HomeMy WebLinkAbout04211975CITY
COUNCIL
M1NUTES
Regular Meeting
April 21, 1975
cuuY
or
ITER PACE
Minutes of March 31, 1975 1 1 5 7
Oral Communications 1 1 5 7
Presentation by Stanford University 1 1 5 8
Public Hearing: Barron Park Annexation 1 1 6 3
Request of Councilwoman Pearson that Council Request Board of
Supervisors to Place a Moratorium on Development along El Camino
in Barron Park until after the Annexation Election 1 1 7 6
Recess to Executive session 1 1 8 2
Request to Continue Items 5 and 6 on the Agenda to May 5, 1975 1 1 8 2
Public Hearing: Piggyback Program - Recommended Amendment to the
Cooperation Agreement 1 1 8 3
Modified Plan for Senior Services Center 1 1 8 4
Downtown Diagonal Parking Plan Evaluation 1 1 8 6
Request of Councilman Rosenbaum for Staff Report on :AR --64 1 1 8 13
Request of Councilman Rosenbaum Concerning "Tumble Turned" Reports 1 1 8 8
Mayor Sher re Meeting Concerting Dumbarton Bridge 1 1 8 8
Mayor Sher are Proposed Postal Facility Meeting 1 1 8 8
Mayor Sher re Special Feting at 9aylanda 1 1 8 9
Councilman Berwald re Rumors of Retirement and Apology for Late
Arrival at Finance and.Public Works Committee Meetings 1 1 8 9
1 1 8 9
Oral Communications
lid, sex t 1 1 8 9
•
1 1 5 6
4/21/75
April 21, 1975
'Pao City Council of the City of Palo Alto =et on this date at 7:40 p.r_e
in a regular =eeting with Mayor Sher presiding.
Present: B•eahrs, Berwald, Clay,
Comstock, Henderson,
Pearscn, Rosenbaum, Sher,
Norton (arrived 7:55)
Absent: None
Minutes of Me3r� 1 1975
rarnmemairftwomaiawsor
Vice Mayor Henderson referred tv the end or the introductory paragraph
on the County -Wide Emergency Ccmxunications System on page 1067 and
requested that the statement be ce rected to read "that the cOundy
operates San Jose's co r uni _ation2 system", and the wards "ait~ Jose
operated its eve sha.1d be deleted, In the z1 st paragraph under
the discussion :ontiernsng Housing Lendbank and Mini --Park -- Norrh County
Courthouse, page 1068, the wed "zoned" was left out of the sixth line
cftcr the word "density"; and Vice Mayor Hendareen asked that it be
inserted. He printed cut that "weu1d" should Laplace "was" in the
second i r..c of the last paragraph cn page 1084, The second centcnce
in that same paragraph should begin: "Ii any of the proposals prove
acceptable, the SMUD prepesal -s the rose interesting".
Council-nAn Clay referred to page 1090 and requested that the eecond
sentence of the last paragraph be revised to read as follows: "It
does suggest that while the city 1ooke at its drug program in its entirety:
it may consider any and all proposals".
Mayor Sher asked that the word "in" on the third line of the last paragraph
cn page 1087 be corrected to "following".
MOTION: Councilman Coma: ock i ved, seconded by Berwald, . that the minutes
of March 31, 1915, be approved as corrected.
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
Oral Communioatipgp
1.
John D. Snow, 105 Lovell Avenue, _ stated that
the members of The Collective should not imbibe
their political beliefs into the drug program.
£puking for the veterans, Mx. Snow said .Council
had their support in its feeling that the drug
program should be politically free.
2. Dr. Carl Ellertsou, Jr., 780 Seale Avenue, spoke.
for the many users of the Palo Alto Harbor. He
had intended to wait until the official notice of
RtDC' a action was in Council packets next week,
1 1 5 7
4/21//5
but with the headline article in The Palo Alto
Times on Friday night, and Council's forthcoming
meeting in the Baylands this coming Saturday, Dr.
Ellertson felt this was an appropriate time for
the following statement: "With the unanimot.s
approved Thursday by BCDC of the county's request
to dredge the harbor, we seem to have come to the
end of a long struggle. Nine governmental bodies
or boards of permits hsve approved the concept of
the maintenance of the harbor; and since there was
well -organized opposition all the way, we feel a
significant victory has been won. Though we
celebrate, we do not gloat. We come, instead, to
ti ask for a joining of all interested parties
the Council, the Planning Commission, the
County Supervisors, the County Parks and
Recreation Commission, and the several environ-
mental organizations to create. a harbor
recreational area of permanence, beauty, and
utility to all. We must begin now to plan for
the future of the harbor; for we all know that
unie;;s siltation can be decreased, the harbor
must be dredged three or four years f_rotn now,
and a permanent solution to the spoils problem
must be found. We ask that the Council,
Planning Ccn.ission, and city staff enthusiastically
undertake the search for this solution, actively
support the concept of a permanent harbor as -a
part of a permanent recreational area, and -abandon
the fainthearted attitude that nothing can be done.
To this end, we feel that remarks in Council or
newspaper articles which infer that city money is
providing harbor facilities for a very few are
unfair and do not represent the truth. Let it be
truly known `hat county recreation funds, voted
by the taxpayers of the county as a Charter Amend-
ment, support this recreational area. Let it be
known that boaters pay their way as no other
recreational users do. Let it be known how -many
hundreds snake use of the harbor, and how many more
would use it if its potential were developed with
a public hoist and ramp within the harbor -as asked
for by BCDC. Let it be known that an uncared-for
harbor its the future will be of no more value to
small boats than it would be to larger boats.
We ask that when considering the Baylands, you
keep the successful future of the harbor always
in your ssche:res.
Thank you."
Pr+essntation b Stanford University.
Robert Rosenzweig, Vice President for Public Affairs at Stanford
University, made the following statement:
"A little more than a year ago, three Stanford Vice Presidents appeared
before a joint meeting of the City Council and the Planning Commission
to discuss the University's academic operations. AA you may remember,
they reported on what they foresaw for Stanford in the future, with
student enrollment biting held at but 11,500 and with no sizeable
1158
4/21/75
increases in faculty and staff. They also discussed the Univcrs.`.ty's
organization, system of governance, some financial data, and building
needs in the central campus and Medical Center.
That was followed in 1974 with a meeting to obtain the City's reaction
to Stanford's proposed land use policy. That policy, as you know,
emphasizes holding Stanford's open lands for future academic use,
and it precludes general purpose, high -density development. It
was adopted by the Trustees a year ago.
In keeping with the high interest these days in the national, state
and local economy, and in view of the news stories that have emanated
from the campus abcut Stanford's financial condition, we thought
that we would report on the fiscal side of the institution. In
addition, we would like to talk abort our plans for academic facilities
at Stanford and - optimistically - their funding.
William Miller, Vice President and Provost, will begin with a view
of Stanford's underlying financial situation, and our search for
a long-term equilibrium position. He will be followed by Robert
Augsburger, Vice President for Business and Finance, who will discuss
our academic failities plan and capital funding forecast. By focusing
on Stanford's financial situation_ and academic facilities, we do
not mean to preclude questions about other aspects of the University's
activities. Piesse feel free to ar,k questions after both speakers
have finished."
William Miller, Vice President and Provost, Stanford University,
stated that with regard to the basic assumptions about Stanford
for the future, little change was expected fn cutricui.urt character.
One area where the U'ni,.ersity did expect substantial change is in
the clinical side of the medical program, with increased teaching
of the clinical aspect of medicine and some increases in the clinical
faculty at the University. The student body size is expected to
remain relatively constant, with a slight increase in the Graduate
Student Cody. Commensurate with this, Mr. Miller expected the University
would have very little change in the faculty size. Another basic
premise in the development of Stanford in tt-1 future is that there
will be the facilities to match the student body, the program, and
the faculty size. The third basic premise is that the University
will achieve a budgetary equilibrium within the contexts of student
body size, faculty size, and some shifting of programs.
Mr, Miller epokk about the criteria for decision making in preparation
of budgets and in search of budgetary equilibrium. The first and
foremost assumption is that acede.nic excellence will be maintained,
which has been a hallmark of the institution. In so doing, the
very etrong programs will be conserved, a few others will be changed,
and the changing needs of the students will be met. The Univer-exty -
expects to provide effective support services for students, faculty,
and staff; and the affirmative action program will be continued.
As the University attempted to develop its budget and its academic
plans, it would attempt to achieve maximum economy and effectiveness
and to assure equity and fairness to individuals.
Mr. Miller showed graph/ to indicate the relationships between the
consolidated budget and the operating budget for the fiscal year
st•.arting Septerber 1, 1975. Ms explained the details of both budgets
in terms of current dollars and constant dollars. In order to gain
budgetary equilibrium, the University is engaged in a three year
1 159
4/21/75
rte•• T-
-. .-� r rrv".. - ,.v.., .1 -..-..,--7
program to close a gap of about 10.3 million dollars, of which
a major portion will be expenditure reduction. During the first
year, about 4 million dollars worth of the gap had been closed.
In maintaining budgetary equilibrium, Stanford would try to 1-�old
on to its sources of support in such a way that each portion of
the budget would keep its constant share tof the budget over a period
of time. Very attractive programs would be maintained since that
was essential in the case of tuition incosse, and an effort would be
made to complete the three hundred million dollar Campaign for
Stanford. So far, the Campaign is on target.
Robert Augsburger, Vice President for Business Affairs, Stanford
University, reviewed a plan for Council- that sets forth those physical
changes to the campus which thie University believes it must undertake
in order to support adequately the academic program. In light
of the financial and economic environrent described by Bill Miller,
one might ask why Stanford needed additional faciliti-es. Mr. Augsburger
explained that program, financial and physical planning for buildings
and lands evolve from specific academic program requirements; and
these requirements are guided by the following four goals: (1)
to provide adequate facilities for the scholar, (2) to correct
deficiencies in existing facilities, (3) ':o support peer grouping,
and (4) to support interaction among disciplines, These four goals
need to be accomplished within two basic constraints. lire essential
qualities of the campus lust be preserved, and the University needed
to operate within financia? constraints. Stanford's five year
plan has two components or sets. O-ie set consists of those projects
where funding has been identified and which are in final design
or construction, and they are: Frederic Merman Engineering Center,
Applied Physics Building, Cros.n Quadrangle - Law School, Governor's
Lane Complex 1, Shern.sn Faairchild Center, Hospital Expansion
Phase 1 -- Stage 1, Uneergraduate Stud€nt Housing Stage 1, and Pearce
Mitchell douses. The other set consists of those projects which
are in academic or physical planning and have been deered essential
for completion to provide an adequate level of physical support
for the University`s educational program. he timing of these
projects is largely dependent upon successful fund raising for
all or a portion of the amounts required. 'chose of the highest
priority are: Nev Main Library, Seeley G. Mudd Chemistry, ILtetory
Corner - Building 200, Computer Science - Building 460, Herbert
Hoover Memorial Building, Governor's Lane Complex II, Sh►ermaan Fairchild
Center - Phase II, Hospital Earpansion -- Phase I - 3tage II, and
Hospital Expansion --Phase II.
