creek and could afford short walks and bitdtatching to those who were interested. Regarding the agreement with Stanford on the 90 -foot setback, she recalled no exclusion of the public mentioned in the agreement. Councilmember Carey said Councilmember Fletcher had missed seeing it in the agreement. it wad been specifically vcted on by the Council. There was a complete difference between a setback and a public easement: setback only had been agreed upon --•Stanford had at no time agreed to public access. Councilieember Fletcher said she was not asking for 90 feet of public access. She was asking that the portion right along the creek bank be retained for people to enjoy nature. She did not see it as a violation of an agreement about a 90 -foot setback. People had waved toward a recognition of the right of people to enjoy special places of natural beauty, as evidenced by the Coastal Act, which would have been unheard of in earlier times, and it was known that so much had been lost through private development that what remained had to be preserved. Councilmember Henderson ascertained that Council would not vote on the matter tonight. He said he would tentatively supgort a motion, to see what could be done about limited access. Heavy usage would not be practical, but a fcottrail or t, -ike was quite important. Since the other two areas had been closed cif it would be too bad to lose United access in this area. Councilmember Cray questioned if the present meeting's discussions would make the next Council meeting more efficient, for he felt sure all the questions would be raised again November 21. He felt some kind of action should be taken. He preferred that questions of various Councilmembers be asked where clarification was needed --individual opinions only confused the matter. Based on what had been said so far, he did not know who would know what to do. Ben Pawloski, Director of Public Works, said he was confused , as to what staff direction would be. Voce Mayor Brenner said that if Council wished to reverse the present procedure, and decide to vote,on each point, it would be appropriate. Councilaenber Fletcher said she thought Council was departing from the idea of the original motion, and that a vote would be appropriate. FIRST PART OF MOTIOUz Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by,1enderson, that staff and Stanford discustm deletion of the second half cf the paragraph under Section 11, Limitations, on page 2 of the setback agreement. Councilman Ryerly observed that from the way Councilmember Fletcher had made her motion that she vas asking Council to support staff spending time to discuss ..the two items with Stanford. Receiving agreement from Councilmember Fletcher, he said he would support the motion. Marilyn Norsk Takata, Senior Assistant Attorney, noted that when tkee passage vas deleted she would intend that staff speak with Stanford about having limited public access, becaure there vie a difference between just eliminating the language, and teen including different language on public access. 3 2 1 11/./77 1 Councilmember Fletcher said she would consider that addition as incorporated in her motion. FIRST PART OP MOTION PASSED: The motion that staff and Stanford discuss deletion of the second half of the paragraph under Section II, Limitations, on page 2 of the setback agreement, and add that staff speak with Stanford about having limited public access, passed on the followiag vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazeino, Fletcher, Henderson NOES: Carey, Clay SECOND PART OF MOTION: Councilmember Fleteoer moved, seconded by Henderson, that on page 4, first paragraph of the setback agreement, the following sentence be deleted: "Stanford shall be entitled to such compensation for the taking as it would have been entitled had the parcel not been burdened by this agreement." Councilmember Fletcher e.Laborstored that she wanted the otaff to discuss deletion of that sentence, in the spirit of permitting public access without the City compensating for it. Councilmember Carey said that a party to a contract should not be asked to back off his condemnation position --the party would be told, not asked. If the party were asked he would say "no, I don't want to do that." It was a different matter from exploring with Stanford the possibility of some kind of public access. He agreed the sentence should come out of the agreement. If. Stanford had agreed to have a 90 -foot setback, in perpetuity, c::,,' there were condemnation, the award ought to be on the basis of the setback and the use. It was not customary to go back to an agreement of some years ago and base the condemnation award on it. Now the matter was complicated further because if Stanford was going to agree to public access or use of the setback, he felt they would be entitled to compensation. Ee would vote for the motion, about discussing taking it out, but he would qualify it by saying that if the sentence were taken out he might wove to put it back in if the public access question were determined differently from the way it now stood. Councilmember Fletcher said she would modify her motion so that it would express the desire that the sentence be removed. Councilmember Henderson, seconder to the Motion, agreed to the modification. Marilyn Norek Taketa confirmed just which deletion would be asked for, the entire sentence- 4,Jusit the first part; the two provisos which comprised the bulk of the sentence were items she thought would be best included --the fact that the agreement would stay in effect during the pendency of the condemnation action and is reinstated if, in fact, the condemnation act is abandoned. She herself interpreted those provisos as being protections to the City. So the following would be deleted, "Stanford shall be entitled to suh compensation before the taking as it would,:.ave.been entitled had the parcel not been burdened by this agreement." That meant that the rest of the sentence would be retained. Councilmember Fletcher agreed. SECOND PART OF MOTION PASSED: The second part of the motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councflmember Witherspoon and Mayor Sher not participating. Item 4 Preparation of a general landscaping plan for the 3.5 acre "open space" parcel. 