Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-11-22 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MMiNUTES Regular Meeting November 22, 1376 ITEM PAGE Committee Rescheduled 4 7 0 Minutes of October 4, 5, and 12, 1971 4 1 0 Oral Co aunicatifms 4 7 0 Consent Calendar - Referral Items 4 7 1 1976-1977 Liability Insurance Premiums r, 7 Retirement Joe Cool: 4 7 of 1 Comprehensive Plan: Review of Planning Coniiaion Conr ents 4 7 and Adoption Motion to Adjourn to November 29 4 8 7 Adjournment 4 8 8 4 6 9 11/22/36 November 22, 1976 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date at 7:40 p.,m. in a regular meeting with Mayor Norton presiding. Present: Beahra, Berwald, Carey, Clay, Eyerly, Norton, Sher, Witherspoon Absent: Comstock (arrived 7:52 p.m.) COMMITTEE RESCHEDULED_ Mayor Norton announced that the Policy and .Procedures Committee meeting had been rescheduled to November 30, and that one of the items for con- sideration on the agenda was the Stop Sign Evaluation Study. N. ES DE OCTOBER 4 5 AND 11976 Councilman Beahrs referred to page 343 of the October 4 minutes, in the first paragraph, and asked that the last sentence read instead, "...if one of the presidential contenders can simply ask "Trust me,'P I must say "I trust Scott Carey." He added that when he rode his bicycle down to City Hall he used a rack provided by the City in the garage, and he objected to seeing a number of bikes parked tonight in the council chambers. He referred to the possibility of a tripping acvident, and the high cost of liability insurance already paid by the City. Councilman Eyerly referred to page 353, line 14, saying it should read PP...If Palo Alto had to buy peer from PG&E it would still be a lower average cost with what we are gathering from Central Valley Power." MOTION: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that the minutes of October 4 be approved as corrected. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously, Councilman Comstock absent. MOTION: Councilman Beahrs moved, seconded by Norton, that the minutes of October 5 be approved as read. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously, Councilman Comstock absent. MOTION: Mayor Norton moved, seconded by .Beahrs, that the minutes of October 12 be approved as read. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed unanimously, Councilman Comstock absent. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS --�- 1. Re. E. Loder, 4206 Darlington Court, saying she had recently returned to Palo Alto where she bed raised her children and she had been a member of the school board, asked hots she could get some answers to a arrester of commmmity concern. She said a succession 470 11/22/76 of rental residents had created a progressively deteriorating situation in her neighborhood. She had called the realtor, who had shrugged responsibility for the various renters saying "You know this is not a good area." Ms. Loder said the area was good, except for same of those who rented and were irresponsible neighbors. She said she did not want to sell her property and move, and she asked Councilmembers what recourse was available to her. Mayor Norton asked Mr. Sipel if he would contact Ms. Loder in a short while to find out more specifically about the problems. GsEl, CALENDAR - REFERRAL ITEMS, 1976-1977 LIABILITY EtiX13l+IS (CP c:520:6) MOTLON: Mayor Norton moved, seconded by Beahrs, that the matter of insuring against the City's financial risks arising from legal liability be referred to the Finance and Public Works Committee for review and investigation of alternatives to the present program. MOTION PASSED: The motion passed with a urneni ous vote. ggiL'iliMMSLAEALAPIRL(C1IR ; r 06 :6) Mr. Charles Walker, Assistant City Manager, informed the Council that Mr. Cook had retired on disability after suffering a heart attack last November. Mr. Cook had served the City for fifteen years and Mr. Walker sumsted the Council pass the following resolution in recog- nition of Mr. Cook's loyalty. MOTION: Councilman Beahrs introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Clay, its adoption: RESOLUTION 5289 entitled "RESOLTYITON OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO JOE A. COOK UPON HIS RETIREMENT." moms PASSED: The motion passed unanimously. IVE PLAN: REVIEW OF PLANNING SS I4H his BETI iB CMt : 519:6 ) Mayor Norton said the new Comprehensive Plan had been in process for three years; the Planning Commission bad held over twenty pubic hearings in various parts tof the City, with due public notice; the Council - members had considered the recommendations of the Planning Commission and also made its own revisions. and the Plan, in c siding such revisions, was now before the Council for its final hearing. He said Councilmen - bets' comments were limited to those on the subject of their suggested revisions, and the entire Compressive Plan had been, and was not to be further, discussed. Ms added that people in the audience could address the Council on the Plan, with the some lim4tstione as those imposed on Cor ncilanembera„ for the Plan itself had been discussed during five Council meetings. Me said the matters discussed could be classified as "routine," and "not routine," as contained in the staff report of November 18. 471 11/22/74 Corrected See pg. 594 Ms. Anne Steinberg, Chairwoman of the Planning Commission, urged the Councilmembers to consider the recommendations made by the Commission very carefully for they had been made in response to comments and letters from the public, mostly regarding emendations in the trans- portation section. Almost all of the recommendations, she said, had been adopted unanimously. Some matters requiring consensual agreement were brought to the Couicil, and the said she would point them out when the appropriate time came. Councilman Sher asked if Councilmembers were to give attention only to items which had been passed by motion, because he had understood through a talk with the City Attorney that it would be okay to discuss any topic, whether or not it had passed at the Planning Commission. Mayor Norton answered that in order to avoid Council re -voting on issues already resolved, he would like to focus attention only on the consensual issues returned by the Commmissiou, but he felt that if Councilman Sher wanted to re -open some tie -vote issues it would not be out of line. Councilman Sher said he did not want to be .limited to tie -vote issues; he would like to discuss matters which the Planning Commission had previously recommended and which the Council changed and were sub- sequently returned by the Commission. Mayor Norton said that he would rule that they could be discussed. Councilman Sher said he did not want to be limited to tie -vote issues; he would like to be able to discuss matters which the Planning Co - mission had reeommended and which the Council had changed, and then were subsequently returned by the Commission. Mayor Norton replied that he would rule that those matters