Beyond these projects, Mr. Augsburger reported the University's
principal needs appear to be for incremantal space in the Medical
Center, which until this yeah has operate. in space designed and
built in the late 1950's and early 1960's despite significant advances
in medical science and technology; incremental student housing;
and finally, adds;:ional renovation of many of the original or early
Stanford buildings. Because of financial constraints, it is unlikely -
though possible -that sonde of these additional needs can be initiated
during the next five years.
At present, excluding SLAC, the campus facilities total some 5,608,000
square feet. "the seventeen projects mentioned would add 673,000
square €eet, which would be a twelve percent increase.
In concluding, :ir. Augsburger observed that the development of
Stanford's physical plant is not driven by the desires of donors.
Rather, it is the product of careful plannning and forecasting of
academic needs and then matching those needs with the specific
1160
4/21/75
interests of donors, He added that the very rapid, perhaps even
explosive, growth of knowledge during recent decades simply demands
additional share for libraries, laboratories and related service
facilities. These planned projects do no more than enable Stanford
to get up-to-date, and that is a condition that must be accomplished
to maintain the University's academic excellence.
Councilman Comstock was struck by two things as a result of the
presentations. One was the cost squeeze, and the other was that
Stanford was moving up fairly well in the area of academic space
per student. It seemed to Councilman Comstock that Stanford could
garner some more immediate income either by raiaing tuition or
by increasing the number of students who are paying tuition.
Mr. Miller responded there were a number of forces against the
increase of student body size. It was felt that over the last
few year the University had just gotten to a favorable student/faculty
ratio, and to :increase the student body without increasing faculty
size: would deteriorate that ratio. Also, as you look at the number
of individuals in the eighteen to twenty-one year age bracket for
the 1980's, you find a decline. Providing for more students now,
i en it was obvious a decline was in the future, would be rather
poor planning:
Councilman Seahhrs asked to what extent Stanford had reached stability
in it.s suppotttrg staff.
Mr. Rosenzweig replied that the indication was that next year's
budget would produce a decline in staff of about 85 and a decline
in faculty of about 17, That would be handled by attrition rather
than by lay-offs, but the follewinig year would probably produce
further declines of a magnitude that could not presently be predicted.
Mr. :filler painted out that if Stanford were not managing an increase
in efficiency, they would be laying off staff,
Vice Mayor Henderson noted that the total construction projections
cam to about 130 million dollars, yet construction appeared on
the chart to be about 25% of the total budget. He had tried to
see in the construction figures how touch of that related to the
research and auxiliary side, and that was an area not counted
upon in terms of growth and expansion. Vice Mayor Henderson asked
if the growth would be coming basically from research and hospital
facilities, ;:.r if there were limits there also.
Mr. Augsburger said a large portion of the planned expansion over
the next five years was in the form of libraries. That eonsieted
of the main library as well as libraries in the Engineering Center,
the Chemistry Building, etc. The other major category is some
220,030 square feet in instruction, which would include the classrooms
in the law school, the engineering building, and so on. in the
auxiliary categories, there is an expansion of 91,000 square feet
in the hospital and clinics and 44,000 square feet In student residences.
In sponsored research, there would be an expansion of 136,000 square
feet, the bulk of shish would be in the Medical Center.
Vice Mayor Hendersoo asked if a major factor in the University's
need for expanded libraries was an increase in research efforts.
1 1 6 1
4/21/75
Mr. Augsburger thought this depended upon what you called research
and what the source of that research was. The expansion of the
main library was being done primarily to meet the needs of the
humanities and social science scholar, and that form of research
is generally not financed through government grants and contracts.
That kind of expansion is intended to serve not only faculty, but
also graduate students in humanities and social sciences. Mr. Augsburger
explained that he had been addressing himself to expansion that was
designed for sponsored research.
Mr. Miller explained that constant faculty size actually put a ceiling
on the amount of research in which you can engage. In terms of constant
dollars, research vblune has slightly declined.
Councilman Clay asked if he understood correctly that 45Z of the
University's income was a result of government grants and contracts.
Mr. Miller responded that it was the University's expectation to
maintain about the same level of research volume in constant dollars.
Of the consolidated budget, the percentage would be roughly 30%.
Councilman Rosenbaum noticed ia the chart showing new construction,
there seemed to be a fair amount at the terminus of Carpus Drive.
There was the hospital expansion, the Sherman Fairchild Building,
the Governor's Lane Co.=plex, and the new chemistry building. He
asked if the Universit4 were making budget plans for an extension
of Campus -Drive out to Ju ipera Serra.
Mr. Augsburger responded negatively.
Councilman Berwald thanked the repreEentatives from Stanford for
giving their quantitative insights into operations and needs, and
he hoped that at another time a presentation would be made of the
qualitative side of the University, He said he would like to hear
something about Stanford's professional_ accomplishments, contributions
to the community and the larger society, human services and achievements,
and so forth. In that sense, Councilman Berwald felt it could not
be assumed that the people of Palo Alto understand the worth of the
University; and it would be Well for that type of form to be provided.
Councilwoman Pearson thought that with this amount of construction
contemplated, there would be no peace on campus or in Palo Alto for
many years. She was interested in knowing whether someone from Stanford
would be willing to present its plans for the rest of the campus
and whatever building construction it had in mind, for whatever purposes.
Counciiwomar Pearson guessed with that kind of building going on,
particularly in the Medical Center, one would expect to have an increase
in the amount of traffic on campus and through Palo Alto and a rather
large increase in the number of employees involved. She realized
a traffic study was going on to eliminate cars from crucial areas
on camnua, and Councilwoman Pearson wanted to know if Palo Alto was
involved in that study.
Air. Augsburger commented that Stanford would be willing to share
any construction plans with Palo Alto when they had them. The traffic
study has largely dealt with the parking aspects, and that had not
involved Palo Alto,. However, the Univf:rsity was very actively involved
with the cities of Palo Alto and Menlo Park in a subregionai transportation
study.
I 1 6 2
4/21/75
Nr. Rosensweig added that Stanford did not anticipate any substantial
increases in employment at the University because there would be
no money for that. The facilities being built will be handled by
the present staff.
Mayor Sher thanked Messrs. Rosensweig, Miller and Augsburger for
their presentations. Since. Mayor Sher was involved in both comrunitieo,
it pleased him when occasions arose which helped to improve the understanding
between the two communities.
Public Hearing: Tiarron bark Annexation _tC' Rc274:5)
Mayor Sher stated that this was the time and place when and where
any and all persons may be heard on the proposed annexation of the
territory known as "Barron Park" to the City of Palo Alto. This
was also the time. and place when any requests for exclusion of property
from the territory proposed to be annexed, supported by written application
filed prior to this hearing, will be considered. Any interested
person could. be heard on such requests also. Mayor Sher asked that
the record show that the City Clerk has filed affidavits of publication
of notice of this heating, and he asked for the City Clerk's report
regarding the railing of notice of this hearing to any persons who
filed a request for notice.
Ann Tanner, City CFck, stated there were no requestsi for notification;
therefore, none were mailed.
Mayor Sher .asked the City Clerk to report on whether any written
requests have been filed for the exc.Iusion of property from the territory
proposed to be annexed,
Miss Tanner read the names and addresses of those who had requested
exclusion of property from the territory proposed to be annexed;
and they are &s follows: Lucia Moser, 892 Los Robles Avenue; Mr.
and Mrs. Marvin S. Tupper, 892 Eairon Avenue; Fiona St.. John concerning
3790 El Centro Street, 3895 La Donna Avenue, and 3925 La Donna Avenue;
Fumy Lou Miller, 3890 La Donna Avenue; Norman J. Miaseth, 3710 Carlitos
Court; DeRay Norton, 3725 La Selva Drive; Howard Kline, 597 Military
Way; D. Reed and Edward F. Erickson, 784 Josina Avenue; Pauline Thompson,
Parcel liumber 137-21-006; Alfred and Norma Rezendes, 749 La Para
Avenue; Holland D. Roberts, 3851 La Donna Avenue; ila Huebner, 3880
La Donna Avenue; Roger C. an:; Wilma E. Cowger, 754 Los Robles Avenue;
fsaxbara C. Whittemore, 3883 El Centro Street; Mr. and Mrs. David
A. Kilbourne, 701 Chimalus Drive; William and Diane Nephew, 935 Matadaro
Avenue; Junya D. Petersen, 4021 Campana Drive; John J. Driscoll,
3691 Laguna Avenue; William H. Radcliffe, 752 Chimalus Drive; Dorothy
R. Nunes, 705 La Fara Avenue; Joan L. Stauffer, 37665 La Donna Avenue;
and Mrs. Dorothy H. Roavold, 3737 La Donna Avenue,
Mayor Sher asked for the City Managtir's report ragardirlg the proposed
annexation.
.lay Gellert, Administrative Intern, stated that the staff report
was self-explanatory. Council should note that this is a final decision
step; and if. Council passes the resolutions attached to the report,
than would sett in motion tht steps which will end up in an election,
Kr. Gellert pointed out that staff had made three recommendations
on issues of community concern to the people of Barron Park, and
it soled appropriate that they also be considered at this times.
1 1 6 3
4/21/75
Mayor Sher asked if there were anyone present who wished to be heard
on these matters.
Barbara C. Whittemore, 3883 El Centro Street, stated that her anxieties
with regard to the proposed annexation were financial ones. Mrs.
Whittemore felt that if Barron Park were annexed to the city, there
would be the possibility of an increase in taxes and assessments.
Junya Peterson, 4021 Campana Drive, said that most of the Barron
Park residents in attendance at this meeting were distressed because
they had not heard about the date for filing -requests for property
exclusion. Ms. Peterson noted that fortunately someone had seen
the legal advertisement in The Palo Alto Times. On behalf of those
persons who still might not know that the filing date had past, Ms.
Peterson requested that Council postpone action until some future
time.
O. Reed Erickson, 784 Josiva Avenue, expressed the fact that there
were many people in Barron Park who did not know this action was
being contemplated. Ids. Erickson felt there was something wrong
with a system where notices were not sent out unless requested when
there was no way for citizens to be aware of the need to make a request.
Her concerns about the proposed annexation were that Barron Park
would become just like Palo Alto, and that people in Barron Park
could not afford to be brought up to Palo Alto specifications.