3 2 2 11/7/77 Vice Mayor Brenner said the specific Council direction was in Appendix D. Staff intent's to request funds for a landscape plan for the fiscal year 1978-79 as part of the 1978-82 Capital Improvements program. The staff commented that no action w-ts required et this time. Review and approval will occur as part of the 1978-82 Capital Improvement Program whin it is prepared by staff for Finance and Public Works review later this year. Councilmember 'ienderson said that since he had raised the matter he wanted to comment that the plan was totally acceptable to him. Itew 5 Staff to explore the traffic gate alternative concept for the Willow Road/E1 Camino intersection. Councilmember Fazzino said that though the traffic problem at that intersection remained a major stumbling block against his voting for the project, though he intended to do so. Mr. Bechtold from the State Department of Transportation had said the railroad type gate would be completely unacceptable, for it would present an unexpected hazard to motorists. Councilmember Fazzino asked staff its opinion of an a1ternativ.: proposed by Mr. Bechtold, namely, a signal that shows continuously red, making it illegal for traffic to cress El Camino. He wanted to know where the light would be located add also whether or not there would still be included some type of traffic barrier in the middle of the intersection. Mr. Pawlhski said staff was talking about the same kind of traffic median as had been discussed before, to be in the middle of El Camino Real. Then there was talk of traffic signal heads being installed so that the drivers who would make the left -turn movement at the appropriate two lanes would see a red light or, the straight -ahead movement, and also would see the green arrow for the left turn. On September 6, when that plan had been presented, they read not been specific about a program which coordinated with the turn movement and was also visible to the two left -turning lanes. The second recommendation from the state department of transportation was a flashing lighted message sign on Sand Hill Road in advance of El Camino Real, indicating left turn only. That had to be placed so that.the right lanes did not view it. Since there were so many problems with physical barriers they were avoiding them. Councilmember Fazzino asked if Mc. Pawloski would have some designs for the next meeting so the intersection program could be visualized. Mr. Pavloski said tho state would do the design of the intersection. Item 8 addressed that --through a cooperative agreement with the state highway department the State would undertake the design and award the contract and administer the 'onstruction. When their plans were prepared staff could bring them to Council. The state vas running slightly behind the City in their schedule for the design. Councilmember Fazzino said his suggestion had been a seri,ua attempt to solve that problem at the intersection. He thought the project was too far down the road to move the road into the parking lot, and, if it were 1975, he thought he would propose that. Item 6 Cooperative agreement with the California Department of Transportation for improvements at the El Camino Real intersect;on. 3 2 3 11/7/77 Vice Mayor Brenner said that the status of the agreement was that it wad Being prepared but has not been finalized yet. Background int.'ormation on this item is in Appendix F. Nc action was to be taken, pending receipt of the Cooperative Agreement. Item 7 Council statement of intent regarding approval of possible future changes to the Oak/Vine intersection requested by the City of Menlo Park. Background on this matter is in Appendix G. Staff recommended that Council approve the following statement of intent: "The Palo Alto City Council will consider modifications to the present desige for the Oak/Vine intersection after the award of the construction contract, provided that such vodifications do not adversely impact Sand Hill Rood traffic movements sad there is no increase in cost to the C'ty or the District." Itee8 Cost participation agreement with the City of Menlo Park. The status of that agreement is that it has not been finalized. The background on it was in Appendix 11. Staff suggests no acci.on at this time. Vice Mayor Brenner said Council had now taken care of the miscellaneous items, and had agreed to vote on them after a little move work had been done: Vice Mayor Brenner said Council was at the main body of the subject of the meeting, Sand Hill Road, (formerly Willow Road) Project No. 74-65. Two separate hearings had been scheduled for the project, and they would be held concurrently, because they both relate to the same proceeding. The first hearing is on the Engineer's Report prepared pursuant to Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code. The