could be discussed. Councilman Beahrs spoke with some impatience at what seemed to him an interminable planning process. He asked if matters discussed in that evening's session were still going back to the Planning Commission. Mayor Norton told him the process would be concluded that evening. Councilmen 8erwwald rated that a 3-3 vote was, with parliamentary pro- cedure, a defeat for an affirmative motion, yet he accepted Mayor Norton's ruling. His attention would be given not to tie votes made by the Planning Commission, he said, but to their recommendations. Mayor Horton said his "ruling of the chair" was certainly open to contest If anyone so wished. He had acceded to Councilman Sher's wish because the control wards in the City Code were "the report of the Planning Commission." He said he regarded "the report" as the minutes for the two meetings, and that the two -page summary before them contained the gist of those meetings. Mr. John Forester, 782 Allen Court, quoted from Item 34, of CMR:S19:6, "establish a bicycle boulevard network," now revised to read "test the feasibility of a bicycle boulevard network." He averred he was one of the world's authorities on bicycle transportation, and he said he agreed with the revised wording, due to "technical unknowns in whether stop signs or other impediments will actually work." He thought there were about four different ways of testing the concept, and until then "test the feasibility of," was the most appropriate wording. Speaking on Item 35 he said a cyclist could get anywhere in this town anytime, 472 11/22/76 day or night, and so "remove various {.mpediments to bicycle transpor- tation," set up expensive machinery to accomplish what was not needed. Referring to page 29, he acknowledged the Plan's aim to remove dangerous intersections, and he urged them not to "make them" either. Finally, on Item 36, bicycle parking, a problem in most places due to inadequate facilities, and therefore the biggest block to bicycling, he said it cost one-half cent per bike mile to provide rosd area for bikes, 1.8 cent per car mile to provide road area for cars. He said one store would not permit hiss to bring his bike inside as he shopped, and so he took his business to a store that would permit his bike inside. Re concluded that cyclists spend money, if parking is provided for them. Some employers forbid bringing bicycles inside also, a further discour- agement to bicyclists. He concluded by saying he thought bicyclists had been harassed somewhat by police, and he asked that bicyclists be treated as though they were motorists. Councilman Seahrs addressed Mr. Forester, saying that if Mr. Forester's observations were aimed at his earlier counts about bicyclists bringing their cycles inside, he could only say that the City's liability insur- ance was going to be increased from around 200,E dollars to about 900,E dollars next year, and there was an obligation on the part of the general public to reduce hazards. He pointed out that City Hall had bicycle parking facilities close to the garage entrance. Vice Mayor Clay asked way Mr. Forester would not want, through bicycle toulc:va rds . Hr. Forester responded that while they were desirable what was needed vas a through route that attracted cyclists yet discouraged ftotorists, which would be a boulevard with stop sign protection. However, he added, a stop sign not backed up by motor traffic is not obeyed by motorists, therefore the bicyclist does not have the safety he would have were there also cars. Vice Mayor Clay asked if Mr. Forester felt there were different needs for himself, as a "professional" bicyclist, compared to chose needs of "amateur" bicyclists. M•. Forester replied that the safety elements applied to both classes of bicyclists, adding that, paradrixically, the lowest percentage of accidents involving bicycles was in that portion of travel among heavy automobile traffic. Mayor Norton pointed out that fifteen aeis.ates had been used by one speaker. Mr. Howard Smith, 3267 Emerson, said be would dismiss the five-minute 'speech it had taken him three or four hour* to write, and, summarizing the gist of it, maid he was vitally concerned about general over- dependence on the automobile, adding that fuel for the car would run out about the time the Comprehensive Plan got underway. He praised Park Boulevard bikeway, saying that compared to Redwood City, Atherton and San Carlos the biking facilities were "paradise," and he noted the two fine bike/pedestrian bridges at the north and south boundaries of town. He said Palo Alto was a pacasette_ for other towns. Ms. Barbara Mcbride, 1125 University Avenue, local action director for the League of Women Voters. She read a statement from the League to the Palo Alto City Council. which favored acceptance of the Comprehensive Plan as revised, but with reinstatement of the emphasis on encouraging bike travel and reducing dependence on the automobile. The League also spoke of the elimination of the word "require" in relation to provision are 4 7 3 11/22/76 of low- and moderate -coat housing, replacing it with the word "should," as referred to in Program 18, on page 13, The League asked that Council appropriate enough funds to keep the document up to date, and also with enough copies available to the public. Mr. Benjamin Lefkowitz, 3468 Greer Rd., President-elect of Western Wheelers --a 200 -member bicycle touring club on the Peninsula. He read a section from a magazine, "California Tomorrow," November, 1976. The magazine cited the cities of Davis and Palo Alto for their systems of bikepaths, which they considered exemplary. He spoke of the paevi►ous Council having built bicycle bridges across freeways and city boundaries. He urged this present Council to continue to support bicycle transpor- tation by restoring the original wording in the Comprehensive Plan. Se said two years ago City staff had counted 13,000 bicyclists in a 12 - hour period, and that bicycling had increased about 12 percent annually. Ms, Ellen Fletcher, 3543 Greer Road, spoke toward restoring the original wording of the Comprehensive Plan policy on reducing dependence on the automobile. She spoke of the grave dangers to health from car emission smog, yet how difficult it vas to find adequate transportation to, for example, Foothill College, which forced students to buy cars, with ownership making car use habitual. Hs, Fletcher asked that the minutes of the Planning Commission which stated that she had collected 1000 names for a petition, be corrected, for she had not done it alone. She submitted a list containing 316 additional signatures. She urged a strong commitment to bicycle boulevards on Program 34, which she thought, with adequate signing, would be safe. She felt bicyclists were entitled to equal, and perhaps better, treatment than automobiles, and so she urged full implementation of Program 35, setting up systems of street barriers, with close attention to the ten most dangerous intersections for bicyclists. She