Hawley Smith, 525 University Avenue, stated he was present to read
a letter from James C. Sater in opposition to the annexation. The
letter vas as follows: "My brother and I own a small, commercial
property located at 4102 El Camino Real. We purchased the property
in 1959 when Ming's Restaurant, then a well known and active business,
was located on the site. Over our objections, the restaurant building
was condemned in 1967 in order to widen El Camino Real. This condemnation
was accompanied by the City of Palo Alto's assurance that El Camino
Real would soon become' the Wilshire Boulevard of Palo Alto''. In
spite of that promise, cur property has remained vacant since. Last
year %le applied to the Palo Alto City Council for pre -zoning of our
property to allow construction of a small commercial building utilizing
the entire lot. We had met the requirements of the city staff, including
the Architectural Review Board, when the Planning Commission recommended
denial of our application on April 24, 1974. The Planning Commission
felt that our property, barely half an acre, should be residentially
developed. The Director of Planning, Mr. Knox, however, said: 'the
property is too email for any kind of viable residential developmeent'.
On May 20, 1974, the City Council heard us and voted to continue
the matter to allow us to modify our plans to meet the objections
of certain members of City Council. In spite of the poor nature
of the adjacent development, they demanded that we employ expensive
architectural features in our building. We returned on July 15 with
a greatly modified set of plans, drawn at extra cost, and after receiving
approval of the city's Architectural Review Board. At that tae
our application for commercial development was denied, and at that
point we lost our tenant. Having some experience in apartment construction,
it was obvious to us, as it should be to any school boy with paper
and pencil, that the land is far too expeu*ive and limited to practically
permit residential, development. Moreover, as was rioted by one member
of the City Council, it is questionable that anyone would care to
live on a congested, noisy section of El Cassino Real - in our case,
surrounded by card clubs, pornographic theaters, adult book stores
previously developed and detracting from the verdant country atmosphere
the Planning Commission envisions. Paced with property that could
not be developed, could not be sold, and in a very real sense wee
1 1 6 4
4/21/75
Corrected
See pg. 1258
.rte-r.rrTW •-rr-•-;-, �••y-�
•
about to be condemned without compensation, we went to Santa Clara
County. As is apprcpriate to property commercially zoned for more
than thirty years, we obtained a building permit to build a smaller
building on the commercial portion of the lot, only. The City of
Palo Alto at this point illegally refused to grant us a water permit
and attempted to .ford: the Sanitation District to withdraw a previously
issued surer permit. We were then obliged to take the matter to
the courts, where we easily prevailed. We are now under construction,
aad 1 think it is interesting to note some results of this .,lengthy
struggle: 1) No one owning a dilapidated building en El Camino Real
will consider tearing the building down and replacing it with upgraded
improvements if faced with the kind of senseless and illogical opposition
we had to meet from the City of Palo Alto. The City Council, in effect,
has frozen the character of the area into its present unhappy state.
2) Our property will not be developed to the best advantage of Palo
Alto, Barron Park, or ourselves. We were willing to do whatever
was necessary to build a commercial building acceptable to the city.
We are no longer able to do this, We feel very strongly, however,
that this "even worse development", as Hrs. Pearson terms it, is
by far core attractive than the other buildings to be found in the
immediate vicinity. We found the City of Palo Alto arbitrarily and
illegally acting against real estate over which it had no present,
and possibly no future, jurisdiction. Disregarding completely the
professional advice of the city ,tai I , the Planning Commission decided
to downgrade a long established cime_cial zone without regard to
our legiti.::ate rights :as property owners, A recent court decision
concerning rezoning of ce::.-rercial land over which the city has jurisdiction
to residential states: 'the city has the duty to overlay its police
power with the requirement of just c.p LLpensation where the individual
loss is great compared to the gain': it became apparent to us early
in these proceedings that certain members of the City Council had,
for political reasons and in disregard of our rights, decided the
outcome of the Public Hea. ing prior to the hearing. Justice, at
the very least, demands the appearance of justice. We cannot close
this letter without commenting on the particularly rude behavior
of Mrs, Enid Pearson. One gratuitous remark implied that. we would
build score architectural horror ;.n Barron Park and then retire to
the wastelands of Beverly Hills. Her rhetorical question as to whether
there was any truth tc the rumor that the owner of the Sater property
is the Cameo Club is reminiscent of the late Senator Joseph McCarthy
and comparable, both in its ethical and political etandard4. We
feel sorry for the citizens of Palo Alto who entrust their affairs
to mfrs. Pearson, a vindictive and arbitrary politician."
Mayor Sher noted that Mr, Hawley had gone over the five minute tire
limit, and his remarks were no longer dealing with the point of the
hearing.
Roger C. Cowger, 754 Los Robles Avenue, coutitiued to read the unfinished
portion of the Smith/Sater letter: "We resent the way we have bean
treated, We expected more from the government than we received.
We hope this letter will bring this matter forcefully to the minds
of the City Council and to the Palo Alto citizens".
Ellen Felice, 580 Barron Avenue, felt that Barron Park provided an
ideal atmosphere in which to rare children. Persons of moderate
income were able to afforL to live in Barron Park, and Mrs. Felice
feared that annexation to Palo Alto would mean a change in the financial
situation. There had been a number .f things the City of Palo Alto -
had done that had an unpleasant effect on residents of Barron Park;
1 1 6 5
4/21/75
and as an example, Mrs, Felice mentioned that several years ago,
the local Boy Scout Troop had been asked to help direct traffic at
Foothill Palk the first weekend it was open. Her own boys had taken
part in this effort; but at a later time, they were denied admission
to the park because they were residents of Barron Park.
Armin Wolff, 708 Matadero Avenue, expressed concern about non -conforming
uses if Barren Park were annexed to Palo Alto; and he asked Council
to not work a financial hardship on people in the way that Los Altos,
for instance, had done, Mr. Wolf was also interested in using a
dome -type cover for his swimming pool is order to save on energy
costs, but he had been told that such covers were illegal in Palo
Alto. He asked what the rationale was for preventing the use of
such a pool cover, and he wanted to know what benefits Palo Alto
expected to receive from the proposed annexation.
Jerry Dunn, 550 Hamilton Avenue, said he had seen many changes take
place in Palo Alto over the last twenty-two years; and despite some
of the prevailing views on Council, he did not think they all had
been constructive. He asked if enyone on Council could wonder why
Stanford world not want to be annexed to Palo Alto and why many residents
of Barron Park did not want to be annexed. In Mr. Dunn's opinion,
Palo Alto had more than enough land already to manage; and the city
was not doing all that good a job of it. He thought it was completely
unrealistic for. Council to think than life in Barron Park would remain
the same once Palo Alto takes over. .ir. Dunn pointed out that this
Council could not make any representations to the people of Barron
Park that there never will be sidewalks, gutters, or Palo Alto specifications
in that area. He suggested that once the city took over with its
Council, Coamittees, and Commissions, life would not be the same
whether the subject be a pool oc a sidewalk or any of the other amenities
of Barron Park, Further, Mr. Dunn stated that this Council clothed
itself with the aura of being the friend of the poor, oppressed,
and downtrodden a the residentialists. He said he represented Rudolpho's
on Los Robles and El Camino, and they wish to be excluded from annexation.
They did not know about the requirement to file an exclusionary request;
and Mr. Dunn thought that if Council wanted to be ultimately fair
with everybody, it could reopen that period of time so those who
wanted to file exclusionary requests could do so.
Robert Moos, 4010 Or - e Street, stated he lived in Palo Alto adjacent
to Barron Park; and he had no sidewalks, curbs, or gutters in his
area. A number of people seemed to be considerably concerned about
those kinds of urban amenities; but in his case, the only place within
walking distance from his home where sidewalks existed was within Barron
Park. With regard to property values, Mt. Moss had seen a number
of houses iu Barron Park selling for much more than comparable houses
in Palo Alto. The oxity inexpensive houses in Barron Park were those
which were small, In Mr. Moss' opinion, a blanket statement that
annexation to Palo Alto would destroy the rural character of Barron
Park was a gross exaggeration.
Ken Arutunian, 922 Matadero Avenue, thought it was somewhat facetious
for people to speak of lack of response to citizens' needs by the
city. These same people needed to go to the county and see the kind
of response they gave to problems individuals might have. Mr. Arutunian
said a citizen did not have to involve himself in very many activities
to discover he woull get very little support from the county, and
this included those parsons in Barron Park who would like to see
the community remain the way it is. The kind of support that one
would think he could expect from the county is just not there, and
Mr. Arutunian's personal feeling was that Barron Park residents would
get snore support from the city. Therefore, he was in eupport of
the annexation.
1 166
4/21/75
Kathy Millar, 980 Matadoro Court, Barron Park, felt that residents
there were paying more for services than they would if they were
in the city. She pointed out that a petition had been presented
requesting an election to decide the matter, and Ms. Millar urged
Council to proceed with that plan.
Jane Grubgeld, 3746 La Calle Court, referring to the comments made
indicating that residents of Barren park had not been informed of
the annexation, stated that she had accepter; the responsibility of
seeing to it that informational sheets were delivered to every house.
Mrs. Grubgeld was also surprised about the concern over cost effects
that had been exrressed at this meeting. Two different times comparisons
had been given as to cost of living in the county versus the city,
and Mrs. Grubgeld concluded that there had been very little reading
of the information that had been provided. Jay Gellert's number
was given, and he had been eecy cooperative about answering any questions
Barron Park residents had. Mrs. Grubgeld snid that proponents of
the annexation had been insistent that everything done was open and
aboveboard, but tonight's comments indicated there was a big job ahead
regarding education before the election date.
John Miller, 1736 Cass Way. stated he was tor the annexation of Barron
Park. He pointed ^.'it chat there were sole areas in Barron Park where
there were sidewalk:, and sone cthe: e e. s ::here there were none.
In Mr. Miller's ivpttilen,, se,ie•...ir;s v.>ne .3•ast. not 2n issue.
Betty Cone of Barron Pack stated that she was for annexation to Palo
Alto, and she felt thau Santa Clara Count,; had really let Barron
Park residents down, Mrs. Cane ex tessed the difficulty she had
with the c iunty in regard to getting responses to serious traffic
problems, and she felt sure Palo Alto weuid be much more concerned
about such :riot_ to:s
Robert England, 3%68 La Donna Avenue, reported that he and his wife
fought the county for two years to prevent the installation of sidewalks
on Paradise Way. With the assist.znce of the city staff, the residents
had been able to keep that situation in abeyance pending the outcome
of the proposed annexation. With regard to the diseerination of
information, Mr. England said a special point was made of distributing
fact sheets door to doer_
Howard Smith, 720 La Para Avenue, appreciated the fact that any guarantees
made by Council to Barron Park would art be gold-plated; but no guarantee
spade by the county would be worth anything more. He noted that any
information he had received, as a relatively new resident in the .
area, had come from the City of Palo Alto; and he had received no
assurances and no useful information from the County of Santa Clara.
Mr= Smith said he had an indication from Palo Alto that his taxes
would not go up appreciably if Barron Park were annexed; in fact,
they may go down a little. He thought his utility bills might be
slightly less and his insurance prei.t mia quite a bit less because
of the fire protection Palo Alto can offer.
Richard Placone, 601 Chimalus Dt .•e, said the one subject which kept
coming up was the concern about preserving the rural environment
of. Barron Park. The main aspect of this subject had to do with development.