sole purpose of this first hearing is to receive and hear protests against the proposed acquisitions; and improvements. Protests at this first hearing may be either writeen or oral. Written reports filed during the course of the hearing will be received and considered by Council, but cannot legally be included in the percentage of protest. The second bearing is on the Engineer's Report, which includes all of the details of the project, LicIuding plans, specifications, estimates of cost, saps and descriptions, and proposed diagram and assessments. Formal protests as to this phase of the project may only be in writing and will be received and considered by the Council if they are filed at any time berorue"the conclusion of the hearing. However, as in the case of the first hearing, only those protests filed at or before the time fixed for the hearing can be considered in determining the percentage of legal protest. Anyone interested may therefore address tbe Council on any detailed phase of the project. Objections or endorsements may be to the location and extent of property to be acquired, to the question of whether the acquisitions are to be made or whether any particular property is benefited, to the - "ineer's estimate of the costs and expenses, to the method proposed ' for spreading assessments, tc the assessment- diagram, or to any other phase or detail of the project. Vice Mayor Brenner then declared the public hearing open. MOTION: Csuncilmember Carey -moored, seconded by Brenner, that the public . bearings on Item 13 be continued to November 21, without debate, and that at the toemencement of the November 21 meeting, the meeting again be opened to the public. _ 3.2 4 11/7/77 Vice Mayor Brenner cotfirmed that the intent of the retion was that the public hearing be opened again November 21 for the people who had wished to speak on it that evening. Councilmember Henderson su¢gested cortinuing the public hearing to the beginnin3 of the November 21 meeting. Coumcilnaember Carey set the time at 7:45 p.m., November 21. Assistant City Manager Walker said it was possible for Council to get the meeting for a 'time certAiu.' A provision its the code permitted it. Vice Mayor Brenner asked for the titles of the other items Council would consider that evening. Assistant City Manager Walker replied that Planning Commission items would be scheduled that evening, items which had received the Commission's unanimous recommendation, so that they would be on the Consent Calendar to begin with; there was also to be a discussion of the county housing plan. The Sand Hill Road project item might be under Special Orders of the Day. MOTION PASSED: The mot;cn that the public hearings on Sate! Hill Road Projece be continued to November 21, at 7:45 p.m. after hearing from the public that evening, (November 7) and with no debate that evening, with the understanding that on November 21 the public could also be heard from, passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmembet Witherspoon and Mayor Sher not participating. Vice Mayor Brenner asked City Clerk Ann Tanner to report on the publications posting and mailing of notices and the filing of the boundary maps. Ms. Tanner said that at Councilmembers' places was a report on the notices in writing, which would be included in the record. Proposed Boudaries of Prolect (map) Filed with City Clerk, September 1, 1977 Approved by Council, September 6, 1977 (Resolution 5452) Recorder October 4, 1977, with Santa Clara County Recorder, Book 19, Pages 61, 62, And 63. Notice of Improvement Dated September 6, 1977 Filed with Clerk, October 5, 1977 Published once a week for two successive weeks on October 21 and 17 Affidavit from Palo Alto Times available in Clerk's office Posted on all open streets within the assessment district at not more than 300 feet apart on each street so posted, and no leas than three in all. Said posting was fully completed on October 16, 1977 Affidavit of Posting nlgned by W. A. Howarth, dated October 17, 1977, available in Clerk's Office. Notice of Proposed Street Vocation Dated September 6, 1977 Piled with Clerk, October 5 1977 Published once in the Palo Alto Times on October 13, 1977 Affidavit from Palo Alto Times available in Clerk's office Pasted along the line of the portion of the street proposed to be vacated as describes' {n said Resolution of Prelladnary Determination and of Intention at not more than 300 feet apart and not less than three in elle 325 11/7/77 Posting •.ompleted October 23, 1977 Affidavit of Posing signed by W. A. Howarth, dated October 24, 1977, available in Clerk's office. Notice of Prelimiriry Dete_a�ination and of Intention Dated September 6, 1977 Filed with Clerk, October 5, 1977 Mailed to all perilous owning real property proposed to be assessed under said Resolution of Prelimin ry Determination aid of Intention and to all holders of leasehold or other known interests, in said real property Affidavit of Mailing signed by W. A. Howarth, dated October 7, 1977, available in Clerk's office. Notice of Filing Written Report Under Division 4 of the $,+greets and SigkeDI Cods Dated September 6, 1977 Filed with Clerk, October 5, 1977 Meiled to each person to whom land in the proposed assessment district for the proposed improvements was assessed on the last equalized County assessment roll Affidavit of Mailing; signed by W. A. Howarth, dated October 7, 1977, available in Clerk's office, Notice of Intention to Adopt Resolution ofiaeessity Tniti5ting Eminent Domain