cited the high rate of accidents for cars as opposed to the low rate for bicycles, the space needed for cars opposed to the space needed for bicycles, and the like. Mr. David Jeong, 4056 Park Boulevard, praised the numbers of citizens appearing at the Council meeting on this Comprehensive Plan. He urged adoption of Program 31, with the land Use map as the guide for future development; he asked for reinstatement of the phrase "reduce dependence on the automobile" in modification Item No. 7; he feared that the words "...increased building coverage," in Item No. 11 would increase density in the areas it was applied; he concluded with the recommendation that modification Item No. 13 be retained in the Plan, with the full strength of the statement on page 31 of the Comprehensive Plan on that topic. Mr. Tom Myers, 2250 Amherst Street, spoke for the College Terrace Residents Association. He said predicted growth for Palo Alto would also increase traffic --the most unpleasant consequence of growth. He lauded 1.h, traffic diverter system installed in College Terrace, and urged that the original language about installing traffic diverters be restored to the Comprehensive Plan. Ma. Philip H. Stavn, 2222 Obelin, said both he and Mr. Myers were natives of the College Terrace area. He supported Mr. Myers' co ts, and said he hoped the words "diverters, chokers," and the like also included the word "barriers," for those were what had made College Terrace a more pleasant place to live. Mr. John Monroe, 1545 Castilleja Avenue, spoke of the Commission's re- wording of Program 31, with the belief that Program 31 would help maintain . the pleasant character of Palo Alto. Mr. Mark L6rberbaian, 4043 Second Street, added support to the re -wording of Program 31. 474 11/22/76 Ms. Patricia Judson, 3949 Park Boulevard, spoke as a member of the Ventura Neighborhood Association, supported Program 31, for she felt the Ventura neighborhood had been kept "healthy" through the instal- lation of such diverters. Mrs. Douglas Barnes, 1588 Castilleja Avenue, urged diverters, and thought their removal would reintroduce many traffic problems. On the matter of bicycles, she felt she owed her former accident -free bicycling record to the facts that she tried to be completely visible, and to obey the rules of the read. She felt present-day cyclists took chances such as night cycling without lights, cycling wrong way on one-way streets, and the like. She felt enforcement of traffic laws was needed for the safety of cyclists, if nothing else. Ms. Bea Casper, 1535 Castilleja Avenue, spoke in suppoit of Program 31, discouraging through traffic. She thanked Mrs. Steinberg for the initiation of the idea, though traffic had risen recently, in spite of the diverter. Mr. Randall Millen, 1931 Cooley Avenue, East Palo Alto, said that he had returned from "exile" of three and one-half years in Sunnyvale, having been unable to afford residence here in his native town. In time spent living overseas he had noted the effectiveness of a com- bination of bicycle and freed -rail system, as well as bicycle and bus comtination. He voiced nostalgia for the early days of his residence in Palo Alto, and his pleasure at returning and participating, by urging reinstatement of the original phrasing on Programs 34, 35, and 36. He supported Mr. Forester's statements, and said that for safety he wore reflective clothing while biking, and for safety he urged law enforcement, along with simple signs showing where parking was avail- able for bikes, as well as signs denoting significant bike travel. Mr. Robert Moss, 4010 Orme Avenue, supported the League of Women Voters' wish that the City Council adopt the Planning Commission's recommenda- tions, pointing to the three years' of painstaking review it had been given. He favored Program 31; but said the wording on page 59a about the Land Use map was too ambiguous and needed clarification. Mr. Colin Mick, 2130 Hanover, praised the system Palo Alto had of incorporating citizen suggestions within its administration and practise, of which the Comprehensive Plan was a worthy example. He pressed for the use of bare iers having seen their effectiveness in College Terrace, Mr. Frank LaFetra, 1035 Whitney Drive, Menlo Park, current president of the Western Wheelers, said that people would be overcome by fumes and smothered by parking if an alternative to the automobile were not provided. He said safe parking for bikes des needed; the parking pro- vided at City Hall was not safe, and chat while it was lighted there were no people. He said that chaimlock systems did not prevent wheels from hikes from being stolen. As an employee he had persuaded Raychem Corporation to provide safe parking for bicyclists. He said he was saving at least 50 percent on gasoline consumption by both he and his family riding bikes, on which he traveled about 5000 miles a year. Mr. David Wright, 344 Oxford, asked that the Coil follow the Planning C ieaiom's recommendations on traffic diverters. He pointed out that may neighborhoods had built-in traffic diverters such as the cul-de-sac, the loop--withia-loop, and only the older naighborhoads which had been laid out before the times of excessive employment io Palo Alto felt the full brunt of increased traffic, and were entitled to have traffic diverters. i 7 5 11/22/76 Mr. R.J. Debs, 3145 Flowers Lane, agreed with earlier speakers in favor of using traffic diverters, then moved on to speak on the subject of Palo Alto Land Use map revisions of Stanford land. He had given all Councilmaembers a letter from Mr. Augeburger, vice president for business and finance at Staaf;'rd University, in which Mr. Augaburger referred to September 17 Councilmeeting during which only five of seventeen requests by Stanford relating to designations on Palo Alto's Land Use map were granted, A letter attached listed the requests still not dealt with, and Mr. Debs said he appeared before the Council to point out some very serious questions, (1) that the Major Institution/Special Facilities area of the campus be extended eastward to Area A, and it had not been done. Corrected See pg. 594 Mayor Norton intervened in Mr. Debs statement, saying that the Council, without having cleared the matter with the Planning Commission, had no power to act on Mr. Debs' requests, though Mr. Debs could continue to speak if he felt so compelled. Mr. Debs replied that he did feel compelled to speak about it, though he knew the matter did go back to the Planning Commission, nnich held public hearings, though some time ago some former Councils did not hold public hearings, which had resulted in public hearings being made mandatory. He said he would be brief, going on to say that "it looks like a minor retitlement on the Land Use Map," and that It was land that belongs to Stanford, which they had a right to ask for, but if the Council approved that land there would be some very bad results. He asked, for example, what the phrase "Major Institution Facility" meant. To