Residents would like to preserve Barron Park as a resident:.a1 community,
bring some kind of reason to the development along El Camino Real,
pet a atop to the very dense apartment projects that surround Barron
Park on Araetradero Road and El Camino Real, and do something about
the tic.ky-tacky commercial development that currently exists on El
Camino Real, Mr. Placone stated there was a real interest in having
1 1 6 7
4/21/75
r, , .r -• ,Tr_. . , .y , .
the entrance :.o Barron Park reflect the lovely community that is
behind El Camino Real, He sympathized with developers who were faced
with a morass of rules and regulations, but the Barron Park Residents'
Association was strongly against chaotic development. It has been
the Association's conclusion that while Palo Alto may not hold out
the panacea to all of Barron Park's problems and that annexation
would not mean that everything would then be taken care of, at least
the interest that has been expressed all over the county could be
transferred to the Palo Alto Council Chambers, Mr. Piacone asked
Council to pass the resolutions and allow the issue to come before
the citizens of Barron Park in November so that the total taxpaying
population could vote on it.
Philip Stillman, 941 Roble Ridge, thought a very fine case had been
made for annexation; but he did feel a few misgivings about the fact
thatethis meeting was relatively unpublicized. Mr. Stillman suggested
that perhaps more Council members could attend meetings held by the
Barron Park Residents' Association in order to alleviate some misgivings
which people had andehen submit the matter to an election in November.
Councilman Berwald referred to the Sater property, and recalled that
he had voted for approval of the building. Staff had recommended
that the building be approved, and Councilman Berwale thought it
was an attractive one and pr:,bab'y as good a one as the city would
get in that Location, He telt ti.LL.e had proved that, 1r, Smith had
said, when reading the letter, that the owners were willing to construct
a building acceptable to Palo Alto but were no longer able to do
that. Whether the building finally would be in the county or the
city, and whether the builders and Mr. Smith felt personally imposed
upon by Council's majority position., Councilman Berwald could not
understand why the buildia6 could not be constructed to the specifications
that the city had seen It was Councilman Eetwald's hope that the
owners would let bygones he bygones and proceed to construct a quality
building.
Mr. Smith said that if the owners could build a 9,000 square foot
building of the character the city's planning staff recommended,
that would be economically ieasi.ble. However, 5,760 square feet
is roughly within a thousand square feet of the former proposed building;
and because of the higher cost per square foot, a larger building
would be needed to take the project au economical one.
Councilman Comstock asked if the entire statement made by Mr. Smith
were Mr. Sater's words or if they were Mr. Smith's words.
Mr. Smith responded that his entire statement was a letter from Mr.
Sater.
Councilman Comstock asked that Mr. Smith convey his distress at Mr. Sater's
necessity to use the kind of statements he did in making a personal
attack on Councilwoman Pearson. He considered the statements out
of place, not only in respect to the Barron Park annexation issue,
but also with regard to the original issue before the Council.
Mr. Smith agreed to do that.
Since no one else wished to ask questions of any of the persons who
had addressed Council, Mayor Sher declared the hearing closed.
Councilwoman Pearson stated that she lived in Palo Alto for twenty-
three years; and prior to that, she lived in Barron Park at 3737
La Carle Drive. She pointed out that Mr. Sater was given the opportunity
1 1 6 8
4/21/75
to cooperate with the Planning Commission, the Architectuzai Review
Board, and the citizens of Barron Park. Councilwoman Pearson said
she was sorry that when Mr. Safer was turned down by a majority
on the Council - and not just herself - that he chose to go to the
county and get a permit for a building that is of lower standards
than Palo Alto requires. She explained that she would continue
to reserve the right to comment on the aesthetics of any development
upon. which she is to make a judgment; and personally, Councilwoman
Pearson was pleased that the Wilshire Boulevard plans as envisioned
by the Council in 1961 had been obliterated. She remembered them
vividly, and she fought teem vigorously. For instance, Councilwoman
Pearson remembered the twenty-seven story proposal on El Camino
Park; and she was head of a committee which opposed that. She thought
Mr. Sater lost a few bucks when he could not build his high-rise
on his property, but the fact remains that he is from Beverly :ii11s.
Councilman Beahrs-had been very impressed with the articulation
of the Marron Park residents, and he thought they would fit in very
well with the political arena in Palo Alto. Re asked what the cost
of the election would be and who would bear that cost.
Miss Tanner explained that the cost of the election in November
depended to a certain extent on whether this would be a measure
consolidated with the county or a separate question financed by
the City of Palo Alto and put to the voters in Barron Park. The
cost would be somewhere between five and ten thousand dollars.
Councilman Beahrs asked who would finally fund the election,
Mr. Gellert responded that staff had been discussing this with the
county, and they have expressed interest in funding at least part
of the cost The details had not been worked out because they were
largely dependent upon the total cost, and that would be determined
in the near tuture when, the county decided whether to have a countywide
election in November.
Councilman Beahrs asked what the effects of exclusionary requests
would be.
Robert Booth, City Attorney, responded that any exclusions may approach
up to five percent at the discretion of City council; and they would
be subject to the approval of LAIC°. Staff's prediction was that
approval (would be very unlikely since that would create an even
smaller w annexed island in the area than presently exists.
George Sipel, City Manager, said that staff's recommendation would
be that there be no exclusions.
Councilman Beahrs recalled some single lot exclusions in the midst
of Palo Alto in previous years, and he was concerned about the number
of requests from reafdeats of Barron Park since the acquiaiticn
would be quite speckled if the requests were approved.
Mr. Gellert agreed that the impact of accepting the requests would
be a speckled acquisition.
Councilman Beahrs referred to the last paragraph on page one of
the staff report. dated April 17 and said there was a reference there
to comparative ,assessed valuation of properties it Barron Park to
1 1 6 9
V21175
those in Palo Alto and a comparison of the electorate figures, which
were not included. Staff concluded that paragraph by stating that
if these two findings recited in the resolution cannot be made,
there Council would have to call a special election in the city on
the annexation question. In re -reading the resolutions, Councilman
Beahrs had not found any references to this particular point, and
he would like that clarified.
Mr. Gellert pointed out that the law requires that a special election
be called in the instance that the value of the territory to be
annexed equals one-half or more of that within the city or the number
of qualified electorates of the territory equal one-half or more
of those within the city. Last year's assessrne-it indicated that
Palo Alto has approximately $382,000,000 worth of assessed valuation,
and Barron Park has almost $10,000,000. With that in mind, it becomes
obvious there would be no need to call a special election within
the city. The figures regarding the electorate equally indicate
there would be no need to call a special election.
Mayor Sher asked for the comparison of the electorate figures for
Palo Alto and Barron Park,
Miss Tanner responded that as of April 13, 1975, there were 1,756
registered qualified electors in the territory proposed for annexation,
and 27,'►54 in the City of Palo Alto.
Councilman Berwald remarked that this had been a very public and
open issue, and the Barron Park residents had led the campaign to
be annexed. He felt it had been done very forcefully and openly,
and it came as a surprise to him that there were so many persons
who felt they had not been accorded due process. To Councilman
Berwald this question came down to not what Barron Park annexation
proponents had done but what the official requirement of the city
is with regard to notification. Councilman Berwald asked what the
official notice requirement was is the Code and how the city
had complied with that.
Hiss Tanner reported that Government Code Section 35119 requires
the City Clerk to give written notice of the proposed annexation
by mail to each owner of.an equitable or legal interest in land,
provided that person has filed his name and address with the City
Clerk. She commented this was rather ambiguous. There is also
a requirement for publishing of the Resolution of Intention, and
this was complied with. Miss Tanner said the Resolution was published
,twice in the San Jose Mercury, and it was also published once in
The Palo Alto.Times.
Mayor Sher asked if he understood correctly that the only Code section
involved then was the one that requires the mailing of notice to
persons who have filed their name and address with the City Clerk.
Miss Tanner responded that this was correct.
Councilman Berwald raid then the queetien uaa how does a person
in the territory being annexed notify the city of his intent to
ask for en exclusion if he does not know about the annexation.
This seemed to Councilman Berwald to be an imperfection in the law,
and he asked Miss Tanner 11 she had been actually quoting from the
law.
1170
4/21/75
Miss Tanner answered affirmatively and added that. the only helpful
thing there is that the publication of the Resolution of Intention
occurs during the three week period in which the te3ident could
tile his name and address,
Mr. Gellert commented that the law was, in fact, changed in the.
last Legislature and was made markedly more strict than it originally
was. Because of that, staff had rigidly adhered to it and made
certain that every step was consistent with the Government Code.
Councilman Berwald concluded that every resident in the territory
to be annexed is not officially notified individually by the city
annexing the territory.
Mr. Gellert said this was correct. There is nc requirement for.
that to be done, but the Barron Park Residents Asscciation carried
out a rather extensive communications effort, Other communities
that had annexed territories were impressed with the efforts that
had been put forth to communicate with the Barren Park residents.
Councilman Berwald thought it was very regrettable that no official
body was responsible for notifying residents of a proposed annexation,
and he sympathized with those persons who received no notice. Councilman
Bezwaid asked what percentage of the 1,756 electors asked for exclusion.
Since there were so many persons who had requested exclusion, Councilman
Berwald asked if it would be in order to have staff comment on some
of the conoerns that had been expressed such as increase in taxes
and assessments, utility costs, building standards, etc. He commented
that the complaint with regard to the Boy Scput Troop not having access
to foothill Park would be ceslved if Barren Park were annexed.
Mr. Gellert responded that with regard to the issue of taxes, at
the present time the taxes in Palc Alto are approximately fifteen
cents per one hundred dollars of assessed valuation lower than they
are in Barron Park. In addition, utility Nests are lower. Further,
Mr. Gellert said that Palo Alto is a Class Three city in regard
to fire protection; and Barron Park is Class Six; and .in some instances,
that would prompt significant savings in fire insurance. Staff
estimated that this year, for example, Barron Park residents would
save approximately $150,00 if they were in the city. Conneening
assessments, staff had fairly extensively considered all the possible
areas that would require assessments; and the only arseseme.nts that
would be made would be for sewers in areas where they presently
did not exist. That was primarily the Roble Ridge area, and there
would be no requirement to hook up because the homes there are not
close enough to the line to be required to do so by the Municipal
Code. Mr. Gellert explained the only agency that would require
homes to be hooked up to the sewer system.would be the County Health
Department, and that would be the same in either a county or city
situation. No real assessu+encs were foreseen, and the motions that
staff recommends would further insure that. Speaking to non -conforming
uses, Mr, Gellert said that in a1r' st all instances non -conforming
uses would be allowed to retain. The instances cohere they would
not be permitted to remain s_re primarily commercial uses in the
wrong sone, and that is not a problem in Barron Park. So there
would be no requirement for upgrading non -conforming U806 in Barron
Paxk.until expansion or ,remodeling was planned.