Proceedings Dated September 6, 1977 Filed with Clerk, October 5, 1977 Notice mailed to all persons wbose property is proposed to be acquired by eminent domain Affidavit of Mailing signed by W. A. Howarth, dated October 12, 1977, available in Clerk's office. (signed) Ann J. Tanner, City Clerk Vice Mayor Brenner called on the following people, all of whom deferred to speak November 21, or had left the meeting at the present tine: Gerard Wagstaffe Joseph Carleton Duane Halleay Dr. Nancy Jewell Cross Jeanne Pinneo Jeremiah F. Hal.lise Mary Ann Mark Vice Mayor Bremner said she wo-.zid keep the cards in the order in which they had been received, and call on these people 3n November 21. Councilmsmber Carey asked if his understanding was correct that the hearing was liaised solely to these wbo wished to protest. Vice Mayor Brenner said that was coot her understanding. Co mcilmember Carey said thee the staff report said "The sole purpose of this first hearing is to receive and tsar protests aseinst the proposed acquisition: and improvements. . ." Did that mean that those with protests ad to have some interest is the project, and that it vas limited to those within the proposed assessment district? Vice Mayor Bremer said she understood that the first ane second hearings ran concurrently. The second hearing included all of the details of the projedt, plans, specs and the like. 326 11/7/77 Marilyn Norek Taketa sate elle would defer to Bond Counsel on that question. Kenneth Jones, Bond Counsel, amplified that the first hearing was limited to the technical purpose of identifying these who wanted do file a protest; th second hearing, as stated by law, wa) open to any interested person --that is, those who have a financial interest in the project, such as those whose property was subject to assessment, or anyone legally responsible for payment of the assessment. The Council was not necessarily restricted to limiting testimony to those who had a financial interest. The term "any interested person' would be broadly construed. Mayor Sher and Councilmeskber Witherspoon returned to the meeting. FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS CaMMITTEE BE CALIFORNIA A P ING IBIL1TY S 3:7) Council:.aem'ser Eyerly, who had removed this item from the Consent Calendar, expressed the wish that the Finance and Public Works Committee had recovered all the bases" for a parking structure had a considerable impact on a shopping area. One convideration was that the assessment district might need aid want and be able to build another parking structure across Birch Street on the present parking structure, and so the structure presently planned should p;ovide access to another structure. The aesthetics would deman=d that there be emphasis on exterior design and landscaping, in addition to setback. For that reason he wanted to have the final design brought back to Council for its approval. He asked Mr. Knox the process that was followed fez final design approval, Naphtali Knox, Director of Planning and Community Environment, said normally the Architectural Review Board (AR.B) would give final design approval once Council had approved the project. The plan which took a possible parking structure across Birch Street presented the problem of attaining enough height with the present proposed structure, or the street hed to be dropped, which posed a problem on how to allow for the utilities. California Avenue merchants had said they only wanted a simple structureone floor, asphalted, at ground level, with a simple ramp to a second deck; that is, aaxiaum parking in the least amount of space. Councilmember Eyerly said he assumed that if there was a second story there would be a strong enough structure to possibly support a bridge to cross Birch. Mr. Knox said that parking structures usually have a floor -to -ceiling beitht of 7'b" up to 8', with 1' to 1i' feet for structure, depending on how the slab vas spanned; there could be a total -rise from ground level of Cti3', not a sufficient distsnce to bride a street. A second floor would be necessary, 18' above the street bed, sod along with 2' or 3' of structure for girder there would be the needed clearance, of about 15'. One of the alternatives last year had been for a three-story structure on a three -level deck so that it would he possible to get across to the possible future structure. To propose doing that now would present a big complication. Mr. Fyerly said he had wanted to keov if it was feaaiblem-he realized now dare would not be the necessery► height. 3 2 7 11/7/77 MOTION: Councilman Carey moved, on behalf of the Finance and Public Works Committee, the recommendation to Council re the California Avenue Parking Garage Feaeibilit, Study that the California Avenua beveiopuent Association and the consultant recommendation for a r"o-level parking facility be approved; that the City proceed directly into design, (omitting the consultant's request for an additional $14,000 for further study); that with respect to design of such study, emphasis be placed upon maximum setbacks, provisions for bicycle facilities, an anel.psis of the feasibility of ingress -egress on the alley, particularly with respect to the safety, and that the financing of the facility be based on the recommendation which is 25 percent on land area assessment, 75 percent under G bond formula. gMENDMENT: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Henderson, that in the notion, after "...setback," there be included "exterior design and landscaping"; and that after "safety" there