him it meant more industrial/research/manufacturing- He said such labeling virtually ordered future Planning Commissions to consider the designation as a fait accompli. He stated the area should be called "manufacturing" or "industrial" and settle the matter, for as it read it was prejudicial toward future planning. He added that the Council should be concerned about retitling from "Open Space" to some designation Stanford might want, so that there will not be conflict, as shown by the recent Arastra case. Councilman Beahra voiced agreement with Mayor Norton's response, but said he had concern about Stanford's fourth and fifth points in the November IS letter, since the City had spent about eight million dollars to learn "the hard way" that people's property cannot be taken without reimbursement. Mr. Debs said his concern was also with Item 1, and he repeated the need for clear statement. He said the designation "Major Institution" was euphemistic --"...a clinic is called an institution," he noted, Mr. Robert Finn, 951 Lincoln Avenue, said he had nothing to add on the matter of bicycle traffic except that he would like to have Lincoln Avenue become a bicycle boulevard. Ms. Denny Petrosian, 443 Ventura Avenue, spoke of her dismay at sentiment leading away from the use of diverters and reduced number of stop signs. She said all the protection against undue traffic would be taken away from the neighborhood she lived in, if those two things were to happen. She deplored the "total resources used by the auto- mobile" as being "unconscionable," and she referred to the use of land taken from the possibility of use for housing mod given to the use for parking automobiles. She said she would like to have the present parking lots designated for future housing use. She also favored non- conforming use procedure, which could not be accommodated in the Land Use plan itself. 76 11/22/76 Mr. Bob Hay, 300 San Mateo Drive, Menlo Park, member of the Menlo Park Transportation Commission, speaking about parking provisions made by employers for bicyclist/employees, "There's just a slight chance that Menlo Park might beat you regarding eaployer parking facilities for bicycles," he said, adding he hoped Palo Alto would not let that happen. He said that visibility was the key, and that if employees, and other bicyclists could see their bikes they could leave them outside safe in the thought that at least they could identify the one who stole the bike. Me said shops who provided safe bicycle storage could have many bicyclist shoppers. Mr. William M. Robinson, 4164 Wilkie Hay, gave the support of the Charleston--Meadowrs Association toward the use of traffic diverters. He asked members of the audience who also favored that use to stand up. Ms. Diana Lewiston, 1849 Newell, announced she was a "bike -pool mother," who pulled a trailer which held her two small children behind her bike. She spoke of having taken her children to their day school some miles away in this fashion daily, for two years. She took them to dentist, grocery and the like in the sane fashion, not wishing them to grow up tied with an "umbilical cord" to the automobile. She closed with a plea that bicyclists who break traffic laws be apprehended. Ms. Ellie Cioumousis, 992 Loma Verde, noted that while she was gathering signers for the petition Ms. Fletcher had spoken of, one of the most popular topics was the possibility of bike boulevatds, which would eliminate the greatest danger to bicyclists, the automobile :raking a right-hand turn. Council recessed from 9:30 to 9:50 p.m. When the meeting reconvened Mayor- Norton pointed out that the procedure would be first to find the additions to the Environuental impact Report (EIR) in the Comprehensive Plan are suffie:lent. MOTION: Councilman 5eahrs moved, seconded by Carey, that the City Council certify that the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been completed in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the state guidelines, and that the Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR. YDTION PASSED: The motion passed with a unanimous vote, Councilmembers Clay and Comstock not participating. Mayor Norton said the next action was to vote on the Comprehensive Plan Itself, to which the Council had devoted some five or six meetings, and which had now culminated into the final adoption of the Plan as recom-- reended by the Planning Commission, together with changes made by the Council. The Council's changes had been referred to the Planning Commission for the forty -day review process, required by ordinance. The Planning Commission held two meetings, as attested to by their report of November 1S and their minutes of November 3 and 10, as required by ordinance, and the November 18 memorandum (C :519:6), reported back to the Council the Planning Commission's action on the changes suggested by Council. Council now hod before it the Plan Council had approved, as amended, and also the Council's comments, subject to the report of the Commisaioa. Mayor Norton recommended that the Council take the Commission's amendments in two categorical steps: (1) Consider in a single Council motion eighteen items which do not change the sub- stance of the Plan, and (2) consider remaining items one at a time. He suggested that the motion which placed those eighteen items before the Council in blanket form have the proviso that any Councilman, who differed with the staff is the opinion that one or more of these items did not 11/22176 change the substance of the Plan, move that that item be removed from the blanket motion. Councilman Eyerly asked that Item 13 be removed from the blanket motion. Councilwoman Witherspoon asked that Item S be removed from the blanket motion. Staff noted that Item 14, since it was related to Item 5, would also have to be removed. Vice Mayor Clay asked that Item 12 be removed from the blanket motion. Councilwoman Witherspoon asked that Item 32 be removed. Mayor Norton enumerated the items remaining, #1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 17, 20, 26, 27, 28, 30 and 31. MOTION: Councilman Beahrs moved, seconded by Comstock, that items 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 17, 20, 26, 27, 28, 30 and 31, (see CMR:519:6) he approved as recommended by the Planning Commission. Item 1. Delete on page 13, left column:, last remaining paragraph, the sentence "Current income levels established for federal housing programs and updated by HUD continue to be used to establish the selling price of the required units." Item 2. On page 18, the sentence underneath the chart be reworded to Lead as follows: "The Palo Alto data refers to the 1975 city limit and therefore does not include Barron Park which was incorporated in Palo Alto in 1976." Item 3. On page 1S, the list of objectives be reordered so that the design standards do not appear to be related only to El Camino. Item 4. On page 19, the two charts be reinstated and updated. Item 9. On page 28 at the end of the