-Councilman Berwald assumed that they would have to comply with the
Building Code as far as fire safety, etc. ware concerned.
1 1 7 1
4/21/75
Mr. Gellert responded that both the county and the city were under
the Uniform Building Codes so there would be no distinction in that
matter.
Miss Tanner, in replying to Councilman Berwald'a earlier question,
stated that there were written protests concerning twenty-four parcels.
Vice Mayor Henderson asked Harley Smith to add his name to Councilman
Comstock's in the protest to Mr. Safer. He objected to Mr. Sater's
statement that Council had made up its mind prior to the Public
Hearing, and that was totally untrue. Vice Mayor Henderson stated
that the annexation procedure had been going on for months with
much publicity and information delivered to every house. The negative
things he heard at this meeting were from any years back, and that
included the Wilshire Boulevard proposal. Vice Mayor Henderson
said that if Barron Park residents wanted relatively uncontrolled
commercial enterprises, twenty-four hour card clubs, and a complete
lack of knowledge and concern about the community, then they should
by all means stay with the county. One aspect of the evening's
discussion that disturbed Vice Mayor Henderson was the comments
made about Palo Alto being out to gobble up Barron Park. He recalled
that Palo Alto got involved in all of this because a large number
of people from Barron Park came to the city with the idea; and he
thought those people knew that this Council would protect the rural
atmosphere, which is what it intended to do.
Mayor Sher stated the Chair would entertain a motion that the Council
proceed with the proposed an.exation of Barron Park to the City
of Palo Alto.
MOTICN: Councilman Comstock introduced the .following resolution
and moved, seconded by Pearson, its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 5084 entitled "RESOLUTION
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
CALLING THE BARRON PARR ANNEXATION
ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 4, 197.5'=
Mayor Sher stated that from the beginning his position had been
that Palo Alto ought not to engage in imperialistic ventures gobbling
up neighboring communities. His feeling was that in situations such
as this, it vas important that the initiative come frov the community;
and when the initiative does come, as it has in this case, by virtue
of the petition that was signed, it is the city's responsibility
to respond. What the city was doting at this meeting was not making
any decisions for the community but arranging for as election so
that: Barron Park can decide for itself whether or not it wishes
to be annexed to Palo Alto. Mayor Sher thought it was important
during the period prior to the election that all the information
pro and con be widely disseminated so that each person could cast
an informed vote.
The resolution was adopted on a unanimous vote.
1
The motion having passed, Mayor Sher said Council would now consider
the matter of the boundaries of the territory proposed to be annexed;
and he asked that staff indicate on the map the approximate location
of the properties for which owners had requested exclusion from
annexation.
Hr. Gellert did this for benefit of Council and those in the audience.
1 1 7 2
4/21/75
MOTION: Councilman Comstock moved, seconded by Serwald, thet the
boundaries remain as specified in Exhibit "A", with ne exclusions.
Councilman Comstock said his reason for not excluding properties
was that. Barron Park should be considered as an aree to be annexed
in its entirety. The city has had some experience with previous
annexations where there had been exclusions of single properties;
and this situation presented a eroblem to the city, and even a larger
one to the property owner who, in theory, was receiving services
from the original agency. In this case, if these properties were
excluded, they would c;ntinue to receive services from the county.
This can become rather difficult in terms of fire and police protection
and other essential services. Property owners may feel they would
be willing to take their chances on that; but personally, Councilman
Comstock would feel remiss in encouraging that kind of are arra_Ygement.
He preferred to have the citizens of the area proceed with the annexation
election and argue that issue out among themselves. Couecilm►an
Comstock cautioned the proponents of the annexation to be very careful
and thoughtful concerning those people who may be very dedicated
to non -annexation, He did not feel the city, the county, or the
residents concerned would be well served by an annexation of an
area that had individual property exclusions. Perhaps it would
be another matter if the :.rimers involved were a block of homes,
but that was clearly nA the pattern in this case.
The . >>t in n p_ F,s _d on a un, nir:.'us v re
the .lotion having passed, Mayor Sher stated the Chair would now
rear the City Clerk's report on the nu:-.ber of qualified electors
in the territory pr0_poaed to be annexed as compared to the number
of qualified electors in the City of Palo Alto -
Miss Tanner reported that as of April 13th, there were 1,.756 qualified
voters in the l!erritcf:y proposed to be annexed; and on the same
date, there were 27,454 qualified voters in Palo Alto.
Mayor Sher asked foe a repeat from the City Manager on the value
of all property in the territory as compared to the value of all
property in the City of Palo Alto,
Mr, Gellert responded that as of the 1974-15 assessment, Palo Alto's
assessed w1uation totaled $382,269,506.00; and Barron Park's assessed
valuation totaled $9,837,830:OO which is approximately 2,9% of the
city's assessed valuation.
Mayor Sher stated the Chair would entertain a motion that the Council
find that the value of the property of the territory proposed to
be annexed does not equal one-half or more of the value of the property
in the City of Palo Alto and, further, that the number of qualified
voters in the territory propctied to be annexed does not equal one-
half or more of the number of qualified voters in the City of Palo
Alto.
MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Norton, that Council
find that the value of the property of the territory proposed to
be annexed does not equal one-half or more of the value, of the property
in the City of Palo Alto and, further, that the number of qualifed
voters in the territory proposed to be annexed does not equal one-
half or more of the number of qualified voters in the City of Palo
Alto.
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
1 1 7 3
4/21/75
This motion having passed, Mayor Sher stated the Chair would entertain
a notion to adopt the resolution before Council requesting the services
of the Registrar of Voters for the election.
MOTION: Councilman Comstock introduced the following resolution
and moved, seconded by Berwald, its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 5085 entitled "RESOLUTION
OF HE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA TO PERMIT THE
REGISTRAR OF VOTERS TO ASSIST THE CITY
CLERK IN THE CONDUCT OF THE BARRON PARK
ANNEXATION ELECTION T) BE HELD ON
NOVEMBER 4, 1975"
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
Mayor Shet stated the Chair would entertain motions as to the three
questions specified in the staff report on the Council's policy
if annexation of Barron Park to the City of Palo Alto is accomplished.
Councilwoman Pearson, thought it very important to make these motions
so that when the citizens of Barron Park go to the polls, they will
feel. more comfortable about these issues.
MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that
in approving the reeolutJons regarding Barron Park annexation, the
Intent of this Council is that no street ;widening or street construction
be undertaken in Barron Park with the exception of Improvements
mentioned in the January 16 report; that no curbs, gutters, or si.dewalke
will be required on already dedicated streets; and that before Barron
Park zoning is comprehensively reviewed, after annexation no denser
land use than that which is already acceptable tinder present county
zoning will be allowed.
The following wording in the above motion was recommended by Councilman
Berwald and agreed to by Councilwoman Pearson and Vice Mayor Henderson.
"that in approving the resolutions regarding Barron Park annexation,
the intent of this Council is".
Councilmen Clay asked what impact the restriction on widening of
streets would have on fire service, for instance.
Mx. Gellert responded that the fire Department has studied all of
the streets in the Barron Park area, and they are confident the
community can be well served with the present street configurations.
A little longer response time will be entailed in the Roble Ridge
area, but: there are no significant problems present that would relate
to safety.
Councilman Clay asked if the louger response time would affect the
fire rating.
iJ
Mr. Gellert said it would not significantly affect the fire rating
because it would not be that great. He explained there were areas
within the city having generally the samo conditions, and the Fire
Department is able to serve them adequately.
Councilman Rosenbaum asked what the third part of the motion meant.
It wxe his understanding that everything would automatically be
zoned R-1 upon annexation, and he wanted to know if chat were the
case.
1 174
4/21/75
• - .. •. . • a . r a•••••-•-7,91-a—,,••••••••••-•—•••••••f-a—•-.T,"'"9"" Y. '•rte—. T
Mr. Gellert replied that everything would come in as R-1. The Roble
Ridge area is zoned at a larger minimum acreage for development,
and the staff would intend to not change that upon annexation.
Councilman Rosenbaum asked if what was oeing stated was that If
something other than a single family house were to be built in Barron
Park, it would require rezoning.
Mr. Gellert said this was correct.
Councilman Rosenbaum asked further if Council was saying its policy
was that such rezoning would not be to a higher density than that
which currently exists in the county before the city does a comprehensive
study.
Mr. Gellert responded this was correct.
Councilman Beahrs pointed out that Barron Park's fire rating was
six compared to Palo Alto's rating of three, and that is a substantial
difference, He asked if Barron Park would automatically receive
a three rating upon annexation.
Mr. Gellert explained that the reason for Barron Park's high fire
rating is primarily because of the volunteer fire service and not
a result of co munity conditions. Upon re -rating, Barron Park will
be considered at the sat:,e level as Palo Alto; end they will not
be a burden to the city.
Councilman Beahrs re. a11ed that Palo Alto A s very close to receiving
a rating of two.
Mr. Sipel responded the city was forty-seven or forty-eight points
from receiving a two ratin�g. Pe added that, assuming there is a
successful annexation, it would take some time before an individual
would see a eh.nge in his fire insurance premium.
Councilman Beahrs asked for a review of the improvements mentioned
in the January 16 report.,
Mr. Gellert read from the report as follows: "Nineteen of the forty-
nine streets in Barron Park do require resurfacing in order to restore
them to a sound condition for maintenance. The only street requiring
major reconstructive work is a small stretch of Paradise Way that
is yet undedicated. The resurfacing should cost about $34,000,
and the reconstruction should cost about $43,000".
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
Request to Move Item Seven
MOTION: Mayor Sher Moved, seconded by Pearson, that Item Seven
concerning Councilwoman Pearson's request for a moratorium on development
along El Camino Real in Barron Park until after the annexation election
be moved forward on the agenda for consideration at this time.
the motion prised on a unanimous vote.
1 1 7 5
4/21/75
Request of Councilwoman Pearson that
Council Request Board of Sys ervisors
o Place a Moratorium on Bevelmment
&long El Camino Real in Barron Park
until after the Annexation Election
Councilwoman. Pearson said her subject was a moratorium on development along
El Camino Real in Barron ?ark until after the annexation election.
This election is many months off, and citizens of Barron Park feel
the vacant pieces of land along El Canino Real are about to be developed,
They do not want this to occur until they are annexed to the city
so the proposals will be controlled by Palo Alto's zoning ordinances.
They also feel that perhaps better uses of these parcels will be
made if Palo Alto's Planning Commission has an opportunity to review
their present county zoning with our traditional zone and any new
uses that our Comprehensive Plan might encourage. The county is
obviously too far removed to understand and respond to the feelings
of the Barron Park residents, witness the Sater property end run
and the allowing of the Camino Card Room to stay open twenty-four
hours. Also, it appears that even the Council and the staff cannot
communicate with the county staff. Supervisors are at, the uercy
of their own staff who are probably too busy to understand the problems
of this small area. Councilwoman Pearson said it had been pointed
out to 1,er that the Sater property and the Yarkin property are well
on their way, and Council action would have no affect on those.
MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Cczstock, that
Council request that the Board of Supervisors declare a toratoriumm
on (1) the issuance of building permits on any land currently zoned
non-residential, (2) zone changes, and (3) subdivisions and lot
splits in Barron :'ark until the annexation election has been held
and certified.
Councilwoman Pearson commented that the planning staff felt this
would cover all the bases.
In answer to a question put by Councilman Comstock, Mayor Sher explained
that the words "in Barron Park" in the third part of the notion
epplied to all three parts of the motion.
Councilman Berwald stated that he has almost always opposed moratoria
of any considerable period because he felt they suspend the parts
of the rule of law that have to do with the guaranceea of due process
and protection of property rights. They sometimes are something
of a compensatory mechanism for our own imperfection, his own included.
Councilman Unsaid stated he did not like the idea of a moratorium.
Council had talked from time to time about a special zone in that
area, and Councilman Berwald would support a special architectural
planning zone along El Camino. He said he deplored the kind of
construction that is presently there. Councilmax. Berwald asked
if the moratorium would be raised the day after the election.
Mr. Sigel responded that the moratorium would be raised when the
annexation election was certified, and everything in the whole area
would then come in as R-1.
Councilman Berwald thought the motion just passed by Council was
that the property would not be any more dense than it is now, not
that it would remain all R-1.
1 1 7 b
4/21/75
Mr. Gellert explained that under the Code, all of Barron Park will
cone into the city as R-1. The motion is in regard to areas that
are presently zoned as less dense thanR- ; and it is to assure
them that when it d: -,ca come in as R -I under the code, that will
not provide an opportunity for more dense development in those areas.
This is in reference to the Roble Ridge area which is in the far
western portion of Barron Pare.
Councilman Berwald pointed out that the county strip indicated on
the map as CGH was not residential.
Mr. Gellert commented it was presently zoned that way, buc upon
a au .ce::srsful snnexation election, it would come into the city as
R -I and would then be rezoned as part of the Comprehensive Review
of Zoning that staff will propose:
Councilman Berwald asked if staff intended to take commercial land
and make it R -I.
Mr. Gellert replied that would be the interim situation until consideration
of rezoning requests were made.
Councilman Berwald asked how that could be justified under any common
sense reasoning.
Mr. Sipel indicated that the justification relates in part to state
law which provides for that to happen unless the City Council takes
action to the contrary. Council could pre -zone the area, and upon
annexation apply those zones. The concern staff has had about doing
that was that it will be at that time working on a new zoning ordinance,
and staff thought it would apply those zones when they were established.
Mr. Sipel explained that Council had the prerogative to establish
any zoning it would like.
Councilman Berwald asked what the General Plan called fur in this
area.
Naphtali Knox, Director of Planning, said it had been so long since
he looked at the 1963 plan that he could not recall what was indicated
for that area; but it was generally commercial.
Councilman Berwald said he was referring to the new Comprehensive
Plan,
Mr. Knox explained that staff was not far enough aicng on that to
indicate what would be done, and that is the problem. If staff
were far enough along on the Comprehensive Plan studies, some indication
could be given of what would be an appropriate plan for this particular
area and what would be appropriate zoning. Mr. Knox felt a process
was necessary in terms of having citizen participation from the
residents of this area, and staff had not had the opportunity to
do that as yet with regard to the Comprehensive Plan. It was his
hope that could be done when the first draft came out at the end
of May.
Councilman berwald stated he could not make a recommendation for
any kind of zoning because he did not know what it ought to be,
but he was certain the toning should not be R-1.
1 1 7 7
4/31/75
Mayor Sher pointed out that the motion does not relate to zoning,
but to a moratorium on building permits, zone changes, etc.
Councilman Rosenbaum: asked if Councilwoman Pearson's remarks concerning
the Sater and Yarkin proposals meant that the motion on the floor
would not apply to those.
Councilwoman Pearson said this is what she had been told by the
Planning Department. Mr. Sater already has a building permit, and
Mr. Yarkin has all the approvals he needs. Therefore, the moratorium
would not be able to be applied to either one of those two properties.
Councilman Rosenbaum asked if building permits had been issued for
both of those properties.
Councilwoman Pearson did not think Mr. Yarkin had a building permit,
but she had been told that Mr. Sater did. Both the county and the
city staff had told her that Mr. Sater and Mx. Yarkin were too far
along for Palo Alto to take an attempt to stop construction.
Councilman Rosenbaum asked what the point was of the three specific
provisions. He assumed that Mr. Sater's property was the reason
for instigating this action.
Councilwoman Pearson responded that there are other vacant properties
there, and the owners were probably itching to develop before annexation.
Her feeling was they should be prevented from doing that until there
was a study done by Palo Alto's Planning Department as to how the
city really wanted that area to be developed. There are enough
large pieces left so that the city would not want to see them developed
the way things were presently done, without Barron Park's input
and without a study by the Planning Department.
Councilman Rosenbaum knew the city had been very much concerned
about co,aaterciai development, but he wondered if this might interfere
with certain residential developments about which Council might
not have any great concern.
Mr. Knox commented that under the procedures the county now uses,
all the proposed developments are referred to the city for comment.
The Planning Department received several each month that related
to lot splits or proposed remodelings or additions. These take quite
a bit of time to study, and staff finds that the various lot configurations
proposed do not fit strictly under the codes Palo Alto has. Staff
is bound to look at what the county codes are in these instances
and make some judgments. It seems to staff"that in this interim
period between now and the time an annexation election is heid if
all of these matters could be held in abeyance, staff would have
the opportunity to begin to work with the residents and the Planning
Commission in developing soma ideas about lot splits, rezoning,
and development on land that is currently multi -family or commercially
zoned. It is not jest a question of the vacant parcels or even
the parcels on El Camino. There are a number of parcels potentially
developable or redevelopable to denser uses; and, in a way, this pre-
ceding action by Council would be a signal to developers to get
in during the next sit months and have their development accomplished
before the annexation comes through and they find themselvea under
a different set of rules. Mr. Knox said that the city's Architectural
Review Board had a different set of procedures which staff believed
resulted in better looking buildings, and some developers would
prefer to work under the County Architectural and Site Approval
1 1 7 8
4/21/75
Committee which will not result in a superior building, Mr. Knox
concluded that a moratorium would be very helpful in giving staff
time to study all these matters. He added that he assumed if Council
wanted to take this action, it would be a request to the Board of
Supervisors. They would hold a hearing on the matter; and as of
the date of the hearing, anyone who had the appropriate vesting
of right in a property would be exempt from the moratorium. He
explained the effective date would not be tonight, but as of the
date the Supervisor' took action.
Councilman Beahrs was concerned about this action, because any developer
could make a move in a week; and the County Board of Supervisors
will probably not perform in that period of time. Councilman Beahrs
also thought that moratoria had not been too productive in the past
of anything but grief, but they were very productive of good political
smoke. It seemed to him that every man deserved personal freedom,
and that includes the possession and use of property; and he wanted
to know who would bear the expense if the property owners had some
rights in this situation.
Mr. Booth responded that this action by the city has no effect on
the activities of the county other than a request of them to take
some action. If the county took such action, they would be obligated
to defend it.
Councilman Beahrs noted that if the county did not respond favorably
and timely, people who wanted to develop th►'ir property would make
some quick moves.
Councilman Comstock urged Council to support the moratorium, He
felt that the fact Palo Alto had accepted the petition that requested
the Board of Supervisors to call the election was a de -stabilizing
action to the extent that it is de -stabilizing in the areas of non-
residential properties in Barron Park. Any person who owns a piece
of non --residential property and thinking about developing it will
be thinking in terms of the election date. If the election approves
the annexation, the consequences are quite clear to the property
owners. Councilman Comstock did not think there was anything secret
about it or any misunderstandings in the minds of the property owners.
Because of that, the Council is in a position where it has to think
about what is going to happen between now and November. In a way,
you could say Council had turned loose some forces that are going
to operate in that area; and the question Councilwoman Pearson rightfully
raises is what Council's responsibilities are to the property owners
who are concerned about the annexation. Councilman Comstock thought
Council's responsibilities were to consider them quite carefully
and to deal with them in the sense that if the election is successful,
the property is going to change status - ' at leant for some time.
How it cows back from that status will be a matter of proceedings
before this Council. If the election is not successful, property
will continue as it is. Council is left with considering what the
impact is of no action or some action on the motion on the floor.
The impact is less severe on the general community, not the property
owner, to take some action along this line. If the election does
not succeed, the action taken under this motion then becomes moot.
If the election succeeds, Council would carry on generally with
the position taken on the proposed action this evening and then
resolve the status of the entire area. Councilman Comstock thought
this was as important a signal to give the people in that community
as the action calling for the election, and he asked his colleagues
to think of it in that vain in this particular case and support
the motion.
1 1 7 9
4/21./75
Councilman Clay wondered whether or not the county could honor this
request for a moratorium because the city was asking them, in effect,
to not honor the zoning that is on that land. Assuming this were
in the city and someone came in with a permit on land zoned a given
way, Councilman Clay wanted to know what Palo Alto could do.
1
1
1
Mr. Booth responded the city could impose a moratorium until it
had established a General Plan and appropriate zoning had evolved
for the entire area. The zoning would not have to be honored unless
a building permit had been issued and construction commenced.
Councilman Clay asked Mr. Booth if he were saying that the city
could change the zoning after the request of an individual to use
the land in the fashion for which it was currently zoned.
Mr. Booth said this was correct as long as the land was under study.
Councilman Clay asked how long it would take to make the study.
Mr. Knox replied that staff was in the process of looking at some
new zones that would replace the present commercial zones; hopefully,
the Commission would have information on that during the summer
and toward the fall. It is possible that by the time an annexation
election takes place, sta€f may have some definitive -but still
tentative: - language for the new zones. It is also possible by
the fall that staff would have been able to progress in the Barron
:ark area to look at the future land uses to an extent that staff
could then ,mesh those land use considerations with the new zones
that are being proposed. But Mr. Knox said he could not in any
way guarantee there would be new zones ready for adoption of an
ordinance. The best that could be hoped for would be that if there
were a successful annexation election, and if, therefore, Barron
Park came in entirely R-1, enough policies would have been acted
upon by both the Commission and the Council that anyone wanting
to develop could cone in and ask that his property be reverted to
the zoning it had before annexation. According to policies acted
upon by that time, consideration could be given to the request as
to whether or not it would be appropriate.
Joyce Anderson, 3881 Magnolia Drive, stated she supported Councilwoman
Pearson's request for the Council to ask the Board of Supervisors
for a moratorium on building permits, but she asked if Council felt
that was enough. She wondered what would happen if the request
for a moratorium on development lost on a split vote at the Board
of Supervisors. Ms. Anderson asked if the moratorium on just the
properties that front El Camino were enough. She pointed out that
there were just four small vacant properties along El Camino Real
while there are thirteen parcels vacant or not developed to zone
in the adjacent residential area. Some of those parcels were three
.and four acres each. Ms. Anderson asked if Council could specify
undeveloped or redeveloped lands.