be included "final design approval will be made by the Council." AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment passed on a unanimous vote. Mike Golick, director of the board of the California Avenue Development Association, and a member of the parking committee. said that he and others had been working on the matter of parking for two years. He was anxious for Council to give the "go-ahead." MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: The motion, as amended, pasa€d on a unanimous vote. MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Henderson, that staff *~equest a meeting of the Chairman of the Finance and Public Works Committee, a Palo Alto staff member, County Supervisor Gerry Steinberg and her staff person, to discuss California Avenue Area District Parking problems relating to the North County Court House and the feasibility of the County joinin, the California Avenue Area assessment district. Councilmember Carey said that while he was not anxious for another meeting he would support the motion. If the motion passed be would suggest sta:i providing background information --perhaps Mr. Golick could also provide some. Re recalled the Cnunty saying it did not vent to be in the assessment district since they would build their own parking facility, then they had said they would not build their own parting facility becaus,,%there was ample public parking; the Catty bad tried to shorten the tours o; parking but the visa* parking problem remained. MOTION PASSED: The motion, that Palo Alto staff and County Supervisor Gerry Steinberg and her staff person discuss the County joining the California Avenue Area assessment district passed on a unanf seous vote. HUNAN RELATIONS COMMI SIGN RECOMMENDS OPPORTUNITY CONTACT COMPLIANCE `(CMit:427:7; CMR:503: 7) Councilmember Pazsino said he had a number of concerns rsparding justification for a part -,time st41f person. He would like to sae a full discussion of the matter at a Policy and Procedure* Committee Meeting. MOTION: Councilmen bar Pausino ,moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that the lumen Relations Commission support of that staff report and recommendation to Council is follows re Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity contract compli,aica be rnfsrred to the Policy and ProceduresCommittee: 328 11/7/77 1) To increase staffing in the purchasing department to be responsible for monitoring Affirmati••k Action/Egr..al Economic Opportunity cont-act compliante by .50 person years; 2) Rev ee the municipal code to be in compliance with federal and state AA/EEO provisions; 3) HRC be involved in the selection process for the staff person; 4) That the staff person responsible for this program zaakes sure vendors are not excluded from counseling, monitoring or audits because individual city purchases are small, especially if the accumulated amounts of contract•payments are large; 5) That: periodic reports be made to the Human Relations Commission as to how the Affirmati' s Action/Equal Economic Opportunity Program is working. MOTION TO REFER PASSED: The motion to refer passed on a unaninous vote. REQUEST OF COVNCILMEMBERS EYERLY AND SHER RE PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONING Councilmember Eyerly said that problems of maintenance and enforcement of conditions in P -C zones have recently been before the Council in the discussion relating to Palo Alto West apartments. When enforcement problems arise, the expense to the City can be burdensome. Also, proposed changes in a P -C zone are often controversial and cFn lead to extenFive debate by Council. Because of those inherent problems, and lack of procedures toward enforcement, he thought there should be some inquiry with staff about devising a more effective enforcement of zoning. MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Sher, that staff be directed to report on P -C zor:Ps, with recommendations for improvement of procedures. Matters which should be considered are enforcement procedures, including the possibility of a bond requirement; powers of the zoning administrator; periodic inspections by staff, surveillance over a five - to 10 -year period by Council -appointed Commissiona, AM the like. Councilmember Brenner said she thought part of the matter might be covered in the zialing ordinance which was coming up. Mr. Knox replied that not all of the matters would be included in that repvet which was to be made on coning. Enforcement seemed to be the main topic of the motion before them. He predicted that in the future there would be fever P-C°e because the granting of a P -C had, to show definite public benefit. There would probably be two different kinds of tones: those which needed the enforcement procedures now under discussion, and a nee. Kind of P -C zone, which might present enforcement problems but, because it would be harder to get, there would be fever. MOTION PASSED: The notion, that staff be directed to report on P -C zones, with recom6andAtions for improvements of procedures on enforcement; a possible bead 1equirement; powers of the zoning administrator; periodic inspections`by staff; surveillance over a fire- to tea -year period by Council -appointed Commisslms, and the like, passed on a unanimous vote., ORAL CO* JNICLIi0l:S Monte 3 2 9 11%7/77 ADJ TO EXECUTIVE SESSION RE PERSONNEL Council aijourned to Executive Session re personnel at 11:50 p.m. FINAL AD.�4L' �T The Executive Session and the meeting were adjourned at 12 midnight. ATTE.7s City Clerk Mayo 330 1107/77