page, the words, "If funds are not..." be reworded to "Until funds are available for the Page Mill -- El Camino interebaage, the approved redesigned intersection should be built to ease the flow of traffic." Item 10. Reinstatement on page 28 of the wording after Policy 9 as follows: "However, new parking facilities should be avoided whenever possible by pursuing the policies and program designed to discourage auto use." Item 17. On page 28, Program 20 "If Bey►abore Freeway is...", be reworded to "If Bayshore Freeway is widened, join with adjacent cos - amities in supporting the reservation of two lanes for transit." Item 20. On page 38-A, Program 16 be reworded to "Encourage recycling of buildings that are vacant and/or derelict." Item 26. On page 50, Program 26, the words "Wherever possible" be deleted. Item 27. On page 50, Program 25 be revised to read "Implement program to reduce total transportation related emissions through the encourage- ment of sore efficient use of private vehicles and increased use of mss transit and other modes of travel." 4 7 8 11/22/76 Item 28. On page 59-A, the third paragraph be modified as staff sees fit to indicate that numbers (1) and (2) are related and (3) and (4) are related. Item 30. On page 59-A, third paragraph, Item (3), the words "the property is improved and" be deleted. Item 31. On page 59-A, third paragraph, Item (4), the words "conform with" be replaced with the word "accommodate" to r°ad "If the use is compatible, the Land Use Plan Map will be changed to accommodate the existing use." MOTION PASSED: The motion to approve passed with a unanimous vote. Mayor Norton explained that in relation to the balance of the recom- mendations, that in the absence of affirmative motions which early (on the part of the Planning Commission, as shown in their minutes) no action be taken. lie noted that Items 5, 12, 13; 14, and 32 had been removed from the block motion and Items 6, 7, 8, 11, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25 and 29 would require separate motions. He said that taking the items in order, Item S would be the first and he called for a motion. Councilman Sher suggested an expediting procedure: that items, which staff said did not make substantive changes but which they had recom- mended unanimously by the Commission, be dealt with in a blanket motion. Mayor Norton preferred to deal with each item in a separate motion. MOTION: Councilman Sher moved, seconded by Comstock, that the Council adopt the recommendation of the Planning Commission to reword (Item 5), Employment Program 4 to read: "Revise the zoning ordinance to deter further encroachment of offices In multi -family zones." Councilman Beahrs asked that people who move adoption of items state their reasons for their support. Mayor Norton intervened to say that Councilman Berwald had a general statement to make. Councilman Berwald stated that in the earlier part of the evening many fine presentations had been made by the public regarding the changes to the Comprehensive Plan and he wished to clarify what the Council had done. He felt Council action had not changed intent of any statements, but, instead, had strengthened the language affirming that intent to appreciably reduce traffic from residential areas. He said traffic barriers had not been reserved for affluent neighborhoods, but had been made more prudent, and the program had not been quashed, only treated with more gravity. In another area the Council had acted on their belief that encouragement was better than mandate --in short, the Council has acted toward the matters ender consideration in an appro- priate and rational way. ! Councilwoman Witherspoon asked about Item 5, noting the intention contained in the wording discouraging more offices in multi -family zones and the intention read in the Planning Commiesion differed from that which appeared before the Council. She referred to page 19, Program 4. As. Anne Steinberg, chairwoman of the Planning Commission, said that in the corrected minutes Comaiaefoner Green queried the meaning of "generally prevent" and so the word "deter" was used. L/ ';9 4 7 9 11/22/76 MOTION PASSED: The motion to accept Item 5, which rewords Program 4 as stated above, passed with a unanimous vote. MOTION: Councilman Sher moved, seconded by Comstock, that Council accept the Planning Commission recommendation on Item 6, which would delete the text at bottom of Comprehensive Plan, Page 19, reading:- "They could also be replaced by new office buildings except where offices in older houses are acceptable only because of the character of the building and not because of their location." Councilmen Sher explained that his motion was to support the Commission's recommendation to delete a sentence that had been added by the Council. The Commission construed the sentence to mean that the old buildings could be torn down and new buildings constructed in multi --residential zones, just because there happened to be offices in an older structure, which went beyond the policy proposed by the Planning Commission. Councilman Sher said he agreed with the Planning Commi sign, Councilman Eyer`y said that deletion of the sentence might mean that, for example, houses near University and Webster might he continuously used as offices, for the area was not likely to be used as residential. He felt people now using residential as offices should be able to replace the older structures with true office buildings. Councilwoman Witherspoon asked to have the "clarified" wording of the Item read. Mr. Naphtali Knox, Director of Planning and Community Development, replied that staff had devised transparencies which made the re -worded meaning clear at a glance, for in the case of Item 6, the sentence that had been lined out was the one which said "...should be replaced by new office buildings." fir. Knox added that he thought Councilmember Eyeriy°s staterent about the permission to build new offices rather than continue in converted residential was reasonable:, though the assumption that the locations would not be used for residential was tenuous, for at the moment there wits a proposal for that very location, although it was an extension of Lytton Gardens, and therefore "special housing." Councilwoman Witherspoon asked who would decide which house was worth keeping, even though as offices, they had lost their usefulness, would it be the Architectural Review/ Board, the Planning Commission...? Mr. Knox replied that both of them would --and that if the sentence were removed the formerly residential building could not be replaced by new office buildings. Councilmen Peahrs asked if the density would provide sufficient tax base. itr, Knox replied that a Mr. Allen had au offer for property he owned and At his asking ptice, and so he concluded that the market value is what the property will bring, at least from Community Housing, Incor- porated. He said the average density of Lytton Gardens vac. 100 units per acre, and that the units were junior one -bedroom, therefore about 100 bedrooms. Councilman Realise asked Mr. Knox if be thought the proposed language van sufficient accommodation for the problem of a an who wanted to invest in housing for the general good of the public, aro that he could survive financially. Mr. Knox replied that the example he had given of the asking price being set toad to so desronetrate. 