Mayor Sher responded that he thought that the motion had been broadened
to include those properties.
Ma. Anderson suggested the city place a moratorium on utilities
approval so the residents of Barron Park and the city would not
be stuck with more developments that are undesirable. Or, in the
interimwhen the parcels were referred to the city, perhaps Palo
Alto could refer them back to the County Planning Commission and
disk them to rezone to a different density. However, it was hard
1 1 8 0
4/21/75
to know who would set that density figure or determine land use
when Palo Alto's old plan is twelve years old, and the new plan
is not adopted. Anderson thought perhaps Council might consider
adopting a policy for the interim period that all referrals from
the county be brought before the Palo Alto Planning Commission.
At present, they are being referred only to the ARB; and the ARB
looks only at the building, not the land use. Ms. Anderson noted
that without a Council policy for the staff, the new Comprehensive
Plan not adopted, and the annexation election not until November,
there is no basis for land use and density decisions that have to
be wade now. The developers have taken advantage of this period,
and Ms. Anderson felt the end was not in sight. For two years the
citizens have been patiently waiting for the Comprehensive Plan
while the developers have been busily at work. If Council voted
favorably on the motion, Ms. Anderson asked that they request the
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors to agendize the item immediately.
Irwin J. Yarkin, 181 Ely Place, reported to Council that he owned
three parcels on Vista Drive. Having planned to develop one of
the parcels, Mr. Yarkin followed the new county procedure. This
entailed going through Palo Alto's Architectural Review Board twice,
and he wan presently going through the county's Architectural Review
Board. It was fir. Yarkin's understanding that the proposed moratorium
w3uld not affect that parcel. Mr. Yarkin's concern was for the
zoning of the two other parcels which he had no intention of developing
at this tire; specifically, he did not went to see those two parcels
revert to R-1 zoning. Mr. Yarkin had multiple zoning on hie properties
now, and he did not want to have to plead with the city to permit
multiple zoning in the future. He could see an economic )urden
developing. First, he would have to try to regain from the city
his multiple zoning; and secondly, he felt there would be a definite
financial effect if he decided to sell the property in the next
six months.
Vice Mayor Henderson clarified for Mr. Yarkin that this was an automatic
situation upon annexation, where properties would become R-1. That
would not be the result of any action taken by the city. Vice Mayor
Henderson saw no way to aid Mr. Yarkin in avoiding coming to the
city and requesting a change from R-1 to his present zoning unless
Council took some action for prezoning the land.
Mr. Yarkin understood that his property would be down -zoned to R-
1 immediately upon annexation, and this was what worried him.
Vice Mayor Henderson explained that this would be so temporarily,
because he was sure that land along El Camino would not be kept
R-1.
Mx. Yarkin asked if the existing zoning could be automatically retained
if the annexation took place.
Tics Mayor Henderson stated that the land would all come into the
city as R-1. This included existing multiple -dwelling properties,
commercial properties, etc.
Mr. Yarkin said it was now his understanding that everyone would
have to ask for rezoning.
Mayor Sher thought the fact that there was commercially zoned property
that would comb in as R-1 insured a review of the whole area, and
there would be rezoning.
1 1 8 1
4/21/75
Mr. Sipel pointed out that the Council would have the prerogative
of applying the existing zoning at the time of annexation, if it
so desired. For instance, Council could simply say the pre -zoning
was the existing zoning.
Councilman Berwald asked if this subject could not be handled by
an emergency zoning ordinance rather than a moratorium.
Mr. Booth responded that prezoning any parts of Marron Park would
require a notice of Public Hearing before the Planning Commission,
and their recommendation to Council would be followed by an ordinance.
The motion passed on the following vote:
AYES: Comstock, Henderson, Pearson,
Rosenbaum, Sher
NOES: Beahrs, Clay
ABSTAIN; Berwald
(Norton absent.)
Recess to Executive Session
From 11:05 to 11:20 p.m. Council recessed to Executive Session regarding
personnel matters.
Request to Continue Items 5 and
thA n dd_ t0 May 5, 1975
MOTION: Mayor. Sher moved, seconded by Beahrs, that Item 5 on the
agenda, having to do with long-term power supply proposals, be continued
to May 5 as Item 1 on that agenda.
The motion passed on the following vote;
AYES: Beahrs, Comstock, Sher,
Rosenbaum
NOES: Berwald, Henderson, Pearson
(Clay and Norton not present.)
MOTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Beahrs, that Item 6 on the
agenda, having to do with downtown diagonal parking, be continued
to May 5 as Item 2 on that agenda.
The motion failed on the following vote:
AYES: Beahrs, Rosenbaum, Sher
N0 S: Berwald, Comstock, Henderson,
Pearson
(Clay and Norton not present.)
1 1 8 2
4/21/75
Public Hearin : Pi •back Pro ram
ecommen a en went to t e
o- _operat can greement7 CMS: 62:5)
Mayor Sher stated this was a hearing on the proposed resolution
approving Amendment No. 1 to the. Cooperation Agreement with the
Housing Authority of the County of Santa Clara, and this was the
tine and place when and where any and all persons wishing to be
heard as to whether the proposed Amendment No. 1 to the Cooperation
Agreement with the Housing Authority of Santa Clare County should
be entered into. Mayor Sher asked that the record show that the
Clerk has filed affidavits of publication of this hearing. The
Council would now hear the report regarding the proposed agreement.
Cherie D. Charles, of the Planning Department, stated that Council
had received two staff reports in the last several seeks regarding
Palo Alto's Piggyback Program. The two teports, dated March 27th
and April 17th, outline two recommended amendments to the city's
Cooperation Agreement with the County Housing Authority, which governs
operation of the Piggyback Program. Council members had at their
places tonight a draft of the proposed amendment, which was originally
included with the March 27th report. Ms. Charles thought the reports
and the amendments were self --explanatory; but she pointed out that
Amendment No: 1, as zeferred to in the draft approval resolution,
includes both amendments described in the April 17th staff retort.
Ms. Charles reiterated that the amendments being considered tonight
would nut increase the total allocation already msde to the Piggyback
Program, but they would ,allow for effective use of that allocation.
Finally, Ms. Charles commento.; that this meeting offered an opportuiity
fer Council to make note of the extra effcrts which John Burns and
his Housing Authority staff have put into the Piggyback Program
and the cooperative participation of local landlords, which have:
made the program as successful as it I.
Councilman B`ahrs asked if Mr. Burns could tell Council what he
thought the future was for this type of program. In his opinion,
the problem was not being met by any neasuiahle or significant perceutage.
Mr. Burnes said the program the Housing Authority was operating under
at the present time was Section 23; and by federal law, that program
is being discontinued. Me had received word from HUD this week
that the Housing Authorities would be allowed to continue Section
23 as long as they had an annual contribution contract. That weans
the program will continue foe another nine years, using the same
level of funding presently being received; and this means the. Piggyback
Program can be continued also. Mr. Burns noted that the state has
not as yet passed its Housing Finance Agency Bill. It appeared
to Mr. Burns that the bill would be passed, but he did not expect
any action from that for at least another year. Under the new federal
program, Section 8 - which deals with rental housing, Mr. Burns
expected action on that from HUD withlee the next month; and the
Housing Authority would become acts e:ty engaged in that. As far
as solving all the problems of housing for low income people was
concerned, the county was a long way from that under any of the
programs; but the effort was being made. Mt. Burns commended the
cityfa planning staff for their fine cooperation, without which
the results would not have been achieved.
Mayor Sher asked if there were anyone present who wished to be heard
on these matters. Since no one wished to be heard, Mayor Sher declared
the hearing closed. Mayor Sher added that Council had received communications
1 1 8 3
4/21/75
in support of the proposed amendments from Sylvia Semen, the Senior
Coordinating Council of the Palo Alto Area, Inc., the Palo Alto
Housing Corporation, Midpeni.nsula Citizens for Fair Housing, and
the League of Women Voters of Palo Alto. He stated the Chair was
prepared to entertain a motion to adopt the resolution before Council
approving Amendment No. 1 to the Cooperation Agreement with the
Housing Authority of the County of Santa Clara and authorizing the
Mayor to execute the same.
MOTION: Councilman Berwald introduced the following resolution
and waved, seconded by Comstock, its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 5086 entitled "RESOLUTION
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COOPERATION
AGREEMENT WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF
THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLAR.A"
The resolution was adopted on a unanimous vote. (Norton absent.)
MOTION: Councilman Comstock moved, seconded by Henderson, that
the Mayor be authorized to send a letter to Mr. John Burns of the
County Housing Authority and Department of Housing and Urban Development
expressing the appreciation of Palo Alto for their part in making
the Piggyback Program possible in the City of Palo Alto.
The :notion passed on a unanimous vote. (Norton absent.)
Modified Plan for Senior Services Center (C.►R:231:5)
Vice Mayor Henderson, Chairman of the FSPW Committee, said there
had been a search for some time for a location thatwould enable
the city to expand its services to senior citizens. The present
office in the Downtown Library occupied ay Diana Steeples is totally
inadequate for the range of services now being given. At the end
of this month, the recommendations will be received from the Task
Force on the Aging; and there is no doubt a recommendation will
be included for a new senior citizens ,.enter. Even if such a recommendation
is accepted and acted upon immediately, it will be two or three
years before such a facility can be constructed. Meanwhile attempts
to locate an interim site for basic services have not been successful,
at least not at a reasonable cost. Consequently, Director of Libraries,
June Fleming and the library staff have very graciously consented
to the use of the El Camino Room of the Downtown Library fc senior
services. Vice Mayor Henderson appreciated their unselfish contribution
at a time when they, too, need more space. The cost breakdown of
$22,000 for conversion of the room is considered high, and it is
expected that the job can be done for less than that. Vice Mayor
Henderson pointed out that dearly half of that sum is for furniture
and equipment that will be usable in permanent facilities. Council
is being asked to approve temporary arrangements, probably for a
period of two to three years.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Henderson moved on behalf of the Finance and
Public Works Committees that the El Camino Room of the Downtown Library
be remodeled for the use of the Senior Adult Services program and
the reallocation of space se a temporary arrangement for a maximum
of two to three years.
1 1 8 4
4/21/75
John Fredrich, 157 Bryant Street, noted that Squire House and the
Veterans` 3uilding needed remodeling anyway; and these properties
would be very suitable for use by the senior citizens. He also
thought it might be wise to hold off on the conversion of the space
at the Downtown Library until the report came in from the Task Force
on the Aging,
John D. Snow, 105 Lowell Avenue, commented that he agreed it would
be ideal to have the Senior Citizens use the Veterans' Building.