4 8 0 11/22/76 L Councilman Carey recalled an earlier discussion. He posed the premise that the Planning Commission was to deter further offices in multi -family zones. He noted that the use of the word "premise" emphasized the fact that the Comprehensive Plan is a general, not a specific, plan. He said the proposed modifying statement, as outlined in Item 31 of CXR:519:b, had to do with non -conforming uses for the Land -Use map, where the Commission made a determination using as guidelines the wording that if the house/office was compatible with the surrounding area --only because it was a house --it would not be replaced with an office were it to be eliminated, for whatever reason. However, if a house is being used as an office, and the use is compatible with the neighborhood, then the house could be rebuilt as an office. He said the matter had been debated earlier. If the motion passed, Councilman Carey concluded, all non-residential uses in residential areas would have an eventual time of amortization. Se said he felt that was not the intent of the Council, and he urged the Council.members to defeat the motion. Councilman Sher commented that the text language used by the Council does appear under Program 4 which now reads "...provided the zoning ordinance deters further encroachment of offices in multi -family zoning." He said the text would permit building new office space in a multi- family zone simply because there had been a house there, whereas he thought the direct and honest way of doing that would be to appeal fort new zoning. He said that his motion made the text consistent with the program. Courcile3an Comstock said Mr. Sher had covered most of his points, and he added his support to the motion deleting the sentence. He noted that the Land Use Map was fairly specific, and also that writing these qualifications into the zoning ordinance required writing in an exception procedure, which in turn raised the problem Councilman Peahrs referred to, namely the economic issue, particularly if someone had replaced a residential structure with an office structure. The price of the land would be driven upwards, making attainment of the objective of residen- tial usage more difficult. He said deletion of the sentence would confirm the present use pattern. Mayor Norton disagreed with Councilman Comstock's words, saying he thought the motion to delete this language, if passed, would be a further encroachment, and that the zoning ordinance could limit the number of square feet given to office use, creating the same effect without encroachment. Councilman Eyerly asked Mr. Knox what other areas in the City would be affected by the issue. Mr. Knox replied that saga areas along El Camino and California Avenue could also be affected, as well as University. Ha recalled that several areas or the map had so-called "inconsistent usage." Councilman Beahrs added Middlefield Avenue. Councilmen Carey asserted that if the motion passed, an automaticamor- tization had been put on all such structures. He felt that was perhaps an undesirable inflexibility. Be said the specter of a steel -beamed bighrias in Palo Alto was not at all imminent, for the coning and planning and AU process had to be undertaken. Councilmen Comstock said the intent of the motion wear not clear ---was it to retain the area as residential' or was it to give none guidelines to the Cowissioea Councilmen Carey agreed that perhaps limitations were the needed factor. 4A1 11%22176, 1 Corrected See pg. 594 Mr. Knox said that his interpretation was that Item S was subsidiary to Program 4, and that was to "...deter further encroachments." He went on saying the sentence under question would have to be interpreted in that light. He said he could not foresee that if an office building in multi -family had a certain amount of office footage that the replace- ment building would also have that number of feet, but if office space remained in multi -family zones, an exception procedure would have to be found that explained it, at which time it would come back to both Commission and Council. Councilman Carey said that the process Mr. Knox described had been what he had understood also. Mayor Norton conjectured that there might be less complicated ways of dealing with the issue, for it would mean keeping a record on every lot that may have had an office on it. Perhaps more reasonable would be a ratio of footage area to lot area. MOTION FAILED: The motion to uphold the Commission's recommendation (Item 6) to delete the text added by Council at the end of Page 19 failed with the following vote: AYES: Sher, Comstock NOES: Beahrs, Clay. Carey, Norton, Witherspoon, Eyerly, Betwald AGENDA CONTINUSIION dF AGENDA ITEMS 4 THROUGH 8 TO DECEI�LBIER 6, 1976 MOTION: Vice Mayor Clay moved, seconded by Norton, that items it was not necesaary to act on in that meeting be carried to the next scheduled Council meeting (December 6); specifically Items 4--8. Mayor Norton asked Mr. Booth, City Attorney, how pressing the remaining matters on the agenda were. Mr. Booth replied that ail of the items could be continued without any problem. Mayor Norton conveyed that the intent of the motion was that Items 4 through 8 of November 22 agenda would be continued to the next regular meeting on December 6 end would appear first en the agenda after the roll call, and after Orel Communications. He announced it would be a moot vote. NOTION PASSED: The motion to continue agenda items 4-8 to December 6, 1976 passed with the following vote: AYES: Sher, Beahrs, Clay, Norton, Comstock, Eyerly, Ber ld NOES: Carey, Witherspoon PALO ALTO'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (cO INi ) MOTION: Councilman Sber moved, seconded by Copprove the Planning Commission recommendation the Transportation objective on page 21 of the "Reduce dependence on the autr bile." tv stack_, that the Council (Item 7) to reinstate in Comprehensive Plan, 482 � - 11/22/76 Cou cilman Sher indicated that his motion arose from belief that the '°reduced dependence" was the main thrust of the Transportation Section of the Comprehensive Plan, and many speakers had confirmed that point of view. He alluded to the emotional language the public had about changing that phrase to another which indicated that Palo Alto would continue to accommodate to the automobile, rather than provide for a strong alter- native. Some of the language used was "Automobile is king" and talk of the program for bicycles being "gutted." He pointed out that the Planning Commission had given the Council a second chance to reinstate the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan --that specific programs came later. Masi Norton expressed the wish to offer a substitute motion. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Mayor Norton moved, seconded by Berwald, that the words to be inserted in the Transportation objective on Page 21 be amended to read, "Reduce dependence on and improve the efficient use of the automobile." Councilman Berwald said he had wanted to reduce dependence on the automobile also, as his past record indicated, and he presses: for double action, both reduction of dependence on and increase of effi- ciency of the automobile. Councilman Carey noted that both bicycle and autorobiles were hot issues in the community. He felt the automobile had a firm place in our lives and could be supplemeneed, and replaced on occasion, by mass transit as well as bicycles. He noted that reading further in the Transportation Section revealed that all the known alternatives to the automobile were given cognizance, showing the issue was not bicycle versus cars, and the matter of transportation was very complex. Councilman Comstock said the proposed new wording could also be "Reduce the dependence on, and take steps to increase efficient use of the autoobile." Councilman Sher said that the matter of carpooling and the like had been elaborated on in the Transportation Section. He repeated that the Council's attention to wording helped establish clear objectives that could be referred to for future use. He said the greatest clarity would come not from combining objectives, but from separating then. He requested that Mayor Norton's substitute motion be separated into two objectives, for he felt the combination of the two objectives resulted in either confusion or dilution of one or the other objective. Mayor Norton said he did not agree with Councilman Sher, and he asked that Councilman Sher vote against the substitute motion if he felt they were separable objectives. Councilman Slaver challenged Mayor Norton's statement that his substitute motion did not contain separablethaughts. CHALLENGE TO CHAIR: Councilman Sher challenged the Chair's ruling to combine the two objectives in one motion. Mayor Norton pointed out that an "aye" vote would sustain the Chair, a "nog" vote would sustain the challenge. CHAIR MELD: The challenge to the Chair failed on the following vote: AYES: kahrs, Carey, Norton, Witherspoon, Herwald, Lysrly, Clay NOES: Sher, Comstock ' J 4 8 3 11/22/76 Vice Mayor Clay said he would not vote against the main motion, which he agreed was indisputably favored; he said he would vote against the sub- stitute motion, however, for he felt it was not consistent with Item 12 of the Transportation Section, in which it was stated that the automobile would remain the principal mode of transportation, though much could be done by state and federal government to increase its efficient use. Item 10, he noted, which read "..,however, new parking facilities should be avoided whenever possible by pursuing the policies and purposes to dis- courage auto use." also subsumed the intent of the substitute motion, and was inconsistent. SUBSTITUTE MOTION PASSED: The substitute motion passed with the follow- ing vote: AYES: Sher, Beahre, Carey, Norton, Witherspoon, Be rwa l d , Eyerly NOES: Clay, Comstock MOTION: Councilman Sher moved, seconded by Comstock, that the Council adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation (Item 8) that on Page 26 of the Plan, the words "when demand warrants" be deleted from Transpor- tation Programs l and 3. III Corrected See pg. 594 i Councilman Shea explained that the words referred to possible transfer points and the like in public transportation. The Planning Commission declared more people would be attracted to public transportation when efficient service was provided, and that the County Board of Super- visors had control of the transportation district, but. that Palo Alto could make statements about their own Palo Alto transportation. Councilwoman Witherspoon said the language had been put in there because due to the expense of the transportation programs, the Council had wanted to :sake sure that demand warranted the expensive planning and execution of its routings. She reminded Councilmsember.s that the wording had arisen after a conference about light -rail transportation, which had a very high "price tag." Councilman berwald recalled the expense of "Dial -A -Ride," and the need for study before programs were undertaken. Councilman Eyerly said he felt the words "When demand warranta" signified no irresponsible transit moves would be initiated, and he felt the words should remain. Councilman Beahrss felt the words could be made even stronger, for he had learned at a Metropolitan Transit Commission meeting that only ten per- cent of the expense was covered at the fare box. Couneiiwan Sher referred to the newspaper clipping given to Council - members that evening, which pointed out that construction of freeways in the bay Area cost 26.7c per wile, and that motorists paid about 11 per mile through gasoline tax, and he pointed out the considerable subsidy taxpayers made to the automobile, and that while ten percent was low, the subsidy was still more than on freeway costs Ha stated that ordy attractive transportation programs would make people choose not to use their csrs, therefore there would be more mass transit riders when the programs were more efficient. Mayor Morton suggested it did not make sense to increase efficiency before demand warranted, in his opinion. Re called fok the vote. 484 `f`(:1( 11/22/76 AYES: Sher, Beahrs, Comstock NOES: Carey, Clay, Norton, Witherspoon, Berwald, Eyerly Mayor Norton reviewed briefly, saying items 9 and 10 had been adopted, and he awaited a notion on Item 11. MOTION: Councilman Comstock moved, seconded by Beahrs, that the Council adopt the Planning Commission recommendation (Item 11) that the text preceding Policy g at the bottom of page 29 be deleted, which reads "and increased building coverage." Councilman Berwald said he had made this motion initially, as a part of an overall idea to increase incentives for large businesses to use car and vanpoola and other alternatives which would decreace the amount of land needed for parking, thus freeing that part of open space for employee amenities. Concomitant to that there could be increased space for the business to expand, were it compatible with the :ode, thus perhaps increasing employment. He said he would vote against the motion to delete this language. Councilman Comstock noted that employers had not infrequently been told that their parking accommodations exceeded Palo Alto's requirements. He said a not -unforeseen consequence of removing restraint could lead to yat larger parking lots, and so he suggested maintaining restraints on building expansion, for the "trade-offs" possible with the wording reinstated would lead to too much complexity. Councilman Sher asked Mr. Knox, Director of Planning and Community Development, if the words "...include substitution