Councilman Comstock commented that Committee members had those thoughts
in mind; but the concern was that time was going by, and action
was not being taken. A report from the Task Force on the Aging
will require some time for reaction and implementation, and the
needs of the senior citizens are quite pressing. Councilman Comstock
stressed that use of the downtown library was an interim solution,
and there would be a broader recommendation to deal with in due
course. This could be viewed as an inconvenience, but it is a short
term arrangement that is needed right now; and Councilman Comstock
said he supported the recommendation.
Carleen Bedwell, Direceor of Community and Social Services, explained
that the improvements to the Downtown Public Library will be made in
one of the public meeting rooms; and they would not create any substantive
change in the library operation itself, One room is being removed
fro the public facility rental program, and those programs would be
located in other facilities. All of the improvements in the Fl
Camino Room will be temporary, and there will be items that will
be eventually used in other city facilities. Mrs. Bedwell thought
it was important to keep the senior services located right in the
downtown area while action is awaited on the Task Force on the Aging
report. There is a great deal of identification with the Downtown
Library, and it seemed this was the quickest, least expensive, most
practical way for senior citizens to proceed with their activities.
Councilman Derwald questioned the figure of $782,00 for each desk
that would be needed.
Mrs. Bedwell explained that these are wail -hung desks, and the reason
for that 1s to have the maximum amount of space for people in that
rather small. area. She agreed that this was an expensive amount
for desks. The Purchasing Department was looking for ways to reduce
costs; and out of tfe total list, costs would probably be reduced
by two to three thousand dollars.
Councilman Berwald thought Council should have harsh things to say
about anyone who would actually spend $782.00 on a desk, and perhaps
about half that much would be more appropriate. The offer of the
use of the Veterans Building was an attractive one, and he asked
Vice ?Mayor Henderson to comment.
.
Vice Mayor Henderson remarked that one of the problems was the location.
The Downtown Library was very convenient for all of the people who
live in this area, and using the Veterans Building would result
in a reduction of the number of people who would be provided with
the services.
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
1 185
4/21/75
Downtown Dia onal Parkin Plan Evaluation cMR 270:5)
Mr. Knox reported that this natter was initiated in September, 1974,
by the downtown merchants, and Council set a six month trial period,
which began in November, 1974: -The plan was inaugurated on two blocks
of University, Avenue between Bryant and Waverley Streets. Two oz
three months ago, the angle of the parking was changed on the block
between Florence and Waverley from 30 degrees to 45 degrees during
the teat period. Staff is proposing that the alternate face diagonal
parking be instituted all the way from High Street to Webster Street
at the 45 degree angle. This provides for the parking of three
cars between each pair of tree islands. Before the Downtown Beautification,
there were 144 parking spaces on University Avenue. The beautification
took 40 spaces out of use, and the implementing of diagonal parking
will reinstitute 26 of those spaces; therefore, the downtown area
will now have 130 parking spaces. Mr. Knox noted there had been
no increase in accidents; and staff had made three reco endat.l.ans
to Council which, if approved, will make the diagonal parking scheme
a permanent one.
MOTION: Councilman Comstock moved, seconded by Berwald, that Council
(1) approve the following resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 5087 entitled "RESOLUTION
OF TUE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING RESOLUTION 2971 TO DESIGNATE
DIAGONAL PARKING ZONES ON UNIVERSITY
AVENUE BETWEEN HIGH STREET AND WEBSTER
STREET";
(2) authorize the substitution of the Lytton/Webster intersection
for signalization under fiscal year 1974--75 Capital Improvement
Program funding iu lieu of the scheduled Arastradero/Miranda/.Foothill.
Expressway intersection; and (3) declare a negative environmental
impact based on the environmental impact assessment.
Councilman Comstock wanted to be certain that staff understood that
in voting for this, he was not giving them any kind of a license
to go back and put in a loop system. He did not think anyone was
proposing that, but he wanted to be sure there was no confusion
about it later on. Perhaps staff felt such a system was recommended
travel pattern, but he did want to find them putting up and signs
that would produce a back -door loop system.
Councilman Rosenbaum *eked what the conditions would be for making
left turns.
Mr. Knot responded that there ere At) longer any left turn lanes,
but staff had noticed no difficulty in terms of left turn movement
problems. In response to Councilman Comstock, Mr. Knox pointed
out that there are signs which encourage traffic to use Lytton and
Hamilton Avenues; but this diet not create the previous loop system
with emphasis can one -,way movement.
Councilman Rosenbaum said he had received complaints to the affect
that traffic does tend to back up becsues of left turn difficulties,
and he asked what the expectations were in this area when the diagonal
parking was installed all the way dawn Univermiq Avenue.
1186
4/'21/75
Mr. Knox commented that traffic does teed to back up, and diagonal
parking and removal of left turn lanes may aggravate the problem.
The staff believes that some kind of traffic equilibrium will be
reached in terms of what University Avenue will,hold versus Lytton
and Hamilton Avenues. Staff felt University Avenue should be considered
a street which is one where traffic moves slowly, people can park
in front of shops and banks and become pedestrian custcmeee, and
those interested in the speed and flow of traffic will come to realize
that Lytton and Hamilton are intended for those purposes.
Councilman Rosenbaum assumed then that part of the intent, aside
from providing new parking spaces, was to discourage through traffic
on University Avenue. He said he would be interested in what the
downtown merchants thought about that.
Crystal Gamage, Downtown Palo Alto, Inc., said the merchants had
noticed the slowing down of traffic; but they had no objection because
customers liked being able to park in diagonal parking spaces.
The traffic on Hamilton and Lytton has not increased to the point
where the merchants on those streets would complain.
Vice Mayor Henderson stated he had noticed several times that University
Avenue seemed to be completely blocked because of people veering
over from the diagonal parking areas and because of drivers trying
to cake left turns. He asked if any thought had been given to having
angle parking on just one side.
M rs. Gamage responded that staff had poieted out that because of
the amount of space needed by buses to move in and out that it was
not practical to do that. She thought that when Council could computerize
the signalizatlondowntown, a lot of the movement difficulties would
be alleviated. Mrs. Gamage reported, too, that drivers had some
confusion about the lanes because the permanent striping had not
been done,
Vice Mayor Henderson asked if Downtown Palo Alto, Inc. had any conversations
with the bicycle groups.
Mrs. Gamage said the bicyclists had indicated that it is hazardous
to ride downtown, but the traffic report points out that it is not
as hazardous as had been expected.
Mr. Knox recalled that Mr. Noguchi had said on several occasi'ns
that the city needed to publicize the fact that Lytton Avenue is
the bicycle route for those interested in through movement. There
are signs on University Avenue to the effect that there shall be
no bicycle riding on business area sidewalks. Staff hoped that
through proper signing and campeigaing towards this end, the bicyclists
will use the marked lanes and come in from the side streets to where
the bicycle racks are located.
Councilman Baehr* thought the ultimate consideration should be to
maks University Avenue a pedestrian mail, and that was the way he
used it.
Mayor Sher felt soma concern about the feet that he had indicated
to Ellen Fletcher, Bicycle Advisory Committee, that Council would
not be considering this item at this meeting and it would be continued.
Mrs. Fletcher had therefore left the meting. Because of the responsibility
he felt, Mayor Sher made the following motion:
t
1
s 1 8 7
4/21/75
MOTION: Mayor Sher moved that this item be continued to the tweeting
of May 5th.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
The motion passed on the following vote:
A1.17.$: Beahrs, Berweld, Clay,
Comstock, Henderson,
Pearson, Rosenbaum
ABSTAIN: Sher
(Norton absent.)
to �.ae!s t. i1 fi2:n Rosenbaum
for Staff Re ort on -
Councilman Rosenbaum stated there was a bill to mandate election
by district for any city of mote than 15,000, and he would be interested
in having information on that item.
MOTION: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Comstock, that
stuff prepare a report for Council on AB -b4.
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
Councilman Rosenbaum had noticed that or: some of the City's reports, the
back page was upside down from the front page; ant he requested
the reports be prepared as they previously had been.
Mr. Siple agreed to check on this matter.
4,040.40011
Mayor Sher announced that under the auspices of Menlo Park, a meting
was being arranged with Senetor Gregorio and a representative of
the State Deportment of Tres sportation and communities interested
in the Dumbarton Bridge, particularly with regard to the recently
introduced legislation. Menlo Perk invited Ps10 Alto to sand two
or three Council sssbers to the **sting. Mayor Shur said he would
attend; and ii trying to choose Council steers with a range of
ewe on the subject, bt 'shred Councilmen Clay and Comstock to also
attend. This s etinl is scheduled for 4;30 p.m., Friday, April
/5th; and although he felt there would be no objection to anyone
coning to listen, the intention was to keep the number of participating
umbers et a sisti>M.
Me 2t •, �tofloa6eal Jl o 7e ir��ewYI�iltt1 ti
•
Mayor Sher reported that Cengreemeaen McCloskey is arranging a meeting
regarding the postal facility. Mayor Sher would be attending the
meting along with Boise of the postal officials, some staff members,
1188
4/21/7,5
and some of the Planning Commissioners at Congressman McCloskey's
local office on Grant Avenue, Saturday morning, April 26th. Hopefully,
Mayor Anthony of East Palo Alto would also be in attendance. Mayor
Sher pointed out this is not the public meeting and that the Postal
Service has indicated it wishes to hold an open meeting at some
future date.
Manor Sher re Special M
Mayor Sher reminded Council of the Special Meeting to be held at
the ibaylands interpretive Center, 9:00 a.m., Saturday, April 26, 1975,
re Refuse Disposal EIR3
C
an !� o o for au
Ca
Late Arriv ? ce
c -r'ics as ttee Meetings
Councilman Berwald said there was a rumor that he was retiring from
Council, and he wanted to make it clear to Council and the public
that the rumor vas not true. ,Also, recently he had missed one meeting
of the Finance and Public Works Committee; and he arrived late on
April 15th. For personal reasons he might not be able to attend
the Finance and Public Works Committee meeting on April 22; but
If there is not to be a quorum, he would be in attendance. Councilmen
Berwald mentioned this because he knew if was disturbing to the
Chairman of the Conmittee to not have a quorum; and he wanted Vic`
Mayor ;Henderson to know that when he was not in attendance, it was
because he had some very important co'~trftment. He apologized to
Vice Mayor Henderson for disrupting the proceedings by his recent
absences and tardiness.
grail Li it sa 2.01
1• John Fredrich, Y.57 Bryant Street, spoke regarding
budget priorities, especially social services. He
stressed the need for Public Hearings, preferably
prior to the election.
2. Fred Eyerly, 877 Sharon Court, had inspected the
Veterans' Building, and he concluded the structure
wee strong enough to support a new roof.
A.l i ouz n t
The meeting of April 21, 1975, adjourned at 12:10 a.m.
ATTEST:
el
,,(1/
City Clerk rJ
APPROVE:
Mayor
1 1 8 9
4/21/75