of landscaped reserves," should not appear in the preceding sentence, so that the possibility of iaacreaeed building coverage would not be offered. Councilman Sher then deleted the word "reserves" from his suggested clause, changing it to "...include substitution of landscaping." Mayor Dorton agreed that he thought the intent was to increase the open space, and the removal of the word "reserves" was more consistent with that intent. Mx. Knox said be had understood landscaping as such, and not landscaping reserves, was what was vented, which clearly told the employer that Landscaped area not asphalt parking space was wanted ---especially since the cost of one parking space was about 400,000 dollars plus. Corrected See pg. 594 Mayor Norton asked if it was not now the practice of the Plaunia.g Commiesion to, for example, ask the employer to put in 50 parking owes if tbc employer had said be needed 60. Mr. Knox answered that it was the present practise to do that, and it had eot been satisfactory. Be said it was only used to get by the present code, until the code wee changed. Councilman Sher aged if the language as it was now with "...include substitution of landscaping," wee an incentive. Re said it could be said to permit building enlargement if the clause were not in the preceding sentence. Re said he had seen some possibility of a relationship between required landscaping 74.5-a!t-Yvts possible building enlergement. Mr. Knox said the item had been given only as an initiative for employees to decrease the aawsmt of space given to parking. 4 6 5 11/22/76 MOTION PASSED: The motion to delete the phrase. preceding Policy 8 at the end of Page 29 passed with the following vote: AYES: Carey, Beahrs, Norton, Witherspoon, Sher, Eyerly, Comstock NOES: Clay, Berwald MOTION: Vice Mayor Clay moved, seconded by Comstock, that Council adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation (item 12), which was that on page 29, the text following Policy 8 be reworded to "The automobile is expected to restrain the primary means of travel, but much can be done by state and federal government to increase the efficient use of automobiles by reducing harmful emissions and noise, and derreasing fuel consumption." MOTION PASSED: The motion to reword the text following Policy 8, Page 29, passed with a unanimous vote. MOTION: Councilman Comstock moved, seconded by Sher, that Council adopt the recommendation of the Planning Coms<ission (Item 13), which was that on page 30, Program 31 be re -worded to "Discourage through - traffic from traversing residential neighborhoods by using diverters, intersection chokers and stop signs." AMENDMENT TO MOTION: Mayor Norton moved, seconded by Carey, to amend the motion to add that "Yield" signs be used, as well as "Stop" signs. Councilman Sher said that he did not think "Yield" signs "...would increase travel time through residential neighborhoods," which were the words in the original language. Councilman Eyerly said that the Council's wish was that through traffic be discouraged in residential neighborhoods, and he did not think that wish should be modified. AMENDMENT FAILED: The amendment to the motion failed with the follow- ing vote: AYES: Carey, Norton, Witherspoon NOES: Clay, Beaters, Comstock, Berwald, Eyerly, Sher Councilman Sher, speaking to the wain motion, said he had earlier suggested that the means of decreasing and slowing down traffic was a community --wide concern, and through the Council some definite statement had to come on what steps had to be taken to bring that about. Councilmen Beahrs pointed out that residents went through the neigh- borhoods of others, but did not want others coming through their own neighborhoods.. He held that since the traffin problem was so general it was a community, not a single -neighborhood problem. Councilwoman Witherspoon referred to the pictorial display of various methods of traffic control that had appeared on page 29, showing the actual devices and impediments that would be installed, and she asked Mr. Knox if that page, and the original language were going to be retained, for both would demonstrate the Council's firm intention of developing traffic controls. Ms. !Gaon replied that both were going to be retained. 4 8 6 11/22/16 :J t 6 Councilman Berwald asked that the ways in which traffic was going to be discouraged be included along with the statement that it was to be discouraged. He noted that Program 33 related to California Avenue, and he felt some distinction in Program 32, by means of mentioning proposed traffic controls, was needed, so that there would be no misunderstanding that California Avenue was included. Mr. Knox said referral back,to the Planning Commission required addi- tional time, and he suggested the Council could adopt the Program, then return the Plan tc. the Planning Commission with the suggested amendments. Councilman Berwald said that at the appropriate time he would move such amendments. Councilman Comstock said that sometimes the various items were mis- understood by different aegments of people. He added that perhaps some residents thought the traffic abatement plans might not be acted on, and so in order to show their clear intent the Council should vote for the Program. Vice Mayor Clay referred to the requests of Barron Park, South Gate, College Terrace, West Meadow, and more recently, Greenmeadow, and he questioned the criteria that could be put to work in order to grant one neighborhood's request over another neighborhood. He recounted his difficulty getting to a meeting in College Terrace due to the present system of traffic barriers. He felt the barriers withheld the rights of residents from other parts of town to travel on city streets. Mayor Morton noted that a vote in favor of Item 13 would reinstate the former wording. Councilman Berwald said he wanted the words about reducing the speed of traffic into stet 13. Mayor Norton said he would entertain the motion at a later time. MOTION PASSED: The main motion, reewording Program 31, Page 30, failed with the following vote: AYES: Sher, Comstock NOES: Carey, Clay, Mahn', Norton, Witherspoon, Berweld, Byerly Councilman Comstock expressed concern that owing to fatigue Council - umbers might tend toward over -hasty consideration of etsuing its. MOTION TO ADJOURN TO NOVEMBER 29 POTION: Councilman Comstock moved, seconded by Beahra, that considera- tion of subsequent items be continued to a special meeting, to be held November 29 (fifth Monday). Mayor Norton announced that the public hearing of the public testimony was closed, and that on toe November 29 meeting there would be no additional public hearing. NOTION PASSED: The motion setting a special meeting for November 29 and continuing consideration of the Plan to that date passed with a unanimous vote. 4 S 7 11/22/76 ADJOURNMENT The Council meeting of November 22 adjourned at 11:32 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Monday, November 29. ATTEST: APPRJ : Mayor 488 11/22/76 eir Y'